Jason, you were right that there was a sell-off of HUSA today for Alibaba, or at least that is what it looked like. Did you get some BABA shares? I kept raising my bid prior to opening so I got my initial shares right at opening. Bought some more throughout the day and am just about break even now. If BABA does what I think it might, I will probably use the profits to buy some more HUSA shares.
E-trade shows HUSA closed the day at 37 cents, after dipping down to 31 cents on 507,000 shares. Yahoo shows a 35 cent close, but I trust E-trade's cutoff more than Yahoo's. Not bad on a day like today where Alibaba was sucking all of the oxygen out of the room.
The Chinese stock Baidu is up 8000% since its IPO in 2005. I don't necessarily expect that from Alibaba, but I think it will go up since it has 80% of the online retail market in China. I kind of look at BABA as a booster rocket for my HUSA stock and a hedge against the SEC and the disgruntled shareholders who don't know how to take a loss and keep running.
I don't really recommend BABA to anyone since it could possibly be very risky, but it has been an interesting ride so far. Let it go up $20 or $30 and then I'll probably call it a fun ride.
Have a good weekend,
Bobby, you must really have a lot of shares if you averaged down to $1.67 from $9.00 (compared to what you started out with.) I like the concept of averaging down if you think there is a decent chance of the share price going back up. Now all you have to worry about is hitting $1.67 or above.
My guess is that if we get to $1.67, then things will probably be looking up by then in a big way and you may want to stick around for some profit. In any event, I like $1.67 because that number is pretty close to what I need in order to accomplish the financial objects I have in mind for the profits from this stock. Like Mitchell, it would help out with my retirement.
Jason, thanks for the tip on SSN. I took another look at it just now and it looks pretty good to me, but there must be some reason why it is trading at 35 cents. With HUSA, we know what the reason is - mainly the lingering SEC enforcement action and the shareholder lawsuit. Get rid of both of those and I think we go to $2 fairly rapidly.
Not sure what the catalyst would be with SSN, other than getting more oil and gas production. I see they were at $4 in 2011, before the share price melted away. Based on what little I know about it, I would give it a $3 share price if it can get the ball rolling again. That would be 9 times where it is now, so it could be a home run if it starts hitting regularly. But that is a big if. Plus, it is based out of Australia. At the moment, I don't care much for foreign run companies. Having said that, just for fun the wife and I may get a few shares of Alibaba tomorrow morning. It was her idea, so we'll see what kind of investor she is :)
In my case, I like companies that provide more to me than just possible share price appreciation. With HUSA, I like everything about it except the fact that it crashed a few years ago due to 3 big wells that didn't come in, resulting in attention from the SEC and disgruntled shareholders. I could do without the SEC action and the former shareholders that can't seem to take responsibility for their own investing decisions. But then again, if it weren't for them, we wouldn't be able to get HUSA at these bargain prices.
If they were smart, they would buy now to hedge against losing their lawsuit. Who knows, maybe that has something to do with the high volume and rise in share price over the past few days.
Have a good evening,
Hey Bobby. To answer your question, at 37 cents we are exactly halfway between zero and this year's high of 75 cents. The news that the SEC complaint is now going to an administrative law judge bombed us out, in my opinion. Now there must be something going on behind the scenes that we are not aware of that is attracting new investors, or causing previous investors to get back in. Will we retrace? My gut tells me that we won't, but at least half the time the share price does exactly the opposite of what I think it will. Bottom line is that volume is up for a reason. We may never know exactly what that reason is.
These are some things it could be, in my opinion:
1. It could just be a simple short term trend reversal that traders are taking advantage of. The SEC sent us down. We bounced. Now the trend is back up. We were due for an uptrend. How long will it go on like this? Until the next downtrend. I know that sounds stupid, but that is how I look at it. For the long term, however, the stock is in an uptrend.
2. Hupecol could be drilling now in Serrania and some investors could have found out about it. We know that HUSA said Hupecol is planning to drill 2 test wells in Serrania before the end of the year. The end of the year is closing in fast.
3. More progress on the domestic pipeline of projects is always a possibility. More drilling. More wells coming in. We know that HUSA is under a cease and desist order from the SEC, so that is probably why we aren't seeing any press releases at the moment. But that doesn't mean HUSA can't continue to do business.
4. But the thing that I suspect the most is that the market is starting to see the SEC action and the shareholder lawsuit as likely to be concluded in HUSA's favor. The SEC has no case. There was no fraud. We laid that out earlier on this board. I think folks are just catching on now. In my mind, HUSA is worth $2 on Columbia alone. How much with no SEC complaint?
