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.
What energy sources do you rely on in your life?
I see no popular support for a decline in our collective quality of life in the USA (or globally).
We all still need to heat and cool our homes. We require fuel for transportation in commercial, private business, and recreational travel. We need homes, jobs, food, medicines, manufacturing, clothing, etc.
Insights from Exxon’s Outlook through 2050:
“The world’s future energy needs will be determined by the number of people there are and the level of economic growth they enjoy. On both counts, the numbers are staggering. 2 billon more people and a global economy 2X the size.
“To support a growing population with rising living standards, we project the world will need to produce 15% more energy in 2050 than it does today.
“Even with an unprecedented rise in lower-emission options, oil and natural gas are still projected to meet more than half of the world’s energy needs in 2050.
So despite the political aspirations of some, oil is not going away anytime soon, and energy demand will require that exploration and production become a higher priority just to maintain the standard of living we currently desire and enjoy.
Absent any startling new technological developments in energy production, one should expect to see no substantive evolutionary changes unless it is clear that the majority of voters prefer a decline in their quality of life and will tolerate a third-world lifestyle for themselves and their families.
Those that wish to stifle and punish oil companies need to ‘pull their heads out’ before it becomes too late to avoid the unintended consequences to our society that will result from the incompetency of this approach.
So I support the prediction of the Exxon forecast that oil and gas investments will not only continue, but will increase over time.
These GSPE “Expert Market” travails may just be a hint that I should be prepared to update my alias to ‘No Oil Gal 199’….
And as well as the active phone lines, the company is maintaining their website, complete with recent changes.
The flagrant truth is, Biden has his foot on the neck of GOM exploration, and it is not going to change until he is out of office. Expectations for future good news may come as a result from a new political outcome in November.
So at most, about six months to go the way I see it. Until then, I will continue to hold my @$k and be a moderator for this board.
Remembering an old saying “Patience is a virtue that attracts happiness and brings near that which is far”….
Mrs Smith
I greatly appreciate these clarifying insights from both spec and Werbe.
I also share the belief that the company and the stock price could rebound. After all, even though there are no visible flames, the smoke around Gulfslope Energy is visible and hard to miss.
It appears that the biggest issues holding the company back after Tau1 have been the effects that Covid had on the world economies and markets, followed by the huge effect of the Biden administration’s enormously unfortunate energy policies and outlook.
Those of us that remain shareholders are all about to become ‘expert’ watchers, keeping an eye out for certain future developments.
After reading the Delek Group financials released on March 29th, it is evident that Gulfslope’s partner is still holding on to their 23% ownership of the company and continues to maintain a 75% ownership interest in the Tau prospect as well.
These audited financial reports are heavily scrutinized before being released, so I am curious as to why Gulfslope Energy is still being mentioned in the partner’s financials to it’s shareholders, despite being written off for tax reasons in 2019, and Gulfslope itself being delinquent in their filings. This cannot be just a coincidence.
Also, if a billion $$$ company like the Tau partner has no intention of drilling in the GOM, then why does it continue to acknowledge and support the entity managing their GOM assets? And why continue to pay the costs related to these GOM investments?
There are forecasts that predict the price of crude will reach $100/bbl. So should shareholders be expecting internal discussions about another Tau drilling project anytime soon? Like after an election that changes administrations and outlooks on energy. These conversations are very likely to happen.
But itself being a BOEM approved GOM Operator from back in 2018, could the partner be considering drilling Tau on it’s own? Which will be OK for shareholders, because Gulfslope Energy still owns 25% of the Tau lease, and should benefit accordingly from any successful endeavor.
And does the partner have any designs on increasing ownership in the company? This action could result in a needed infusion of cash into the depleted company treasury. Can this activity alone get the company’s SEC filings current?
Coincidentally, it appears the Tau partner continues discussions with the BOEM since they are still listed on the weekly BOEM Chief Notes. This activity confirms the partner’s interest in the Tau.
And what is the value of all those NOLs anyway? Who can use them and when? My answer is that the best bang for Gulfslope’s bucks is for the $70 million in NOLs to stay with the company considering they would be allowable as a deduction against future taxable income.
All these are curious questions lacking satisfying answers. If the situations surrounding any of these questions evolves into impactful activity or actionable operations, how will it affect shareholder risk and the GSPE share price?
Unfortunately, the minutiae of the ‘big picture’ still remains obscured and fuzzy, so I do not have answers to these questions. But for now, I believe that Gulfslope Energy is favored to maintain the BOEM Operating Status for the Tau field.
Waiting to see….
Mrs. Smith
To put the discussion into perspective, the USA uses 21 million bpd. So IF the SPR was completely full, we have a 35 day supply of crude. Except, as things now stand, the country has less than an 18 day supply. This a very precarious position to be in when coping with some circumstances. Joe should have thought about that. The country is counting on these administrations to be up to speed on this stuff….
Mrs. Smith
I do agree with your points about enhancements to the overall design of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).
Considering that the SPR came into existence in the 1970’s after an oil boycott, I do support ‘modernizing‘ to better address issues the country faces today. A new administration should be the ones to address it now, and Make It Greater, lol.
As far as a definition for the SPR, I would prefer that it be crude oil stored in underground caverns and reserved for use due to disasters, economic considerations from oil boycotts, military fuels in time of war, and in response to other catastrophes.
I think the underground storage caverns should be filled to 100% of capacity and maintained at this level at all times. If necessary to release volumes, they must be refilled as soon as practical. Price should not be an impediment (Poor Joe. He may not understand the purpose of the SPR).
This STRATEGIC supply could be all that Americans have to rely on in times of catastrophe or emergency and must therefore be protected at all costs and at all times. How long should we expect to go without power (electricity) and fuel (vehicles)? The current authorized capacity of the SPR is 714 million barrels. But after Joe’s release, it is now filled to only 50 percent of it’s capacity.
And it may also be necessary to use it to provide fuel for military activity (ships, planes) to protect the population during time of war. In this instance having this supply available and ready for refining is critical and may make a difference to the outcome.
And recognizing the time (1-3 yrs) needed to plan the projects, manufacture the tubulars (made overseas), execute drilling, and transport the crude to refineries, to replenish 700 million barrels, makes me uneasy. How about you?
I will admit being upset over the position the country’s (D) leadership has placed us all in while pursuing their political CYA games.
These underachievers supported an inept and naive energy plan intended to force the country toward a goal that will give them more of a political advantage. Manipulative, Not Smart.
They deserve the costs and the price required.
I hope they are made to pay it in November.
