Seeking Alpha

Emails from energy executives, industry lawyers, state geologists and analysts show skepticism...

Emails from energy executives, industry lawyers, state geologists and analysts show skepticism about the profitability of gas drilling from deep underground shales. “The word...is that the shale plays are just giant Ponzi schemes and the economics just do not work,” wrote one analyst in August 2009.
Comments (62)
  • mgcolin
    , contributor
    Comments (116) | Send Message
     
    Looks like healthy debate to me...NYT trying to stir things up with mostly anoymous speculation and skepticism about a new technology. Time will tell.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:25 AM Reply Like
  • You're Kidding
    , contributor
    Comments (115) | Send Message
     
    Is anything honest anymore when it comes to money? Does everyone just lie for their own gain if they think they can get away with it? Do we have to question the truthfulness of everything we hear if it has to do with $$$? Can nothing be taken for granted as spoken? Is no one trustworthy? No company? No institution?

     

    I'm losing faith...!
    26 Jun 2011, 06:54 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    You're a little late to the game. I lost faith two years ago.
    26 Jun 2011, 07:00 AM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (993) | Send Message
     
    When you question trustworthiness, honesty, etc, are you referring to the gas industry or the NYT?

     

    NYT mentions Enron several times in the article. It's kinda like Obama trying to scare people with the Bush card whenever he gets into a tight spot. Then the article goes on to imply that the gas majors are all breaking the law by lying about their reserves.

     

    The article is full of innuendos and very few facts.

     

    Having said that, a healthy dose of skepticism is in order when making decisions regarding Nat Gas as a reliable energy source for far into the future. The fossil fuel energy sector, not just Nat Gas, is a business that operates based on secrecy and mis-information. Do your own homework. Don't let these "just heat and eat" stories from the NYT take the place of your due diligence.

     

    As mgcolin writes, "time will tell".
    26 Jun 2011, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    I agree that we should always do our own research. Unfortunately most all research requires accepting someone's representation at one juncture or another.

     

    Even supposed objective criteria, as simple as balance sheets, don't tell the true story. There is no TRUTH only SPIN. Everyone in the Financial industry is acting in SELF-INTEREST.

     

    I have found only one proven investing theses. Listen to as many sources (talking heads) as you can, calculate their consensus and DO THE OPPOSITE. Never fails.
    26 Jun 2011, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • Joe Morgan
    , contributor
    Comments (1500) | Send Message
     
    What can you expect from the New York Socialist Times......

     

    There is Krugman, telling us everyday, that if we spend more everything would be just fine.....guess what the boat is sinking and Krugman is looking like a clown......

     

    Spending more money, money that we can't afford, just pushes a heavier tax burden on our kids......

     

    Shale Gas drilling is just okay, don't let the New York Socialist Times coupled with the left, and marxists extremists cloud your thinking.....
    26 Jun 2011, 12:02 PM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3529) | Send Message
     
    "Spending more money, money that we can't afford, just pushes a heavier tax burden on our kids......"

     

    That assumes that the money will be paid back. By depreciating the dollar, only savers are being ripped off. Just bought a car for twice what I paid for my first home forty some years ago. And financed it for 3.15% for 65 months. Makes no sense to me but why fight the reality of this leaderless, amoral government.
    26 Jun 2011, 12:47 PM Reply Like
  • cbc
    , contributor
    Comments (411) | Send Message
     
    Your very late to the game as well. I lost faith 34 years ago.
    26 Jun 2011, 02:47 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    So is Germany in your opinion Socialist? Germany has universal health care and a range of social benefits that knocks the socks off the American system.

     

    I think I will Socialist Germany over the country that you advocate based on Raw Capitalism and Third World Outsourcing.

     

    Oh, by the way, manufacturing is 12% of US GDP and 32% of Germany GDP.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:36 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    I save most of my income and keep it in American index funds and ETFs and I am not being ripped off. Contrarian buy and hold investors did very well the last two years.

