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 : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Carpenter who wrote (35271)	1/17/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: John Carpenter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

How will SLB revisit $10 and GLM revisit $3? During the next couple of years, cash starved oil-exporting nations will comtinue to dump excess supply on the market. Before enough oil is pumped to start dwindling world reserves to the point that oil prices could actually increase, a major initiative by enviornmentally friendly, greenhouse emission conscious, President Al Gore will put increasing numbers of electric cars and trucks on the road. Fossil fuels will be increasingly abandoned in favor of clean renewable energy sources.

To: John Carpenter who wrote (35271)	1/17/1999 1:57:00 PM
From: Wallace Rivers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

I'll beg to differ, given this simple analysis from Value Line 1989 through 1998. I've read your next post, and the scenario you present may happen, and is just as likely not to happen. SLB traded at, on average 2.96 book at lowest trade price in that time period. 2.96 X SLB BV of 15.50 (this is using lowest estimates) in '99 gives low projection of 40.30. Didn't run highest trade prices, but cursory glance gives that a number quite a bit north of 4 X BV. 4.25 X 15.5 = 65.88 Using earnings, the downside risk is not as limited, nor does it come close to the lows you mentioned. Per VL, average SLB PE ratio from 1982-1997 (that includes a period from '82-'86 when SLB never carried a PE higher than 13.3, and a nil PE in '86) was 19.5. Low estimate for '99 of $1.50 X 19.5 = 29.25. Consensus estimate of $2.14 x 19.5 = 41.73. I'm not at all implying that SLB will trade at $200 anytime soon, I'm merely saying IMHO that I do think that there IS more return than risk potential.