Views: 1467

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

C'mon GD....

Do you really believe that everyone working at CHK is a scammer?  Let's face it -- most people go to work do their job, and go home to their families.  These people need their jobs to pay their bills and save for retirement.  99% of all "whistleblowers" end up unemployed with nothing.  You cannnot expect the guys who work on rigs or the people who write the monthly royalty checks to know what schemes are being thought up at the top levels of the corporation. 

BTW, I noticed that the $3B loan has now been upped to $4B.  CHK is saying this is evidence of their strength.  I think most view it as a weakness.  A strong company does not need to borrow at 8.5%.

I expect there will be a nice yard sale up in OK real soon.

 

 

Baron, like they say:  "buy low; sell high."

Wonder if CHK will break da buck?

Okay, that might be too much to root for.

But hey, breaking the so-called $10 buck per betting on the short side could be a wild ride for the real gutsy TX hold 'em types.


I read somewhere that Icahn no longer has a stake in Chesapeake.

So, Henry, did you have the same opinion of the worker bees who punched the clock at Enron?

Using hyperbole in a debate is easy; but if you notice, GD never said "everyone" at CHK was a crook.  You did to boaster your debating point.

Hey, most people sometimes kinda drive over the speed limit, too.  Of course, I bet there are some GHS members who never even do that, right?

So many "honest" folks do dance around minor legal technicalities.  That's true.

Anyway, I appreciate your concern for those who were making $100k salaries at CHK, which I think Fortune said was the average take-home pay with the company.

Dang.  $100,000 a year.  And I'm supposed to feel for these folks because Aubrey messed up their lives (not us) and also messed with the lives of a lot of folks I know (landowners), right?

Of course, I understand where you're coming from, Henry.  I respect your compassion and level-headed-ness, and that's why everyone seems to trust you with their royalty statement data.  You have always been a high-quality GHS member.

Ergo, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, Henry.  See, I'm come from "dirt" poor.  My family who got messed with by the dang CHK crooks lived in very, very deep poverty during the Great Depression.  The father died and left the wife with five kids to feed and no job.

Just some hardscrabble land.  It was exceptionally rough on the family back then.  And still, many in the family live pay check to pay check. 

So, yeah.  Really poor people kinda do a disconnect when fancy city folks make $100K and plead for help to cushion their 401-K's.

Roger that. 




GD, $100K doesn't go very far.  I know, if you're bringing in $10K, a 100K sounds like a lot, but I'm sure that most people who make $100K would not think they're rich.

Personally, I think anything over 5 mil would put you in a "rich" category.

GoshDarn,

It's nice to have a polite disagreement with someone. 

But yes, I doubt the average worker bee at Enron had any clue the company was completely unstable.  If that were the case, we would not have heard about all those people who lost their jobs and life's savings all at once.

In any event, the best that a shareholder can hope for right now is an orderly sale or breakup of the company.  If Aubrey and the board attempt to fight off buyers, and keep taking out loans at high interest rates, while selling assets at discounted prices to the circling vultures, they are probably not acting in the best interest of the shareholders.

Speaking of Aubrey, I looked for him on the sidelines of the Oklahoma Thunder/Lakers game 2 nights ago at the Chesapeake Energy Arena.  Didn't see him.  Has he gone underground?

Henry,

CHK won't sell...

CHK won't get bought out...

Saddled with DEBT...  No CASH...   NO BUYERS...

More DEALS... YES.   A Merger...  Maybe, but that will take guts on the "cash offering" company's part.

But I don't believe McClendon will EVER SELL OUT!

Mr. Chesapeake, if anything, is sly as a fox...  I wouldn't ever underestimate him!

He has gotten out of bigger messes than this.  And...surpassed...every disaster...with more personal equity. 

CHK hasn't (IMO) ever acted "in the best interest of the shareholders" unless we're talking "unit holders." 

