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 : Mr. Pink's Picks: selected event-driven value investments -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (17094)	9/24/2002 7:02:48 PM
From: torquatus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 18998

Mr. Pink is not real good at picking his spots. I seem to remember CNC bouncing from $5 to $19 while Mr. Pink was hoisted by his flabby ass. If I am not mistaken, Mr. Pink made the mistake of not covering his last EP short at $10. Something about the "end of the world." EP may be dead in the long term, but in the short term their will be a war. I wouldn't want to be short energy when that happens or when the markets ramp on the backs of the shorts.

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (17094)	9/25/2002 6:59:37 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 18998

You gotta be FERC-in kidding me! El Paso message boards react to stock swoon By Shawn Langlois, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 7:16 PM ET Sept. 24, 2002 SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) - El Paso became the latest in this year's steady parade of energy companies to get raked over the cyber-coals as the stock's harsh plunge has nearly reached Enron-esque proportions. On Monday, a judge found that El Paso (EP: news, chart) helped drive up power prices in California by pinching the natural gas supply during the state's energy crisis. And, of course, making matters worse, the requisite downgrades were soon to follow. See full story. While shares responded with a swift freefall, ornery stock jockeys, as to be expected, went on a frenetic posting binge. Raging Bull's Bernard captured the somber mood on the boards: "News looks bad but do we have any idea how bad, money-wise? I still think this is a sound company and frankly I'm down so far (no stop order...stupid, stupid, stupid) I may as well try to ride it out. Why don't you just shoot me?" More of the same from Yahoo's AshLee: "I'd guess they end up resolving that the judge's assumptions are unrealistic, but that EP could have kept pressures somewhat higher. So then the issue is what damages were caused by being a sloppy operator? And who else can sue for damages because of the finding of fault? "If EP has any chance to settle they should. But it looks like they may also greatly reduce this 'maximum' negative finding on appeal. Should the stock be down by half? Probably not. Is it? Yes. Am I screwed? Yes." Then there was LightSpeedGravity who jumped on the bear bandwagon: "Never stand in front of a freight train. EP will only go lower for the rest of year. Recent buyers will be disappointed and will sell out later. It's a bear market and buying a bad stock now is not wise." Clearly biased, SFP300 agreed: "If this stock goes up, this planet is flat on the shoulder of three elephants. Rally? What Rally? Oh, you mean the rally to join her sisters: Dynegy, Calpine, Mirant, etc at $1? Sell this baby short." But while the masses lamented the state of the stock, others, like MTABO, waxed political: "All hail the Right and Honorable Governor Gray Davis and the Honorable Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein for their efforts at justice and getting their constituents the $$ back that was stolen by the Texas pirate! We got Enron and EP is next and then Dynegy and then Williams..." So you want a bigger mess, asked CoAnalyst: "Shut down one of the largest NG suppliers in the country and see what that disruption does to the California economy. That isn't going to happen. Even Gov. Davis knows better than to go that route. He's looking at the election also." Finally, PJM was clearly at his wit's end: "The FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) and SEC are supposed to PREVENT corruption, not act on it 2 years later. Everyone is pointing a finger and these bozos are compounding the problem instead of making it better. When Nat Gas was at record prices where was the FERC? "In business you do your job or you are gone ... these fed agencies should be revamped completely. Once EP files BK from the inevitable settlement the stock goes to zero, it doesn't matter what the assets are worth because debtors get all and sell it off for pennies on the dollar." What's your take? Share your thoughts on CBS MarketWatch.com's El Paso Discussion Board. Shawn Langlois is a reporter for CBS.MarketWatch.com, and the editor of its community message boards.

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (17094)	9/25/2002 7:04:49 AM
From: StockDung	Respond to of 18998

"California utilities claim they were overcharged by as much as $3.3 billion because of El Paso's actions." FERC judge silent on what penalties El Paso faces By Chris Baltimore WASHINGTON, Sept 24 (Reuters) - Investors looking to pin down El Paso Corp.'s <EP.N> exposure to possible penalties stemming from a finding that it illegally withheld natural gas supplies during the California power crisis got few answers from regulators on Tuesday. A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission judge on Tuesday was mum on the potential penalties the nation's largest natural gas company might face, after recommending that the commission punish the firm. Judge Curtis Wagner, FERC's chief administrative judge, issued a ruling on Monday that El Paso's pipelines withheld "extremely large amounts" of natural gas desperately needed to keep California's electricity generating plants operating between November 2000 and March 2001. Wagner's initial finding sent El Paso shares plunging on Monday by $4.16 per share or 36 percent on investor worries about the punishment it may face. On Tuesday, shares fell another $2.21 to $5.30 per share. El Paso has denied any wrongdoing and said it will challenge the judge's ruling. When pressed by reporters, Wagner refused on Tuesday to outline the potential penalties that could be imposed against El Paso if the four-member commission upholds his ruling. "There are all kinds of things they could do. That's pretty much up to them," he said. His refusal was matched later by FERC Chairman Pat Wood, who said the commission will likely act on the case by the end of the year. "I'm not going to answer that until I hear the briefs of the parties on that," Wood said when asked about possible penalties. California utilities claim they were overcharged by as much as $3.3 billion because of El Paso's actions. Venturing a guess about the commission's options, a report issued by Schwab Capital Markets said the FERC could order the firm to refund ill-gotten profits, revoke its certificate to operate its California pipeline or refer the matter to the Department of Justice as a criminal antitrust case. A Nov. 20 meeting is the soonest the commission could act on the matter because of the required comment period, Schwab analyst Christine Tezak said in the report. "That seems pretty tight," Wood said when asked about the Nov. 20 date. CREDIT DOWNGRADES LOOM On Tuesday, Moody's Investors Services said it may cut its rating on $25 billion in senior debt of El Paso because of the ruling. El Paso shares also were downgraded by Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Securities. El Paso has held $185 million in reserve since last October, which the firm claims are the profits earned by its merchant subsidiary over the relevant time period, Tezak said. If the FERC determines that El Paso willfully violated the Natural Gas Act, it could order the firm to refund profits gained through such activities, Tezak said. If rating agencies think El Paso's exposure to those penalties is above the ear-marked amount, "they downgrade the company to junk," Tezak said. The FERC could also suspend El Paso's pipeline certificate if it finds abuses. But such a move would in effect stop the flow of natural gas into California, which would have harmful effects, Tezak said. Another possible option would be for the FERC to refer the case to the Justice Department "for prosecution under criminal antitrust law," Tezak said. To take that action, the FERC would have to determine that El Paso acted willfully to withhold supplies, Tezak said. Wagner made his remarks during a break in closed-door negotiations aimed at settling a separate case over California's demand to renegotiate billions of dollars in long-term electricity contracts signed last year. El Paso Corp was among the companies participating in the settlement talks, along with Dynegy Inc. <DYN.N>, Sempra Energy <SRE.N> and Allegheny Energy Inc. <AYE.N>. California accused those companies and several others of overcharging the state by some $21 billion for wholesale electricity supplies in contracts signed in late 2000 and early 2001. The El Paso natural gas pipeline case is pending before FERC in docket RP00-241. 09/24/02 18:04 ET