Mmarrkk

Total Rating:
+3 / -2

257 Comments

    • Wed Sep 3rd 13:54 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Oil: The Inconvenient Truth
      On a serious note, your thinking about pre-election manipulation may not be too far fetched. However, it would take more coordination and machination than I believe either party can pull together in D.C. But it is certainly plausible. If it works and we keep O out, I like it though!

      Did you see where the Mexican gov't announced that Canterrel production dropped more than even they were forecasting? Saw a columnist today who was "surprised". I'm not. I expect it to decline exponentially from here on out. What's going to replace it?? Hopefully Iraqi oil fields. Lots of oil waiting to be tapped there once we get the whacko's under control.

      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 13:50 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Oil: The Inconvenient Truth
      Fitz: 1000 crack computer whizzes are balanced out by one Pelosi. 1000 Stanford engineers are negated by one Babs Boxer. 1000 UCLA grads are balanced out by that lunatic mayor up in SF. 1000 USC...football players??...are balanced out by Waxman. If Cali were such an informed state, we wouldn't see these lunatics keep getting re-elected over and over again. There must be some idiots in the state if those folks are being elected. And that's just the "all stars"...doesn't include the middle of the pack and the low enders. I'd also throw in there Arnold Governator...an anti-Republican.

      Forgot to mention Berkley...never mind, I'd rather keep them forgotten for a long time. The grapes are good though and some of the wine is excellent! Don't get me wrong, I have family that live there and its a pretty state. But politically, the state as a majority is just totally screwed up. And they are exporting that via Pelosi, Boxer, Waxman, et al. Unfortunately, we have to live with those retards.

      I am trying to convince my California brother that the election has been moved to December 1st due to problems with the voting machine software; too many people expected to vote so Democrats are being asked to vote in December to help ease the overflow. I told him its not fair as they will know how many votes they will need to win. It might just work :) Heck, if he's willing to vote D, he just might believe it! We can only HOPE and CHANGE!!
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 12:24 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Oil: The Inconvenient Truth
      Jack: agree fully. But I would add that EVERYTHING in California is "much ado about nothing" and hysteria. The whole freaking state is one big bowl of fruits and nuts. Pelosi: take your bow! or is she too busy congratulating Sarah Palin for having courage to reach her full potential (as per the maddam's new book...maybe Sarah read one of the 14 copies sold!)
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 12:20 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Oil: The Inconvenient Truth
      Whooaaaah. Wait a minute!! Brian Pursley and I agree on something. Stop the presses. Dogs and cats are playing together!!!

      Man made global warming is a hoax being thrust upon the American public so that AlBore can make extreme, excessive, windfall profits at our expense.

      Brian, don't know if we'll ever agree on something again but thanks for the post!
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 12:15 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Economics of Political Spin
      Gunner: there are export laws that regulate the exportation of crude oil. A big "urban myth" is that "all" or "a majority" or "a huge percentage" of Alaskan oil is exported to Japan. That is just not true. Only a small percentage is shipped to Japan and that as a result of a trade out to get the crude oil needed in other parts of the country. Instead of sending oil from Alaska all the way to the Gulf Coast refineries, Alaskan oil is shipped to Japan and Carribbean oil is diverted from routes to Alaska to the Gulf Coast. This cuts out a lot of shipping costs. Plus, if all Alaskan oil goes down the pipeline, it swamps the West Coast refineries.
      View article »
    • Wed Sep 3rd 09:25 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Called the Market's Bluff
      Howsie: you are partly right on gas pricing. In the actual market, gas is priced in the $/mmBTU and 1 MCF has ROUGHLY the same value of 1 mmBTU. However, note that I said ROUGHLY as gas quality and heating value vary from place to place and well to well. There are many producing wells that have gas heating contents of 1200 mBTU per SCF (or 1.2 mmBTU per MCF). So be careful.

