RE:RE:RE:The impairment was an increase in the discount applied to Well put, MrFrisky. The coherence, which is sometimes lacking here, is welcome. People see BIG numbers like a $3.7 billion impairment and they lose their minds. A basic grasp of accounting would surely help them keep their composure.
You said you doubt whether the assets will increase in value if oil rises and estimated cash flow from these assets improves. Wouldn't that be necessary if oil moved up to say the $70 range and remained there for a couple of years?
And, do you think this was a "kitchen sink" move using overly pessimistic factors, specifically the discount rates?