Permian in for Prosperous and Bright Future

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

9 minutes ago, Coffeeguyzz said:

Pearl Clutchers

As one of those Pearl Clutchers, thank you for an excellent discourse about the celestial side of the dark cloud hovering over oil and gas. I saw my first deep well brought in about fall 1950 but I have found that the more busts you go through, the more you clutch the pearls. 

Giving in to the evil naysayers whispering into my good ear, I finally bought some green energy stock in batteries, little 'lectric cars, windmills and things I don't really care for. Today I'm having trouble figuring out which is the baby and which is the bath water. 

I'm getting too old to wait for the population to double and bail out oil and gas. But I do like your encouraging words about the Bakken. I hold positions across five counties up there and have been dismayed to hear other Pearl Clutchers say that it is stranded in the ground. For the most part I own well #1 in 1280 acre drilling plats and they're good old wells. Man, I haven't even heard about the Bakken in 2020 until your nice posting. 

[taamvan + 19]

7 hours ago, Tomasz said:

Of course Permian future is rather bright because its for sure the best shale oil deposit

But generally I suggest to read this summary if we want to talk about general perspective of US shale oil and associated shale gas anno domini 2020

 

I do not want to announce any collapse in oil production, but undoubtedly oil production and related gas will be significantly lower than at the end of last year.

https://www.worldoil.com/news/2020/9/21/us-drilling-total-for-2020-will-be-lowest-in-more-than-80-years?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=

 

Unfortunately, because of DUCs, technology, and desparation, they just produce more and more as soon as the price recovers, smothering any price increase.    Low prices make the petrostates less willing to fight with each other and many historical catalysts for upward prices are less prominent in 2020 than ever.    Despite the massive and rapid depletion, production in the US has already partially been turned back on, then we have Libya, and seemingly Russia's willingness to produce as much as it can.

Low prices beget low prices when they are so in debt (see yesterday's article re nation-states) because they have no choice but to overproduce to finance their debts.    There seems little reason to believe that production will dramatically fall just because of depletion in fact it is appearing to increase despite no real increase in net price.    That means that only demand can push a recovery--however the world is so terrified of COVID and GCC that it has catalyzed major changes in sentiment, technology and policy that all point to a permanent downslope in demand.

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Mr. Maddoux

The capital destruction has  been breathtaking. Enforced obsolescence is taking place at blinding speed across vast swaths of industries. The disruptive innovations are cropping up on a near weekly basis. And still it seems like all this craziness may be amping up in intensity.

The little that I have been learning about anticipated hydrogen adoption (blue, green, and/or grey), it seems likely to be introduced sooner rather than later.

The SMR (Small Modular Reactor) nuke boys are raising a fuss about how we are long over due in giving this approach a closer look.

Advancements in material, process, and manufacturing realms are simply impossible to maintain an awareness of, let alone claim to understand. (Both 3D printing and Reticular chemistry - aka the World of MOFs - seem to offer revolutionary potential on a weekly basis, as just 2 examples).

 

A wise man recently said that this coronavirus drama has telescoped a decade's worth of future developments into a few months' time. Simply looking at a Google maps traffic flow of any US city during the AM or PM rush hours will show nothing but green ... a simply preposterous state of affairs just last winter.

 

Adaptability, Mr. Maddoux, combined with a keen intensity for forward looking potentialities, may offer a prudent path forward ... plus a pair of dice, mebbee.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Coffeeguyzz

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

Coffee:

Could you tell me where the Bear Creek Field is? I'll be darned if I know it. I have acreage in McKenzie, Williams, Dunn, primarily. Probably the fact that I don't know where it is means I don't own anything in the Bear Creek. Boy, those are crackerjack wells!

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

^

Never mind, I found them. Dunn County. 

I am nearby. 

Someone tried to buy my acreage when I was sick with the Covid-19 and I then forgot all about it. 

Thanks again for sharing that data. At $35 oil, those wells paid out $14M and 16M, respectively. 

Is that right?

Seems ironic that now that we can't give this stuff away we're able to get to it. 

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Mr. Maddoux 

Yes, the figures of about $14/$16 million gross revenue are correct.

Naturally, a lot of expenses will whittle those figures down.

The 2 bigger factors for so many of these wells are the increased recovery factor along with much lower Drilling and Completion costs.

