ERHC Energy Inc (CE) (ERHE) News

Nothing more than over winded bullshit.

Youve also said that if you believe what you said its not a lie. Thats funny coming from a proven liar.

I don't care how far you are underwater here. Good luck RKT.....you're going to need it.
Badog

Q. Does ERHC have interested companies looking at our assets?

Is there a reason you didn't give a date of that statement?

ERHC management is very good at generalizing and being vague. Been doing it as far back as I can remember.

When we have an agreement in place, we will notify shareholders."

Pretty old statement I would guess but still confirms that there are no agreements to date. We don't even know if ERHC still has any remaining rights to assets.

What kind of outfit leaves investors in the dark this long?

Of course this is trashing...trashing management for the way they conduct themselves.

Badog

Seriously, looking at years old erhc faq's that still reference Chad even though erhc had to bail out on Chad assets long ago? It's been years since erhc went dark. Website out of date, no financials, shareholders diluted and reverse split down to nothing. Try reality, while it might be painful it is also refreshing.

Look at dickran's latest for example:
"You dismiss my speculation because you believe it’s just bullshit"
For once he/she hits the nail on the head although it comes as no surprise since dickran has been wrong about erhc with thousands of baseless claims, false rumors and outright lies (thousands of them) for years and years. Need humor? Look at dickran's recent "movie casting" and obliteration of short sellers all over the world. Demented, delusional, desperate, deceitful, despicable dickran, it never ends.

Lots of back and forth bashing and trashing that serves no useful purpose here. Management has told shareholders nothing, as there is nothing available to share (yet). Might be helpful to revisit some of the public information ERHC management has provided in the frequently asked questions (FAQs). Some folks might find it useful to reflect and focus on some of the things they HAVE told us. For the interim though its been obvious for quite some time this is now a caveat emptor issue and that gray market expert stocks are difficult if not impossible to trade - some just like to keep repeating the obvious. I guess we just have to tolerate it until news of some sort becomes available.

FAQs

Interesting excerpt from link above:
"Q. Does ERHC have interested companies looking at our assets?

A number of interested companies are examining our assets and our plan is to monetize a portion of our Chad and EEZ assets to raise funds. We are in talks with prospective partners for the Chad Blocks, several of which have visited the data room where we are confidentially making available technical information about our assets. Additionally, several credible deepwater operators have visited the data room established jointly by the National Petroleum Agency of São Tomé and Príncipe and Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) as a repository for the existing seismic and related technical data on the EEZ. When we have an agreement in place, we will notify shareholders."

And of course the cautionary statement section at the end of the FAQs has a LOT of cautionary statements regarding the FAQs, including this:
"A discussion of the risk factors that could impact these areas and the Company’s overall business and financial performance can be found in the Company’s reports and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These factors include, among others, those relating to the Company’s ability to exploit its commercial interests in the JDZ and the Exclusive Economic Zone of São Tomé and Príncipe, general economic and business conditions, changes in foreign and domestic oil and gas exploration and production activity, competition, changes in foreign, political, social and economic conditions, regulatory initiatives and compliance with governmental regulations and various other matters, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. Given these concerns, investors and analysts should not place undue reliance on these statements. The Company expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in the Company’s expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any of the above statements is based."

What I find interesting is that the FAQs say on one hand that management will notify shareholders when and agreement is in place, yet on the other hand the very last sentence of the cautionary statement section "expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in the Company’s expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any of the above statements is based" - statements which on their face are difficult to reconcile.

I feel a "patience young grasshopper" Kung Fu (ref -TV show) sort of quote coming in response.... ( Patience Grasshopper - Kung Fu show ) LOL 😜

You are in your own world. I have never gone there I guess.
Have you talked to PN lately in this world of yours?
Hope you are enjoying your delusions where everything is speculation. You can paint whatever picture you want.
LOL
Badog

I see.

So I take it then that you're going for the "humiliated short seller" movie role with mustache?

Am I hearing you correctly? I'm still casting, so you still have a chance at it. I would consider it because it might be the only saving income that keeps you from living under a Canadian bridge.

Who knows you might become famous from it.

Krombacher

Oh no no no.... I grasp the game you are playing. It's call 'I'm STUCK so lets see how many others I can convince to be STUCK with me'. Then when you realize that you could have gone to far and gambled too much you promote a short squeeze theory to get others to wait while you sell your hundreds of millions of shares (if there ever comes the opportunity to sell). Yea, I grasp the game.

