Fri, Nov 28, 2014, 3:00 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed early today

Recent

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

Frontline Ltd. Message Board

keembodakine 177 posts  |  Last Activity: 2 hours 43 minutes ago Member since: Mar 2, 2012
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Black Friday is taking place...Many fracking companies down near 20%. I doubt EEP will be able to command as much for using their pipelines. Less oil flowing through them as companies start collapsing.

  • keembodakine keembodakine 2 hours 48 minutes ago Flag

    Mr. Shores,
    Florida's utility companies are seeing that they must lobby to stop solar or they will go broke. Of course, they could invest in it, but then eventually, their PUC's would regulate way down the price for their low cost energy and utility bills would plummet, and executive salaries and shareholders would suffer. It is about money...not what is right. This being said, I think these utility companies never anticipated people like Elon Musk. Unless they can stop his battery factory from ever being built, the storage problem for wind and solar will be a done deal and much faster than we think. When this happens, the exponential increase in solar homes will be phenomenal, and each one that goes off grid will be a monthly bill lost to the utility forever. Expect new subdivisions to be built with neither underground nor above ground wires, as they will be self contained, That 4 billion dollar battery plant isn't being built solely for Tesla automobiles. Musk is looking at the 95 out of 100 homes for which he will be supplying energy storage. The big drawback at this time will be how to recycle all those batteries when they finish their service life. It is just a matter of time, but that is of course if the world lasts long enough for this to materialize without conflicts and strife making everything too unstable for much of anything.

  • Loads of them seeing five year or all time lows.

  • Lots to be thankful for.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 2:14 PM Flag

    Nice try Lake. Go look up the average owner's take per McD's store they own. Like one manager said...his owner makes $3 million dollars a year....however that is because he owns 20 McD's. The average McD's franchise owner makes far less than the 150K I put up there. There are small companies that are in high tech and high profit who may pay their employees $30/hr. I have a plumbing contractor friend and he pays each of his employees that amount...Food service is a very broad category. There are restaurants where the people waiting tables make over six digits a year and yet are paid practically nothing. The world is far far too complex for your simple solutions. How many employees do you have, what business are you in, and what do you pay them? Please educate us.

  • Reply to

    Happy Thankgiving!

    by franciswool Nov 26, 2014 11:36 AM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 1:48 PM Flag

    Happy Thanksgiving to you and thank you Lord for everything.

  • Reply to

    Seadrill hammered. Dividend gone

    by keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 12:07 PM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 1:44 PM Flag

    Got rid of FRO awhile back and SDRL some time ago. FRO is a speculative move at present, as lower priced oil should...and I say should spur demand, and I don't expect OPEC to do anything this time, so this should continue to keep oil prices low, but Saudi's could change their mind, as many countries are now losing money and can't keep services without oil income. SDRL, being a drilling company may be more likely to have some very slow quarters, as lower prices stop drilling and owners may idle rigs. Saudi Arabia wants to put crimps on the shale business, as they see the US and Canada as much larger competitors, and so they are keeping prices low until they see some of the shale companies start closing shop or shrinking, thus lowering supplies without Saudis doing it.
    It is called capitalism, filled with monopolies and price fixing. If you want to remain in the oil business, perhaps refining companies might provide a little lift, as they are buying low priced crude, refining, and profiting on the refining end. I own some ALDW and believe it will have another good quarter, although a bit less than the recent report. CLMT may be another one that could benefit. Pipeline companies in the same sector may be in better shape, but if prices stay like they are now, it could be interesting to see what happens with Keystone pipeline, as it won't look near so profitable.
    Good luck.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 12:41 PM Flag