Mrs. Smith
Seasonal demands look favorable for oil producers at this time.
‘Global Oil Demand In Summer Months of 2024’ - OPEC Featured Article, released April 11, 2024
https://momr.opec.org/pdf-download/res/pdf_delivery_momr.php?secToken2=accept
In 2024, global oil demand is expected to grow by a healthy 2.2 mb/d, y-o-y, led by robust demand from non-OECD regions, mainly China, Middle East and Other Asia. On a quarterly basis, global oil demand is expected to grow by around 2.0 mb/d, y-o-y, in 1Q24, 2.2 mb/d y-o-y in 2Q24, 2.7 mb/d y-o-y in 3Q24 and 2.1 mb/d y-o-y in 4Q24.
In the upcoming summer months, and focusing on transportation fuels, global demand for jet/kerosene is forecast to grow by 0.6 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and by 0.8 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. At the same time, demand for gasoline and diesel is forecast to increase by 0.4 mb/d and 0.2mb/d, y-o-y, respectively, in 2Q24. In 3Q24, gasoline demand is forecast to improve further and expand by 0.8 mb/d, while diesel is projected to increase by 0.3 mb/d, y-o-y.
In OECD, the upcoming driving season in the US is expected to provide the usual additional demand for transportation fuels. Economic activity is also expected to pick up in 2H24, supported by a likely more accommodative monetary policy by the US Federal Reserve in 3Q24, as fears of inflation risks subside. Overall, OECD Americas is forecast to lead demand growth in the region with around 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and same in 3Q24, while oil demand in OECD Europe and Asia Pacific is expected to also rise, albeit only slightly in both quarters.
In non-OECD countries, China is projected to drive oil demand, supported by strong mobility and industrial activity, growing by 0.5 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.7 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. Similarly, the Middle East is forecast to expand by 0.3 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.5 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. India’s oil demand is forecast to grow by 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y in 3Q24. Other Asia and Latin America are also expected to see healthy growth in the range of 0.2 mb/d–0.4 mb/d, y-o-y, on average in 2Q24 and same in 3Q24.
On the refining side, global crude intakes have declined since the start of the year despite a slight recovery in March. Intakes fell to 79.5mb/d in February, and in March they were still 2.4 mb/d lower compared with the peak level of 82.1 mb/d seen in December 2023 (Graph 2). Refinery runs declines were mostly in the US, China, Russia and Europe on the back of severe weather, seasonality and weakening refining margins. In March, however, refinery intakes improved slightly, with a gradual capacity return in the US and rising demand in select Asian countries.
In the US, gasoline markets on the Gulf Coast strengthened on tightening gasoline availability, elevated octane prices (a gasoline blending component), and a positive outlook for summer gasoline demand. In Europe, ongoing geopolitical tension could further intensify upward pressure on regional diesel markets. Meanwhile, Asia has so far remained well supplied amid strong refinery runs, particularly in India, and product supplies from the Middle East.
Expected growing demand for gasoline and diesel in the Atlantic Basin is expected to establish stronger East-to-West export opportunities for these products. Moreover, strong near-term upside potential for residual fuel in Southeast Asia is expected to add strength to Asian product markets. Jet/kerosene markets are projected to show solid upward potential across regions in the coming months as air travel picks up.. Demand for naphtha, however, may remain soft, amid new capacity additions despite projections for robust gasoline blending demand in the coming months. Outside of the US, propane could become the preferred petrochemical feedstock on the back of stronger margins.
The robust oil demand outlook for the summer months warrants careful market monitoring, amid ongoing uncertainties, to ensure a sound and sustainable market balance. To this end, the countries participating in the Declaration of Cooperation (DoC) will remain vigilant, proactive and prepared to act, when necessary, to the requirement of the market.
The EIA Short-term Energy Outlook (STEO) for APRIL continues to forecast growth in 2024 and 2025 for International Petroleum and Liquids Production and Consumption.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/3atab.pdf
The April STEO also forecasts the “average price” of WTI to remain above $80/bbl in 2024 and 2025.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/2tab.pdf
I will emphatically “second” your comments regarding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and the changing of administrations. Respectfully, “Kudos”.
Not everything in Texas is big, but the oil reserves are. Interesting fact about this is, without continuous exploration drilling, the U.S. has about 5 years left before depleting production from all existing wells.
So, without further capital investments in oil and gas exploration over the next five years, our country will be vulnerable to forces from outside our borders.
The USA will not be energy independent, and will be at risk of pressure from other countries because of a reliance on imports. This is why the replenishment of the SPR is vital.
With our current capabilities, I am wondering how long it takes to drill enough wells to offset this inevitable decline. The answer is ‘Woe is Us’.
We need to get started. Time is a factor. This will not happen overnight, and failure is not the preferred option.
I agree that the USA cannot tolerate another 4 years of attacks on the oil and gas industry. It is an undesirable risk for our quality of life, security, and freedom.
No administration should be allowed to sell our SPR assets on a whim. Or print additional billions of inflationary dollars to have monies to cover for the failure of the progressive green agenda.
The bottom line here is, if the progressive ideals on our energy future were workable, why was it necessary to deplete the SPR to keep the country going? And what happens next?
That it was necessary to pirate the SPR is all you need to know to realize the flaws existing in the progressive perspective on energy sources.
So they have only proved to all of us that drilling is required. Because, once the SPR is exhausted, what hope is there for us?
This is a real-world, vivid example of why the progressive perspectives on oil and gas energy cannot continue.
The saddest thing is that they had to have realized this too, or they would never have compromised the SPR in the first place. But unfortunately, that did not deter them in any way. This is why I believe they cannot be trusted to remain in charge of the destiny of the USA.
Still, there will be a group of people whose thoughts do not venture beyond their day to day secure bubble, and they have no desire to ever be inconvenienced by the truth. All they seek is the power to control the lives and fates of other Americans for the benefits of their own continued wealth and welfare. We should deny them this outcome.
Now Joe is setting up another token gesture which is doomed to fail and increase costs for all. I refer to “Green Banks”. And they are fast coming to a community near you. How is this really reducing inflation? And especially in the poorest of communities? It will not. In my opinion, this is only a smokescreen to obscure the results from the populace.
I suggest the bulk of these monies will be used for large projects that mostly benefits the profits of those banks. And will not have a great influence on reducing inflation in poor communities.
And thank you for including the wishes for Gulfslope Energy to play a supporting role in rescuing our country from the potential collapse of our energy security.
I now realize that my stomach growling yesterday must not have been due to fasting. But rather, it was because of climate change.
