"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:28 -0500, "RayB"
wrote:

Given the ungodly profits, etc., and the daily fluctuations (usually
upwards) I believe there is a special place in Hell for the oil people.

I've got oil stocks and they are looking VERY good.

WHOO HOO!!

Señior Contrarío has spoken! :-)

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:28 -0500, "RayB"
wrote:

Given the ungodly profits, etc., and the daily fluctuations (usually
upwards) I believe there is a special place in Hell for the oil people.

I've got oil stocks and they are looking VERY good.

WHOO HOO!!

Señior Contrarío has spoken! :-)

The oil companiens are only throwing off about 10% profit and are not doing
any better profit percentage wise than most other businesses. The perception
of those buying and selling stocks is what really matters. The run up of the
oil company stocks has already occured. You should have bought your oil
company stocks 15 months ago.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:20:48 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:28 -0500, "RayB"
wrote:

Given the ungodly profits, etc., and the daily fluctuations (usually
upwards) I believe there is a special place in Hell for the oil people.

I've got oil stocks and they are looking VERY good.

WHOO HOO!!

Señior Contrarío has spoken! :-)

Si - mucho dinero.

WHOO HOO!!

You might want to take a peek at this: PFACP
Very little price movement. Buy it for the dividend. Pretty solid, unless
people all over the country stop buying Birds Eye frozen foods, or every
farm in upstate New York is bulldozed and turned into a parking lot.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 07:37:11 -0500, "Bert Robbins"
wrote:


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:28 -0500, "RayB"
wrote:

Given the ungodly profits, etc., and the daily fluctuations (usually
upwards) I believe there is a special place in Hell for the oil people.

I've got oil stocks and they are looking VERY good.

WHOO HOO!!

Señior Contrarío has spoken! :-)

The oil companiens are only throwing off about 10% profit and are not
doing
any better profit percentage wise than most other businesses. The
perception
of those buying and selling stocks is what really matters. The run up of
the
oil company stocks has already occured. You should have bought your oil
company stocks 15 months ago.

Even better if you bought three years ago.

Agreed. When you see the train coming you can climb aboard the engine rather
than running to catch the caboose.

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...


There hasn't been a new nuclear plant in the US in over 30 years.

Why not?

Fred Dehl wrote:

There hasn't been a new nuclear plant in the US in over 30 years.

And the number of oil refineries is actually in decline. Most of the
refineries that have been closed have been voluntarily closed by the
big oil companies. In fact, there was a case last year or so when Shell
announced that it was going to close a refinery. A small oil company
stepped forward and offered to pay fair market value to Shell for the
refinery assets. Shell refused to sell, opting instead to spend tens of
millions of dollars dismantling the refinery rather than accept tens of
millions of dollars in a sale. The small oil company took Shell to
court to try and force them to sell- I'm not sure how the case was
resolved. In any event, the situation illustrates that Shell felt there
was more profit in
closing the refinery (and creating a "shortage" that would justify
higher prices) than in selling it to a competitor (who would not
contribute to a "shortage" and would in fact tend to depress prices
through fair competition).

When prices were at their peak last year, there were frequent comments
from Limbaugh, etc, that it was because "The liberal environmentalists
have been fighting the oil companies every time the companies want to
put up a new refinery!" I think the air went out of that balloon when
it was pretty well established that no oil company has even sought a
permit for a new refinery in the US for several decades now.

The basic problem is that there is no meaningful competition in the oil
business.
The free enterprise model is broken.

Let's say that I was in the business of selling center console fishing
boats, and my market research showed that I could expect to peddle 25
new boats a year in my market area. If I wanted to do business like the
oil companies, I'd order only 17 boats, proclaim a "shortage", and
demand a premium price from each buyer as I let each one know they were
just darn lucky to be able to buy a boat at all. If I jack the price up
high enough, the profits on those 17 boats would exceed the profits
realized on 25 boats sold at competitive prices. However, in the real
world where there is actual competition, my business plan to create a
false shortage would fail. Somebody selling another boat across town
would realize "Gould is driving away prospects with his high prices, so
instead of the 25 boats *we* normally order in a year this year we'll
order 33. We may have to discount them a little to be sure we don't get
stuck with a lot of inventory in the fall...." That's how the system is
supposed to work, but the oil companies seem to be in collusion rather
than competition these days.

wrote:
snip..

