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.

Pastimes : NNBM - SI Branch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: altair19 who wrote (21227)	1/16/2003 8:16:17 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 104216

Some folks think going into Iraq is NOT about oil after all...fyi... Talk about oil and Iraq is just that: A lot of talk By Trudy Rubin Columnist The Philadelphia Inquirer Posted on Sun, Jan. 12, 2003 Is the United States going to war with Iraq to get its hands on Iraqi oil fields? Nearly everyone in the Middle East thinks so. So do some Americans. The theory is seductive. Iraq has the world's second-largest oil reserves, with rich new fields to explore. It's not just critics of an Iraq war who speculate about a war-oil linkage. Conservative pundits contend that post-Saddam Iraq will turn on the pumps and drive global oil prices down, while pulling out of the OPEC oil cartel and replacing the unpleasant Saudis as our key oil ally. Administration officials predict that oil will pay for all of Iraq's reconstruction - and, some hint, for the costs of war. The only problem with all these oil theories is that they are wrong. There will be no fantastic oil bonanza at hand if Saddam Hussein is ousted. After 20 years of war and sanctions, Iraq's oil infrastructure is in disarray. It will take three or more years and $7 billion to $8 billion just to get back to 1980 production levels of 3.5 million barrels per day, according to experts. Boosting production to 6 million bpd would take $30 billion to $40 billion more in investment - and many more years. (So much for hopes that the Iraqi oil tap will soon make Saudia Arabia's 8 billion bpd irrelevant). Moreover, Baghdad doesn't even have the cash to get started. Iraq's annual oil revenues at present are only around $10 billion a year. Even if we assume that Saddam doesn't torch the oil fields as a parting gesture, that level of income won't begin to meet the country's immediate needs. There will be huge emergency humanitarian bills after a military conflict. There will be an urgent need to rebuild basic infrastructure, like power grids, roads, and hospitals, which will eat up $25 billion to $100 billion more. Do the math, and what you get is a huge shortfall. In the next couple of years, international donors will have to pour money into Iraq. Anyone who imagines that Iraqi oil is going to pay the $100 billion bill for a war there is in fantasyland. Of course, foreign investment could help speed up the oil industry's recovery and augment Iraq's future income. But this brings us to the political impediments to dipping into Iraqi oil. U.S. companies might not be in a hurry to invest in an Iraq whose stability will be shaky in the near term. Even if they are eager, they will confront crucial issues of Iraqi nationalism - and of law. Iraq, like the rest of the Gulf, has a state-owned oil company. No foreign oil company has operated in Iraq since 1960. Multinationals buy Iraqi oil for refining, but they have no equity share in the oil fields, nor do they get any percentage of oil for services performed. In a desperate bid for political support, Saddam promised the Russians and the French that he would offer them a chance to develop new oil fields. But if his dictatorship ends, any new oil arrangement will require the passage of new laws by a new, democratically elected parliament. This process will be time-consuming, but - if the Bush administration really means to support democracy - it must accept the results. And the results may not be to its liking. "If the Baath Party survives, or some general makes a coup, it might be conceivable they would give the U.S. some oil contracts," says oil expert Fereidun Fesharaki of the East-West Center in Honolulu. "But if they have proper elections... you can't predict. You might have a nationalist government which doesn't want equity sharing or to give the U.S. the oil." Prime case in point: After the Gulf War, American companies expected to be invited to develop new Kuwaiti oil fields. Kuwait's government was willing, but the elected parliament refused. For similar Arab nationalist reasons, many experts expect that a new Iraqi government would stay in OPEC. "Iraq was a founding member of OPEC," says Amy Myers Jaffe, senior energy adviser at the James A. Baker III Institute in Houston. "You can't eradicate a country's history because they have a new government." That history - which includes British colonial rule - will require the United States to handle the oil issue with care after an Iraq war. Iraq has many oil experts, inside and outside the country, who can manage the industry. Control should be turned over to them once oil proceeds are weaned from U.N. supervision under the "oil-for-food" program. An elected Iraqi government may give contracts to U.S. companies or not. But any heavy-handed U.S. pressure is likely to boomerang and confirm the beliefs of those who think the war was only about oil. Even though, in reality, Iraq's fields are not up for grabs. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact columnist Trudy Rubin at 215-854-5823 or trubin@phillynews.com. philly.com

To: altair19 who wrote (21227)	1/18/2003 7:21:28 PM
From: Clappy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 104216

Arnie19, I worked a half day today and brought my clubs with me so I could stop off at the driving range on the way home. The place is close to my house. No golf course just a driving range, miniature golf, and batting cages. I never thought the place would stay in business long but it looks like they are doing well. They are digging the foundation for some indoor batting cages. Anyhow what's neat about this particular place is that the golf stations are are usually open but covered by a roof so you can practice in any weather. In the winder they put up some sort of tent material with clear plastic that prevents the wind from howling. If it's really cold you can turn a timer and an electric heater comes on radiating some warmth down onto you. It's excellent especially if you have a golfing jones or just want to keep your swing in tune. Anyhow today there was a group of older men. I figured they were all retirees. It appears that meet there each Saturday to shoot the breeze and goof off while honing their skills. They new each other well and passed around different recycled golf jokes and stories while they warmed up. Then suddenly one of the dudes would call out a target. "Okay. Closest to the 150 sign without a bounce." They would then each take a turn to see who got the closest. One dude kept score as to who was nearest in order. I didn't realize it at first but they were playing for money. Just like they probably do on the course. It was so much fun watching them and listening. "Okay, see the snow patch in the middle of this strip of grass?" "Which one?" "See? The bigger one on the left side." He pointed out about 75 yards. "Let's see who can hit it. This is a skin." All six of them fired away in turn. I found that I and the guy to the left of me began reaching for clubs to try to nail it too. But then I'd feel a little embarrassed so I'd take out my 3 wood and aim at the 200 sign. Then they probably saw me and they would yell out, "Okay, nearest to the 200. Has to finish the closest." All of them would reach for respected iron or wood and fire away. "Okay next shot. Closest to the edge of the snow out 50 yards... Swinging from the opposite side of the mat." They all turned around and tried to poke out a dribbler using their three iron with the blade flipped around pointing down. This went on for a while. One fun comment followed by one fun shot assignment. It helped extend the time it took before their bucket would be empty. The final skin was who could hit the "100" sign. As a joke one guy asked, "Closest to which zero?" His friend said the middle number. Well sure enough one dude nailed it right in the center of the zero. "CLANG!!" Without hesitation he called the next shot. "Okay, closest to the 175 sign... But everyone has to use a nine iron..." They sure did have a lot of fun. At the end they divvied up the money. "Hey Hogan! Hope you remembered you checkbook this time. Last time you paid me in Titleists." I hope they are there next Saturday. They sure are fun to watch. It's perfect golfing weather in those stalls. At least for those 6 dudes and who ever is lucky enough to be there watching. -JackassNicholas.