Mrs. Smith
Sometimes when a prediction comes true, it is not a cause for celebrating.
The DOE has just announced it will not be replenishing the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) after all.
Since this administration took office, the SPR has been reduced from 638 million barrels to 363 million barrels, a 43% decline.
Regrettably, my predictions were correct about this administration being disingenuous when telling us the SPR inventory would be replenished.
The smoke they blow at citizens is so thick that I carry eye drops on me 24/7.
Link to article:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/biden-admin-cancels-plan-to-refill-emergency-oil-reserve-amid-high-prices
SPR data:
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCSSTUS1&f=W
I find it appalling that our government would put us in this position in the first place. Hopefully there will not be cause for further regret.
Mrs. Smith
Just thought I would mention that the Tau partner owning 23 percent of Gulfslope Energy, Delek Group, acknowledged this ownership in their recently released financials (March 29, 2024).
So, this partnership continues even though the costs of the partnership was written off by Delek for tax purposes in 2019.
As of April 1, 2024 the Tau lease remains active (Page 2694 of the BOEM Lease Data Report) and does not expire until the end of 2025.
https://www.data.bsee.gov/Leasing/Files/1221.pdf
Feel free to draw your own conclusions.
We still need a change of political leadership to address the hostility towards GOM drilling.
Mrs. Smith
Just to be clear to all readers, even though the Department of Energy (DOE) has always released the EIA Annual Energy Outlook in prior general election years (at least as far back as 2000), the DOE has declared it will NOT be releasing one in 2024, although the DOE will continue issuing the EIA’s monthly Short-term Energy Outlook.
Considering that the World relies heavily on hydrocarbons, and the data from this annual report is often referenced when companies are reporting financial results to shareholders, or planning business strategies and budgets, this is definitely a curious occurrence.
The good news is the DOE will be issuing the EIA Annual Energy Outlook once again in 2025. Better late than never, especially since this Outlook includes projections out to 2050.
And despite all of the DOE’s efforts to hinder oil exploration, the Tau lease remains active. It is by now obvious the Tau partners are resilient enough to roll with the punches and stay off the ropes.
In view of the unprecedented actions, policies, regulations, and general hostility directed towards the Oil and Gas Industry by this administration, the presidential election cannot come soon enough.
So, …. Hit the Road Joe….
And do not come back no mo’.
Meanest Ol’ Woman,
Mrs. Smith
Something to think about regarding the Department of Energy’s EIA ‘Annual Energy Outlook for 2024’.
The Outlook is being delayed until after the general election. So the next annual forecast will not be issued until the Spring of 2025.
This is a remarkable new change in protocols but perhaps not that uncommon for the bureaucrats in this current administration.
Could this be due to concerns regarding how their base will react to a forecast that reflects growth for crude prices, oil and gas production, and fossil fuel consumption?
Elections affect many things. Those that believe elections do not matter are wrong.
What will be the first proposed legislation of 2025 if things change up “bigly” in November? Considering the foremost Bill introduced to the 118th Congress (H.R. 1) was focused on lowering energy costs through strengthening domestic energy production, exports and infrastructure, I will go with legislation or executive orders on ENERGY.
Surely the Tau partners are not the only ones who recall these executive orders under the previous administration.
*13783 of March 2017 - ‘Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth’
*13795 of April 2017 - ‘Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy’,
*13867 of April 2019 - ‘Issuance of Permits With Respect to Facilities’…,
*13868 of April 2019 - ‘Promoting Energy Infrastructure and Energy Growth’
I wonder what influence DJT’s Executive Order - 13795 ‘Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy’ had on Delek’s decision to partner in the Tau prospect. Conversely, I wonder what effect the Big Guy’s hostility towards oil exploration is having on the Tau2?
After all, this is an Industry that features high investment combined with high risk, and the last thing a partner wants to deal with is a lack of support from the federal government.
The bottom line as I see it is, this can be a big deal for our side if DJT wins. Just saying.
Recalling his ongoing mantra “Drill Baby, Drill”.
Wishing all a joyous Easter.
Mrs. Smith
The Tau BOEM lease G36121 remains “active”, but no SEC filings at this time.
The theme of this post is a true oil exploration story. And the wildcatting moral of the story is essentially ‘if you quit, you will not find it’. But please remember to guard against overlooking the real risks facing the company in the pursuit of a GOM discovery.
Two large international energy companies decided to become partners in an exploration plan drilling for offshore oil.
Six years later, one partner dropped out after millions of dollars were spent, and only a few dry holes resulted.
But the other partner continued on alone, while following trusted seismic data, and found new partners.
The following year (2015), the first discovery was made. Since then, other successful wells have been drilled. And developmental drilling continues.
It is estimated that these reserves are 3X larger than those of Saudi Arabia. A big deal discovery for sure…. Kudos to these exploration professionals.
The company that dropped out (Shell) is scrambling around searching for other drilling blocks in the area with potential for a similar result.
The company that continued on (Exxon) has created wealth for their new partners, their shareholders, and the country of Guyana (which is now considered to have the world’s fastest growing economy as a result of this discovery of more than 11 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves). It is estimated that by 2027 oil output in Guyana will be over 1.2 million barrels per day (currently 645K bpd).
Despite the huge differences between Gulfslope and Exxon, there are a couple of parallels to point out. If there exists good seismic data worthy of confidence, and if the partners are determined to continue the search, then the potential for success still remains. Additionally, Gulfslope obtained much desirable data and drilling experience from the Tau1. Who knows what the future holds?
If any readers see this post as being too optimistic regarding the prospects for the company, I say this is just the way the oil exploration and drilling business works. I offer no encouragement or enticement for following any particular path.
Mrs. Smith
The March 2024 EIA Short-term Energy Outlook (STEO) forecast growth in 2024 and 2025 for Domestic and International Petroleum and Liquids Production and Consumption. Note: This takes into account the increase in GOM production as well.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/3atab.pdf
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/4atab.pdf
The EIA also forecasts the “average price” of WTI to remain above $80/bbl in 2024 and 2025.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/2tab.pdf
I consider this good news for energy investors.
Mrs. Smith
Although I find it disconcerting to be posting about the stock of a company (Gulfslope Energy) that has missed the last two SEC filings (the annual 10-K and the first quarter 10-Q) due to “working capital issues”, I want to say that I am in agreement with much of the sentiment expressed in your post 7762.
That said, perhaps there still exists potential for the Tau. So with a focus on the timeline in mind, please consider the following points….