Thanks for the compliment. First I was Mr. Terwilliger and now I'm Josch. There is a word for your condition. It is called delusional. To get a good idea of where you are coming from, Dave, I would suggest anyone interested just click on your nic and look through your posts for the last 3 months. Quite revealing. Anyway, you bring up a couple of good points.
A $20 stock, you say. Yes it was $20, after a run powered by irrational exuberance and based on potential earnings that never materialized. It never should have been that high, but it demonstrated clearly the volatility of this stock and the potential for runs to the upside should the conditions be right.
Excited about a 12 cent move, you say. Well, in this case, the small 12 cent move you talk about is from 25 cents to 37 cents in just a few days. That looks to be almost a 50% move to the upside. I guess that wouldn't be too good, if someone is short like you appear to be, but to folks that loaded up around 25 cents, I guess you could say they feel rewarded for their investing prowess, in a way.
Anyway, its all good at the moment with HUSA and will get better when the SEC enforcement action and the shareholder lawsuit go away. I have recently concluded after extensive research, some of which I posted, that they both will either go away or be settled in a way that is in HUSA's favor.
Thanks for keeping your posts clean. The well articulated insults I can handle. It is the dirty and nasty language that needs to be dealt with by Yahoo.
Thanks, Josch. I very much agree with you and your legal friend that HUSA has not committed any fraud.
When I read the Halcon article from a couple of days ago, a light really came on for me. What HUSA did is done in the industry all the time. Why did the SEC decide to call out HUSA on the matter? Plus, I believe the appeals judge that reversed the dismissal of the shareholder lawsuit indicated that the use of the word "reserves," as opposed to resources, is not an issue. And HUSA never filed its CPO-4 estimates with the SEC in any of its quarterly or annual reports, from what I remember reading. If anyone wants to read the entire Halcon article on Bloomberg from September 8th, just google "Drillers Pile Up More Debt Than Oil Hunting for Fortunes in Shale."
In fact, if anyone is new and wants to judge the SEC case for themselves, I would recommend reading the Halcon article first, then go to the SEC website under administrative proceedings and read the SEC's case, as laid out in "Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8a of the Securities Act of 1933 and 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934." Then read HUSA's response in "Respondents Houston American Energy Corp. and John F. Terwilliger's Answer." The whole thing is clear as day to me, but what do I know?
Part of HUSA's defense is that they are getting unfair treatment before the law, in that similar cases are not handled as a SEC enforcement action. How true. In fact, I think this case could be a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court if it can be shown that the SEC has targeted HUSA like the IRS has targeted certain groups.
I hope the HUSA legal team deposes the SEC, like the SEC did to HUSA, and finds out who and how the SEC case got initiated. If this can't be done in an administrative hearing, then do it during discovery in a jury trial. Then make it clear there was no fraud, just estimates. And don't be afraid of the SEC. The best defense is a good offense.
Thanks for that, Josch. In my mind, the threat from the SEC is simply a money threat, in that they might find that HUSA should be fined. The bigger issue is that a finding for the SEC by the ALJ could feed into the shareholder lawsuit and make it more likely that the Fifth Circuit Court in Houston could find something in favor of the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit. That is where company assets would come into play, in my opinion. I think if you stop the SEC, you likely also stop the lawsuit, or at least cool it off a little bit. This may now be part of HUSA's strategy, as we know when the SEC hearing is but we have heard nothing about getting the case back on Judge Harmon's docket in Houston.
Good discussion. The more I look into this, the more apparent it is that the SEC complaint and the shareholder lawsuit are way out of line and intended simply to compensate investors who did not do their own due diligence and bought shares without doing an appropriate level of research first.
If not dismissed by the ALJ, I hope the SEC complaint eventually gets before a jury so HUSA can mount a full blown and proper defense. I would especially be interested to see if the discovery portion can find out how the SEC investigation got initiated and who actually made the initial complaint and who they work for. Keep in mind that some folks made millions as HUSA fell. They have all disappeared now with their gains. I have written about this before. I guess I am saying I would like to know exactly who or what is behind this obviously biased SEC enforcement action.
Read this from a recent article about Halcon and its CEO, Mr. Wilson, and then ask yourself why the SEC has decided to jump on HUSA.
"Halcon's recent lousy run shows how quickly a bright future can dim. Like many of its peers, Halcon uses two sets of numbers to describe its outlook. To the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the company reports what's known as proved reserves.
