http://www.gulfkeystone.com/ The firms exploration programme in Algeria is going well and "the shares look good value", say the Investors Chronicle. Your comments please. goal.

I believe a 90 day time limit on judgement,so June is my guess too?

And even then the judgement may go against them. Risky.

Posted 8th March 2013:
"The trial in the English Commercial Court of all the claims asserted by Excalibur, which were vigorously disputed and contested by the Companies in the course of the trial, was completed on 1 March 2013. The Judge will give his decision in a written Judgment, the completion of which may take in excess of three months due to the size of the case."

Harry would it make a huge difference if the case is lost?

hard to tell, but though there must already be a fair amount of "fear" built in, i guess you could easily see sp down to 100, even if only as a knee-jerk

I suppose it totally depends on the judgement and the size of any settlement. The Excalibur guys are "continuing to seek up to $1.62bn in compensation and damages from Gulf Keystone Petroleum". The trouble is that this could drag on even further if there is any kind of appeal, though I'm not sure if they can appeal the judgement, just the size of the settlement.

i know everything we've read on here has been pretty partisan, and it is equally clear that the GKP executives also have no idea how to act with decorum in court, thus losing at least an element of credibility

for all that, the judge will be well-experienced and issue his decision based on the facts presented, though the credibility of the witnesses and their responses will certainly not be immaterial

on balance, i don't think the carpetbaggers will be seen as anything other than exactly that - or at least that is very much my hope!

Not so sure i agree, with regards to exc's behavior,in fact my readings of their conduct was the opposite,clear and consise.Against a long winded attempt to drag the case out,(hoping the effect would bring the company to a early settlement) by the plaintiffs?

perhaps i got it arse-about-face as to exactly who was bulshitting whom in that case :-)

the way i read it was that one party (i thought it was the excalibur scallies) couldn't remember all sorts of relevant facts, lied or intentionally misled a number of authorities and potential sources of finance, and thus blew themselves out of the water when they could not come up with the splosh when it was demanded and required against a deadline

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/04/iraq-provincial-elections-maliki-majority.html





By: Ali Abel Sadah for Al-Monitor Iraq Pulse Posted on April 24.

إقرأ باللغة العربية

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki did not win the political majority that would have enabled him to form local governments by himself, according to the results of the local elections held in 12 Iraqi provinces. In the coming period, he will be required to engage in a fierce struggle with political blocs, some of which — even Shiite ones — are his opponents.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/04/iraq-provincial-elections-maliki-majority.html#ixzz2RVmNDMR2

. Wrong thread

and it is equally clear that the GKP executives also have no idea how to act with decorum in court..................

new here, hello chaps. what do you base that on. were you at court?

during the course of the hearing, there were regular reports from ringside

thanks cynic, are you able to point me to the posts that led you to think what you said. are the reports you mention on this board or another website. just trying to get to facts. good luck.

niceonecyril is a prolific updater for this thread, so you would need to trawl back through the pages to find the relevant bits, but he did daily post the details of the proceedings.

thanks , i'm still trying to figure out how to go back in time on this board!

"earlier posts" or "page"

Try around page 190.
Link here:
http://www.moneyam.com/InvestorsRoom/posts.php?page=190&tid=7803

oops, ' earlier post' button.

thanks alot for the link. i was just wondering what was reported to justify cynic saying,
'and it is equally clear that the GKP executives also have no idea how to act with decorum in court, thus losing at least an element of credibility'

i've probably read the court feedback before elsewhere but i'll go back to your link later and read what's on this board. anyway niceonecyril refutes what cynic says .

my recollection - and i admit it was often difficult to determine exactly who was saying or doing what - was that EXC's management/owners were less than consistent or convincing in their evidence ..... however, GKP's equivalent, certainly at one point, seemed to be treating the court rather like a perry mason drama