There are NO fees associated with letting a BOEM lease go and relinquishing it. And at this time I can find no evidence indicating that the company or it’s partner ever intended to relinquish the Tau lease. The BOEM lease, G36121 still remains “active”. And for your convenience that detail is made available on the following March 5, 2024 BOEM GOM Lease Data Report, page 2694:
https://www.data.bsee.gov/Leasing/Files/1221.pdf
And although company cash resources were limited, it appears the decision made on how to best allocate the final effect of these resources was to make the Tau lease annual rental payment, even though this action would facilitate the financial reports becoming delinquent. Undoubtably a tough call.
The company may still fail, but I believe this to be a clear sign that Gulfslope management has no intention of abandoning the pursuit of the Tau 2.
It also appears there is ongoing communications between the Tau’s 75% working interest partner, Delek GOM Investments and the BOEM. They still reflect the Qualification Updates “received” but not yet “completed”. Once the BOEM has completed those updates, Delek should be removed from the weekly BOEM Chief Notes.
https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/oil-gas-energy/Industy%20Report%2003042024.pdf
Certainly there is much ‘smoke’ being seen by all, but as already mentioned, the source of the fire remains unknown.
Therefore, despite the lack of clarity in our circumstances, I am in agreement with your assessment that there is no upside to be had from selling our shares at this point. This is a helpful perspective on your part that guides the decision regarding what steps to take next.
So with an appreciation for the great value of these recoverable resources if they are ever proven, and considering the resulting effects to the stock price in such a scenario, I too will hold my shares for as long as possible.
But there are many IFs to overcome. If the company can hold on until after the next general election, and if the hostility of the current administration is rejected by voters in a fair election, and if the new administration wishes to support GOM exploration (which I believe they will), and if a new partner is found, and if the Tau 2 is successful, then all will be well with GSPE shareholders.
But those unwilling to make this investment in time and money or to take on this risk will be disappointed.
So it is really not a complicated decision despite the smoke. Only those willing to stay long in the face of potential disappointment can win big. And even then, only if a successful Tau 2 well is drilled.
Those with a short perspective can perhaps chip off a few bucks here and there, but the big payday will evade them. As bottom feeders deserve.
I see it as High hopes and Low expectations.
In the meantime, although I will miss the frequent interactions of posting here, and it has been my distinct pleasure to exchange comments and ideas with you all, I will mostly be focused on other endeavors in the future.
But I do plan to check back from time to time to read recent comments and maintain my duties as moderator. And perhaps a new post here and there as well, provided I have a comment pertaining to any new developments.
So, until then, Good Luck to All and Thank You.
Calm waters, light winds, and good fishing.
Mrs. Smith
It is unfortunate that these developments are not keeping up with our preferred time table but recall there are reasons to not be more faithless.
Maybe we should all take up short positions. Although this may not work out for us because, if there is no one with faith left in the stock, what will be the value of our investments?
One final comment, searching for oil and gas is not for anyone that has a low tolerance for risk. No virtue signaling here just being realistic.
Signing off for now.
Mrs. Smith
Thank you spec. You found the words I was hoping for. An excellent post with a top-tier summation. I could not have said it any better (and did not). Primo.
Mrs. Smith
Here is another tidbit of ‘who knows what this means’, but I noticed that the Tau partner made the effort to ensure that their “qualification information” on record at the BOEM was updated and accurate. The changes were accepted and processed on October 23rd by the BOEM.
I take this as an indicator that the partner remains engaged with the BOEM and the Tau lease. It is most certainly not a sign of disinterest coming from the Partners. The Tau lease remains ‘active’.
BOEM Chief Notes 1/8/2024 Weekly Report, page 6 under ‘Qualification Updates that were accepted and processed’: https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/oil-gas-energy/Industy%20Report%2001082024.pdf
Mrs. Smith
Oops, problem! I understand that beginning in 2024 ‘Lambos’ are only going to be available as EVs. So back to the drawing board.
That is okay. No one wants to be driving a Lambo in the snow anyway.
Let us not forget that the important point of my recent post was about the ‘Big Guys’, their commitment to oil and gas, and not necessarily EVs.
Happy Winter! And Go Houston Texans, because if the Texans can do it, so can Gulfslope Energy.
Mrs. Smith
Thank you. You made a great point too.
Demand for hydrocarbons does not appear to be diminishing anytime soon. In fact, the January ‘24 EIA Short-term Energy Outlook (STEO) forecast ‘global’ demand for Petroleum and Other Liquid Consumption to increase by almost 1.4% and 1.2% in 2024 and 2025, respectively. The EIA forecast U.S. demand to rise by almost 1.4% in 2024 and to remain basically unchanged in 2025.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/3atab.pdf
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/4atab.pdf
And recall, the USA is the number one exporter of LPG and LNG. And I believe in Q4 ‘23 Petroleum held the title as our top export product.
Also, the STEO forecast reflects the ‘average’ price of WTI to remain relatively unchanged in 2024 from the prior year and indicates a slight decline in 2025.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/tables/pdf/2tab.pdf
Mrs. Smith
I want to share the best article and facts about EVs, climate change, and energy that I have come across lately.
My favorite quote from the article is “Those with the greatest knowledge, betting real money, know oil and gas are here to stay. ”
Knowledge that the major oil companies and renowned investors are making these large monetary commitments to the oil and gas sector should be the very best confirmation needed for us to keep our investments focused in oil and gas as well. These are among the biggest of the real Big Guys in the pursuit of profit.
And this all just highlights and accentuates that the potential rewards of a starting off E&P player such as Gulfslope Energy could turn out to be an astute investment as well.
And, all things considered, next to a drilling contract, continuing to maintain the Tau lease was the best outcome for anyone invested in GSPE at this time.
And until the challenges before us are worked out, we only need to continue ignoring the negativity of those self-serving attempts to cover positions which are of no concern to anyone else.
Despite that it seems this level of reward is not easily captured, we just need do as we have been doing. Sustaining our ‘hanging tough’ posture by standing our ground in the face of the risk and the adverse comments is the best strategy for us.
Another sound strategy we have all often heard before is to “Follow the Money”. In the past I have found this tactic to be Good Advice. Now might be a good time to do it again.
It is uplifting to know that these Big Guys are seriously in pursuit of profit by investing large sums of capital in oil and gas. Rather than blindly following the lead of that other so-called ‘Big Guy’ that is seeking political favor and/or his 10%….
So, “Drill Tau 2” continues to be the GSPE motto I stand behind and support.
