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 : Canadian Oil & Gas Companies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (7086)	2/3/2000 5:14:00 PM
From: SofaSpud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24925

I agree, the similarities are troubling. I'm all too aware of the shortcomings of analysts -- they certainly didn't have a clue about any of the last bad situations (MEL, PRX, Remington, etc.). Now, having said that analysts are useless, I'll talk about what Peters is saying. They've pegged BKP average at 27,000 boe/d for '99, which would be +35% from '98. If '00 is 36,000 (the low end of the company's guidance) growth is 33%. If it comes at at 38,000 (the high end of company guidance, and the number Peters is using) it's 41%. Those are OK numbers for a company this size. So, is somebody picking up vibes from somewhere? MEL ran an astonishing string of dry holes. Is BKP doing the same? Are people adding Cal Canal and Norman Wells together to make a trend? Are the decline rates on existing production out of line? Having one big whack of shares in this, I would dearly love to know. Anyone?