% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Houston American Energy Corp. Message Board

grgsvll 201 posts  |  Last Activity: Apr 13, 2015 4:12 PM Member since: Jun 20, 2007
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    CHKR Trade

    by willi14555 Apr 13, 2015 9:30 AM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 13, 2015 4:12 PM Flag

    that would be the "obvious" conclusion after looking at what happened last quarter. It dropped to $5....back up to $8 for next divvy, down to $6 due to others seeing this same on way back up to $8 before divvy......but we all see that. My guess...and its just a guess like everyone else, is smart money gets out before then because the divvy will not be as big and going forward will be much worse as their $88/bbl oil hedges are coming off in the next few quarters.

    Point is a trend can never be a trend because others see the same thing and act accordingly and everyone wants to be in at the low and out at the high. So lets see what happens. Is it worth getting in now for a 50 cent upside and risk a drop of $3? If I got in at $6 I might hold for that huge divvy and acquire even more stock back down again in the $5's. I sold all my stake for the record at almost $12 and am sitting on sidelines watching..........waiting......???????

  • grgsvll grgsvll Apr 13, 2015 4:01 PM Flag

    There are no earnings. Sell the story....quick. It is over. Bankruptcy is a positive outcome for them...that is why they take that path. Not positive for you or any other common stock holder. Ever wonder why the insiders own almost no shares? Think about it. Why are they not loading up at these prices? You are about to find out. Do not let the MMs suck you in with this little pump....before the dump. Buyer beware.

  • at 67 cents. You can buy back tomorrow or day after at 60 cents. Not that I would.

  • Reply to

    EPA Decision....

    by enuffofthis35 Apr 10, 2015 6:19 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 13, 2015 1:04 PM Flag

    favorable to big oil?? After being sued by them, you think the EPA will favor them? Have they ever? Even with an oil man as president (George Bush), he put in this standard. No, I do not think it will be favorable to big oil....whatever that is. By having to blend renewables into their fuel and then sell that fuel....well.....what would be favorable? All they want is for EPA to get off their lazy white collar fat rear ends and write down the volumes required. No excuse for that. How long would it take someone to do that? A day? Big oil is not asking EPA to reduce the volume, as it does not matter to them what it is.

  • Reply to

    CHKR Trade

    by willi14555 Apr 13, 2015 9:30 AM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 13, 2015 12:49 PM Flag

    sorry will......after reading your post again, I see you are not saying to stick around and collect divvy. Yes, it has a $2.50 upside.....but we are here now. It has a little bit left but you better find a seat when the music stops.

  • Reply to

    CHKR Trade

    by willi14555 Apr 13, 2015 9:30 AM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 13, 2015 12:43 PM Flag

    have you not been watching? The way to play chkr is to buy after it has severe crash after paying huge divvy. then you need to sell it before huge divvy. You stick around to collect that will lose. That has been the trade and will continue....with a slight shift in timeline as everyone knows this is the trade. Need to be exiting this stock this week.

  • grgsvll grgsvll Apr 10, 2015 1:58 PM Flag

    at this point I am just hoping for a buyout from a big refiner......assuming the EPA ever comes out with their new RFS volumes for this year and the future. Lots of lobbying going on that we are not privy to. Low ULSD prices and not that low feedstock prices have margins suppressed, even with RINs at 82 cents.

  • Reply to

    Obama links climate change to public health risks

    by msghohoho Apr 7, 2015 10:27 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 10, 2015 1:51 PM Flag

    but Obama thinks its carbon emissions. Increasing CO2 to 400 ppm MUST be the problem. Maybe your doctor somehow decreases you susceptibility to it. Reroutes the CO2 coming out of your mouth away from your ear.

    To hear our president spout such nonsense kind of reminds me of Al Gore. Enough lawyers already.

  • Reply to


    by walla1957 Apr 10, 2015 1:41 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 10, 2015 1:46 PM Flag

    yes, they have to.....and no......not some day. Who and why would anyone buy a company with a negative value? Their assets are worth less than debt. I might go out and buy some of their assets, but why on earth would I buy the common stock that comes with billions in debt? I would not.

    Take your 63 cents and run walla. And do not look back. Get into biotech.

  • grgsvll grgsvll Apr 8, 2015 12:09 PM Flag

    actually they do. You might want to do some more DD. And muldermoo.....why ask the question..."why are we up". Did you not invest in anticipation of it going up? Is that not the point? It is up. Now you should be asking...yourself....when do I take some gains off the table.

