To: LesX who wrote (860 ) 1/9/1998 6:40:00 PM From: Lord Smooth Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 14347
LesX, Thanks for some commentary. I have to disagree with you though. You make a number of faulty assumptions in your argument. You assume impending deflation as fact. Yes, with Asian currency crisis inflation in U.S. is less of a threat. But deflation? There are debates about this. I pick the "nay" side. What if there were deflation tsunami, destroying everything in it's path? Well, sure, markets in general would tank. That does not mean RNTK and other selected stocks would tank. "A stock is worth 70% of the underlying broader market?" Maybe you could point to the stocks that make up the major indexes and demonstrate a correlation. But even that correlation would still be coincidental. In regards to RNTK and the above statement, RNTK is such a hit or miss situation that it's value is only impacted by a smaller degree to the broader markets. Those who trade RNTK based on the underlying markets are missing the point of the RNTK story---it's a pissant company with goliath prospects. Perhaps more to the point, what if oil and gas prices declined by half or 99% in a deflationary environment? Well, RNTK and SLHO would not do so well and maybe die croaking. And maybe Texaco and Exxon would have to liquidate their assets and go into radio and television broadcasting. I think you have to be very pessimistic to foresee this kind of future, though. There is currently tremendous interest in GTL technology. This interest is not going to go away overnight. There would have to be prolonged deflation and prolonged lower O&G prices for enthusiasm for GTL to dry up. Meanwhile, O&G industry continues to pursue GTL, including potentially RNTK. What matters more about RNKT: Legitimacy through a GTL deal with an O&G company. What matters less: General market conditions. Schopenhauer