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.

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

To: CHRISTINE who wrote (4046)	9/11/1998 4:12:00 PM
From: CHRISTINE	Respond to of 4276

Subject: REPLY on AOL From: CALIFTALK Mr Steve Hales I do not intend to waste my money. I intend to recover the assets due to the shareholders of Oilex and I am the holder of 3,835,000 shares of stock in Oilex. And all the shareholders of Oilex will benefit from my actions. I ventured in on the assumption that after getting $3 million dollars of new cash from convertible debentures between July 1997 and Feb 1998, that Oilex a company that claimed to have no long term debt, and valuable royalty assets in Australia, and interests in four operating oil fields in Texas, plus interests in Utah,Colorado and West Virginia, and equipment free and with a claimed large short position, and with unhappy shareholders that were not getting current data from management anf therefore were not buying the shares that had lost over 95% of their value after the 20 to 1 reverse split was a natural winner. After all calculations the outstanding shares were only 9 1/2 million shares and at 13 cents placed a total value on the company of approx $1,200,000. If neccessary I would buy 100% of the company at this depressed price. How could a company sell for a fraction of the new capital just received from the convertible debentures. WHO WOULD EVER IMAGINE THAT A CONSULTANT TO THE COMPANY WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO LOOT THE COMPANY BANK ACCOUNTS and that the Board of Directors would be asleep at the wheel, and that Oilver Timmins, the President and his wife , the Secretary/Treasurer would allow this to occur. That most of the nerws releases were false and misleading. That Burditt and Timmins ran a side deal called BT Energy to double deal and over charge Oilex on most deals. Yes even a smart man like me and the Oilex auditors and Oilex Board members and investors and shareholders can be deceived. We are all too trusting. Yes now that I have access to the records, I will trace the path of the money, and the stock certificates and the twisting paths between dummy companies. Yes I will recover assets purchased with money that belongs to the shareholders of Oilex. Yes, I intend to protect my investment and the investment all the shareholders. Yes a hidden 1994 management contract that was never disclosed to the auditors and members of the Board of Directors and shareholders, will be thrown out of Court and not have any value. A contract that was never in force and never reported on any income tax records of either party. To keep the record correct- Mr Hales- I did not visit the Oilex office 6 months prior to investing. My first visit was after I completed the heavy purchase the last three trading days of June 1997 when I acquired 1 1/2 shares in three days at 13 cents per share. And Allen Burditt felt happy to show me the "salted" mines and tried to convince me to add cash to make the company prosper. He had a new sucker. But I demanded a Board of Directors meeting first to make everything legal and proper. Then he pulled the sneaky trick of issuing 2 1/2 million shares for free while I was buying shares for cash and all trust was lost. The rest of the story everyone knows and it is going to continue until we have justice.

To: CHRISTINE who wrote (4046)	9/11/1998 4:25:00 PM
From: Steve	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4276

Cases on their face may seem similar but there are substantial differences here that make them different in the kinds of remedies that the respective shareholders might expect to enjoy. The case cited, I guess, by Saul is one of actual fraud combined with negligence and actual violations of truthful reporting. This case has got it all a couple of oldsters living in sin committing their last crime together, going out with a bang so to speak, the completely empty company, false press releases without a shred of truth, and dipping into the corporate treasury with the barest of cover. The Oilex case, if it becomes one, will likely turn on negligence statutes for remedy but this would require Saul to acknowledge the consulting contract which he won't do. The other similarities of the Reg S debentures is that they were properly placed in the case of Oilex but improperly placed in the case of the Members. So improperly place that the 96 year old nursemaid gleefully lied that she lived abroad. The case of similar cases is a way to hone your legal skills, the game is guess what crime was committed. Two cases almost identical down to the last very detail the same acts the people even identical in age appearance race and religion. It is your job to name that crime......<g>