Continental said a year ago that they were recovering about 20% of the OOIP (up from 3/5 per cent in the early years). The numbers coming from Marathon and these XTO wells would certainly support those estimates.

Several Bakken operators now claim a $6 million cost to D&C new wells with Marathon bringing on 3 wells, same pad, for average cost of $4.9 million each.

Pretty low cost.

Appalachian Basin  operators are regularly under $700/lateral foot with a few wells approaching the $600/foot threshold. ($6 to $7 million for a 10,000 foot lateral).

 

These higher recoveries combined with lower costs are vastly expanding the productive footprint in these shale plays.

I believe the long held view of hydrocarbon scarcity needs to be revisited as the amount of oil available at, say $65, or natgas at $3.50 is simply an astonishingly large amount.

[Billyjack + 58]

Just a few facts about the Permian:

1) Not one rock that has been drilled in the Permian is a shale. All of the horizontal wells are in normal reservoir rocks that have been drilled for decades vertically, but had very limited drainage areas. In fact, no oil has been produced out of a shale source bed. The ability to move a molecule of oil out of a shale matrix with 10 ^-8 darcy permeability would require geologic time scales. It's called Darcy's equation. The oil produced from the Bakken & Eagleford is coming from the reservoir rocks above and below the shale that has been contacted by poor hydraulic fracture design fracturing out of the shale.

2) I have run numbers on 1.5 mile horizontals and compared to verticals drilled in the same area. The recovery from a horizontal is about 7 times the recovery of a single vertical. The cost of the horizontal is about 7 times that of the vertical. So in the area I evaluated the money could have been spent on verticals. Of course, the vertical wells probably only drained about 10 acres so the horizontal should probably recover around 15 to 20 times the vertical except for the fact that after flush production there is no way to pump the horizontal economically. 

3) The dramatic increase in domestic production was because of massive capital expenditure not due to new technology. For the first time in the oil field history the guarantee of no 100% write off (dry hole) could be assured in the horizontal drilling of low permeability rocks. This occurred about the same time that fed funds rate went to zero. The oil field was flooded with money from capital sources that had historically been off limits due to the potential of dry holes. The money was so massive that it had to be spent faster as the oil field changed from producing oil to spending money. One can spend a lot more money faster drilling horizontally than vertically particularly when you are pissing off $30,000 per acre for lease bonuses. 

4) Domestic production will drop dramatically without continuous drilling due to the 80% to 90% first year decline rate and now that the reality of the real rate of returns is being evaluated it is doubtful that the Permian will be flooded with capital again even at $100/bbl oil prices.     

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

5 hours ago, Billyjack said:

Not one rock that has been drilled in the Permian is a shale.

That statement, sir, is going to surprise many oilmen more than did the coronavirus!

Edited September 23, 2020 by Gerry Maddoux

[Eric Gagen + 713]

On 9/17/2020 at 6:31 AM, Wombat said:

SNIP

As I say, there seems to be a competition between nuclear and gas when it comes to backing up wind or solar? Ditto with batteries versus pumped hydro in some countries. Personally, I think the more renewables PLUS nuclear and CCGT plus batteries and hydro, the better. Geothermal is starting to get a mention too. Tidal and wave power are useful in some areas too. Add them all up, and you can see why coal is about to fall fast? Next on the list is oil thanks to the increasing number of EV's. No wonder the oil industry is pinning it's hopes on LNG?

Natural gas and nuclear aren't really in competition to back up wind and solar.  Nuclear power plants are at their heart a steam powered plant, and they work best when the function at exactly the same power output day in and day out.  They can adjust that output, but unless it has to be done slowly over the course of several hours because the large volume of steam and boiling water in the system produces a lot of thermal inertia - even if you wanted to you can't quickly turn the power being produced up and down.  Added to this,  there are often minimum output levels required to make operating the reactor safe  This makes them best suited for base load electric power generation.  Natural gas plants on the other hand can move output up or down quickly - about as fast as the engines on a passenger jet airplane are powered up or down by the pilot, since at it's heart a natural gas power plant is a jet engine.  Even the slowest ones can go from zero to full power in under 15 minutes.  This makes natural gas powered plants the ideal complement to intermittent wind and solar - they can quickly power up or down to match fluctuations in wind or solar output, or demand.  

