Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: russet who wrote (1597)	10/3/2001 5:58:52 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (1) of 11633

----- Some comments concerning Stan's response to this post of yours 1. At any given point in time, X number of wells need or could use some rework. But I don't believe you will gain much insight into overall gas supply conditions speculating whether the value of X is higher or lower than it was in the past. There isn't enough data to draw any conclusions. ------ Typical response to any new info that does not jive with his views ---- I DON'T BELEIVE.-------------------- 2. There never was a "gas production spike" but there was a gas price spike, one that was largely caused by administrative farkups by Californian gas procurers caught asleep at the switch last winter. In truth, the fact that production didn't appreciably increase quickly in the US was the cause of much consternation a few months ago, because most people expected that it would. -------- For this I looked straight to the Q2 report from enerplus and this is what I found under the headings MARKETING -- NATURAL GAS """""""" INCREASED NATURAL GAS DRILLING SPURRED ON BY THE HIGH PRICES """"""""""""""". So clearly there was a gas production spike. For one trust for all trusts. A case again of just not accepting what the real numbers show.---------------------------------------- 3. As for the analysts of this world - it is of little importance to me or most investors that the trusts may have outperformed index X, Y or Z in the past. Some people might even argue this predicts that trusts should now underperform in order to return to the mean. IMO, the whole discussion is all so much rearview mirror BS. All I care about is where they're headed now, as you should be. ----- These people just can't get it through their heads that past info is the best and only source by which to judge how something is to perform. How it has done. Gives a pretty good indication of how it will do. Especially if that track record is long enough. Spanning both industry good times and bad times as well as market good times and bad. That whole discussion about pricing showed all that prices for ngas hovered between the $1 and $2 range for the most part since 1988. A few of the longer running trusts survived and unit holders received good income all during that time period. To come out here and rant about how the trusts were selling at huge losses now when prices are only in the same general historical trading pattern they have been in was and is the only BS.------------ 4. The number of producers willing to sell gas at a dollar would obviously be quite high if the alternative was no sales gas at all, so just remember price is relative. IMO you haven't seen just how self-sacrificing companies can get when too much production is competing for not enough consumption, especially when the buyers are sitting on historically high storage volumes and would like to recover some of the dough they got pinched for last winter. Business is business. ------------ A simple call to any or all trusts will clear this up quite nicely. Ask them if they would sell ngas at a huge loss just to make a sale. Knowing the pricing cycle like these trusts do. It is just sheer nonsense that they would even consider such a thing.--------------------------

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next