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: Bearcatbob who wrote (7578)	9/12/2000 8:30:22 PM
From: Buckey	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24921

Anybody been following the tightly held OEL-CDNX. Moved from 7 cents to $2.50 in two years. Pres was on ROB TV today. I own lots- Not sure if its done like dinner or just getting started. Any O&G experts take a peek and see if the numbers jive - I think it is still a buying opp based on recent numbers

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (7578)	9/12/2000 11:20:29 PM
From: russet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24921

Hi Mr. Bearcatbob, Don't know why you're asking all those questions,...cause the boys in the Alberta gas industry say one thing,....we is going to get California prices for our gas now,...instead of !@#$%^&*%^$#@! Jean Cretin Liberal POS prices,....good election issue, don't you think?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (7578)	9/13/2000 12:41:22 PM
From: SofaSpud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24921

Bob / Alliance There was quite a bit of discussion on Alliance on this thread a couple of years ago. I don't have time right now to go back and tell you exactly where, but it would be worth your while to browse around. I'm not expert by any stretch, but I was trying to at least pay attention when the issue first came up. When Alliance was first proposed, it was thought by some to simply be a threat. A number of producers were dissatisfied with TCPL's toll structure, as well as the ownership of liquids. Keep in mind that this was before the Nova/TCPL merger. Nova operated the gas gathering system within Alberta. One thing they did was to operate straddle plants to strip out the liquids for the petrochemical business. Producers didn't feel adequately compensated. One reason that there was suspicion that the Alliance proposal wasn't for real was the fact that it didn't seem possible to fill it and all the existing and proposed pipe capacity. In fact, once Alliance was far enough along, TRP backed off on an expansion of their own export capacity. So where is the gas coming from? Some of it is indeed coming from TCPL's system -- note the chart: bigcharts.com Not all of the weakness was due to botching the Nova acquisition -- some of it was a result of losing contracts to Alliance. Bottom line is, as russett pointed out, that Canadian producers now get the U.S. price for NG, less shipping costs. That's a huge change from the situation they faced up until a few years ago. Before deregulation, they were forced to sit on 20 years supply or some such number. Now demand exceeds supply. Glory days, while it lasts.

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (7578)	9/24/2000 8:38:14 PM
From: bcjt	Respond to of 24921

(Oilexco,v.oil)OPEC Warns Against More Reserve Releases CARACAS, Venezuela (Reuters) - OPEC (news - web sites) Secretary-General Rilwanu Lukman cautioned industrialized nations on Sunday against following the U.S. lead in releasing strategic oil reserves to counter high prices. ``Those who hold reserves should be careful when they use them so they can be there for real emergencies,'' Lukman told a news conference ahead of the oil producer group's summit this week in Caracas. President Clinton (news - web sites) decided on Friday to release 30 million barrels from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve over 30 days to prevent heating oil supply disruptions this winter. ``It's not our business to interfere with what industrialized countries do with their reserves, but I don't know whether the current situation could be regarded as an emergency. It's not quite an appropriate use for it,'' Lukman said. U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson has said the United States was prepared to take further action if necessary to calm oil prices, which last week hit their highest level since the Gulf War. Prices have fallen sharply as the United States signaled it would release reserves, and European leaders called for measures to ease high prices. Lukman said he hoped that the United States' move along with an 800,000 barrel per day increase OPEC will implement beginning October 1, would moderate prices, but he said the group would work to avoid prices falling back too far. ``We are not going to get pushed into putting more oil into the market than it needs,'' he said. ``People forget that prices have come up from just $10 a barrel two years ago. No one felt sorry for OPEC then.'' OPEC oil ministers meeting on Tuesday would not emerge with any new supply decision, Lukman said, adding that the group had the option to raise supply at the end of October under its price stability mechanism. This week's summit, only the second in the group's 40-year history, will help OPEC's efforts to work together to manage oil prices, he said. ``It could not have come at a better time for our organization. It will go a long way to strengthen us,'' he said. He reiterated that OPEC believed high taxes in consuming countries, lack of refining capacity and oil market speculators were just as responsible for current high prices as a shortage of crude oil. ``It's all very well to blame OPEC. We are a very convenient scapegoat,'' he said. ``We have taken steps to alleviate high prices and we believe prices will come down to a level us and our customers are happy with. People expect this to happen in five minutes. Time is required.'' Strong prices were necessary to make sure oil producers invested enough in exploration and production to meet future demand, Lukman added. ``Without good prices we may well end up with a shortage of capacity in the future,'' he said.