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 : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: t4texas who wrote (6605)	1/19/2002 6:50:23 PM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36161

PCX: I think these are usually royalties to land and mineral rights holders? My understanding is that they have secured these mineral rights as part of the spin off from their parent Canadian Pacific, who in turn secured them over a century ago as part of the RR land rights. PCX has vast mineral right holdings throughout Canada and thus is not obligated to pay royalties on property that's already theirs. That's a unique cost advantage and is a primary reason that they are such as great energy holding. PLUS they've been getting lucky offshore. When this sector comes back to life: look out, this one's a rocket. Incidentally, Peter Linder of Research Capital in October put the odds of a takeover of PCX as 5:1 by year end 2001 at a price of US 38-44. It's still only January. CEO, China Energy: This seems consistent with China's rather aggressive intentions to secure offshore energy (totally understandable for the next great economy powerhouse: read Marc Faber's roundtable comments in Barrons this weekend)while energy is still on the backburner and the US is distracted. CEO is the "corporate arm" that allows this state directed objective to happen at arms length.