RE:RE:RE:RE:Analysts and Management and NamsocThank you for your clear answer. I own COS and I hope it does better than the break even you describe. I also own Dec 2019 oil futures and I hope it goes up from its 80 bid, 81 offered level. I think there is downside to these but I have taken the risk that there is more chance for upside. (Maalox--it was $78 just weeks ago) On a technical point, using your $85 figure, the futures investor/speculator only has to put up a fraction of the $85 and could put the rest in COS and earn 7%. A bullish-on-oil risk taker would be happy earning more than the Treasury rate. I agree that futures for oil have been all over the place. I think hedging by COS would be idiotic. There are a lot of people on this bulletin board who think COS management is AAA. Some think that management has no role in operational effectiveness. I think that management should do what the shareholders want them to do. There a lot of energy stocks yielding more than 7%. Just look at the bottom to panels of table ISC-1 of Kurt Wulff's Income and Small Cap Weekly. COS price will have a tough time going up if the break-even example occurs. Since all these companies face the same energy markets, better than break-even will have to occur through operations improvement. Your analysis of the buyer's logic for paying $85 was very helpful but how do you explain the logic of the seller at this same price? There must be a reason--they could lose real money if the $85 goes up by $15 plus loss of the use of their margin in the mean time. Do you think COS is better off having given in on the change in Alberta royalties a few years ago? Is Kurt Wulff's statement that operating volume has been declining to about 20% below design capacity approximately correct?