     

    In fact, there is plenty of good yield out there - 6% tax yield on high yield municipal bonds.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:40 PM Reply Like
  • Dibber
    , contributor
    Comments (1361) | Send Message
     
    Germany also has a much lower per capita GDP than the US.
    26 Jun 2011, 08:35 PM Reply Like
  • been there
    , contributor
    Comments (80) | Send Message
     
    national socialism sure caught on there
    26 Jun 2011, 09:05 PM Reply Like
  • short_squeeze
    , contributor
    Comments (153) | Send Message
     
    LOL... Faith was lost after Adam and Eve
    26 Jun 2011, 11:09 PM Reply Like
  • short_squeeze
    , contributor
    Comments (153) | Send Message
     
    Good point, I'm quickly comming to the same conclusion... fundamentals just don't matter, although maybe I'm naive and they really never mattered. It just seems like stock prices are completely "unhinged" from ANY datapoint. It has never felt more like a casino than since the meltdown (and subsequent meltup) since 2009.
    Maybe I'm not the only one that feels this....
    26 Jun 2011, 11:09 PM Reply Like
  • 2PP
    , contributor
    Comments (349) | Send Message
     
    Any story that comes from the NYT is tainted. The NYT is just a mouthpiece for liberal ideology and the Progressive agenda.
    26 Jun 2011, 07:26 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    RIGHT ON !!!!!!

     

    Thank God we have Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Fox News, Rupert Murdoch, et al, to keep giving us unbiased factual, responsible reporting !!!!

     

    Unfortunately, we live in a society that chooses to listen to sources that spoon feed them the agenda they want. Much easier to put a lable on opposing views than actually use thought processes.

     

    What ever happened to listening to both sides and drawing your own conclusion?

     

    It is a sad state when the only objective news source out there is The Daily Show, with John Stewart. A show that freely admits it is not real news, but a comedy show.
    26 Jun 2011, 09:43 AM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    The GOP-Conservatives were the party that toll the American people that big tax cuts for wealthy would create millions of jobs, as unemployment rate dropped to 5%.
    They also sold the unnecessary wars in middle-east that cost one trillion on borrowed money from China.
    26 Jun 2011, 11:42 AM Reply Like
  • dodges
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    Both sides are out there in the media.

     

    Problem is that each news source presents its own bias. None fairly present pros/cons. And most of us just dial-in to the one that reflects our own positions.

     

    The Daily Show? Whether news or comedy... Are you saying it presents conservative viewpoints equally with liberal ones?
    26 Jun 2011, 07:38 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    The Daily Show presents a story that in and of itself is humorous. They are looking for humor not politics. They expose the nonsense or hypocrisy in a comedic way. If they put a spin, it is solely for laughs, not political gain.

     

    It just seems that the conservatives, these days, are so full of hypocrisy they present more opportunity.

     

    Sort of similar to when "W" was president. He presented many more laughable events than Obama. Not a political statement, just fodder for those that get paid to make us laugh.

     

    I have seen Daily Show expose liberals and conservatives and been equally harsh on both. I am just as likely to laugh at either expose.

     

    I feel sorry for those that can't look and see the humor or hypocrisy in their beliefs. I don't know what they are afraid of and it's all a little too shallow for my liking.
    26 Jun 2011, 09:07 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (3992) | Send Message
     
    Hilarious! Wow how many ways to cut into this apple...

     

    Let's see. NG industry trying to push up price of NG which has been sticky, likely reflecting honest market conditions, but not conforming to expectations of it followinv oil...

     

    Or NG industry angling to push subsidies higher or just keep them in the face of potential tax reform...

