Zack's has a nice piece today about FRO and the rates. Frankly I thought that if the rates held where they are NOW that FRO would be a sure thing. Zacks piece however meant to be one to "push" FRO to me did just the opposite. The piece but forth that at present prices FRO would still lossing money which I had thought would not be the case. You might want to read that piece if you had not and correct me or point out where you disagree. At these rates I saw FRO being a very tempting buy and was going to pull the trigger under 2.95 as I have a buy in at that price but it has no went that low.
Do you see FRO going into the black if rates stay as they are now? I was also thinking about buying some SFL as I see them as a company that would go up in value as well if the rates remain high and they are sound and as of today paying a nice 10% dividend. I had bought a few hundered shares a few weeks ago for IRA account and a small position in my brokerage account. Now in the red but the dividend will take it black.
FRO I still see as a sure 5 buck stock at some time maybe sooner than latter. The amount of refined oil leaving the US will continue which will take ships to move. Not sure how FRO would fit into that market but ships enganged in any market reduces the oversupply and thus supports rates.
Thanks for you post about rates.
scs you have proven to be a dodger, and when caught you Lie your out. I once considered you a man I disagree with but on of character but now I see you are not a man of character and will try anything to keep from answering a simple question. Men who lack character usually value not much that is not directly related to them so I have my answer.
scs unlike you I neither dodge or fail to admit when proven wrong. You on the other refuse to answer a simply question that boils down to reallity.
Cost to save lives or let them die. Is my spelling or grammer stumping you or you plan can't bring yourself to admit that in the end that is what it boils down too? Life saved at a cost to you and me or we let them die.
I answer save the life but must be too hard for you to admit that you can't answer the question.
You post a smart reply about endangered species is it so hard for you boys on the right to just address questions with answers or challange the ones you disagree with?
How may whooping cranes have been killed by wind turbines down around their rockport nesting area?
scs he answered you false post and I agree with his answer.
Obama did not do what I wanted as he decided to pour money
into the states to save jobs and the states which I understand his decision but disagree with it. He should of followed FDR and went into a WPA CCC type recovery. He had a chance to really be a Great President but he lacked the guts required.
GW was USED by the boys that pulled his strings and trusted the wrong people and believed that Wall street and bankers could be trusted which anyone with any brains knows they can't help themselves much less be trusted.
Tea party types who want only to cut spending and taxes are morons compared to anything that Obama has done.
That much is easy to see. Many on this list wanted a depression giving up all hope of a long slow recovery to address the debt. They are gloom and doom boys who believe that guns and tax cuts and doing away with all social programs is the answer to our eco woes. We will have eco woes as long as we remain Globalist. I do also blame Obama for not attacking that. I am not as big a fan of Obama as you may think but their is only disaster on the other side at present as even the old line GOP types has lost control to the mad men on the extreme right. A GOP blood bath is comming and soon.
scs again you use a nice dodge to my question. Life or cost
You instead go back to blaming ACA when in fact it does reduce the number using ER room and hospital stay. Million are uninsured and not on medicare and medicade who have preexisting conditions. ACA will end this use of the ER System.
Millions are young or others who choose to GAMBLE and stick US with the cost if they get sick or injured again ACA will end a lot of that.
No Hospital can OPT out of giving care in the ER. MD Anderson or Sloan or anyother must still provide that care. They will also take medicare and medicade as well as many other forms of insurance just as they did before ACA. They will ot accept others just as they did before ACA. Doctors have already "opted" out of medicare and medicade and I will not do business with any who have but you may choose too that is your choice.
The insurance Co. love ACA as it will increase their business and they have the best math boys they are and will do just fine with ACA. If anything is bad about ACA it is how much freedom it allowed the Insurance industry to set prices without oversight. But unless we go to a single payer system that will remain a problem.
I am sure Obama was afraid to shut down the Insurance business in health care as it is a major source of good jobs. He does value the overall eco of the US given how weak it was when he came into office and how slow it has been to recover. The same loss employment that big cuts in Defense would cause would be felt is health insurance was done away with. Obama understands this while tea party types think you can cut spending and not suffer a depression. That is the major difference between those who understand eco and those that just want low taxes and cuts in budget spending.