  • Reply to

    Obama links climate change to public health risks

    by msghohoho Apr 7, 2015 10:27 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Apr 8, 2015 12:00 PM Flag

    "America has seen the number of people diagnosed asthma more than double over the last three decades"

    this is true. The New England Journal of Medicine looked into this data.....which shows graphically an "X" over the last 30 years. The line going up from left to right is indeed number of asthma cases and the line going down from left to right is pollution levels in the US. No correlation. The medical community (primarily long term studies from Harvard, Cleveland clinic, Johns Hopkins) that was published in this magazine concluded the reason for increased asthma was increased measles vaccines. One of the side effects of measles, besides death, is a very compromised respiratory system. So we are healthier and hence, more susceptible to allergens. The question is: what do we do about it? Depends on what you are allergic to. For me its grasses and dogs. Point is......its not trace pollutants caused by industry as the New England Journal and the data show. Putting forward even more regulation and limits will not change anything.

  • grgsvll grgsvll Apr 7, 2015 4:59 PM Flag

    no thanks. Just another penny stock scam.

  • what is much more interesting is how much money is being returned to Mary Jane buyers in Colorado. Love it.

  • grgsvll grgsvll Mar 15, 2015 3:44 PM Flag

    exactly. I do not think gibbersnacks gets it. In BK...the order of claiming any assets or cash is bond holders (debt) first, then stock holders. The common is dead last and almost always gets completely wiped out. Hence the stock price decline of over 99%. At least now we know the answer to: who are the people buying those shares on the way to zero and why?

  • grgsvll grgsvll Mar 14, 2015 12:15 AM Flag

    Those loans at 10-11% were an extension....just till met coal went back up to $200. Of course it has gone down even further. So.....why not tell Walter...."hey guys, do not worry about the principle for awhile....lets extend the term. By the way, those are some pretty nice bonuses you pay yourselves. Are those for doing such a good job? No.....I will take the company assets....sell them later.

    Sorry gippersnacks....but you do not know how long the met coal market will stay down here. Even China is cutting back on steel production and they are the biggest player by far. This is all human history, never has such a large percent of the population go from third world to first world so fast. China is 5 times bigger than the US and they grew twice as fast as we did after WWII. That huge demand seems to be over. So until a lot of the supply goes away.....well, you get the point. Can WLT hand with the likes of BHP, RIO, and VALE? Not even close. Hence the stock price decline.

  • Reply to


    by leroyjetsonpwdyfan420 Mar 13, 2015 12:32 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Mar 13, 2015 2:29 PM Flag

    I will take that bet. Anything you want. No chance. None. How about this.....whomever loses never posts here again?

  • not sure how much is this or something else regarding amrn. Obviously the sector is not moving up 20% a day like this stock.....but they are talking about it now on CNBC. Very interesting. I do not think I have ever owned a stock going up this fast. Crazy. I only got in (below a buck) because of a favor to a relative that works their. Then again at $1.20......which I thought I overpaid for.

  • Reply to


    by shakeitgood654 Mar 13, 2015 1:12 PM
    grgsvll grgsvll Mar 13, 2015 2:17 PM Flag

    Marked. Thanks for all the technical data and logic behind the 7 fold increase in price....."soon". Must have taken you quite awhile to come up with all that. I like the all CAPS and bold text followed by the ! That really adds meaning to your incredible well thought out post.

    Waaahahahahaha Oooohhh. Whew!

  • grgsvll grgsvll Mar 13, 2015 2:14 PM Flag

    I pulled up an older post between him and bigmonkey. It shows monkey man was the long and soren was bashing. Then it reversed. I put them both on ignore. They post way too much and offer no actual data or facts. Just typing #$%$ on the screen over and over. The whole met coal industry is in trouble. They all geared up for a huge china demand and then china demand went down. As more and more mines close things will eventually level out. But right now the price of met coal....all that still dropping and is expected to go all the way down to the $40s. Oil dropping, other metals dropping, almost all commodities dropping. At some point this will turn around and when it does, then one of the big boys (VALE, RIO, BHP) will be a good buy.

  • grgsvll grgsvll Mar 13, 2015 2:10 PM Flag

    4 shares instead of coffee? Where do you get such cheap coffee? It cost me almost $5 for a Vanilla Latte at Starbucks this morning....actually an even $5 as I left the change for the smoking hot girl serving it. I could get 12 shares of WLT.....if I was dumb enough to throw away $5. I would rather buy a cup of Joe.

0.190.00(0.00%)Apr 17 4:00 PMEDT