Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Interactive Map showing rig locations:
http://gis.bakerhughesdirect.com/RigCounts/default2.aspx
Very detailed and you can filter it nicely.
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
Excellent article. Thanks for that. I can't wait until the Earth starts cooling even more and Al Gore's dire predictions of 10years to act are finally thrown to the ash heap of history where they belong.
Just hopefully by then, our economy and country aren't completely wrecked!
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
Joe,
Yep, it is a different presentation. Lots of pictures in the one that comes on the CD.
-faz
Also from SLB CEO Andrew Gould:
..."We therefore reiterate our stronger for longer view of the current cycle of expiration and production spending. It is significant that during the quarter an additional 28 new offshore rigs were reported ordered from shipyards with delivery dates out to 2012 increasing the total on order to more than 180."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/85759-schlumberger-limited-q2-2008-earnings-call-transcript?source=yahoo&page=2
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
ARCA is all over the shop here at the end. It seems like they are doing everything they can to not let this run.
Nice close though!!! .89!!
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
Nice setup indeed. I also think that all the positive press that the Oil Field Services will be getting over the next few days will hopefully attract more attention to our sector.
I like the way the chart is looking.
-faz
Looks like ARCA moved off the ask.
Nice!
-faz
Obama, Pelosi and Reid's 68 Million Acre Joke
This week President Bush signed an executive order lifting the 29 years old offshore drilling moratorium. Of course lifting the ban is more a symbolic move than a practical one; after all, congress must also lift their ban on offshore drilling before any action can be taken. But congress cannot act unless House and Senate leadership stops blocking the bills that would authorize drilling to commence. Senator Reid and House Speaker Pelosi have both stated that they will not allow drilling legislation to proceed, although they are both aware that the legislation now has enough support to pass both houses. Senator Reid yesterday acknowledged that only 80% of the Senatorial Democratic Caucus opposed lifting the moratorium. If that were the case, then that would mean that the legislation would have close to the 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster.
The argument of Reid, Pelosi, Obama and several other congressional leaders has shifted in the past few weeks from an attitude that we cannot drill to an attitude that oil companies should drill on the land they already lease. This argument is based upon a report published by Rep. Rahal that pointed out the oil companies currently hold the leases on 68 Million Acres of unproducing land. According to the report, that 68 million acres, if tapped, would provide 4.8 million barrels of crude per day, or roughly 3 times our current offshore drilling production. Wow! Sounds Great!! If only these congressional leaders had the ability to apply logic and provide actual geological data to back up their claims.
Now most Americans would assume that the production number, 4.8 mil. barrels per day, would be based upon geological studies. But of course, it's not. The 4.8 million barrels per day that Pelosi, Reid and Obama are claiming is a number that was literally made up by congressional staffers putting together the report. The Institute For Energy Research quickly pointed out that the number was based upon our current offshore extraction, stating "in order to arrive at these numbers, the authors of the report had to “extrapolate” as follows:
* Roughly 23 million acres of federal land are producing 1.6 million barrels each day today.
* Roughly 3 times as many federal acres - about 68 million - are leased to oil companies, but are not currently producing oil or gas.
* Therefore, the United States could be producing 3 times as much oil - or an additional 4.8 million barrels per day - if the lease holders for the non-producing federal lands started producing oil today. "
Pelosi, Reid and Obama are using data which has absolutely no geological evidence to back up their claims. The fact is that the 23 million acres that are currently considered to be producing are the result of years of geological research and exploration of the total acreage that the oil companies lease. The oil companies, like any business would, have already tapped into the largest and easiest to reach oil deposits contained within this 91 million acres of land. Therefore, the 23 million acres that are currently producing are the most productive and cost-effective of the total available acreage. The oil companies could extract oil from the 68 million acres of remaining land, but at a much higher costs, a greater length of time, and with less production than their current rate. The very basis of Pelosi, Reid and Obama's claims are false and meant to mislead a general public too lazy to "look into it".
The IER goes further in their criticism of these congressional leaders by pointing out that "Using the “report” as a baseline, the Institute for Energy Research (IER) has calculated several ways to achieve American energy independence September 1, 2008:
* If we use the very same extrapolation, we can estimate that all 2.45 billion acres of the mostly-inactive federal estate (onshore and offshore) could be leased to produce an additional 160 million barrels of oil each day. That’s almost double the amount that is produced on a daily basis in the entire world.
