is... a buy and hold investor of dividend US and Canadian stocks
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.
anybody heard of OCE? Open EC Technologies Inc on the TSX? It divested it's major revenue business last fall, hence has little activity. But is is doing something, there is little news.. used to be a high-flying dot-com.
hi. new to the board. I was looking for a board that focus' on Canadian stocks. Is this it? I am kind of wondering.. becuase judging from what I am reading in the ibox, it does not focus on Canadian stocks... i find the American markets to large to work effectively in... I prefer to stick with Canada..
what the heck happened to this stock? I used to follow this, knew it had problems, and stopped following it. Now it looks to be dead, what happened?
I am not short. In fact they don't call the The Big Guy for nothing. I am about 6'3" at over 200 lb. Anyway you are taking me too seriously. I think all things considered mid February would be a great time to sell JBII.
Of course there is a difference between "now" and the end of December. Capital gains fall in the calendar year. For sales prior to Jan 01 (settlement date) they would count as a capital gain in 2009, not 2010...
makes perfect sense to me. Selling in December if you have a tax loss and you want to get it behind you (included in 2009 taxes) makes sense. Likewise selling in January if you have a capital gain makes sense (taking the gain in January as opposed to December '09). Generally in an upward market that is going to be true. However it seems as if january is an indicator for how the whole year will go. I think this January will be a barn-stormer, if a bit temporary. SHould reduce holdings in Mid-February.
Not specific to JBII, but I would say reducing in February and taking capital gain would be a good idea.
and one last thing! happy new year everyone. EOM
It is not the production cost I don't understand, it is the larger picture. $10 seems quite reasonable. It is the selling for WTI less $3 I don't understand.
Anyway, I think it was Warren Buffet who said not in invest in what you do not understand. I follow that philosophy. If I can't add a bit of intuition or personal experience to what I am investing in I don't touch it. I don't think quoting company literature is helpful either.
Yesterday I tried to do some research to better understand the industry. I could not do that in a short time.
So I have given my .02. That is about it.
Please don't quote the iBox or company literature... thanks.
Someone should undo the photoshop of that guy on the pipe as well.
New to this board. Good company here. Good chart, good financials. Defence industry is a pretty good market to be in once you are established...
well I am glad it was not all drivel!
whew..
wonder if I broke that 3-minute barrier?
ah the wonders of modern Blackberry technology...
actually Mike you are the one that is not seeing the big picture and spouting drivel. You are putting on this board that this company is going to make $65 approximately per barrel of oil they sell. This belief is supporting a stock price of now over $7. that $7 must be supported by a business plan for large volume, not small quantities. And not only can I poke holes in your argument, I can drive a truck through it. It seems like the more you try to explain your claims, the easier it gets to question them. They do not stand up to scrutiny.
Not only that, but I can offer an explanation for this claim from a completely different perspective that is rational.
That number does not make rational sense and it should be fairly obvious to anyone. I have given examples from my own experience of what the cost of crude is. I would guess it to be maybe $20. And that has nothing to do with the spot price of oil. That should be obvious.
The "spot" price of oil is the overnight price or what a refiner will pay for the next barrel of oil they buy. It is a marginal price, as it is in any market. There is such a thing as the "overnight" rate for various kinds of labor. Same thing. It does not take into account escalation (changes in labor prices over time). The spot price of oil is not reflective of the cost to the refiner or the prices at which oil trades generally. I could come up with references on this because I remember reading something on this about a year ago. The spot price of oil is merely a bench mark to reflect the general cost of oil and the health of the industry as a whole. It would only apply to small orders.
I can give further evidence from my personal experience. I worked as the planner/ Cost Control person on a refinery construction site. There were 3 trades working there; Pipefitters, Ironworkers, and Millwrights. The Ironworkers were responsible for setting the modules (preconstructed piping components the size of a room that had to be welded together). It was explained to me that in order for the plant to be efficient the alignment of the modules had to be perfect. That is to say, accurate to within 1-2%. If it was not aligned properly, they might as well not build it. It would not be profitable. This was for a low-sulphur plant in Canada.