     

    Or... anti-fossil folks inventing an entirely bogus red herring to promote renewables (that one probably most popular with the SA commenters here I bet)

     

    Also i should point out linked article points out multiple sources of shale skepticism, not one.
    26 Jun 2011, 08:33 AM Reply Like
  • talbano
    , contributor
    Comments (324) | Send Message
     
    Bo'a Admin trying to push renewables- A windmill and solar panel for every home.
    26 Jun 2011, 09:42 AM Reply Like
  • talbano
    , contributor
    Comments (324) | Send Message
     
    Does congress own these Car Battery companies, of which we still do not know how long they will last nor how they will be disposed of and with electrical cost no one can say they are less expensive to operate.
    First the government car rating system now this.
    Telling Boeing where they can build plans.....Calling Goog in for an antitrust review.
    While GE doesn't pay taxes and GM is exempt for a couple of years.
    Pretty soon they will allocate how many miles per week we can drive.
    No problem though for Obama taking air force 1 to PR for a fundraiser.
    The latest in dictating how much nutritional value can be put in to products - If you do not meet the government requirements, you cannot advertise to children, use toys or TV show character affiliations or popular things like kids movies.
    WTF is going on in this country -

     

    How about solving some real problems first ....like jobs, debt and the economy.
    This is getting more surreal everyday.
    Is there an industry this administration will not go after?
    Hmmm then they wonder why no one wants to do business in the US and no jobs are being created.

     

    Just a thought on something I heard yesterday..
    An interesting comparison, when you privatize something or make people pay for it themselves. The competition drives cost down.
    Ever since Dental and Eye care have been removed from most HC plans over the last 10-15 years, the cost of these services have fallen because the consumer is paying.
    Eyeglasses are so much cheaper today than they were years ago as are contacts.
    Dental I am not as convinced on but I did negotiate how much our next cleaning and exam will be since we are self insured.
    26 Jun 2011, 10:14 AM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    Energy is going to be the great challenge of the 21st century.

     

    What Obama is trying to do is too little. Europeans have paid twice the American price of gasoline for 40 years and that is why we use a fraction of what my American cousins use.

     

    When oil prices get to $150, everyone will hurt, but the Americans will be truely f**cked.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:46 PM Reply Like
  • Dibber
    , contributor
    Comments (1361) | Send Message
     
    What is your basis for the assertion that higher oil hurts the US disproportionally? Oil consumption is a lower percentage of our GDP that most of the developed world and Europe. In fact the US is the buyer that can afford to pay the most. High oil prices really hurt continental Europe and many of the developing countries like China and India.

     

    I'd also point out that while it is true that the US imports about half of its oil consumption, people forget that the US is also one of the world's largest oil producers, producing about 9 million barrels per day in 2009, a little lower than Saudi Arabia but more that Iran and the UAE combined. Also the US is home to many of the world's largest oil production companies like Exxon and Chevron, as well as oil service companies, drillers and transports, who tend to benefit from higher oil prices.

     

    So on balance higher oil prices hurts the US, but not as much as many other countries.
    26 Jun 2011, 10:03 PM Reply Like
  • Econdoc
    , contributor
    Comments (2944) | Send Message
     
    NYT garbage piece to cast aspersions on the natgas industry in the Marcellus. Pure and simple.

     

    "Enron" like..."dot com bubble". What ridiculous nonsense.

     

    There is a lot of gas in the US and more each day - the price is coming down - but consumption is rising. Nat gas is fuelling pertochemical and fertiliser industry - for powergen - soon in cars. Who knows if it is a good investment for people. Certainnly Exxon Mobil the largest and best run energy company on th eplanet just committed a lot of capital to the nat gas business. it is also true that China, Poland and a lot of other nations are learning heavily from what the US has done in this area and moving into unconventional gas in a big way.

     

    As an aside - fracking technology might change the balance of power in Europe - imagine Polish gas replacing Russian. Take that Vladimir.

     

    On the other hand, France has banned fracking - without any experience. That also tells you something. If the cheese eating surrender monkeys are against it - you almost have to be for it.

