Continental Resources Business Practices

[Pete]

Apparently this isn't the first time for them. But, it gets more public as Continental grows. Must be tough to have your personal disputes carried out on newspapers and magazines across the country.

Yes, she has threatened to divorce him in the past and still hasn't done it.

It may have gone a bit further this time but my source said he didn't think she would ever divorce him.

[CaptDave]

Harold Hamm: Keystone XL no longer needed | News OK

[onthestrip]

Harold Hamm: Keystone XL no longer needed | News OK

Thats fine by me. If Canada thinks they need to pipe oil to the coast to process and ship, then why dont they build the pipeline in Canada and go to their east or west coast with it. I never understood why we had to let this happen. Pretty much the only benefit was temporary pipeline construction jobs.

[bradh]

Thats fine by me. If Canada thinks they need to pipe oil to the coast to process and ship, then why dont they build the pipeline in Canada and go to their east or west coast with it. I never understood why we had to let this happen. Pretty much the only benefit was temporary pipeline construction jobs.

I'm no expert in this, but I'm pretty sure there is benefit to refining and shipping those resources from American coasts.

Also, pipelines don't just sit after they are built. There are pump stations along the entire line (a few in Oklahoma I believe) and other maintenance positions created.

[ou48A]

Most of the people who said they were against the Keystone XL pipeline said they were against it for pollution reasons... But the fact is that by not building though the USA we won't have any say in how its this crude oil is burned.... We won't have the advantage of cheaper crude and the advantage of making value added products from this cheaper crude that would add some jobs to our economy.

If the pipeline is not eventually built Canada will export much of this crude to another nation, most likely China where their will be almost zero concerns about its pollution. Shipping it to China on tanker ships will cause a lots of pollution too... The blockage of this pipeline actually means far more pollution which begs the question of why it was blocked in this first place?

The environmental movement has many people in it that are anti USA. They hide behind the green movement and other movements in an effort to weaken our nations economy and thus the nation.
They know full well that they can motivate gullible individuals by making them feel guilty over a wide range of issues.

[ou48A]

Hamm and his family are probably going to build their own major crude oil pipeline from North Dakota...?
So it stands to reason why he would not want to see the construction of the XL Keystone pipeline.
It was originally going to be blended with large amounts of Bakken crude.
More Bakken crude means more money for Hamm's pipelines!
Smart man.

[ou48A]

I'm no expert in this, but I'm pretty sure there is benefit to refining and shipping those resources from American coasts.

Also, pipelines don't just sit after they are built. There are pump stations along the entire line (a few in Oklahoma I believe) and other maintenance positions created.

You are correct and those are good jobs but relatively few in number.

But the big benefit comes from the cheaper raw cost of crude that lets US refiners provide cheaper raw products to company's who turn these products into finished goods. This is where ten's of thousand of jobs can be created.

Not only do we save money on the raw end cost, because of lower shipping cost we save the cost of shipping finished goods in from other nations. We are still a very huge market for goods but because we will do it cleaner than many other nations, its a big win-win.

In age where the environmentalist say to buy local, why do they hypocritically stand in the way?

[onthestrip]

... the fact is that by not building though the USA we won't have any say in how its this crude oil is burned.... We won't have the advantage of cheaper crude and the advantage of making value added products from this cheaper crude that would add some jobs to our economy.

If the pipeline is not eventually built Canada will export much of this crude to another nation, most likely China where their will be almost zero concerns about its pollution. Shipping it to China on tanker ships will cause a lots of pollution too... The blockage of this pipeline actually means far more pollution which begs the question of why it was blocked in this first place

It was going to be exported anyways. Why else would they pipe it to a port city? And it wasnt like it was going to drop the price of gas at the pump.

[bradh]

It was going to be exported anyways. Why else would they pipe it to a port city? And it wasnt like it was going to drop the price of gas at the pump.

No offense, but this is such a simpleton view of oil in general. ou48A is dead on in discussing the need for this resource in the production of other goods that come from petroleum resources.

Also, I'm sure there are more refineries along the coast capable of refining this product. Could be wrong though.

