Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum Bridge Resources Corp V.BUK

TSXV:BUK - Post Discussion

Bridge Resources Corp > Management Change
View:
Post by cfhasib on Sep 27, 2011 9:33pm

Management Change

Suzi Budge, executive director of the Idaho Petroleum Council, said the resignations were expected."The company is transitioning from a focus on exploration to a focus on development, and these changes reflect that," https://www.istockanalyst.com/business/news/5429438/slate-of-management-resigns-at-payette-county-s-natural-gas-driller
Comment by Bob_Brant on Sep 28, 2011 10:09am
That is just an excuse...and a bad one at that.IF they really wanted to transition they would have spun the properties out into a separate entity.It's impossible to do anything when you are cash starved.Bob
Comment by cfhasib on Sep 29, 2011 9:18am
- The cash starved issue is very obvious, its a no brainer that they cannot proceed without further financing, so the point was pretty obvious- Why would they spin off to a separate entity when the commodity and the minning lands are the same? Transitioning from explorer to producer doesn't require different entity unless they found some other commodities and/or the location is physically far ...more  
Comment by Bob_Brant on Sep 29, 2011 11:59am
Jsut speculating...if they spun off the UK properties and debt, a bank may be more inclined to fund the Utah work.since it would then be a clean slate...I'm not a finance person so this may not make any sense.
Comment by TheJesus on Sep 29, 2011 11:38pm
How about a lawsuit against Perenco? They managed to fuckbuk out of 20 BILLION cubic feet of gas for 9 million dollars by not pumping it in the first place. Now that they own it they still won't pump it? Wake up white people.There may be more than one fox in the henhouse.If buk goes broke will perenco only have to pay 5% to the bank instead of 20% to buk? Maybe have a deal with another company ...more  
Comment by TheJesus on Sep 29, 2011 11:49pm
I have heard many allegations of Perenco environmental infractions and also that they are protected by the government. These are only allegations and only if they were to be proven true would I report it to any other media.
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities