Petro One Energy Corp CUDBF

RE:Facts/Not Fiction

[Jsbachfan]

You might add some credibility to your position if you practice what you preach and concentrate on "fact".The following are some that you might wish to ponder and they are all verifiable from the news archives on the company's website.
1)  in early 2011 POP announced that it had entered into a "Management Agreement" with Chapman under which Chapman would manage its "drill program". 
2)  This relationship meant that describing Chapman as "independent" is inaccurate as it was earning revenue that depended on the scope of the drilling program.
3) Shortly after, in fact after the first trial drilling, Chapman were quoted in a news release as calling the result "an outstanding quality reservoir" and that "it is rare to find an untapped reservoir in the Viking that has such excellent porosity etc". Accordingly, based on this "company changing potential" drilling activities continued at a high level.
4) Based on this also the share price rocketed from about 40c to over $2 by the end of July 2011.
 Many investors, including myself, bought shares on the strength of the Chapman report, which POP's IR team used extensively in their promotional activities.
5} But commencing later that year  the bubble burst when subsequent results failed to deliver what Chapman had glowingly intimated was a "major new find".
6) The share price peaked at 1400% above what it is today, and conspicuous by its absence from news reports is any recent reference to Chapman, the "Management Agreement" and the potential reserves touted as a result of Chapman's findings.

What PeakReturn alluded to in his post  as a "joke across the Prairies" presumably stems from these facts. Whether or not this is the case  because a number of people believe that something improper took place, it can only ever  be a matter of speculation in the absence of hard proof.It may well be the case that this was simply another genuine promising early discovery that failed to prove out. Either way, when "facts" are equally consistent with both viewpoints it is perfectly proper that those facts should be aired so that people can make up their own minds.

So, given the above, what "false statements" are you referring to?