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

Linn Energy, LLC Message Board

dadnorris1 41 posts  |  Last Activity: Sep 25, 2015 10:35 AM Member since: Oct 25, 2005
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Russia bases in SYRIA to begin Bombing

    by accessconsutants Sep 24, 2015 12:09 PM dadnorris1 Sep 25, 2015 10:35 AM Flag

    Anything is indeed possible under Obama and neo-progressive in Congress. Especially with the lawlessness.

  • Reply to


    by rrb1981 Sep 19, 2015 12:39 PM dadnorris1 Sep 19, 2015 1:22 PM Flag

    " The biggest limit it appears is simply their ability to acquire enough notes on the open market"

    rrb the racist persona produces pure wanton ignorance, again.

  • Reply to

    A Must-read for Longs

    by ronharv Sep 17, 2015 5:45 PM dadnorris1 Sep 18, 2015 1:26 PM Flag

    OPie go play with something else.

  • dadnorris1 Sep 13, 2015 3:57 PM Flag

    Wozzle Oilvebur you are bored? Read a great book.

    Also, in all these years not one OLB trooper has bothered to read an econ 101 book. So it is the same yammering year after year.

    You really do not understand just how ignorant you are? Also do not care?

  • dadnorris1 Sep 8, 2015 11:54 AM Flag

    Such is the natural of irrational reality. Oliverbur will just pretend.

  • Reply to

    Too many fumes?

    by sanjose18732 Sep 2, 2015 3:34 PM dadnorris1 Sep 2, 2015 8:55 PM Flag

    Just use American natural gas. We do not need your contribution. Ignore

  • "Many scholars,[specify] such as Paul Joskow, have described limits to the "levelized cost of electricity" metric for comparing new generating sources. In particular, LCOE ignores time effects associated with matching production to demand. This happens at two levels: (1) dispatchability, the ability of a generating system to come online, go offline, or ramp up or down, quickly as demand swings; and (2) the extent to which the availability profile matches or conflicts with the market demand profile. Thermally lethargic technologies like coal and nuclear are physically incapable of fast ramping. Capital intensive technologies such as wind, solar, and nuclear are economically disadvantaged unless generating at maximum availability since the LCOE is nearly all sunk-cost capital investment. Intermittent power sources, such as wind and solar, may incur extra costs associated with needing to have storage or backup generation available."

    In addition, they ignored very serious issues of grid soundness due to variability. Germany let this get so out of control they are dumping wind generation on their neighbors and destabilizing their grids.

    Avoiding this truth is why the OLB is changing the subject or rather attempting to do so.

    "The US Energy Information Administration has cautioned that levelized costs of non-dispatchable sources such as wind or solar should be compared to the avoided energy cost rather than the levelized cost of dispatchable sources such as fossil fuels or geothermal. This is because introduction of fluctuating power sources may or may not avoid capital and maintenance costs of backup dispatchable sources."

  • Reply to

    Saudi price wars

    by vujjeni2013 Aug 17, 2015 2:18 PM dadnorris1 Aug 18, 2015 9:49 AM Flag

    Nothing like a Middle East arms race set off by an Obama nuclear deal.

  • dadnorris1 Aug 15, 2015 9:47 AM Flag

    Wrong. OIl shales were sold to buy Hugoton. Which is very low cost very rich gas.

    Another Progressive folb lat earther.

  • Reply to

    More on Bonds

    by ronharv Aug 12, 2015 8:47 PM dadnorris1 Aug 14, 2015 9:42 AM Flag

    Oh no Willie is having tantrum with guns. ;)

  • Reply to

    More on Bonds

    by ronharv Aug 12, 2015 8:47 PM dadnorris1 Aug 13, 2015 5:16 PM Flag

    "If Linn can do that, which means deferring payment on the bulk of their debt, there'll likely be no problem doing the same with the far"

    My goodness just when I think there are not new ways for Ron^3 to demonstrate basic ignorance.

    LINE certainly could roll over their debt. Question is at what rate. Will cash flow be enough to service the coupon?

    Has nothing to do with deferring payment on the other notes. Which would cause a default. So it could not be done in the first place. Such foolishness.

    I can not explain the Progressive condition. Neither can they.

  • by dadnorris1 Aug 13, 2015 12:39 PM Flag

    I am being censored.

    Interesting how Progressive can slur Americans like homosexuals and not get deleted.

    Honesty it is better to leave their ugliness in the light. Still it does make a point.

  • Reply to


    by bnwild56 Aug 10, 2015 12:11 PM dadnorris1 Aug 10, 2015 8:02 PM Flag

    Good post.