There’s no courage in reacting only after the fact, when everything’s clear. That’s not how the market works; it rewards those with the guts to move before everyone else.

Many gamblers/investors have gone broke demonstrating their courage/guts on highly speculative investments. Especially companies that don't communicate with investors, don't publish financials, don't answer phones or return calls, etc. The only DD anyone can do is to scan the news to see if you can find a tid bit from other sources. This one has become one of the most speculative high risk ways to lose ones money I have seen. I really don't care if you all want to throw your money down a high potential rat hole such as ERHC. Hell I blew my food budget for a day to pluck my $12 down on this. That took courage.

But I always post when I see what looks like new scams on this board.

Badog

I'll tell you what boys,

When all this comes to an end, and I become a billionaire, and the shorts lose everything and are humiliated in the courts as proven cowards as payback for 18 years of verbally abusing me, I am *considering* offering the shorts a role in the epic movie of ERHC's story that resulted in the permanent end to naked short selling and the iconoclastic destruction of Canadian institutions called "the rise of DICKran"

I do require, however, that the shorts grow out an evil looking "pornstache" type of mustache because that's how I envision them to look like.

Lol

Krombacher

Badog and SSC,

It seems you're not quite grasping the game I'm playing with you two.

You dismiss my speculation because you believe it’s just bullshit, and that’s largely due to your lack of confidence in my ability to read the tea leaves and accurately predict the future. Fair enough. But let’s flip the script for a moment: what if my speculation turns out to be true?

If you were short sellers, you’d find yourselves in a devastating position, kicking yourselves for not having orchestrated a premature short squeeze when there was still no backstop in place. Waiting for that backstop to materialize will only increase the pain for shorts when it finally hits. The longer you wait, the more overwhelming the consequences will be.

But I understand your hesitation. For you to be motivated to initiate a premature squeeze, if you were short sellers, you need certainty—some advance knowledge that my speculation will indeed become fact. And that’s where the real game begins.

If you knew my speculation was a guaranteed outcome, then where’s the challenge in that? There’s no courage in reacting only after the fact, when everything’s clear. That’s not how the market works; it rewards those with the guts to move before everyone else.

So ultimately, this is a test of your cowardice. Do you have the courage to act now, or will you wait until it's too late?

Come and play my game,

Krombacher

Alvaro Silva, Executive Director, ANP-STP, to speak at World Energies Summit

Is speaking at:
ANP-STP | São Tomé and Príncipe Poised for Exploration Success
Wednesday, October 2, 2024 2:00 PM to 2:15 PM
Álvaro Silva · ANP-STP
Jason Robinson · Independent

The Race is On: Emerging Oil & Gas Producers in a Warming World Panel
Wednesday, October 2, 2024 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM
Maggy Shino · Ministry of Mines and Energy, Namibia
Alejandro Stipanicic · ANCAP
Álvaro Silva · ANP-STP
Andrew Farrand · Horizon Engage
Gayle Meikle · Frontier

https://www.worldenergiessummit.com/speakers

But again, my speculation about the block's value is informed by past industry valuations, like Kosmos’ estimate of 17 cents per share and Oranto’s 20 cents for a neighboring block. This is logical deduction based on available evidence, not "wild speculation."

Speculation of JDZ asset value was also based on available evidence. Sinopec found out what that available evidence was worth. How much did they lose? Yet some of you still may think that the JDZ blocks hold massive oil assets. Sinopec took their beating and bailed. Too bad many here did not do the same back then. I posted that I was bailing after the Danagas report but many of you told me that you knew better. That Sinopec and ERHC were hiding the real results. That badog was too negative.
Now many of you are just STUCK

Badog

This one-sided argument supports the idea that his motives align with those of a short seller who benefits from fear-mongering.

You also say I am risking incarceration if I am claiming to not be short. Bring it on. Nothing to fear. Nothing to hide.
I think it could be you that could be in trouble. But who would waste their time prosecuting a poster on a delisted grey market stock valued at .000001.
So it's you that is the fear mongerer. Prision time? LOL

My one sided arguments are based on the current situation where no one knows if we have any assets remaining. We have no communication with or from management. We have no financials. We are delisted and cant trade on any USA exchanges. Our sp is so low that I don't know what fraction of a penny it is. We are strapped with approx 3 billion shares which would dilute any profit from any sale so bad that I don't know if most of you can even break even so you dreamed up this short squeeze dribble.

Is that enough to warrant a one-sided argument. And you claim there must be massive shorts. Except you admit that you only speculate on that.

