GGR: GeoGlobal Resources Inc [was GEOG was BOWG] (2000 + )

» Wendell - From Yahoo board

-- posted by Wendell

» Kirk - Gujarat State Petro Corp strikes oil in 2nd well at Tarapur

I believe GGR has a 20% interest in this well.
It sounds like they could see positive cash flow in 6 months from this well!!!

Lets get the story on our record here:

Gujarat State Petro Corp strikes oil in 2nd well at Tarapur

ABHISHEK SHANKER

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2005 12:26:42 AM]

AHMEDABAD: The second oil well at the Tarapur block being drilled by the Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC) struck oil on Monday. GSPC, the operator of the 1,618 sq km Tarapur oil block, had first struck oil in May this year.

“Oil was discovered in the second well at Tarapur,” sources told ET. The well, Tarapur No 2, has so far been drilled up to a depth of 2,500 metres and digging will continue. “We struck oil at around 1,500 metres,” sources said.

It will take GSPC another six months to begin commercial production from the second well. In the interim, it will have to submit a production plan to the directorate of hydrocarbons in New Delhi. The company also plans to drill two more wells in the same block.

The company started drilling the second well in September. The first well, Tarapur No 1, was drilled up to 2,250 metres and GSPC had said that initial recoverable reserves are 5-7m barrels.

The Tarapur block has been the second major discovery for GSPC, as an operator, after discovering oil in the Dholka block in August ’04.

While commercial production has already begun from one well in Dholka, commercial production from Tarapur will start only next year after the drilling of the third well is completed.

In addition, the company is now looking at E&P opportunities abroad and has bid for two blocks in western Australia in a joint venture with Oilex of Australia, Gail and Prize Petroleum-HPCL.

Also, in June this year, the state-owned company had announced a huge gas discovery in the third well it was drilling in the KG basin along the country’s east coast. According to state government estimates, the reserve could be as much as 20 trillion cubic feet, worth $50bn.

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - GeoGlobal Short Interest

Settlement     Short    Avg Daily Days
  Date        Interest   Shares    to
                         Volume   Cover
Nov. 15, 2005  647,970   185,377  3.50
Oct. 14, 2005  501,357   209,871  2.39
Sep. 15, 2005  486,722   152,642  3.19
Aug. 15, 2005  508,903   439,466  1.16
Jul. 15, 2005  190,619 1,120,366  1.00
Jun. 15, 2005   29,596   248,727  1.00
May  13, 2005   38,087   188,010  1.00
Apr. 15, 2005   61,079   376,990  1.00
Mar. 15, 2005      300   84,178   1.00
Feb. 15, 2005    5,308   59,847   1.00
Jan. 14, 2005      869   75,404   1.00
Dec. 15, 2004        0   82,742   0.00

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - GGR Charts

<img width=516 height=262 src=http://chart.bigcharts.com/bc3/intchart/... >

URL for this page: http://6URL.com/GGRCHARTS

For more coverage on GGR, along with my buy and sell points to try and profit from its volatility, subscibe to my newsletter today!

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - GSPC strikes oil: Preliminary tests are very encouraging

GSPC strikes oil in second well in Tarapur block: Preliminary tests are very encouraging

Nov. 30: Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC) has struck oil in its exploratory well -- Tarapur-P -- in the onshore block CB-ON/2 in Gujarat. Reliable sources in GSPC told this website that "preliminary tests on the oil find are very encouraging." However, to fully establish whether Tarapur-P is a commercial discovery, further drilling and appraisals would be undertaken in the well, sources added. Tarapur-P is the second find in the Cambay block by GSPC this year. The company found oil in exploratory well -- Tarapur-1-- at the rate of 10 m3/day between 1,487 and 1,492 metres intervals during tests in July 2005. GSPC is undertaking the third phase of the minimum work programme (MWP) in the block. The company completed the second phase of MWP in the block on May 22, 2005. Phase-III has a term of two-and-a-half years, according to the provisions of the Production Sharing Contract (PSC).