* If we use the very same extrapolation, we can estimate that the 9.4 billion acres of the currently non-producing moon orbiting our earth could produce an additional 654 million barrels each day. That would supply America’s total annual demand in less than 12 days (but the pipeline construction would be a bear).
...Obviously, oil and gas aren’t going to be found under every each and every acre of land, just as the sun is not going to shine and the wind is not going to blow during every hour of every day. The moon, however, may have oil and gas - we don’t know because, like 97 percent of the U.S. outer-continental shelf, we haven’t looked."
If oil extraction was based upon the type of research (made-up numbers) that Pelosi, Reid, and Obama have provided us, then why is it that other nations are drilling in the waters off our coasts. By Obama's logic, it is ridiculously ineffective for a nation, such as China, to begin drilling operations just 60 miles off our shore. After all, the Chinese, according to Obama's methodology should have more than enough oil resting off of their massive shoreline. Oh...Wait... the Chinese must not subscribe to the PRO (Pelosi, Reid, & Obama) school of oil extraction. The fact is that the 68 million acres does contain oil, but the question is at what price, length of time, environments intrusiveness, and results could that oil be extracted? Wouldn't it be wiser for us to look for oil deposits that are larger, less intrusive, less expensive, easier and quicker to extract? After all the Chinese and Russians are doing it off our shorelines, and the last time I checked the EPA has no control over their operations.
Obama, Pelosi and Reid would never apply this failed logic to land, but somehow the media has allowed them to apply it the sea. After all, if they used the same extrapolation methods on land, then I could sink a small well in backyard in Illinois and produce more than enough oil to be energy "self-sufficient".
Let's face the facts, we need an energy policy that takes advantage of every possible resource at our disposal, increases incentives to develop efficient and low cost alternative energy and technology, focuses on efficiency and conservation, increases American control over environmental friendly extraction of it's energy needs, creates jobs, and ends the $10 trillion dollar transfer of American wealth that is expected to occur over the next 10 years. Offshore drilling legislation is an important first step in instituting an a comprehensive and no-nonsense based energy policy. Personally, I would like to see an amendment to the legislation that calls for the drilling rigs to be manufactured on US soil. But regardless, we must take action now, and end the ridiculous claims and obstructionism of our current congressional leadership.
18 months ago they ran on a platform that promised us increased energy independence and lower energy costs. In 18 months they have done nothing, proposed no legislation designed to lower energy costs or offset global oil production that peaked in 2005, and now are blocking legislation that will not solve our problems, but will set us on the right path. What is occurring in Washington today is what happens when our elected officials become more focused on obtaining power than doing the job they were elected to complete.
http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/07/obama-pelosi-and-reids-68-million-acre.html
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/06/26/can-america-extrapolate-its-way-to-energy-security/
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/images/stories/Documents/truth_about_americas_energy.pdf
Gotta love how the dems continue to push the idea that by increasing production through drilling will not lower prices. Where was she when the oil price tanked this week on the threat of decreased global demand and a huge drop on the announcement of lifting the executive ban on OCS?
This is why the democrats are so dangerous. This woman offers no short term solution to alleviating the increased gas prices. She is into pipe dreams of transitioning to renewable fuels. That dream is more than 10 years away and will provide no relief. Suing OPEC? Yep, that'll work. These clowns are killing us and they are quite content doing it.
The real numbers surrounding the oil industry and the OCS:
* 97 percent of Federal offshore areas are not leased.
* 94 percent of Federal onshore areas are not leased.
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/06/25/truth-about-ocs/
Oh well, guess the mindless people out their will continue to believe the lunacy that is the democratic party.
The distraction of offshore drilling
Bush is pushing a false promise. What we need is a long-term energy strategy.
By Dianne Feinstein
July 18, 2008
There is no quick fix to $4.50-a-gallon gas, no way to provide instant relief to consumers we know are hurting. Yet President Bush and others continue to push the false promise of offshore oil drilling.
Just this week, the president lifted the executive order banning drilling that George H.W. Bush put in place in 1990. And he's asked Congress to lift its own moratorium on oil exploration on the outer continental shelf -- which includes coastal waters as close as three miles from shore.
This would be a terrible mistake. It would put our nation's precious coastlines in jeopardy and wouldn't begin to fix the underlying energy-supply problem. And it surely wouldn't ease gas prices any time in the near future.
The vast majority of the outer continental shelf is already open to oil exploration: Areas containing an estimated 82% of all of the natural gas and 79% of the oil are today available to energy companies through existing federal leases. Federal agencies are issuing drilling permits at three times the rate they were in 1999 -- but that hasn't slowed oil prices during the climb from $19 to beyond $140 a barrel.