You got yourself into this mess. I guess this is your way of trying to get out of it.

Sorry....but you and your band of followers are STUCK.
Badog

Sorry, but your "logical deduction and induction" is based on pie in the sky, dollars/share, worn out bullshit and your endless claims about erhe short sellers are based on outright lies. Your threats of legal implications and financial ruin when you accuse me of being short erhe are as empty and baseless as your sketched headed short seller you created a fake Facebook account for and claim is erhe's largest short seller.

And where do you come off making a statement like this: "Given that Offor owns both companies" (erhc and Starcrest)? That is not speculation, it is stated as a fact. And it is a baseless claim with no reliable information to back it up, just like your billions of erhe shorted shares. In fact, the SEC data shows you as the only 10% or more shareholder. Of course you also lied about erhc doing a count of non-voting shares, didn't you?

When all else fails, you revert to the gag order even though you don't know what it says or if it is still in effect. None of this is logical, it's all just delusional, deceitful, desperate dickran bullshit. No gag order would prevent a public company from disclosing mergers, partnerships, revenues, compensation, board of directors changes for years and years as its shareholders are stuck holding worthless shares with no financial information about their investment and erhe shares are doomed to the Caveat Emptor list. To even suggest a gag order like that is not logical, it is asinine. Nothing personal, you just happen to lie about erhc all the time; thousands of times but still the share price remains near zero. Pathetic and despicable.

Link, please, to “the latest seismic surveys confirming the presence of "source oil."”

Thanks.



.

Let's do a hypothetical conversation between ERHC and PPP.

PPP: So how much revenue do you make? Please note that by revenue we mean funds from stuff you actually sell to customers. It cannot be a loan or other forms of capital.

ERHC: last year we made revenues of $ 100 million bazillion.

PPP: That's very interesting. And how much of the $ 100 million bazillion was used to cover your payroll and payroll related expenses?

ERHC: we used approximately $1.6 million annually to cover payroll and payroll related expenses.

PPP: very good, so if we take that figure and apply it to the "covered period", you get a sum of $X in the form of PPP funding. Nice doing business with you.

The above is hypothetical.

Krombacher

Of course, I speculate—there's no denying that. But my speculation is grounded in logical deduction and induction, pointing toward potential truths. When we analyze available information, my reasoning stems from tangible data, such as ERHC's assets, industry valuations, and the structure of government programs like PPP. On the other hand, your argument seems to rely heavily on personal attacks rather than engaging with the facts and logic that I present.

Let’s address the $1.6 million in revenue you referred to. This is the minimum threshold required to qualify for PPP funds, which are meant to cover payroll and other business essentials. If ERHC qualified for this amount, it logically follows that their total revenue must be significantly higher, as companies don’t use 100% of their revenue solely for payroll. The $1.6 million is just a baseline and suggests that ERHC’s revenues are far beyond that number.

Regarding the status of Block 4: You’re right that we don’t have definitive public information due to the gag order. But again, my speculation about the block's value is informed by past industry valuations, like Kosmos’ estimate of 17 cents per share and Oranto’s 20 cents for a neighboring block. This is logical deduction based on available evidence, not "wild speculation."

Your dismissal of these numbers and refusal to consider their significance is itself speculative, based only on skepticism, not logic. Also, when you question whether anyone ever paid these amounts, the fact remains: these valuations come from industry experts and stakeholders, which adds weight to them.

As for the gag order, it’s precisely because of its secrecy that the lack of information could imply undisclosed deals or developments. While you accuse me of being speculative, your skepticism ignores the possibility that ERHC might have pursued other ventures or mergers (e.g., Starcrest). My speculation is rooted in patterns and logical connections; yours seems to rely purely on dismissal.

In conclusion, yes, I speculate, but I do so based on logical inference and available data, while you rely on ad hominem attacks rather than addressing the underlying facts. If you're going to critique my reasoning, at least engage with the facts and logic I’m presenting instead of resorting to personal insults.

There are several logical reasons why a merger between ERHC and Starcrest could have occurred, and why the CEO of ERHC, as well as another board member of ERHC, are also board members of Elcrest, a joint venture between Starcrest and Eland. Here's the breakdown:

1. Shared Leadership Indicates Strategic Alignment: The fact that the CEO of ERHC and another board member of ERHC also sit on the board of Elcrest is a strong indicator of strategic alignment between the companies. It’s common in the corporate world for leadership to overlap when companies are pursuing partnerships, mergers, or joint ventures. In this case, the overlap suggests that ERHC and Starcrest could have significant shared interests, possibly leading to a merger or deep collaboration.


