Rod Black

Agree on Lowry moving forward, being a force. Untouchables in terms of a trade by this GM, are Ladd, little, wheeler, Scheif, Lowry, buff, Meyer, trouba. Need frolic, Perrault, Stafford. Jets total comp this year is 68 mil. Hawks was 89. Jets have tons of room to keep building.

Watching Jets with Buff is a lot more fun than without Buff. He is the type of player that I would want on my team, rather than on the enemies team. He teaches the opposition to look over their shoulders. The Ducks are just one of maybe two or three teams that can deal with his intimidation and physical domination. Everyone one knows what a Buff is capable of. This isnt a series that the Jets are getting blown out. They are showing they can compete with a Cup calibre team and play very entertaining hockey. But for petes sake, getting a couple of wins would make this season a success beyond my expectations.

That Dinwiddie to Bryant play made me like the guys abilities.

The ugly rider fan, residential schools, buggers in politics, cowboy church, gay cowboy church, gay ugly bugger rider fan politicians that attended a residential school run by a cowboy church on the flat earth. What does it take to discuss the REALLY important stuff...when is the McRib coming back?

Bill Blaikie was a Long time church minister, rider fan, politician and mp for Transcona, most of the things were fighting about here, and not once during our arguments, did he ever admit that the earth was flat. He obviously had NOTHING going for him. I'll say it again, the EARTH is FLAT.

I've been to a friends Cowboy Church. You wear whatever western wear you want. But I must say during the service, Seldom was heard, a discouraging word.

Wow, thank you Mr. Moderators! Quick action taken to clean up the board. Excellent work!

Good article. Tells it like it is.

He wore 14 for the Bombers. Here's what he said in the article linked above: Thanks Jacquie. My recollection is NOT what it use to be. And 1414 at 411 makes way more sense, after you confirm the proper number.

Now if I got my recollections right, he was number 13 for the Bombers. At the time 411 Cumberland was suppose to be an upscale apartment block. He lived there and only took an apartment if he could reside in suite number 1313.

Not counting the past week of declines, the big brains state that WTI oil has a 50% chance of rising to $66.50 in March and an 11% chance of achieving $80.00 in the same time period. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/uncertainty/index.cfm

according to this http://retail.petro-canada.ca/en/fuelsavings/2139.aspx 10 cents to the feds, 14 to the province, a flat tax regardless of price. Naturally, gst floats.With the TSX falling below 14K on pretty pedestrian volume, I wouldn't be surprised to see it test support at 12 or 11.5 in the next few months. So GST generated in dollars from gasoline sales should drop, right? The Federal budget could be affected. What did everyone miss in May when oil prices were flying? Did the supply and demand issues just materialize? Is the very rapid rise in the U.S. Dollar influencing the oil price, unduly?

Fraser. The volume on oil stocks doesn't appear to be sending any telling signals, indicating capitulation. In fact, the EIA oil inventory report shows a significant increase as opposed to a consensus decrease. That indicator might suggest that your theory is valid on this dive in prices is based on fundamentals, supply, rather than traders doing what traders do. So, is the federal tax value per litre of gas a fixed cent rate or a percentage rate?

what do you think the odds are that the saudis are making back whatever they lose per barrel, by betting on the rout in oil stocks. Interesting theory, mark F. Fraser, with the benefit of 9 hours after your post, looks like oil is opening the day in Asia at 62.25. Could be capitulation. High volume today in the North American markets, but not very huge volumes. Would expect huge volume to coincide with a hammer to signal a bottom.

There are kinda 2 pictures here. There is the producers, and what they get for a barrel, then there is what the gas station charges. The 2 are only loosley connected and there sure seems to be some collusion amongst the retailers. That's what most people complain about. The lag from the drop in oil prices to the drop at the pump is not offset by how quickly pump prices move when the barrel price goes up. Your correct that the collusion is what most people talk about. But collusion is such a strong word when what folks witness is the result of competition and free market activity. Still don't buy it. At least not locally. Price fixing at the pump still seems to be what is going on with retail prices moving pretty slowly. We don't have an aggressive retailer in Kelowna like I've seen in the Lower Mainland and our prices reflect that. Not buying it is certainly your prerogative. In fact, most folks agree with you.

