To: Spekulatius who wrote (38165 ) 6/3/2010 4:04:02 PM From: Jurgis Bekepuris Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 78462 Well, to tell you the truth I did not expect moratorium. I expected tougher regulations, so no not "business as normal after 2 weeks", but also not full indeterminate suspension of deepwater drilling. Probably I should have expected it, but I did not. Moratorium changes expectations in a major way, since now we know that GOM work is gone for 6 months minimum and possibly longer. I also expected the leak to be stopped faster, which was a bit naive. If the leak was stopped faster, there would not have been a moratorium. Finally, even though I may seem like a driller-bull, I have always been a bit uncomfortable with the fact that they are in commodity (even the deep-water drilling is becoming overcrowded/commoditized) service industry that is probably not really growing while facing buildout glut. I'd rather be in E&Ps which have physical assets in the ground that are getting more rare. Drillers did seem to be cheap and I think they were, but now we are getting into a pretty bad political+oversupply storm. The real question is not what I missed by not selling 30% higher (actually I don't think I lost that much money, since my positions were minor and I did some trading that might have helped), but whether the current prices are attractive enough to discount the issues we know of.but selling and asking questions later is often not a bad strategy if something unexpected happens. Not really. I never sell if it's clear what the unexpected entails and if I believe it is temporary or not important to long term business. Kneejerk selling is usually bad strategy even though you, Dale (through stops, I think) and Mike Burry (through stops) advocate it. Yes, I will suffer worse (temporary?) losses than kneejerk sellers when the issue is worse than originally thought. I win when the issue is not as bad as assumed and kneejerk sellers never have a chance to rebuy at the original drop price.