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: Broken_Clock who wrote (38968)	3/4/1999 10:02:00 PM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 95453

Papaya, I was by no means attacking you. I love hearing the opposite viewpoint, but only when logically supported and argued. It's just that I feel this guy from Noesis is not being fully honest with his readers/subscribers when he says there has been no fundamental changes in the Supply and Demand picture. He should at least address these changes and than provide his rationale for why it does or does not alter his oil price forecast. Instead, he chose to take the easy way out - deny anything has changed. Also, I am not playing SLB because I do think there are a lot better values out there with a lot more upside. If one truly believes in a thesis that we will experience utilization and pricing levels of 1997 sometime within the next five years, why not play the ones with more upside (FLC, PDE, KEG, UTI, PTEN, NBR, MRL, RDC, CDIS, GLBL, BJS, SII, NE, PGO, ESV - too name a few of my favorites). Remember all cyclical stocks usually look expensive near a cyclical bottom. Fortunately, I feel you can get some stocks at their cyclical bottom at good absolute and relative values. For example, PGO should generate close to $600 mm in EBITDA in 1999. With it's current market cap barely above $1 billion, this is a good value - IMO.