SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : OILEX (OLEX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Omar who wrote (2140)12/23/1997 4:15:00 PM
From: Marty Rubin  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 4276
 
BTW--About the misspelling on the SI. If that's the worst thing you can say about Omar then I'm so glad. And, if you want to complain about my posts, I will only say that I have got a B in high school (the only subject I got lower then an A) and an A in college for my English. As long as my spelling doesn't get graded, I don't give it a thought. As long. If it affects any one's health, please notify me. 10 extra minutes are worth if I can save a life--especially yours. I'm getting off the computer now. So, once again, Merry Xmas, Happy Chanukah (I hope I didn't miss. this one--but you could understand) and a very happy, healthy, and productive new year to all of us, Marty



To: Omar who wrote (2140)12/24/1997 12:11:00 AM
From: edward shapiro  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 4276
 
Hello all,
Allow me to introduce myself as one of the formerly silent and currently angry (and growing angrier) Oilex shareholders. I want to thank everyone, especially OFW and Prudent Investor for their enlightening and eye opening posts. They have taken due diligence to a new level. I don't care how they came in possession of this information or how much stock they own or how they acquired the stock that they own or formerly owned. The information speaks for itself. In my opinion it is all relevant to Oilex. I can't see how any of it, even if it is old is not relevant. Those of us that think this information revealed on SI is capable of driving the stock down to its current levels better get a dose of reality. Anyone who buys or SELLS a stock based upon what is written on SI without doing their own homework gets what they deserve. I also want to thank Larry Sallee for his all his work on the oil properties and the oil that never actually gets out of the ground and to the bottom line. As for the small cheerleading team that has formed, I don't know what infomercial on positive thinking you are watching, but I don't see this stock in its present situation as having a single positive or redeeming quality (a tax loss does not count). As we test new lows daily, the rest of the market is obviously smarter than all of us who have held and doubled and redoubled our positions. I am definitely one of the dumb ones as I have enough of this stock from the .60 level on down to get me committed.
Baron and Omar, while I don't envy your position of trying to defend a stock that is in freefall, you brought much of the anger here upon yourselves. You get paid for publicity. If you can't handle a small group of investors who exchange ideas on a computer message board, what are you being paid for? I thank you for volunteering your time to answer questions, but you should have understood that the stock performance was not going to make your job easier. When people are making money, they will let little things slide. When people are inexplicably losing money, they are going to examine everything that they possibly can. Don't offer to answer questions and dodge them. If you can't give an answer, don't ignore it or give an evasive answer. Just state that you can't answer the question. Baron, don't direct anyone to go read the 10-K. I would guess that we all read the SEC documents once. If there is anyone out there who enjoys reading and rereading these documents, I would love to hear from you.

" For further clarification regarding the conviction please be advised that Mr.Burditt voluntarly agreed to the proceedings in order not to be black mailed, extorted , threatned with law suits by a slick group of lawyers representing the Waymans over a transaction that full and competent legal advise was provided for.
Mr. Burditt voluntaraly got on the airplane flew to Kansas stood through the proceedings was apologized to after the proceedings by the judge for the inconveinence to his life and was invited by the Judge to come to Kansas to drill some Oil Wells."

Omar, who wrote the above response and what were they thinking? "...Mr.Burditt voluntarly agreed to the proceedings." As I recall these were criminal proceedings. A person does not selectively choose which criminal proceedings to recognize. A person does not volunteer to have criminal charges pressed against them. One does not volunteer to do the court a favor and make an appearance at their own criminal trial. I think Mr. Burditt's slick lawyers told him he better show up at the proceeding. If nothing was wrong in the first place, then things would never have gotten to this level. Things don't get to this extreme without there being a serious problem. Why didn't Mr. Burditt just give the money back in the first place, without all of the court problems? I guess his legal team thought they would win the case (I really hope this is not the same legal team that is handling Oilex's lawsuits. More on that in another letter.) My guess is that there was some sort of deal negotiated by Mr. Burditt's slick legal team. Maybe the Waymans were not alone. Maybe there were other securites sold, which shouldn't have been. Maybe a guilty plea and full restitution was accepted in order to avoid a full investigation of all that was happening. These are all my guesses, but they seem to fit. Omar and Baron, Mr Burditts past is relevant to Oilex. He is an integral part of the company. A mans past shows his character and is usually reflective of a mans future actions.

"...over a transaction that full and competent legal advise was provided for." Omar, can you please clarify this part or the whole of the above statement since I can not understand it.

To the Baron : Re : Australia

1)Are there any royalties being earned on the Australian properties?
2) If yes, then how much and when will we see them on the bottom line?
3)If no, are there currently any producing wells on the property? how many? If there are producing wells, then why aren't we seeing any royalties?

Sorry for the long post, but there is much to be addressed about this company. Baron and Omar, nothing personal as my anger is directed at the stock, but you guys are on the front lines here. I will have more to say.

Show me the Oil.

Happy holidays

Ed



To: Omar who wrote (2140)12/24/1997 9:39:00 AM
From: OFW  Respond to of 4276
 
Omar, in your SI Post 2140 you stated as follows:

"Without his continued support over the next 12 months this company will not survive."

You were specifically discussing Allen Burditt when making this statement.

QUESTION: Are you really saying that Oilex, a publicly traded company, will not survive the next 12 months without Allen Burditt, who serves only as a consultant to the company?

Thank you for clarifying this rather disturbing comment.

