Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View ArtM72's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is The Money Real? [View article]
    Do you absolutely know where the money is in your bank account today?

    I'm not certain the US landed a man on the moon. And I have no way to absolutely prove to myself the world is round. But then, I don't go around writing maybe we didn't and maybe it isn't.
    Nov 21 12:57 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is The Money Real? [View article]
    Maybe you would like to consider the cash balance question in light of all of the other allegations in the MW hit piece which have proved to be false.
    Nov 21 12:53 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Exxon Can't Afford To Let Shell Steal InterOil Or Its Resources [View article]
    You state "all of the evidence shows that Interoil and SHU are over touting the resources." While I'm certain your thesis needs no critique, I would offer that you have no evidence the resource doesn't exist in the size most frequently discussed on SHU and as determined by three internationally recognized and respected independent petrogeological firms. Your only argument is the deal hasn't been done and therefor it can't be done, thus there is no resource to support a major gas/condensate selldown.

    As for no major has endorsed the "bull thesis" and no scrutiny of that thesis should be made, I don't really know there exists a "bull thesis". There are a lot of different theses debated on SHU. True, most are based on the belief that there is an agreement among the knowledgeable petrogeologists IOC has in Elk/Antelope alone around 8 TCF and possibly much more in PRL-15 alone. There is just no credible scientific thesis out there which disputes these numbers. This fact alone should tell you something: after many, many people have been through IOC's data room and nobody has left that room challenging the basic resource size numbers. Not a one.

    The best argument I could put forth to support your thesis FeelTheHeat, other than your knowing it to be disingenuous, would be this: You were taught in a creationism science classroom that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. Therefore there is no reason to respect the opinions of petrogeoscientists who believe the Earth is much older and who tell us most of the 8+ TCF of gas/condensate in Elk/Antelope was formed over 100 million years ago. This would be clearly an impossibility since the Earth didn't exist then. Therefore IOC can't have any gas to speak of because it couldn't have formed when the scientists claimed...and in any event if the gas did exist it would already have been sold.
    Nov 9 04:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What Exactly Is So Objectionable About Obamacare? [View article]
    The only reason you can provide to fault Obamacare has nothing to do with Obamacare. Figures.
    Oct 24 12:38 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • What Exactly Is So Objectionable About Obamacare? [View article]
    While the website is not yet right I would suggest we look back to how many Atlas rockets blew up on launch at Cape Canaveral before one finally took John Glenn into orbit. Or, perhaps closer to case, how many versions of Windows have we seen? Hell, the first one that was ANY good was not Windows or Windows 2 or even Windows 3, but 3.1. Was it Windows 2007 that first retired the phrase "blue screen of death?"

    People need to get real, but I've lost all faith in the Republican party's ability to do so.
    Oct 22 09:21 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What Exactly Is So Objectionable About Obamacare? [View article]
    The above three criticisms are classic ad hominem attacks where rather than addressing the underlying arguments the writer is condemned. Bob, Perplexed and TakeFive should all consider the simple proposition, if Obamacare is so bad why are Republicans fighting so hard against it? Abject failure of the program would certainly translate to Democratic defeat in the next election.

    Y'all might want to visit the link to see how Kentucky is doing.
    Oct 13 08:56 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: The Stars Are Aligned For A Takeover Battle To Ensue In The Coming Weeks [View article]
    Everyone who has first hand experience with the wells and well data, including service companies, resource geologists and engineers, national and international oil companies...

    Ever hear of any organization of that ilk with first hand knowledge walk away from the wells or the data and say the resource does not exist in substantially that quantity? I didn't think so.

    Your moniker is a cheap threadbare veil.
    Aug 7 12:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Jedi Mind Trick: These Aren't The Deals You Were Looking For [View article]
    People lie, stocks don't? No problem with the first, but I would suggest the second could be "stock prices today can't lie because they are stupid." We are in a casino environment with millisecond algorithm based trading. If you want something fairly rational follow a stock that pays a dividend. Not so much fun for the traders. Much less apt to be subject to deceptive or high speed algorithmic practices.
    May 28 07:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interoil: Let's Get Ready To Fumble [View article]
    J Maher -

    Everyone seems to ignore the fact that Antelope 2 testing was not completed until December of 2009, and without the subsequent analysis no one really understood the size and scope of the Antelope field. Suggesting credible bidding could have started during 2009 is simply erroneous.

