Member Info for Love_You

Yeah, I also wonder who is deceiving who because the official stats stopped deceiving me about six or seven years ago.

Take a typical English village, albeit a large one, 5,000 houses/bungalows, so assume the population is 12,500.

The only jobs in this relatively job-friendly village are a local post office/corner shop (3 jobs), a high-school which they are lucky to have, (75 jobs), 2 small garages (10 jobs), a dentists (8 jobs), a medical practice (12 jobs), a pub (3 jobs full-time), and an Indian restaurant (8 jobs but part-time: so only 4 full-time jobs really), and a family-owned coffee shop (2 jobs). And that is the sum total of the employment opportunities in that village = 117.

So 114 jobs for 12,500 people and the official statistics claim "full employment" - if anyone actually believed the official statistics anymore they may as well believe that pigs fly.

I'm a bright fellow - given shareholders have lost $300 million here due to bureaucratic incompetence, I'll make you an offer (you being those with a decent equity stake such as above 7%). Pay me $300,000 and I'll do my damndest for 6 months to get the necessary approvals for Barryoe to be developed. I'm normally pretty good at navigating/negotiating bureaucratic systems, and I have the advantage of my first language being English, and having been educated at five different UK universities. So I consider my services well worth the fee alluded to above - after all what's another $300,000 when you have sat for seven years watching this company get nowhere whilst over $300 million of equity value (shareholders' money) has been squandered.

It is sheer incompetence in my opinion.

I'm a bright fellow - given shareholders have lost $300 million here due to bureaucratic incompetence, I'll make you an offer (you being those with a decent equity stake such as above 7%). Pay me $300,000 and I'll do my damndest for 6 months to get the necessary approvals for Barryoe to be developed. I'm normally pretty good at navigating/negotiating bureaucratic systems, and I have the advantage of my first language being English, and having been educated at five different UK universities. So I consider my services well worth the fee alluded to above - after all what's another $300,000 when you have sat for seven years watching this company get nowhere whilst over $300 million of equity value (shareholders' money) has been squandered.

You need to look at tax rates - the profitability of oil production differs hugely by country and their individual tax regimes/rates.

Tullow have struck lucky with Ghana - they have one of the lowest tax rates for oil in the world at only 30%.

By contrast Enquest's oil production in Indonesia is never going to be financially worth much as Indonesia has one of the highest tax rates for oil companies anywhere on Earth - no one ever makes much profit from oil production in Indonesia after paying their taxes, extra charges, and royalties - Indonesia is a terrible place to try and do business with regards to oil extraction as it's massively over-taxed as an industry. However, the UK is also a very poor jurisdiction for oil production due to the excessive tax rates.

The lowest tax rates on the oil industry are in Ghana, Falkland Isles, Guyana, Canada and USA - these are the places which oil companies want to do business in because the tax rates are fair and it is possible to make a reasonable return on capital for shareholders who are risking their money don't forget - but places like Indonesia and UK don't deserve to have an oil industry as shareholders can't make any money because the tax rates are at least double what a sensible rate would be.

PMO are lucky to have the Falkland's because their government is realistic enough to realise that setting a fair, but lowish, tax rate is in everyone's interest as it is the only way to attract companies to develop the oil at all - and getting the oil developed with make everyone involved a lot richer than if people squabble to the point that oil demand declines so much that there is no longer enough interest in getting the oil produced at all.

You need to look at tax rates - the profitability of oil production differs hugely by country and their individual tax regimes/rates.

Tullow have struck lucky with Ghana - they have one of the lowest tax rates for oil in the world at only 30%.

By contrast Enquest's oil production in Indonesia is never going to be financially worth much as Indonesia has pretty much of the highest tax rates for oil companies anywhere on Earth - no one ever makes much profit from oil production in Indonesia after paying their taxes, extra charges, and royalties - Indonesia is a terrible place to try and do business with regards to oil extraction as it's massively over-taxed as an industry - even the UK is a very poor location for oil production due to the tax rates.

The lowest tax rates on the oil industry are Ghana, Falkland Isles, Guyana, Canada and USA - these are the places which oil companies want to do business in because the tax rates are fair and it is possible to make a reasonable return on capital for shareholders who are risking their money don't forget - but places like Indonesia and UK don't deserve to have an oil industry as shareholders can't make any money because the tax rates are at least double what a sensible rate would be.