     

    Ofcourse all of the investors are idiots and fools being hoodwinked by hedge funds, bankers and assorted criminals...Obama should have the EPA regulate it and there needs to be an indefinite moratorium while we study it...what's that you say? What about the people who work in the industry - what about their jobs. Easy. Take Paul Krugman's advice and set them to work digging ditches. But don't give them any heavy equipment...we need to maximize the number of jobs...give them shovels...actually better yet - listen to President O'Carter about the evils of technology - and give them teaspoons instead. That is sure to maximize employment. And think of the carbon emissions saved Next unionize them and enforce work and labor rules enshrining the one tea spoon - one man - one job - rule and see...problem solved. Easy Peasy

     

    These are private individuals putting money into ventures. They have the right to lose it all if it does not work out. They can also make a bucket if it does. That is the basis of the remarkable machine that provides the properity we enjoy. That risk reward plus property rights and the rule of law are all you need - just add people and capital.

     

    They NYT is a blight. It is amouthpiece, nothing more, for the loony left. Ignore it.

     

    Anyone but Obama 2012.
    (except Pailin, Paul, Gingrich, Bachman and Santorum - all loathsome)

     

    Got Teaspoon?

     

    E
    26 Jun 2011, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    France gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear power. It's a far better choice than what Americans have done.

     

    NYT is read by the move and shakers. I suppose the New York Post is more to your liking ...
    26 Jun 2011, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • Cincinnatus
    , contributor
    Comments (3399) | Send Message
     
    The NYT is worthless. If you believe the NYT hack piece companies like Apache, Encana, and EOG are fools for spending money on Kitimat to send LNG to Asia. The Chinese are spending big money to get into the North American shales and thus are fools as well. By all means AIP, listen to the geniuses at the NYT.

     

    As to Old Man Europe, it's a sick and dying continent. Those that fawn over Europe as some role model and point to its ways are mostly Americans of European ancestry driven by a nostalgia for the tribalism and xenophobic ways of Old Europe. Americans need to start looking to Asia as that's where both the competition and growth opportunities will come from. Focusing on Europe is to focus on those in decline and of waning influence.
    27 Jun 2011, 02:30 AM Reply Like
  • cjalpha
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    haha nuclear power..you have no idea..One large French biz recently
    purchased into Sunpower ina big way,,Just wait solar will eclipse nuclear and they will have difficulty disposing of all the spent nuclear waste...
    29 Jun 2011, 09:44 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    One of the big players in natural gas is Chesapeake Energy (CHK) there stock is down -18.2% in the last 3 months.
    NYT is correct, GOP is wrong again.
    26 Jun 2011, 11:53 AM Reply Like
  • 2PP
    , contributor
    Comments (349) | Send Message
     
    Terry, you are nothing but a Liberal tool. Now put your computer away, I think they are serving popcorn in the common room.
    26 Jun 2011, 04:39 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (7699) | Send Message
     
    Terry,
    Speaking about high school dropouts, the correct word is "their" and not "there". Perhaps high school dropout is apt for you. Spellcheck won't correct a lack of knowledge of the English language.
    26 Jun 2011, 06:08 PM Reply Like
  • Monngie
    , contributor
    Comments (928) | Send Message
     
    Geez wyo.............can you lay off the English lessons already? At least you haven't harped on me yet.

     

    But now I guess I'm a target.

     

    Never mind.
    26 Jun 2011, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • Venerability
    , contributor
    Comments (3048) | Send Message
     
    The Nat Gas industry is finally finding the RIGHT argument for winning the hearts and minds of the American public by strongly supporting CNG.

     

    CNG has made amazing inroads everywhere else in the world besides the US already, and the US will soon follow suit: New contracts being announced nearly every day.

     

    CNG will fast become the fuel of choice on a local level in most American cities: Bus fleets, taxi fleets, local trucking, rental car fleets. This is not something that is GOING TO happen. It is something that is ALREADY happening - but most Market participants are still not on top of it.

     

    When the local markets are penetrated, CNG will make big inroads in long haul trucking. This is just beginning to happen in places like India - which is truly CNG crazy.

     

    The battle over Nat Gas use in power plants may rage for awhile longer - because the coal lobby is strong and the nuclear lobby thinks it can preserve its status against very great odds.