I encourage all to read this article as it addresses future issues that none of us will be able to avoid. Please enjoy the article and feel free to share it with others.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/01/the_electric_car_con_explained.html
The Electric Car Con Explained, By William Levin, released January 11th
Is electricity a source of energy? Most people will answer yes, which is incorrect. Electricity carries energy but it is not itself a source of energy, which in the U.S. is supplied 60% by natural gas and coal, 18% nuclear and 22% renewables (hydro, solar and wind).
The related question is whether cars are a major consumer of energy and hence a significant contributor of Co2 emissions? Again, most people believe both statements are self-evidently true, hence the importance of moving to electric cars.
In fact, cars (light-duty transportation) account for less than 5% of global energy demand, with U.S. cars accounting for 19% of the global car fleet, declining to under 15% by 2050 as car demand grows faster outside the U.S.
Putting these facts together, and they are indisputable facts, provides a stunning insight.
The U.S. car fleet accounts for a mere 1.0% of global energy demand (5% x 19%), declining to 0.8% by 2050. So even if the U.S. shifts 100% to electric-powered cars, the maximum climate impact in 2050 is a meaningless 0.2% (22% x 0.8%) reduction in global Co2 emissions from the current electric grid, up to a maximum of 0.5% assuming solar, wind, and hydro can, implausibly, power 60% of electric demand.
In other words, there is no factual basis to claim that the government mandate to switch to electric cars will have any material impact on global Co2 emissions.
This is not a debatable point -- it is easily verified, it is correct under any view of climate science, and it remains true even if solar and wind magically grow sixfold over the next 25 years, which is highly unlikely given the need to build a new transmission network, estimated at more than 200,000 miles of wires crisscrossing the country, and devise totally unknown, unproven, and likely impossible to achieve large-scale, economic battery storage.
Nor does the picture change materially if the entire world goes 100% electric for cars. In that case global Co2 emissions fall a mere 3.5% in 2050 versus a baseline of 24% electric adoption by 2035.
Put simply, cars are not a meaningful source of global emissions and electric cars do not and cannot curtail the continued reliance on fossil fuels in electric generation. On top of this, counting all sources, the U.S. is responsible for only 14% of all global Co2 emissions, declining to 9% by 2050 due to rest of world economic growth.
But facts count for nothing in the Biden era. The EPA seeks to force conversion to electric cars through draconian limits on tailpipe emissions. American taxpayers foot the bill for billions in subsidies to electric cars. California leads the way in mandating conversion to electric cars. Perversely, the major auto companies have signed onto the electric agenda, the harbinger of future bailouts.
Perhaps most galling is the continuous misleading of the public.
By law every new car must affix a window sticker with the following statement: “Vehicle emissions are a significant cause of climate change and smog.“ Any private company marketing such demonstrably false claims would be subject to ruinous civil and criminal liability.
If going electric yields virtually no climate benefit, why bother buying a battery-powered car, with limited range, high purchase cost, and low resale value, the death knell to affordable leasing costs?
Consumers are smarter than the government in figuring out that battery-powered cars are a raw deal, resulting in widespread reports of missed sales forecasts, high unsold inventories, and cancellation of future projections by the major auto companies.
Here again the new car sticker hides economic reality by featuring in bold type a hypothetical five-year operating saving versus an average conventional car, based on the cost of gas and electricity.
By sticker math, savings rise as gasoline prices increase, hence the perverse and persistent administration incentive to force high gas costs on Americans, except in an election year. And the savings disappear as electric costs increase.
Already there is no operating benefit when charging stations routinely cost $.40/kwh-$.50/kwh, a fact conveniently not mentioned in the sticker calculation. Nor are consumers warned of the inevitable sharp increase in electric rates if the grid must absorb high-cost solar and wind, as in Germany where electric rates already are $.45/kwh, removing any incentive for electric cars. At current gas prices, a typical hybrid costs less to run on gas once electric prices exceed $.24/kwh.
Taking the broader view, fossils fuels currently account for 80% of global energy supply. Even if the world aggressively grows solar and wind, fossil fuels in 2050 continue to supply 68% of all energy.
The reason is quite straightforward. The major sources of energy, and hence global energy emissions, come from non-car sources that are extremely difficult or technologically infeasible to convert to renewables, namely industrial, commercial transportation (heavy-duty trucking, aviation, marine, and rail), and residential/commercial. The government focus on cars is political theater.
Nuclear energy can uniquely reduce emissions to zero in these sectors, but for reasons well-known, war has been successfully declared on nuclear energy in the U.S. and it is not growing globally at the exponential rates needed to solve global Co2 emissions permanently.
The continued dominance of fossil fuels explains what is otherwise inexplicable: Warren Buffet’s multi-billion-dollar investment in oil companies, especially Occidental Petroleum, and the recent surge in oil acquisitions, notably ExxonMobil paying $58 billion for Pioneer Natural Resources and Chevron’s purchase of Hess Corp. for $60 billion.
Those with the greatest knowledge, betting real money, know oil and gas are here to stay. Without skillful, continuous oil and gas investment in the billions and trillions in the U.S. and the world, global oil and gas production by 2050 would drop more than 70% from current levels, yielding economic Armageddon.
The Biden Administration response is astonishing. As reported by the Department of Energy in September 2023, the National Security Council has issued an edict banning government employees from attending any international conference that promotes fossil fuel production, with limited exceptions.
Yet even at 68% market share for fossil fuels, global emissions will be cut significantly. By a factor of three, the most important lever of global greenhouse gas reduction is not growth in solar and renewables, but continuous private sector innovation in energy efficiency, reducing energy content per unit of output.
Missing in climate change discussions is its inhumane logic. Global emission increases through 2050 are due to population growth and rising economic activity in China, India, and the rest of the developing world (i.e., non-U.S. and Europe). GDP growth raises living standards. Falling GDP and population reduction outside the developed nations are the true, but strategically hidden, moral epicenter of the climate change agenda.
China, India, Asia, and Africa are not buying what world elites are selling as they self-righteously jet to exhilarating climate confabs. No one should. Demanding that 80% of the world, or some six billion humans, sacrifice their well-being, and their children, is an immorality never before articulated and rationalized.
The hard truth is that no set of actions can remotely meet the arbitrary IPCC requirement for a 70% reduction in global Co2 by 2050, certainly not the puny contribution from electrified cars and indeed nothing short of a horrific determination to strangle the world whole.
By all means purchase a battery-powered vehicle if it pleases you. But do not imagine for a moment that it saves money or is doing anything that matters for climate change.