    Mr. lake,
    I agree that the vast majority of people would rather earn their income than live off of food stamps. I also doubt that the dollar menu would have to go to $1.10 but rather considerably higher, thus affecting those with fixed low income and no longer working. I was only trying to provide you with various scenarios, as you depicted a large increase in hiring and additional jobs, and I doubt that. Here is an example. Owner of X business has 10 employees, each working 30 hrs/wk so as not to provide healthcare. Excluding owner's payment to SS, disability insurance, let's just say owner has no other payments except the $7.50/hr. If owner is netting after taxes, $150K/year, let's see what happens when wages are raised. An additional $7.50/hr x 30 hours/ week x 10 employees x 52 weeks =$117,000.00 So now, unless the owner does way more business, the owner now has a net for his/herself of $33,000 for the year instead of $150K, and that doesn't take into account the increases now required by owner of doubling the contribution to Social Security for the workers as well as any increases to state disability insurance, etc. Should the owner net $33K while each minimum wage worker earns $23,400, and each worker is a 30 hr per week employee? I know plenty of small business owners that have about this amount of employees and really net about $150K/year which is a decent amount of money, but I doubt they would want to be in business if they are reduced to $33K/year.

  • Looks like yearly low down 2/3 from its high. JF's companies not looking so profitable.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 26, 2014 11:52 AM Flag

    Mr. Lake,
    Your suggestion of $15/hr would probably mean a number of things...some good, some bad, but you only see the good. For those who would retain their minimum wage jobs, this would be a positive effect..probably. There would be many who would then lose their food stamps and wind up spending all their increased pay on food and perhaps welfare benefits, so their lifestyle might not change at all. The tendency for employers to take on new minimum wage workers would probably be curtailed unless there was lots of profit in the business. Social Security would benefit, as now, minimum wage workers would see their contribution to Social Security in terms of dollars double, thus adding to SS solvency. The taxpayer would benefit possibly, as they wouldn't have as much money going to food stamps, but then again, there would be the possibility of businesses not hiring as much or laying off immediately as business slows, thus putting more people on unemployment and food stamps. To say it would increase the number of jobs is really speculating Lake.
    Why would you think that? If the higher paid workers now lose food stamps, they would just be spending the same amount of money, but it would come from different resources...wage instead of tax monies, and the tendency to cause increases in prices to consumers should be apparent. I can't imagine McD's doubling the pay of all their minimum wage people and still having a dollar menu. Many poor people depend on that dollar menu, and they are on fixed income already, so you probably would be causing pain to them. It is a noble try though. Seattle has done it, I believe, but I have no idea what % of their working population is minimum wage compared to other areas of the country.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 25, 2014 1:29 PM Flag

    "SCS,you need to know that the stories written in the Bible are a collection of fables, written by Hebrews.
    CHRISTAINS HAD NOTING TO DO WITH THESE HEBREW WRITINGS."

    Mr. lake,
    Just a few corrections to your over reaching statements. The Old Testament in the Bible was certainly written by Hebrews, and being that those books were written prior to the arrival of Christ, it is hard to call any of those people writing those books "Christians" other than to say they were Messianic believers. On the other hand, the New Testament books were written by believers. The book of Luke Acts was written by Luke, who was both a physician of Paul and follower of the disciples although not one of the original 12. The gospel of Mark was written by John Mark. The book of Mathew is attributed to the tax collector disciple Mathew. Of course, none of the books had the signature of the author at the end of the book, but that was extremely common in all things written then, so with your logic, you could say everything ever written and not signed can be attributed to anybody. There are lists of all authors, but what experts have determined is that the first 5 books of the OT are attibuted to Moses along with the book of Job. Joshua is said to have written the book of Joshua. I believe Paul...formerly Saul wrote much of the New Testament with I believe 14 books being attributed to him, many of them personal letters. Josephus might be of some help to you, but you are just bound and determined to deny it, so have at it.