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - Dec 1: Equipment failure and rough weather hit GSPC in KG

9--Equipment failure and rough weather hit GSPC in KG

Gujarat State Petroleum is dogged by trouble at its fourth exploration well at KG-OSN-2001/3. Drilling was suspended for 23 days until 15th November due to a combination of problems. The first was extremely bad weather off the eastern coast. Due to this no drilling could be carried out for seven days. "The sea was very stormy and the wind was very strong," we are told. "What they had was cyclone conditions." Added to this were record heavy rains that lasted longer than usual and inundated large parts of the coast. After the weather returned to normal and drilling was set to resume, a large crack was noticed in the top drive shaft of rig Perro Negro 3. "That was a serious problem," we hear. "It happened in the rarest of rare cases. It could have happened due to metal fatigue caused by uneven distribution of stress." This itself, we are told, could have been the result of some component not attached tightly enough to the shaft. "Because of the loose component, stress caused when the shaft is in motion is unevenly distributed and the weakest portion of the metal gives way first." Drilling was immediately suspended and after a thorough inspection it was decided to replace the shaft. Saipem - the owner of Perro Negro 3 - flew down a replacement shaft from Dubai. "But the equipment was not cleared by Indian customs for three days." Finally, the old shaft was taken out and the new one put in place. The bit had reached about 4000 metres when drilling had to be suspended for bad weather. At its third (lucky) well KG#8 GSPC had lost 24 days drilling due to a combination of geological surprises and rig problems. Before the latest incidents, drilling at the fourth well KG#17 had been incident free and GSPC was seven days ahead of schedule.
"They were hoping to reach target depth sometime by the middle of November and use the time to carry out a longer testing programme," adds a source. "Now all that time gained has been wiped out and they are behind schedule."

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - Dec 1: Despite delay good news imminent from GSPC block

10-Despite delay good news imminent from GSPC block

Bad weather and equipment failure on board rig Perro Negro 3 have upset GSPC's well laid out drilling schedule at well KG#17: target depth of 5700 metres is expected to be reached only sometime in the second week of December. Despite this delay of more than three weeks, GSPC continues to be cheered by news from KG#17, its fourth well in a 14-well Phase-I drilling commitment at KG-OSN-2001/3. Spud on 17th August in 65 metres water depth, the well is located 1.8-km northeast of the third
(discovery) well KG#8. The fourth well is meant to delineate the extent of the 20-tcf discovery reported by GSPC - to industry disbelief - at the third well. The third and fourth wells lie on the same fault block on KG-OSN-2001/3. By the middle of last week, after drilling resumed, Perro Negro 3's drill bit had reached a depth of 4375 metres. Says an industry source: "GSPC encountered cap rock at about 4000 metres and this is expected to continue till about 4500 metres." After that, sand is expected till about 5700 metres, which is also the target depth for this well. From about 4100 metres GSPC began drilling an 8.5-inch hole to the target depth. "Once target depth is reached the 7-inch liner will be lowered." GSPC senior management believes the fourth well "could turn out to be one of the best wells in India with a very big pay section."

An industry source adds GSPC is basing this assumption on leads from the seismic data as well as drilling logs. "GSPC has been recording gas shows continuously, earlier than expected, from the upper zone of this well," we hear. "The upper zone, particularly from 3800 metres to 3900 metres is very good sand with good porosity and permeability." GSPC has co-related logging data with seismic and is coming to the conclusion that this sand could be about 10-sq km in area and 40 metres thick.

Tentative plans are to perforate one interval in this zone to carry out a drill stem test.

NOTE: GSPC was lucky not to have an open hole when cyclonic storm conditions compelled a suspension of all rig activity.

"They had already lowered the 9 5/8-inch casing when the storm struck," we hear. "Luckily they had no damage at all."

-- posted by Kirk

» Kirk - Dec 1: DGH supports GSPC request to retain all of CB-ON/2

DGH officials believe Gujarat Petroleum should be allowed to begin Phase-III at CB-ON/2 in Gujarat without relinquishing 50% of the block area, as required by the PSC. A source confirms the oil ministry has received a DGH request to approve GSPC's wish to hold on to 50% of the block area that - technically - it should have relinquished when Phase-II ended on 22nd November, in line with the PSC. Advises the DGH:

"The operator's (GSPC's) request to enter into Phase-III of the work programme without relinquishing 50% of the original block area (809-sqkm) and retention of the Phase-II area of 1,211-sq km is recommended for approval."

DGH officials justify their support of GSPC's position with the argument that "the whole of the block area has not been fully explored and there is a need to further evaluate existing hydrocarbon prospects." Support for GSPC within the DGH comes following the Gujarat-based operator's commitment to shoot additional seismic of between 500-sq km to 1000-sq km and drill one or two additional exploration wells in addition to the existing Phase-III work commitment of one well to a minimum target depth of 3000 metres over two and a half years. Relations between the DGH and GSPC over this block have not always been so cosy. In March this year the DGH strongly objected to newspaper reports sourced to GSPC of a discovery at the Tarapur-1 well - drilled to 2250 metres - saying there was no recorded evidence of flow to surface. But GSPC argues that the Tarapur-1 well tested in April did indeed show modest flows of 60 b/d of 42 API grade crude. On 30th October, Dalma Energy rig MR-4 spudded a second exploration well (Tarapur-P) for GSPC some 80-km from Tarapur-1 to delineate the discovery. Another five drilling locations have been identified.