Pumped hydro is always better than batteries, but it's not available on demand everywhere, and hydropower isn't available in any significant capacity in many highly populated areas.  This makes batteries necessary.  

Coal is definately on it's way out.  Oil has maybe 25-35 years as a key component of the energy system.  Natural gas will be around for a long time yet.  Can't pin an 'end date on it IMHO.  

Edited September 24, 2020 by Eric Gagen

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

^

What about lithium-ion ESS serving as backup redundancy for lithium-ion ESS? That's the California plan. 

I scoffed at that because grid inertia has always been a necessary component of power plants--to prevent interruptions in power. But I understand that synthetic grid inertia can be implanted by virtual means. 

And of course, the ultimate "peaker plant" will be millions of EV's reversing charge on the car and truck batteries to satisfy that two-three day demand surge. 

I am an oil and gas guy with a minor position in transmitting energy from a wind farm. But I am told that the above is the future. 

Thoughts? You seem like a thoughtful, well-informed individual.

[Eric Gagen + 713]

On 9/24/2020 at 12:51 PM, Gerry Maddoux said:

^

What about lithium-ion ESS serving as backup redundancy for lithium-ion ESS? That's the California plan. 

I scoffed at that because grid inertia has always been a necessary component of power plants--to prevent interruptions in power. But I understand that synthetic grid inertia can be implanted by virtual means. 

And of course, the ultimate "peaker plant" will be millions of EV's reversing charge on the car and truck batteries to satisfy that two-three day demand surge. 

I am an oil and gas guy with a minor position in transmitting energy from a wind farm. But I am told that the above is the future. 

Thoughts? You seem like a thoughtful, well-informed individual.

IMHO, reverse charging via large numbers of EV's' will be a valuable local aid, but it won't be a grid wide solution because quite frankly the grid isn't up to allowing a task like that and probably won't be for a considerable time.  In places where grid reversibility is required by law, it's being done on a tiny scale, typically with solar roof installations where the volume of power moving back and forth is too small to matter to the overall stability of the electric grid as a whole.  On a larger scale, the grid simply isn't set up to allow multiple point sources of power to feed into it. Changes have to occur in the physical organization of the grid (a LOT more high capacity wires going to and from a lot more places with much more interconnections), in the control systems that monitor the flow and movement of power, in the contracts between the grid operators and the power producers, and in the types and levels of operating authority given to the grid controllers and the power plant operators.  

I have a buddy of mine who is a physicist working for Shell right now,  and his current project is basically trying to construct a 'microgrid' for a midsized ofice park powered in 3 ways from the 'big grid',  from a small wind field of wind turbines next to the office park, and to and from a battery array on site at the office park. Notice that there is no 'too the big grid' in this system, because it simply can't accept it.  His job is to try and come up with mostly automated control and switching equipment that will optimize when to draw power from the grid, when to use the wind power, and when to charge or use the battery system based on the weather, price of electricity, demand, etc.  in a semi controlled system that is simpler to understand than the grid as a whole.  Then those lessons can hopefully be scaled up to a full sized grid solution.  

Edited October 1, 2020 by Eric Gagen
misplaced a sentence

[John Foote + 1,135]

On 9/16/2020 at 4:02 PM, ceo_energemsier said:

UAE has been buying condensate from the US since they stopped buying Qatari condensates.

Pretty sure they still get their natural gas from Qatar, just through a pipeline, and contracted to do so through 2032. No point to LNG. It fuels their aluminium plant and of course electricity. Iran is also one of the UAE's major trading partners.

 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 9/24/2020 at 11:33 AM, Eric Gagen said:

Natural gas and nuclear aren't really in competition to back up wind and solar.  Nuclear power plants are at their heart a steam powered plant, and they work best when the function at exactly the same power output day in and day out.  They can adjust that output, but unless it has to be done slowly over the course of several hours because the large volume of steam and boiling water in the system produces a lot of thermal inertia - even if you wanted to you can't quickly turn the power being produced up and down.  Added to this,  there are often minimum output levels required to make operating the reactor safe  This makes them best suited for base load electric power generation.  Natural gas plants on the other hand can move output up or down quickly - about as fast as the engines on a passenger jet airplane are powered up or down by the pilot, since at it's heart a natural gas power plant is a jet engine.  Even the slowest ones can go from zero to full power in under 15 minutes.  This makes natural gas powered plants the ideal complement to intermittent wind and solar - they can quickly power up or down to match fluctuations in wind or solar output, or demand. 