OIl is below 70 cents a barrel and still falling because there is an over supply globally, prices won't get jacked up until the price comes back up as supply gets cut and that will take some time to happen. Companies don't just shut down their production instantly. OPEC has already said they won't cut supply so the first to be cut will be American oil shale production, if a low price persists then you'll see oil sands production cut, but that would require several years to really see a big impact, too much investment already to just walk away from because prices are down.Of course you mean 70 bucks. However OPEC has only said they are not cutting NOW. The higher cost producers within OPEC are outraged at that decision. OPEC made a decision but is far from unanimous. They have to revisit this issue in a few months as well. There is way more oil in the ground than just American shale that could be curtailed. What happens first is the capital drilling programs will be curtailed before any current producing rig is shut off. This stuff happens all the time in the resource industry. As an example Mines produce all the time during a dip in the Underlying commodity. I know how the oil industry works, I'm part of it, I work in the production side of things. The reason I say that it's American oil shale will be the first cut is because it's the most cost and energy intensive kind of oil to produce and it's the newest player. The way they are getting a lot of that out of the ground it's pretty straightforward to postpone production there. There will be lots of production cut, but a lot of it depends on the company drilling it and the complexity of the play. Really this all came about because the United States has become more self sufficient and less reliant on mid eat oil. OPEC doesn't want their global market share impacted so they're willing to take on lower prices to drive some of the production from the higher investment sources down. That means Oil shales are first on the chopping block. It is most accurate to say that it depends on the company drilling it, and the complexity of the play. If broken out to finding costs and lifting costs of oil, the U.S. energy Information Administration may not be specific enough. But what comes is lifting produces income, and finding is a must do for continued growth. http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=367&t=6

There are kinda 2 pictures here. There is the producers, and what they get for a barrel, then there is what the gas station charges. The 2 are only loosley connected and there sure seems to be some collusion amongst the retailers. That's what most people complain about. The lag from the drop in oil prices to the drop at the pump is not offset by how quickly pump prices move when the barrel price goes up. Your correct that the collusion is what most people talk about. But collusion is such a strong word when what folks witness is the result of competition and free market activity.

I wouldn't mind knowing Wade's bathroom schedule. Sometimes being a General Manager is a messy bit of business.

OIl is below 70 cents a barrel and still falling because there is an over supply globally, prices won't get jacked up until the price comes back up as supply gets cut and that will take some time to happen. Companies don't just shut down their production instantly. OPEC has already said they won't cut supply so the first to be cut will be American oil shale production, if a low price persists then you'll see oil sands production cut, but that would require several years to really see a big impact, too much investment already to just walk away from because prices are down. Of course you mean 70 bucks. However OPEC has only said they are not cutting NOW. The higher cost producers within OPEC are outraged at that decision. OPEC made a decision but is far from unanimous. They have to revisit this issue in a few months as well. There is way more oil in the ground than just American shale that could be curtailed. What happens first is the capital drilling programs will be curtailed before any current producing rig is shut off. This stuff happens all the time in the resource industry. As an example Mines produce all the time during a dip in the Underlying commodity.

but they aren't flexing their muscle's. Normally they flex their muscles by cutting production to increase prices. They are basically admitting that they can't do that any more because it wouldn't increase prices, it would just eat into their market share. I doubt US is going to stop fracking either just because they came later to the party then Canada and have less skin in the game. If were waiting for companies to curtail production to bring supply and demand back in line, that isn't a blip in the radar, its a pretty long process especially with the high amount of fixed costs already invested. With Europe crawling and Asia slowing down, I don't see this playing out too fast. Agreed. There is no clear conspiracy to shut down North American producers. The boogey man is a great theory when fact isn't used. A few overly levered juniors or mids might be forced to idle some rigs, and this will cause them to amalgamate or be purchased at very good prices. Gasoline prices will harden when demand increases.

Impressive that Riley is respected by such a huge football program like Nebraska. At 61 years of age, it's not clear how much longer he plans on coaching, but another 10 years on the sidelines is within the realm of possibility for a college coach. Nebraska has produced legendary coaches. Would love to see Mikey do well. Maybe the Huskers are my team again.

Big Blue, maybe it's good that they aren't sharing. Isn't there a maxim something like"Laws are like hotdogs, you wouldn't want to watch either being made".

Glenn would wind up as the starter there without a doubt if you ask me. Hey 17 to 85, do you doubt that Glenn would wind up as the starter there?

I can honestly say, I think there are going to be some changes.

WHAT?! that's shocking Who did we give up?