Recent

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

LDK Solar Co., Ltd. Message Board

china_s2 78 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 2, 2015 5:23 PM Member since: Nov 7, 2007
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • china_s2 china_s2 Jun 9, 2015 1:17 PM Flag

    For my own part, I'd vote for the fellow who a) has consistently demonstrated an ability to articulate his thoughts in complete sentences, and b) has never descended into the puerile, playground practice of personal attacks and disparagement.

  • Reply to

    You shorts are not ready for the truth !!!!

    by gwmortgage May 15, 2015 5:54 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 May 15, 2015 6:14 PM Flag

    Just looked at the PA Division of Oil & Gas data portal. For May 1 through 15 this year, they have issued 51 "unconventional" drilling permits. For the same period last year, they show 31.

  • china_s2 china_s2 May 22, 2015 3:10 PM Flag

    justice_47

    Bear in mind that the SEC doesn't promulgate securities law, it merely enforces it.

    There's nothing illegal per se about an RTO (although there probably should be). If Congress sees fit to make the practice illegal, that's another matter. Until they do, the SEC can't simply prevent a reverse takeover. The next best thing is to revoke the "zombie" issuers that often are the RTO targets, which they are doing, although I'd argue that they could pick up the pace considerably.

    The same is true of VIE's. There's nothing illegal per se about these at present. In cases such as ABAT, BABA, etc., the government of the PRC could undeniably help here by allowing majority foreign ownership of corporations within the PRC, but until they do, nothing will change. Similarly, the SEC is powerless to enforce PCAOB regulations in the PRC, absent the cooperation of the Chinese themselves. Some infinitesimally small beginnings in that direction have occurred, but ultimately this won't change either absent some type of treaty cooperation between the U.S. and PRC. This lies within the purview of the President and State Department, not the SEC.

  • china_s2 china_s2 May 22, 2015 2:13 PM Flag

    Frankly, I'm surprised that the SEC hasn't initiated proceedings against ABAT long before now, but I just chalk that up as another example of "your tax dollars at work".

    Personally, I'd prefer that there be a statutory, mandatory suspension that would automatically be applied in the event an issuer fell into delinquency for any required periodic report (taking into account any automatic extension due to a timely filed "NT" form).

    In order to lift the suspension, the issuer would need to either become current in filing, or show cause as to why the filing can't be done. Given the state of current case law, of course, there really is no acceptable cause that would excuse filing delinquency.

  • Reply to

    temp

    by etott89 Jun 24, 2015 11:39 AM
    china_s2 china_s2 Jun 24, 2015 1:13 PM Flag

    I hereby nominate this for designation as "Most Sensible Post" of 2015.

  • Reply to

    Other item: The missing dollar

    by justice_47 Apr 7, 2015 2:50 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 Apr 7, 2015 5:15 PM Flag

    Maybe Paritz is their auditor.

  • china_s2 china_s2 May 22, 2015 1:32 PM Flag

    I'm curious as to what you believe the SEC's capabilities are in this situation.

    Ultimately, the only enforcement tool they have available is the threat of revocation of an issuer's share registration. Are you suggesting that they should have long since revoked ABAT?

  • It would appear that the U.S. Supreme Court today shot down the EPA's MATS rule. Personally, I don't think this will have much impact on coal-fired power station retirements this year, or perhaps even next, but probably does change the picture starting in 2017.

  • Reply to

    Rig Counts by Basin 17 April

    by china_s2 Apr 17, 2015 2:11 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 Apr 17, 2015 2:13 PM Flag

    For purposes of comparison, counts from today and the same reporting periods in prior years:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 04-17-15 04-17-14 04-19-13 04-20-12 04-15-11
    Ardmore Woodford 1 0 5 9 5
    Arkoma Woodford 2 7 2 14 17
    Barnett 3 13 23 35 61
    Cana Woodford 0 5 18 35 42
    DJ-Niobrara 7 16 16 22 24
    Eagle Ford 16 10 26 76 86
    Fayetteville 7 10 13 24 31
    Granite Wash 1 10 31 21 68
    Haynesville 26 45 38 66 152
    Marcellus 68 80 81 120 114
    Mississippian 0 5 1 0 20
    Permian 3 5 15 39 27
    Utica 19 19 5 2 9
    Williston 0 0 0 0 1
    Others 64 91 105 168 228
    Total 217 316 379 631 885

