Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services 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 : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: BoNg-N-BoNg who wrote (23107)	5/31/1998 10:39:00 AM
From: Big Dog	Read Replies (3) of 95453

Re my GOM jackup post of Saturday: The following was emailed to me this morning from the CEO of a NYSE company in our sector. I communicated to him much the same info as was in my post here. His comments are a bit unclear so take it FWIW: "Not surprised by your comments about JU's in GOM. On the other hand I believe some of this relates as much to reduced cash flow and high cost of service equipment as it does to project feasibility. While gas storage may be fairly full (have not checked) kilowatt burn is running quite high. Of course fuel switching also feasible but limited by available resid and clean air act requirements. Boats in layup. Have heard the same but keep in mind that we have probably had 20 or more vessels delivered in last few months, including "upgrades and stretches" which are resurrected vessels from other services, like fishing, and larger crew boats which are now serving the drilling markets as well as production." Is he saying that project feasibility is responsible for the weakness? Sounds like it to me. So what does that mean? These big shots talk like politicians. The Ever Vigilant Dogged One

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next