To: A. Geiche who wrote (37519 ) 2/13/1999 3:02:00 PM From: Mike from La. Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
I'm not sure I understand your point. The Wall Street Journal earlier this week reported on the meeting last week between oil executives and the Saudis. Turned out the Saudis weren't interested in investments in upstream projects at all, but in downstream works. The Saudis said they obviously didn't need any more production, that they have 10 million barrels a day capacity that they are only using 80% of. If they wanted to flood the market, they have the surplus capacity to do so any time they want. The reason they took the Iraqi quota was they were the only country with the spare capacity to do so instantly. Support for the Gulf was would have disappeared very quickly if it had produced $40 oil. As it was, oil prices blipped and then fell. I didn't say anything about fairness as to quotas, population etc. I do know that fairness is often, maybe usually secondary to power, economic, military or political. My only point was that there is a reasonable possibility that the Saudis are still using their power to force a binding OPEC agreement to reduce production. Some may think the Saudis are taking advantage of their power, but who doesn't? Are the other producing countries willing to face a production war that they can't win, or will they accept some degree of unfairness from the Saudis in order to get their economies profitable again? We'll find out soon enough. The Golden Rule "He who has the gold, makes the rules." I commend you for your concerns for fairness, and what's right. Keep on it. But don't forget that what should be, from a fairness prospective, is often not what actually is. Mike from La