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 04-17-15 04-17-14 04-19-13 04-20-12 04-15-11
    Ardmore Woodford 5 8 4 1 4
    Arkoma Woodford 4 0 0 1 0
    Barnett 3 10 16 15 22
    Cana Woodford 40 17 13 15 7
    DJ-Niobrara 21 38 28 21 16
    Eagle Ford 107 207 203 170 65
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 1
    Granite Wash 16 52 39 75 28
    Haynesville 1 0 1 0 2
    Marcellus 1 1 1 0 0
    Mississippian 31 69 77 63 6
    Permian 255 535 454 465 366
    Utica 7 18 28 13 0
    Williston 84 185 187 212 168
    Others 159 370 320 286 195
    Total 734 1510 1371 1337 880

  • Per today's data release from Baker-Hughes, the basin-wise rig counts:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15 03-20-15 03-13-15
    Ardmore Woodford 1 1 1 1 1 0
    Arkoma Woodford 2 4 5 6 6 5
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 4
    Cana Woodford 0 0 0 0 0 0
    DJ-Niobrara 7 8 9 9 9 9
    Eagle Ford 16 15 13 13 16 19
    Fayetteville 7 7 6 7 7 9
    Granite Wash 1 2 2 3 3 5
    Haynesville 26 26 28 31 33 33
    Marcellus 68 69 69 69 69 63
    Mississippian 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Permian 3 4 4 6 6 5
    Utica 19 21 22 22 22 24
    Williston 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Others 64 65 60 63 67 81
    Total 217 225 222 233 242 257

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15 03-20-15 03-13-15
    Ardmore Woodford 5 8 7 3 4 5
    Arkoma Woodford 4 1 1 0 0 0
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 40 38 40 40 40 40
    DJ-Niobrara 21 20 21 21 24 23
    Eagle Ford 107 110 124 124 122 127
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Granite Wash 16 20 21 21 21 21
    Haynesville 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Marcellus 1 1 1 1 0 0
    Mississippian 31 40 40 43 44 42
    Permian 255 260 280 283 285 305
    Utica 7 7 7 8 8 9
    Williston 84 89 91 97 99 104
    Others 159 162 165 168 174 186
    Total 734 760 802 813 825 866

  • Reply to

    Rig Counts by Basin 24 April

    by china_s2 Apr 24, 2015 1:55 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 Apr 24, 2015 2:01 PM Flag

    Merely as an observation, it appears that we have more or less reached a point of equilibrium in the gas rig counts. This suggests to me that the gas drillers remaining in the field have found a way to stay profitable even at this level of commodity pricing, or are simply too stubborn to quit (or, perhaps, can't afford to quit).

    Sooner or later, we're bound to reach that point with oil drillers, as well.

  • From the latest Baker Hughes release, the basin-wise rig counts as of this week:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15 03-20-15
    Ardmore Woodford 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Arkoma Woodford 1 2 4 5 6 6
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 0 0 0 0 0 0
    DJ-Niobrara 7 7 8 9 9 9
    Eagle Ford 17 16 15 13 13 16
    Fayetteville 8 7 7 6 7 7
    Granite Wash 1 1 2 2 3 3
    Haynesville 28 26 26 28 31 33
    Marcellus 69 68 69 69 69 69
    Mississippian 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Permian 4 3 4 4 6 6
    Utica 19 19 21 22 22 22
    Williston 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Others 67 64 65 60 63 67
    Total 225 217 225 222 233 242

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15 03-20-15
    Ardmore Woodford 5 5 8 7 3 4
    Arkoma Woodford 5 4 1 1 0 0
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 41 40 38 40 40 40
    DJ-Niobrara 22 21 20 21 21 24
    Eagle Ford 98 107 110 124 124 122
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Granite Wash 17 16 20 21 21 21
    Haynesville 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Marcellus 0 1 1 1 1 0
    Mississippian 29 31 40 40 43 44
    Permian 242 255 260 280 283 285
    Utica 7 7 7 7 8 8
    Williston 79 84 89 91 97 99
    Others 154 159 162 165 168 174
    Total 703 734 760 802 813 825

  • Reply to

    Rig Counts by Basin for 1 May 2015

    by china_s2 May 1, 2015 1:46 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 May 1, 2015 1:47 PM Flag

