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 : Harken Energy Corporation (HEC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rod Copeland who wrote (3205)	7/12/1998 7:39:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Respond to of 5504

Rod, the answer is a squarely "NO". I have explained many times on these threads why I refuse to talk to corporate officers and use only the raw material offered to all investors in SEC filings. I am sure that Faulkner is very capable, and you are most probably right that he should be able to "charm me" off my feet. After all it is his job, and he would not have raised so much money if he did not have a charming and persuading personality and was not a straight shooter from the hips. Anything he tells me orally that is not exactly what is in writing (SEC), I will have to challenge and be put in a position to doubt his word, an unpleasant position in the best case and in the worst case such a friendly discussion could degrade to a "shouting match" and "who are you to doubt my integrity" counter claims (and from his point of view, an absolutely correct assessment). Sorry, Rod, I yielded once, and agreed to such a call and the CEO of TTRIF called me to try to dissuade me from pointing to the inevitable conclusion that TTRIF stock is doomed to go to half its then value of $3/share (and half as much of that today $3/4 share). It ended up with "believe me" and "I am not a crook" and so on. Very uncomfortable, since by doubting their judgment (the executives I mean) of the impact of an action, the lack of an action or a specific financing scheme, or a questionable entry in the books, always make them feel as if I doubt their integrity. I do not. All I am saying is that floorless instruments are an invitation to current stockholders dilution. I accepted that fact in the case of AKSEF and stayed away (despite Strain's glowing reports) until my call on these threads to buy (just above 2) for a nice rally to above 6 (at a time when the action of the stock indicated the end game of the floorless was over), where I refused to fall in love with the stock and I said "sell". Some companies are left no choice but to go the floorless route, it is not my job to tell management it is fraught with danger, they know it, they may simply not have a choice. You the investor that decides to invest, average down or simply stay invested, must take into account the possible huge potential of an "elephant field" vs the very real threat of a bear raid by the floorless bandits. Zeev

To: Rod Copeland who wrote (3205)	7/12/1998 11:04:00 PM
From: Ed Ajootian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5504

Rod, Even though the Guadual and the Islero are officially totally different prospects, if the off-the-wall geological interpretation that this could be one monster field is correct then they are actually targeting the same structure. I know that's hard to fathom for someone used to drilling in Texas & Oklahoma, for much smaller targets, but that is my understanding. So if they find oil in the Estero, the dream of having found the mother of all oil fields is still intact. In this event, trying to prove this theory could dictate placing the Guadual at a different location than where you might place it without having known that the Islero found oil.