Tuesday, July 22, 2014

OXY USA Reports Another ... OXY USA Well; EOG, Newfield Will Each Report A Huge Well Wednesday -- July 22, 2014

Wells coming off confidential list Wednesday:
  • 21807, 1349, HRC, Fort Berthold 152-93-9C-10-6H, Four Bears, t5/14; cum 12K 5/14;
  • 24571, 823, EOG, Hardscrabble 23-21H, Lake Trenton, t2/14; cum 41K 5/14;
  • 25476, 332, CLR, Josephine 3-17H, Sauk, t4/14; cum 15K 5/14;
  • 25823, drl, Slawson, Diamondback 3-21H, Van Hook, no production data,
  • 26490, 1,305, Newfield, Wahus state 152-97-12-1-11H,  Westberg, t5/14; cum 17K 5/14;
  • 26601, 1,045, EOG, Liberty 27-23H, Parshall, t3/14; cum 56K 5/14;
  • 26602, 1,135, EOG, Liberty 28-23H, Parshall, t3/14; cum 26K 5/14;
  • 27119, drl, BR, Arches 24-35MBH, Keene, no production data,
  • 27120, drl, BR, Arches 24-35TFH, Keene, no production data,
  • 27177, 1,943, XTO, Cherry Creek State 44X-36C, Siverston, no production data,
  • 27313, drl, Hess, EN-Eva-156-94-1621H-1, Manitou, no production data,
  • 27472, drl, Hess, HA-Thompson-2560-152-95-2017-1918H-1, Hawkeye, no production data,

26601, see above, EOG, Liberty 27-23H, Parshall:

DateOil RunsMCF Sold

Active rigs:

Active Rigs19620718213841

Nine (9) new permits --
  • Operators: CLR (5), XTO (4)
  • Fields: Noonan (Divide), Crazy Man Creek (Williams), Dollar Joe (Williams)
  • Comments:
Wells coming off confidential list were posted earlier; see sidebar at the right.

Five (5) producing wells completed:
  • 22761, 50, OXY USA, Crosby Creek 1-19-18H-144-98, Little Knife, t2/14; cum 630 bbls 5/14;
  • 23671, 1,466, KOG, Koala 2-2-11-15H3, Poe, t6/14; cum --
  • 24324, 832, CLR, Topeka 4-12H, Brooklyn, t6/14; cum --
  • 24325, 966, CL$, Topeka 5-12H, Brooklyn, t6/14; cum --
  • 26770, 717, CLR, Winston 6-12H1, Long Creek, t7/14; cum --
Earnings: July 23, 2014

ATT, at 68 cents beat consensus by 5 cents; a huge quarter, though after-market trading has not confirmed such; from the press release -- best-ever postpaid churn drives strongest postpaid net adds in nearly five years and continued U-verse gains highlight AT&T’s second quarter as business transformation continues. [When you get right down to it, there's not much choice when choosing a cellular plan if one does a lot of traveling.]

Trading At New Highs Today

APA, BK, ENB, HAL, KOG, NOV, Newfield (NFX), UNP, WLL.
WTI crude oil back down to $102.
Let's Think This Through

Let's say Canadian separatists started firing rockets that could reach New York City. The rockets necessitated that the FAA ban all flights into all airports into New York City. Any question what the US military would do? US government has banned all US flights into Tel Aviv. 

How's That Again? Department

The most inane statement of the day:
A federal appeals court panel in the District of Columbia (i.e., Washington, DC, the federal capital) struck down a major part of the 2010 health-care law Tuesday, ruling that the tax subsidies that are central to the program may not be provided in at least half of the states. The ruling, if upheld, could potentially be more damaging to the law than last month’s Supreme Court decision on contraceptives.
Remember: Hobby Lobby provides 16 of 18 contraceptive options, or something like that. Hobby Lobby did not offer 2 of 18 options. The vast majority of folks working at Hobby Lobby do not need 18 contraceptive options. Comparing the Supreme Court opinion on ObamaCare contraceptives to illegal subsidies is a real stretch. Worthy of a blog. LOL.

It was in The Fiscal Times.


  1. My understanding that the case was decided on a technicality, based on an obvious reading of certain sections of the Obamacare law (remember the bill was not widely circulated, nor was public input and scrutiney allowed). So it should be no surprise that technical glitches are now being found.

    The written and broadcast report that I have read/heard today stated that as the law clearly reads, subsidies are to be allowed only by State exchanges - not by the federal exchange. Obama chose to ignore that technicality and directed subsidies be issued for coverage by participant in the federal exchange.

    1. Agree 100%, although I wouldn't call it a technical glitch. There was a very, very good reason why the law was written the way it was: state exchanges only, and not a federal exchange.

  2. The National Review has a good article, written by a prominent knowledgeable attorney, comparing the pro - cons of whether this should be considered a technical glitch / common drafting error or not, and clearly pointing out facts in support of why it should not be considered a technical glitch.

    1. Thank you. Nice article for several reasons. I've linked the article at today's post.