     

    But Nat Gas for transportation purposes will be adopted quickly, IMO. Anyone who really cares about "ending dependence on foreign oil" should theoretically LOVE CNG. It is transportation which uses the most of that "foreign oil." And as far as I know, no one - not even the NYT - is suggesting that coal or nuclear can somehow be adapted to fuel New York taxis, Los Angeles buses, trucks and vans, or your friendly car rental.

     

    Ask anyone within the Nat Gas industry: CNG is going to be The Wedge.
    26 Jun 2011, 12:10 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    Yeah, right, 'Venerabilty'. Ninety percent of transportation runs on oil and no one is going to migrate large populations to natural gas given that the shale gas fields only produce significant amounts of gas for 2 to 3 years.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:50 PM Reply Like
  • Bob de'Long
    , contributor
    Comments (696) | Send Message
     
    The funniest part of this silly NYT’s article is the use of a group of Ft. Worth Black preachers as The Victim, as if the natural gas rights under a church and its parking lot were worth a fortune.
    26 Jun 2011, 12:27 PM Reply Like
  • Venerability
    , contributor
    Comments (3048) | Send Message
     
    In case you haven't seen the following or other stories like it:

     

    www.platts.com/RSSFeed...

     

    Nat Gas - or more precisely, Nat Gas derivatives and the ability to control them - may be at the heart of the UK's attempt to take over Canada - excuse me, the LSE's attempt to take over TMX/TSX.

     

    26 Jun 2011, 12:32 PM Reply Like
  • ArchiAlternative
    , contributor
    Comments (25) | Send Message
     
    Tnx for the link
    Regards from Canada :)
    26 Jun 2011, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • David Urban
    , contributor
    Comments (1036) | Send Message
     
    From someone who knows NEPA fairly well there was a rush into the area a few years ago but now many drilling companies are finding counties like Luzerne and Lackawanna to be dry and have been pulling out.

     

    The bubble talk is accurate.

     

    A significant problem with natural gas is that many new areas are barely profitable at current prices. We have a glut of natural gas in this country.
    26 Jun 2011, 12:48 PM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (3992) | Send Message
     
    So its not a conspiracy, a fraud, a pack of lies promoted under the NYT's secret agenda??!! Who could have expected that!

     

    <sarcasm>
    26 Jun 2011, 12:53 PM Reply Like
  • Charles A. Smith
    , contributor
    Comments (1088) | Send Message
     
    Natty remains cheap precisely because markets recognize the vast new capacity available, particularly in the Marcellus and Utica shales. The NYT article barely mentions these formations (and others including the Bakken), and focuses instead on the areas first exploited by George Mitchell.
    26 Jun 2011, 05:24 PM Reply Like
  • Tom in Texas
    , contributor
    Comments (352) | Send Message
     
    seekingalpha.com/news-...

     

    Gushers highlight potential of Pa. gas field
    Sun June 26, 2011 12:30 PM

     

    ALLENTOWN, Pa. -- Two unexpected gushers in northeastern Pennsylvania are helping to illustrate the enormous potential of the Marcellus Shale natural gas field.

     

    Each of the Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. wells in Susquehanna County is capable of producing 30 million cubic feet per day _ believed to be a record for the Marcellus…

     

    Drilling companies knew the Marcellus held a lot of gas. They just had to figure out a way to get it out, and they say they're getting better at it all the time.
    The result is that the Marcellus, a rock formation beneath Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia and Ohio, has turned out to be an even more prolific source of gas than anyone anticipated. Energy firms are boosting their production targets, not only because new wells are coming on line but also because they're managing to coax more gas from each well.

