Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Cardinal Energy Ltd (Alberta) T.CJ

Alternate Symbol(s):  CRLFF

Cardinal Energy Ltd. is an oil and gas company with operations focused on low decline oil in Western Canada. It is engaged in the acquisition, exploration and production of petroleum and natural gas in the provinces of Alberta, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan. Its operating areas include the Midale, South District, Central District, and North District. It has over 730 million original oils in place (OOIP) and its low decline production of approximately 3,200 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d) is supported by both water and carbon dioxide (CO2) enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Its South District operating area is located east of Calgary in southeastern Alberta and produces medium gravity crude, as well as liquids-rich natural gas. Its Central District operation is located in East Central Alberta, which is focused on producing oil from multiple, large original oil in place (OOIP) pools. Its North area includes Grande Prairie, Clearwater, House Mountain, Mica, and Mitsue properties.


TSX:CJ - Post by User

Comment by Quintessential1on Mar 15, 2024 3:40pm
620 Views
Post# 35935561

RE:RE:Here's a beauty

RE:RE:Here's a beautyYeah it was a tough economic time to try and build anything.  Just ask TRP about their estimates on the Coastal Gas Link.  The difference is the Coastal Gas Link is going to have contracted rates that I doubt TRP can just increase because it cost more to build than they planned on.  TMX are the only crude pipes heading to the coast and they are going to charge what it cost to expand it and if the rate payers don't like it they can ship it some other way.  Of course TMX's increased cost route is still the cheapest egress out of Alberta on the market so they'll pay it and if the whiners don't like it they can try to build their own.  I doubt they'll get approval. They are already talking about running out of pipeline capacity even with TMX coming online so my guess is TMX will be payed for either through tolls or a sale one way or another.  Don't forget the more they can charge for toll rates the more they can sell it for and maybe recoup some if not all the tax-payer's costs.  Egress is egress and TMX will help ease the stranglehold the USA has on the price of Alberta's oil.  WCS is going to go up...more and more.  As a CJ investor, that's all I really care about.

GLTY and all



NonCredibleSrc wrote: I appreciate the article and can certainly understand why anyone would want better insight into the numbers in order to validate any related pipeline charges, but...

Comparing anything 'real' in 2024 to a 2017 'estimate' is futile - it borders on moronic.

Beyond the fact that an estimate is just an, umm, ESTIMATE, the landscape in 2024 is so radically different than in '17 it's like apples to oranges.

Estimates such as these are generally produced by those with a vested interest. They may lack or not take into account all process and variables that could occur through the duration. I see it all the time. One of these was the inflation levels of recent years. While none of us sat in 2017 thinking inflation would hit the highs of the last couple of years, any comparision should at minimum take this into account.

Underlying this article are valid concerns and requirements for better transparency but it is hyped with numbers that are simply there with an intent to enrage.


<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>