It will be interesting to see what Gen IV nuclear reactors can accomplish, esp. when we throw batteries into the system. Without grid storage, natural gas peaking plants are the only technology that can keep up with renewables. With grid storage, almost anything can.

It's noteworthy that grid storage can already be cheaper than NG peaking plants. Utilities are finishing the first round of grid storage demonstration and testing; the next step will be large scale implementation. Once storage is in place, we have more options.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Halliburton eyes slimmer shale industry but more profitable future

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-halliburton-results/halliburton-eyes-slimmer-shale-industry-but-more-profitable-future-idUSKBN2741BF

 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

1 minute ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Halliburton eyes slimmer shale industry but more profitable future

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-halliburton-results/halliburton-eyes-slimmer-shale-industry-but-more-profitable-future-idUSKBN2741BF

 

(Bloomberg) -- Halliburton Co. expects the rout in North American shale to peter out after history’s worst crude crash decimated many of its customers.

The world’s biggest provider of fracking signaled that attrition among oilfield service companies is beginning to show results and, in North America at least, a bottom may have been reached, according to a statement on Monday. Overseas is another story, however, because orders there are still weak.

In an illustration of how deeply Halliburton has cut to cope with the crisis, executives revealed Monday that half the company’s North American workforce has been eliminated in the past year. Industrywide, almost one-third of fracking gear has been junked.

 

The shares rose 3.2% to $12.64 at 10:04 a.m. in New York, after earlier dropping as much as 3.3%.

“The pace of activity declines in the international markets is slowing, while the North America industry structure continues to improve, and activity is stabilizing,” Chief Executive Officer Jeff Miller said in the statement.

The brightening domestic outlook was partly overshadowed by ConocoPhillips’s deal to buy Concho Resources Inc. in a $9.7 billion takeover that will mean one less customer for Halliburton’s services. The combination will result in $500 million in cost cuts, much of those from reduced oil and natural gas exploration.

Oil exploration in North America, which has long been Halliburton’s primary cash cow, has atrophied amid lower crude prices and a global pandemic that sapped energy demand. Customer spending in the U.S. and Canada is contracting for the fourth time in six years and hovering at levels not seen in almost a quarter century, according to Evercore ISI.

Almost two-thirds of Halliburton’s sales came from overseas markets for a second straight quarter, a historic shift for the company.

Excluding severance costs and other charges, Halliburton’s 11-cent per-share profit surpassed the 8-cent average estimate of analysts in a Bloomberg survey. Sales of $3 billion were just shy of the $3.1 billion average forecast.

Changing Course

The 101-year-old oilfield-service provider is in the midst of what it calls a “fundamentally different course” that involves cutting more than $1 billion in costs and looking outside of North America for better growth. Miller has also dismissed thousands of workers and clipped Halliburton’s dividend.

But growth in oilfield work anywhere in the world will be hard to come for an extended period. Larger rival Schlumberger warned investors late last week not to expect growth over the final three months of the year and said it’ll be 2022 before overseas drilling picks up.

Hydraulic fracturing, which blasts water, sand and chemicals underground to release trapped hydrocarbons, could see a slight uptick thanks to the mountain of pre-drilled wells waiting to be completed, Schlumberger executives said. After plummeting to a record low in May, the number of frack crews working in U.S. fields has climbed back above 100, but is still down by more than half since the start of the year, according to Primary Vision Inc.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has approved construction and operation of the Double E natural gas pipeline,.

The 134-mile pipeline will run from the Delaware Basin of West Texas and New Mexico to near Waha in West Texas where it will connect to other pipelines.

It will run through two counties in southeast New Mexico and four counties in West Texas.

It is being designed to move up to 1.35 dekatherms per day of natural gas from the western part of the Permian Basin.

It is being developed by Summit Midstream Partners, which owns a 70% equity interest in the pipeline.

The other 30% is owned by ExxonMobil Permian Double E Pipeline LLC.

Summit Midstream Partners said its share in building the pipeline is about $350 million.

The company expects to get FERC approval to begin construction in the next 90 days after completing a right-of-way grant from the Bureau of Land Management.

The pipeline is expected to begin service in third quarter 2021.

Subsidiary Double E Pipeline LLC is directing the project.