PMO are lucky to have the Falkland's because their government is realistic enough to realise that setting a fair, but lowish, tax rate is in everyone's interest as it is the only way to attract companies to develop the oil at all - and getting the oil developed with make everyone involved a lot richer than if people squabble to the point that oil demand declines so much that there is no longer enough interest in getting the oil produced at all.

You need to look at tax rates - the profitability of oil production differs hugely by country and their individual tax regimes/rates.

Tullow have struck lucky with Ghana - they have one of the lowest tax rates for oil in the world at only 30%.

By contrast Enquest's oil production in Indonesia is never going to be financially worth much as Indonesia has one of the highest tax rates for oil-&-gas companies anywhere on Earth - no one ever makes much profit from oil production in Indonesia after paying their taxes, extra charges, and royalties - Indonesia is a terrible place to try and do business with regards to oil extraction as it's massively over-taxed as an industry - even the UK is a very poor location for oil production due to the tax rates.

The lowest tax rates on the oil industry are Ghana, Falkland Isles, Guyana, Canada and USA - these are the places which oil companies want to do business in because the tax rates are fair and it is possible to make a reasonable return on capital for shareholders who are risking their money don't forget - but places like Indonesia and UK don't deserve to have an oil industry as shareholders can't make any money because the tax rates are at least double what a sensible rate would be.

You need to look at tax rates - the profitability of oil production differs hugely by country and their individual tax regimes/rates.

Tullow have struck lucky with Ghana - they have one of the lowest tax rates for oil in the world at only 30%.

By contrast Enquest's oil production in Indonesia is never going to be financially worth much as Indonesia has pretty much of the highest tax rates for oil companies anywhere on Earth - no one ever makes much profit from oil production in Indonesia after paying their taxes, extra charges, and royalties - Indonesia is a terrible place to try and do business with regards to oil extraction as it's massively over-taxed as an industry - even the UK is a very poor location for oil production due to the tax rates.

The lowest tax rates on the oil industry are Ghana, Falkland Isles, Guyana, Canada and USA - these are the places which oil companies want to do business in because the tax rates are fair and it is possible to make a reasonable return on capital for shareholders who are risking their money don't forget - but places like Indonesia and UK don't deserve to have an oil industry as shareholders can't make any money because the tax rates are at least double what a sensible rate would be.

You need to look at tax rates - the profitability of oil production differs hugely by country and their individual tax regimes/rates.

Tullow have struck lucky with Ghana - they have one of the lowest tax rates for oil in the world at only 30%.

By contrast Enquest's oil production in Indonesia is never going to be financially worth much as Indonesia has pretty much of the highest tax rates for oil companies anywhere on Earth - no one ever makes much profit there after paying there taxes, charges, royalties - terrible place to try and do business.

Also Vodafone employ far too many lawyers on far too vastly inflated salaries - too many people getting paid mega-bucks for offering legal advice that probably isn't even needed from the bit of insight into the company I have had.

All analysis is just GroupThink and pretty useless unless the analysts are getting out onto the streets all around the UK, from the smallest hamlets to the cities, and asking people questions such as:

(1) What could HSBC do to improve your life over the next five years?
(2) Do you contribute more to the economy than you take out, or vice versa?
(3) If your local area was to become the ideal place for you to live and work, how would it look in terms of housing, leisure opportunities, and the types/locations of businesses (and of the roles/jobs within them)?

All analysis is just GroupThink and pretty useless unless the analysts are getting out onto the streets all around the UK, from the smallest hamlets to the cities, and asking people questions such as:

(1) What could RBS do to improve your life over the next five years?
(2) Do you contribute more to the economy than you take out, or vice versa?
(3) If your local area was to become the ideal place for you to live and work, how would it look in terms of housing, leisure opportunities, and the types/locations of businesses (and of the roles/jobs within them)?

All analysis is just GroupThink and pretty useless unless the analysts are getting out onto the streets all around the UK, from the smallest hamlets to the cities, and asking people questions such as:

(1) What could Lloyds do to improve your life over the next five years?
(2) Do you contribute more to the economy than you take out, or vice versa?
(3) If your local area was to become the ideal place for you to live and work, how would it look in terms of housing, leisure opportunities, and the types/locations of businesses (and of the roles/jobs within them)?

All analysis is just GroupThink and pretty useless unless the analysts are getting out onto the streets all around the UK, from the smallest hamlets to the cities, and asking people questions such as:

(1) What could Barclays do to improve your life over the next five years?
(2) Do you contribute more to the economy than you take out, or vice versa?
(3) If you local area was to become the ideal place for you to live and work, how would it look in terms of housing, leisure opportunities, and the types/locations of businesses and of the roles/jobs within them?

