Oilpatch giant makes billion-dollar threat over Alberta royalties

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

So what field are you in? Assuming you're in Calgary, I don't think there's much in this town that doesn't have an indirect link back to O&G in this town. Everyone from teachers, to Chefs, to plumbers are going to take a hit to the pocketbook if O&G tanks in this town.

People always talk about how this is a "diversified town", not just O&G. I laugh at that.

there is lots of IT in calgary not related to O&G....
Anyhow just about every city in Canada would be devasted with the loss of it's major business...

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

So what field are you in? Assuming you're in Calgary, I don't think there's much in this town that doesn't have an indirect link back to O&G in this town. Everyone from teachers, to Chefs, to plumbers are going to take a hit to the pocketbook if O&G tanks in this town.

People always talk about how this is a "diversified town", not just O&G. I laugh at that.

Employment by industry[38]
Industry Calgary Alberta
Agriculture 6.1% 10.9%
Manufacturing 15.8% 15.8%
Trade 15.9% 15.8%
Finance 6.4% 5.0%
Health and education 25.1% 18.8%
Business services 25.1% 18.8%
Other services 16.5% 18.7%

[Muta]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

So what field are you in? Assuming you're in Calgary, I don't think there's much in this town that doesn't have an indirect link back to O&G in this town. Everyone from teachers, to Chefs, to plumbers are going to take a hit to the pocketbook if O&G tanks in this town.

People always talk about how this is a "diversified town", not just O&G. I laugh at that.

This town isn't diversified. The blood that flows through this city is Oil and Gas. That's probably the worst kept secret today. It may be diversified to some extent on some level, but when comparing to other cities of Calgary's size and population, Calgary is a one-industry force. This, of course, spawns the business for other industries. One shouldn't forget though, that oil and gas runs this city.

Is my industry connected to Oil and Gas? You bet it is. Oil and Gas companies need a) facilities and b) people. Directly, as a result, we have business because of a). Indirectly, companies need people, people move here because of opportunity, developers see a need to build housing (both low and high rise), and thus we get business. Even more indirectly, because of the increase in population, more un-related facilities / institutions are needed (ie. Healthcare, recreation). This also fuels our business.

What industry am I in? Architecture.

Oh yes, and I'm not going to lie - I want some share in the oil profit too. I want to drive a Ferrari like everybody else. I want a big house. Indusrty's too bloody hard to get into though, so tough bananas for me!

[Frequitude]

To those wiser than I. Correct/clarify this simplified chain of events:

1) Royalties go up
2) O&G profit margins go down
3) Fewer projects go ahead
4) Less labor required
5a) Less people moving to Alberta for work
5b) O&G wages go down
6) Less people/money to buy houses
7) Housing prices drop

[if.away]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

7) Housing prices drop

8) Young people cheer

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by if.away

8) Young people cheer

I'm young, I own my own house AND I work for Suncor...

[Muta]

Originally Posted by if.away

8) Young people cheer

Not if you're young, own a place, and THEN it goes down in value. FRACK.

[NuclearFart]

This is exactly it: we all want a piece of that sweet, sweet oily pie. As it currently stands, people may argue that the "invisble hand/trickledown effect" will benefit us all indirectly, but its all relative to the cost of living. Are you gaining more by this trickle down from the O&G, or being hindered more by the soaring cost of living?

In my industry, particularily my niche, the salaries have not increased to the same degree as O&G, and nor would I expect it to. It's overall increase has been more or less linear, consistent with the last 30 years, and irregardless of the recessions or booms. But my spending power has decreased substantially, as the cost of living has exponentially inflated around me by the O&G. I was, and will always be, better off when the main industry goes into the red.

For selfish reasons, my industry has everything to gain by the proposed royalties.
________
PORTABLE VAPORIZER

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Healthcare.

It's one of the few products people will always need, boom or bust.

Yeah but if the population drops they will be less people to require your services, and less demand for you. Dentists see a marked drop in revenue in tough times. Although granted, the current shortage of professionals means that its going to see not much of a hit.

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Industry Calgary Alberta
Agriculture 6.1% 10.9%
Manufacturing 15.8% 15.8%
Trade 15.9% 15.8%
Finance 6.4% 5.0%
Health and education 25.1% 18.8%
Business services 25.1% 18.8%
Other services 16.5% 18.7%

Looking at this list I'd lump Manufacturing, Trade, Finance, and Business Services into the O&G dependant category for a total of 63.5%. Health and Education would go into indirectly affected IMHO. Not exactly diversified.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

In my industry, particularily my niche, the salaries have not increased to the same degree as O&G, and nor would I expect it to. It's overall increase has been more or less linear, consistent with the last 30 years, and irregardless of the recessions or booms. But my spending power has decreased substantially, as the cost of living has exponentially inflated around me by the O&G. I was, and will always be, better off when the main industry goes into the red.

For selfish reasons, my industry has everything to gain by the proposed royalties.

That's bizarre. I won't arue that's your impression, but nobody benefits when the main industry goes into the red.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Muta

Not if you're young, own a place, and THEN it goes down in value. FRACK.

If you're ever looking to upgrade it's a good thing.

I'd rather upgrade from a $100,000 place to a $200,000 place than what I face now when I want to get a bigger place one day.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

Yeah but if the population drops they will be less people to require your services, and less demand for you. Dentists see a marked drop in revenue in tough times. Although granted, the current shortage of professionals means that its going to see not much of a hit.