2. Mutual Ownership by Offor: Both ERHC and Starcrest are associated with Emeka Offor, and it's unlikely that two companies under the same ownership umbrella would operate in isolation. It’s logically consistent to assume that a merger or close cooperation between these entities would streamline operations and maximize efficiency, particularly if they’re both focused on similar goals within the oil and gas industry. A merger could help consolidate assets, reduce costs, and improve their market position.


3. Revenue and Operational Continuity: ERHC claimed $1.6 million in annual revenue to qualify for PPP funds, but without significant existing revenues on its books, this figure strongly suggests it could be pulling revenues from a related entity. Given the leadership and ownership ties to Starcrest, it’s logical to conclude that the revenue figure could be derived from joint operations, possibly via a merger or significant partnership with Starcrest, which would allow ERHC to access Starcrest’s revenues or assets.


4. Elcrest as a Joint Venture Between Starcrest and Eland: Elcrest, a joint venture between Starcrest and Eland, indicates that Starcrest is an active player in oil and gas operations. If ERHC were to merge with Starcrest, ERHC could gain access to Elcrest’s assets and operations, which would instantly increase its revenues, production capacity, and exploration opportunities. It would make business sense for ERHC to merge with Starcrest to tap into Elcrest’s operations and boost its overall value and market prospects.


5. MOU Between ERHC and Starcrest: ERHC previously announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and while the details of this agreement were not disclosed due to the gag order, the timing and nature of this announcement strongly suggest that ERHC and Starcrest could be working toward a merger. Given that Offor owns both companies, it’s highly likely that the MOU was intended to facilitate closer operational ties or even a full merger. This would enable ERHC to enhance its asset portfolio and revenue base significantly.


6. Maximizing Shareholder Value: A merger between ERHC and Starcrest would be a logical move to increase shareholder value for both companies. By combining their resources, they can consolidate their oil and gas assets, expand their exploration footprint, and streamline operations, ultimately making them more competitive in the industry. This would directly benefit ERHC shareholders, who are currently dealing with the uncertainty surrounding the company's future and Block 4.



In summary, the overlapping leadership, shared ownership under Offor, revenue implications, and existing joint ventures (Elcrest) all point toward a merger as a logical conclusion. The CEO’s role in both ERHC and Elcrest suggests that the companies are more integrated than they may appear on the surface, and this could explain the $1.6 million revenue figure as well as the strategic direction of ERHC.

Krombacher

The truth is that you have no idea what assets erhc still controls. Recent news points out the questionable status of block 4. Regarding $1.6 million in revenues, that is more dickran "speculation" about something from years ago. Even if true, after expenses what would that number be? $500,000? A loss? Even the total revenue figure equates to just $.0005/share. Quite a distance from dickran's $8/share "speculation".

You also don't know squat about the gag order. You have never seen its contents, and you don't know if it is still in effect. And you insist on repeating the meaningless numbers from Oranto and Xrimlinger. Did anyone ever pay that much? Were they talking about unexplored blocks owned by cash strapped company like erhc?

Then of course, as usual and ad nauseam, the classic dickran, without proof, sketched headed short seller lies. Add it all together and you get more desperate, deceitful, delusional, demented, despicable dickran "speculation", which in dickran's weird world of the new erhe paradigm means blatant, intentional lying. It never changes, just like erhe share price near zero.

While we're examining dickran's world of deceit, where is that non-voting share count you promised? lmao.

Badog's valuation of ERHC at half a penny could only come from the perspective of a short seller, consider the following:

1. Lack of Fundamental Justification: Badog's suggestion of half a penny doesn't align with the actual data surrounding ERHC’s assets and potential value. Kosmos valued Block 4 at 17 cents per share, and adjacent Block 3 is valued at 20 cents by Oranto and Xrimlinger.com. This shows that industry insiders believe the assets are worth significantly more, and this is before even factoring in the latest seismic surveys confirming the presence of "source oil."


2. Short Seller Incentives: For a short seller, a valuation at half a penny would be a low, artificially pessimistic price, designed to drive down investor sentiment and suppress the stock's price. Short sellers profit when the price declines, and by pushing a narrative that the stock is only worth half a penny, Badog might be attempting to keep the price low or even provoke panic selling.


3. Short Squeeze Fear: Prices "much above half a penny" could cause problems for short sellers, especially if there's a substantial rise in the stock price. This could lead to margin calls and force them to cover their positions, triggering a short squeeze. Badog could be downplaying the potential value of ERHC to avoid this scenario.