NOTE: If permission were awarded, it would be a landmark decision setting a precedent. In India exploration companies are rarely granted an exception to the rule that they must progressively relinquish parts of an exploration block when entering the next phase. Other companies in a similar position may wish to take note. GSPC is operator and owns 80% participating interest in CB-ON/2 while GeoGlobal Resources of Canada has the remaining 20% stake. ONGC has the right to back in 30% of any commercial discovery. If it exercises this right, GeoGlobal's stake would reduce to 14% and GSPC's stake would reduce to 56%.

URL for GGR Charts: http://6URL.com/GGRCHARTS

.

-- posted by Kirk

» Wendell - Persistence

-- posted by Wendell

» SteveT - Re: Persistence

For my good friend Wendell, I hope all is going well with you and your family. I know you realize GGR is not the former BOWG. Last I heard you were hanging on to all your shares bought at a really cheap price, good for you. I've taken a different path. I am not wild about the energy industry after Enron. I am not so worried about the company based in Canada but find it worrisome they are doing business in India. From what I understand India is ripe for backroom dealings. I feel this stock is heading up above $12 and will stay there for 20 days or so. imo that would be a good time to sell a bunch. If it drops after that, if you like buy back the shares cheaper. I'm not doing that since I don't want to be in this stock LT. I'm looking for other places to put the capital. Again hope all is well and you make a Million on this stock. We were lucky to land where we did and make good money on the stock. I am thinking it makes no sense to press our luck to far and get greedy.

Maybe look over this article.

The New Blind Pools

By ERIC J. SAVITZ

AMID A DIFFICULT ENVIRONMENT for initial public offerings, Wall Street has latched onto an ingenious approach to raising capital. It's an equity structure that George Costanza would love: the IPO about nothing.

Over the past two years, investors have snapped up $2 billion worth of shares in a new breed of blank-check stock offerings. It's the return of the blind pool, gussied up with a nicer name -- the special-purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. Whatever you call them, the game is pretty simple: You buy shares of a company with no operations, and then that company takes the cash and goes shopping for something to buy.

Pure genius! No need to worry about investors finding holes in the business model, since the prospectuses for these deals can truthfully offer absolutely no substantial information about operations. The deals are sold on the strength of management, the allure of vague plans to invest in hot sectors like China, oil or offshore outsourcing, and a set of strictures designed to protect investors from the kind of unscrupulous operators that gave blind pools a bad name in the early 1980s.

More than three dozen SPACs have come public this year and last. By one estimate, the deals have accounted for some 20% of all successful initial public offerings this year. And another 40 are in registration, with plans to raise $3 billion more.

The roster of current and would-be SPAC officers is startling. These are not the old-fashioned penny-stock sleazeballs. They are well-known private-equity and hedge-fund operators, current and former mutual-fund managers and Wall Street analysts, and assorted current and former politicians and corporate execs. Even Richard A. Clarke, the anti-terrorist expert and former official in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, has a SPAC.

IT'S A BIG CHANGE from the bad old days. Back then, sketchy investment banks would float tiny companies for a minimal amount of capital, creating public shell companies. Eventually, the shells would attempt to hook up with a real company that might otherwise have trouble going public, and the two sides would engage in a reverse merger, with the larger operating company swallowed by the smaller shell.

Blind pools were often the target of pump-and-dump scams, prompting a host of state and federal laws designed to protect investors from being duped into throwing away money on companies of dubious merit. And the problem has ebbed considerably: The days of First Jersey Securities and Blinder Robinson are thankfully gone.

The new generation of blind pools avoids the nastiness of bygone days. In the current deals, at least 85% of the cash generated in an initial offering has to be placed in a trust, unavailable to the company and its management until the day they make an acquisition. Until then, the cash sits in low-risk government securities, collecting interest. The rules also say you can't start shopping for deals until after the IPO closes; even looking for something to buy ahead of time is against the rules. So basically, you've got to jump in with no idea of what you're going to purchase.

