% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • ilap2004 ilap2004 Apr 4, 2011 2:58 PM Flag

    George Soros loaded up on PBR


    You're being evasive again. There has never been any official ban in the first place. It has been a defacto ban. Everyone who has any familiarity with this knows that.

    From the AP article on Seahawk's bankruptcy:

    "The government halted drilling in deep waters and imposed tough new rules that have curtained ALL ENERGY EXPLORATION in U.S. waters."

    You didn't give the full quote. I wonder why.

    Landrieu went on to say that although the shallow-water industry was not part of the moratorium, the regulations have made it “very difficult” for anyone to conduct business in the Gulf.

    "I will save you the trouble. Seahawk was losing money in 2010 after the ban took effect and in 2009 before the ban was enacted, and the amounts were about the same."

    The first earnings report after they were spun off was June 2009 quarter. That includes the period when the defacto ban started.

    "For the six months ended June 30, 2009, the Pride GOM business earned $4.2 million from continuing operations. These results compared to earnings of $93.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008.

    Seahawk reported a pro forma loss from continuing operations of $9.4 million for the six month period ended June 30, 2009. This compared to Seahawk pro forma earnings from continuing operations for the first half of 2008 of $66.8 million."

    "I am not even sure Seahawk did oil."

    More evasion Barack-joe. You remind me of your lunatic hero. They provided drilling services in the gulf. They owned oil rigs which they leased in the gulf. They didn't do oil or gas.

    Your apparent attempt to claim a drilling ban couldn't possibly be affecting companies and employment in any material way is either spectacularly dishonest or lunatic. It's hard to tell in your case. It might be a combination of both. It makes as much sense as saying cutting off someone's oxygen wouldn't adversely affect someone. Neither are something any sensible person would try to claim. Come to think of it if Obama did that to someone then you might try to make that claim.

    What happened to your claim about the escrow fund Barack-joe? I thought that refuted the idea that the drilling ban could possibly be putting anyone out of work.

    This topic is deleted.
9.415+0.045(+0.48%)3:50 PMEDT