The SEC requires an annual tally and limits these calculations to what the firm is reasonably certain it can extract from existing wells and other properties scheduled to be drilled within five years, based on factors such as geology, engineering and historical production.
To investors and lenders, Halcon also highlights a much higher figure that it calls resource potential. These estimates, while loosely defined by industry guidelines, don't follow the SEC rule or timeline, as Halcon discloses at the beginning of its presentations. In fact, as Halcon notes, the SEC forbids companies from making resource-potential claims in official reserve reports. The agency doesn't regulate what companies say at investor conferences, in press releases or on their websites. No one does...
Halcon's August investor presentation for an Oil & Gas Conference in Denver illustrates how far apart the figures can be. The company told investors it had resource potential equal to 1.3 billion barrels of oil. That's almost 10 times the proved reserves it reported to the SEC at the end of 2013.
Asked in the July interview how much faith investors should put in resource estimates, Wilson says: "They shouldn't put hardly any in them. They should just put in the idea that there's some upside there. And if the practitioners are good at what they do or lucky, that upside might get turned into value."
So far, from what I have been able to read, the court has said that HUSA's misuse of the word "reserves" is not an issue that should be prosecuted. So why is HUSA being put through the grinder and who started it?
Josch, to answer your question, my take is that most of the exposure is to the company directly, with some exposure to the board members, but mostly to Mr. Terwilliger. I know HUSA is trying to get Mr. Terwilliger dropped from the picture, which I fully understand.
The shareholder lawsuit names HUSA as the defendant, as noted here: Steve Silverman, et al. v. Houston American Energy Corp., et al. (first complaint). But I do believe there are claims within the lawsuit against individuals at HUSA. I'd have to go back and read the lawsuit again. In any event, I take this action as the one most likely to be resolved in HUSA's favor, either through action by Judge Harmon or through a jury trial. Worst case scenario for current shareholders is that a sale of HUSA is forced by the court, which would include all the concessions you talked about, with the proceeds distributed to members of the class action lawsuit. So there is risk here, even if unlikely. I think this will ultimately go in HUSA's favor, because the lawsuit is frivolous and bogus, in my opinion. Judge Harmon didn't like it either when she dismissed it the first time.
On the SEC complaint, the following are listed as respondents: "In the Matter of HOUSTON AMERICAN ENERGY CORP., JOHN F. TERWILLIGER, JR., UNDISCOVERED EQUITIES INC., and KEVIN T. McKNIGHT
Respondents." This action as all over the map and tries to slap down everybody, and especially Mr. Terwilliger, it would seem, while saying nothing about the responsibility of the investor to do any due diligence research on his own and to take responsibility for his own investment decisions. This is what the SEC wants the administrative law judge to determine:
"whether the Houston American Respondents should be ordered to pay a civil penalty ...; and whether the Houston American Respondents should be ordered to pay disgorgement..."
My take is that HUSA could be hit with an SEC penalty, but it could also be thrown out of court.
Hey Josch. Good point about the D&O (Directors and Officers) insurance and the plaintiff's lawyers probably wanting to settling the shareholder lawsuit. You would think that after the 90 page opinion by Judge Harmon on why the shareholder lawsuit should be dismissed that the plaintiffs would see the handwriting on the wall. If this lawsuit were legitimate, it likely would have already been tried by now.
My question would be how much D&O insurance does HUSA have and would it cover all of any potential settlement? I imagine the shareholder base is pretty large. I can't imagine them getting more than pennies on the dollar, if that much. As I have said before, if they were really smart they would load up on HUSA stock and then drop the lawsuit. Wouldn't want anybody to do anything illegal, of course, but you get my point.
I totally agree with your point about fraud not even seeming to be an issue in the SEC case. My conclusion was exactly like yours. They used 1 billion as the low end of their estimate, which came from SK Energy, and then established the high end based on their own experience in the field. Plus, it seems to me that anybody investing in any company has an obligation to themselves to perform due diligence and to see if what the company is saying makes sense. If it doesn't make sense, don't buy the shares. It is almost like all of these investors in the class action lawsuit are saying "I am not responsible for my own investment decisions" and HUSA now needs to pay me for making a mistake. Gee, I really hope the ALJ sees all of this. It is clear as day to me.
Plus, HUSA is an oil exploration company, for crying out loud. What do folks expect when there are 3 dry holes in a row in a major oil play? I guarantee you that these same folks would have been strangely quiet if HUSA had hit oil in CPO-4 and the stock had stayed in the teens.