      XTO: a good company and part of what I would call "foundational&quo... nat gas stocks, along with CHK, Devon and EOG. If I could only have 4, that's the 4 I'd take. Devon, XTO and EOG have a bit more oil in their portfolio whereas CHK is virtually 100% gas. Devon also has deepwater GOM exposure. If you told me I could only have one, I'd probably take EOG as they are good, organic growth company.

      CHK's leverage: I actually look at CHK's leverage as a huge positive. They have leased hundreds of thousands of acres in some of the best plays going in North America. Its like owning 25% of New York City before it was developed (someone say $24 worth of beads...?). Now they are working deals to get other companies to pay for a huge portion of the drilling costs, yet CHK gets the revenue. This is one slick model!

      Production: One of the previous posters talked about the cost to produce and why the companies won't shut in production after investing so much. What you are missing is the type of wells currently being drilled. These shale wells come on at very high rates but decline very rapidly. So, when prices decline, the companies just stop drilling new wells, reduce their capital burn and then the production starts to fall. Then storage gets reduced, then prices ramp back up and they start drilling again. And the smart companies like CHK also use hedges wisely. When prices are high, they lock in hedges/floors to guarantee prices above $9/10/mmBTU. As production goes up, prices drop to the $6/7 range but CHK keeps getting $9/10. And while prices are down in that $6/7 range, they go out and reset some of these hedges, lower their costs, and wait for the cycle to go back up again! Its actually a pretty good deal.

      And, you've got a CEO willing to invest $40+ Million of his own money in the company. Not stock options, warrants, etc.....but real live stock purchases!

      And to the whiner about "his" basketball team being "stolen" by Aubrey, can you say "out-bid" and "out-negotiated&q... Aubrey used the free market to go and flat out school your weak West Coast butts. People on the East and West Coasts have such an "entitlement"... attitude. Maybe that's why they vote heavily Demoncratic and the rest of the country...the REAL PEOPLE...vote Repub's. Ooops, slipped the politics.

      But you can watch your team...I'm sorry...Aubrey's team...on television. Pay Per View, of course!!
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 2nd 10:38 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Called the Market's Bluff
      Steve: the gel frac's still take water and they aren't effective. I believe there is an innovative solution to the water issue that is coming in the not so distant future. Won't solve all the problems but will enable the continued drilling/fracing of wells in many places. For the places that don't want to go after the gas, then their utility bills will have to go up as any cut back in drilling for the shale gas will directly result in skyrocketing nat gas prices. These wells decline rapidly when drilling stops.
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 2nd 08:44 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Chesapeake Energy Called the Market's Bluff
      First, the author needs to get a grip on his "CHK lost money on their hedges" conclusion. That is so much bull cr*p. These are paper losses on marked-to-market...a nuance of stupid financial accounting. They did not lose money on the hedges. Repeat after me: no losses. They only gave up the option to make MORE money, they didn't lose money. The financial accounting lala land (as opposed to cash accounting and cashflow) show it as a loss but they didn't.

      Second: jjason, if you want anyone to take you seriously as an investor, you need to drop the Obama/Biden crap. That just shows you don't have a clue and are drawn to empty promises. I'll take that comment back if you can list for me 2 accomplishments that Obama is responsible for. Actual things he has done that has resulted in anything! And don't bring that "hope" and "change" baloney. Tell me about a bill he passed. Tell me about a program he administered, led, or showed any EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT experience. Without that, your opinion is forever tainted as it shows you can be led by the nose with nothing but an empty suit and some cute words.

      Third: CHK is a long term play and a great one. Don't be misled...gas prices will be stuck in a range of $6-10. They can't go much lower as it will result in the stoppage of drilling and an abrupt drop in supply. When they go too high, storage gets full and price drops. At those prices, CHK will make huge money, regardless of the costs alluded to by a few posters. CHK is spending roughly $2-3/mmcf to find and develop the gas. They are getting paid $6-10/mmcf. Hmmm, sounds like a good deal. A huge percentage of their gas costs $1/mmcf to produce. Yeah, looks like a bad business deal!

