Arconenergy, Inc. (Long Term Investors and Fundamentals) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Arconenergy, Inc. (Long Term Investors and Fundamentals)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Crossy who wrote (1642)	5/18/1998 8:21:00 PM
From: Ga Bard	Read Replies (2) of 1757

Ok you took me by surprise there. I have to disagree with you (no offense now) this is my opinion. My conclusion of Point 1) is - since Mr. Fisher owns the other part of preferred - means to me the company doesn't need that cash any more. Especially after they sold the BobWest field - maybe (just my opinion) to one ex-employee who left and always wanted to do the oil-drilling game <?> My counter is the following ; What Mr. Fisher owns is mute because he cannot sell a share due to the fully reporting SEC rules of insider selling. Esppecially the perferred. However I agree that the company apparently does not need the P to sell to institutional for financing the plants. The Bob West field they sold is true but I do not think they made a penny only sold off the liability of debt. To me they apparently have the plant financing available so why leave the treasury P just sitting on the shelve so the MMs can short against it hoping for it to come into the market. Well it came into the market alright and the way it came just added 33% to their short position if they have one. Shareholders win. Does no good to call the company for A because none is there. The market is the only place to get shares now to cover. Point 2) leads me to conclude the same than 1) with one added thing - since the automatic conversion procedure was reworded with a conversion option - You have to take into account how many warrants have been issued to date. My conclusion: They apparently do not need the cash for the $1.00 exercise price. By dropping the exercise price the warrants now equal in value to the common so really buying a warrant is like buying a common. Also why not let the warrants exercise sooner which would also cause a short position if any to have to cover. To me they just leveled the playing field. PLUS there must be something far more at work here, I could be wrong though. GB

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next