Meantime, energy companies haven't fully utilized their existing permits to drill on another 68 million acres of federal lands and waters. Exploiting these areas probably could double U.S. oil production and increase natural gas production by 75%.
Opening the protected areas of the continental shelf, on the other hand, wouldn't produce a drop of oil for seven years or longer. It takes a minimum of two years to process the new leases. Industry experts tell us that there's a three- to five-year waiting list for new drilling ships and other equipment.
And with any drilling, oil spills are a very real threat. Californians have learned the hard way how much damage -- environmental and economic -- can be caused by a major spill. A healthy coast is vital to California's economy and our quality of life. Ocean-dependent industry is estimated to contribute $43 billion to California each year.
We cannot drill our way out of the energy problem. Our nation doesn't need smooth talk and rosy scenarios. We need a clear-eyed view of our energy situation.
Oil markets are global. Economic growth around the world -- including millions of new cars in Asia -- means demand for oil is on the rise. With less than 3% of the world's oil reserves, our nation simply doesn't have enough domestic oil to dramatically lower the price.
A weak U.S. dollar and instability in the Middle East exacerbate the problem.
We need to forge a long-term energy strategy that takes these factors into account, moves our nation away from fossil fuels and invests in renewable energy resources. We need to promote conservation and develop clean technologies and clean fuels -- like cellulosic ethanol. We need to continue to raise fuel economy standards for vehicles and improve the energy efficiency of our buildings by 50%.
It's also time to crack down on excessive speculation in critical energy markets. In May, Congress took a first step by closing the "Enron loophole," which brought more energy trading under federal oversight. Congress now needs to eliminate other loopholes and to get serious with large institutional investors who are trading energy futures with no speculation limits.
Changing our nation's fuel consumption pattern is an enormous endeavor. It will take years. But this is the reality we face. And there's no time to waste.
Dianne Feinstein is California's senior U.S. senator.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-feinstein18-2008jul18,0,4750904.story
Al Gore has finally got his wet dream fulfilled. He has successfully got many people around the world thinking that carbon dioxide (aka plant food) is a pollutant. I think that plants all around the world would beg to differ.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM300.pdf
FERTILIZATION OF PLANTS BY CO2: pp. 8-9 of original article
How high will the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere ultimately rise if mankind continues to increase the use of coal, oil, and natural gas? At ultimate equilibrium with the ocean and other reservoirs there will probably be very little increase. The current rise is a non-equilibrium result of the rate of approach to equilibrium.
One reservoir that would moderate the increase is especially important. Plant life provides a large sink for CO2. Using current knowledge about the increased growth rates of plants and assuming increased CO2 release as compared to current emissions, it has been estimated that atmospheric CO2 levels may rise to about 600 ppm before leveling off. At that level, CO2 absorption by increased Earth biomass is able to absorb about 10 Gt C per year. At present, this absorption is estimated to be about 3 Gt C per year.
About 30% of this projected rise from 295 to 600 ppm has already taken place, without causing unfavorable climate changes. Moreover, the radiative effects of CO2 are logarithmic, so more than 40% of any climatic influences have already occurred.
As atmospheric CO2 increases, plant growth rates increase. Also, leaves transpire less and lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally.
Nice picture!
Lookout for the future regardless of which candidate is selected. Turning carbon into a commodity will be the death of this economy...just what we need right now with skyrocketing gasoline prices.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,566441,00.html
Killing Jobs to Save the Climate
By Karsten Stumm
The price of European emission permits is rising so rapidly that German companies are threatening to leave the country. Thousands of jobs could be lost. And the environment may, in the end, be no better off.
Numerous German companies would relocate abroad if the EU fully implements its carbon trading scheme.
They sat silently through two lectures, but then they couldn't control their anger any longer. The civil servants from the Environment Ministry, the Environment Agency and the German Emissions Trading Authority made it sound easy for industry to take up carbon trading. It was just too much for the managers to tolerate.
"If that's the shape the trading will take, we will simply move our cement operation to Ukraine," a cement factory manager shouted into the lecture hall. "Then there won't be any trading here, nothing will be produced here anymore -- the lights will simply go out here."
The businessmen's anger surprised the emissions-allowance trading experts. They had invited industry representatives to a relaxed forum at the Environment Ministry's office in Bonn. They wanted to present international developments in the carbon trading market. However, the mood in the German business world has soured -- managers no longer have the stomach for academic lectures. The reason is that emissions allowances are already burdening some companies that require a lot of energy for production purposes.
