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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (372952)	3/6/2008 6:21:48 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572282

I'm sorry but I really don't believe that story. Tankers are big, and yes its a big ocean but they would have been seen, esp. if they where not far out in the deep ocean, there is too much traffic around the shore. More importantly the economics of it don't work out. It costs a lot of money to keep large ships out at sea doing nothing, and there is also the carrying cost for the inventory of crude, and the fact that your cutting your volume down because they can't keep getting more if they stay off our shores. And none of the oil companies controlled enough of the market for their pulling supply off the market to do more than amount to a bonanza for their competitors. Even if you do want to keep oil supply off the market its much cheaper (and probably less visible) if you store it in onshore tanks. Could A tanker, with some of your friends on it have delayed a short time? Maybe. But fleets of tankers sitting off shore full of crude. Nonsense.