MAVERICK MINERALS CORP

16 Sept 2010capital raising announcement● NeutralMajor

On September 7, 2010, Maverick issued 725,971 new shares at a deemed $1.05 per share to Art Brokerage, Inc. to settle $762,269 of debt it owed that company. This turns debt into shares, so the debt shrinks and the share count rises, diluting existing holders. The filing does not say who owns Art Brokerage; the share price and debt are as stated.

Discuss in chat

18 Dec 2009asset acquisition disposition▲ GoodMajor

On December 14, 2009, Maverick signed a farm-out with Southeastern Pipe Line Company giving it the right to earn an interest in oil and gas leases in Fort Bend and Wharton Counties, Texas. Conditions include a non-refundable $350,000 fee, starting drilling on a test well by December 14, 2010 (or the deal ends and the fee is lost), and drilling at least four wells. If earned, Maverick would get a 70% net revenue interest, subject to SEPL's option to back in for 25% of the working interest after costs are recovered. The filing says Maverick is no longer a shell company, which is a new direction after it had no property following the S. Neill lease return.

Discuss in chat

20 Feb 2009capital raising announcement▼ BadMajor

On February 13, 2009, Maverick took a revolving loan of up to US$1,000,000 from Senergy Partners LLC at 8%, due December 31, 2012, for general expenses, due diligence, professional fees and joint venture programs. It also issued Senergy 89,500,000 shares at a deemed US$0.005 to settle a US$447,500 debt that Senergy took over from Art Brokerage, giving Senergy 92.3% of the stock and a change in control. The filing also states the company is an exploration-stage company that no longer owns the S. Neill lease and is evaluating joint ventures in Texas and Saskatchewan.

Discuss in chat

23 Apr 2008financial restatement▼ BadMajor

The board concluded on March 24, 2008 that the 2005 audited financial statements, and several 2005 and March 2006 quarterly statements, can no longer be relied on and must be restated. Corrections include treating the 2003 UCO deal as a reverse acquisition, extra management and stock compensation expenses, a $71,600 loss on a loan settled in shares, a $419,959 impairment of the oil and gas leases, and $1,027,791 of a gain on forgiven related-party balances moved to paid-in capital. Restated filings are promised on or before May 15, 2008.

Discuss in chat

11 July 2006material agreement termination● NeutralMajor

Eskota gave its 100% working interest in the S. Neill lease back to the vendor/operator it was bought from in August 2005. In return the vendor released Eskota from the US$1,400,000 note and took over the trade payables (over 90% already paid). The filing says rising contract service and equipment costs and operational difficulties made the burden with the note unacceptable. This ends the dispute and reverses the March 2006 plan to drill a new well on the lease.

Discuss in chat

3 Mar 2006debt financing● NeutralMajor

Eskota Energy, Maverick's subsidiary, received formal foreclosure notice on its S. Neill lease in Fisher and Nolan Counties, Texas, after it suspended interest payments during the payables dispute. It then reached an accord with the vendor: it will pay interest arrears and keep paying, assign its interest in a separate ~800-acre co-owned lease (net proceeds expected about $60,000) toward the outstanding payables (estimated $90,000 balance), and the vendor will take no further action under the foreclosure notice before the first principal payment is due, provided regular interest is paid. This continues the December 2005 demand and for now defers the dispute; the company plans to drill a new well on the lease's North Unit instead of continuing the work-over.

Discuss in chat

19 Dec 2005debt financing▼ BadMajor

A note-holder demanded repayment of the full $1,400,000 note owed by a Maverick subsidiary. The note-holder is also the operator of the oil and gas lease where the subsidiary owns a net royalty interest, and the demand arises from a dispute over unpaid payables on that lease. Interest payments are up to date, the parties are discussing options, and legal action is not ruled out.

Discuss in chat