4. Selective Negativity: Badog's post focuses exclusively on the negatives, such as the cost of drilling and the risks involved, while ignoring the positive developments, such as potential block buyouts, ERHC's existing assets, or any undisclosed deals (e.g., a possible merger with Starcrest). This one-sided argument supports the idea that his motives align with those of a short seller who benefits from fear-mongering.


5. Undisclosed Developments: If ERHC has indeed merged with Starcrest or made significant moves under a gag order, Badog’s valuation ignores these possibilities entirely. The estimated $1.6 million annual revenue that ERHC filed for PPP funding also suggests ongoing operations, which conflicts with the idea that the company is worth just a fraction of a penny.



In conclusion, only someone with a vested interest in keeping the price low—like a short seller—would argue for such an implausibly low valuation of half a penny. The valuation ignores asset-backed estimates from credible industry players and potential undisclosed developments that could substantially increase the company’s value.

Lov it when you speak Canadian.................

He's desperate. He isn't selling shares anymore of this scam and not one single person believes him.

This coming from a guy who only posts on one board for over a decade. You're not very smart and you suck at this game. You're showing desperation because you know that nobody is convinced of your amateur con-job at trying to sell shares of a company that doesn't even exist.

Oh, what's the pps today btw? .00000000000000001? and when are you planning to show the shorts that we've all been asking on this ticker? You dodge this question the most of anything on this board because you don't have any evidence of shorts at all.

dickran delusion #147 - "It's not a lie if you say you believe it". lmao. Control of close to 2 billion erhe shares and still in the dark. Main source of dd is gossip at women's oil conference and say nothing switchboard operator. Controlling interest of the company and don't even know what happened to block 4. Best dickran can do is say something good might happen "sometime between now and the end of time, OR erhe could go to zero". Beyond absurd.

Hey Krom....You have said you are sure I am short ERHE. I'm saying I am not short ERHE and have never been short ERHE. Now...bring on the authorities to throw me in jail. They can't. They would be wasting their time. And you are wasting everyone's time promoting this scare tactic.
You and others are simply STUCK and there is nothing you can do about it. You have been STUCK for how many years now? The short squeeze nonsense is not going to save you or anyone else. You had just better hope for a miracle as in a buyout of block 4 if ERHC still owns any rights to it. Even then I doubt that we would see an increase in the sp of more than a half a penny. Hell, drilling is expensive and it's a crap shoot. No one knows if there is even anything to drill for.
Again, you got yourself into this. And you admit that you are purely speculating about all of your theories, all of your senerios....well, everything I guess. Some followers are always sucked into these wild ass schemes and dreams but close to 100% of the investors out there are savvy enough to know a made up scam.
Badog

Again, I did not lie.

Your conclusions are false.

I suggest you go back and read my last post on the topic and focus on the word "unanimous".

As an example, if there were a hypothetical document which required unanimous agreement and only 69 out of 70 participants signed and agreed to the document, then the agreement is still not agreed upon UNANIMOUSLY. It doesn't mean there's no agreement. It doesn't mean that there are no signatures. It means a few may have dissented and so we couldn't move forward with a big investor who required it.

There was no lie.

Krombacher

You falsely said:

You created an erhe SPV. There is no erhe SPV.

You have signed contracts from SPV members promising not to sell erhe for less than dollars/share. There is no SPV so there are no members and there are no signed contracts from members.

You went so far as to threaten to release the newly created SPV documents publicly to scare short sellers. Again there is no SPV and there are no short sellers.

Now in dickran's demented world of the new erhe paradigm that might be called "speculation". But you don't speculate about things you claim to have done. And calling those falsehoods "speculation" or anything else does not change the fact that in the real world they are lies. dickran said those things. dickran is a known liar.

Regarding the asinine, completely unhinged dickran nonsense that "ERHC will be the stock that puts an end to all naked shorting in the OTC world", and "entire institutions will be dismantled in Canada because of this and may even influence Canadian elections. Mission from God", won't someone please coordinate the much needed intervention before it's too late?

I did not lie.

But to this day you still have problems reading.