Now with regards to this post:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44972396&txt2find=katie
This scenario makes no sense. If the above was true (the tight tolerances on a refinery) then why would a company add cost by offering to pick up the oil themselves? Would they rather not have it delivered? Is it not like the auto industry where they squeeze suppliers on cost in order to keep their costs as low as possible? I worked at Ford before and I know that they do that. back in the SUV days that is where their profit was, in reducing material costs, and that is all they did. So why would they give them the spot rate?
Their is one logical explanation; THEY ARE BEING NICE. why not? Here is this company with this cool green technology. Why not help them out?
This has nothing to do with the long term or what this company can do with any volume. This IR person even states that they are only talking about small/ medium refineries. Even that does not make sense. If they are desperate for business as is stated say, why would they give them the spot rate. ?
The only explanation is that they are being nice to this nice little green company. IR people are paid to hold the company line so this makes perfect sense.
What is really interesting about this is that if they are going to get this rate for small quantities the CEO cannot be accused of lying. It is perfectly true. and typical of the kind of thing that misleads people. There is a fine line between putting the best face on things and lying. Companies, in their literature and financial reports, always put the best face on things. Smart investors learn to see through it, usually with industry knowledge. DD without that being done is useless...
that is an explanation. makes perfect sense.
well... maybe I will go see him. Seriously..
that guy probably got photoshoped in because whoever created it thought it looked cool,, or deep. That person would have never worked in a refinery.
who put that photo up anyway? it is a stupid photo. Whoever put it up should take it down... it destroys credibility.
that photo would not have been put up by the company you are right... it means that the rest of the information in the iBox is suspect.
I am going to go horseback riding.
I don't trust CEOs in general. I would have to get to know this fellow to change that. Is he in Niagara Falls? I am like a 2-hour drive away (Toronto).
I use objective analysis to select the best stocks from a subset of all stocks using criteria. that way you avoid this kind of trust issue. I suppose that is really market timing.. the last step I do is to look at the qualitative aspects (business model).
I think some of you get too excited by the business model, do not pay attention to financials... and lose your objectivity..
but I wish you luck with your approach.
absolutely not my philosophy but there is nothing wrong with that. Good luck.
well it is +.90 now....
you guys don't get it. Everything you are saying is in the Ibox, which is coming from the vendor. Can't you think for yourselves? do you have any objective input? I can't believe that you would throw money down on some industrial process that claims to be able to do something that no one else has been able to do in the history of oil production because some guy that buys a company says he can do it... that is a huge risk.
There are times when one can put money down on an idea. I would say uWink was an example. You had a known entrepreneur starting a restaurant chain. Guaranteed potential and huge PR.
Besides that, some technical ideas are destined for success of the fill a previously unforeseen market need. The Blackberry (I only just bought one), fax machines, and Voice Mail come to mind...
but.. even if you did believe in these claims, I would say now is not the time to invest in this stock. The horse has left the barn. Congratulations to those who have made money. Take some and go home!!!
And stop talking about what the vendor says or what is in the ibox. It does not matter...
it is all in the Catalyst!!
any industrial process is highly regulated. I have seen no mention of that... that is all.
Point #2 is something like a car. After all, maybe 5% or less of the fuel (2%) goes to turning the alternator to keep the battery charged to provide the spark to keep the whole thing going...
so the cost of running a car must be zero?
Did you know that the efficiency of a nuclear plant is only like 30%? all of that excess energy going off in the form of heat to the lake nearby... of course some of the power produced runs the nuclear plant..
nothing revolutionary or even Disruptive.
Once again, from the vendor...
yeah thanks.. btw, your last point.. about the ease of setting up a new plant. Remember, once again it is the vendor JBII giving us this information. I have worked in nuclear plants and other industrial environments. There is ALOT of red tape, much of it safety-related, that goes along with setting up anything. The average person fills his/ her car up with gasoline and has no idea. That is why this stock is taking off with the announcement that it is "gasoline grade".