[ou48A]

It was going to be exported anyways. Why else would they pipe it to a port city? And it wasnt like it was going to drop the price of gas at the pump.

It was not all going to be exported anyway's and to say so is a lie or said out of pure ignorance that had to have been pulled from environmentalist extremist talking point lines.

Some of the crude was to be shipped to coastal areas because that's where a very large presentage of our nations processing and shiping facilitys are located. It's much cheaper to do it this way.

The economics as I have previously explained mean that we would have the opportunity to manufacturer many products from this crude that would largely stay in the USA. What didn't stay would be exported with great value added to it.

But this is how the environmentalist wage war against prosperity in the USA.
But Obama decision makes us more dependent on higher priced sources of crude from volatile places. Thus hampering our economy.

[Bellaboo]

It was going to be exported anyways. Why else would they pipe it to a port city? And it wasnt like it was going to drop the price of gas at the pump.

I would guess, it would be exported as a refined product, to Europe......and it very well could drop prices to a degree, due to an increase in refined product capacity.

[PhiAlpha]

It was going to be exported anyways. Why else would they pipe it to a port city? And it wasnt like it was going to drop the price of gas at the pump.

I don't know...could it be because the bulk of large US refineries are located in and around Houston... Did your inside sources tell you it was going to be exported? That's what all the crazy environmentalists have said, but from everything I've read about the project and from my knowledge of the industry, the vast majority of oil refined in Houston is used domestically.

[CaptDave]

US Gulf and East Coasts Expanding Gasoline and Diesel Exports « Breaking Energy - Energy industry news, analysis, and commentary

U.S. Exports of Finished Motor Gasoline (Thousand Barrels)

Summer gasoline prices 16 cents less than 2012; why not lower? - Los Angeles Times

[DoctorTaco]

US Gulf and East Coasts Expanding Gasoline and Diesel Exports « Breaking Energy - Energy industry news, analysis, and commentary

U.S. Exports of Finished Motor Gasoline (Thousand Barrels)

Summer gasoline prices 16 cents less than 2012; why not lower? - Los Angeles Times

Yes the US exports a ton of finished petroleum products. But I cannot see why this is a bad thing. As high as our trade deficit is we could use a few exports. And finished petroleum products have a lot of value added to them during the refining process--a process which occurs within the US and which we are very good at. So yes, we import oil, refine it, and export some as finished products. In so doing, we take a raw commodity, increase its value dramatically and keep the profits here in the USA. We employ people in the refining process and we help our balance of trade also.

How is this different than if we were importing beaver pelts and making them into fine hats which we then exported for a profit?

The debate over Keystone XL is really about environmental concerns. I am not at all sure how the message, "The US doesn't need Canadian oil, it'll just get exported!" has any relevance. Perhaps it is the oil comp[anies themsleves who played into this, by implying or even explicitly saying that improting Canadian crude will lower people's prices at the pump here in the US.

[CaptDave]

Perhaps it is the oil companies themsleves who played into this, by implying or even explicitly saying that improting Canadian crude will lower people's prices at the pump here in the US.

Exactly - I do not object to the US exporting gasoline at all. But one of the primary reasons given for the Keystone being "necessary" is domestic supply. Simply not true. It is the usual tactic of using national security or energy security for the oil companies to get their way knowing many people will blindly agree. If security was the real motivation, we would not be increasing our exports, we would maintain a stockpile of known reserves to be extracted and refined when needed. But the industry is sucking every drop of oil from the ground they can right now. There are some benefits to that I guess but they certainly are not looking beyond the balance sheet at any potential future strategic plan.

A little honesty from the industry would be refreshing. They want the pipeline to make even more in profit regardless of the potential environmental consequences. The oil companies do not operate with any benevolent intent - profit is their sole motive. Not a problem, but stop telling half truths to deceive people.

[ou48A]

One of the great advantages of being able to export what is a fairly small amount of gasoline is that in the grand scheme of things, is that it provides a degree of cushion against refinery outages.
In the mean time the refineries can make a little extra money which in the end helps US consumers by providing cheaper and stable supplies of gasoline and other products.
It also helps keeps people employed in high skilled good jobs.