SPACs also are working against the clock: They are structured to be liquidated unless they can complete a deal in a specific period, generally 18 months, with an extra six months' grace period if a deal has been announced but not completed. The SPACs are also required to spend an amount equal to at least 80% of the cash in the trust on their initial deal, although if sellers are willing, they can pay in stock or borrow some of the money. The main point: SPACs aren't supposed to be mutual funds or roll-ups; they are designed to acquire operating companies.

The first acquisition by any given SPAC has to be approved by 80% of the company's shareholders, or the transaction can't close. (Once a deal closes, the SPAC becomes an operating company, and the SPAC rules go away.) And in an interesting wrinkle, any investor who votes against a deal that wins the required super-majority approval can return his shares to the company in exchange for a proportional slice of the trust's cash.

IN SOME OF THE DEALS, management agrees to buy warrants, with the proceeds contributed to the trust -- although the warrants have no call on the trust assets in a liquidation. That has the effect of increasing the cash available for a deal, and boosting the payout to common shareholders, were there to be a liquidation. SPAC prospectuses often also require management to buy a certain percentage of the company's warrants, often 10% of the post-IPO total outstanding, as a way for them to have "skin in the game," while also supporting the price of the warrants in the after-market.

The warrants are an important feature of these deals: SPAC offerings generally consist of units representing one share and one or two warrants. In one variation associated with a New York underwriter called HCFP/Brenner Securities, the companies offer two classes of units: One class gives investors two shares and one each of two classes of warrants (with all the usual SPAC provisions). The other class provides two shares and five each of two classes of warrants, but with no claim on the trust in the event of a liquidation. All of that paper makes SPACs wildly popular with arbitrage-loving hedge funds, who can design elaborate strategies to trade them without really caring much about the underlying businesses.

Still, for all the protections they afford, SPACs aren't for the faint of heart. In fact, according to some state securities regulators, they shouldn't be for anyone. In the aftermath of the penny-stock scandals of the 1980s, many states installed stricter disclosure standards that largely bar the registration of blind pools. SPAC advocates consider those rules antiquated; the states contend that blind pools historically just haven't been wise places to put your money.

To get around the states' blind pool rules, some SPACs have registered for trading on the American Stock Exchange, which, as a designated "national exchange," allows companies to receive an exemption from state "blue-sky" securities registration requirements. (To date, there are four Amex-listed SPACs, and others in registration.) But most SPACs are traded only on Nasdaq's OTC Bulletin Board, which lacks the same national exchange status. Ergo, in New Jersey, Texas, Arizona, Wisconsin and a long list of other states, you aren't allowed to buy most SPACs.

That's a reflection of the arcane world of state-securities registration. Frank Widmann, chief of the New Jersey Bureau of Securities, notes that most states take one of two approaches to reviewing stock offerings. In "disclosure states," he says, companies can register as long as they are truthful in their filings. In "merit-review states," regulators can block registration of deals deemed too risky. In general, SPACs don't even bother trying to register in merit-review states, which tend to frown on blind pools.

"THEY DON'T EVEN APPLY here," says Texas Securities Commissioner Denise Voigt Crawford, who heads a task force on SPACs for the North American Securities Administrators Association. "There is no way they could ever pass muster under our review standard." She and some other state regulators remain irritated that the Amex has agreed to list some SPACs. In fact, at the states' request, the Amex earlier this year briefly stopped listing new SPACs, although it has started listing them again.

The concerns of state regulators don't seem to have deterred very many people from getting into the SPAC market or from creating them or selling them. Among the more prominent entrants is Acquicor Technology, created by former Apple Computer executives Steve Wozniak, Gilbert Amelio and Ellen Hancock. Acquicor has filed for a $150 million IPO and plans to find a technology company to buy.

Richard Clarke, who often opines on terrorism on national television[[I think he has a regular GIG on ABC news, possibly other stations...so wording needs modifying] and radio, heads Good Harbor Partners Acquisition Corp., which plans to raise more than $50 million in one of those complex two unit-class deals that HCFP/Brenner has been pushing.

Jonathan Cohen, manager of the Royce Technology Value Fund (ticker: RYTVX) -- perhaps best known as the one-time Internet stock analyst at Merrill Lynch -- now heads TAC Acquisition, (TACAU.OB) a SPAC which raised $120 million. Larry Feinberg, the respected health-care investor, has filed to raise $100 million for Oracle Healthcare Acquisition Corp. See listing on this page and complete tables on page M55.

IT'S NOT HARD TO UNDERSTAND why people would want to create a SPAC. For the founders, with 20% of the equity and little of their own capital initially at risk, a successful acquisition can mean a fat payday.

