Mmarrkk

Roger Wiegand: Look for Major Selling Event in the Fall, and Oil to Rise

RW: There are at least 3 statements in this interview which lead me to believe that you are not very astute when it comes to the oil and gas industry. Anyone with a lick of sense/knowledge in the business would know that these 3 statements are completely wrong, and 2 of them border on total moronic/misinformed insanity:

1. "There are two new proposed natural gas pipelines delivering fuel from the North Slope of Alaska...". Yes, there are 2 proposals, but everyone who is anyone knows that only one of these pipelines will be built, if any. So while there are 2 proposals, which makes you technically correct, you failed to mention that only one will ultimately be built as per all of the experts.

2. "The newer Bakkan tar sands fields in the U.S. Dakotas are being explored but this mammoth field is ten years away and must use huge amounts of natural gas for production." Uhhh, the Bakken is NOT A TAR SAND, it is a shale play and is not "ten years away"; it is currently being developed and produced. You have the Bakken Shale Oil play mixed up with the Oil Shale play in Colorado and Utah. Again, anyone with an elementary level knowledge of the oil industry knows the difference.

3. "Apache is one of the larger service companies for the oil and gas industry." What a waste of good ink! Again, anyone who is anyone knows that Apache IS NOT a service company!!! They are an oil and gas producer. Schlumberger, Baker Hughes, etc. are service companies. Companies like Apache, Chesapeake, EOG, XTO, etc. are producers. They hire service companies. This mistake is unforgiveable.

Your article started out very good but based on these 3 errors, I find that you are a book smart investment analyst that doesn't know a thing about the oil and gas industry or just doesn't do a smidgen of research. All credibility is lost when one makes mistakes of this proportion!

10 Highest Paid CEOs for 2008: Unbelievable

Here's where I stand: if they are truly "overcompensated", then the shareholders would hold the BOD's responsible. The BOD's are voted on by the shareholders and elected by a majority. Now, am I not correct in saying that a majority of shareholders VOTED FOR the BOD? So, that would say that the BOD has the approval of a majority of the shareholders. SO, if what they did is SOOOOOO bad, I would envision the BOD getting voted out next election. But that isn't going to happen because a MAJORITY OF SHAREHOLDERS AGREE WITH THEIR ACTIONS! And this is a majority rule situation. Heck, I can't stand the actions being taken by Obama, but he was elected by a majority.

10 Highest Paid CEOs for 2008: Unbelievable

ubuy2w: were you happy when Aubrey ran the stock up from $3 to $70? Would you be happy with a run from $3 to $21? Cuz that's basically what it did. Running from $3 to $70 to $21 is the exact same thing as running from $3 to $21, if you are a long term investor. The commodity market gave them to extreme run to $70 and took it back to $21. When your product drops in price from $13 to $3, your stock price has to drop accordingly.

BTW, without Aubrey there is no CHK. It would be long gone.

10 Highest Paid CEOs for 2008: Unbelievable

You are so out to lunch. McClendon brokered deals for CHK that netted over $10 billion at a peak in the market. These deals sealed the prosperity for CHK stockholders for years to come. You, and many others, have one big problem: you look at stock price over months or a year. The way to judge a company and a CEO is not to look at the stock price over the last 12 months. That's typical MBA grad school crap! Look at it over the next five years. Has the companies assets been set up to succeed? In CHK's case, they are a dominate player in the U.S. natural gas industry, they hold huge acreage positions in all of the big growth plays, and given Aubrey's unbelievable deals in 2008, they have 3 companies that will be paying much of the capital for drilling over the next 1-2 years.

Why has CHK's stock price fallen? Quite simply, look at a chart of natural gas prices. Do you see ANYTHING there?? Like a drop from $13 to #3?? Hello! Anyone in there? Of course the stock price of a natural gas company is going to go down when the price of their product crashes like that. When nat gas was $13, CHK was selling at $70. Now that nat gas is at $3, simple math would tell you CHK could be as low as $16-17. Well its higher than that. The CEO of CHK doesn't control the price of the commodity.

Quit looking at stock performance over 3 months or 12 months. Start thinking long term and then start looking at the fundamentals of a company. Look at CHK's acreage under lease, their proven and unproven resources, their positions in 3 of the hottest natural resource plays going, their technical advantages to identify these plays well in advance of others, their ability to take acreage they purchased at $500/acre and then turn for over $20,000 per acre, while still retaining over 50% of the interests, and to get the buyer to carry their drilling costs for a year or so. Come on, didn't they teach you anything in grad school other than how to read a stock chart and a financial statement?

8 Possible Targets for Exxon's Cash

Bill: XOM has more capital than most banks!!!

Surf: MRO has refining and that will be an anti trust issue. But, sell it off before the purchase!! Done! Will it happen? XOM will wait a while longer and let more folks squirm in pain, then they will move at a great price.

I think the big JV idea is a good one but XOM doesn't like to sit in the back seat (unless it is their executive limo's); they want to drive the operation so doing a deal like BP did with CHK is probably not the XOM way. Maybe a reverse of that type of deal?? In any case, they will wait until the blood runs freely on the streets before making a move.

The Triple Play: Oil Addicts, The Credit Crunch and Deflation

Well said Mixter. If any other industry would have lost 600,000 jobs, there would have been an uproar. Big Oil (and Little Oil) invest huge amounts of capital, employ hundreds of thousands of people and support millions of investors/shareholders... Those goofy Senators should have been kissing the feet of the oil exec's in front of them!

But, the fact that almost 50% of the people in the US voted for AlGore and will probably vote for the Marxists running for president reallys shows that a huge percentage of the US voters are clueless and ignorant to basic business acumen. Ye reap what ye sow. No drilling offshore East/West Coast or ANWR, $5/gal gasoline. No big surprise!