  • wallstreetdailyDOTKOM/2014/11/07/u-s-saudi-arabia-oil/

    Goog the above article and enjoy the read.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 24, 2014 12:21 PM Flag

    Mr. dan,

    Actually, the republican party today is so far from Reagan and Bush, it is really impossible to claim much of a connection other than in name only.
    Reagan was a great big spender with no balanced budget amendments for him. As soon as the Marine barracks was bombed in Lebanon, Reagan started pulling troops out. If Obama had been given that same situation and done the same, he would have been called a traitor and this republican party would have tried to remove him through impeachment. Reagan and Bush both talked to the other party and the other party negotiated. This house of representatives started from the first day blocking anything Obama tried to do. The now leader of the Senate stated publicly his number one goal was to get rid of Obama.
    Today, we just aren't dealing with a republican party similar to what existed in the 1980's and 1990's. Ted Cruz has about as much in common with Ronald Reagan as a parrot has with a dog. Today's right wing of the party would really prefer if there was no government at all, as they believe that smaller is better. It is just a different party altogether now, and that reflects in the Ted Cruz', Michelle Bachmans, and much of the far right.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 24, 2014 3:28 AM Flag

    Mr. Shores,
    I have to agree with Rogere on this one, as you clearly insinuated that it really doesn't matter what man does at this point, as the CO2 levels are rising too fast for man to do really anything about it. I think Rogere was trying to argue long past that you were pretty much taking the attitude that like someone who smoked for 20 years, already would have done to much damage to themselves to matter much if they quit. Trying to go back and look at every one of your posts is a waste of Rogere's time. Just be aware that what Rogere said you inferred was certainly what I remember, but I am not going back and wasting time looking over the voluminous amounts of BS OT posts that you have put up.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 23, 2014 1:50 AM Flag

    Actually, I think republicans will be forced to address immigration reform soon after the new congress convenes, as that is their only method of countering Obama's executive order. If they just go the route of not funding Obama's executive order, they will be tossed just as quickly as they got in. People held their noses when they voted last election, and their votes for change was for that...change from gridlock.

  • keembodakine keembodakine Nov 21, 2014 2:24 PM Flag

    Mr. nikk,

    You are confusing them with facts. If only the American Indian had the same immigration policy that the republican right wing today wants, we wouldn't be discussing immigration in this country.

  • Reply to

    BLAH BLAH BLAH!

    by heysutty Nov 20, 2014 6:32 AM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 21, 2014 12:05 PM Flag

    and now it is worth about 1/25th of that price, and guess who was running the company the whole time??

  • Reply to

    Solar City {SCTY} Walmart

    by lakeed98 Nov 20, 2014 5:38 PM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 21, 2014 11:55 AM Flag

    Mr. Semper,
    This shouldn't be Walmart's "dirty secret." Walmart locates stores where they believe sales demand for their products will be most profitable. Walmart doesn't own electric utilities in the areas Walmart builds stores, so the way electricity is generated in that area is beyond Walmart's control. I laud them for going green at their store, as they now generate some electricity they use at the point they use it.
    Every business located near Walmart stores can be given the same "dirty secret" argument you posted including the govt. installations within the same utility range. That article is rather silly. There is nothing dirtier about Walmart at their store than Sears, Target, etc if they consume the same electricity in an area where juice is made from coal. Pathetic attempt to label Walmart. Kudos to Walmart for putting panels on their store roofs.

  • Reply to

    Warren Buffet has invested 15 billion in Solar

    by lakeed98 Nov 20, 2014 12:14 PM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 20, 2014 2:10 PM Flag

    Actually, it does replace the grid daily. How many crops are raised due to the grid. Take away the sun, and you wouldn't exist nikky. Take away the grid, and you might suffer a bit, but human life went for centuries without the grid, and never went anywhere without the sun.

  • Reply to

    ALJ, ALDW nix Krotz sale

    by runnerln Nov 20, 2014 12:19 PM
    keembodakine keembodakine Nov 20, 2014 2:04 PM Flag

    This should be immaterial at this point anyway. Personally, today's fall looks like a bit of an over reaction, as some folks thought the move wasn't that smart anyway. I doubt this will effect next dividend at all.

FRO
1.24+0.02(+1.64%)Nov 28 1:01 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.