So, setting up a plant may be more difficult that is being represented. Secondly, when the industry gets wind of this, they could easily make things difficult. wait and see..
AND
guys do not stand on pipes in refineries. that picture should be removed... JOHN B.. ? are you serious or what? that is an unsafe practice. Get real. Anybody seen doing that would immediately be directed to step down. Someone fix the ibox!
I was on a refinery in 2005. I guy got an ACL injury (that is Anterior Cruciate Ligament - knee) stepping across a pipe, much less working on it or standing on it. that is a Lost Time accident which costs the employer money and reputation.
This has nothing to do with my analysis. All this means is that it is good enough to go to market. Well, it had better be. one question I have had for a long time is what exactly grade of oil it is, what can it be used for.. and what exactly does the announcement below actually mean? Not being in the refining business, i do not know myself..
don't get so excited before asking some questions.
Again Mike, I do not think that your post reflects common sense. What is relevant is JBII's cost to produce, or to supply raw product, vs the competition. And I maintain that that cost is maybe $10-$20. What you are saying is an oversimplification of things.
What I find really surprising is that you would quote the company as a source. What kind of DD is that? Can't you provide any of your own analysis or at least an objective viewpoint? The company press release said this, therefore it must be true. Don't be so naive! If I believed every piece of information coming from every company I took an interest in, I would be broke long ago.
Don't forget that the price of crude is all over the map. The cost to extract crude form some old well in Texas has got to be a fraction of what comes form the oil sands. That well in Texas has all of the costs already buried (literally... ) in it. What the accountants decide the cost is is really up to them. If they get wind of some upstart trying to undercut them... I bet they could do something about it.
I don't drink tequila, but catch me in the summer after a few games of tennis and an nbeer or two... and it gets difficult for me to keep on top of all of those spelling mistakes.
Mike: Based on my knowledge, you would have to provide much more information to prove your basic point about the profitability of the oil from the P2O process. But, I think there is some common sense to be applied here. First of all, the $10/barrel is the cost to produce something using the P2O process. That must be refined or processed further to get WTI. That much is obvious. What is the cost of that processing?
I have done cost control in companies. The cost of a product is dependent on the costs of the Raw Materials going into it. Those prices change with time, in time with the business cycle, but gradually. A "spot" price is by definition market-driven, driven by Supply and Demand. Those are two different things. Spot prices can fluctuate wildly.
The function of a Cost Control person and Cost Accounting is to define the true costs, and that is what will impact the success of JBII. The spot price is important for forecasting profitability. Oil companies are massive machines with all kinds of cost everywhere and it is impossible to simplify them here. Suffice it to say, that spot price is reflective of the profits the company will take over time that can be applied to all of there various costs. Nothing more... I know for a fact that although that price is a benchmark, it is just one type of transaction that can occur.
Of concern to JBII is the Cost of their product as raw Material vs what else is out there. I know for a fact (having worked in the engineering industry in Canada) that oil extraction in the Oil sands in Canada becomes efficient and economic when the "price" of oil is about $50/barrel. i also know (from an interview in Calgary some years ago) and was told directly by a hiring manager that oil can be extracted from the Oil Sands for about $18/barrel. That is the cost for the crude product that goes to the refinery.
So the $50 would be based on the Cost (anywhere from $10-$25) for the raw product, plus the cost of any refining, plus an acceptable Profit Margin.
Extraction from the Oil Sands is one of the most costly methods of extracting oil, btw.
What is relevant here is the Cost of the Oil from any source. So at $10/barrel oil from the P2O process does seem attractive, but it is important to be realistic.
You are implying a huge profit margin that is not there. Your figures cannot be right. I would guess that if produced in quantity, oil from the P2O process may have a $8-$10 price advantage based on what I know. ($18 - $10?)
Wow. you are such a smart guy. I wish I could understand all of the subtle nuances of your post.