"The structure is attracting hedge funds and some private-equity players who see a disconnect in valuations between private- and public-equity markets and are trying to arbitrage that differential," says Brett Goetschius, editor of Reverse Merger Report, a quarterly publication that tracks the SPAC market.

But it's not exactly a novel idea; private-equity firms are forever buying assets on the cheap and turning around and selling them to the public market. And there are wrinkles in the SPAC strategy that complicate their ability to capture that gap.

For one, there's that ticking-clock problem: Potential sellers realize that a SPAC has a limited window in which to close a deal, which could work against them in a negotiation. Would-be sellers also know that the SPAC is required to spend at least 80% of its assets on a single deal, effectively setting a floor price on any acquisition.

"Some people have concerns that the SPACs effectively have a gun at their heads, which could lead them to paying inflated prices because of a weakened negotiating stance," says the Reverse Merger Report's Goetschius. And investors in the IPO, meanwhile, start off at a disadvantage, since investment-banking fees skim away some of the potential reward.

Of the SPACs that have come public in the past two years, only three have announced deals and had them approved by shareholders, although another five have signed acquisition agreements and await shareholder approval. To date, none in the current class has had an acquisition rejected, or had to liquidate. But it's too early to consider SPACs to be a permanent part of the IPO landscape.

In fact, this is the second go-round for SPACs. In the first batch, in the early '90s, just over a dozen came public, with structures not all that different from the one being used in current offerings. All of the last generation were underwritten by a New York-based firm called GKN Securities. SPAC proponents say the trend fizzled as the bubble-related IPO boom played out; no need to be doing reverse mergers at a time when almost any company could raise money in the public market. And in the 90s, the SPAC story was also tainted by scandal.

In 1997, the NASD fined GKN and 29 of its brokers a combined $725,000, and ordered them to pay $1.4 million in restitution to investors in connection with excessive mark-ups on eight securities, from December 1993 through April 1996. The NASD alleged that GKN had controlled after-market trading in the eight issues, all of which were classes of warrants -- two from one company and one class each from six others -- and artificially inflated their prices.

Of the seven companies involved in the case, four of them were SPACs. One, Restructuring Acquisition Corp., is apparently the only SPAC to date that had a proposed acquisition rejected and had to liquidate. At least two of the SPACs involved in the GKN mark-up case had directors or officers who are now principals at newer SPACs, although only GKN employees were implicated in the violations.

It's worth noting that some of the principals at GKN at that time now run a firm called EarlyBirdCapital, which has been by far the most prolific underwriter of SPACs. It has more than 20 deals completed or in registration. David Nussbaum, who was CEO of GKN at the time it ran into trouble, and who was fined $50,000 and suspended for 30 days in connection with the case, now runs EarlyBird. Other former GKN execs are with EarlyBird as well. That's not really surprising; in fact, the now-defunct GKN and EarlyBird share a common parent, a bulletin-board-listed holding company called Firebrand Financial.

Like EarlyBird, most SPAC underwriters are second- and third-tier securities firms. In recent months, however, several large firms have begun dabbling in SPACs: Deutsche Bank (DB) has underwritten one deal that's been completed, Cold Spring Capital, and has another, Grubb & Ellis Realty Advisors, in registration. Citigroup (C) is the lead underwriter on the pending IPO for a SPAC called Boulder Specialty Brands. That's not surprising: If you assume an average 7% underwriting fee for the $5 billion worth of deals completed or pending, you are talking about $350 million in revenue.

Steve Levine, president of EarlyBird, and a former GKN hand, contends SPACs fill a need for companies that would otherwise have a hard time getting to the public market. He notes that the investment banks that once dominated the market for smaller-growth IPOs, like Alex. Brown, Robertson Stephens and Hambrecht & Quist, have disappeared, leaving a void.

As more SPACs file to go public, competition is heating up. In some deals, the percentage of dollars headed for the trust is being raised, in part by investment bankers agreeing to delay part of their fees, pending completion of acquisitions. The recent Cold Spring Capital (CDSU) offering, for instance, has 92% of its IPO assets in trust. The pending offerings of Endeavor Acquisition and Boulder Specialty Brands would each have 94% of assets in trust.

Still, despite the safeguards put into place, SPAC investors are voluntarily flying blind; they don't know what they're buying. SPACs might provide a chance at a big score for their officers, and make nice playthings for hedge-fund managers. But for retail investors, they're just Wall Street's latest casinos. Enter if you're a gambler, not an investor.

E-mail comments to editors@barrons.com
URL for this article:
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB1134...

-- posted by SteveT