Member Info for Poods

Guernica-

The painting your "handle" is named after is certainly symbolic of the FOG experience. For those who might know the history of this painting, it is worth Googling or simply visiting the Prado Museum to appreciate its significance. Our own "never-ending story" possibly had a new short chapter to it, if the Yahoo chat comment I read is accurate. Specifically, the comment was our leader POQ had sold more shares!!? Is this what a leader should be doing at this point. If true, why doesn't POQ invest part of his excessive salary to purchase those option shares. Maybe his golf dues were raised and he does not totally believe of what he speaks?

Nami-

A couple of responses to your recent. POQ is in the backseat like all of us waiting and think any delay would have not in anyway been of his making. Of course he would be disappointed, but next year he will simply get more options to salve his wounds. Secondly, it is my understanding the underwriting was allocated to perhaps a dozen accounts. So, it is hard to believe real institutional investors took part, as the investment is so small, it would be a distraction. Suspect the placement was a few guys like me taking on some shares. Would love to know otherwise, but not holding my breath.

Nami-

A couple of responses to your recent. POQ is in the backseat like all of us waiting and think any delay would have not in anyway been of his making. Of course he would be disappointed, but next year he will simply get more options to salve his wounds. Secondly, it is my understanding the underwriting was allocated to perhaps a dozen accounts. So, it is hard to believe real institutional investors took part, as the investment is so small, it would be a distraction. Suspect the placement was a few guys like me taking on some shares. Would love to know otherwise, but not holding my breath.

WW-

I know it is extremely frustrating for most FOG shareholders to read a lot of what is repeated on this board, as there is little in the way of new news. Credit is due to POQ for keeping his mouth shut as I requested several times. The fact he is in quiet mode has greatly reduced the share price volatility, but also allowed the seller(s) to slowly liquidate positions. Granted between who is selling and the non-specifics of the Bruner related matters has only added to the uncertainly.

What now? The share price may be telling us there is going to further delay despite comments to the contrary. We may have a short seller as well. But all this is speculation and wears on everyone. If and when, Origin issues a press release that drilling has commenced, volume should pick up, helping absorb more of the selling, but my feeling is the shares will not move too much until some drilling results, good or bad, are released. IF--we ever get the kind of news we all hope for, then the share price has a better chance of rising up. Bad news will be bad news for all of us, who have held out hope for so long.

WW_

I did not want to be accused of "cherry picking" when I re-posted earlier my complete initial post. What I specifically wanted chatters to appreciate was the 3rd paragraph which is as follows and was completed ignored by POQ and at least one Board member I spoke with:

'Unfortunately, FOG's history has resulted in cash being wasted, resulting in today's dangerously low cash reserves. ? If for some unknown reason, operations in both Australia and SA were delayed further, substantial additional dilution is in our future. Directors and management will not suffer, as they will find a way to issue themselves substantial additional options as they have shown they do well for themselves historically; spending basically nothing to "have a chance" we shareholders have paid for and waited patiently! Our current market value partially reflects what investors feel is a good "prospect". As such the company should strongly consider an offering of sufficient size to get us properly funded and better known'. note: WW. it is at this point we could have offered share and properly suffered at least half as much dilution.

WW-

Never intended to be disingenuous, perhaps, a bit too "tongue in cheek", but appreciate you probably are correct. After I sent this morning's note, the Cassandra Complex to mind (see below for the link), as a good analogy to the present situation. I am the first to again admit "the noise" we all experience on this chatboard will be nearly forgotten, if and when drilling begins. My purpose here is to highlight my belief the FOG board was simply short-sighted:

"Cassandra Complex" link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_(metaphor)

Over the weekend my thoughts were centered on digesting the current chatter as to whether we are or are not about to see Origin "spud" our joint venture. I also thought this morning, I would see if one can go back and review all one has posted and voila, indeed it is available. So, I am going to post what was essentially my FIRST chat and let you see what you think of my comments back then: right or wrong?