      And, BP has bought in to 25% of one of their big plays. I can tell you that Aubrey got lots of leverage in that deal because everyone wants in on his plays/acreage so he is able to negotiate really sweet deals. Look at the Plains deal...Plains paid $1.7 billion for 30-40% and then will also pay all of CHK's drilling costs for the first $1.5 billion. But CHK retains their production revenue for their share. Now that's leverage!

      If it goes to $40, buy a boat load.
      View article »
    • Sat Aug 30th 15:47 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      New Gas Discoveries a Boon for U.S. Energy Sector
      Actually Alan I think you'll find in 2007 there were over 2 BCF /day being imported as LNG from Trinidad and other places to the east. It started 2007 at 3 BCF/day but went down to 1 BCF/day later in the year as the prices in the Far East and Europe went to $20/MMBTU. No one wanted to ship LNG to the US for $8-10 when they could send it to Japan for $20.

      While the Barnett was discovered and mapped in the 70's and some of the drilling/fracing techniques were starting to develop in the 80's, I think you will find that the Barnett didn't really take off until 2000. Just look at a graph of the production from the Barnett. It was lying flat and very very low until 2001/2002 then it started to ramp up as Devon, who purchased Mitchell, started pumping money into it. Then in 2005/06 they started using horizontal wells. Not many horizontals drilled until then. Drilled them, studied them, changed them, etc. so I know what I'm talking about.


      On Aug 30 08:54 AM Alan von Altendorf wrote:

      > Simpkins: "Additional natural gas resources would also ease U.S.
      > dependence on foreign imports. The United States imported a record-high
      > 4.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in 2007"
      >
      > ...from Canada.
      >
      > Note also that jet aircraft, Peterbilts, D-9s won't run on nat gas.
      >
      >
      > Philmon's remark about this "great new resource" and can-do creative
      > Americans was pretty funny, since Barnett play was discovered and
      > mapped in the 1970s, cheap fracing and horiz drilling in the 1980s.
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 15:52 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      ConocoPhillips Is Latest Oil Major to Exit Low-Margin Retail Gas Stations
      Get real. The sum of all the untapped reserves in North America are huge, including Canadian Oil Sands and the Oil Shales in Utah/Colorado not to mention the oil deposits potentially off the coasts and in ANWR. Just the Oil Shales alone are enough for decades. REad the USGS reports.

      Now, long long term, I agree we must get off of gasoline but we are a long way away from Solar as our primary, let alone, only source. Natural Gas is a good transition fuel and will be needed for electricity generation as well as cars/trucks/buses.


      On Aug 29 02:59 PM Itsonlymoney wrote:

      > We can not drill our way out of this energy predicament. The sum
      > total of all untapped North American oil on and off shore if delivered
      > will power our present oil consumption for just months, not years.
      > Ultimately oil will be gone or too expensive to retrieve so the sooner
      > we wake up to the necessity for a renewable energy future the better
      > we will all be. Big oil is getting out of retail gasoline distribution
      > because they see that it is a fading industry. Service stations make
      > more money on soda's than gas. Oil will be too valuable to burn on
      > a trip to the store.
      >
      > The future for personal transportation is anything but gasoline powered.
      > Smart people may someday plug their vehicles into a home solar charger
      > and fuel up while they sleep from the days solar electrical storage.
      > Or we may be walking again if we blow this opportunity to restructure
      > into sustainable and renewable means for energy production.
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 09:35 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      ConocoPhillips Is Latest Oil Major to Exit Low-Margin Retail Gas Stations
      Sorry, mispell...should be "the Chosen One"
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 09:34 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      ConocoPhillips Is Latest Oil Major to Exit Low-Margin Retail Gas Stations
      The possibility of government control of gasoline is frightful...and I fear not too far of a leap should the Chose One be elected. McCain would make the odds a bit longer, but still a possibility that would have to be discussed. Just wish we had a true conservative in power the next few years but alas, our choices do not include one! Its either a Hugo Chavez wanna-be or a chameleon that you never know what he'll do to make a compromise. Given the choice, best to prepare for the worse. Probably take the chameleon...at least there's a chance he won't drive toward socialism. O-Chavez will definetly take us there in a really fast bus!