In the last 12 months alone, the price for the right to pump a ton of carbon into the atmosphere has shot up from €23 ($36.5) to nearly €30 ($47.6), according to the European Energy Exchange in Leipzig. This hike of around 30 percent has a direct effect on the electricity production of power companies.
According to calculations by Point Carbon -- a Norwegian company that specializes in analyzing global power, gas and carbon markets -- this price hike would drive up the marginal cost of energy from an old brown coal power plant by the entire price of carbon. For modern natural gas power plants, it would increase prices by a third. Energy company RWE, which is based in the German city of Essen, reckons it alone will have to pay €9 billion ($14.2 billion) for its own electricity production, which it, of course, will pass on in higher electricity prices. So carbon trading will have a direct impact on which countries firms chose to locate in.
"If the cement industry is gradually pulled into the trading of carbon emission allowances, companies will move production to countries that don't take part in the scheme," Andreas Kern, President of the German Cement Industry Federation, has warned.
Thousands of Jobs in Danger
Still, the really tough measures of the European emissions trading scheme have not yet been put into force. Only from 2013 -- the start of the third trading period -- will prices shoot up.
According to European Commission plans, every European company will then have to acquire pollution permits from a sort of stock exchange. So far the permits have been handed out free, or largely free. In the coming months the European Council and European Parliament are supposed to give their blessing for the Commission's plans. And then the pressure to relocate abroad will likely rise for affected German firms.
"The cement industry is also facing cost increases of around €900 million ($1.4 billion) from 2013," Kern said. "That amounts to around half of our current annual revenues." Not surprisingly, the German finance ministry is now looking into whether some sectors should continue to receive the emission permits for free, Manager Magazin Online has learned.
According to calculations by the Federal Statistical Office and the Institute for Applied Ecology, a number of other German companies from industrial sectors other than the cement industry will relocate at least part of their businesses because of the new carbon trading scheme -- either because of the rising cost of permits, or because of higher electricity prices.
"In Germany the raw-material chemical industry, companies from the iron and steel sector, lime producers, aluminium producers and refineries might be affected," Franzjosef Schafhausen, the Environment Ministry's undersecretary, said at the Bonn conference. Felix Matthes, coordinator for energy and climate protection at the Institute for Applied Ecology, added: "The CO2 price signal prompts shifts in production and investment. Yet it doesn't lead to lower overall emissions, as the production and investment at the company's new sites will not be subject to CO2 pricing, either now or in the near future."
Thousands of German jobs won't be placed in jeopardy, of course, if enough other countries join the European carbon trading scheme. But at the moment there is only one winner: the German state. Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück can expect tax revenues from the climate protection program which will far exceed estimates from the start of the year.
Until the end of June, according to the finance ministry, the program added €525 million ($832 million) to the state's coffers; in the second half of the year it could rise to €900 million ($1.4 billion) -- more than predicted. However, this sum would not even cover a fraction of the fall in tax revenues from thousands of job losses which may result from the carbon trading scheme.
Anyone who says we can't drill our way out of this crisis is an idiot. Saying "we can't drill our way out of this" is like saying "we can't get out of a food crisis by growing more food."
What a joke. Drilling is not the only avenue that should be tried, however, it is essential as no matter how many cars or homes or businesses run on solar, hydrogen, electric, we will always need oil.
Democrats are beholden to environmental weenies and may be in for a big surprise come November if they can't get their heads out of the sand.
-faz
Interesting read on Short Selling:
SEC set to fight short selling of financials
By Joanna Chung in New York
Published: July 15 2008 21:31 | Last updated: July 15 2008 21:31
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d28fc66a-52a9-11dd-9ba7-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
US regulators will take emergency action to stop abusive short-selling of stock in financial institutions such as mortgage financiers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and investment bank Lehman Brothers.
Christopher Cox, Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, told legislators on Tuesday that the agency would issue an emergency rule to stop so-called “naked” short-selling of shares in significant financial entities. The SEC will also consider new rules to extend those trading limits to the rest of the market.
Short sellers aim to profit from share declines – usually by borrowing a stock, selling it and buying it back in the market. But in a “naked” short the shares are sold without being borrowed first. The emergency rule, which would be in effect for up to 30 days, would require anyone making a short sale to borrow the security first.
It would apply to Fannie and Freddie – the government-sponsored entities that own or guarantee almost half of US mortgages – and all primary securities dealers including Lehman, whose shares have been battered by rumours the bank says are false.
