Those are the ones with the economic and political clout to delay, patent, lie and buy their way into benefitting from this development, if it proves true.
They don’t actually care about oil as in carbohydrates, they care about “stuff we can use to make oodles of money”.
Probably. I do not know of any such sayings, and do not know much about markets and solvency and shorting in general.
Perhaps a better rephrasing would be that a naive first outside view should conclude that oil companies will be just as stuck-in-their-ways as other examples have been or still are.
Kawoomba also makes a few other good points that are worth considering, tough I’m not sure they all add up to them doing all that much better than everyone else on the “update for new technologies” front.
Energy companies are in a reference class of their own, and their political influence, lobbying power and entrenchment comparable if at all to that of banks and financial institutions. They are transnational players that many see as transplanting state actors, even when some of them (e.g. Chinese energy companies, Russian energy companies) act as surrogates for their state. They are not like Hollywood.
If there is a new way to produce nigh-unlimited energy, it won’t be long until there’s a law to regulate it, and that law will be heavily influenced by energy companies. Or will they be stopped by public pressure and idealistic politicians? More like the lone battle of Elizabeth Warren, failing to get the simplest kind of regulation passed in the banking sector.
Let’s not even get into the broken patent system which can be weaponized by the highest bidder.
Those are the ones with the economic and political clout to delay, patent, lie and buy their way into benefitting from this development, if it proves true.
They don’t actually care about oil as in carbohydrates, they care about “stuff we can use to make oodles of money”.
People used to say the same thing about Hollywood. Now look at what Hollywood is doing.
I don’t see why big bulky bureaucratic oil companies would fare any better at adjusting to change and new technologies.
Outside view says short them.
outside view? doesn’t the even more outside view have a saying about markets and solvency and shorting?
Probably. I do not know of any such sayings, and do not know much about markets and solvency and shorting in general.
Perhaps a better rephrasing would be that a naive first outside view should conclude that oil companies will be just as stuck-in-their-ways as other examples have been or still are.
Kawoomba also makes a few other good points that are worth considering, tough I’m not sure they all add up to them doing all that much better than everyone else on the “update for new technologies” front.
“Markets can remain irrational a lot longer than you and I can remain solvent.” is the saying.
Energy companies are in a reference class of their own, and their political influence, lobbying power and entrenchment comparable if at all to that of banks and financial institutions. They are transnational players that many see as transplanting state actors, even when some of them (e.g. Chinese energy companies, Russian energy companies) act as surrogates for their state. They are not like Hollywood.
If there is a new way to produce nigh-unlimited energy, it won’t be long until there’s a law to regulate it, and that law will be heavily influenced by energy companies. Or will they be stopped by public pressure and idealistic politicians? More like the lone battle of Elizabeth Warren, failing to get the simplest kind of regulation passed in the banking sector.
Let’s not even get into the broken patent system which can be weaponized by the highest bidder.