I am thinking....NW LA and East Texas wouldn't be as financially healthy as these regions are today had it not been for CHK and Petrohawk moneys.  And look at the JOBs...  We got lucky in Sept. 2008...When the rest of the World Financially Fell Apart.  

Off track...  I believe the "moneys" generated from NW LA SHALE is one of the reasons Baton Rouge attempted to merge LSUS and LA Tech... And wants to put the squeeze on LSU Med Center...

Just think about it....  Baton Rouge gets rid of NW LA "Institutions" and fewer State moneys come this direction...  BUT... Baton Rouge STILL WILL GAIN allllllll those Haynesville Shale Tax $$$$$$$$$$.... And with ONE swipe... Gets to CUT OUT NW LA and KEEP OUR State tax dollars FOR SOUTH LOUISIANA....  Wicked deal had Baton Rouge gotten away with it!

I don't trust anything coming out of Baton Rouge any more than I trust some CEOs.

Some "Governor" and Some "Legislators" seem as shady as Some CEOs.

Maybe it's time for NW Louisiana to introduce a "secession" plan and wake-up Some "Governor" and Some "Legislators" and tell them WE are OVER "getting their shaft." 

My Opine for a TGIF Morning...

Have a good one Henry.

DrWAVeSport Cd1 5/18/2012 

 

 

I AM HOPING THIS MEANS THAT CHK WILL BE ABLE TO PAY ME FOR MY GAS.  I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS & NEVER GET PAID ON TIME.......WHEN I SPEAK WITH THEM ITS ALWAYS YOU SHOULD GET PAID NEXT MONTH.  I FEEL LIKE" WIMPY"....who will gladly pay me for his burgers on Tuesday but Tuesday never comes.

 

IMO...

CHK cannot FAIL. 

CHK cannot FAIL for more reasons than I can think of right now.  CHK is the BIG Dog on the nat gas energy block.  CHK has single handedly changed, moved, and kicked U.S. from U.S. Energy Talk into WALK.  CHK is THE reason CNG and LNG are on the minds of Americans who want to gain their Energy Independence and who want to grow a greener U.S. Energy Environment with less use of oil and coal.  CHK put Nat Gas again ON THE MAP!  CHK "turned the truck around" and got U.S. going in a better, independently sustainable direction.  CHK charged in like a bull and that is what it took for U.S. to snap out of it's $2 Billion plus dollar a day addiction on foreign oil...  And, CHK was the 1st to say it WAS POSSIBLE!  And the 1st to MAKE IT POSSIBLE!

No matter what my "beef" with the way CHK handles its "books," and I won't let them off the hook here...  CHK has succeeded in creating a new U.S. Energy dynamic with the U.S. Energy Gatekeepers that have historically been keeping their U.S. Energy  "eyes wide shut,"  and their feet planted in political cement.  

I believe Mr. McClendon will do what it takes to ensure CHK et al survives as much intact as possible.  This a.m. the stock is @ 13.77, and that's a crime in itself.  I did not believe it would ever go under 15.  No one else but Aubrey McClendon is responsible and he will have to be the one to CHANGE Aubrey McClendon.  

I for one, would like to see CHK succeed.   I would like to see CHK find a CEO who isn't so self-serving.  It is too bad that those seem to be Mr. McClendon's first instincts...the self-serving kind.   Taking CHK public gave Mr. McClendon the huge "cash" supply he needed for shale land procurement and production.  But going public did not give him the right to "cash" out CHK Stakeholders.  IMO...He does not see the line between the two.  And there lies CHK's fate. 

CHK has had it ALL, every opportunity to survive and thrive.  CHK never needed so much DEBT.  Mr. McClendon mortgaged much of CHK for his own self-serving instincts, and that will be his downfall...IMHO.  I hope it will not be CHK's downfall too...

 

DrWAVeSport Cd1 5/17/2012

  

 

 

Faustarian for sure.

RSS

© 2021   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service