Krombacher

Known liar and erhe's largest shareholder is squirming into the use of "speculation" in a lame ass attempt to cover thousands of his/her own baseless claims, false rumors and outright lies. Fortunately no one is fooled.

dickran stated that he/she formed an erhe SPV. He/she also stated that spv members had signed contracts promising not to sell erhe for less than dollars/share. Was dickran "speculating" about his own actions when he presented them as done deeds? Or is the demented claim of "the other dickran" to blame? lmao. Apparently in the bizarro fantasy world of dickran's "new erhe paradigm" "speculation" means to lie profusely with purpose and intent.

Just how delusional, demented, desperate and unhinged has dickran become? These asinine claims provide a good measure:
ERHC will be the stock that puts an end to all naked shorting in the OTC world.

It's a total game changer of iconoclastic proportions. Entire institutions will be dismantled in Canada because of this and may even influence Canadian elections. Mission from God. We're making history here.

Before dickran pretends he/she didn't make those astronomically ignorant statements, here's a link:

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175003556

Is it now too late for that intervention? I hope not.

Well, there, bud, I think ya missed the ol' maple leaf on this one, eh? You see, when you're out here on the message board shouting, ‘There are no shorts in the grey market!’—well, gosh, you’re kinda makin’ yourself the Timbit at the hockey rink, aren't ya? Here’s the thing, eh: by loudly claimin’ there’s no shorts, you're pretty much sayin' you're not a short seller. Which, ya know, wouldn’t look too good later if you turn around tryin' to file a lawsuit sayin’ you were short, eh?

Now, lemme lay it out for ya like we’re playin' a nice game of curling. If you’re publically claiming there’s no shorts, and then later you show up in a lawsuit as a short seller, well, that’s like throwin' a double-handled stone, eh? You’re basically admitting you’ve been fibbin’ the whole time! That’s what we call fraud, and I don’t think anyone’s servin' double-doubles in jail, ya know?

So, ya might wanna rethink how you’re puttin' the ol' pucks on the ice, pal. Can’t be sayin’ there’s no shorts and then showin’ up later like, ‘Whoopsie-doodle, guess I was short after all!’ That's a one-way ticket to lookin' like a real hosier in front of the judge—and probably some time in the penalty box, eh?

Krombacher

Bullshit

There are no shorts in the grey market. Nobody is shorting a stock that has a pps of .00000000000000000000000000001

And using words like "if" "might" or "likely" simply indicates that I'm speculating which is what speculators do with speculative investments like ERHC.

I'm glad you admit to massive speculation on your part. Your followers are easy to convince I guess. But the one thing you can't speculate on is the sp. That is the one true gauge of the current value of ERHC. All of your speculation has failed to convince the mass of investors out there of a short squeeze or anything else. They don't get swayed so easy. They don't throw their money down a rat hole of a grey market stock that can't even be traded in the USA.
Badog

You have never seen the contents of the gag order. You do not know if it is still in effect or when it stopped being in effect or even what type of information it would have gagged. It was issued during legal actions that have long since been "ended with finality". Everyone has seen information released by erhc via 8-K's over the last few years. Your selective use of gag order excuse whenever it fits your latest narrative while other times saying it's probably not still in effect is desperate and deceitful. The 400 page document is 6 years old and like the gag order, you have no idea whether it is still in effect. The most important parts of it remain redacted so, also like the gag order, you have no idea what it says.

At least in your twisting, squirming way you admit all of your baseless claims, false rumors and outright lies are pure speculation. In spite of years of hyping things like done deals, dollars/share, billions of shorted erhe shares, epic short squeeze, you finally admit none of that is based in reality. Amazingly, in spite of owning close to 400 million shares and leading a group that owns more than half the erhe shares, you remain completely in the dark regarding erhc operations for the last 5 years and going forward, which is apparently exactly the way erhc insiders want it.

How's that count of non-voting shares by erhc coming along? Or was that more of your "speculation"? lmao.

More of your erhc management misconduct allegations:
it's better (for erhc management) to follow the new paradigm and keep good news silent... until such time that the backstop, aka the Kraken, can be released. Not releasing an 8k as needed results in ZERO consequences now that the stock revocation case has been dismissed.
Dirty business to "speculate" about. Of course true to dickran form, I suspect none of it is true.

I don't see any allegation in anything you quoted.

Of course, the information about a merger during an active gag order can be withheld!

That's not an allegation. That's just fact.

The 400 page document clearly alludes to a gag order (in fact two of them if you include London). And the order was issued just after the Starcrest MOU. So the timing coincides and corroborate with the evidence in the 400 pages.