[ou48A]

The debate over Keystone XL is really about environmental concerns. I am not at all sure how the message, "The US doesn't need Canadian oil, it'll just get exported!" has any relevance. Perhaps it is the oil comp[anies themsleves who played into this, by implying or even explicitly saying that improting Canadian crude will lower people's prices at the pump here in the US.

The Canadian crude would displace crude from places that are further away that arrive to the USA by tanker. This difference in shipping cost would lower prices at the pump by a little, so it's not wrong to say that prices would be lower at the pump. This same cost advantage would give us a potential manufacturing advantage on other goods and services.

This administration supported off shore oil drilling off the coast of Brazil with billions of dollars of backing that a major Obama booster was heavily involved in. Then another major Obama booster makes tons of money because new crude oil is being forced onto his trains.

Off shore drilling comes with increased risk and shipping crude by trains or by tanker ships is not near as safe as it is by pipelines.... They do a great job of hiding behind it, but the XL Keystone pipeline is not about the environment, its about political pay back and punishing his enemies.
End the end, it makes average people poorer.

[Bellaboo]

Warren Buffet loves his North Dakota trains.......

[PhiAlpha]

Yes the US exports a ton of finished petroleum products. But I cannot see why this is a bad thing. As high as our trade deficit is we could use a few exports. And finished petroleum products have a lot of value added to them during the refining process--a process which occurs within the US and which we are very good at. So yes, we import oil, refine it, and export some as finished products. In so doing, we take a raw commodity, increase its value dramatically and keep the profits here in the USA. We employ people in the refining process and we help our balance of trade also.

How is this different than if we were importing beaver pelts and making them into fine hats which we then exported for a profit?

The debate over Keystone XL is really about environmental concerns. I am not at all sure how the message, "The US doesn't need Canadian oil, it'll just get exported!" has any relevance. Perhaps it is the oil comp[anies themsleves who played into this, by implying or even explicitly saying that improting Canadian crude will lower people's prices at the pump here in the US.

That is what I was going for in my post. We don't generally export crude oil. Just as one of the articles above says, we export finished product after domestic demand is satisfied. I'm fine with that, more oil to US refineries just means more product for US workers to refine and more profits for US companies. I can't see the keystone xl pipeline as anything other than a positive development for that reason.

[PWitty]

Exactly - I do not object to the US exporting gasoline at all. But one of the primary reasons given for the Keystone being "necessary" is domestic supply. Simply not true. It is the usual tactic of using national security or energy security for the oil companies to get their way knowing many people will blindly agree. If security was the real motivation, we would not be increasing our exports, we would maintain a stockpile of known reserves to be extracted and refined when needed. But the industry is sucking every drop of oil from the ground they can right now. There are some benefits to that I guess but they certainly are not looking beyond the balance sheet at any potential future strategic plan.

A little honesty from the industry would be refreshing. They want the pipeline to make even more in profit regardless of the potential environmental consequences. The oil companies do not operate with any benevolent intent - profit is their sole motive. Not a problem, but stop telling half truths to deceive people.

Just because we export refined gasoline to certain trade partners doesn't mean we don't need to boost our own domestic supply.

[Kokopelli]

Noticed a half page ad on the back page of Business section that Hiland Partners has opened an office in OKC and is hiring.

Hiland Partners is owned by Harold Hamm and is currently headquartered in Enid,

[Bellaboo]

Noticed a half page ad on the back page of Business section that Hiland Partners has opened an office in OKC and is hiring.

Hiland Partners is owned by Harold Hamm and is currently headquartered in Enid,

I know nothing, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Hiland Partners HQ'd in OKC someday.

[ou48A]

The price of CLR stock has crossed the $100 per share mark today

[blangtang]

The price of CLR stock has crossed the $100 per share mark today

people can't get enough of it today

see what happens when they issue the guidance later today

[adaniel]

Good thing they are still hiring. It may absorb some of the cuts that are coming to CHK.