Who bought gas on May 15th?

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

but then I come back to this ... I drive a HEMI laded RAM. The boost of 14 cents in the last week will cost me $11 bucks to fill. That just isn't that big of a deal for me.

Last summer I rode my bike to work for a few of days about 20km each way and it took me about an hour each way plus getting everything together to make the trip took a few minutes too. If I left the house at the same time and drove I could get there in 15, and if I left work at 6:00 I was home in 15 minutes. So by driving I could get an extra two hours in at work at time and a half for being out of the house for the same amount of time. I didn't think it was worth my time to ride the bike as it was costing me like $5 a day to drive to and from work with a V8 Mustang.

[Nufy]

I look at it this way...

I drive a SUV with a V8..

I own it....(Ie .. no payments )

Why should buy a newer more fuel efficient vehicle and add another payment to my monthly budget...

Motorcycle ?? (Not with the idiots in Calgary roads these days)

Higher gas prices will affect the other things I do in my life....

That drive to Cochrane to get the kids some ice cream.....Sorry son..Can't go...

Taking my trailer out on the long weekend to do some camping.....probably not....

That extra 10 bux I am spending on gas will come from somewhere else in my budget...

It may even affect my beer purchases............

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I can appreciate that the perception of things can sometimes seem like Skullduggary. Those 'few cents' each time are actually companies trying to be proactive to avoid a shortage or missing a market opportunity. When a major event happens on the supply side companies forecast what that's going to do to inventory and then watch competitors prices and then adjust accordingly. They don't want to have too much inventory or too little. The worst thing that can happen to a gas station is to run out between deliveries.

I suppose the phrase 'market opportunity' is what you call 'gouging'. I hate to go back to my e-bay example, but go try to buy something from the 'Buy/Sell' thread and ask someone to cut their price in half and sell that to you despite someone else's bid because they won't starve if they sell it to you at that price. It's not right to expect that of them nor is it right to expect that from any company selling anything.

You are taking the position as if the oil companies will suffer if gas prices were to hold at 80 cents throughout a full year. That's B.S. and i'm saying that while ENCANA is building the two tallest office towers west of Toronto, i highly doubt that they would suffer, they just take advantage of a market that NEEDS the product that they offer rather than WANTS it.

[Tron_fdc]

On a sidenote, my inefficient gas guzzling diesel truck was filled yesterday at the Flying J for a meagre price of $0.82/litre.....I might just leave it idling outside while I work!

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

You are taking the position as if the oil companies will suffer if gas prices were to hold at 80 cents throughout a full year. That's B.S. and i'm saying that while ENCANA is building the two tallest office towers west of Toronto, i highly doubt that they would suffer, they just take advantage of a market that NEEDS the product that they offer rather than WANTS it.

You're right oil companies probably wouldn't go under, just as grocery stores won't go under if they arbitrarily sold food for less as well. You NEED food don't you? Are oil companies not allowed to build towers to meet their office needs like companies in other industries? You need a bank too, why don't they just charge less interest than they could get on the market? Hell, why don't they just lend you money for free because you NEED it. You NEED a phone too, why not make Telus sell their phone service for arbitrarily less because they wouldn't go under if they sold things for cheaper too.

The issue is that when prices are set lower than the market is willing to pay for them comsumption will increase because the marginal consumer will be consuming more. The pumps would run dry, and then people like you would blame the oil companies for a giant conspiracy for holding back gasoline from the market. There simply isn't the refinery capacity available in North America nor the ability to quickly add capacity to meet the demand of a constant 80 cent/ litre price.

Shows how uninformed you are when you specifically mention Encana because: a) They don't even sell gasoline in Canada, b) they are building ONE tall building in Calgary not two, 3) Oil makes up less than 20% of their business

[Sylvanfan]

Well I just phoned about every rental place in Edmonton looking to rent a truck for any time this weekend, and no dice 15 places are booked solid for the weekend! So given how many people own trucks, are renting trucks, I'm guessing they could charge $3 a litre and it would have minimal effect. I'm at a point where I'm considering buying a junker to use for two days and than selling it next week, thats how desparate I am to pick up a gas guzzler for the weekend.

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

You're right oil companies probably wouldn't go under, just as grocery stores won't go under if they arbitrarily sold food for less as well. You NEED food don't you? Are oil companies not allowed to build towers to meet their office needs like companies in other industries? You need a bank too, why don't they just charge less interest than they could get on the market? Hell, why don't they just lend you money for free because you NEED it. You NEED a phone too, why not make Telus sell their phone service for arbitrarily less because they wouldn't go under if they sold things for cheaper too.