The FERC approval was “an important milestone,” said Heth Deneke, president, CEO and chairman of Summit Midstream Partners, in a statement.

The pipeline will range from 30 to 42 inches in diameter.

Capacity could be expanded to 1.85 dekatherms per day in the future by adding compression, the company said.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Oct 16th, 2020

The Wink-to-Webster (W2W) pipeline has started transporting Permian crude and condensate from Midland, Tex. to Houston. The pipeline’s main segment, constructed by an Enterprise Products Partners (EPP) affiliate, is operated by ExxonMobil Pipeline Co.

The 650-mile, 36-in. OD W2W system is designed to transport 1.5 million b/d of crude and condensate. Underpinned by long-term commitments, the pipeline will have origin points in Wink, Tex., and Midland, multiple destinations in the Houston market, including Webster, Baytown, and the Enterprise Crude Houston Oil terminal, and connectivity to Texas City and Beaumont.

 

Wink-to-Webster Pipeline LLC is a joint venture consisting of affiliates of ExxonMobil, Plains All American Pipeline, Lotus Midstream, Delek US, MPLX LP, and Rattler Midstream LP.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Reports of Shale’s Death Were Greatly Exaggerated

 

 

 

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Remember seven months ago, when a three-way supply war between Saudi Arabia, Russia and the U.S. was about to deal a mortal blow to America’s shale oil industry? Whatever happened with that?

All the evidence of late is that there’s life in the oil patch yet. Production from Texas’s Permian Basin in September was 4.49 million barrels a day. That’s down from a peak of 4.9 million in March, to be sure, but higher than in any month prior to September 2019 — and the cut is considerably smaller than those enacted by Saudi Arabia and Russia since they struck an agreement to bring the oil market back from the dead in April.

Capital markets are taking notice. ConocoPhillips announced Monday that it would buy Concho Resources Inc. for about $9.7 billion in stock, helping consolidate the two companies’ acreage in the Permian. Just three weeks ago, Devon Energy Corp. spent $2.56 billion in shares buying WPX Energy Inc., building its position in one of the lower-cost districts of the Permian. Parsley Energy Inc., one of the remaining minnows in the basin, is in talks about a takeover by Pioneer Natural Resources Co., the Wall Street Journal reported late Monday.

As we’ve argued, life is much more manageable in the range of $40 a barrel than many would have expected a few months ago.

 

For exploration and production companies, the size of your balance sheet is probably as important as the size of your reserve base at the moment.

Thanks to the slump in interest rates this year, investment-grade energy companies can borrow as cheaply as at any point since before the last oil price crash in 2015, based on the pricing of option-adjusted spreads. Meanwhile, junk-rated energy debt has settled at far higher rates, increasing the advantage for the big end of town. In both the ConocoPhillips-Concho and Pioneer-Parsley deals, we’re seeing companies with relatively comfortable investment-grade ratings buying smaller rivals on the verge of relegation to junk.

Once borrowing costs are brought under control, it’s not nearly such a challenge to keep pumping out barrels. The so-called fracklog — drilled but uncompleted wells that could be put into action the moment prices rise far enough to cover their operating costs — remains at elevated levels, with July seeing a record number in the Permian basin. Working through that overhang will be enough to sustain output for some time, even in the absence of aggressive drilling activity. Around 80% of the fracklog is able to break even at prices below $25 a barrel, consultants Rystad Energy estimated in March.

That won’t be enough to keep the oil flowing forever, and earlier-stage activity to develop new wells is still relatively subdued. The number of land-based exploration rigs in operation across the U.S. has risen in six of the past nine weeks, but it’s still running at about a third of the levels seen before March’s price crash. Drillers need prices above $50 a barrel before exploration activity picks up substantially, based on the predominant views expressed in a survey of the industry by the Federal Reserve of Dallas last month.

Still, that should be cold comfort to oil producers elsewhere in the world. Most members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries  need prices north of $60 a barrel to balance their budgets. If $50 is sufficient to kick off a new flood of supply from U.S. shale basins, OPEC members are going to need to force through spending cuts even more radical than the ones they’re already planning. Meanwhile, the consolidation of the U.S. upstream industry from the current wave of deal-making may further reduce its cost structure into the $40s, or even below that.