You left this quote out:

Is this how a public company should operate? Of course not. However, the gag orders provided enough legal cover for the company to remain silent. The SEC's attempt to revoke ERHC shares was dismissed in ERHC's favor, partly due to a control deficiency at the SEC. With no immediate threat of revocation, ERHC has been able to withhold information, even about positive developments, much to the frustration of short sellers. These short sellers often interpret silence as bad news and double down on their positions.

You're always taking things out of context. The additional quote says that the gag order is the legal cover.

Hence, no allegation was made.

And using words like "if" "might" or "likely" simply indicates that I'm speculating which is what speculators do with speculative investments like ERHC.

Krombacher

Asking for links to your own posts yet again. Must be difficult keeping track of all your own lies since there are thousands of them. Unfortunately for you, everyone has read them and IHUB has documented them. Does this ring a bell:
But ERHC, led by Nigerian management, follows a different approach—one where even positive developments, such as a merger, can be withheld. ERHC has been able to withhold information, even about positive developments, much to the frustration of short sellers.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174990821

And there are many more, all designed to support the most ridiculous "backstop" nonsense. mba, cpa, cfa, and you come up with the "backstop" by the end of time? And implicate Shell Oil, Offor, STP, erhc, Total in it? lmao. It's all out there. So let's focus on this latest display of twisting, squirming, hedging stuck long bullshit:

if a starcrest merger occurred

we don't know for a fact

it might still be

The merger with Starcrest, if it happened,

likely solved
So many dodges in such a short post. And you didn't even mention "not based in reality" or "sometime between now and the end of time" lmao.

Before you deny saying those things (just a few minutes ago), here's a link:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175106996

You have yet to produce a link of alleged allegations, lol. You just like taking quotes out of context to further a short seller narrative.

That said, the reason I'm focusing on the gag order has to do with the fact that if a starcrest merger occurred, it would have occurred during the time when the gag order was still in effect, and we don't know for a fact that the gag order has expired; it might still be in effect.

The merger with Starcrest, if it happened, likely solved much of the dire financial circumstances arising from the lengthy and resource draining litigation with Kosmos and allows for Peter to travel in private jets and pay for his very fashionable Hermes Eyewear he likely had on while at the conference, because Peter has good taste afforded by the salaries indicated were paid in the PPP Care Act funds, which can only be possible from revenue that ERHC must have to secure PPP funds in the first place.

Krombacher

Twisting, squirming, lying dickran at it again. Just can't control him/herself. Far too words filled with if's, may's, even if's and based completely on the dickran manufactured falsehoods about short sellers he/she can't prove exist and a gag order he/she has never seen. dickran's self-destructive greed and hubris just won't allow the lies to end.

Why this sudden, renewed focus on the worn out gag order excuse? Could it be dickran has recognized the absurdity and potential liabilities of continuing to circulate his/her allegations of conspiracy by Shell OIL, Total, STP officials, Offor and erhc to hide material information worth billions of dollars from erhe shareholders? All to try and justify the new, asinine "backstop" bullshit. Oh what a tangled web dickran weaves...

Huge over winded bullshit.

The short seller’s argument about the inevitability of lawsuits is flawed for several reasons, particularly when you account for legal nuances, financial realities, and market behavior. Let’s break it down:

1) Gag Order/Restraining Order and the 10th Amendment (State's Rights)

If a Houston County court judge has issued a gag order or restraining order, that court order takes precedence over SEC regulations under the 10th Amendment. This amendment affirms states' rights to manage certain legal matters, including judicial orders. Here’s why:

Court orders have primacy: In this scenario, the company cannot legally disclose information if a gag order or restraining order prevents it from doing so. This judicial action protects the company from violating federal regulations, as the SEC would have no legal ground to punish a company for complying with a state court order.

Dismissal of SEC revocation case: The fact that a court case related to the revocation of ERHC’s shares was dismissed, albeit due to a control deficiency, strengthens the argument that legal precedent may favor the company in this context, protecting it from SEC litigation or further regulatory penalties.

2) Short Sellers' Inability to Fund a Lawsuit After a Short Squeeze

After a short squeeze, the short sellers who took significant losses may no longer have the financial resources to pursue complex, multi-jurisdictional lawsuits involving legal systems in both Canada and the U.S.:

Financial devastation: Given the potential magnitude of the short squeeze, many short sellers may face devastating losses that leave them unable to fund litigation, particularly given the high costs involved in hiring attorneys for a complex cross-border lawsuit.

Uncertainty of recovery: Even if they were to initiate lawsuits, the costs and uncertainty of any potential recovery would likely deter most short sellers from pursuing legal action. They would need to prove that the company withheld information deliberately to harm their short position—a difficult and expensive claim to substantiate.