We are ruled by liars, fools and demons, too often all three in one.
Mrs. Smith
More reasons why Hydrocarbons are King. “At some point America’s power grid will fail. What happens then? Dennis Quaid on a risk the government seems to be ignoring”. Worth your time.
Time stamp:
Grid Down, Power Up (00:40 - 24:99)
Ep. 64 At some point America’s power grid will fail. What happens then? Dennis Quaid on a risk the government seems to be ignoring. pic.twitter.com/EzX2e4NfU2
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 13, 2024
The BOEM has released a monthly report dated January 10th which shows the Tau lease G36121 active. This confirms the annual rental payment of $105,000 was paid by November 1st and the lease status is still considered ‘primary’ and has not been relinquished.
So my question for those predicting that the company will fold is, if this were actually the case, why would the company and it’s partner pay the $105,000 rental fee and continue to hold the Tau lease?
The answer is they would not. So since they did pay, it appears there is no evidence to support that the company (or partner) is considering ceasing efforts to drill.
Not wishing to be confrontational, I will just say those predictions appear to mostly be attempts to drive the share price lower for some undeclared reason.
This is my take on it.
Link to BOEM report ‘Lease Data’ (Gulfslope Lease G36121 on page 2694):
https://www.data.bsee.gov/Leasing/Files/1221.pdf
Mrs. Smith
This is a Tucker Carlson video interview with Dr. Willie Soon for a different perspective on how the ‘sun’ and not ‘fossil’ fuels is responsible for any changes in the environment or global warming.
Also they circle back to NASA’s Cassini spacecraft discovery of Saturn’s orange moon Titan “having hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth”. These were ‘not’ created from fossils, but rather formed in the atmosphere and deposited on Titan.
There is also discussion of the general scientific opinion of ‘climate change’ that I found interesting. Truth should never be silenced.
I recently saw a 45 year old news clip of an environmental group shouting that ‘Big Oil’ should be shut down.
Speaking of creating energy poverty, imagine if these extremists had their way at the time, the majority of people today would have suffered all these years (that is us). And the impoverished would have suffered the most. It is obvious there is a lack of concern and compassion for those less fortunate.
Extreme environmentalists and simple-minded politicians and elites today howl ‘there are way too many internal combustion engines, appliances, people, animals, plants, etc.
Even considering 80% of the World’s energy is generated by hydrocarbons, extremists would still today have the populations of the world suffering. They will even block out the sun if they are allowed to have their way. Makes one wonder what is the real reason to force the world populations into poverty, hardship, and starvation.
There has got to be a ‘grand goal’ in mind to pursue such a devastating outcome on a global scale. Anyone care to hazard a guess?
For now, renewable projects and the green ideology is staying afloat by way of government subsides and credits because the general population does not support paying the higher costs of these renewables. Those costs are funded by our tax dollars and will leave future generations paying a debt of +$34 trillion and counting. No tax breaks for them.
One must love the ‘D’ level of fiscal responsibility. Or not, could be an ‘F’.
Link to Tucker Carlson X interview, episode 62:
Ep. 62 If fossil fuels come from fossils, why have scientists found them on one of Saturn’s moons? A lot of what you’ve heard about energy is false. Dr. Willie Soon explains.
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 9, 2024
TIMESTAMPS
(01:49) Fossil Fuels in Space
(14:27) Global Warming Throughout History
(25:31) Outside… pic.twitter.com/GMaDkDl8z9
I was pleasantly surprised by the revenue generated in the recent BOEM oil and gas lease auction, especially considering the efforts to limit exploration and production.
The auction yielded approximately $400 million in revenues. In contrast, the most recent ‘GOM Wind’ auction produced around $6 million in revenues.
What an indicator of the contrast between the two different energy approaches! Energy investors obviously understand where the ROI comes from and the risks of abandoning oil and gas investments.
For purposes of comparison, the following are the last 3 BOEM lease sales and the lease sale prior to Covid.
BOEM lease sale (253) on 8-21-2019, pre-Covid, had 27 participating companies for a total of approximately $160 million in high bids on 151 blocks.
BOEM lease sale (257) on 11-17-2021 had 33 participating companies for a total of around $200 million in high bids on 303 blocks.
BOEM lease sale (259) on 3-29-2023 had 32 participating companies for a total of approximately $260 million in high bids on 313 blocks.
BOEM lease sale (261) on 12-20-2023 had 26 participating companies for a total of around $400 million in high bids on 311 blocks.
Observe that the revenue generated is steadily increasing.
I think it is fair to say that the majority of Gulfslope’s domestic and foreign investors hoped to share in a rare opportunity to create enormous wealth that an emerging oil and gas company can produce.
But when U.S. Oil and Gas E&P businesses are not allowed to have a free market to control the way they make their own profits in the Industry, then the whole system is at risk.
U.S. government overreach by using unfair rules and regulations against one particular industry, in this case the oil and gas industry, which happens to be ONE of the LARGEST PROFIT PRODUCING industries, can and will stifle and potentially destroy Capitalism.
Over the past three years, the DOI and DOE has been laying the foundation for a reduction in oil and gas BOEM lease auctions and the permitting process as a whole.
Even with the positive amendments to NEPA’s permitting process in the ‘2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act’, they have been relentlessly enforcing additonal EPA and NEPA restrictions to achieve a negative impact on as much exploration and production as possible. But it appears that despite all these efforts companies did not hesitate to bid 50% more dollars in this week’s lease auction. The obvious conclusion is energy from oil and gas will exist far into the future as has been predicted in all the recent forecasts.
Fortunately for the consumer, they have not yet been completely successful in their mission for power and control over energy production. Thus far it has mostly been a losers game of cat and mouse retaliation. When you get in the way of the Federal Offshore ‘Atlantic Wind’ lease auctions to protect the Right whales, then they retaliate by new restrictions on Federal Offshore ‘GOM Oil and Gas’ lease auctions in the name of the Rice’s whales.
Due to circumstances being fluid, investors should plan to rely on information released by Gulfslope Energy in the upcoming 10-K and other reliable sources.
Tiger01, I was elated by your post. However, I believe they officially referred to it as ‘Recoverable Resources’. You do not have reserves until after a discovery.
Mrs. Smith
I think the name of the game here is to do your own research and due diligence. Then form your own conclusion based on these efforts, and make investment decisions appropriate to the circumstances.
There will be those so committed to their objective that they do not seek to identify and understand the trends, preferring instead to only pummel the share price.
This intent is easily spotted. These participants are unlikely to have the ability to predict the future course of the stock based on what is happening in the marketplace.