"
This is my first comment in this forum; although, have been a shareholder of several million shares of Falcon for about 8-10 years. Let me say this board has generally been an excellent resource for shareholders and others to express their opinions and on some occasion?s? to provide expertise, particularly, those with oil / gas industry expertise. ? ?Once, it was suggested to POQ, he consider reading this board for some useful input, but at that point said he did not read it?. Perhaps, he does now. Over the last several years, several unsuccessful attempts to convince POQ and a few others of the need to reverse split the shares and reasons to do so have failed.? ? My suggestion is based on over 50 years of investment experience as an analyst, director of well-known regional firm and principal of a U.S. based, registered investment firm.? ?

Unfortunately, FOG's history has resulted in cash being wasted, resulting in today's dangerously low cash reserves. ? If for some unknown reason, operations in both Australia and SA were delayed further, substantial additional dilution is in our future. Directors and management will not suffer, as they will find a way to issue themselves substantial additional options as they have shown they do well for themselves historically; spending basically nothing to "have a chance" we shareholders have paid for and waited patiently! Our current market value partially reflects what investors feel is a good "prospect". As such the company should strongly consider an offering of sufficient size to get us properly funded and better known.

Perhaps, an issue not addressed by the current company board is an under?appreciated fact many investors are excluded as potential shareholders for one simple reason: the current price of the share is literally pennies and considered JUNK! ? ?Unless the share price is above $5 per share, most brokerage firms; and therefore, many qualified investors, are excluded from purchasing FOG shares at major brokerages. ? ?A reverse split could be a positive move for its shareholders for the following reasons: first, prospective investors would be permitted in many cases to invest where price is ?currently ?a restraining factor in allowing shares? to be traded?; secondly, potential larger investors could absorb shares being sold by shareholders, some selling involuntarily, as in the case of a bankruptcy; and lastly, over time research recommendations might be written, increasing awareness.

My comments for the need to raise emergency funds continues to fail.

philmickelson-

~$0.11

Let's see if you are a man of your word.

philmickelson_

why is that important to you. all you do is throw trash on my observations

Naminanu

To your point below re the recent capital raise, it may simply be the report was approved before the financing was completed. The question is whether the pending financial could be mentioned in a "Subsequent Events" footnote. Unfortunately, I am not attuned to the details of Canadian securities regulations, which would cover that. However, it should be disclosed in upcoming filings, like the next quarterly statement, at the latest. Hopefully, FOG will spudded in at that point.

ITguy_

You are correct in pointing this out, which is about as strong a statement that can be made of the mismanagement of our company.

schlemiel

Thought a few of you would be interested to know given my largely negative observations, I decided purchased shares for someone special today. Not sure the price will weaken much, if any, judging by the improved trading action. My fingers, like yours, are crossed that our spud date is just around the corner. If we miss this season, a selling price in the single digitals is a real probability and of course management will REWARD themselves with more options.

schlemiel

Thought a few of you would be interested to know given my largely negative observations, I decided purchased shares for someone special today. Not sure the price will weaken much, if any, judging by the improved trading action. My fingers, like yours, are crossed that our spud date is just around the corner. If we miss this season, a selling price in the single digitals is a real probability and of course management will REWARD

Schlemiel-

Despite your handle, you are the last one this board properly designated by your handle.In any event, you can either answer an important question if you know, or if not, find the answer to this question. Has FOG not been qualified to have a reserve split for many years? If so, this is probably why POQ continues to hide the answer with his silly "the shares will only go down"! There is zero proof this is correct, as much quality research on the subject, seems inconclusive.

So, since POQ and Ann refused to answer my question regarding the reverse split qualifications, perhaps with your chat board credibility and following, you could find someone to answer the specific question as to whether FOG simply has not qualified for reverse split status the entire time I brought it up. If indeed FOG has NEVER qualified and POG and the board knew all along FOG would not qualify, we will really be getting closer to the bottom of this important question. This is important, since if we could already have had a reverse split, FOG very possibly be in stronger condition for the unexpected, which just happened. Instead, we shareholders have had the answer withheld by being dancing around the question with the trading concern issue.