     

    Operators say they have a greater understanding of the complicated geology of the Marcellus, allowing them to land their drill bits in the sweet spot of the formation

     

    The technology has unleashed a drilling frenzy in Pennsylvania _ where more than 3,300 Marcellus wells have been sunk the past few years _ and accounts for a twelvefold increase in U.S. shale gas production since 2000

     

    The Marcellus isn't the only shale formation in Pennsylvania that energy companies have their eye on. Drillers are just beginning to explore the gas-bearing Utica and Upper Devonian formations. The Utica is deeper that the Marcellus, and the Upper Devonian is shallower. It's triple the resource potential under the same plot of land.
    26 Jun 2011, 08:20 PM Reply Like
  • OilFinder
    , contributor
    Comments (2397) | Send Message
     
    "The bubble talk is accurate.

     

    A significant problem with natural gas is that many new areas are barely profitable at current prices. We have a glut of natural gas in this country."

     

    This is contradictory. Think about it.

     

    If there is a glut of something, that indicates the *lack* of a bubble, not a bubble itself. If it was a bubble, the price of natgas would be sky high, not down in the dumps.

     

    If you want to define a bubble as a *production* bubble, then indeed we're in a "bubble." But that's not how one usually defines a "bubble."

     

    The excess of production we've been seeing in the US is testament that the author of NYT article has no idea what he's talking about. One has to wonder how long all these gas drillers are willing to lose money by drilling wells which are supposedly unprofitable. One also has to wonder how long these companies think they can hoodwink investors by claiming they're making money with all of this drilling when they're supposed to be losing money (according to the article), and how long they think they can hoodwink investors by claiming reserves that (according to the article) don't really exist.

     

    The chart at the link below is a spectacular example of just how much of a failure all this shale gas drilling is. Not.
    www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hi...
    26 Jun 2011, 11:01 PM Reply Like
  • David Urban
    , contributor
    Comments (1036) | Send Message
     
    If you could see how many companies rushed into northeastern and central PA promising jobs and throwing around cash only to pull up their wells when they came up dry.

     

    Apartment prices more than doubled overnight as owners tried to take advantage of the situation. Counties bent over backwards in the hopes of filling the coffers with taxes.

     

    To the people here it is a bubble.

     

    Your comments about reserves that may or may not exist are another sign of a bubble. Reliance of India overpaid for their assets by a huge margin.

     

    But when you look around there is a massive glut of natural gas production in the US. Just look at inventory levels for the past three years.
    27 Jun 2011, 12:37 AM Reply Like
  • OilFinder
    , contributor
    Comments (2397) | Send Message
     
    Personally, I would only call something a "bubble" if the price was skyrocketing. In the case of natgas, it isn't. It's not like the 2003-07 housing bubble when both prices *and* production (home building) went sky-high. THAT was a bubble. If this is only a bubble of production, I wouldn't really call it a bubble. A "gas rush" maybe, but not a "bubble."
    27 Jun 2011, 01:06 AM Reply Like
  • Venerability
    , contributor
    Comments (3048) | Send Message
     
    The Yahoo Boards - controlled, as we now all know - by Street.com - abruptly closed to human beings the minute I attempted to post the link above.

     

    Do we all understand now how important the rejection of the LSE bid for TMX/TSX is to the future of commodity pricing?

     

    And that all of this should be coming to a head at the moment most close observers of physical Silver stocks - which I am not expert on, I must add - say that real Silver is now literally GONE from the Crimex - just when China has announced a new Silver Panda issue, and the Indian demand for actual non-paper Silver is close to the mania stage.

     

    They're all pieces of the exact same puzzle, aren't they?

     

    Paper Oil versus real oil.

     

    Paper Nat Gas versus real Nat Gas.

     

    Paper Grains versus real Grains.

     

    Paper Metals versus real Metals.

     

    Censored News from the Bubblevisions versus real news based on actual events.

     

    Internet news filtered through Script Bots versus Human Beings doing the reporting.

     

    LTCM in the micro sense blew up. But LTCM in the macro sense has now taken over.