Life or cost scs you still going to dodge it?
Goldy I did google and I admit that I found most of the sites stating wind speed in the area that you posted as being possible. The speed of the wind would vary the mph at the tips but I will grant you that I owe you an apology based on what info I read your post was made based on what you found.
I did not find anything about bats or birds being killed other than several post that said the death rate was low and that birds appear to fly around the windmills.
That of course was posted by the companies that own the site which I view with the same "look" as I would an oil co. saying Francking causes little or no danger.
I assume that birds are killed by wind turbines. I also maintain that NO such turbines would be allowed in area that are known to be sites of endangered birds.
The bald eagle is found in many places and I doubt endangered at all even if on the list but since it is a national bird of sorts they get lots of attention. I have seen them in Texas, Col, NM, Ariz, Cal,Wy,mont, Id, Wash and alaska.
I am more concerned about human life than animial life and am not a person to put a snail darter at the head of my list on what must be protected at the cost of human life. However to disregard animial life when it can be avoided is just being a good stewert of Earth.
The netting required over a oil well tank farm of bad water is something that can be done with little cost and ease at one location. It would be impossible to "net" off each area of a wind turbine as it would take a 360 degree net and at great heights. I would not stop using wind turbines to save birds no more than cars as many birds are killed by cars.
Again you were right I was wrong on wind speed that can be reached by a wind turbine.
scs so what is different than before ACA? Illegals did not have medicade and still do not. How they can't get private insurance if they can afford it is curious to me as what insurance co. would turn down money. Is there a law against insurance to illegal aliens? But be that as it may whatever the answer may be ACA did not change that. The real issue is not ACA but health care for ALL that need it in life threatening situations.
Before ACA the answer to that was YES we will give it. As of now with ACA the same answer applies.
So what has ACA changed? Nothing as far as ER care being the law and Yes it will cost to give care to ANYONE who uses the ER who is not insured or on Medicare or Medicade same as it did before ACA.
Do you want as a Christian to let people die simply because they are illegal aliens? Do you want those with no insurance or not on Medicade or Medicare and legal to die for lack of care?
That is the real question. To saves lives cost money. It cost YOU and Me money. It did before ACA and will cost after ACA. The number of people without insurance and on Medicade may go up but they will still be those legal and illegal who will not have the funds to pay for their health care. Death or cost pass through is the only answer. Which do you want to see?
Almost all if not all of the E&P sector is down. XOM even down and oil is down slighty but still at 97 so oil not the cause. It goes beyound Axas but Axas is getting hit harder than most. Why?
You got me other than the stock market is OWNED by big money and sector moves are down by Big money. Year end switch of Mutual funds and hedge funds plus shorts are driving the E&P sector down when oil has risen during the same drive down. It makes no sence at all but lets hope they get all they want done and start the new year off with a run up.
The sale looks good to me unless I read it wrong. Getting 73 million for 1200 is good price which allows cash to AXAS to do whatever they need to do with it. While it may keep production numbers flat for 3-6 months the improved balance sheet should make up for that. But what do I know just my take. I still think this stock is a winner but clearly I may be wrong about seeing 3 bucks a share before 5. The sector will have to find bottom before AXAS stops going down is my guess.
Not for the faint of heart.
Semp you better check your sources more carefully. Last time I check the Great State of Texas is not joining the ACA health care pools and have instead set up their own. So whatever happens in Texas you can think the GOP of Texas and not Obama good or bad.
As the rest of your smug post. It is merely the insurance co. that are offering plans that vary in coverage the very thing you and BS have been crying about not having enough of. ACA is NOT the blame if someone chooses to pick a policy that eliminates a certain hospital. Freedom of choice I guess is only a good thing when the GOP is pounding on its chest for it?
Post all the poop you want but ACA is not the cause of any hospital being dropped. A person in order to save 50 cents a month like you and BS focus on may choose a insurance policy that limits who a person can go too. Before ACA HMO's did the same thing so the idea is not new and if you are not smart enough to know that then I have given you too much credit once again.
You will say anything to try to paint something bad once you have taken a stand. You are simply WRong on who is at fault and why. BS made his decision to self insuren and you both want to blame that on ACA.