The issue is that when prices are set lower than the market is willing to pay for them comsumption will increase because the marginal consumer will be consuming more. The pumps would run dry, and then people like you would blame the oil companies for a giant conspiracy for holding back gasoline from the market. There simply isn't the refinery capacity available in North America nor the ability to quickly add capacity to meet the demand of a constant 80 cent/ litre price.

Shows how uninformed you are when you specifically mention Encana because: a) They don't even sell gasoline in Canada, b) they are building ONE tall building in Calgary not two, 3) Oil makes up less than 20% of their business

Good point Cowboy, the problem is that when you bring up something like the phone company, they have had a regulating body (CRTC) for years controlling the cost, TELUS and Bell couldn't adjust the prices if they wanted to. Why doesn't the government do this with gas? Probablt because the government is run by oil and gas so they don't want to piss them off.

Have a look at the design of ENCANA's building and ask yourelf if that's two building, unless you consider a plus 15 connecting two different buildings to be one, but then Calgary only has one office building downtown in that case. So tell me about being uninformed, what does it look like?

As for the theory of people driving more when gas is at a lower price, i drive where i need to when i need to regardless of the price, i assume most people are the same way. Gas gets burned probably at the same rate in the winter as the summer in Alberta, when i get into my car and it's -20 out i need to let it run for 15 minutes just to warm it up, as do most people. The oil-patch is at it's busiest during the winter, most of these people drive trucks and drive quite a distance each day, that doesn't happen nearly as much in the summer due to roads not being accesible from the spring thaw.

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by fotze

and so the what, Air canada has its own building, sony, rogers, shaw, hewlett packard and pretty much every major business on the planet. Protest them while you are at it. Do you think those shaw HD boxes actually cost near $700, more like $40, s are taking advantage of the market that wants HD.

Sure, but i can still watch the same channels on a normal TV and i don't need HDTV, quite a few people need gas to get to work......The companies you listed are not saying you need this or that, it's a choice of wanting it or not. In order to get to work some people need to drive, no vehicle equals no work, see how that works?

[habernac]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

Sure, but i can still watch the same channels on a normal TV and i don't need HDTV, quite a few people need gas to get to work......The companies you listed are not saying you need this or that, it's a choice of wanting it or not. In order to get to work some people need to drive, no vehicle equals no work, see how that works?

take the bus, ride a bike, live closer to work. You don't need it, it's a choice.

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by habernac

take the bus, ride a bike, live closer to work. You don't need it, it's a choice.

So how do i get my tools from one job-site to another? I doubt a bus is going to want to wait for me to load a truck-load of tools into the bus, and biking doesn't work for the same reason. Some people actually do NEED it, it's not a choice.

[simmer2]

A Thousand Barrels A Second by Peter Tertzakian is a great read on what it will take to switch from an oil-dependent society. A really interesting book that definitely relates to the thread at hand.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

Good point Cowboy, the problem is that when you bring up something like the phone company, they have had a regulating body (CRTC) for years controlling the cost, TELUS and Bell couldn't adjust the prices if they wanted to. Why doesn't the government do this with gas? Probablt because the government is run by oil and gas so they don't want to piss them off.

Have a look at the design of ENCANA's building and ask yourelf if that's two building, unless you consider a plus 15 connecting two different buildings to be one, but then Calgary only has one office building downtown in that case. So tell me about being uninformed, what does it look like?

As for the theory of people driving more when gas is at a lower price, i drive where i need to when i need to regardless of the price, i assume most people are the same way. Gas gets burned probably at the same rate in the winter as the summer in Alberta, when i get into my car and it's -20 out i need to let it run for 15 minutes just to warm it up, as do most people. The oil-patch is at it's busiest during the winter, most of these people drive trucks and drive quite a distance each day, that doesn't happen nearly as much in the summer due to roads not being accesible from the spring thaw.

Read my post again and your's about Encana's buildings. You said 'THE TWO tallest buildings west of Toronto' and I said 'ONE TALL' building the emphasis being TALL. The second building across connected by +15 is a small building (Which wouldn't even be considered one of Calgary's biggest). Nova Scotia has regulated gas prices in that oil companies can only raise or drop them once a week and they have to apply for it much like your Telus and Bell land line example to the CRTC (Yet NS has some of the most expensive gas in the country). Also Telus, Bell, and Rogers can charge whatever they want for wireless plans as opposed to the regulated land lines. Since 10% of people (myself included) don't have a land line, it isn't a necessity.