    For comparison, this week's counts versus those from the same week in prior years:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 05-01-15 05-02-14 05-03-13 05-04-12 04-29-11
    Ardmore Woodford 0 0 5 9 6
    Arkoma Woodford 0 7 2 13 17
    Barnett 3 16 17 33 62
    Cana Woodford 0 3 16 35 43
    DJ-Niobrara 7 17 17 20 24
    Eagle Ford 19 9 23 75 65
    Fayetteville 7 9 12 21 29
    Granite Wash 0 11 27 21 67
    Haynesville 26 47 36 63 152
    Marcellus 67 84 81 112 121
    Mississippian 0 4 2 1 21
    Permian 3 6 11 32 30
    Utica 19 17 6 4 9
    Williston 0 0 0 0 1
    Others 71 93 99 167 235
    Total 222 323 354 606 882

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 05-01-15 05-02-14 05-03-13 05-04-12 04-29-11
    Ardmore Woodford 6 7 6 0 4
    Arkoma Woodford 6 0 0 1 0
    Barnett 1 9 14 15 19
    Cana Woodford 38 21 19 15 6
    DJ-Niobrara 22 38 28 22 17
    Eagle Ford 91 209 209 173 92
    Fayetteville 0 0 1 0 2
    Granite Wash 17 50 40 67 25
    Haynesville 1 0 1 0 1
    Marcellus 0 1 0 0 0
    Mississippian 25 70 79 62 8
    Permian 235 537 458 483 376
    Utica 7 19 29 17 0
    Williston 80 183 186 215 170
    Others 150 383 333 285 207
    Total 679 1527 1403 1355 927

  • Per the Baker Hughes rotary rig count release this week, the respective basin-wise counts:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15
    Ardmore Woodford 0 1 1 1 1 1
    Arkoma Woodford 0 1 2 4 5 6
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 0 0 0 0 0 0
    DJ-Niobrara 7 7 7 8 9 9
    Eagle Ford 19 17 16 15 13 13
    Fayetteville 7 8 7 7 6 7
    Granite Wash 0 1 1 2 2 3
    Haynesville 26 28 26 26 28 31
    Marcellus 67 69 68 69 69 69
    Mississippian 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Permian 3 4 3 4 4 6
    Utica 19 19 19 21 22 22
    Williston 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Others 71 67 64 65 60 63
    Total 222 225 217 225 222 233

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-02-15 03-27-15
    Ardmore Woodford 6 5 5 8 7 3
    Arkoma Woodford 6 5 4 1 1 0
    Barnett 1 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 38 41 40 38 40 40
    DJ-Niobrara 22 22 21 20 21 21
    Eagle Ford 91 98 107 110 124 124
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Granite Wash 17 17 16 20 21 21
    Haynesville 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Marcellus 0 0 1 1 1 1
    Mississippian 25 29 31 40 40 43
    Permian 235 242 255 260 280 283
    Utica 7 7 7 7 7 8
    Williston 80 79 84 89 91 97
    Others 150 154 159 162 165 168
    Total 679 703 734 760 802 813

    On the gas side, we're pretty much where we started at the beginning of April. Oil rigs, on the other hand, continue to drop.

  • For those interested, here are the basin-wise rig counts for this week from baker Hughes, with prior weeks as reference:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 05-08-15 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-03-15
    Ardmore Woodford 0 0 1 1 1 1
    Arkoma Woodford 0 0 1 2 4 5
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 0 0 0 0 0 0
    DJ-Niobrara 10 7 7 7 8 9
    Eagle Ford 19 19 17 16 15 13
    Fayetteville 6 7 8 7 7 6
    Granite Wash 2 0 1 1 2 2
    Haynesville 26 26 28 26 26 28
    Marcellus 66 67 69 68 69 69
    Mississippian 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Permian 1 3 4 3 4 4
    Utica 19 19 19 19 21 22
    Williston 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Others 69 71 67 64 65 60
    Total 221 222 225 217 225 222

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 05-08-15 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15 04-10-15 04-03-15
    Ardmore Woodford 6 6 5 5 8 7
    Arkoma Woodford 6 6 5 4 1 1
    Barnett 2 1 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 35 38 41 40 38 40
    DJ-Niobrara 20 22 22 21 20 21
    Eagle Ford 86 91 98 107 110 124
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Granite Wash 14 17 17 16 20 21
    Haynesville 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Marcellus 0 0 0 1 1 1
    Mississippian 23 25 29 31 40 40
    Permian 236 235 242 255 260 280
    Utica 6 7 7 7 7 7
    Williston 80 80 79 84 89 91
    Others 153 150 154 159 162 165
    Total 668 679 703 734 760 802