"Wouldn't it be nice if the CEO bought some more shares if he thought the same?"
The CEO did buy more shares at this level last year in May. This is from the Form 4 filed with the SEC:
"Common Stock 05/20/2013 P 173,462 $0.2498 (1) 8,172,434
Common Stock 05/21/2013 P 111,713 $0.2499 (2) 8,284,147
Common Stock 05/22/2013 P 110,105 $0.2499 (3) 8,394,252"
I don't think he has purchased any more since them as we don't have any more Form 4s.
Just like the press releases have dried up, my take is that insiders have stopped trading completely until the SEC and the previous shareholders (a few of them) get off their back. Wouldn't want to do anything that might seem like they were taking advantage of the situation.
Drip, drip, drip. More Chinese water torture. What if the SEC charges and the shareholder lawsuit are both found to be without merit, which is still certainly possible? All of this is dragging out for 5, 6, maybe 7 years. Just doesn't seem fair. The only good thing is that it could end up being a great buying opportunity for the long term investor who thinks HUSA has a good chance of being venerated.
As I said before, I think HUSA is quietly laying the foundation for profitability and success during this time period where the SEC investigation and the shareholder lawsuit are sorted out.
If anyone has any information about what is going on with the shareholder lawsuit and Judge Harmon, please post it for the rest of us. We know the lawsuit dismissal was reversed, but no news yet on what Judge Harmon is going to do with it, like have a jury trial, for example, or maybe decide it herself. I wonder how the timeline of a possible jury trial and the SEC hearing might work out. Maybe good news in one could influence the other, who knows.
This is from the September 4th order from Carol Fox Foelak, the administrative law judge in the SEC case:
" The hearing was set to commence on January 12, 2015, in Washington, D.C., and is expected to last up to three weeks. The parties intend to discuss measures to streamline the proceedings."
Hi Mac. Interesting post. Some comments on what you said. First, were JT and company formally indicted or was a complaint simply lodged against them by the SEC staff? I just read up on indictments and that point is not exactly clear to me at the moment. Seems more like a complaint to me, especially since it is in the administrative law area. However, it seems perhaps it could turn into an indictment after the judge looks at it in pre-hearing, which was supposed to happen last Thursday. Here is an interesting point from Wikipedia about indictments and may be partially why HUSA seems to be indicating they will go for a jury trial if judged negatively the the administrative law judge:
"Indictable offenses are normally tried by jury, unless the accused waives the right to a jury trial. ... the Sixth Amendment mandates the right to a jury trial in any criminal prosecution..."
Second, you are right about the likely low interest in HUSA while the SEC enforcement action is being considered by the ALJ and maybe later by a jury. Looks like the volume was only about 9,000 Friday, while the normal volume is over 100,000. What pops up to me is what a great opportunity to buy shares if you think the charges will not stand up when put under the scrutiny of an impartial judge/jury.
You seem to doubt the 12.5% held by HUSA in Columbia and want an independent source. First, I imagine the SEC and the shareholder lawsuit verified this point, but if you want more go to Canacol's website and look at their holdings page. It shows Canacol with 37.5%, Hupecol with 50% and HUSA with 12.5%. HUSA would really be in hot water if there were no 12.5%. In my mind, if you are so distrusting, maybe you should think about putting your money somewhere else.
How much on legal you ask? Millions by the time it is all said and done. Money well spent if cleared of all charges or if the legal team is able to get all this dismissed. Better to the lawyers than to the vultures.
The SEC has appointed an administrative law judge to look at the enforcement action. She looks reasonable, from what I have been able to find out about her in research. She looks to be getting close to retirement age, so I imagine she has a lot of experience.
The hearing was postponed, but the pre-hearing session was supposed to take place today over the phone. On August 28th, HUSA provided its initial defense to the charges. I read the charges a few weeks ago. I read HUSA's defense today. Wow, I was clapping and ready to acquit HUSA by the time I finished reading the 16 page document. HUSA has retained Fulbright and Jaworski out of Houston. Those are a couple of famous names around Houston. Mark Oakes is the actual lawyer handling the case and is apparently out of the Austin office. I think he was at the shareholders meeting, even though I didn't get a chance to meet him personally.
