Gulfsands Petroleum Share Discussion Threads

[kingsize] 23/3/2016 03:35

Couple of things.....

Is it true the GPX are required to "suspend production" as MyDearWatson says, or simply not allowed to sell product. I suspect there is a very meaningful difference here but I don't know the answer,

Secondly, the Arab Spring is now a distant memory and only Tunisia has even the slightest claim to have got anywhere with it. Syria was supposed to be part of that but has clearly degenerated beyond what the Western powers hoped for when the sanctions were originally mooted. Now, especially after today's events, it's time for realpolitik, something the French are good at even if we Brits have never understood it. This means we can complain about how horrid that nasty Mr Assad is being to his own people but he isn't our enemy, IS is (did we ever have sanctions against Pol Pot?). Bizarrely enough Putin has given the West an opportunity to step in WITH Assad and the Iraqi government to kill off IS once and for all on Western terms and if sanctions have to go by the board, then so be it. Our governments have often liked to say how they prefer to work with rogues to reform them because sanctions don't work and I wonder if the EU will do the same here.

Unfortunately, I suspect the opportunity will pass us by because it is a US election year and requires German soldiers and British acquiescence as well as French realpolitik.

[mydearwatson] 23/3/2016 00:19

Gulfsands wasn't in reality "forced to pull out" of Syria, as Fortson wrote. Western sanctions required it to suspend production of its Syrian acreage, which isn't the same thing at all. Sajjad and his colleagues then burnt their way through $128 million of cash, including making totally pointless buy-backs of shares which achieved nothing, and to make things worse they took on additional unfunded commitments. Which Mr. K had to sort out from his personal monies. No wonder board changes were inevitable lol. And how many people reading this blog have seen the enormously expensive offices, in the heart of St. James in the West End of London, which the previous board took on? Fortson uses rather dramatic language: a "beleaguered" company (is it?) and "last ditch" peace talks (are they?). I suppose some would call it a civil war, but isn't it really the case that the US and certain other parties have been funding terrorism in Syria for years? At least he has revealed who has bought 10% of the shares, so for that I thank him!

[bones698] 22/3/2016 19:37

Shaws. You really are thick, I knew that before but please stop talking shirt just because you have no valid opinion on anything else. I post as myself always have and will. Check my history buffoon.
This guy buying in May well have caused a rise but will soon drop back ready for the next dilution and wiping out of pi's. Don't day you haven't been warned and start moaning when it's worth next to nothing and you didn't sell again

[frank incence] 22/3/2016 18:22

You have to feel for bones. He did his cods here, and has been bitter and twisted ever since.
Looking good for 50p imo.

[wisteria2] 22/3/2016 18:12

hard to control... with a Bounce like that BR. gla

[mydearwatson] 22/3/2016 17:05

Of course there is a reason why the share price has gone up. It's the revealing on Sunday of who the new shareholder actually is lol

[shaws67] 22/3/2016 17:01

Don't buy it then, job done. lol

Did you create an new avatar just to post that?

[soul limbo] 22/3/2016 16:39

shujja... if you read the latest results.... the company itself state what the NPV of the syrian asset is.