The truth is with a pre existing condition BS wife couldn;t get a lot of insurance that ACA has now made available if BS is too tight to pay for it that is his decision and not the fault of ACA. Anyone so tight to gamble on lossing a life time of work due to accident or illness can blame ACA all they want but the truth is that is a person very Risky decision and a stupid one at that if that person has a lot to lose which clearly BS does.
So he waits for Demo provided medicare while hating the gov that will give it to him. Typical of the entitled right to get and complain both at the same time.
scs they are lots of things we could live without but the question intelligent people ask is why would you want to live without them? Is your idea of the American dream finding more and more things to live without?
Large protions of the country may not have ambulance service but the FACT is that that large protion of the country continues a very small % of the population. I think ambulance service saves more lives each year than all the firemen and cops so why not get rid of them first?
How many lives are you willing to give up yearly when you get rid of this "LUXURY" For an English expert maybe you need to check the defination of LUXURY. Like I said you may spell well and use great grammer but your communication skills really suck.
Lesser and scs both right wing boys post 180 degree different Facts both aimed at Obama as far as unemployment is concerned. Can both be correct? Only in the minds of the right winger.
Why would I call a right winger a nut job? Better than what the right calls anyone who disagrees with them and I like be nicer when I can be :P. To be more serious not all right wingers are nut jobs. So when I call someone a nut job they have earned the title by something said in a post. A post devoid of facts, aimed only at scoring political points and the truth not required.
I will let Lesser and scs debate each other about is or is not unemployment higher but in the end I am sure they will agree that regardless of the facts it is Obama fault.
Is the eco. health? For the upper 5% YOU BET. Is it SAFE? Same answer. For the rest of us I see a strong stock market that is subject to same crooked dealings that caused the crash of 2008 as zero changes has been made in banking, investing and brokerage business which caused all manner of failure in the system. As long as Globalism runs rampent the econ on 75% of Americans sucks. You can think both parties and ALL globalist for that. If your not in the bottom 75% nor the top 5% my guess is you have done better for the most part and concerned as we move forward. However those two reason will change on bit the way you vote. If 90% of AMerican voted for their pocket book they would vote anti Globial first and formost since Globalism is the greatest threat to the American dream. Destroy the middle class wage base and you will be left with only poor low paid wages and the very rich. Nothing treatens the average (90%) of American more than that. Not taxes, not debt, not wellfare. Destroy jobs you destroy this country.
Goldy would you please furnish a site to back up your claim? I have seen thousand of wind turbine generators and NEVER, I mean Never seen one turning as fast as you claim. On a boat if the wind gets to high the small turbines are "feathered" (turn into the wind blades adjusted) to stop them from spinning themselves to destruction. In Hawaii I watched BIG really big turbines for 5 mintues wail waiting out side an ER clinic before I was sure the blade was moving at all. In Europe I saw hills covered with them and about 50% were moving the others either too slow to tell from a moving car or "feathered"
Has anyone but Goldy ever heard of 179 mile an hour turning turbine blade? If so show the site such a wind turbine can be seen. In Texas they are farms of wind turbines that move faster and are smaller (still big) than the ones in Europe and Hawaii but even they do not approach the speed that Goldy seem to think they turn at. I have never seen a wind turbine (except for small ones on sailboats) that move so fast it is hard to see the individual blades. The turbines I have seen are not made of minerals.
I think Goldy has found some very potent LSD that sends her on trips. We all know about her big proclaimed % increase of health care while on medicare now she seems to be blowing in the wind maybe she has some found a health care insurance that provides her with medical weed and she is merely tripping.
I really look forward to a site that proves these 179mph wind turbines. I like the idea of bats with the best radar in the animal kingdom flying blindly into turbines now that sounds believerable.
blue10duck have you noticed the releases comming out. Not one problem of the kind that SSN had when they were drilling wells. The only way SSN is going to have a good well is for them not to be in charge of the drilling program lol. Once the production numbers of those wells start to come in lets just hope oil is where it is today or higher. NG will be moving up as winter has arrived with a BANG.
I am not LT on SSN just looking to make a few bucks and move on so I am hoping to see good production news. The time frame on those wells are pretty much being met so production should come as prodicted as well. Given SSN is not in charge I hope the figures are published and not put on the confidental list.
