ShonTron
Moderator
Cool it. We can't have back-and-forth fights. Stick to the topic.
|
|
|
- Thread starter jade_lee
- Start date
H
Hydrogen
Guest
I agree. As a whole, the energy sector in this country just can't do anything right for many people.
Just for the interest of jade-lee, I don't hold mutual funds; I own shares. I'm one of the people who holds a (albeit tiny) bit ownership in some of these companies.
I've also read Peter Foster's book (way back), and I'm wondering what specifically it has to do with a proposed merger in 2009?
kEiThZ
Superstar
What I find most peculiar is that the same folks like jade_lee who admire nationalized companies abroad are always the ones who are opposed to creating champions at home. Surely, if you support nationalized companies a national champion would be a close substitute?
But I guess big business is only bad if its in your backyard. There are many countries that would kill to have companies like Bombardier or Nortel (until recently) or any of our banks as their champions, except of course, Canadians.
But I guess big business is only bad if its in your backyard. There are many countries that would kill to have companies like Bombardier or Nortel (until recently) or any of our banks as their champions, except of course, Canadians.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
Let's not forget the more recent champion of nationalization: Hugo Chavez.
urbanfan89
Active Member
Or George W. Bush.
jade_lee
Active Member
Sadly most of the "champions" are looking more like crooks these days but do support these guys cause they need all the support they can get.
afransen
Senior Member
Everyone owns some energy stock through the CPP.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Sadly most of the "champions" are looking more like crooks these days but do support these guys cause they need all the support they can get.
Let me guess. You'd have no problem with the wonderful nationalized champions like Gazprom and SPDVA who have both done wonders for their respective countries. They are truly shining examples of how well governments can run the energy sector. But you'd have a problem with non-nationalized champions like Airbus, BMW, Embraer, Tata, Qantas, Volvo, Nokia, Siemens, Ericsson, etc. (don't forget there's a big world outside your narrow anti-american/anti-Canadian field of view). Please tell me which of those national champions would be considered crooks in their countries. In Canada, I can guess your opinion about Bombardier, PotashCorp, RIM, etc.
Last edited:
jade_lee
Active Member
Interesting choice of Champions you got there. Personally I think the laws guiding Industries here in Canada are pretty good ones, it's the enforcement of these laws that need our attention.
btw I didn't say I support the nationalization of Saudi oil but merely pointed out how wildly successful they have become.
"But I guess big business is only bad if its in your backyard. There are many countries that would kill to have companies like Bombardier or Nortel (until recently) or any of our banks as their champions, except of course, Canadians."
You putting down all Canadians or just me?
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Yep, interesting. Amazing how when you look at the whole world, there are countries that do support successful companies without nationalizing them.
Agreed. The only laws that I have a problem with are ones that single out specific companies for attention. We slap ownership restrictions on Petro-Canada but no restrictions on Esso-Imperial, Shell, etc. And it particularly makes no sense when the buyer is Canadian. It's time to stop that kind of discrimination.
Really? What was this statement:
Sounds like you were citing the Saudi nationalization experience as a model for our oil industry.
Having lived in the Middle East I know the truth about Aramco and the like. You should check out who works there and runs those companies. They are all foreign staff and labourers who get paid relatively crappy wages. But even Saudi has not maximized oil profits for itself. They routinely hand out oil at low prices under the guise of islamic solidarity. They also routinely funnel money to enrich the ruling family and tribal leaders. You should check out the infrastructure in Mecca. One would not believe they had any oil if they saw that.
As for nationalization, the only reason that worked out so well for Saudi was because they have a moderate attitude towards oil pricing. They aren't out there using oil as a political weapon. For comparison, let's look at Gazprom and PDVSA and let's look at how their home countries are fairing now. There's also another country you might like: Iran. Great energy sector. So well managed, in fact, that they import refined petroleum products. Perfect examples for our energy sector to follow.
Just Canadians who have a problem with Canadian companies being successful.
Let's look at the alternative to this merger. Both Suncor and Petro-Can are too small today to fall under any sort of Investment Review. So let's say this merger does not happen....a foreigner could stroll right in and buy Suncor or pick up a significant legal stake in Petro-Can (25% is the limit I believe). That'd be fine with you? So foreign take-overs good, national energy champion with a good share price and large market capitalization (still only 1/10th of ExxonMobil by the way) having its head offices and main operations based in Canada bad. Got it.
Last edited:
jade_lee
Active Member
Why is Peter Foster questioning the fairness of this deal? Surely this deserves some attention. Some debate. It's very clear that the tar sands are getting a great deal of attention globally and not for all the right reasons.
Question, are Canadian Companies making the bulk of the profit from Canadian oil?
Of course they aren't. Who should we support?
The argument that the Canadian oil industry has no power is something I would agree with in terms of capitalizing their exploration and exploitation.
I would argue that the foreign take over of the Canadian oil industry happened long ago and that Trudeau didn't do a good job of stopping it because perhaps he thought he was dealing with fair people.
Question, are Canadian Companies making the bulk of the profit from Canadian oil?
Of course they aren't. Who should we support?
The argument that the Canadian oil industry has no power is something I would agree with in terms of capitalizing their exploration and exploitation.
I would argue that the foreign take over of the Canadian oil industry happened long ago and that Trudeau didn't do a good job of stopping it because perhaps he thought he was dealing with fair people.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Your right. The companies don't accrue the bulk of the benefits. Royalties, personal income taxes, corporate income taxes, corporate dividends all go to Canadians or their governments.
So you are against the oil industry but would pay for their exploration and resource exploitation efforts?
Perhaps if we didn't have companies with market capitalizations that were so small that they'd statistical errors on the global market, they would not have become easy take-over targets. Even this merger will merely transform Suncor and Petro-Can from snacks for foreigners to a single more filling appetizer.
Dilla
Senior Member
Why waste time in getting yet another Jade_Lee vs. kEiThZ thread going, eh? Why don't you two just get married.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
Sometimes, I do feel the need to take the time to teach the unwise…..
However, you shouldn't mistake charity for affection.
jade_lee
Active Member
Both of you gag me with a spoon!