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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Carragher who wrote (41637)	4/10/2005 8:21:38 PM
From: croesus1111	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206325

You know, after reflecting, I realized that I made that statement out of belief rather than definitive knowledge. When I did a little research I couldn't come up with any conclusive evidence that collusion has occurred. There are a lot of examples that are suggestive of collusion at the retail gasoline level. But I didn't find anything conclusive. Now that may be because collusion is difficult to prove, or it may be because it didn't happen. However, a lack of proof of past history of collusion does not mean that the oil companies are not holding back from delivery of gasoline now, and it doesn't mean that they are not participating in some other way of modulating the high inventories to prevent prices from declining at the pump. I'm just suggesting one possible reason for the high inventories co-existing with high prices. There may be other explanations which are better. Got any ideas? Examples of oil company alleged collusion: worldfuels.com abc.net.au chinadaily.com.cn lancasteronline.com revenuewatch.org ingentaconnect.com starbulletin.com entemp.ie See page 16, paragraph 4.30 spot.colorado.edu oft.gov.uk See page 1, Western Isles starbulletin.com portal.acm.org new.mn.ru gasandoil.com keei.re.kr