The action comes amid intensifying efforts by authorities to crack down on rumour-mongering intended to manipulate securities prices. The SEC has been investigating whether false rumours and abusive short selling contributed to the collapse of Bear Stearns in March and the declines in Lehman’s shares.
It is now working with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and New York Stock Exchange Regulation to conduct industry-wide “sweep examinations” of market participants, including hedge fund advisors
“If we are successful in bringing future cases . . . I believe the penalties should be commensurate with the enormous amount of shareholder value that is destroyed by this kind of wantonness toward other people’s money,” Mr Cox said. The agency has used emergency rule-making powers in the past, for instance after the September 11 terrorist attacks, but this would be the first time it has issued an emergency rule on short selling.
-faz
I thought that Nancy Pelosi had a plan to lower the price at the pump. I thought that was all part of the democrats election campaign in 2006? What ever happened to that promise? Exactly what have they done to lower prices? Answer: Nothing. They want the oil prices high so they can try to push their alternatives down our throats.
No wonder Congressional approval ratings are only 9%. Pelosi maybe the worst speaker of the house in our nation's history.
Thanks for the article EZ!
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
LOL! So true!
-faz
From a blog I like to read every now and then...
Our National Disgrace
Posted by Roxanna M. on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 1:57:34 PM
http://mariposarocks.blogtownhall.com/
At the conclusion of the G-8 summit in Japan, President Bush had this to say: "The Democratic (sic) leaders in Congress will not allow us to explore for oil and gas in parts of Alaska, offshore America, and now is the time for them to change their mind."
In a July 8 letter to the President, Nancy Pelosi urged him to use his "authority as President to draw down a small portion of the oil held in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to expand available supplies and help reduce the record prices that are helping push the economy toward recession." She also said that tapping the SPR is "more than justified by the 'destablizing impact' that gasoline price increases are having on the economy." She believes that "Releasing oil from the Reserve is a tool to manage our national and economic security, and when judiciously used will in no way jeoardize national security." She believes that "The Reserve is currently 97% full - the highest level ever - with enough oil to meet our national security needs."
There is much to like in what she says. She acknowledges that the high price of gas is hurting the economy and that more supply is necessary. In saying this, she is acknowledging reality. But, by saying that the only place she is going to allow that supply to come from is the SPR, she is retreating from reality, back into that happy place where it's always someone else's fault. The purpose of the SPR is to ensure that we have oil in the event of a national emergency. It was not designed to be tapped every time members of Congress need to cover their behinds for their own incompetence.
Also in her letter was the comment that oil prices have increased from less than $30 a barrel to a high of nearly $150 a barrel "since your administration took office."
In July 2007, the price of oil was $75 a barrel, now it's flirting with $150. New math, old math, it doesn't matter. That's nearly double in just one year.
This is worrisome behavior from a person who's only a couple of heartbeats away from the Oval Office.
Either she doesn't know what the price of gas has done since her party took back Congress - in which case she's stupid. Or, she wants to put the blame somewhere else - in which case she's simply dishonest.
Since she's either stupid or dishonest, why should we believe her assessment that tapping into the SPR won't hurt our national security?
Drill here. Drill now.
-faz
no worries. I love the fact that they are getting their name out there like this!
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
Thanks for the heads up 4mars! That is awesome. I was on the same site earlier today reading up on Schlumberger. Here are the screen captures of the ads:
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
"The oil and offshore industry will have to solve many challenges to fully exploit the opportunities in deepwater regions"
Very insightful statement into the future of deepwater E&P.
-faz
Joe,
Excellent post. Love the pictures!
-faz
Deep water rig fleet to double - Schlumberger
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINL0327416820080703?rpc=44
MADRID, July 3 (Reuters) - The world's fleet of oil rigs capable of drilling in deep waters, which are currently in short supply, will double in the coming years, the chief executive of the world's largest oil services company said on Thursday.
Schlumberger (SLB.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) CEO Andrew Gould said around 160 new rigs are currently under construction.
"Sixty eight is the deep water and the interesting thing is that it doubles the size of the deep water fleet," Gould told reporters at the sidelines of the World Petroleum Congress.
Tightness in the rig market has contributed to high oil prices by delaying many companies' drilling plans and the startup of new fields. Rig hire rates have also soared.