      Getting to a sane energy policy is not in the cards...Democrats in Congress don't want to consider anything...period...Re... won't allow anything that doesn't include more drilling (which I firmly and financially support!!)...and neither candidate will make a difference there. They are both completely awash in indecision there. The Fitz Plan has some good ideas...I say "do it all...and do it quickly". First step...disable the greenie weenies and the NIMBY's. Then let the country's best get to work. As much as I hate to say it, use tax incentives to conserve vis-a-vis credits for fuel effecient vehicles, tax incentives for domestic drilling and production, more nukes and aggressive coal-to-liquids. And then more long term research and development on the next fuel source.
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 08:52 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Natural Gas Is Oversold, and We Are Buying
      It's all about supply and demand...demand has been dropping over the last few months and supply appears to be increasing due to the high level of drilling brought on by the shale gas plays. However, both of these factors can whipsaw in a hurry.

      Demand is dropping due to weather (cooler than normal summer) and overall economic slowdown. But it takes but one or two heat waves, throw in a hurricane (or 3 as it looks like we might have over the next few weeks) to make that consumption spike. And we are still seeing sustained high oil prices which creates a good window for fuel switching to cheaper natural gas. And the drive for cleaner burning fuels, which is natural gas for the immediate future. All of these can drive demand back up in a hurry. And if/when we get out of our recession toward the end of 2009, consumption will also increase.

      As prices start to fall, you will see some of this new drilling slow down. At $6/mmBTU, several of these plays are not economic and the companies will stop drilling wells or shut wells in. The nature of the new shale plays is high initial rates and rapid decline in the first 6-9 months. So when the drilling slows down and new wells aren't put online as fast as they were when prices were higher, then overall supply will quickly fall.

      This pricing impact is a form of reversion to the mean. As prices go up, drilling increases, marginal plays become economic and supply increases. As supply increases, prices go down, some plays become uneconomic, drilling slows down and supply decreases. Then the cycle starts all over again. Play this cycle and you will be well paid!
      View article »
    • Fri Aug 29th 08:43 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      New Gas Discoveries a Boon for U.S. Energy Sector
      Brian, your obsession with cow farts is truly amazing...and telling! Since you completly ignored my questions regarding coal bed methane, gas shales and oil shales, I'll assume you are full of cr** and ignore you from here on out. Thought we'd have a bit of dialogue but you are too infatuated with cows and farting to answer a question. Have fun!


      On Aug 29 01:31 AM Brian Pursley wrote:

      > Mmarrkk: So when a cow farts, oil comes out?
      >
      > The proclaimer: Biodeisel is NOT crude oil. Algae CANNOT produce
      > crude oil. It's impossible. Matter of fact, blue green algae is a
      > hydrocarbon destroyer not a hydrocarbon generator. Cyanobacteria
      > feed on crude oil and are used to clean up oil spills. You must be
      > an old fossil because you subscribe to an outmoded 18th century hypothesis.
      > Please study 19th and 20th century petroleum science so you can contribute
      > to the conversation in an intelligent and meaningful way.
      View article »
    • Thu Aug 28th 16:08 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      New Gas Discoveries a Boon for U.S. Energy Sector
      Brian: please explain coal bed methane to me? When I take coal and reduce the pressure, methane gas is released from the coal and is produced. Also, explain shale gas. When I open up fractures in an organic shale, natural gas flows out.

      And, to the point of natural gas and oil not having the same origin, when oil is produced natural gas comes out of solution and is also produced.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»