Chevron Corp. (CVX)

All Comments on CVX

  • commenter
    sumosama
    Sep 03 11:12 AM
    Year to Date Performance of Dow 30 Members [view article]
    I am buying the bottom 4....for long term investments. Plus nice dividends to compound. Reply
  • commenter
    Brian
    Pursley
    Sep 03 11:08 AM
    My Website
    Oil: The Inconvenient Truth [view article]
    Oil does not go from $147 to $105 on tight supply. The reality is the market is oversupplied so OPEC is going to cut back production. Also, man made global warming is a myth. The global temperature has decreased 8 years in row. Reply
  • commenter
    swimjames
    Sep 03 10:51 AM
    Chevron's Share Price Looks Most Compelling [view article]
    re above comment: As of December 31, 2007, BP had net proved developed and undeveloped reserves of 5,492 million barrels of liquids and 41,130 billion cubic feet of natural gas. Reply
  • commenter
    ignorant
    Sep 03 10:13 AM
    Chevron's Share Price Looks Most Compelling [view article]
    BP's total proved reserves are substantially higher than CVX and the market value of BP is about the same as CVX. Reply
  • commenter
    trader_murf
    Sep 03 09:33 AM
    Year to Date Performance of Dow 30 Members [view article]
    At the risk of stating the obvious what this interesting line up shows is that timing (and maybe more than a little bit of luck) is everything in this market. The reality is any one of these can have made or lost one money depending on entry point. It seems like trading on fundamentals is a far second to timing, psychology and luck. In this market I have bought positions that seem fundamentally sound and even with charts that look good that shift in days and have had to just dump them to cut losses, except for BA, ha, ha - see above. What is really bad cutting those losses on great stocks was still the right choice months later. I can only figure that eventually great values like XOM will come back into favor. In this market I am still buying but only very selectively and smaller amounts than usual. If something pops I will tend to sell and take a profit and hold nothing long term except several conservative dividend payors and for better or worse some Vanguard mutual funds for my IRA but that is another story... Reply
  • commenter
    Phil Obal
    Sep 03 08:46 AM
    My Website
    Chevron's Share Price Looks Most Compelling [view article]
    Chevron is a very good company, but I would wait until Friday of this week, to see how much damage was done to wells/platforms/supply lines in the Gulf of Mexico. This may/may not impact Chevron earnings and costs. Reply
  • commenter
    Gunner
    Sep 02 06:47 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    I have a question. If we allow Big Oil to expand drilling off our shores, what will keep them from selling it to the highest bidder (China, etc.) instead of keeping OUR oil for OUR United States citizens? And if they aren't forced to keep it in the U.S., what would be the point in potentially destroying our shores? Would it be so that China could buy U.S. oil from Big Oil that has no allegiance to America? How does that benefit Americans?

    Thank you.     Reply
  • commenter
    Chirag N.
    Amin
    Sep 02 06:26 PM
    Year to Date Performance of Dow 30 Members [view article]
    Exxon-Mobil (XOM): Can someone explain to me exactly how the most profitable company in the world with decent revenue and earnings growth can be DOWN 16% year to date? Here is the past performance results of XOM,