Rather than relying primarily on perceptions, doing research and due diligence, which results in being informed and aware, is what leads to being Bullish or Bearish. Only time will tell the tale.
For those seeking confirmation that Gulfslope is still intending to drill in the GOM, according to the BOEM Chief Notes - Weekly Activity Reports, and Adjudication Files there is no record of the Tau lease being relinquished. In addition, BSEE’s December 1, 2023 Active Lease by Designated Operator Report still identifies the Tau as an active lease. So evidently Gulfslope Energy and Delek Group recently paid their Tau lease annual rental payment of $105,000 ($21 x 5000 ac). I cannot stress enough the importance of this as an indicator of future intent.
Link to 12/1/2023 Active Lease by Designated Operator Report (page 43): https://www.data.bsee.gov/Leasing/Files/1360.pdf
The next indicator to expect is Gulfslope’s ‘audited’ financials (10-K) due out this month.
All things considered, one should contemplate the possibility of an upward movement in the subsequent share price in 2024. Plan accordingly.
As for future paths from this point forward, I will remain a moderator for this message board. As my schedule permits, I will also continue to answer questions.
Visions of relaxing in a hammock under the warm sun are certainly appealing. However, the next tasks ahead for me are completing my Christmas shopping and Holiday visits to family and close friends.
Mrs. Smith
There are ‘false alarm’ posts that cry “wolf” being presented. So I ask what conclusion should one have when confronted by these continuing efforts?
To be clear, due to and despite these posts, I will continue to follow and put my faith in analyses from professional organizations such as the EIA, API, DFR, GCEO (LSU), BSEE, OPEC, et al with reputations for credibility.
These organizations offer consistently accurate evaluations and provide recommendations useful for establishing expectations. Even though it requires a bit more effort, investment funds deserve nothing less.
Finding a need, I have attempted to bring these analyses to the readers of the board in my posts. Perhaps I am wasting my time with this effort. It appears that reevaluation is called for to determine the best path for me moving ahead.
I will leave today’s readers with a final suggestion about relying on the opinions of unknown posters with unknown credentials and unknown agendas.
Do the research yourself and find supporting documentation to settle a conflict of opinion. Posted opinions at face value are suspect in these environments and circumstances. It is my sincere belief that one must never rely on unsubstantiated posts for financial or investment decisions.
.…“Do not be fooled. Your $$$ will be taken from your pocket just as quickly as any other pocket”….
Grumpy Mrs. Smith
It is just that the tenor of some posts is an indicator of intent to accumulate additional shares or participate in short activity. Such as what happened yesterday.
You are right. Did not see signs of cleverness…. None for all to see.
Have a safe trip to Houston.
Mrs. Smith
If I remember correctly, 100% of Gulfslope’s management and employees are full time. Delek Group must not have any issues since they keep paying their share of costs. Which I believe they would not do if there were any doubts about Gulfslope Energy.
And I never said that Gulfslope employees were, in fact, working from home.
From my point of view, there is only one reason for all of this. To purposely drive down the share price.
Relax and enjoy your family and friends this week.
Mrs. Smith
Spec, thank you for the Thanksgiving wishes. A nice touch. We also wish a Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family, and all the dedicated readers of this board. Certainly, the ‘specs’ will keep biting this time of year, especially on the Gulf side (warmer water).
As far as dropping by the office for an activity check, perhaps we are focused on the wrong thing.
In my opinion, the fact that both Delek Group and Gulfslope Energy continue to pay escalating annual rental payments on the Tau lease is a more serious indicator of their intentions.
If in fact they have relocated their offices again, I see that as a prudent and positive development.
After all, considering the prioritizing of funds, I would much rather see them spend the ($100K) on issuing audited financials than continuing to pay office rentals.
If it were up to me to decide, I would have everyone working from home.
Mrs. Smith
While reading the 2024 Gulf Coast Energy Outlook (GCEO) forecast released yesterday, I found these positive comments:
Link to Excellent Slideshow: https://www.lsu.edu/ces/publications/2023/2024gceoslidesreduced.pdf
Link to Report: https://www.lsu.edu/ces/publications/2023/gceo_2024.pdf
* GCEO believes that the global market will continue to increasingly rely on the U.S. as a reliable source of energy and hydrocarbon-based products. This international demand will continue to facilitate investment within our region and sustain another decade of increased production of oil and natural gas. In the long-term GCEO still sees the Gulf Coast as well positioned as a net exporter of energy. In fact, political instability in other parts of the world can solidify the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a reliable source of hydrocarbon-based products such as liquid fuels, chemical products, fertilizers, and polymers. GCEO continues to see longer-term opportunities for investment and employment growth in the energy manufacturing sectors.
* Gulf Coast oil and gas production rebounded even more quickly than the nation as a whole post pandemic and today Gulf Coast oil production is approximately 8.5 percent above the pre-pandemic peak. Gulf Coast natural gas production is 16 percent higher.
* The GCEO anticipates that oil and gas production will continue to increase, although fewer rig counts will be needed to produce more hydrocarbons. Thus, the industry is expected to continue producing more with fewer inputs, a sign of continued efficiency improvements.
* For perspective, in 2022 (the most recent full year of data available), natural gas accounted for 40 percent of electricity generated nationwide, wind for 10 percent, and solar for less than 4 percent. Renewables share of electricity generation are likely to increase, but natural gas is likely to be the largest fuel source for some time.
* This year’s GCEO modeling will assume that inflation continues to gradually slow to the Federal Reserve’s target of two to three percent over the next few years. Wage growth will gradually begin to outpace inflation, and demand for energy globally will continue to rise. GCEO, much like years past, anticipates that long-run energy demand growth will lead to increased U.S. energy exports, especially to the growing developing world.
* At the time of this writing, oil prices are in backwardation, with prices anticipated at about $78 per barrel by the end of 2024. In the long run, futures markets anticipate natural gas prices to oscillate between about $3.50 to $5 per MMBtu. European and Asian markets have not experienced the same rapid convergence to pre-Russian invasion of Ukraine norms, and this has created a comparative advantage for the Gulf Coast in attracting capital for projects in the processing and exporting of hydrocarbon-based products from the Gulf Coast region.
* Gulf Coast crude oil production forecast is anticipated to increase over the forecast horizon. For perspective, in 2022 regional crude oil production averaged 8.5 MMbbl/d. In calendar year 2023, which at the time of this writing is partially completed, ProdCast estimates Gulf Coast oil production to average 9.3 MMbbl/d, or an increase of approximately 9 percent. By 2032, Gulf Coast oil production is forecasted to reach 11.6 MMbbl/d.
