Somebody once called stocks like these "One Decision Stocks". You decide to buy them and never need to make any other decision. At least for a long while.
Contentedly - gomor
I have been following Ballard for a long time because I am very interested in the technology.
Last June I thought that it had bottomed so I bought some at $4.74. It has approximately doubled since that time so I'm not going to change anything.
If all goes well I will hold it for another five or ten years.
I review the portfolio every six months and if something changes, I act accordingly
I wish that this message didn't sound vaguely snotty, but that really is the way I do things.
Respectfully - gomor
In the Bible, "Gomer" means "wisdom realized" -- I figured that's why they named the tv character Gomer: irony....
how 'bout your moniker?? -- the Jman
ps - long BLDP off and on since the last 5 to 10 run... now long again for the next run...
"I believe it would actually be a good thing to have sustained high energy prices. This will allow alternative energy to get a real foothold. Without sustained high prices the AEs just do not compete economically.
In any event, I do not see the oil age ending because there is no oil - I believe it will end because there are cheaper alternatives."
What do you know - we agree completely!
Best Regards - gomor
No, not all of the price increase is due to inflationary or political pressures. There are very real supply and demand issues.
However, historically, low oil prices (and the resulting lack of investment in oil infrastructure) has led to economic expansion and increasing demand for oil. This happens just when spare capacity is at a minimum. The result is often an oil "boom". Energy companies begin to pour billions into production. In turn the high energy prices cause a cooling economy (lack of demand) just about the same time new production comes on-line (increasing supply). The result is an oil "bust".
The real question here is: Is world demand now so inelastic that we will not have the classic "bust" cycle. It very well could be, but it is not like we will run out of oil in the next 50 or 100 or 500 years.
I believe it would actually be a good thing to have sustained high energy prices. This will allow alternative energy to get a real foothold. Without sustained high prices the AEs just do not compete economically.
In any event, I do not see the oil age ending because there is no oil - I believe it will end because there are cheaper alternatives.
If you look at the price vs time curve carefully:
you will see that in the interval between 1986 and 1999 OPEC held the price of oil at about $25 per barrel. This was their stated intention. The �error band� they shot for was between $22 and $28. It is only in the interval between 1999 and the present that the OPEC production has been unable to fill world demand and allowed the crude oil price to increase by a factor of three.
None of this, most important, time interval (the past ~ five years) is shown on the curve you referenced.
Between 1999 and 2006 the price of crude oil has increased by a factor of three. Do you really think the value of the dollar has decreased by a factor of three in this interval of time?
Respectfully - gomor
I paid $2.63 per gallon for regular gasoline today. Interrupting the charts that you linked are easy. They reflect the prices of yesterday and preceding days.
You discern a long term trend from this chart? What trend do you discern based on a constant dollar valuation?
The gas that I bought today at $2.63 per gallon was cheap compared to the price that I payed for gas years back.
In my case,you can not pay me to live in California. In your case,you are paying a premium for the privilege of living there.
I am still betting my money that the price of liquid hydrocarbons will collapse as historically they have done when these high price bubbles occurred .
Thanks Star_Hominid. Wow a thoughtful piece on NOW. I usually find myself swearing at the TV when NOW is on. But now and then they have something rational to report.
<What of the notion that oil scarcity will lead to economic disaster? Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren of the Cato Institute, an American think-tank, insist the key is to avoid the price controls and monetary-policy blunders of the sort that turned the 1970s oil shocks into economic disasters. Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard professor and the former chief economist of the IMF, thinks concerns about peak oil are greatly overblown: "The oil market is highly developed, with worldwide trading and long-dated futures going out five to seven years. As oil production slows, prices will rise up and down the futures curve, stimulating new technology and conservation. We might be running low on $20 oil, but for $60 we have adequate oil supplies for decades to come.">
<The best reason to think so comes from the radical transformation now taking place among big oil firms. The global oil industry, argues Chevron, is changing from "an exploration business to a manufacturing business". To see what that means, consider the surprising outcome of another great motorcar race. In March, at the Sebring test track in Florida, a sleek Audi prototype R-10 became the first diesel-powered car to win an endurance race, pipping a field of petrol-powered rivals to the post. What makes this tale extraordinary is that the diesel used by the Audi was not made in the normal way, exclusively from petroleum. Instead, Shell blended conventional diesel with a super-clean and super-powerful new form of diesel made from natural gas (with the clunky name of gas-to-liquids, or GTL).>