so 'splain me this....

Cypress said:
What Pimp, and other righting armchair experts, don’t understand, is that oil companies are in the business of hording leases, and exploiting them if and when the profit motive can be maximized.

This is something USC obviously understands.

The profit motive of the oil company, and the government’s ostensible policy of energy security and self-sufficiency, are not always compatible. Profit, and national interest are not necessarily always in sync. This is self evident to intelligent people. There may be some tangible relationship, or common interest. But to assume giving away leases to well-meaning oil companies who’s only interest is contributing to america’s energy security, is a weak premise
Click to expand...

It would seem pretty fundamental to me....if the price of oil drops below the level that makes it profitable to remove oil, the oil company isn't going to remove oil.....in that case, it likely isn't profitable for anyone else to remove oil, either.....considering that oil companies pay billions for oil leases, including the sum Exxon paid for the Point Thompsen lease in question, the truly weak premise is to claim we are "giving away leases" to anyone....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I've been "owned" with one anecdotal case of an oil company sitting on an oil lease, with extraneous circumstances and a Republican governor filing the law suit to put a stop to it?.....

you say you've worked for a multinational oil company.....is is common for oil companies to plunk down billions of dollars to obtain an oil lease and then do nothing with it?......
Click to expand...

Yes, it happens all the time in Alaska. my hubby works in the industry and has for 30 years.

Do you think they eat those millions? heavens, no, the good tax system in the USA, they do nicely and even manage to make very healthy profits!

Alaskans have a love/hate relationship with the oil industry.

We love their money, hate their greed.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
This is where PiMP ussually resorts to some lame circular argument. Nice rebuttal Cypress. You're obviously quite informed on this topic. It would be interesting to hear what Topper would have to say about your comments.
Click to expand...

Cypress does know hid stuff in this area!
 
Cypress said:
I'd like to know what oil company you worked for, and what exactly your professional expertise is in the oil industry.

Because you sound like you're full of shit.

I worked for a major multinational oil company, and your assertion sounds bogus. Now, I didn't work in Alaska, so maybe Froggie would know better than me. But, I know how oil leases are sold in the gulf of mexico, in south america, and in west africa. And the way you describe it, I never heard of anything like that.

In the GOM in Trinidad, and west africa, we made bids on leases that we knew we wanted it. We knew exactly which leases we wanted, and there was no guess work, or randomness about it. Its was a lease sale. Highest bidder wins. It wasn't a "lottery", where the government, or whoever, "assigns" you a random lease parcel at their whim. I'd be amazed if the Alaskan leases are anything like what you describe, but I could be wrong. I bet froggie would know.

And UScitizen just owned you, with his link with the Alaska state oil commissioner saying exxon is camping out on its lease.

Seriously, which oil company did you work for?
Click to expand...

Too much rep given in last 24 hours, boy, I have been sucking up for the poll!
Great post.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
It would seem pretty fundamental to me....if the price of oil drops below the level that makes it profitable to remove oil, the oil company isn't going to remove oil.....in that case, it likely isn't profitable for anyone else to remove oil, either.....considering that oil companies pay billions for oil leases, including the sum Exxon paid for the Point Thompsen lease in question, the truly weak premise is to claim we are "giving away leases" to anyone....
Click to expand...

there is profitiable and there is highly profitable.
It is currently more profitable for big oil to get it's oil from the middle east and such. They have a large investment in infrastructure towards that goal and business model.
Big oil will not help us get off the middle east oil teat. They make too much money off of it.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
It would seem pretty fundamental to me....if the price of oil drops below the level that makes it profitable to remove oil, the oil company isn't going to remove oil.....in that case, it likely isn't profitable for anyone else to remove oil, either.....considering that oil companies pay billions for oil leases, including the sum Exxon paid for the Point Thompsen lease in question, the truly weak premise is to claim we are "giving away leases" to anyone....
Click to expand...


You're right. I engaged in hyperbole, and it wasn't an accurate characterization. I'm well aware of the amount of money spent to buy the mineral rights on a lease. I'm also aware that these are public lands, and we have a right to expect oil companies to either develop them, or get the fuck off them and let somebody else try.

Any chance you will admit you had no clue how the lease sale system worked?

Camping out on leases isn't strictly about oil being at a certain price level. As a supposed savy "investor" in oil, I would have thought you would have known that. There are numerous reasons to sit on a lease, that aren't directly related to the price of oil. Left to their own devices, the multinationals are going to drill and produce on a schedule that suits their interests. And left to their own devices, america's "energy security" is not top on their list of priorities.

There's really not enough oil in the GOM or north slope to make a huge dent. At best, it can only be a small contribution to our energy independence. But, if you want to drill for oil in america, on strictly the basis of national interests and the welfare of the nation, I suggest you demand the formation of a not-for-profit nationalized oil company, similar to PEMEX, PDVSA or Aramco, to compete with the multinationals.
 
Oil will either pretty much take over our govt or be pretty much nationalized in the not too distant future. It is inevitable. It will be a matter of national survival.
I will not likely live to see it but most of you will and just remember what I said when it happens.
 
uscitizen said:
Oil will either pretty much take over our govt or be pretty much nationalized in the not too distant future. It is inevitable. It will be a matter of national survival.
I will not likely live to see it but most of you will and just remember what I said when it happens.
Click to expand...


The norwegians seem like they were pretty smart with how they managed their national oil resources. They have some kind of a hybrid system, of private multinationals companies and a nationalized oil company-of-sorts, which resulted in diverting a lot of the profit from oil production into the social welfare of the nation.
 
Cypress said:
The norwegians seem like they were pretty smart with how they managed their national oil resources. They have some kind of a hybrid system, of private multinationals companies and a nationalized oil company-of-sorts, which resulted in diverting a lot of the profit from oil production into the social welfare of the nation.
Click to expand...

Darned Hugoists!
 
froggie said:
Yes, it happens all the time in Alaska. my hubby works in the industry and has for 30 years.

Do you think they eat those millions? heavens, no, the good tax system in the USA, they do nicely and even manage to make very healthy profits!

Alaskans have a love/hate relationship with the oil industry.

We love their money, hate their greed.
Click to expand...


Well, there you go Pimp.

I was hoping Froggie would chime in, because I knew she was knowlegable about the oil industry in alaska. Like I said, my experience is limited to GOM, west africa, and south america. But, I really didn't think the aquisition of leases was that different in alaska.

I'll defer to froggie's knowlege.

Your posts on this thread, in contrast, seem like they came from someone who may have read something on NewsMax, or heard something on the Hannity show. :pke:


Man, message board arm chair experts are a dime a dozen. And more fun than a barrel of monkeys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top