Basically HUSA is denying that they did anything wrong and that their constitutional rights are being denied by the lack of a jury trial. They were very respectful of the judge, but made it clear that this case would be taken to the court of appeals if found in favor of the SEC, which will provide a proper forum for HUSA to defend itself. I was thinking to myself - this lawyer is great and right on top of the defense. I guess there is a good reason Fulbright and Jaworski have an outstanding and tough reputation in Houston.
The initial order gives the ALJ 300 days to decide the case, like I said a few weeks ago. HUSA's defense was all over the SEC's convoluted list of complaints, denying them one by one, paragraph by paragraph. We'll see what the judge says. She has dismissed cases like this before, from what I saw in trying to read up on her.
It you want to see it all for yourself, go to the SEC website and click around and find the current administrative law cases and click on case number 3-16000, which is the one for HUSA.
Actually, Tim, my sense is that everyone is just kind of bored with HUSA at the moment. I know I am. I think the SEC charges and the pending lawsuit jury trial have just kind of put a pall over everything. This feeling is somehow compounded at the moment by the sad state of affairs in our country and the world.
In my mind, the lawsuit and the SEC charges are bogus and without merit, but you never know till the fat lady sings. My take now is that this should all be resolved within the next 12 months. But until they are resolved, we may not see much interest in HUSA.
I think the strategy now is for HUSA to quietly lay a base for future operations while vigorously defending against the lawsuit and the SEC. Either one has the potential of ruining the company. But I do like Josch's take that the company would survive such a hit and continue to do what it does best.
I know you are a trader for the most part, so good luck with that. I am a long term investor, for the most part. I may take a look at selling some now and slowly accumulating over the next 2 years, depending on how things work out with the lawsuit and the SEC. I read your post about being advised to sell HUSA at $12. That reminded me about the fact I should have sold Dynegy at $10 some years ago. Things would have been different for both of us had we acted back then. Anyway, water under the bridge.
What always sticks in the back of my head is the residual value of HUSA's Columbia concessions. From what I can tell, Serrania, Los Pichacos, and Macaya could be worth up to $100 million, if you do the comps with the Ombu block next door. That would be about $2 a share. I guess that is what the lawsuit thinks they are going after. I'm going to sit in the courtroom and see if the judge and jury gives it to them.
By the way, I am still upbeat on HUSA in the long term. I don't want to sound too negative here, but we have to face reality.
Very good point, Doorsheim. It has been ordered that the administrative law judge will hold a hearing on the SEC case in 30 to 60 days, but then he has 300 days more to produce a decision. This 300 days should give the shareholder lawsuit time to go before a jury, if Judge Harmon does not just go a head a decide it herself or possibly even dismiss it again based on its merits. I have said from the start that the lawsuit is a frivolous and bogus case. Plus, Judge Harmon has already written 90 pages on how the plaintiffs didn't have a case (because the charges were insufficient).
Anyway, good point about the SEC covering itself. From their point of view, why waste all that time and effort investigating a company and then not be able to go ahead and punish the company. From your comments, it does look like the SEC may be putting the burden of decision on Judge Harmon and the district court system. That way, the SEC is covered either way. This is actually works for me, because what I want to see now is a jury trial in Houston of the shareholder lawsuit. I just can't see a jury of Mr. Terwilliger's peers convicting him and HUSA of doing anything illegal. I intend to sit in the back of the courtroom the whole time and take in the entire proceeding. In fact, I would be more than happy to take the stand and give an impact statement from a shareholder who will be hurt if the jury finds in favor of the plaintiffs.
This is getting interesting now and I hope HUSA is starting to feel charged up to defend themselves. I have faith in the American system of justice and I will place it in the hands of my fellow Houstonians.
Harvey, thanks for posting the link to the new quarterly report for the 2Q that just came out this evening and the part you quoted about the SEC administrative case.
Tim and some of the others gave a pretty good summary of how the quarterly report looks. It is out a couple of days earlier than last year and shows increasing revenues, increasing production, an increasing list of new projects, and a lower cash burn rate in some respects. I was especially impressed by the list of 8 new projects for the first six months of this year. This shows that the CEO is on top of his game and is executing his domestic plan. Can't fault him now for not executing. This is where his experience in the industry starts to pay off for us and where his contacts prove really valuable. Seems like the 2 wells in Serrania are still on for this year. In fact, one clause in the report mentioned activity that was ongoing or expected by the end of the year and somehow I got the feeling that Serrania may already be underway. But that is just speculation on my part.