* This year’s outlook identifies $222 billion in announced energy manufacturing investments out to 2030, a number that is 26 percent higher than the 2023 GCEO. The 2023 GCEO identified as much as 69 percent of all energy manufacturing investment to be located in Louisiana, driven in large part by LNG export investment.
* Louisiana is forecasted to gain approximately 1,000 upstream jobs in 2024, or about 4 percent due to the current lagged effect of relatively high prices, and then levelize in 2025 and 2026. Texas is forecasted to gain approximately 8,000 upstream jobs in 2024, or about 4 percent, then gain 2,500 jobs in 2025 (a 1.2 percent increase) and then flatten out 2026
* The Gulf Coast region’s refining sector continues its post-pandemic economic rebound, driven in by export opportunities arising, in part, from the geopolitical uncertainties in Eastern Europe, and increasingly, the Middle East. This year refinery utilizations are reaching levels not seen since 2019, approaching the mid to upper 90 percent range. Refined product trade: past trends seen in last year’s GCEO are likely to continue as the U.S.’ position as a global energy exporter strengthens. Disruptions and uncertainties in global energy markets, including refined product markets, will likely see a buttressing of current strong relative U.S. export positions in global markets, if not some smaller opportunities for growth.
* Geographic differences in crude oil and natural gas prices often drive pipeline development. If prices at “Point A” are higher than “Point B” at a given time, firms have the incentive to develop transportation resources to capture this price differential (or “basis”). Although oil production is anticipated to increase, due to the investment in pipeline infrastructure over the past decade, the need for increased barge and rail shipments is unlikely at this time. Last year’s GCEO questioned whether pipeline additions could become necessary once U.S. oil production reached pre-pandemic levels. Given oil production has just recently eclipsed pre-pandemic levels and is currently experiencing historical highs, ….time will tell whether pipeline constraints will become prevalent in the future. But as of today, markets appear to be in balance.
* Electricity is an important input for energy manufacturing that can comprise as much as 75 percent of ‘total variable operating costs’. Thus, regional electricity price competitiveness is important in regional economic development. The Gulf Coast continues to be a region with competitive industrial retail electricity rates. National average industrial electricity rates, at around $0.08 per kilowatt-hour (“kWh”), are considerably higher than the Gulf Coast composite regional average of less than $0.07 per kWh, which gives the region about a 13 percent electricity cost advantage.
My Holiday starts now. Wishing a Happy Thanksgiving to all.
Mrs. Smith
Speaking of investors wanting to get in on the E&P Sweepstakes, note that due to the hostilities in the Middle East, there has been record withdrawal volumes from equity funds focused on Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and Israel.
Capital flight out of the Middle East is estimated to be significant at this time. How great will it be if some of that was to find it’s way to the U.S. GOM? And should that happen, Gulfslope Energy is there to welcome those investment $$$ with open arms and a ready opportunity. And do not forget, Gulfslope’s current partner in the Tau is based in Israel.
If the tensions in the Middle East expand, which is not too remote a possibility, this money will not sit idle indefinitely while those hostilities are resolved. There is also the very real possibility that investment dollars will seek opportunities in more stable locations. So keep those eyes open.
The overwhelming majority of GSPE shares do not trade. Does this tell us anything about these investors? Consider accumulating shares as an investment in the long game rather than only as a trading play. Ultimately, this is where the largest returns will be made, and todays low GSPE share price presents a very real chance to take advantage of a very real opportunity. Recognize that a large stash of GSPE shares could end up being a big time deal down the road. So keep an open mind too.
Hopefully, something to think about….
Mrs. Smith
It is apparent that the majority of GSPE shareholders maintain faith in Gulfslope Energy and continue to hold on to their shares despite repeated attempts to get them to sell those shares at a discount.
There are those that absolutely and positively wish to buy your shares for .0008 (or less), but they will never sell you their shares for that price. Go figure…. Streets are named after these people. They are aptly called “One Way”.
I am not surprised that astute shareholders clearly see that it is but a matter of time before investment interest returns to the E&P sector. And therefore higher GSPE share prices are likely not only on the table, but in the future. This explains the interest by many in accumulating additional shares at this time.
Changes evident in the marketplace that provide a positive outlook for the future of GSPE are easily spotted. Patience might be all that is required for the faith in GSPE shares to be fully validated. Just a reminder that, as is widely known, patience is still a virtue.
But there are storm clouds of RISK building for any that are ‘short’ in GSPE shares. The pendulum can begin swinging back at any time, and it may be a big move, depending on the circumstances that develop. So ‘Caution Advised’.
But, it is your money to do with as you wish. Just do not get caught unprepared. Good luck to you. No FLUFF.
Mrs Smith
Here is a clear sign that the Tau remains a bonafide drilling opportunity.
In the past, I have noticed a Gulfslope management trend that relinquishes active leases which no longer meets the criteria for their E&P strategy.
The current annual rental payment for the Tau lease due on November 1st has escalated in price to be almost 3 times the initial rental amount in 2017 ($105K @ 100% Working Interest).
Which brings the question why continue making these increasing rental payments if there is no intent to drill a second Tau well?
One reason could be that with the administration’s willful obstruction against GOM lease auctions the value of the Tau BOEM lease has increased. So, the main thing moving forward is acquiring a drilling plan and some cash. That puts Gulfslope ahead of other Principals that still need to undergo a lease auction. All of which should be favorably received by those investors wishing to enter the E&P Sweepstakes.
Mrs. Smith
Good morning everyone. I hope you are having a fabulously, wonderful day.
Because it has recently been brought to my attention by someone I know that reads my posts from time to time, they could be considered to be too ‘grumpy’. If that was your perception too, then I apologize.
So, if readers prefer only light-hearted posts going forward, I can do that. No interesting or informative discussions. No analysis. No Data, No opinions. Nothing thought provoking. I get it.
Hopefully most readers will find these better reading, more enjoyable, and not just bland and boring. Let me know. Please.
Profoundly Positive Pablum Posts Provided Perpetually and Permanently upon request.
Or none at all.
I had intended to attach a Michael Bolton track to help set the mood, but in the end I decided not to detract.
Mrs. Smith
Thank you for pointing this out. I have heard it before, but I never get tired of hearing it again.
Since this weekend includes Veterans Day, I wish to express my respect and appreciation for those who have served. A sincere ‘thank you’ and gracious gratitude for your service.
Mrs. Smith