SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Guidance and Visibility -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Connor26 who wrote (110872)3/12/2004 10:25:03 AM
From: Marshall001  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 208838
 
I don't blame you. I am enough underwater where it really doesnt matter anyhow. This is a relatively small position for me and I can sit on it until they do find gas/oil. The 50% haircut on one stupid well seems excessive but that just an opinion. Obviously everybody else thinks otherwise.

There must be more to the story than whats being released. I can only apply my oil field logic to the two sides of the story. In reality, exploration wells turn up dry most of the time so I'm not sure what El Paso was expecting.. I guess they probably got cold feet when the well wasn't a "gusher". The PR from Reuters states that El Paso has been in trouble recently:

"A spokesman for El Paso, which is itself trying to return to financial health after being caught in the merchant energy sector downdraft that followed Enron's collapse, declined to comment on his company's view of Mariner's potential reserves. He said only that El Paso opted not to participate in testing.

Noval was not available for comment, but Mike Coolen, Canadian Superior's East Coast operations director, said his company decided it would be better to put its cash into a future well than foot the whole bill for testing Mariner."

This can mean many things but either way, I bet Mondays press conference will be a cheerleading session for future potential, technical jargon blah blah blah...

Good Luck,

M