The SEC case is completely without merit, in my opinion, after reading its 20 pages today. It is similar to the shareholder lawsuit, but does not reflect the smear tactics incorporated in the lawsuit. What is especially revealing is that the SEC did not file their action until we got the reversal of the dismissal of the lawsuit. Plus, if they were on solid ground, why wait until almost 5 years after the event? I know, the statute of limitations was about to kick in. Read the charge sheet and ask yourself if what HUSA did was illegal or whether it was merely a company trying to promote itself and its prospects to possible investors. Why commit fraud if all you are going to get out of it are 3 dry holes along with an expenditure of $20 million. There was no intent. There was no violation. And it does not even pass the common sense test. HUSA needs to spend what is necessary to defend itself vigorously.
No problem, Bobby. I think we understand and appreciate each other now. Sorry to hear about losing your supervisor job in 2007. I know that must have hurt bad. Even though I didn't lose my job, starting around 2007 I lost big time with Dynegy stock. In fact, it turned out to be much worse than losing my job. Anyway, I have found that investing in individual stocks makes you either a genius or an idiot. After Dynegy, I felt like a real idiot. I'm working on being a genius with HUSA. A sense of humor is so important. I try to not take myself too seriously.
I just finished reading the 20 page SEC statement of charges. It now looks like it goes before an Administrative Law Judge, instead of the jury trial I had assumed earlier. 20 days for HUSA to respond and a hearing to be scheduled in 30 to 60 days before the judge. He then has up to 300 days to announce a judgement, like what Josch was saying.
What got me was how biased the statement of charges was from beginning to send. Read it for yourself. Go to the SEC press release and click on the SEC charges. They even mentioned how 2 blog posts caused the share price to fall to $14, or something to that effect. I said to myself, "what?" This is a factor in the SEC bringing charges? Here is some of what they said Mr. Terwilliger said in his own defense about the 1 to 4 billion estimate:
"During the Division’s investigation, Terwilliger sought to defend his and Houston American’s decision to more than triple the Operator’s estimates, testifying under oath that:
•“[I]n the Llanos Basin, throughout the entire basin, we use 500 barrels per acre-foot recovery. Every one
•“[the Operator] just stuck 150 barrels. They just applied some very conservative worldwide assumptions;”
•“150 barrels per acre-foot is not recoveries for Colombia, so [the Operator’s] report is really a three billion
I just don't see anything illegal. The SEC is grasping for straws here, IMO.
Bobby, you said, "Do I think Crop is a smart guy? Yes, but if everything he Says was true, he would be very rich right now and would not spend his time in a stock chat room like us." You said in one of your previous posts that you had decided not to criticize anybody else anymore. At the time, I thought to myself that you are really showing some wisdom.
But to respond to your comments here, all I can say is that sometimes I think I am a real dummy when I look at the effect of some of the things I say and do. So thanks for the compliment about being smart, but I think you have way overrated my comments. Concerning your conclusion about being rich if I were really smart, I think you are right. I have made some decisions in the past that have resulted in me just being a regular guy like you, working to pay my bills and trying to prepare for retirement.
Concerning my time on this chat board, as I have said before it is a hobby for me and I get some pleasure out of it. I like HUSA and look at this board as something kin to my own personal blog sometimes. You don't have to read my posts if they cause you anguish. Concerning rich folks, I have known a few and most of them are really good people. In a way, I consider myself rich to have known them. I also consider myself rich due to all the wonderful blessings that the Lord has given to me and my family.
So lighten up and lets try to have an objective conversation about what is going on with HUSA. I definitely have some thoughts about the shareholder lawsuit and the SEC charges. Since I am a shareholder for over a year now, I think I have standing on any issue that involves HUSA and may try to do what I can to help out.
Tim, just for the record, I never said I actually wanted to call the SEC. What I said was that if they are interested, they can figure out who I am and contact me. Big difference.
If they contact me, then I would be glad to review the facts with them and give them my opinion on what is going on - not that they are interested in what I have to say. I also mentioned that if they contact me, then I will want to include my senator and congressman in the conversation. Thats all. I really doubt that they will contact me, but you never know.
I believe the SEC has a role in regulating business, but, like the IRS, the SEC needs to stay impartial. If there is anything other than impartiality involved with the SEC, then Congress needs to know about it so something can be done.
When I think about it, I'm giving the SEC the benefit of the doubt at the moment, but I will have some things to ask them if they contact me. Remember, the SEC basically works for us as taxpaying citizens. As a retired military guy, I was basically in the government for over 20 years and I would be glad to talk to these folks about what they are doing, if they want to talk to me. Enough said.