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 : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chispas who wrote (53098)	7/7/2006 9:30:42 AM
From: RealMuLan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

There was an interview with Ned Davis on last week's Barrons. He compared this period to 1946. The market cracked from May 1946 into early 1947, after a 4-year cyclical bull market similar to this period. The market crashed in Sept. 1946, falling 27% before stabilizing. Although the reason for commodity boom in 1946 was different from now. Back in 1946, the boom was due to price controls enacted during WWII were lifted. And he thought the maximum risk level for S&P is 1000 assuming the economy holds together.

To: Chispas who wrote (53098)	7/7/2006 11:00:27 AM
From: mishedlo	Respond to of 116555

birth death model adds 175K jobs this month bls.gov

To: Chispas who wrote (53098)	7/7/2006 11:32:49 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 116555

<<Jim Willie - "DIFFERENT THIS TIME VS 1980" ->> <<Most claims of decade similarities are a bit trivial, obvious, and not important.>> and <<Sorry, but claims of similarity in the decades end abruptly with rising oil and gold prices, or more generally rising commodity prices.>> I disagree completely with these statements; the main similarity I see between this decade and the 70's is housing. People mortgaged their future on speculative housing that put them in a hole that lasted for a very long time in the 70's - like today...... The similarity extends to the publics mind set, a mind set that could see no down side to the economy and the housing market. Buy today because tomorrow the house would cost more...... Another HUGE similarity between the decades was the easy money. Banks looked the other way in both decades as they loaned as if there was no risk involved. All of these similarities look remarkable the same. Of course there are differences this time, but to ignore the past subject us to the same mistakes! steve

To: Chispas who wrote (53098)	7/8/2006 1:36:47 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 116555

Fears growing in wake of expected 50% cost increase at Shell oilsands plant CALGARY (CP) - Fears that cost pressures have spiralled out of control in the northern Alberta oilsands spooked investors Thursday in the wake of news that Shell Canada's (TSX:SHC) Athabasca oilsands project could potentially pay upwards of $11 billion to generate an extra 100,000 barrels of oil a day. Even in an industry that has seen its share of multibillion-dollar cost overruns to build megaprojects, word that Athabasca's first major expansion could cost 50 per cent higher than the current $7.3 billion pricetag hit oilsands producers hard on the stock market. Bob Gillon, an energy analyst with John S Herold in Connecticut, said the Athabasca expansion would now cost six times what the original project did, on a daily flowing barrel basis. "It's not a knock on Shell or this project, everybody's facing it," Gillon said in an interview Thursday. "But my Lord in heaven. If you're talking about something that cost you six times as much as it did six or eight years ago, even with the move we've had in oil prices, we're getting these things back to where the economics . . . are going to get skinny in a hurry." Western Oil Sands (TSX:WTO), a pure-play oilsands producer with a 20 per cent minority stake in the Athabasca development, bore the biggest brunt from nervous investors, dropping $3.70 or nearly 12 per cent to $27.30 in trading of nearly 3.6 million shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday. Shell Canada, which owns 60 per cent of Athabasca but also has a diversified energy portfolio with large natural gas operations throughout Canada and a national gasoline station network, lost nearly two per cent or 81 cents to $40.99. Gillon said at $11 billion, the company is paying twice as much for 100,000 barrels of oilsands crude as it would by buying conventional production. "Now, it lasts forever and it doesn't decline, and supposedly once you get it running you don't have the maintenance capital to stay in position. But that's not so sure either - sometimes they break, they catch fire." Gillon said the dramatic cost escalations could ultimately put an end to oilsands companies drawing the largest investment dollars in the energy industry. A long list of new projects that have not yet begun development might be dropped off the list, said Gillon. While projects that have already been built or are well underway, such as those owned by Canadian Natural Resources (TSX:CNQ) or Nexen Inc. (TSX:NXY) might even attract greater market interest. Other industry observers didn't expect the latest cost overrun announcement to stop growth in the oilsands, which has been receiving international attention as one of the few oil producing regions expecting large production growth in the future. "We don't believe that the market's going to stop, we don't believe even that the rate of production addition is even going to slow down," said Steven Paget, an oilsands analyst with FirstEnergy Capital in Calgary. .... .... canada.com