6 Comments

As always, Michael, your marriage of historical long view and insightful take on current market state is unique and of immense 'navigarional' value.

I wonder if you might do the same regarding the demand side. Many of us have paltry frames of reference for what "high" really means when it comes to fuel prices, inflation and interest rates (to say nothing of international conflict).

Headlines and analyst outputs are geared to their audiences' recent experience, whereas the 'available present' is always a product of a somewhat deeper past.

Expand full comment

Thank you Michael for your priceless insights. You are not only enriching a lot of Canadians but also helping revive Canada's O&G companies and economy.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Michael. Your knowledge base of the space is of immense value. Thank you for adding to mine. I’ve spent about a year now studying and taking positions in Canadian E&P’s and see them as a strong core to building my “last” portfolio in energy, which is becoming my passion. Enjoy everything you write and share in the spaces.

Expand full comment

Interesting, fascinating & informative even if I can't participate.

Expand full comment

The "room to run" illustration would be more meaningful if you compared current market cap to the 2014 market cap in order to discount dilution. Thanks for sharing.

Expand full comment

I don't think that adds much unless the dilution came from issuing shares to raise funds to repay debt and the issue was at a price that did not reflect value. I don't think that happened for any of these names. If I am wrong, let me know which. If shares were issued to acquire assets, the assets would have risen in parallel with the shares and the "dilution" obviated by the gains on the assets.

Expand full comment