By the way, if you had a minute, could you explain to all of us uninformed the basic cost structures in refining?
Just to understand this statement:
"P2O produces oil at less than $10 per barrel. In the United States, refineries have indicated that they will pick up the fuel at the price of WTI (West Texas Intermediate) price less $3, currently around $70 per barrel "
Thanks in advance for your input.
It is so great to be conversing with such smart people...
Looking forward to your response!!!
Well I have done as much research as I can and can post my honest opinions on this now. it is a great idea and taps into many emotions felt by all of us who want a greener world. I agree that there is a huge environmental problem that remains to be solved in the waste plastic in the world, but there is also lots to be skeptical about with this company. Frankly, there is not much hard fact to go on here, that makes DD difficult.
Nothing wrong with playing this way, it all depends on your style. Some years ago I made my biggest score on a stock called uWink (UWKI), which shot up on this kind of hype and promise, then crashed and burned. I have a software development background and so was able to pick out the flaws with that company became clear as the drama unfolded. But it had great promise, promising to be the start of a chain of national restaurants based on technology and revolutionary customer service concepts. They ended up having financial problems, partly because some of the assumptions about how they would grow organically did not come to fruition. I see some of that here as well. $10/ barrel to the refinery? Well that is quite a position to take this early on. I do not have the expertise to comment on that. You would have to be in the refining business to have an opinion on that. I don't have the background.
I think that is a strength, to admit what you don't know. in fact, it is critical to success. I usually do high-tech stocks, because that is my background. i also set firm criteria and pick from the masses based on those criteria. I worry about the business models and intangibles only after those criteria are met, then I use my intuition and experience to try to pick winners. Therefore this stock does not fit with my approach to investing in the first place. There is no financial history to rely on, no trends to examine.
Now having said that, there is nothing wrong with profiting from something like this. I did so on uWink. I just must say that now I would not get involved with it. At current price levels success is assumed. For those that got in early, I say sell half and move on, forget about it. Take your winnings.
In assessing this stock, I can make a few comments:
- there is no financial history to use
- it all looks good though I must admit, as detailed in this post:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=44082776
having no debt is very sexy always, although it does not matter..
Taking this statement from the recent news releases as a statement of what they do:
Accordingly, our revenue sources presently include (i) income from reading archived tapes (including microfiche) from clients such as NASA, (ii) income from the recently acquired JAVACO, Inc., (iii) income from the sale of Pak-It products, and bulk chemical facility which we realize beginning October 1, 2009, and (iv) from the anticipated commencement of operations in the first quarter of 2010 with Plastic2Oil, a process and service that converts plastic to fuel oil.
The first point (reading archived tapes). I would view this as a short-term cash flow. It seems as if the CEO may have some connections to NASA that give him a window of opportunity to get some nice cash flow. But... this has been done before too. There is a company in Canada called Diagnos (ADK.V) that uses Artificial Intelligence to look for patterns in seismic data. What JBII is proposing is to get supposedly valuable information from tapes without even doing any analysis on it. For those of you that know what AI is, you appreciate the difference. Now ADK is not doing very well these days. They have recovered somewhat like everybody else, but they are an established player in this area, and their revenues fell off during the recession. They are very dependent on the level of exploration and mining activity in general. and I would say they are providing more value than JBII is. They take recent data and make predictions about the presence of minerals. Hot stuff. JBII just reads old data... and makes vague promises... no comparison.
Now JBII says that they happened to discover an old formula on some old tapes that has the power to revolutionize the world. Well, I admit that it might be true, but I think it is a big gamble. Gamble if you want, it is too much of a tale for me.
Javco and Pak-It. Not exceptional or unique. Nice green technology. Nothing remarkable about them. Totally untested. Immature businesses.
So, it boils down to the viability of P2O. Of all of this, that is what matters, that is what is driving the stock. It is capturing people's emotions because of the promise it entails. The answer will unfold in 2010 in the first quarter. I will be watching with interest.
