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: Condor who wrote (76855)	12/27/2006 10:37:48 AM
From: tom pope	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206223

Nothing in here to answer your question re nationalization in Kazakhstan, but it may be of interest. From Stratfor today: The final Central Asian state, Kazakhstan, is the most important of the lot -- and it certainly has the most players mucking around in its business. Kazakhstan shares a massive border with both China and Russia, who are battling for control of the country's energy export routes, and boasts more energy reserves than all the other four 'Stans combined. The majority of these reserves are being developed by Western consortia. Kazakhstan also has received more foreign direct investment than any other former Soviet state, Russia included. In general, Kazakhstan is the only state in the region that the West pays attention to. Fourteen years after independence, Kazakhstan is now exporting more than a million barrels of oil per day because of Western investments -- a figure that Astana hopes to triple in the next 10 years. Chances for a messy secession battle are less in Kazakhstan because President Nursultan Nazarbayev has not made it a policy to kill all those with whom he does not agree. But that does not mean the process will be tidy (or that Nazarbayev is a particularly nice man). Kazakhstan's biggest problem is its geography. The country is roughly three-quarters the size of the United States but has a population of only 15 million people. And there are no natural barriers separating it from Russia or China. Even if Nazarbayev or his successors do everything perfectly, this is a country that is impossible to rule without the express permission of one's larger neighbors. Should either Beijing or Moscow decide to make a concerted attempt to control Kazakhstan's mineral wealth, no one could stand in the way -- except, possibly, the other.

To: Condor who wrote (76855)	12/27/2006 10:50:34 AM
From: LoneClone	Respond to of 206223

I don't worry about nationalization issues with respect to my investments in companies that operate in Brazil or Kazakhstan, both of which are IMO relatively safe places to invest. LC

To: Condor who wrote (76855)	12/27/2006 11:09:02 PM
From: ames	Respond to of 206223

condor, re: <<The nationalization reflex in Brazil, VZ, Ecuador, Russia, Kaz, etc>> You're right that officially Kazakhstan is a robust proponent of the modernizing free market. After all, Nazarbaev, who signs documents with an iron pen, is a welcome visitor at the Bush Sr cottage in Maine as well as in DC. But in practice, thinking back to the Hurricane Hydrocarb hassles and the recent scamming of Big Sky in which a local atty in their employ signed over their two choicest new blocks to a shell company w/o authorization and had the transfer legitimized by the Kaz courts (!), the effect is to keep tight control of the goods at home. As Michael Klare & others keep reminding us, the unspoken premise in the air is that we're in the middle of resource wars, and in many of these developing countries, even when "nationalizing" wants to be pure of heart, there's usually some element of warlord or mafia warp keeping a tight fist. Like Russia, eg, Kaz isn't officially nationalizing its resources, but . . . Like "free mkt," it's an elastic term. (For some reason, this year in particular, I feel like Jaques Cousteau seeing a lot of sharks with toothpicks and pinstripes. )