HI LeeRex,

That link didn't seem to be working.

However, I am interested to hear more about hydrogen technology, although personally I feel LPG may be the way to go rather than lithium/electric in the short-term, as LPG prices are about half those of petrol/diesel, and in many parts of America natural gas prices are negative as they can't transport the gas out due to lack of infrastructure and only want the oil from the fracked wells. Hence anyone local who can run their vehicles on LPG has a free source of fuel, as the oil companies are willing to give the natural gas away for free to anyone who can transport it out/away for them because they are trying to reduce the amount which they "flare off".

Then again it won't help me because due to all the financial fraud that has profilerated this past decade I have already lost a huge wedge - when actually the projects I invested in were trying to create genuine growth/lower oil prices, rather than investing in psychologically damaging/addictive/harmful products like Apple/Facebook.

People just needs cars, fuel, food, houses, holidays - and everyone is then happy - why can't Carney just direct all his QE to these areas of the economy rather than creating huge egotistical idiots like Musk and Bezos who wan't to rule the world, transfer half the world's population to Mars, and have everyone just clicking on cheap plastic stuff from Asia, through Amazon, that they don't even need and doesn't make them happy.

What people need is a local economy, and lots of local artisan business - any economy should have a main focus on five things - food, cars/fuel, houses, and holidays. Technology just comes into "other" and is a part of entertainment, and people are free to spend their disposable income however they want - however unless they have access to cars/fuel they can't make a free choice because any outdoors activity necessarily requires "lots of space" and is accessible only by car.

Why is Carney constantly bailing out people/investors who have taken on way too much debt - surely this joke has to come to and end soon, interest rates need to rise to 5%, and over-indebted loans/borrowers need to be foreclosed and allow someone else to take their place

I always respected Mervyn King far more than Mark Carney.

Mervyn King actually seemed to understand the causes of the financial crisis, and claimed to have foreseen it coming, except that he didn't have the powers at the time to do much about preventing it. But from what he was saying it made sense to me that if he'd had the requisite powers he could have prevented the 08/09 economic crisis because the causes he outlined publicly were the ones I also had analysed as the true causes/factors, whereas most analysts seem to have other reasons which I just don't find to be the realistic fundamental causes when I apply a cause-and-effect analysis to the issue, based on reasonable thinking and trying to be "middle of the road."

I would have Mervyn King back any day over Mark Carney - any governor that doesn't have any other plan than to spend 8 years lying about what really needs to be done to fix the economy, whilst keeping interest rates at a completely distorted/irrational 0.5%, is pretty much an economic criminal to me - stealing from people and so far away from "middle of the road" in his policies that he has been a joke for years.

Of course what needs to happen is that oil companies need to start training up the unemployed graduates who have useless degrees in sociology/psychology/film studies in which they can't find employment as the economy never needed 15% of all new graduates to be in these "peripheral" subjects. Complete economic mismanagement by the education system but oil companies should have started offering their own degrees/training programmes years ago once they realised service/personnel costs were getting truly out of control (which is the only way the huge debts in the oil sector can be explained - i.e. they can't pay workers 50p an hour like Apple can to make its I-phones in China, which is ethically reprehensible in my opinion and why I refuse to buy any Apple products until they start to behave like human beings again and implement proper pay and conditions that are commensurate to working conditions the CEO would be happy for his children to be employed under - otherwise how can his world remain stable when it is as ethically two-faced as it is possible to be?).

Hi,

How can shorts have closed positions since last December, it was obvious oil was bullish (well it was to me and I'm not even an expert - but maybe an "expert through experience"). Hence longs should have had the confidence to increase their long positions on oil and oil stocks - if shorters are going to behave irrationally then longs should keep loading up, after all you don't look a gift horse in the mouth in the markets and shorters are 95%+ likely to be wrong here, and yet pigheadedly still refuse to close (which is why the share price won't rise) - hence longs should do it for them by doubling their bets and seeing if the shorters really have the kajones in this situation.

Thank you Montecristo - but perhaps you can help me find employment within the part of a Uk bank which valuates new business ideas and provides them with capital?

Or alternatively, perhaps you could help me to raise £200,000 in starting capital for a business idea which I have? By "help" I mean advise about realistic potential sources of such capital for people who would like to start a business but can not show a few years of accounts because the business can not function at all without more start-up capital than the person with the idea currently has access to.