    The Progressives running around an American natural gas board want solar panels. So they need a corrupt and inept Hillary to impose it for them.

  • Reply to

    The immediate problem is

    by norrishappy Aug 9, 2015 7:55 PM dadnorris1 Aug 10, 2015 12:31 PM Flag

    Progressive Prancing Bear,

    The Planned Parenthood abortionist admitted to manipulating the abortion procedure. Withholding pain killers for the young women and inflicting additional pain so as to maximize the harvest of the slaughtered human being.

    Spare yourself all the inane nonsense. Address the reality.

    It does not matter if the video was edited. It does not matter is it was gained illegally.

    The truth is self admitted by the abortionist. She withheld care, changed the procedure without the girls aware consent and increased pain and duration to manipulate the baby. For a profit motive.

    Did this occur or not? Remember the full video is available on You Tube. Your childish insane lies are already fully exposed. If an American will take the time and the pain of watching the full videos.

    Something which your nihilist behavior allow makes necessary. You are very sick.

  • Reply to

    Moody's Downgrades

    by ronharv Aug 4, 2015 3:01 PM dadnorris1 Aug 5, 2015 10:17 AM Flag

    Simplistic and uninformed Oliver. The short answer is childish Progressive.

    The switch from coal to natural gas is not all that great. What would be important is an increase in overall electricity demand consistent with a healthy economic recovery.

    No surprise despite all the Progressive myth telling about our economy, electricity demand has barely budged. Consistent with the #$%$ part time service jobs of this crippled Obama economy.

    NG processing investment was crippled by Obama. The EPA getting busted manipulating well pollution data had a chilling effect through the whole economy. Frackers fracked but the investment to process the additional production volumes came up far short.

    It is not a matter of not 'liking' Obama policies like a childish Progressive dogmatically believes. It is a matter of understanding just how pig headed and irresponsible this 'mam' is. Trading on the uniformed Progressive Jon Stewart nature for the glory of the ignorant. A step beyond false glory like crony capitalist Clinton.

    Look, all Obama had to do to reduce co2 was leave natural gas alone. It is displacing coal based on cost. All this Obama foolishness achieved nothing except cast fear into capital investment in our economy.
    Then our economy would not be laboring under a 38% increase in the cost of electricity and co2 would be lower.

    That lack of capital investment is why our wages are falling. It is why jobs are of such poor quality.

    Look Oliver, you do not understand. You could understand if you wished. YOu do not understand solar power and you haven't given the slightest thought to grid stability and efficiency.

    Progressive politics as your religion is a sick way to exist.

  • dadnorris1 Jul 31, 2015 3:45 PM Flag

    Overall real GDP from January 2001 through December 2008 grew at an average annual rate of 2.125%.[67] From 2001 through 2004, GDP growth was clocked at 2.35%. The number of jobs created grew by 6.5% on average. The growth in average salaries was 1.2%. Growth in consumer spending was 72% faster than growth in income. Investment in residential real-estate soared, growing 26% faster than average.[12][65]

    Now we can and should do much better than Bush. His China trade policy was an epic failure.
    It put downward pressure on wages and increase employment instability. But incomes did increase under Bush while they are still collapsed under Obama.

    Bush borrowed to much.

    The critical thing is Obama took over while the economy was contracting. So he should have benefited from return to capacity growth.

    Look Obama truly is horrendous.

    We can do better therefore should do better than GW Bush

  • Reply to


    by carlmoni Jul 30, 2015 11:38 AM dadnorris1 Jul 30, 2015 12:31 PM Flag

    Playing the bonds is a favorite game of the shorts. Buy up the bonds and then drive the company into bankruptcy. A cheap way to take over crown jewel assets.

    So in a perverse way, the big discounts on the bonds reflect a belief by the shorts that LINE can service and refinance it's debt load. Being able to buy the debt in at a big discount further builds a barrier to the short game.

  • dadnorris1 Jul 29, 2015 10:06 AM Flag

    Now poor Willie,

    Your Progressive sententious material nihilism is pointless. Which is why you and the entire OLB are pointless.

    The OLB refuse to watch Fox or read the WSJ and this choice results in clear and present wanton ignorance.

    I see the totalitarian CHicoms are so very happy Obama is surrendering American internet control.

    The man is clearly some sort of emotional mess.

  • dadnorris1 Jul 29, 2015 9:34 AM Flag

    Yes. The next President can quickly get to 4% growth by simply not being Obama of the economy killing pettiness.

  • dadnorris1 Jul 17, 2015 9:39 AM Flag

    Foolish and simple minded gpd.

3.36-0.05(-1.47%)Oct 9 4:00 PMEDT