     

    If we don't act fast to stop it.
    26 Jun 2011, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • Duude
    , contributor
    Comments (3368) | Send Message
     
    The problem for natural gas is the lack of enough infrastructure to support the greater use of this to fuel vehicle transport. The price of natural gas has been weak due to a low demand and a huge supply. The US has turned to exporting natural gas and largely leaving natural gas drilling projects on hold.
    26 Jun 2011, 04:16 PM Reply Like
  • 2PP
    , contributor
    Comments (349) | Send Message
     
    I'm with Boone Pickens, if we could convert all 18 wheelers to natural gas and limit the blends of gasoline required in the US. Those two things alone would completely change the way America uses oil.
    26 Jun 2011, 04:46 PM Reply Like
  • ArchiAlternative
    , contributor
    Comments (25) | Send Message
     
    If the article is even 50% true (leave aside the political subjectivity which is so widely debated in your comments) the NG price suppose to go up substantially very soon. Therefore long position for mid/long term in NG ETF's seems to me as a pretty logical move...
    26 Jun 2011, 05:44 PM Reply Like
  • American in Paris
    , contributor
    Comments (5504) | Send Message
     
    Actually, the New York Times is well documented. I have been reluctant to invest in natural gas because these shale plays have poor production profiles and the hype is too good to be true (Americans are always suckers for technological innovation stories - see the dotcoms).
    26 Jun 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • 2PP
    , contributor
    Comments (349) | Send Message
     
    The NYT is not well documented , they print stories that benefit who ever pays them the most money. Always the Progressive left, anyone who can't see through the bias has not paid enough attention to US politics. MSNBC and the NYT should be called out for what they are. They don't deserve to be called media outlets as they are propaganda machines for George Soros.
    26 Jun 2011, 07:52 PM Reply Like
  • been there
    , contributor
    Comments (80) | Send Message
     
    so fucking what, they will lose their own money if it is uneconomical
    26 Jun 2011, 09:08 PM Reply Like
  • short_squeeze
    , contributor
    Comments (153) | Send Message
     
    So where does the price of Nat Gas go vis-a-vis Oil over the next year?
    26 Jun 2011, 11:09 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    I keep reading and re-reading this NYT article. What I take away from it all is not whether or not Nat Gas is in a bubble nor whether or not the wells are economical.

     

    More precisely, I think the article is pointing to deception by the industry executives. So, I ask myself, why would they overstate the reserves or the profit potential?

     

    If they overstate, the sheeple public take heart and stock rises, their options get richer and they take bigger bonuses. Then, when earnings drop, the stock drops. But never mind, they made their money. THIS, I believe is plausible. It happens time and time again, in just about every industry and every public company. Just a higher form of Pump and Dump.

     

    Now, those that insist on debating the NYT agenda are just missing the investment implications. If you want to keep your ideological fist-a-cuffs going, that's fine with me. I'm watching the tape and using the information to make money.
    27 Jun 2011, 05:55 AM Reply Like
  • 7footMoose
    , contributor
    Comments (2266) | Send Message
     
    "If they overstate, the sheeple public take heart and stock rises, their options get richer and they take bigger bonuses. Then, when earnings drop, the stock drops. But never mind, they made their money. THIS, I believe is plausible. It happens time and time again, in just about every industry and every public company. Just a higher form of Pump and Dump."
    If you truly believe this you either think you are smarter that those who would do this kind of thing or you are just plain stupid. I am not making a judgment on your intelligence but if you truly think that the game is rigged by people who can do this and get away with it you must have some rationale for believing you can outsmart them and that you are not part of the "sheeple public".
    27 Jun 2011, 06:35 AM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    I appreciate your comment. But, I think it's time you entered this world.

     

    Anyone who hasn't recognized that these shenanigans (as well as insider trading) go on day after day doesn't pay enough attention and should probably let someone else manage their money.

     

    There are so many incidents of this going around it's hard to know where to start. A starting point for you might be past and ongoing SEC investigations. Or just track IPO's at pre-offering, initial offering and 6 months latter. Need more evidence !!!

     

    As far as trying to outsmart them --- a naive interpretation of how to invest. Most everyone knows the game is rigged, the talent is in discovering which way it's being pushed. It's simply a matter of watching what happens and follow the lead.

