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: Douglas V. Fant who wrote (40582)	3/22/1999 12:05:00 PM
From: Crimson Ghost	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

OSX up 1% as crude drops 24 cents. Good OSX action, IMHO.

To: Douglas V. Fant who wrote (40582)	3/22/1999 12:26:00 PM
From: AltLar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

Doug, In the past you have frequently reminded us that it takes a lot of field maintanence to pump 75 million barrels of oil a day. I am wondering if compliance to the announced cuts might be ensured because the decline in oil field maintenance over the past year or so has reduced the ability to continue to pump at current levels. Oil demand has been steadily climbing for decades while discoveries have been declining for at least the last 20 years or so (see C.J Cambells The Coming Oil Crisis). If C.J. is correct I suspect we've only kept up with demand by continually maintaining existing fields and the modest new ones. If this is true we have a lot of catch up maintanence to do just to stay even let alone meet increases in demand. Right before the big decline in the OSX I was hearing estimates that we will need something like 500 additional rigs in the next decade. I believe it is arguments like these that fueled the last run-up. Because of the hiatus on maintenance I think these arguments are even more valid. What is your take on this?