Fingers crossed, hope you and / or others on the board may know the answer to the requirements question and set the record straight, as the non-professional approach to the question of simply not answer a SHAREHOLDER'S QUESTION is not an appropriate response by management, including board members.

Bigones-

I have been telling the company to do a reverse split for years; but all on deaf ears. Sometimes people seem to enjoy shooting themselves in the foot. When I have asked a number times in the past, there was never once an intelligent response, for that matter, no real response, except the shares may trade down.

About a year ago I wrote a note here that after a frustrating search with Canadian regulators, I suspected but never had the regulations cited for me FOG simply was not financial qualified to do so. This was another reason I had pushed to get POQ and the board to consider such a transaction. He NEVER confirmed whether the problem was internal, i.e. puny balance sheet or something else. The benefits were explained by me and the only response was the shares might go down. Well, they are indeed down some 50% and we missed the chance (maybe) to raise more money at higher prices and same dilution. Now, our forward thinking board has panicked and diluted while raised roughly half the money we probably could have. It is good thing the geology looks pretty interesting for us, that a knowledgeable operation is drilling and POQ can regurgitate what he is told. I know a number of the chatroom listeners think me nuts, but at the highest institutional levels on Wall Street many years ago, very large institutions thought and paid me well for good advice and not my opinion of what golf club we should use.

We****er-

Just read the recent comments and the thing I find amazing is my suggesting for years POQ get funds raised at higher was consistently poo-pooed on this board, as either not needed by the POQ believers or simply not understood, perhaps understandably so by those who have not been involved in corporate affairs. POQ made the mistake of an amateur by assuming status quo for the next several years would not necessitate more cash on the balance sheet. He and the board got caught with their pants down and the only parties to suffer are us shareholders, as the board has never thought: "maybe our poor judgement is cause to reconsider the large options we grant ourselves". If anyone of those people thought about shareholders at least once and not themselves and acted accordingly, I would have little to comment on. The delays and excesses of management are things the shareholders have had little stomach to oppose / address and are unlikely to do anything at this late stage. Thank goodness this is a small position that still holds some potential, but what a waste of time for all, except those who have enjoyed the good life at our expense.

We****er ertal-I suspect WW's comments are mostly true. However, the reason POQ and the board should be penalized is they ignored an experienced person's opinion to raise funds at much higher prices to cover unexpected contingencies. POQ and the board ignored that recommendation and thus should absorb all or most of our dilution. Also, the ridiculous salary POQ receives should finally be addressed. POQ simply is a bean counter and not an experienced executive for our purposes. Granted it is late in the game, but I have tried to get these issues to be topical, only to be dissed by several who know who you are. Wake up and act as responsible shareholders for an irresponsible board of directors. POQ is not the sole issue here.

Schlemiel,

Great question and one I asked a number of times. The CEO, or its CFO if designated to find out the answer, generally can gain insight from their investment banker. It is important information and my repeated requests were always ignored. The answer could certainly be helpful to FOG or any company's shareholders, whether it was good or bad; at least it was an answer instead of silence.

I tried a number of years to find the answer myself by calling a RBC broker listed as a contact by FOG, but was told since I lived in the U.S., the broker could not talk to me? Go figure; but yes, the selling continues to continue in an unexplained fashion, at least to my eyes.

ALL,

Did not think we would revisit these levels, but the seller is in control and the buying is relatively light. It is unfortunate POQ legally needed to say something about the option, even though it has nothing to do with what really counts... starting the drilling. Why the stock / seller decided to make POQ look bad is beyond my pay grade. Hopeful the starting time is near, which should help all of us. If not, "look out below".

Schlemiel, All-

Your statement "There's simply not the liquidity to absorb 40-60m shares of FOG stock" is not reality. There are interested parties in FOG as comments on this board indicate. The value of the block is relatively small compared to the potential opportunity. My guess is an untold number parties, including myself, could buy the block. Big there are enough unknowns related to the disposition of the "Petro shaes", the share price, rightfully so, is seemingly held back. Once the drilling bit starts to work for us and / or the block trades, trading should look more we hope. It is a matter of letting things play out and hope FOG does not run out of $$$.