RE:RE:RE:New monthly report with 2 notableDid Gee's "openly" political stance bring in more investment dollars or less or any for that matter?
Would trying to sweet talk and appease any of the current governments curry him any favours that would translate into more revenue for Peyto? I doubt it.
Did his anti-climate change, pro-fossil fuel rhetoric gain him any more investors or investment dollars? Maybe...probably.
Did it cost him any? I doubt it. Anti-fossil fuel investors are not even thinking about reading PEY's President's Report let alone letting it affect their decisions as to where to put their cash.
Did Gee, during his tenure, take advantage of every carbon loophole and ESG cost saving measure to make Peyto a low cost, low emission production machine? Absolutely!
Because it was just plain good business.
I never liked the political rethoric but have to admit that in Gee's case it may have been the way to go to attract more investment dollars especially retail.
That being said, I like the new guy just fine but he is enjoying walking the easy trail previously cut for him by Gee. It remains to be seen if he can continue forging it but he is off to a good start.
GLTA
topdop wrote: I disagree.
For good or bad, Gee was (openly) too political.
The good CEOs always manage to steer a course that looks to benefit, above all else, the shareholders and they seem to do this in absence of playing politics.
JP Lachance - the "new guy" as you say - is clearly a highly accomplished and experienced Engineer and as head of this firm, I think that's a great thing.