Previously (on November 11) FWR announced that they had “entered into a Confidentiality and Exclusivity Agreement with a third party. The agreement provides, in effect, that subject to certain exceptions, Freewest will negotiate with the third party on an exclusive basis until December 1, 2009.”

“Freewest and its financial and legal advisors have been working with the third party and its advisors to determine whether they can agree on mutually-acceptable transaction terms, and have discussed confidential non-binding terms of a potential transaction. These discussions are ongoing.”

I would submit that the casual reader might assume that the negotiations with the third party were for a bona fide takeover of FWR in the same manner that NOT is proposing to take over FWR.

However in today’s “Update” (November 17) FWR talks of “Freewest's on-going negotiation of a value-enhancing alternative transaction”.

I don't think they are talking here of a takeover that is alternative to NOT's takeover. I would submit that the inference is quite different. Where before the reader was left to assume that a takeover by a third party was possibly in the works, we now have a “value-enhancing alternative transaction” which in my mind would fall short of an outright takeover by the third party.

Now the question is what kind of “value-enhancing alternative transaction” (that falls short of an outright takeover) might be in the works and would be better for the shareholders of FWR than NOT’s offer.

Some posters on Agoracom have previously staed that it could be as little as some new financing for FWR to complete their present drilling program but I just don’t think that cuts it.

Does anybody have any other ideas?

P.S. I also think that FWR is mentioning the "value-enhancing alternative transaction" at this point to head of any criticism in the future by disgruntled investors who thought the first news release (on November 11) was referring to a bona fide takeover by a third party.