The Hail Mary pass made by the world’s oil exporters in March was that a flood of output would be sufficient to squash the U.S. oil patch for good. That would give OPEC members a chance to build their market share, helping them prop up prices through the inevitable decline of oil demand as the world decarbonizes. 

It’s not working out that way. Instead, an informal price cap imposed by U.S. shale appears to have grown tighter, from around $60 a barrel between 2015 and 2019 to $50 or less now. Contrary to false statements by President Donald Trump, a Joe Biden presidency won’t ban fracking, either — indeed, as my colleagues Liam Denning and Julian Lee have argued, a more even-handed government may ultimately help the oil industry by pointing a clear path through the transition away from fossil fuels.

That may not be a bad thing for the global climate, either. From the perspective of a planet eking out the last of its carbon budget, an industry skewed toward shale wells that exhaust themselves in a few years may well be preferable to one where large companies are still signing off on major conventional fields that can keep producing for decades. 

This year’s glimpse into the abyss of an oil glut didn’t kill the shale industry. Instead, it may have only made it stronger.

 

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

David Fickling is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering commodities, as well as industrial and consumer companies. He has been a reporter for Bloomberg News, Dow Jones, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and the Guardian.

 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Consolidation in the prolific Permian Basin continues as Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) is reportedly in talks to buy Parsley Energy (PE).

 

The all-stock deal between the two Permian shale companies could be completed by the end of the month, sources told the Wall Street Journal. Parsley has a market value of about $4 billion, according to the report.

The merger would be a family affair as Pioneer CEO Scott Sheffield is the father of Parsley's co-founder and chairman, Bryan Sheffield. Parsley's current CEO, Matt Gallagher, has previously worked at Pioneer.

Analysts are bullish on the possible merger.

"Parsley has long stood as one of our top consolidation targets, and rumor of a potential deal hitting financial headlines shouldn't come as a big surprise," wrote analysts at Tudor, Pickering & Holt in a morning note. "It wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility with increased scale for the combined company to further work down well costs towards leading-edge levels."

The combined company would have roughly 928,000 net acres, according to the analysts, in the Permian Basin.

Pioneer shares fell 6% to 81.82 on the stock market today. Parsley pared early gains sharply, edging 1.2% higher to 10.22.

 

 

Busy Year For Permian Basin Mergers

Demand for oil has weakened during the coronavirus pandemic and shale companies are finding ways to survive the downturn.

ConocoPhillips (COP) announced Monday that it will buy Permian Basin shale company Concho Resources (CXO) in a $10 billion deal.

Last month, Devon Energy (DVN) announced it would buy WPX Energy (WPX) for $2.56 billion to expand its acreage in the Delaware Basin area of the Permian Basin.

Chevron (CVX) announced it would buy Noble Energy in July for $5 billion. Noble Energy established a significant presence in the Permian Basin with its 2015 acquisition of Rosetta Resources, then added to it after taking over Clayton Williams Energy in 2017.

[Boat + 1,324]

On 9/16/2020 at 10:53 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

It took me awhile to absorb your question. Perhaps a thought, a new President in this US means a peaceful transition of power. And it is power.

It should be quite apparent that transition has not been seamlessly achieved. Frankly a world wide resistance has been formed and now being acted out.

It seems enivitable a massive uprising/civil discord is about to take place..across the world I might say. It is by no means a stretch to state we are only seeing the start of things.

Jan van Eck made a statement which is rather unusual for him in this particular set of circumstances.

"Trump does not know how to lose" he was correct. A flawed man yes, as we all are...all of us. Like it or not his uncanny gift of fundamentals is Eye Opening  at the same time yes he is reckless....Make no mistakes here it has been fundamentals that kept him relevant for 60 years..Wealth is fleeting, animal instincts are not.

Thicken your skin..it's just begun.

We whipped the Germans once. I think we can do it again. Nothing will unite Americans more than another crazy German trying to take over.

Edited October 28, 2020 by Boat

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, Boat said:

We whipped the Germans once. I think we can do it again. Nothing will unite Americans more than another crazy German trying to take over.

I do appreciate creativity, so I've got to give you credit for this angle.  I thought I was the only one that saw through Angela Merkel's public disdain for Trump.  You and I know that she in fact has planted Herr Trumpf in this position so that Germany may finally beat the Allies and declare victory and closure of World War II.  Vunderbar!