  • Reply to

    My take on the NG news

    by alan74z May 7, 2015 11:26 AM
    china_s2 china_s2 May 7, 2015 3:13 PM Flag

    Alain;

    Something to consider with regard to gas well production-

    Production figures from shale wells in the Utica and Marcellus formations in Ohio and Pennsylvania suggest that there is a rather precipitous decay in pressure between "Production Year 1" and "Production Year 2". The data I have suggests a first year average of -47%, with Pennsylvania (Marcellus) being somewhat lower, and Ohio (Utica) a bit higher. This rate is, however, non-linear, with 2nd year decay rates around -18% (of the remaining daily production average), Year 3 around -16%, Year 4 around -14% to -15%, and so on.

    I don't for a minute suggest that China well decay will duplicate this, but it should be similar (i.e., sharp fist year decline, followed by smaller declines in subsequent years).

  • Reply to

    FACT

    by billythart May 10, 2015 3:42 PM
    china_s2 china_s2 May 11, 2015 12:56 PM Flag

    You may be correct with regard to financing, but that doesn't seem to have slowed the drilling significantly. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 219 new "unconventional" wells were spud during 1Q 2015. The monthly breakout is as follows:

    JAN 86
    FEB 43
    MAR 90

    Personally, I have serious doubts whether any of these was completed, but at the very least, they add to the "fracklog" that can be brought into service relatively quickly.

  • From this week's release by Baker-Hughes, basin-wise rigs counts for the last five weeks:

    Rigs Targeting Gas
    Basin 05-22-15 05-15-15 05-08-15 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15
    Ardmore Woodford 0 0 0 0 1 1
    Arkoma Woodford 0 0 0 0 1 2
    Barnett 3 3 3 3 3 3
    Cana Woodford 0 0 0 0 0 0
    DJ-Niobrara 8 11 10 7 7 7
    Eagle Ford 18 20 19 19 17 16
    Fayetteville 8 6 6 7 8 7
    Granite Wash 2 2 2 0 1 1
    Haynesville 26 26 26 26 28 26
    Marcellus 66 66 66 67 69 68
    Mississippian 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Permian 1 0 1 3 4 3
    Utica 18 19 19 19 19 19
    Williston 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Others 72 70 69 71 67 64
    Total 222 223 221 222 225 217

    Rigs Targeting Oil
    Basin 05-22-15 05-15-15 05-08-15 05-01-15 04-24-15 04-17-15
    Ardmore Woodford 6 6 6 6 5 5
    Arkoma Woodford 6 6 6 6 5 4
    Barnett 2 2 2 1 3 3
    Cana Woodford 34 35 35 38 41 40
    DJ-Niobrara 22 19 20 22 22 21
    Eagle Ford 89 87 86 91 98 107
    Fayetteville 0 0 0 0 0 0
    Granite Wash 13 14 14 17 17 16
    Haynesville 1 1 1 1 1 1
    Marcellus 0 0 0 0 0 1
    Mississippian 22 22 23 25 29 31
    Permian 232 233 236 235 242 255
    Utica 6 6 6 7 7 7
    Williston 78 79 80 80 79 84
    Others 148 150 153 150 154 159
    Total 659 660 668 679 703 734

  • Reply to

    LET'S HEAR SOME OPINIONS

    by billythart Jun 26, 2015 11:27 AM
    china_s2 china_s2 Jun 26, 2015 1:09 PM Flag

    I tested three different scenarios:

    Using the average of drawdown this year from the week ended 2 May through Wednesday's report, I get commercial stores at around 414 MMbbl as of the last week of September.

    Overlaying last years actual draws / builds, I get about 432 for the same date.

    Finally, recognizing that last years July-September average was around 160% of the May-June period, I applied the same factor to this year's May-June average to date, and came up with just 384 MMbbl.

    Frankly, I'm leaning toward that last scenario.

  • Receiver Robert Seiden has filed his brief opposing summary judgement in the SEC's revocation proceeding against Sino Clean Energy, Inc. (SCEI).

    He articulates two arguments therein; the first is the usual argument that current shareholders will be harmed.

    The second, on the other hand is a brand new approach-arguing that the ALJ constitutionally lacks the constitutional authority to grant the Division's requested relief. Seiden's argument is founded on Hill v. SEC, 15-cv-01801 (N.D. Ga. June 8, 2015).

    The electronic filing (of the brief) can be found as part of SEC administrative proceeding file number 3-16456.

    Need to read up on Hill; should prove most interesting.