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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kormac who wrote (354)	10/29/2000 8:47:49 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Respond to of 74559

Hi Seppo, Thanks for the kind note. If you feel that Campbell is the least optimistic of the consultants, then I feel obligated to let the Sciam article suffice. I'm far more intrigued by the frontiers of human creativity in the realms of nanotechnology, optics, proteomics and bioinformatics than I could ever possibly be by pawing around a terminal patient like the awl bidness. The agony could go on for decades, and probably will. But by my reckoning, oil hasn't been an interesting upbeat story since 1967. I, too, have been quite surprised at the willingness of the Norwegian and the Brits to get high rates out of their field. Of course, in the case of the British, anyone reading of the age of Drake would realize that the national bent is toward exploitation and short-sightedness as regards ocean based resources. And then there were the Vikings. These national propensities toward being completely shortsighted are in large measure the reason we can't have a reasonable policy vis a vis the collapse of the ocean's fisheries. The tragedy of the commons, writ large. And though we clearly know exactly how to solve this, i.e. licensing territorial rights to the best fishing grounds, there is no will to take this sensible step. But I digress. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OT: If your daughter is in Eugene, there's an outside chance she might be a Nader voter. If so, here's a way for her to vote her conscience, help the Green Party to get 5% of the vote and not help elect George II. nadertrader.com Democracy in action. Of course, if she's voting for Bush.... Oh, never mind.... <bg> Best, Ray

To: kormac who wrote (354)	10/29/2000 9:06:37 PM
From: excardog	Respond to of 74559

to all, I'm sure tradermike didn't want this to turn into an "oil thread" but I believe what is trying to be pointed out by many of those responding is oil's price threat on the economy in general. My practical experience over the past summer was when prices went above $2 a gallon for premium the local rag had the story on page one. Prices dipped and stories died. Premium now sells in the upper 1.90's no stories as yet. We are becoming conditioned so to speak. And why not, on an inflation adjusted basis gas is still cheap. Up to this point it is my opinion that the economy has absorbed the increase quite handily. It could be that bounce from $2 to $3 or $4 would probably tip the economy over.IMO A local friend owns several independent stations is hurting big time. He seems to be unable to pass increases along so margins are razor thin. I am of the opinion that the major's are eating some margin on the refining end in an effort to keep the prices under $2. Profits are so healthy on the production side this course of action appears to make some sense. The debate over the amount of oil will continue and let us all hope that the ME never admits to capacity constraints. Just imagine the future's markets on that day were it to come. The word explosion comes to mind. Should this day come I would not even hesitate one second to go to 100% cash (should I have any left) and watch the fall out. Best of fortune to all.