Offie



To: Omar who wrote (2140)12/24/1997 11:29:00 AM
From: Prudent Investor  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 4276
 
In my experience, when someone is unable to deal with the facts and truth in a logical, rational manner, they frequently resort to personal attacks in order to deflect the attention away from the real issues. This is especially true when they do not have the intestinal fortitude to give their true identity when making those personal attacks but, rather, choose to be identified by a generic, non-specific title like "Management of Oilex" or having a third party post for them. If Oliver Timmins or Richard Clark is posting under the name or "The Management of Oilex", they should sign their own name. If Mr. Burditt is posting under another name, he should sign his own name. That way, they will be accountable for what they say. I must admit that your personal attacks against me are laughable. However, some of the comments are so egregious that they demand a reply.

Let's start with the obvious misconception (intentional or otherwise) by Baron, Marty, Frank Fontaine, and others regarding my posting concerning Omar's use of the English language. My statement is as follows: "My, my, my, how your English, grammar, sentence structure and spelling have improved since your last posting. It makes me wonder if you aren't two different people". The statement was an obvious suggestion that "someone" might be using Omar's name to post his own thoughts. Look at "Omar's" posting numbers 1910 and 1961. Now look at "Omar's" post number 2127. The first two do NOT appear to have been written by the same person who wrote the last one. The sentence structure, grammar, and spelling are entirely different. I was not being critical about Omar's use of the English language. DUH! The point was that it was apparent to me that two different people were posting under the name "Omar".

In post # 2137, baron-marney (yes, Baron, you did not capitalize the proper name) states "To Prudent investor, On an informational basis only in which you reply to English grammar and sentence structure, it is good to know that we all make mistakes. We refer to your last post 2132. Oilex is a proper noun and should be capitalized". I realize that it should be capitalized. I quoted directly from "Omar's" posting #2127 in which he did not capitalize it. You might want to check it out, in the interests of accuracy, of course.

Look at "Omar's" posting #2140 (again, you might want to compare the form with the previously discussed posts). "For further clarification regarding the conviction please be advised that Mr. Burditt voluntarily agreed to the proceedings in order not to be black mailed, extorted, threatened with lawsuits by a slick group of lawyers representing the Waymans over a transaction that full and competent legal advise (sic) was provided for". ARE YOU STATING THAT THE STATE OF KANSAS CONSPIRED WITH A GROUP OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING THE PLAINTIFF IN A CIVIL CASE TO WRONGFULLY EXTORT MONEY FROM MR. BURDITT; THAT, IN ORDER TO DO THIS, THEY WRONGFULLY CHARGED AND COERCED GUILTY PLEAS FROM AN INNOCENT MAN? Blackmail and extortion are crimes, even in Kansas, Dorothy. It appears to me that this is exactly what you are saying. It appears to me that you are accusing the State of Kansas, its officials, the attorneys for the Waymans and, possibly, the Waymans themselves, of criminal acts. That would constitute defamation per se to all of the above named parties. However, if these accusations are true, then the situation should be rectified immediately. I am sending a copy of "Omar's" post #2140 to the District Attorney's office of the Eighteenth Judicial District of the State of Kansas to seek clarification of these accusations concerning potential crimes. I am certain that the State of Kansas would be eager to prosecute any crimes by its officials and others. Of course, I will post any reply I receive.

Offie, I would not lose any sleep over the threats made against you by nameless, non-definite entities. For nearly a year, Mr. Burditt has threatened me, directly or by implication, with dire legal consequences for my "actions". I have found Mr. Burditt's threats to be empty and impotent. In my opinion, the last thing that certain principals of this company want is to file a lawsuit that would give you (or me) the power of subpoena with virtually unlimited scope to conduct a thorough examination of the company's operations, relationship with Mr. Burditt, stock dealings, etc. In case they were dumb enough to do so, I can recommend a very good lawyer here in Houston who is already up to speed on the Oilex situation. I believe that he would defend you with great gusto. Just remember, if you tell nothing but the truth, you have nothing to fear. The truth is not actionable.

I was unaware that inheriting wealth was a crime. The last time I checked, it was not. I must plead guilty to inheriting wealth, to being an heir. In my case, it was an accident of birth. However, Mr. Burditt is a self-made man. He alone is responsible for what he has become. To learn more of what he has become, interested parties might wish to research the PUBLIC RECORDS found in the courthouses of Harris County, Texas, Fort Bend County, Texas, Jefferson County, Texas (interesting how this county keeps popping up, isn't it?), Sedgwick County, Kansas, and Denver County, Colorado, among others.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN SUED AS AN INDIVIDUAL.

NO ENTITY IN WHICH I HELD A SIGNIFICANT INTEREST (5% OR MORE) HAS EVER BEEN SUED.

NO JUDGMENT HAS EVER BEEN ENTERED AGAINST ME.

NO ENTITY IN WHICH I HELD A SIGNIFICANT INTEREST (5% OR MORE) HAS EVER HAD A JUDGMENT ENTERED AGAINST IT.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN THE OBJECT OF A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME MORE SERIOUS THAN A TRAFFIC TICKET, MUCH LESS A FELONY.

I HAVE NEVER BEEN CONVICTED OF, OR ENTERED A GUILT PLEA TO, ANY CRIME MORE SERIOUS THAN A TRAFFIC TICKET, MUCH LESS A FELONY.

I make these statements for the purpose of credibility. Mr. Burditt, can you make the same claim to any ONE of these statements? I think not.

I invite anyone who doubts my credibility to conduct as thorough and exhaustive investigation of my background, reputation and past dealings with others as you can. Unlike some others I can mention, I have nothing to hide or of which to be ashamed.

Russell K. Smith