As easy-to-access oil fields deplete, new production increasingly relies on companies developing fields far offshore such as in the Gulf of Mexico. (Reporting by Tom Bergin; Editing by Paul Bolding)
Back into the .000's!!! Berman does have a confirmed revenue model...sell as many shares as he can. Then, print more and repeat. Throw in an occasional R/S just to keep things moving or maybe a ridiculous PR announcing that they have teamed up with someone.
Currently at a market cap of $81k. Wow, why wouldn't the company just buy RUSL instead of teaming up with them?
What a joke this company is and what a joke the CEO is!!
-faz
Games indeed. I just wish I had some extra powder laying around to scoop up some at this level. Oh well, I will continue to hold fast!
-faz
Really looking forward to PERT being done and moving off the ask! The bid is ultra thin, yet PERT is steadfast on the ask. What a wild ride these past few trading sessions!
.98 x 1.01 1x1 Volume: 50k
-faz
If by more eyes on this you mean you put your glasses on, then yep, I am in agreement. Also, laugh all you like. This stock was a real eye opener for most, including me. Sure I have lost money on this, however, I was smart enough to see a bad ship that would never right itself and moved on to other plays. I hope you do get your bounce, but if history is any indicator, this puppy is going to be going to .0000's very quickly and then you will see more R/S's and 504's.
Best of luck!
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
LOL! I wouldn't put it past Berman to pay a pumper, I just question the means of payment. I think that the snake oil salesman Berman would pay out in shares of this meaningless stock rather than open up his own wallet to pay.
Maybe he will hire a whole bunch of pumpers in one go and then open up another 504.
-faz
Well according to past posts, he is sitting on at least 50,000 shares that are worth a whopping $65! Oh well, the worst part is that there is some other sucker out there buying up shares. Hate to see people get burnt on a guaranteed pile of crap.
However, it is nice to see some action on this board. Thought it was going to be relegated to the ash heap.
-faz
Bro,
You are spending an awful lot of time on other boards pumping this pile of garbage. Have you finally realized that this stock is a waste of money? I think you should put more of your energy into finding another pink to play or just burn your money as you will get a little more pleasure.
-faz
Sure is. Deposit money and then flush.
-faz
6/19/08 Market action:
Previous Close: .005
Currently Trading at: .0013
Just another perfect example of Berman at his finest. Selling and selling and selling so that the stock becomes worthless. I feel bad for the suckers who are buying this thinking that they are get cheap shares.
What a disgusting excuse for a human being Berman is. He may be the most incompetent man at running a business, but he sure knows how to fleece shareholders.
-faz
I have downloaded the file and uploaded it to a different server. This should be good for a long time.
http://fazoolius.fileave.com/DPDW_20080619_DahlmanResearch.pdf
-faz
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
18k hit on the ask!
Nice!
-faz
Thanks locust!
-faz
Some big blocks hitting the ask. Should be back into the 1.20's very soon.
-faz
blue,
Somehow with the management that is in place, I don't think that they are "overwhelmed with the confusion of audited financials and more acquisitions."
Just a little info on the CFO for DPDW from their website:
Eugene L. Butler, Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Butler served in various capacities as a director, president, chief executive officer (CEO), CFO, and chief operating officer (COO) for Weatherford International, Inc., a $2 billion multinational service and equipment corporation serving the worldwide energy market, from 1974 to 1991. He was elected to Weatherford’s board of directors in May of 1978, elected president and COO in 1979, and president and CEO in 1984. He successfully developed and implemented a turnaround strategy eliminating debt and returning the company to profitability during a severe energy recession. Mr. Butler also Expanded operations into international markets allowing Weatherford to become a major worldwide force with its offshore petroleum products and services.
Eugene Butler is a super heavyweight in the oil services industry and I highly doubt that he is at all phased by the recent acquisitions and financing.
-faz
Correct NH!! We need to tap into all of our resources immediately. Alternatives, while the way of the future, will in no way provide any relief for oil prices in the short term.
Yeah big government for not allowing us to use our OWN resources! Can you believe that the most technologically advanced country on the planet has not built a refinery in over 32 years? Is that insane or what?
If the US came out and said: "We are now going to authorize drilling in every place we can get at." ...You would see the oil price plunge.
I just wonder what it will take for the elites in Washington to get a little common sense.
Love the action today with DPDW though. This and the other oil services companies that I own at least makes a jump in oil like to today somewhat managable.
-faz
I applaud those who had the courage to buy!!!
Bummer for those who unloaded their entire position. That may just prove to be a huge mistake.
-faz
Nice wall at 1.23. 1.22 x 1.23 1x7
Gonzo! 1.23's up!