Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Westfort Energy Ltd. (WT-T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: M. Merriam who wrote (638)	6/26/1998 4:02:00 PM
From: bhg	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 1288

Hi Mike, sorry it took me so long to get back to you. I don't know why you seem so mad at me or why names are so important to you but I'll give you a little background. I found out about this forum from a friend the day before I joined in on the discussion. My name is Bruce Gilfix. I am Chairman of Global Asset Management Group, Ltd. and have no affiliations with WT. I started buying WT in Jan for me and my clients. If you want you can call me @ 617-969-3078 or email me at gilfix@mediaone.net. With regards to your comments, I said that WT has 2 billion dollars of SALEABLE ASSETS. I said nothing about the bottom line, nor did I say nor do I think WT will go to US$57. According to Whitney Pansano there are over 100mm bbl of light sweet crude and 315 billion cubic feet of natural gas at the Norphlet site. At $15bbl (crude) that is worth over $2 billion dollars in SALEABLE ASSETS. Whitney told me and I'm paraphrasing, "The average major has to factor in at least $6-8 bbl exploration and finding costs and then add often very expensive actual extraction costs like building and operating North Sea offshore platforms. We don't have any of that. We know where the oil is and how much there is. We own our drill equipment, rigs and salt water disposal well. Our overhead is paid for by our shallow well production and the company has no debt. It will end up costing us less than $2bbl to get Norphlet crude out of the ground." He also revealed to me that the publicly announced figure of 40mm bbl are only "primary recoverable". Normally it turns out that this is only 25% of a fields total reserves. Since the Pelahatchie field already contains 185 billion cubic feet of CO2, WT can inject its own on site CO2, tertiary extraction of the Norphlet (which would scrub almost 90% of the reserves...or well over 100mm bbl) is thus only a little more expensive than the primary. The information of the breakdown of shares outstanding I got from Vancouver. With regards to shorts, I mentioned this only as "advise" for those in this forum. I know there aren't a lot of shorts out there. As for the names of the venture capital people I spoke to in New York and Europe as well as the geologist from the UK, I will speak to them to see if they want their names mentioned. If so, then you can email me and I'll be glad to give them to you. If I seem too optimistic for you or anyone else I'm sorry. I'm not trying to "hype" the stock. I don't think it needs it! But if you don't want me to take part in this forum then please let me know and I'll refrain from further contact. Thanks, bhg