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: Lorne Larson who wrote (2450)	1/20/2002 3:58:34 PM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Read Replies (2) of 11633

So you think there is a major difference between a "realized loss" and an "unrealized" loss? -------------- There is a major difference thats why they are not called the same thing. If it were the same there would be no need for the distinction and all could call it just a plain loss. But that they are called different is because quite simply they are different. The simple just eludes you ------------ A realized loss is just that it can't be gotten back as easily as an unrealized loss which recovers when the unit prices cycle higher. To get a realized loss back your next trade has to be a success and it must recover that previous loss. Not a guaranteed thing and not so easy as just waiting for the cycle to again go higher as it always has done ,over several times, and having the losses just erased because they weren't real in the first place. Your own documented posts show shorting loss after shorting loss after trading loss. To recover from these disasters your next trades are going to have to be huge and in the high double digits if not higher. Now how likely is that given your track record thusfar????? -------- Take your financial statements to your banker and try and sell him on that one, why don't you? --------------- I have taken my financial statements to my bankers. That is why I have at my leisure the use of a rather large investment line of credit. My results of its use is quarterly sent to the bankers so that they may judge my use of it , its effectiveness and results, and which allow me from time to time increase the amounts available to me. Based solely on its running results. All of which I discussed in a posting to Kastelco who asked. When we discussed the use of leverage with these trusts.---------- I guess if I bought Nortel at $100 and I still have it, I don't really have a loss? Jeez maybe some day it'll get back to $100 and therefore I haven't really lost anything. --------------- Technically that is correct in theory but not in practise. You sure like to compare apples to oranges. Just how many times has NT reached $100 or over. Now look to the trading data for the trusts. In particular say ERF. Which in a previous post I posted the long term trading numbers for several past years. Look to how many of those years the unit price has been close to or above $30. It has cycled that high then lower then that high again several to many times. Like clockwork. Can the same be said of NT. NO, again your attempt to give fact and data is sorely lacking and falls well short as usual. Not a surprise. AMATEUR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ----------------------- Why don't you go over to one of the Nortel boards and comfort them with this incredible piece of wisdom? ---------- I am not in the habit of comparing apples to oranges, I will leave that to you and the others ------------------- You are correct however on PGF - the reference to my still being short PGF should have referenced my still being short NCF. If I was also short PGF I would tell you immediately of course Peter, so you could rant about it for the next 3 weeks. That being said, I think PGF is one of the weakest oil and gas trusts out there right now. Carrying more debt than most and apparently (at least according to TD) has major capex coming this year. ---------- You look to outdated facts and evidence as usual. All the reports of PGF debt load are and were conducted on past data. Data which ignores the recent evidence of PGF doing interest rate swaps on its debt. I posted and made reference to this several times. They went from paying well over 10%, double digit interest on some of their debt and exchanged that to the current level of 4.75% for the next several years. That is a huge savings. And they have said that they are in the process of doing much more of the same. With similar savings. All these savings will come back to the unitholders. The least you could do is look to what is happening now and in the near future instead of relying on the past and outdated material. Again your such an AMATEUR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!------------------ And major capex done in the down part of the cycle have always shown to be the wisest of strategies. They have done it previously with great results. Documented results like in the last down cycle when oil prices touched $10 a barrell they did major capex. The results for PGF at that time were that at the time prices were falling to record lows and recovering their monthly payouts were increasing. Because of buying the assets so cheaply and having their values increase with the turn around and increasing their production and cutting their costs.All at the same time. Check for yourself. ITS DOCUMENTED. I find it hard to believe that you still cling to the notion that these trusts operate in a vacuum and have no control over what and how they do their buisness. Again your such an AMATEUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ---------------------

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next