Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[GGG]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No question that the NDP have made the correct decision here and for that, ALL Albertans should be thankful. Rachel Notley and crew are finally showing they do live in reality at moments.

However, it is also now fair game to wonder what all their bluster during the campaign was really all about. When you look at the actual platform they ran on, and all the statements that were in black and white on their website, it's very apparent that one of two things has to be factual and true:


A) they flat out lied about the royalty system being unfair to Albertans and disingenuously parroted it over and over all the while knowing nothing would change but it was a great way to discredit their opponents.

or

B) They truly had no clue what the hell they were talking about even though leadership had full access to how things worked and could easily have informed themselves. Then they chose not to as it would take away the possibility of being "right" through all their rhetoric.

Niether one of those things should go unchallenged by the media nor their constituents because it means they have cost thousands Albertans their livlihoods by being liars or incompetent and that is unacceptable.

It's about the same kind of election promise of we will find inefficiencies in government to lower taxes and reduce debt that gets parroted by every party. Or Trudeaus Syrian refugee commitments. or every party Evers the books are so much worse than we thought they are.

What differentiates good politicians and bad are the ones who when faced with reality have the strength to go against the platform pledges and execute good governance.

The royalty review did not accomplish nothing it's changed some factors of how things ar calculated. It will take some time before each sector can say they benefit or are hurt by the smaller changes.

And it's quite a bit of hyperbole to say that 1000s of jobs were lost due to the uncertainty created by this review. Someone earlier made a good point that light conventional oil and gas drilling was hurt by this review so definitely some jobs lost there.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Where did your previous perception of royalties come from?

Mine came from Stelmech putting through changes, industry blackmailing him with capital flight, then him changing them again under threat of industry leaving.

Under that process it did not appear that an independant review was done or that the publics best interests were in mind when it was conducted.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I'm thrilled the oil sands royalties are staying the same. But without knowing the new rates for oil/gas/ngls, it's tough to say they won't be putting in a cash grab at higher commodity prices.

That's fair, I'm oilsands focused and have zero knowledge of the royalty structure and pretty limited knowledge of the business drivers on the conventional side.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by GGG

What differentiates good politicians and bad are the ones who when faced with reality have the strength to go against the platform pledges and execute good governance.

Sounds like you are saying they should exaggerate and make ridiculous promises but then when in power break those promises and govern in a different direction. You must be very happy with the federal Libs then.

Originally Posted by GGG

Mine came from Stelmech putting through changes, industry blackmailing him with capital flight, then him changing them again under threat of industry leaving.

Industry goes where it can make a profit. If you change the business atmosphere so that a different jurisdiction becomes more attractive then you can expect investment to slow down or leave entirely. That's not blackmail, that's reality.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is absolutely correct and why a carbon tax doenst matter in a properly designed royalty scheme.

The royalty should be set and cost - reasonable investment return based on risk = governments take. If you increase the cost by adding a carbon tax you still need the same ROI to justify projects so the governments take goes down or investment in the industry goes down.

I get it and agree completely. It's a smart move. It's just a rather large change that favours oil companies not the typical NDP favs like the environment or "the average family". If she had mentioned it in her platform, it would have sounded very strange to say...everybody has to do their part so it's 20% across the board....except the biggest emitters who haven't been paying us what we deserve in the first place and who now get to write it off first.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No question that the NDP have made the correct decision here and for that, ALL Albertans should be thankful. Rachel Notley and crew are finally showing they do live in reality at moments.

However, it is also now fair game to wonder what all their bluster during the campaign was really all about. When you look at the actual platform they ran on, and all the statements that were in black and white on their website, it's very apparent that one of two things has to be factual and true:


A) they flat out lied about the royalty system being unfair to Albertans and disingenuously parroted it over and over all the while knowing nothing would change but it was a great way to discredit their opponents.

or

B) They truly had no clue what the hell they were talking about even though leadership had full access to how things worked and could easily have informed themselves. Then they chose not to as it would take away the possibility of being "right" through all their rhetoric.

Niether one of those things should go unchallenged by the media nor their constituents because it means they have cost thousands Albertans their livlihoods by being liars or incompetent and that is unacceptable.

Or, simply that ALL parties move to the middle from election campaign to governing.

[SebC]

http://business.financialpost.com/fp...s-is-that-fair

According to this article, the oil sands have not turned a net profit after royalties. That can't be right... can it?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Sounds like you are saying they should exaggerate and make ridiculous promises but then when in power break those promises and govern in a different direction. You must be very happy with the federal Libs then.


Industry goes where it can make a profit. If you change the business atmosphere so that a different jurisdiction becomes more attractive then you can expect investment to slow down or leave entirely. That's not blackmail, that's reality.