    As to the $1/mmcf as being an appropriate market value for a resource rich in condensates 80km from a protected coast from wells that flow hundreds of millions of cubic feet per day with virtually instantaneous pressure recovery...again from independent evaluators....maybe, just maybe, "averages" simply are inappropriate.
    May 9 09:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Interoil: Let's Get Ready To Fumble [View article]
    This comment is in response to Allan's comment above. I believe it has been misplaced in the thread.

    Aland, you are just dishonest. IOC has hundreds of millions in cash and credit. They built and operate a refinery and 60% of the PNG retail distribution market and their wells flow by independent testing literally hundreds of millions of cubic feet of gas a day. Just how much more "relevent" experience do you need to become a player?

    And lets not forget the advanced aerial and seismic studies undertaken by IOC over the past several years identifying 40 additional prospects in their lease area? Did I mention Triceratops?

    As I said Alan, you are simply dishonest to dismiss IOC as "half a lease". Your posts are simply HAIL.
    May 9 08:52 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The P'nyang Paradox And Why Exxon Needs InterOil's Gas [View article]
    Guanobean - Your comment reminds me of the guy who while watching Neil Armstrong at the top of Eagle's ladder in 1969 observed " If ya ain't walkin on the moon you ain't never got there."
    Apr 30 11:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The P'nyang Paradox And Why Exxon Needs InterOil's Gas [View article]
    I think you are referring to the article

    You must not have read the article as you didn't even read the title accurately. You seem apparently so bound to your beliefs and so insistent at promoting their truth that you can't tell the difference between the word "bid" and the word "deal".
    Apr 30 07:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The P'nyang Paradox And Why Exxon Needs InterOil's Gas [View article]
    Nothing precludes Exxon from building an LNG plant in Gulf Province, and certainly nothing precludes Total or Shell from building one and selling 3.8 mtpa to Exxon for early monetization. These companies work together all over the world, so why not here? Per my rough calcs Exxon's pipeline across the gulf likely has the capacity for four units (16 mtpa?) with intermediate compressor stations.

    And let's not forget the Japanese. Is there anybody in the world willing to sell LNG at $8/mcf in a 20 year contract? That is about what it would cost them for acquisition, liquification and shipping if they paid $3/mcf for IOC's gas from E/A.

    BTW, Bonk. You have a great writing style, but Mulacek "cleaning out his desk?" He remains the fourth largest shareholder with a seat on the Board of Directors. A little disingenuous characterization, don't you think, albeit consistent with the rest of your arguments. Wasn't quite sure though who drove Exxon's timetable...Exxon or UBS? LOL.
    Apr 30 06:09 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Pacific Rubiales, Other Indicators Confirm Majors Embroiled In Bidding War For InterOil's Assets [View article]
    Leviathon was discovered in mid 2010, just a little after Antelope 1 was drilled and in the period during which the size of the Elk/Antelope field was becoming understood. Leviathon does not at this time appear likely to move as quickly as Elk/Antelope. Of course every field has its challenges.

    On a side note, it is interesting that rumors have Shell selling its $7 billion share in Woodside because of Woodside's share in Leviathon. You have to wonder how long that deal ha s been going on, and where on earth do you think Shell could use money like that to quickly replace those reserves?
    Apr 21 10:48 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: A Free Cash Flow Machine With An Unparalleled Reserve Growth Profile [View article]
    The Lakeview presentation you, Adamsdk, recommended is either one of the most ignorant or the most dishonest (you pick) characterizations of Interoil ever presented.

    The Lakeview presentation's entire thesis rests upon the idea some sort of hypnosis has been cast upon geologists and tribal neighbors, national leaders and Interoil employees, investment bankers and executives of national and international oil companies, suppliers and subcontractors and others all who have participated in the Interoil charade. Perhaps some sort of hypnotic spell has been cast upon each and every one of those people who have lived with and worked with Interoil for over a decade in a shared alternate reality, a fantasyland where roads and bridges and wells and barge loads of equipment and instrumentation and data and enormous gas flares and the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars to someone for something never existed but is all simply a shared imagination. Mighty powerful black magic.

    Or, in a very real way that Lakeview presentation is a caricature of the short arguments used for years against IOC. Ignorant. Vacuous. Dishonest. Shameless.
    Apr 17 10:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment