Shale Oil Fiasco

[remake it + 288]

Mike when other posters get to you then 

as this character has the record for most posts with   

but luckily never missed any of your excellent contributions so you would be missed here.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

Mike Shellman:

I've read your posts. You have a lot of friends here, also have a lot of good information, and I'll be the one to go.

In truth, I don't have much to offer. I was using this for self-education, though I am heavily involved. 

I have taken your words of wisdom to heart and am trying, as we speak, to get out of the shale business. 

I never was offended by what you said, it was how you said it, brushing the more uninformed of us off. I'm probably too thin-skinned.

Anyway, I'm out of here. Good luck. Stick with it. Thanks for the value of your sermon.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

This is a forum, for discussing various viewpoints.  Having an echo chamber where everyone agrees with everyone else would be boring as heck.

How about nobody feels the need to leave the forum.  Words are words.  If mere words can make oneself feel like one's opinions are no good, it might be a good idea to take a deep breath and step back a bit and try to get a broader view.

And before anyone accuses me of hypocrisy as a moderator for my very vocal pro-Trump and pro-America views, ... despite my bluster and words, I don't recall disallowing anti-Trump or anti-America views here.  If I have done so in the past, my apologies.  Most of my comments are written on the fly, off the top of my head at the moment.

Nobody is 100% wrong or 100% right.  (Well, except maybe for a certain British Trader in the UK who can seemingly deflate any pompous pronouncements with a one liner.)

So how about everyone take a breath and chill out and agree to disagree, but still continue to be on speaking terms.

As I have mentioned before repeatedly:

A diversity of global views is what makes the world a special place.  Conformity is just a slow, painful death of not speaking your mind.  So SPEAK UP.  Please don't be a jerk about about it, though.  If you want others to consider your views, please be willing to consider the views of others.

 

 

Or not, I'm not your mother....

Happy New Year everyone.

 

[0R0 + 6,251]

Happy new year!!!

🎇

🍾

[James Gautreau + 86]

Big Oil needs another quarter like this one to clear out the pipes:

Big Oil's most profitable quarter ever: $51.5 billion

 

By

John Porretto, AP Business Writer

August 3, 2008, 4:28 PM

4 min read

 

HOUSTON -- Chevron and Total wrapped up a string of gargantuan, record-breaking earnings reports from oil companies on Friday, a stretch in which six of the major international oil companies topped $50 billion in combined profit for the first time.

While the profits of unparalleled size have brought withering criticism from Washington and disgust from consumers across the country, very few were surprised. Crude prices during the second quarter were nearly double what they were a year ago.

 

Chevron CVX said Friday its second-quarter profit rose 11% to a record $5.98 billion, despite losing money on the refining side of the business.

The San Ramon, Calif.-based company said net income for the three months ended June 30 amounted to $2.90 a share, versus income of $5.38 billion, or $2.52 a share, a year earlier.

Revenue rose significantly to $82.9 billion from $56.1 billion a year ago.

But results for the second-largest U.S. oil company missed Wall Street forecasts and shares fell slightly in afternoon trading. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial expected a profit of $3.03 per share on revenue of $92.41 billion.

Like its competitors, Chevron made the bulk of its money at its exploration and production arm, also known as the upstream, where income nearly doubled from a year ago to $7.25 billion.

Chevron said the average sales price for crude and natural gas liquids was $109 a barrel in the quarter, up from $57 a barrel in the year-earlier period.

In addition to Chevron, soaring commodity prices led to record quarters for ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, BP and Royal Dutch Shell.

ExxonMobil stood apart even from this crowd, logging the largest ever quarterly operating profit for a U.S. company. Barring companies that made huge profits on one-time gains like bankruptcy settlements and spinoffs, ExxonMobil holds the top 10 records for biggest U.S. quarterly earnings.

French energy company Total said Friday its profit climbed 38.7% in the second quarter to $7.38 billion. Quarterly sales rose 23% to $75.25 billion.

Altogether, the profits of the six companies jumped more than 40% in the second quarter to $51.5 billion, the first time big Western oil companies have ever reached that level.

Total's earnings were at the top end of analysts' expectations.

[James Gautreau + 86]

My bad on saying China is importing 8 mbpd. 

Meanwhile, China reported yet another record-breaking month of oil imports: the average daily for November was 11.18 million bpd, which, according to Bloomberg, was unprecedented. This was largely thanks to the ramp-up of two new refineries with a combined capacity of almost 900,000 bpd, but also because of signs of thawing between the U.S. and China.

The two have been cautiously getting closer to a preliminary deal despite setbacks. The latest from President Trump on the topic was that the parties are almost done with the so-called “phase-one” deal, and all that remains is for it to be translated.

That implies China is using 15 mbpd. 

[James Gautreau + 86]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

This is a forum, for discussing various viewpoints.  Having an echo chamber where everyone agrees with everyone else would be boring as heck.

How about nobody feels the need to leave the forum.  Words are words.  If mere words can make oneself feel like one's opinions are no good, it might be a good idea to take a deep breath and step back a bit and try to get a broader view.

And before anyone accuses me of hypocrisy as a moderator for my very vocal pro-Trump and pro-America views, ... despite my bluster and words, I don't recall disallowing anti-Trump or anti-America views here.  If I have done so in the past, my apologies.  Most of my comments are written on the fly, off the top of my head at the moment.

Nobody is 100% wrong or 100% right.  (Well, except maybe for a certain British Trader in the UK who can seemingly deflate any pompous pronouncements with a one liner.)

So how about everyone take a breath and chill out and agree to disagree, but still continue to be on speaking terms.

As I have mentioned before repeatedly:

A diversity of global views is what makes the world a special place.  Conformity is just a slow, painful death of not speaking your mind.  So SPEAK UP.  Please don't be a jerk about about it, though.  If you want others to consider your views, please be willing to consider the views of others.

 

 

Or not, I'm not your mother....

Happy New Year everyone.

 

Here, here! I thought I indeed found such a special place, but as quick as the water turns from cold to hot, everyone was offended and insulted and threatening boycotts. We come here for discussion, not agreement. A diversity of opinion makes for a rich blog-o-sphere. I guess it's just like love. As soon as a whiff of it becomes visible, everyone and everything tries to kill it. 

[Rob Kramer + 696]

There are multiple posts through the 37 pages of "wow this is very informative " ect. And countless unwritten posts of learning. I think its helped top to bottom oil investors to rig hands see both sides or hear both sides. That's the only way to accurately measure your own view. 

I'll say it again thanks all for sharing information.  I invest in oil and gas  stocks and this has helped me shape my own view of what's happening in the world and what to expect ahead. 

Happy New Years All!

[AcK + 50]

24 minutes ago, Rob Kramer said:

There are multiple posts through the 37 pages of "wow this is very informative " ect. And countless unwritten posts of learning. I think its helped top to bottom oil investors to rig hands see both sides or hear both sides. That's the only way to accurately measure your own view. 

I'll say it again thanks all for sharing information.  I invest in oil and gas  stocks and this has helped me shape my own view of what's happening in the world and what to expect ahead. 

Happy New Years All!

+1

Lets us dial down the anger, we are all adults here. Go watch a few episodes of Anger Management and laugh it off!

The one good thing about digital comm is, if you dont like it, you can ignore it (peacefully).

Wish everyone in the group a happy n prosperous 2020!

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Right now, it looks bleak, but the flip side is that no one cay say where pricing for oil will be in the future.  So let's not nail shut that barn door, let it play out, the financiers will take their chances and either reap rewards or take their lickings. 

DING!! This is the funniest part of all this to me. If you are pro shale, you will invest and see how it goes. If you are anti shale, you will not invest and see how it goes. That's the end of it to me essentially. I can't get over how many views and comments this thread has and I guarantee not only has no one changed their mind, but their initial view is probably even strengthened. There is logical discussion and then there are spiral chats.

1 hour ago, James Gautreau said:

as quick as the water turns from cold to hot, everyone was offended and insulted and threatening boycotts. We come here for discussion, not agreement. A diversity of opinion makes for a rich blog-o-sphere.

Yep. 

1 hour ago, Rob Kramer said:

There are multiple posts through the 37 pages of "wow this is very informative " ect.

You're referring to replies to my posts I assume Rob. You're welcome.

2 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Nobody is 100% wrong or 100% right.  (Well, except maybe for a certain British Trader in the UK who can seemingly deflate any pompous pronouncements with a one liner.)

100% wrong? Me? I'm dubious. This place needs the odd logic or common sense bomb to break through the crap now and again that's all. You should all take a leaf out of my book as you won't catch me mindlessly arguing with people.

2 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

If mere words can make oneself feel like one's opinions are no good, it might be a good idea to take a deep breath and step back a bit and try to get a broader view.

Yep, the lack of considering the other side is constant here, not just this thread. As Papillon said the other day, that isn't argument or debate, it's just a circle, and here that's ''look at these stats'', ''I don't agree with those stats'', etc ...   If you guys don't agree on the future of shale that is ok by the way, the world will still turn believe it or not, and time will tell anyway. It does not have to be proven or determined in the next week, as the non stop back and forth seems to suggest, to a point it's now getting personal. 

As I say, if you are pro or anti shale, then great. That's your right. But as Tom says no one other than me is 100% right (and he is bang on), plus, as Jan suggests, time will tell, and you will either celebrate it or lick your wounds and move on. That's the end of it to me, in terms of the essence of what you're discussing. I'm not saying it's pointless, although I have joked about it. There are clearly many people here who know their stuff, and I admittedly know precisely zero about this subject deep down, but if everyone just disagrees out of hand instantly because of the position of the other side, then that is verging on nuts and pointless, unless you just enjoy echo chambers and circles. 

2 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

So how about everyone take a breath and chill out and agree to disagree, but still continue to be on speaking terms.

Yep, or atleast appreciate why you disagree and try and bridge that difference, before getting deeper into what other shit you disagree about. I'm pretty sure Doug didn't create the thread with the intention of it becoming this.

And Gerry, you're going nowhere I'm afraid, don't be silly. 

Anyway, happy new year. 

Edited January 1, 2020 by Guest

[James Gautreau + 86]

One only has to look at the Cantarell Field in Mexico to understand the vicissitudes of the oil market. It pumped a cool 1 mbpd from 1981 to 1995, but was declining slightly. Now you can bet there was one camp that said let it decline naturally and another camp that said let's do something to stem the decline. Guess which camp won? Doing something is always preferable to doing nothing, right? So they installed the largest nitrogen plant in the world  in 2000 and started pumping gas into the reservoir. Production more than doubled in a few years but peaked in 2004, and then fell off a cliff. Now would Mexico had done better doing nothing, getting their 1 mbpd for 20 more years. I think so. 

Year	Production in kb/d[10]
2003	2122,8
2004	2136,4
2005	2035,3
2006	1800,9
2007	1490,5
2008	1039,5
2009	684,8
2010	558,0
2011	500,7
2012	454,1
2013	439,8
2014	374,9
2015	273,4
2016	215,8
2017	176,0
2018	161,2

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Nobody is 100% wrong or 100% right.  (Well, except maybe for a certain British Trader in the UK who can seemingly deflate any pompous pronouncements with a one liner.)

 

1 hour ago, DayTrader said:

100% wrong? Me? I'm dubious. This place needs the odd logic or common sense bomb to break through the crap now and again that's all. You should all take a leaf out of my book as you won't catch me mindlessly arguing with people.

 

Jeez, I was jokingly trying to imply that you are 100% right.  Guess that means now that you are only 99.99% right.

[Guest]

LOL it reads like sometimes I'm 100% wrong which clearly I never am. 

5 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

I was jokingly trying to imply that you are 100% right. 

Jokingly? It should be etched in stone.

5 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Guess that means now that you are only 99.99% right.

If it comes to the USA and various circus like crap then yes maybe. 

[Rob Kramer + 696]

DT this is oil price.com the land of NASCAR! It may be elongated circular racing but every lap has something new. I had an idea of alot of the grey zones I didnt know much about before this thread and some fine gents took time to fill in some info. Not everyone reads through all the pages or takes the same info out of each post the same way. If some are still talking let them without belittling their conversation. 

[Guest]

Have I suggested they stop at all? All I'm saying is to try and hear the other side, and not just on this thread. 

15 minutes ago, Rob Kramer said:

It may be elongated circular racing but every lap has something new.

Fair enough, I'm just not seeing much of the new I guess and haven't for a while mate. 

15 minutes ago, Rob Kramer said:

If some are still talking let them without belittling their conversation. 

I don't need to belittle it and am not trying to at all, it is already just arguing. Ask yourself why it is 'some' are still talking or is that my fault too? 

Edited January 1, 2020 by Guest

[Papillon + 485]

Outrageous behaviour DayTrader! Trying to install some civility to the conversation while adding a little humour? On New Year's Day of all things sir? People will post as they mean to go on clearly. This cannot be tolerated ...   /sarc

Edited January 2, 2020 by Papillon

[remake it + 288]

One takeaway from this thread is that at a global level if ever the oil price can be sustained over some magical TBA number in the $60+ range then a good number of presently unprofitable US LTO plays can swing into action and mitigate potential supply issues on one hand while simultaneously capping price rises on the other.

Given USA's massive LTO reserves the above scenario can play out for many years so it's difficult to currently see WTI benchmark prices rising over $80 into the mid-2020s even inflation adjusted.

By then the nascent EV evolution will have turned into a revolution and existential demand destruction of refined crude product - which grows year-on-year - will further curb oil price rises.

 

[Rob Kramer + 696]

8 hours ago, DayTrader said:

1)DING!! This is the funniest part of all this to me. If you are pro shale, you will invest and see how it goes. If you are anti shale, you will not invest and see how it goes. 

2) That's the end of it to me essentially.

3) I can't get over how many views and comments this thread has

4)and I guarantee not only has no one changed their mind, but

5)their initial view is probably even strengthened.

6)There is logical discussion and then there are spiral chats.

7)100% wrong? Me? I'm dubious. This place needs the odd logic or common sense bomb to break through the crap now and again that's all. You should all take a leaf out of my book as you won't catch me mindlessly arguing with people.

8)Yep, the lack of considering the other side is constant here, not just this thread.

9)As Papillon said the other day, that isn't argument or debate, it's just a circle, and here that's ''look at these stats'', ''I don't agree with those stats'', etc ...   If you guys don't agree on the future of shale that is ok by the way,

10)the world will still turn believe it or not, and time will tell anyway. It does not have to be proven or determined in the next week, as the non stop back and forth seems to suggest, to a point it's now getting personal. 

As I say, if you are pro or anti shale, then great. That's your right. But as Tom says no one other than me is 100% right (and he is bang on), plus, as Jan suggests, time will tell, and you will either celebrate it or lick your wounds and move on. 11)That's the end of it to me, in terms of the essence of what you're discussing. I'm not saying it's pointless, although I have joked about it. There are clearly many people here who know their stuff, and I admittedly know precisely zero about this subject deep down, but if everyone just disagrees out of hand instantly because of the position of the other side, then that is verging on nuts and pointless, unless you just enjoy echo chambers and circles. 

Yep, or atleast appreciate why you disagree and try and bridge that difference, before getting deeper into what other shit you disagree about. I'm pretty sure Doug didn't create the thread with the intention of it becoming this.

Your saying its funny that others are arguing or disagreeing, then saying it's a pointless thread as you can summarize it so quickly and that you know noone is advancing as they're all stuck in their own view. - this doesn't sound like belittling?

Also you claim circular debate ... while point 2 and 11 say the same thing twice ... along with your 2 other posts prior that both say: "I cant believe this thread is still going" and "  I know noone has changed their veiw"

Point 7 ... prove it and dont drag this out so we can get back to shale fiasco.  

Edited January 2, 2020 by Rob Kramer
See pg 10 , 16 and 20 ... probs more for your belittling repetitions of the same thing.

[Guest]

On 12/31/2019 at 12:50 AM, Gerry Maddoux said:

So after 34 pages, we're back to where Douglas Buckland began: "House of Cards."

Some people notice this kinda stuff atleast.

33 minutes ago, Rob Kramer said:

this doesn't sound like belittling?

No it sounds like an accurate summary but thankyou for splicing up my post at your leisure to try and prove a point. Also thanks for ignoring the little detail about loads on here arguing to a point Gerry says he will leave, Old Ruff talks about blocking, Mike deleting all his posts in this very thread as he is sick of it, and a certain post I saw that said ''I have never read so much bullshit in one paragraph'', etc etc etc. Sounds like a real productive, mature thread Rob so enjoy it with the 'some' that are still even talking (your words). 

I apologise for trying to inject a little common sense and humour, won't happen again. 

Happy new year by the way. You seem to have already forgotten the happy part. 

1 hour ago, Papillon said:

Trying to install some civility to the conversation while adding a little humour? On New Year's Day of all things sir?

Yeah what was I thinking Pap. Just amazing stuff. Glad you and Tom got it atleast. 

[Rob Kramer + 696]

3 hours ago, DayTrader said:

 

1)I apologise for trying to inject a little common sense and humour, won't happen again. 

2)Happy new year by the way. You seem to have already forgotten the happy part. 

3)Yeah what was I thinking Pap. Just amazing stuff. Glad you and Tom got it atleast. 

1)The ammount of sarcasm you use to talk to your fellow "mate" is very rude. And apparently disrespect doesn't cheer everyone up .

2) I'm plenty happy. You and those arguing are the ones that sound upset.

3) Mabey you 3 can start a thread to belittle us for talking shale for 37 pages. 

[shallow sand + 5]

Regarding upstream oil projects, I am under the impression that you want to shoot for a project that will payout in 36-60 months.  At least that is what the people in our little century old conventional waterflood field try to do.  Sometimes it works out and sometimes it does not, there is a lot of risk and many unforeseen things that can occur, both good and bad.

Of course, the money is made after the project pays out.  So, that is after the time that you have had your "flush" production.  At that point, of course, LOE is crucial.  LOE can vary quite a bit, and a lot of that depends on downhole failure rates.  I do not have personal experience with deep horizontal wells, but I have read a lot of LOS for shale well interests that are for sale on the internet auctions.  It seems that LOE varies greatly well to well and month to month.  I have seen wells with no downhole failures for an entire year.  I have seen wells with 3-5 downhole failures in a year. 

It appears to me after 60 months most shale wells are nearing "stripper" classification.  15 BOPD. I suppose in the Bakken the production rates after 60 months are higher, maybe so in the Permian. Again, have to remember these are wells with a total depth of 10,000' - 20,000'.  I assume one tubing job runs at least $25K?  I also assume there are downhole issues that appear over time with laterals?  Again, I do not know, I only deal with straight holes (really like the old cable tool holes, much straighter than the newer rotary holes - therefore fewer failures).  I assume in the rush to drill these wells as fast as possible these 100,000+ shale wells all have vertical sections that are straight as an arrow?  I sure hope so for the operators' sakes. (Shellman says EOG has a time near him with failures due to what I call crooked verticals).  Also, I see that many are produced with submersibles.  We have a little experience with submersibles, and it is not good.  Seems you have to pull those more than you do those pumped with a pumping unit.  And the repair cost for those submersibles is not cheap, nor are they cheap to buy begin with. 

This is the problem with shale wells.  They become stripper wells fairly quickly, despite costing $5-12 million, depending on where you are at and what problems you do or do not encounter.  In the end, all of these companies are going to be operating stripper wells just like everyone else in US lower 48.  Stripper wells work very well at $80+ WTI.  Business is not so good at sub $50 WTI, it is mediocre at the prices we have had for 2018 and 2019, with 2018 being a lot better. In 2015-2016, when the price crashed, I did a lot of shale well calculations because the shale companies were saying that they could make a good return at $50 WTI, then $40 WTI, then $30 WTI.  With these pronouncements, the traders just kept pushing oil down, until it got so low Saudi and Russia acted. I did these calculations because I was worried if the shale guys were correct, and could make big time money at $30 WTI, our little stripper wells would all need to be plugged and we were finished. 

I did enough calculations to become convinced that shale generally does not work at sub $50 WTI.  It works somewhat in the range of $50-65 WTI.  It does much better above $65 WTI. Some companies need much higher prices than $65 WTI to also service the debt.  In my calculations I also figured in natural gas, but assumed a price of $3.  Seems it has mostly been worse than $3.  That is too bad.  The Hugoton Field is one I am familiar with, and it has been practically destroyed by shale.  

In my calculations I did the checkbook approach, because after all, if you are an etal in one of these, they send you a bill for every cost they incur, during the month they incurred it.  Sunk costs are still costs in my checkbook.  I will admit that on most of the calculations I did, I did not include land.  Land can be a big expense, or no expense.  It is a tough one for sure.  Also, I did not include "off-lease" product or water gathering systems.  I know there is a lot of infrastructure being built to handle all of that water.  Not sure how to allocate it, so I didn't. 

I guess maybe someone can explain why XOM is spending so much CAPEX on shale and still is not showing much in the way of GAAP earnings for its upstream US operations, if shale works so well at $30 or $40 WTI? Doesn't XOM have more rigs running in the lower 48 right now than anyone else?  I think CVX is doing better because they own a lot of royalty.  Much better deal when NRI is 95-100% as opposed to the typical 75-80%.  I am jealous of the folks who own the royalty.  They are definitely the real winners regarding shale.  At least as long as they did not go non-consent.  I know someone from my neck of the woods who inherited a lot of ND mineral acreage, and went non-consent.  Was a bad deal in the end for sure. 

I rarely see NRI better than 80% for non-operated WI in shale wells on the internet auctions.  There are not as many operated shale well interests for sale, but again, the ones I see are usually 75-80% NRI (or should I type .75000000 to .80000000?).

My view is that shale is generally high cost oil, and my view was not developed out of emotion so much as out of trying to figure out if we should unload everything ASAP for next to nothing so we would not have to plug out our wells.  Now days I am more worried about EV's and politicians who view all oil as BIG OIL than I am about shale. I really do not want to rent or buy an $85,000 infrared camera to monitor methane emissions from wells that haven't been capable of burning a flare for 30+ years.

I think traders have figured out that sub $50 WTI absolutely will not work, and we can get by on WTI $50, although I would much rather have WTI $60. So for now, I have moved on to things such as fracking bans (we do tiny fracks on our shallow conventional wells - would those be included by  the POLS?) loss of percentage depletion (Obama said it is a BIG OIL tax break after all - LOL) and EV revolution by government mandate. 

We had a decent amount of drilling from about 2006-2014 in our field.  Since then it has fallen to about nothing.  Drilling here is all done out of cash flow, no borrowed money that I am aware of.  Maybe some non-operated interests or ORI's are used to fund drilling here some.  We were on a good little annual drilling program that was keeping up with fighting our decline.  We haven't seen an oil price since 2014 that justifies it, so we have not drilled a well since Q3 2014.  Every acre we have is HBP, so no need to rush. But our annual production is slowly on the downhill slide, as is the rest of lower 48 conventional.  

Sorry for the ramble, just the view of another stripper oil well operator (really investor - relatives make the day to day decisions) that knows about 1/10 of what Mike Shellman does.

[AcK + 50]

9 hours ago, remake it said:

>> Given USA's massive LTO reserves

 

We havent resolved this at all.

If so, then it will play out as you have highlighted. No reason for price to go beyond a certain level (which we can debate 60-70-80) since every time it hits that level, LTO supply growth will come into play (with a few months lag), and push prices down again till more non-swing supply comes into the market. LTO/Shale being short cycle asset will be ideally suited to be the swing producer.

The point is Shale has been anything but the swing producer in this decade (more like the structural growth story, barring maybe 2015-16). In fact Shale has pushed OPEC+ (ME with their US$10/bbl cost - I dont know about Russia) into being the swing producers. Ok, so initially it was to drive energy independence in the US (few people have alluded to govt-industry nexus in these forums). That was done and dusted in 2019. But at 9mbd annual supply, Shale/LTO is depleting US resources at a fast pace, yet supply is still growing.

So are reserves than high that the pace of supply can be maintained for years to come, or is 2020 the inflection point down?

[Guest]

On 12/12/2019 at 4:10 PM, DayTrader said:

Guy A says ''well the production figures are this much'', then Guy B says ''well that won't last'', A says ''no trust me, check out these stats'', B says ''those stats are shit, check out my stats'', A says ''nah, you're not taking into account X'', B says ''X is bullshit anyway coz of Y, check out these graphs'', A says ''those graphs don't take Z into account, watch this presentation'', B says ''that presentation distorts the facts'', A says ''what about these figures then?'', B says ''those figures are written by morons who don't have a clue'', A says ''what are these new technologies anyway?'', B says ''what technologies?'' ... 

Rob K ... This comment got 6 laughs, and 1 of them was you. 

On 12/12/2019 at 8:56 PM, Rob Kramer said:

This is the reason why Jabbar and Douglas are at odds . Guy A as DT said is calling efficientcy gains and a different use of current technology a new technology and Guy B is saying those were invented years ago and have been used in different manners before.

And on the same day you agreed. 

On 12/20/2019 at 12:41 AM, DayTrader said:

Bear in mind this thread has 500 posts in it and over 30,000 views ... and I'm guessing not one of you have changed your mind on what your original position was? 

This short comment got 5 trophies by the way. 

4 hours ago, Rob Kramer said:

1)The ammount of sarcasm you use to talk to your fellow "mate" is very rude. And apparently disrespect doesn't cheer everyone up .

2) I'm plenty happy. You and those arguing are the ones that sound upset.

3) Mabey you 3 can start a thread to belittle us for talking shale for 37 pages. 

1. Although sometimes you laugh at it and agree.

2. Yeah you sound it. 

3. Your sarcasm of course is not rude and perfectly fine. I love the ridiculous hypocrisies here at times. 

You know you can block me yes? Makes life easier. 

Edited January 2, 2020 by Guest

[Rob Plant + 2,617]

Happy New Year to you all!!

Can we stop with the personal jibes and get back to some proper debating?

@Mike Shellman Nice to see you know what you are talking about, the only person to mention EBITDA which is king for any business!

 

[Papillon + 485]

11 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Can we stop with the personal jibes and get back to some proper debating?

''Back to'' sir?

That exists here does it?  ... / sarc