Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: double-plus-good who wrote (52280)	10/1/1999 3:11:00 PM
From: Richard D	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

TIA, re: GW, if not horrifying, the balance sheet gives one pause. Consider that GW has price to book roughly equivalent to PTEN (GW-3.4, PTEN-3.1), yet GW has a debt to equity of 1.73 while PTEN has one of .28. GW has 165 million shares outstanding compared to PTEN's 30 million. In order for this stock to move, it must push a lot of stock. Add to this the fact that, as of a filing on 9-10-99, GW intends to sell 200 million in common and preferred stock, depository shares, debt securities and warrants to make ends meet ( siliconinvestor.com .) It's in the right subsector, has a burgeoning chart, and has a cool name, but given the debt, I fear even Angels may fear to tread here. PTEN is leaner, meaner, priced better (on a price to book or price to sales basis), and has a stellar chart. PTEN has double the number of rigs operating since the beginning of the summer, with increased day rates as well. Why drive a Yugo when you could drive the new Bentley concept car (16 cylinder, 2--yes 2-- engines, etc. for only $3 million/car as I vaguely recall). Richard PS perhaps the Acura NSX is a more apt description of PTEN as a fast moving, great value. I've always liked that car. I just couldn't believe the Bentley story. Maybe we're nearing a market top when those kind of cars are built. Of course it probably gets gallons/mile rather than miles/gallon, so it's bullish for oil <g>. PPS. I don't follow GW, so take what I say with a grain of salt.