    2008 YTD: -16%
    2007: +24.3%
    2006: + 39.1%
    2005: +11.8%
    2004: +28.0%
    2003: +20.6%

    I would assume that their dividend is the safest that you can find in this economy. So what am I missing here? Is XOM a great value play at these levels or what?     Reply
  • commenter
    weiwentg
    Sep 02 04:35 PM
    Year to Date Performance of Dow 30 Members [view article]
    Any votes for the stocks which have lost over 15% but don't deserve the punishment? I vote American Express and Pfizer. Pfizer's pipeline may look dry, but they have the financial clout to partner anyone with a hot drug, or to buy them outright. American Express' problems are overstated, I think. Reply
  • commenter
    The Old
    Wizard
    Sep 02 03:58 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    Longoil, That is a very big worry. What worries me even more is that Pakistan is destabilized and that some of their nuclear arsenal gets in Al Queda's hands. It's their technology that got exported to N. Korea and thru them to Iran. We clamor for democratic governments in these places where there is great danger, which leads to government overthrow or change that introduces more danger and critisize Bush for his backing of a dictator, while at the same time declaring that we should bomb pakistan to get Bin Ladin. History has a way of repeating itself. Carter encouraged the Shah of Iran to not persecute the radical religious opposition on much the same grounds, which led to the overthrow of that dictatorship which got replaced with what we have now. The great wisdom of the elite now is that we should talk to Iran. Maybe we should get Putin to take over Iran and then we will only have to make a deal with one less dictator to save the world. Reply
  • commenter
    Shiv
    Sep 02 11:35 AM
    Oil Will Only Fall So Far [view article]
    Oil will fall only so far for now. But how far is far enough. Near term, oil is oversold; by 11 September a couple of weeks of falling inventories & the result of OPEC should firm up oil. Russia is another threat but one already priced in. Still got a month of hurricanes & then winter demand. So worst case would be $95-$100.

    But thinking longer term - where goes oil? Ultimately, equilibrium is where demand meets supply. In a perfect market, price would strike at the marginal cost of a barrel; which is near $50. That, or somewhat below is where I see the bottom for oil in the next cyclical oil bear within a great secular bull.

    I would go long oil once it starts consolidating & go short rate sensitives & financials.     Reply
  • commenter
    longoil
    Aug 31 07:36 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    Old Wizard,
    I would bet bin Laden improvisioned the video with the drawings of the WTC after the fact to further terrorize people with his supposed know-how. Everything these Al Quaeda guys have done so far shows what a bunch of amateurs they are: e.g. the shoelace bomber and the liquid and gel bombers. I doubt very much they would have done a structural analysis of the WTC, calculated the explosive force of 20000 gallons of kerosine and figure out the optimal point to hit the buildings in order to collapse them.

    I agree with you on the potential of jet fuel. In liquid state this stuff is as safe as kerosine in a lamp. However, when jet fuel is vaporized (i.e. after a 600 mph) impact, it is capable of incredible explosive force and high temperatures enough to melt I-bars.

    What really worries me is if these terrorists get better funded by the Saudi Arabians et al., they will have access to more dangerous weaponry like Surface-to-Missles and nuclear technology. This is why I believe it is important to move to alternative energy technology now, not just to save a few cents on motor fuel, but to deprive the principal funders of terrorism.

    Reply
  • commenter
    The Old
    Wizard
    Aug 31 06:02 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    Furthermore the collapse of that much weight so quickly transmited a ground wave much like an earthquake. The nearby subway station was closed for a long time. I believe for over a year because of worries about structural damage. Reply
  • commenter
    The Old
    Wizard
    Aug 31 05:56 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    Not just building 7 was affected by the shock wave. This is not a newly dicovered or fictionalized phenomena. The big killer in an atomic explosion is the shock wave as in many other lesser but strong explosions, then comes the heat generated. I think that we should have a debate about the motivation of Bin Ladin and find out whether he was abused as a child, or had adverse environmental issues growing up and blame Bush for the whole thing. I would like to remind Fitz that the attack on pearl harbor killed less people than 9/11 and led to the largest war in which we have been involved outside our borders. Those killed in 1941 were mostly members of our armed forces, not civilians. Reply
  • commenter
    The Old
    Wizard
    Aug 31 05:40 PM
    The Economics of Political Spin [view article]
    Longoil, I think I remember a video released by Al queda that showed Bin Ladin with the world trade drawings, bragging about how well his plan worked. Hitting the towers near the 80th floor virtually doomed all those people there in the upper floors to die. The planes could have hit much higher with just as much drama and a smaller loss of life. His "prayers" could not of foreseen that so many fireman would lose their lives trying to rescue people in the buildings nor that such a catastrophic collapse would occur so quickly. Fitz your comment on no jet fuel hitting building seven is typical of your not wanting to face into evidence and physical facts if they disagree with your conclusions. Explosions of 10 to 20 thousand gallons of jet fuel create enough heat to cause combustion for a large radius and the shock wave is large enough to cause a serious threat to the structural integrity of nearby buildings. Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: