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

Mart Resources Inc MAUXF



OTCPK:MAUXF - Post by User

Comment by mjh9413on Dec 17, 2012 12:16pm
379 Views
Post# 20740213

RE: Time to put this thing to rest once and for al

RE: Time to put this thing to rest once and for al

Okay I am no expert but this PIB's, if it ever gets passed, main intention is to put a use it or lose it obligation on the marginal field acreage owners...under the current lease/sublease arrangements there is no lose it provison but the main problem is that few indigenous companies have develeoped their marginal fields since 2006. Mart is just a payer of all expenditures and lends technical expertiser and drilling services, the latter being the only indigenously registered part of MMT's existence. They have no ownership over the oilfields and in fact their co-ventureres present a credit risk to MMT if they prove unable to pay, and the obligation to pay is set out in the RSA. So what merger?? Mart's expressed strategy is to get into bigger fields which are not marginal which needs no indigenization. 

And to settle the question of Eni/Agip's obligation to pay, it is covered in every MD&A, namely

 

"Mart’s share price could also be adversely affected if the sole purchaser of its petroleum decided not to pay for nominated petroleum during a prolonged shutdown. The third party purchaser is under no contractual commitment to continue to pay for nominated petroleum not delivered, even when
it is through its own fault. If production was halted and Mart was not paid for nominated oil, Mart’s cash flow ould also be significantly impaired, which could require Mart to source alternate financing."
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>