Trending up is just fine with me even a few pennies a week. Good luck.
ifyyoung You want to say BC is a globalist fine I agree with you there and yes he got NAFTA passed but who voted against it? Only Demo's did. Name ONE GOP against globalism? name on Demo that is? None right now that are going to run for President so BOTH parties have sold us down the river on globalism but only the demo party has anyone in it that is against Globalism. Hillary will be pro global but so will her right wing GOP opponent whoever he may be.
You say the young will have to take care of the sick, old and lazy. If they do not who will? What is your idea of what to do with the sick and old? The children? Do you have a plan? TAlk is cheap and the problems are real and will take real soluations or we merely admit that we are a nation for only the strongest and let the rest die and then somehow disposed of? Will you at least pay taxes to have disposal squads or do we let them rot in the streets and under our brides?
The Gop was against SS, against medicare, against medicade, against SSI, against student loans, against national health care and we end up with ACA because the Gop would have no part of a single payer health care plan like Europe and Canada have and is cheaper and as good as our current mess. ACA is not much of an improvement and will be not a cost saver but the GOP is the blame for blocking the single payer plan and is to blame for keeping drug priced regulated like again in ALL the rest of the world. Now you can fool yourself into thinking WE are right and all the world is wrong if you like but that is exactly what your saying when you oppose what would save you money. As much as those on the right cry about money I have been puzzeled why they want to pay higher prices for health care and drugs than the rest of the world is it some kind of Ego or Class trip? GOP also against any Wall street reforms which of course leaves all free to fail again as in 2008. What is up with that? Strange way to conserve wealth.
trmmara your wasting your time. The right wing nuts do not have a manifesto to speak of they simply "React" as told.
But if you want to understand them.
1.dislike or resent anything or anyone who may cost you money.
2.name call and insult when disagreed with and break off any contact with such people in real life and blast away in the safety of a message board.
3. Avoid any question that Fox or Rush or any other right wing nut job source of proproganda has not provded them with talking points.
4. Put all who are not just like into one big bunch of people, call them the worse names you can think and make sure they are seen as the enemy.
5. Be devoid of all mercy and compassion
6. Go to church on Sunday and pray to a God of Love while you of course understand that God only loves right wingers and only right wingers are saved.
7. When confronted with anything that starts to bother you break off all communication and turn on TV or radio or go to your favorite right wing webb site to get than comfy feeling again.
8. Avoid facts and history at all cost and never admit to ever being wrong.
Now you have gotten me on the right wing shoot list like you are but better to be on that list than one of them lol.
earth at today price getting your back is a given. The rate of return however is another matter.
Price of oil and NG as well as production will be figured into that. The next 10 quarters should yield about 6 bucks leaving only 4.50 cents to "recover your cost" over the next 15 years. At and average of 20 cents a quarter it would take 22 quarters or 5 1/2 years to get the 4.50 back and 9 years of profit off the dividend.
I am not worried about getting my principle back but I admit that the rate of return on my money over 18 years will not be a good investment. However now my choice is to sell and take a big loss or wait 8 years to get it back in the form of dividends. The sale price down the road 10 years will be determind by what happened to the price of oil and gas and the overall production numbers. I do not say this is a good investment even at today price they are better. But if your end I would wait it out if you do not need the cash a sale would bring or unless your looking for a write off. Good luck to you.
The sale looks like a good move to me got a big price for 1200 acres of land unless I read that wrong. So why the big sale off? Only reason I can see is typical Market crooks at it again.
The only legit reason for the stock to be down given the rise in oil and ng prices over the last week is that the sale was viewed as getting rid of valuable lease. Eagle Ford is hot but the press release was worded in a way that suggusted the money would be used to expand drilling in the Bakens and Eagle Ford thus another Eagle Ford lease remains after the sale.