Going back to driving, you might decide to rethink vacation plans that involve driving for multiple days if gas were to cost a significant amount more. Also poorer people might decide to drive less as well with higher prices. You personally might be able to afford increases and thus you continue to consume the same amount, but to assume that 100% of consumption consists of people in exactly your boat is simply incorrect and just anecdotal. The many people on here 'habernac' included who mention alternatives to consume less gas and save money is evidence of that as well.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

You are taking the position as if the oil companies will suffer if gas prices were to hold at 80 cents throughout a full year. That's B.S. and i'm saying that while ENCANA is building the two tallest office towers west of Toronto, i highly doubt that they would suffer, they just take advantage of a market that NEEDS the product that they offer rather than WANTS it.

Encana isn't building anything, they've pre-leased the entire area for 25 years. Making it the Encana building. The developer is H&R REIT who is also securing financing to pay for this building. Meaning no one other then some lending institutions is forking out 1.1 billion for this building. Additionally most companies don't own their own buildings. They just lease the majority of the space and thus get it named after them.

A little off topic, but so is your implication that they are building some super towers because they are so profitable

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by Wookie

Encana isn't building anything, they've pre-leased the entire area for 25 years. Making it the Encana building. The developer is H&R REIT who is also securing financing to pay for this building. Meaning no one other then some lending institutions is forking out 1.1 billion for this building. Additionally most companies don't own their own buildings. They just lease the majority of the space and thus get it named after them.

A little off topic, but so is your implication that they are building some super towers because they are so profitable

You are correct, ENCANA is not profitable.......neither is Imperial Oil, they make no money and need to make money any way they can.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

You are correct, ENCANA is not profitable.......neither is Imperial Oil, they make no money and need to make money any way they can.

Yeah, because that's what I said.

It's not denial. I'm just selective about the reality i accept. -Calvin and Hobbes

[SeeGeeWhy]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

You are correct, ENCANA is not profitable.......neither is Imperial Oil, they make no money and need to make money any way they can.

Deep breath man, just take a deep breath.

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by Wookie

Yeah, because that's what I said.

It's not denial. I'm just selective about the reality i accept. -Calvin and Hobbes

Nobody but lending institutions foot the bill, right? Who pays the bill off? Oil and Gas are profiting from customers that need to pay to heat homes, drive cars......now they are gouging the customers as they have them by the balls.......hard to see, i realize that.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

You are correct, ENCANA is not profitable.......neither is Imperial Oil, they make no money and need to make money any way they can.

Since when is making money and being profitable a sin? Unless you work for the government or non-profit, or are just plain unemployed, the money you make is paid out by the cash flow that your company takes in. Even if you're in the prior categories you are paid indirectly by the profits of corporations or individuals.

Your angst seems to stem from the simplistic notion that you cringe when you see the headline "Encana's quarterly profit soars to $1.9 Billion." That number looks big and when you pay more at the pump it annoys you. There is context to the number as well considering that Encana actually spends $6 Billion a year on wages, Service contracts, infrastructure for projects, etc. If they weren't cranking out a $1.9 Billion quarterly profit on their capital employed then their shareholders would have their heads. If somehow you wanted to trim that profit level down to a few hundred million a quarter then it would tremendously underperform other companies in which to invest in. BTW feel free to buy oil company stock to insulate you from any losses you experience at the pump.

[Ayrahb]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Fair enough, but ~30% of the Government of Alberta's revenue is from the oil and gas sector, not to mention income tax collected from those in the Oil and gas industry. So yes, you are affected quite signifigantly (if not indirectly) by the oil and gas industry. If it dried up, how much funding do you think it would be for non profit programs such as yours?

Sorry to keep hijacking this thread.

Just to clarify this: Alberta government contributes just over $60,000 annually to the program I work for.

It's true that it would be much harder for them to fund various programs without the O&G revenue, but we have been in existence for the past 25 years and received the AB gov funding for much of that time. The have-not provinces all have similar programs regardless of their oil revenues.

Back on topic: I do understand that I too should be looking to make a move to O&G and stop complaining about the cost of gas. But until I do that and start getting a higher salary, bonuses, RSPs, and other benefits that could make me comfortable spending over $1/liter of gas, I am definitely changing my driving habits.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

Nobody but lending institutions foot the bill, right? Who pays the bill off? Oil and Gas are profiting from customers that need to pay to heat homes, drive cars......now they are gouging the customers as they have them by the balls.......hard to see, i realize that.

You seem to be at a point where rational discussion is pointless so I'm not going to continue with this.

Interesting thread though. I always like seeing everybody's take on this.