When prices were at their peak last year, there were frequent comments
from Limbaugh, etc, that it was because "The liberal environmentalists
have been fighting the oil companies every time the companies want to
put up a new refinery!" I think the air went out of that balloon when
it was pretty well established that no oil company has even sought a
permit for a new refinery in the US for several decades now.

The basic problem is that there is no meaningful competition in the oil
business.
The free enterprise model is broken.

Let's say that I was in the business of selling center console fishing
boats, and my market research showed that I could expect to peddle 25
new boats a year in my market area. If I wanted to do business like the
oil companies, I'd order only 17 boats, proclaim a "shortage", and
demand a premium price from each buyer as I let each one know they were
just darn lucky to be able to buy a boat at all. If I jack the price up
high enough, the profits on those 17 boats would exceed the profits
realized on 25 boats sold at competitive prices. However, in the real
world where there is actual competition, my business plan to create a
false shortage would fail. Somebody selling another boat across town
would realize "Gould is driving away prospects with his high prices, so
instead of the 25 boats *we* normally order in a year this year we'll
order 33. We may have to discount them a little to be sure we don't get
stuck with a lot of inventory in the fall...." That's how the system is
supposed to work, but the oil companies seem to be in collusion rather
than competition these days.


When they closed the local Ultimar refinery, they dismantled it and sold
all the valuable parts to UAR in the Persian Gulf.
Now we have one refinery in the entire province.. Imperial Oil (Exxon ?)

http://tinyurl.com/nt3lo

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...


There hasn't been a new nuclear plant in the US in over 30 years.

Why not?

Envirofreaks.

In the 1970s, Long Island Lighting Company began construction of a nuclear
power plant in Shoreham. They claimed that if there was a meltdown, there
really wouldn't be a problem evacuating anyone who was at risk. They
purchased a number of local officials to make sure all the reviews & permits
went smoothly. At the time, the Long Island Expressway was one long traffic
jam for almost its entire length, even in the middle of the night. Opponents
of the plan pointed out that evacuation would be impossible. The project's
paid supporters (who were later shamed out of office) said that boats would
be one solution.

To make a long story short, the project was halted, never to be touched
again. Would you say its opponents were freaks? Take a good look at a map of
Long Island before you respond:
http://maps.yahoo.com/maps_result?ad...1 &name=&qty=

Zoom out to be sure you understand.

On 24 Mar 2006 06:57:21 -0800, wrote:

That's how the system is
supposed to work, but the oil companies seem to be in collusion rather
than competition these days.

Tanker loads of gasoline are bought and sold every day on the
commodity markets worldwide. There is nothing to stop you or any
other independent from buying up a few loads and going into business.

And why should Shell or any other company be forced to sell production
assets to a potential competitor?

If there was big money to be made building refineries, people would be
finding a way to do it. There is no shortage of investment capital
looking for opportunity.

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
wrote in
oups.com:

I'd order only 17 boats, proclaim a "shortage", and
demand a premium price from each buyer as I let each one know they were
just darn lucky to be able to buy a boat at all. If I jack the price up
high enough, the profits on those 17 boats would exceed the profits
realized on 25 boats sold at competitive prices. However, in the real
world where there is actual competition, my business plan to create a
false shortage would fail. Somebody selling another boat across town
would realize "Gould is driving away prospects with his high prices, so
instead of the 25 boats *we* normally order in a year this year we'll
order 33. We may have to discount them a little to be sure we don't get
stuck with a lot of inventory in the fall...." That's how the system is
supposed to work

Yes. Thank-you for exposing the fallacy of "predatory pricing".

Following from that I must conclude you're a big supporter of Wal-Mart.

but the oil companies seem to be in collusion rather
than competition these days.

The problem is that the oil co's are all buying the same raw material from
the same producers and therefore ALL of their prices are going to rise and
fall in tandem. This looks like collusion.

Obviously the solution is to increase the number of producers, and have
them under US control rather than beholden to the instability and
hostility of foreign regions. That means, at a MINIMUM, offshore and
ANWR.

ANWR would barely make a dent. Even the oil companies have stated this.