I'm saying every government ever campaigns on one Thing and does another. Anyone remember income trusts. To say the NDP is somehow worse then previous governments at moving their promises toward the middle is false. And then to judge them negatively based on good decisions is terrible. It pushes parties to just go for their base as they can't convince anyone else.

People got good governance but because of laundry can't see it and need to complain about it.

The point at which it becomes blackmail is when the claim of the damage exceeds the damage being done. No different than sports teams threatening to leave.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by SebC

http://business.financialpost.com/fp...s-is-that-fair

According to this article, the oil sands have not turned a net profit after royalties. That can't be right... can it?

Seems probable. The oil sands projects I'm familiar with are some of the most successful ones, and the profit every year is about equal to sustaining and growth capex. It will be this year as well, just with growth capex = 0.

Since there have also been some boondoggles, (long lake, stp mackay, Total Joslyn) I'd be suspicious of anyone who said otherwise.

[Resolute 14]

Also, it's long been said the Oil Sands needs $80+ oil to be profitable. WTI has only been over that level for about six years or so in that entire time. Not a lot of time - yet - to turn profits. I would guess oil sands so far is mostly losses anticipating future payout.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by GGG

...What differentiates good politicians and bad are the ones who when faced with reality have the strength to go against the platform pledges and execute good governance...

Originally Posted by Bunk

Or, simply that ALL parties move to the middle from election campaign to governing.

Wait a moment... Are you suggesting politicians would promise just about anything to get elected? Even if they don't really mean or care to do it?? OMG!

[Flash Walken]

Hey, at least after this royalty review we know oil companies aren't at fault for the debt levels inthr province.

We know now that that can be placed firmly at the feet of the previous PC governments who squandered that wealth instead of the oil companies not kicking in.

So, good news for the energy sector. Bad news for the PCs






Right?

[Red Potato Standing By]

squandered the wealth giving albertans what they wanted. services without having to pay more in taxes for it.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Hey, at least after this royalty review we know oil companies aren't at fault for the debt levels inthr province.

We know now that that can be placed firmly at the feet of the previous PC governments who squandered that wealth instead of the oil companies not kicking in.

So, good news for the energy sector. Bad news for the PCs






Right?

I don't think anyone is going to argue that the PC's pissed money away like someone's drunken Uncle at Stampede, while building a bloated, ineffective civil service with a unsustainable pension, and a high paystructure.

If the NDP wants a chance at winning a re-election in these difficult times, they're going to have to turn an eye towards their union base and deliver some severe bad news when they re-negotiate 170 contracts this year.

They're also going to have to look at seriously shaving their government day to day operation costs.

If they arrive at the budget with a 8 figure deficit and no significant spending cuts (and I'm not talking about their infrastructure plans, which they're going to have to go ahead with, but with an intelligent plan for spending), then they're no better then the PC's that got washed out of government.

The NDP are going to have to live with the reality that their ascertain that its all the evil corporations fault for not paying their fair share was wrong. They're also going to have to show a intelligent plan for the use of the money from their increased taxation.

The budget is going to be the next serious angst moment for this government.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

You can always count on team ndp to come in and deflect things when people start picking on them

Is there a union for that?

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

You can always count on team ndp to come in and deflect things when people start picking on them

Is there a union for that?

Isn't this post just a little hypocritical?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Or, simply that ALL parties move to the middle from election campaign to governing.

In that case you and ALL leftists should have little problem with the WRP being elected.....right?

Or a complete cop out...one of those have to be true.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by transplant99

In that case you and ALL leftists should have little problem with the WRP being elected.....right?

Or a complete cop out...one of those have to be true.

Yes it's very unlikely that the WRP would implement the social agenda favoured by its members and it is complete fear mongering when they get lake of fired. Or How about when the WRP fails to find a billion dollars in efficiencies we just don't bring it up.

Is everyone who claimed the NDP was going to destroy the oil industry by raising royalties going to come in and apologize too.

This whole issue is just cheering for laundry now instead of us being happy that good governance without political interference preveiled

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Also, it's long been said the Oil Sands needs $80+ oil to be profitable. WTI has only been over that level for about six years or so in that entire time. Not a lot of time - yet - to turn profits. I would guess oil sands so far is mostly losses anticipating future payout.

Not nearly as long as the oil sands have been around - although increasing production means that aggregate data will be weighted towards the recent.

Also, GGG, "laundry"? As in dirty laundry, baggage, skeletons?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by SebC

Not nearly as long as the oil sands have been around - although increasing production means that aggregate data will be weighted towards the recent.

Also, GGG, "laundry"? As in dirty laundry, baggage, skeletons?

Laundry as in Seinfelds take on sports teams being just cheering for laundry.