     

    Thankfully, there is no need to go up against them, it's the sheeple that are the suckers. Easier to go against the ignorant masses.
    27 Jun 2011, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • 7footMoose
    , contributor
    Comments (2266) | Send Message
     
    You have assumed that you know that I am naive enough to fall for the games playing that goes on on Wall Street. So can I conclude from your response that you also believe that you are smarter than they are?
    27 Jun 2011, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    Hi 7foot...

     

    You seem like a nice chap, so I'll continue the conversation.

     

    If you would actually read what I'd said --- I believe that "they" are smarter than the sheeple. At least "they" know what "they" are doing and why "they" are doing it.

     

    The sheeple are easily sheared because, like you, in this case, they are unable to see clearly what is being said and acted upon. Instead, the sheeple, react emotionally and get sheared.

     

    The positive aspect for the sheeple is that some of them can learn and do better for themselves. But, alas, the market is a "zero sum game". No one makes a profit unless someone loses an equal amount (after the "house vig"). So, if you do well, it is at someone else's expense.

     

    I choose to follow the group that consistently wins and buck the group that loses. I let "them" show me the way and follow in "their" tracks. It isn't any simpler than that.
    27 Jun 2011, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • 7footMoose
    , contributor
    Comments (2266) | Send Message
     
    No one and no group consistently wins without ever losing especially those who, "follow the group". You know nothing about my investing but after this conversation I know that you feel you have all the answers, answers that do not always exist.
    27 Jun 2011, 04:46 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    Actually, you are quite mis-informed. I know a great deal about your investing. I read your other posts in SA before I even ventured a reply. I was particularly moved by your theme of the market being irrational and thought you could use a new perspective.

     

    I never said I had nothing but winners. Another case of your mis-reading. A typical sheeple mistake.

     

    I have been an active investor for 40 years and have seen a great deal. I have managed my own portfolio for the last 20. My investing style targets a BETA of around.5 while returning an ALPHA of around 110%. I easily track this as my B-D provides running returns vs. the market for any time frame.

     

    So, I would consider that my record supports my comments.

     

    I wish you success in your endeavors.
    27 Jun 2011, 05:15 PM Reply Like
  • Cincinnatus
    , contributor
    Comments (3399) | Send Message
     
    Reelken, it's time you took your own advice and "entered this world". There's no way that companies like Apache or Encana are just going to make this stuff up for short-term gains in stock price, nor are they going to embark on projects such as the Kitimat LNG terminal which has started and will require huge sums in investment just to attempt to pull-off a short-term deception.

     

    Did you even bother to look at some of the NYT sources? The first email I pulled up had the username blocked out but the address was "@hotmail.com". If these are energy executives and industry lawyers why are they using hotmail.com accounts? The NYT's thesis here is laughable. I wouldn't be surprised if they've failed to authenticate most of these emails - they've certainly become accustomed to plagiarism at the NYT so it wouldn't surprise me. These guys are desperate to keep what readership they have left at this liberal mouthpiece of a rag and this is simply bait to reel in the gullible.
    27 Jun 2011, 05:58 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3855) | Send Message
     
    Hi Cincinnati

     

    Yeah, right....

     

    There's no way Goldman, JPM, ENRON,AIG, HealthSouth.. etc.,etc., would make things up. And just today a big bank exec was indicted for embezzlement. Can't be true !!!

     

    If you choose to believe Corporate America is just filled with nothing but honest hard working executives who aren't just chasing the almighty dollar that's your choice

     

    I've seen enough to conclude they act in SELF-INTEREST, period.

     

    The corner of Broad and Wall is Papered with worthless stock from companies that went bust while the Execs walked off with fortunes, and brag about it.

     

    Keep fighting your ideological battles. Kool-Aid is free. Insight is expensive.
    27 Jun 2011, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • Enpassant
    , contributor
    Comments (194) | Send Message
     
    Anyone know where to look for the going price on oil/gas exploration leases?
    27 Jun 2011, 10:53 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|