Cleaning up the balance sheet an added bonus to the sale so I would bet it is the crooks that use the under 5 buck stocks as their sole playpen. Good news better come out fast or they will take it lower. Any change in oil price or ng price will give them a great chance to do as well as the market soon to retreat in end of year selling. I admit I am surprised to see go this low given how strong it has been but the strength is real and reamains so sooner or later LT holders will get their rewards.
fschwedman the examples of tort law that you suggusted was in fact contractual law. While certainly a part of civil law it is not the only brand of civil law. Motive can indeed by a factor in considering the guilt of an accused as the jury will consider motive in thier reaching a verdict. I can assure you if you were on trail for killing your wife and you had taken out a 1 million dollar life insurance policy before it happen that would be presented during the trail.
If for the intent or with the motive of making money a co. failed to obey the law that could be a factor as to rather the case would be tried criminally or civil action but in a criminal case the elements of proof is higher and evidence of law is higher as well the intent of a company not to comply even after being warned or fined could be a factor in deciding to go criminal or not.
It was the silly idea that Obama or the Justice dept. declared war on big oil by filing a dead bird case that cased the post. I or Lake neither one ever suggusted the law suit was political it was you and scs that cross into that line of thinking. Your Intent was to attack the president and your motive for doing is your strong dislike of him. Both those factors combined to show how silly you right wingers can be.
I do not need to talk to a lawyer to see how foolish and ill leanred you are on matters of law. You either have no idea of how the Federal Judicial system works or prefer to pretend like you do in order to try accuse Obama of yet another thing he had nothing to do with.
scs the law is very complex and open to various differences of opinion as the decision on ACA by the Supreme court last year showed. 4 Liberals found it was not bad law while 4 conservatives found it was and one conservative Judge found that the case "turned" on a totally different point of law than either the liberals or conservatives had focused on.
If we look at end results and try to apply a person or political leaning to such findings of law we do not do justice to the complexities found within any law which are written by politicans for political reason in some cases as was the case in the ACA case.
The laws concerning migratory birds is both a US law and a treaty with Other nations. I do not know the "facts of the case" as to why the Special Agent for Fish and Game felt their was a violation of law.
The judge decision was based on (you will love this) his understands of words and how to apply them.
The Agent knew that Oil companies are required by law to have slug ponds covered by netting to keep birds from landing in them or drinking in them. I saw no mention of this in the articles I read so I do not know if this was part of the case or not. The fact the case went criminal instead of civil is in my history unusual if this was a first time violation or one where warnings were given and ignored. Again I do not know the facts of this case. I do know the facts of the case where the Fish and Wildlife Agent closed a Hazard waste plant when dead endangered species were found and this seizure/closure of the plant was not fought but instead they chose to Go Bankrupt. I have known several Special Agents of Fish and Game and they are very BOLD in how they enforce the law. Like State game wardens their powers under the Game laws excede most of what other law enforcement officers operate under and they as a whole are fairly "hard core" in game law enforcement. Political? No hard core in laws they enforce YES. Dont mess with them lol.
scs you may be able to spell an use good grammer but you clearly are not very good at reading and understanding what you have read. IF you want some legal facts on the cases filed under the miratory bird act google it and read ALL that has been written about it and you will find that fschwedman choose to pick and choose his view of the law.
First some facts. The US Fish and game commission files cases of violations of criminal and civil law within a Judical district that the violation happened. The US Attorney NOT the President or the Atty gen then makes a decision to go criminal or civil or not pursue the matter.
In the case that fschwedman mention was decided by federal Dist. Judge and is binding only in that Dist. The Gov can decide to appeal or not.
Clearly you are NO legal expert and as I hope you realizied by reading the post that I was pointing that out lol. The fact you can spell or use proper grammer clearly does not help your reading and comprending skills or your communication skills either.
The Fish and Game speical agent who discovered the dead birds also found what he considered a violation of law. Was he under orders from Obama? He presented the facts which are not mention in any post I found but was known to US Attory Office and did come out in court to an ASST US Attorney who decided he agreed with the Agent that a violation was present
the US Attorney would have to agree or at least allow the case to go forward.
A US Attorney does not work for the Attorney General for your information. His staff answers to him first and the Dept of Justice as well but case decision are left to the US Attorney who is hired and fired by the President only.
The judge that ruled on the case was appointed by
GW Bush in 2002 so I guess that is non political but the actions of the US Attorney Off are?
Fact could be that both acted in good faith. They merely disagree on what a violation is in the case.