There is this statement in the last News. One statement of hard fact:
P2O produces oil at less than $10 per barrel. In the United States, refineries have indicated that they will pick up the fuel at the price of WTI (West Texas Intermediate) price less $3, currently around $70 per barrel
OK. I used to be a programmer and am now in Project Management. I have worked in refining (Oil&Gas), as well as construction and many other businesses. I do not know enough about refining to analyze the above statement. Unfortunately, I doubt many of the people on this Board do either. One thing: wasn't the "price" of oil $35 about 1 year ago? and what exactly does that price mean? Until you know that, how can you explain the above statement? It seems to imply that the price for the fuel input to a refinery is currently $70 and the output from P2O is only $10. Well then P2O is a huge bargain!! or is it.. the cost of oil to a refinery does not change, it is the raw materials cost... so how could it be $35 a year ago and now suddenly be $70? something does not add up. It costs so much to get a barrel of crude out of a well in Texas and ship it to a refinery, does it not? and that does not change, does it not?
Just make sure you understand all of this stuff. I don't. Someone fill me in please.
I can compare this to another stock: WPUR. It supposedly makes water from air. Look at the chart. There was a massive popup back in 2006. Just when it started out I think. Much like... this stock.. now it is worth pennies. One of the companies I worked at was in the Water Treatment business. I approached one of the engineers about this. He emphatically told me that water from air would never work. Not economical. In order for any environmental technology to be successful it must make economic sense. In other words, it must be cheaper to get water from air than from the tap. Period. Interestingly enough, this technology is only used in certain situations as well.
The same must hold true here. Oil has fluctuated between $35 and $70/ barrel. That is a benchmark which I believe is Texas light crude (has to do with sulfur content.. I think). That is output from refineries. What is the cost of the input? Can this process produce enough in high quantities to be economically viable? Or is it just applicable in certain situations, like on ships? I could see that... producing useable fuel in small quantities and cleaning things up. Then what is the business case?
So, I would recommend selling half your holdings and moving on. Congratulations to those who successfully rode this emotional roller-coaster.
One final thing; the picture shows a guy standing on a pipe. That is simply not done. It is an unsafe practice. therefore, the picture is BS. lol...
do any of you realize how long this idea (plastic to oil) must have been around? It is a fairly obvious reversal of an industrial process that must have been tried before... come now, this can't be that revolutionary.
so... interesting developments on this one. I got out because of suspicion about the scam angle and all of the news about sales revenue increases without the impact on the bottom line. Just not enough tangible evidence of a business with a solid foundation. I never liked the excuses they dreamed up in the last earnings release about their expenses. Am I correct in assuming that all of this stock action is due to the Google lawsuit? Seems like a huge reaction to it. It is not due to earnings or something more tangible?
Glad I got out. Wonder if this is good for a pop after the furor over this lawsuit dies down...
so what happened today? Seems to me it was a downward pointing ">" that finally broke resistance, but in a big way. Holy cow batman.
btw, we do not need the "_". "The Big Guy", "Biggie", or "TBG" will do just fine.
Go EGMI Go. (Satisfying TOU).
what do I win?
thanks for the info AB.
I think everybody on this board has been totally misled because the y-axis on the chart is logarithmic, making it total bullshit. That is just what I choose to think. Prove me wrong.. anyway, I have had a few be3ers tonight, and it is time for a few more... later.
well the chart auto-updates... so that does not matter. I just think that the use of the logarithmic axis for the y-axis is misleading.. it is kind of an MBA school point i am making here. Sorry to stress your brain. There must be some reason why it is displayed that way... I just think it serves no purpose and is misleading... WHAT DO YOU THINK ANYWAY? or are you all asleep there in California?
why the f___ is he so important anyway?
can't you have an intelligent conversation about my post? the chart? don't you think the at the use of a logarithmic y axis is misleading? and why is it used anyway? what value does it add? smell the coffee man... or are you fresh out?
what up?
who the f___ is lord Steinburg?
i think I will use that website as the basis for all of my transactions...