My Trefis
Join Trefis today!
Register to create your own "My Trefis" of stocks, news, and people that interest you.
FILTER BY COMPANY
- All Companies
- Edit My Portfolio
-
Add to watch list:You don't have any companies in your watch list yet.
- My Collection
-
- Accenture ACN
- Alaska Air... ALK
- Baidu BIDU
- Bank of Ame... BAC
- Capital One COF
- Cisco CSCO
- Citigroup C
- Costco COST
- Dell DELL
- Delta Air L... DAL
- HP HPQ
- Intel INTC
- JPMorgan Ch... JPM
- Lexmark LXK
- MetLife MET
- Microsoft MSFT
- Morgan Stan... MS
- NetApp NTAP
- Procter & G... PG
- Prudential... PRU
- Sina SINA
- Southwest A... LUV
- Target TGT
- Travelers TRV
- U.S. Bancor... USB
- UnitedHealt... UNH
- VMware VMW
- Wal-Mart WMT
- Wells Fargo... WFC
You don't have any items in your collection. Click next to an item to add it to your collection.
BY CONTRIBUTOR
BY CONTENT
Example question: Bloomberg reported that supply constraints are leading to iPhone shortages. Do Trefis analysts see a meaningful impact on AAPL?
Example comment: Competition will squeeze AMZN's operating margins from 4% to 2% meaning a 10% hit to the stock according to Trefis.
Name (Required)
Email (Required, but never displayed)
SUBMITSUBMIT
Insert Chart or Image...
* Companies:
Your comments on Poland are misleading and inaccurate.
1. Exxon's two failed tests prove nothing. They were in the south-east corner of Poland that is hundreds of miles from the main focus of shale development in the country (the north), and Exxon left just as it announced a huge new deal with Russia, which is terrified of Polish shale. There were plenty of failed tests ahead of the US shale boom: jumping to conclusions about the entire country after just two tests in a small corner of it is either dishonest or amateurish.
2. The data used is by the Polish Geological Institute was a MINIMUM estimate and all very old, based on nothing new on the sun. Lazy, gullible journalists portrayed this as a 'downgrade' of the EIA maximum estimate when it was no such thing. The two different figures are a RANGE, not a downgrade.
3. Fracking is much LESS controversial in Poland than it is in the US. Poles don't want to depend on Russian gas and Polish coal for their energy supplies, so they are enthusiastic about shale. Just because France and Bulgaria oppose shale (and both have cozy relationships with Russia) it doesn't mean Poland will too. Quite the contrary.
4. Polish shale is not in "higher population density in drilling areas" than the US. Most of it is on farmland empty, in the US there is plenty of drilling in built-up north Texas. Poland has about the same population density of the average US state. The point is bunkum.
5. Here's a presentation from the leading shale co in Poland, which backs up what I have written (and if you doubt what they say, go ahead and cross-examine them in an interview, they're pretty open folk): http://jetslides.tv/webcasts/774
Now, most of your comments have been flying around the media for a few months and you have aggregated them - but don't believe everything written by hack reporters with no expertise of the subject. Check, double-check, triple check. [ less... ]
1. Exxon's two failed tests prove nothing. They were in the south-east corner of Poland that is hundreds of miles from the main focus of shale development in the country (the north), and Exxon left just as it announced a huge new deal with Russia, which is terrified of Polish shale. There were plenty of failed tests ahead of the US shale boom: jumping to conclusions about the entire country after just two tests in a small corner of it is either dishonest or amateurish.
2. The data used is by the Polish Geological Institute was a MINIMUM estimate and all very old, based on nothing new on the sun. Lazy, gullible journalists portrayed this as a 'downgrade' of the EIA maximum estimate when it was no such thing. The two different figures are a RANGE, not a downgrade.
3. Fracking is much LESS controversial in Poland than it is in the US. Poles don't want to depend on Russian gas and Polish coal for their energy supplies, so they are enthusiastic about shale. Just because France and Bulgaria oppose shale (and both have cozy relationships with Russia) it doesn't mean Poland will too. Quite the contrary.
4. Polish shale is not in "higher population density in drilling areas" than the US. Most of it is on farmland empty, in the US there is plenty of drilling in built-up north Texas. Poland has about the same population density of the average US state. The point is bunkum.
5. Here's a presentation from the leading shale co in Poland, which backs up what I have written (and if you doubt what they say, go ahead and cross-examine them in an interview, they're pretty open folk): http://jetslides.tv/webcasts/774
Now, most of your comments have been flying around the media for a few months and you have aggregated them - but don't believe everything written by hack reporters with no expertise of the subject. Check, double-check, triple check. [ less... ]
Your comments on Poland are misleading and inaccurate.
1. Exxon's two failed tests prove nothing. They were in the south-east corner of Poland that is hundreds of miles from the main focus of shale development in the country (the north), and Exxon left just as it announced a huge new deal with Russia, which is terrified of Polish shale. There were plenty of failed tests ahead of the US shale boom: jumping to conclusions about the entire country after just two tests in a small corner of it is either dishonest or amateurish.
2. The data used is by the Polish Geological Institute was a MINIMUM estimate and all very old, based on nothing new on the sun. Lazy, gullible journalists portrayed this as a 'downgrade' of the EIA maximum estimate when it was no such thing. The two different figures are a RANGE, not a downgrade.
3. Fracking is much LESS controversial in Poland than it is in the US. Poles don't want to depend on Russian gas and Polish coal for their energy supplies, so they are enthusiastic about shale. Just because France and Bulgaria oppose shale (and both have cozy relationships with Russia) it doesn't mean Poland will too. Quite the contrary.
4. Polish shale is not in "higher population density in drilling areas" than the US. Most of it is on farmland empty, in the US there is plenty of drilling in built-up north Texas. Poland has about the same population density of the average US state. The point is bunkum.
5. Here's a presentation from the leading shale co in Poland, which backs up what I have written (and if you doubt what they say, go ahead and cross-examine them in an interview, they're pretty open folk): http://jetslides.tv/webcasts/774
Now, most of your comments have been flying around the media for a few months and you have aggregated them - but don't believe everything written by hack reporters with no expertise of the subject. Check, double-check, triple check.
Most of the comments in the above response are correct. Natural Gas Europe has a large selection of archived articles on shale gas in Poland and readers can do their research on the topic.http://www.naturalgaseuope.com