I can't fully comment on dentists, but my impression is that there are more of them per demand (when was the last time you had a hard time finding a dentist accepting new patients?) and their income is supplimented to a greater degree by elective procedures (ie. fueled by those with more disposable income). They are also paid moreso through dental care plans, which are a external providers, and will fluctuate with the economy as they are factored into "benefits" by the employers of other sectors. This is the price Dentists pay, in exchange for receiving a piece of the pie during boom times.

With medical practitioners, there are alot less of us relative to demand, a steadily increasing elderly and unhealthy population, and our income is almost entirely based upon providing an essential service (ie. not fueled by disposable income, ignoring plastic surgeons). We essentially get paid by the governement, and do not receive "pay cuts" during hard times. People will always get sick, and will not disappear until death. If you mean migration away, fair enough to a small extent, but the shortage of providers makes us very resiliant to this. It's just as hard to find healthcare providers in Calgary, as it is in the maritimes. Our skillset is also very mobile/transposable, so it is actually much easier for us to move away, than it is for our patients away.
________
Vaporizer

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

That's bizarre. I won't arue that's your impression, but nobody benefits when the main industry goes into the red.

Is it really? To quote an old cliche: if everybody was rich, then everybody would also be poor. During a boom, I can buy one house at 100$, but during a full blown recession with the same salary, I can buy 100 houses at 1$ foreclosures....
________
BBW Webcam

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

Is it really? To quote an old cliche: if everybody was rich, then everybody would also be poor. During a boom, I can buy one house at 100$, but during a full blown recession with the same salary, I can buy 100 houses at 1$ foreclosures....

There's another cliche that says a rising tide floats all boats. Virtually everyone in the public service in Alberta in 1993 would probably not agree that they are immune to hard times.

If you were right, everyone in public service would be stampeding to newfoundland - or even rural alberta where relatively speaking it's much more advantageous.

I'll agree that if you are rich enough, a recession is irrelevant. No one still working for a living is that rich.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

There's another cliche that says a rising tide floats all boats. Virtually everyone in the public service in Alberta in 1993 would probably not agree that they are immune to hard times.

If you were right, everyone in public service would be stampeding to newfoundland - or even rural alberta where relatively speaking it's much more advantageous.

I'll agree that if you are rich enough, a recession is irrelevant. No one still working for a living is that rich.

I think you're missing the point. Sure, I will conceed in absolutes that no man is an island, but it's all about relativity. During a boom time, "everyone" does well, but some much MORE than others. So who is truly better off? Those who did better than the others, which in this case is not the health care sector. Conversely during hard times, "everyone" does poorly, but some much LESS than others. So who is better off? Those who fell minimally (if even at all), which in this case is health care. When you have separate sectors benefiting inversely, it's completely relevant to the economic cycle.

It doesn't matter what the absolute amount of dollars floating around is, it's about who has more, relative to the others. This is the essence of spending power.

And I disagree about public servants stampeding elsewhere during hard times, as there is much more to ones decision of where to live than income. Not to mention up front prohibitive factors such as moving costs/loss of family proximity...etc
________
THE CIGAR BOSS

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by fotze

Mind you, they have to watch people die, tell people their child has cancer, stick fingers up homeless guys arseholes, deal with vomit and other bodily fluids and the worst thing, hanging out in a hospital all day. It takes me days to get that horrific hospital feeling out of me after being there. I will trade away all of that for less job security in a heartbeat.

Yeah it's not without it's negatives, although there is alot of variability in how much those play a role. You also have to add that we are essentially self-employed so there are no paid holidays, sick leaves, benefits or pensions. That's the killer, as most health care professionals are notoriously poor businessmen/money managers .
________
California Medical Marijuana Dispensary

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

No I get the point. If everyone else slows down you catch up or even get ahead.

But only in the short term. Long term you are and will forever be linked in income and purchasing power by those who pay the bills - the rest of the economy.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by fotze

I think doctors are pretty much in the drivers seat. Probably why mothers across the planet hope their daughters marry one. They can work anywhere, make good money, never be fired, can turn down difficult patients. Also, if it goes bad here they can go to another country where it is better. They put doctors through crap getting there, but once they get there it is a good career. They also work pretty hard from what I have heard. Aside from billionaire heiress I think doctor is the most solid/secure career on the planet.

Mind you, they have to watch people die, tell people their child has cancer, stick fingers up homeless guys arseholes, deal with vomit and other bodily fluids and the worst thing, hanging out in a hospital all day. It takes me days to get that horrific hospital feeling out of me after being there. I will trade away all of that for less job security in a heartbeat.

I'm actually pretty sympathetic to docs. I think their divorce rate is insane. They get paid crap compared to what it takes to become a doctor and the responsibility they bear. And if you move countries, you almost have to start from scratch.

I'd rather be almost any other professional - higher earning potential and less downside.

[DuffMan]

and in case you were wondering what kind of cash the CEO makes....

Originally Posted by edm sun

One of these realities is the $1.2 million in salary, $1.6 million bonus, 160,000 share options plus the $10 million pension "obligation" that securities filings show Eresman took home last year.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Colu...0/4537829.html

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I'm actually pretty sympathetic to docs. I think their divorce rate is insane. They get paid crap compared to what it takes to become a doctor and the responsibility they bear. And if you move countries, you almost have to start from scratch.

I'd rather be almost any other professional - higher earning potential and less downside.

Too true. But to be fair, most doctors arn't in it for the money, at least around Alberta.