SA author Kevin Quon highlights 5 firms that are prospering from low natural gas prices,...

This news story has 11 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

asclepius8 Comments (340)
 
May want a different adjective than "prospering". Where's the earnings?

Insider selling at CLNE: buy/sells are 1/20.
21 May 2012, 02:43 PM Reply Like

bigazul Comments (915)
 
Damn, you beat me to the punch on that one. Prospering generally means profit, does it not?
21 May 2012, 08:06 PM Reply Like

Holthusen Comments (309)
 
Prospering???
The Stocks surely aren't!
CLNE down 40% in past 30 days
FSYS down 40% in past 30 days
GLNG down 25% in past 90 days
WPRT down 45% in past 60 days

GTLS great "buy" last Sept.

Perhaps the Companies are prospering in growth, but I have seen any great profits, so I agree with asclepius8, perhaps another adjective should have been used. Those of us that held the stocks over the past several months have really suffered from all this prosperity!
21 May 2012, 03:41 PM Reply Like

Wagon Master Comments (2)
 
Holthusen,

You gotta know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. They'll be back - soon. WPRT was up almost 12 % today!
21 May 2012, 11:20 PM Reply Like

bigazul Comments (915)
 
Short-covering throughout the sector yesterday, make sure you take some profits if you are long.
22 May 2012, 07:24 AM Reply Like

Holthusen Comments (309)
 
I couldn't agree more. I held shares of CLNE from 2010 and sold them at a profit several months ago (it was a long, and at times, a painful wait.).
My response is directed at the article claiming that these Companies are "prospering". The latest earnings reports do not support this premise for most of the Companies listed nor does current stock price.

Sell at the high is a great concept and I'll try to remember that. However, recognizing the current high is an even better concept and I'm still working on that skill.
22 May 2012, 07:55 AM Reply Like

Wagon Master Comments (2)
 
I agree that all these companies have seen better times most recently, but have been dealt a double whammy since the PIIGS affected the market most adversly of late. Since running up in mid-March the way was nothing but down. It simply amazes me that the country does not recognize the upside of using natural gas to power our motor vehicles. We supposedly have more Ngas that Saudi has oil. Could it be the big oil lobbyists putting the kabosh on this natural resource useage? Damn the torpedoes - full speed ahead. These companies will turn around price-wise. I hope the American people do like-wise.
21 May 2012, 11:20 PM Reply Like

Holthusen Comments (309)
 
6 or 8 months ago some folks were blaming the Koch brothers for blocking the Nat Gas act and I shrugged their comments off as "jealous nit picking." Since then I've come to realize the huge dollars that were being made by Koch Industries (and others) with Nat Gas at (and remaining) historical lows. It's the raw material for fertilizer, plastic,etc. Our wonderful Reps in DC (both sides of aisle) allowed themselves to be bought off at the detriment of America's future. I think we all remain naive at the amount of pay-offs that occur just to benefit a few. I'm a conservative but I'm starting to wonder how greedy the top 1% can become. Our huge supply of Nat Gas is a blessing, but it should be a blessing for 100% of America.
22 May 2012, 09:23 AM Reply Like

dksjan Comment (1)
 
Agree Holthusen,

Natural Gas Act would have been a benefit for at least 99% of America. Surprised both Texas Senators voted against it, even though Texas is such a big Oil and Gas State again (read about Eagle-Ford Gas/Oil finds). So, I emailed both Senators and only one replied.

Why they did not vote for the Natural Gas Act-

The Bill would have to be subsidized with a Federal Tax at the Gas Pump (about 11 cents.Gallon). Wow- versus losing out on the creation of hundreds of thousands of Texas/and Other Gas State jobs, huge tax subsidies on Natural Gas sales, $2/Gallon gas versus $3 to $4 /Gallon, independence from Middle East Oil, Cleaner Air, and a world more at Peace.

I feel the real reason they voted against it was to keep the big Oil companies from losing profits to Gas companies. Pay-offs to benefit a few, as you say. What a trade off.
22 May 2012, 11:51 AM Reply Like

Holthusen Comments (309)
 
I'm 64 years old, highly educated and I'm extremely embarrassed to admit that I refused to believe until now that votes on important policy issues such as the Nat Gas Act could be bought. I'm sad for what this Country has become...a haven for the Very Rich and Welfare Seekers. Anyone in between is no longer represented.

This country was blessed with the discovery of HUGE deposits of easily obtained Nat Gas & great ideas for utilization from T Boone Pickens & others, yet we have failed to act for over 3 years. The situation is sadly pathetic.
24 May 2012, 07:13 AM Reply Like

Jocardan Comments (22)
 
I think that perhaps they were looking at the over all picture of what an .11/ gal. increase would mean. The price of EVERYTHING would go up because this is a nation on wheels, specifically truck wheels. There was a point where gas and diesel prices were so high that hundreds, probably thousands of small independent truckers had to sell their rigs because the price of fuel was too high for them to make a decent profit and make payments on their rigs, too. If the government stays out of it, free enterprise will make gas powered vehicles and gas filling stations affordable and available across the country.

I don't buy gas in the state where I live because the state fuel tax is so high I can get it .25-.30/gal cheaper in the next state.
22 May 2012, 07:43 PM Reply Like