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: Dennis Roth who wrote (138452)	7/30/2010 12:16:18 PM
From: Big Dog	1 Recommendation Respond to of 206326

I have been searching my computer for the interview I did with Matt Simmons for my Offshore Drilling Bits newsletter some years ago. At that time he was saying that the world needed to have about 650 new offshore rigs built. He was thought to be a bit "bonkers" at the time. (Maybe someone here has a copy of that 20 Questions interview...if so, please post it because he made some other predictions at the time as well.) I don't know how many new rigs have been built since then, but likely many more than folks would have expected when Matt made his projection. Sometimes it takes an extreme view to call attention to a topic. The fact that the observer is off by a few magnitudes may not matter as much as the fact that he brought the topic to the forefront of discussion. just sayin big

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (138452)	7/30/2010 1:08:03 PM
From: ChanceIs	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206326

>>>He (Simmons) was wrong in his shrill predictions about US gas "going over a cliff". He predicted a catastrophic drop in US natural gas production by summer 2005.<<< In all fairness to Matt, there are a few ex "Simmonites" (Pickering comes to mind, and I think the corpus still at Simmons Inc.) who say that the traditional (ex "unconventional" shale gas) is in SERIOUS decline. I can't recall when shale gas came on the scene in a credible fashion, but I think it was post '05. One must recall that the esteemed FED Chairman, Alan Greenspan was calling for price controls on natural gas in '03. I sat in a Senate Energy Committee hearing and witnessed Sen. George Allen call for a ban on any new NG fired electric plants. Did these people all listen to Simmons w/o any critical thinking?? Probably yes to a certain extent. Did they just extrapolate from the California energy crisis. You bet. A lesson for the board. Half (perhaps 75%) the battle in the energy biz is political. Consider (this afternoon would not be too early) what will happen if the anti-shale gas (water table fracing contamination) movement really catches on. Post Macondo, the mantra is becoming - "let's wait until we really know the risks." The head of the major environmental protection organization in New York City (public works - water basically) is adamant on having no Marcellus - because the risks are not known, but the damage could be great. IMO, the vast majority of political pundits maintain that the House will go Republican in November. But if it doesn't, watch out. An investment suggestion. Buy a weekly straddle on the gassers at the end of October. Things should get quite volatile moving into the election, and those weeklies don't carry a big price tag. I would suppose that the post election House majority would be rather clear from the polls by early October. But you never know. The Obama admin is talking quantitative easing #2 (QEII). One vehicle is to simply cut mortgage rates from 6.0% down to 4.5%. (The mechanics of that is beyond this board). Politicians have been know to use the public purse to buy elections, and real estate is starting a second downtrend.