RE: Threats are dangerous. Mr.mrbb, re:yup everpatient/bert
Yup, cry on my shoulder if it helps. I have been here in the 50s and sixties when the US protected their wigwam by keeping canucks oil and gas out, no one cared.As for the big price drop in the 80s read:
https://www.angelnexus.com/getreport/ce4c5c724b56446cf8eb82ae14a4a2c7.pdf
Did anyone care who and how many were laid off?
A deal is a good deal if both parties are in agreement. It is obvious that one of the parties is not happy, so lets talk and see who blinks first. It is sad that things always have to go from one extreme to another, but that's the way it is, it seems. However, The US needs the oil and development of the oilsands is a lot more time consuming than drilling holes in the ground and connecting pumps to it, so I think that a little slowing down will do Alberta some good.
I would not worry that the oil would stay in the ground or that a cheaper replacement will be found. As for gas, the price has not kept up to the oil price and drilling for it has been cut back for a year now and has nothing to do with royalty rates. If the big oil companies think they can get a better deal somewhere else they will go regardless and the shareholders ( I'm a small one)of encana and other big oil companies get screwed anyway, as share holders are always the last ones to benefit when it comes to sharing.