3) Fraud Exposure of Short Sellers

If a short seller who publicly claimed on message boards that there were "no short sellers" then turns around and admits in a lawsuit that they were short all along, they would be admitting to fraud:

Self-incrimination: By initiating a lawsuit, these short sellers would have to reveal their own fraudulent behavior—namely, that they intentionally misled other investors by claiming no short positions existed. This would expose them to legal action themselves, making it highly unlikely they would pursue litigation.

Fear of prosecution: Short sellers involved in such a lawsuit would be exposing themselves to potential criminal prosecution for fraud. This is a powerful deterrent, as no rational short seller would risk outing themselves in this manner.

4) Market Speculation and Assumed Risk

It’s critical to remember that market speculation and rumors about mergers, buyouts, and dividends have been widely discussed on message boards for an extended period. As a result:

Informed risk: Any investor—including short sellers—who has been following the stock should have been aware of these speculative risks and the possibility of withheld information, whether related to mergers, buyouts, or dividends. If they chose to ignore these discussions and proceeded with their short positions, then the responsibility for their losses lies squarely with them.

Assumed risk: The short sellers assumed the risk of the stock moving against them, even without company confirmation of rumors. In markets, participants are responsible for managing risk based on available information, which includes speculation. Therefore, they cannot claim to be blindsided if the speculation turns out to be true.

5) No Legal Basis for Claiming Withheld Information

Even if certain information was withheld due to legal orders (such as a gag order), it would not constitute a violation of securities laws:

Legal protection under court order: The existence of a gag or restraining order provides legal cover for the company to refrain from releasing sensitive information. The company cannot be held liable for not disclosing information under such legal constraints, and any lawsuit claiming otherwise would likely fail.

Market dynamics: Furthermore, the fluctuations in share price due to speculation or lack of information is a normal part of market behavior. Companies routinely withhold information for legitimate reasons, such as pending deals or court orders. This does not automatically open the door to shareholder lawsuits unless there is proven misconduct, which in this case does not exist.

6) Limited Precedent for Such Lawsuits

There are limited examples of successful shareholder lawsuits in situations like this. The burden of proof would be on the short sellers to demonstrate:

That the company intentionally withheld information to manipulate the share price;

That they were harmed by that withholding, and not by their own speculative positions;

That their short positions were somehow protected from the normal risk inherent in shorting a stock.


Given these challenges, it is very unlikely that any lawsuit would succeed.

Conclusion

In sum, the short seller’s argument fails to hold up under scrutiny for several reasons: the potential gag order takes precedence over SEC rules, short sellers are unlikely to have the financial means or incentive to sue post-squeeze, their fraudulent claims on message boards expose them to legal risks, and they assumed the risk when entering their short positions. Add to that the fact that speculation about withheld information has been widely discussed, and any lawsuit would be extremely difficult to win.

Krombacher

LOL LOL

the answer is poster is short bigtime ERHE shares !


jmho

what did the pps close at today? I don't think this has changed in more than 5 years. Not sure what "outcome" you're referring too, but evidence shows that this is a grey market trading scam that hasn't moved in over 5 years and has no sign of moving ever again.

Dude, the outcome Dude

Dude, it's been how many years that this has been in the grey market and trading at trips or lower. Wait and see what exactly?

Will wait and see................................ LOL

It’s all pretty simple

This stock is a zombie issue. The fat lady sang a very long time ago. The SEC gave all investors fair warning that the game is up.

Anyone that believes in short squeezes / backstops / etc is not going to be convinced by the all of the verifiable facts that have piled up over the years.

There will be some ups and downs, much like death rattle gasps, but this is deader than dead and the longs have been taken.

You have my sympathy

Of course he knows it. Or he/she doesn't know it and they just don't care. These clowns all spew that same garbage on all these scams. They word vomit all this bullshit that you can't keep track of anything they say so you ignore most of everything except key words like, "SOON" and "YOU'LL BE SORRY" and "FOMO". This Krom account has been on this ticker since it opened. The only board he/she has ever posted on is this one. Just like many other accounts that are scam accounts on this site. Posting all on one board the same bullshit over and over again to get noobs to buy thinking they will get rich overnight while they or the people they work for dilute and sell at peaks. Rinse and repeat.

You teach nothing. You know it's all crap. I believe the crypto king who is now in jail was teaching others also. LOL
Badog

what's the pps today? .000000000000000000000001?