Monday, May 21, 2012

The Conspiratorial Hypothesis Regarding Chesapeake ($CHK)

This was a comment on the Natural Gas/Oil BTU Spread In An Indeterminate World post from yesterday.

"Maybe you're right. Maybe it's all dis-information being used by big-money to vacuum up shares on the cheap and create pressure for Aubrey to lose some control now that the hard work of building from scratch is done and all that's left is pumping gas and selling off assets. I certainly hope so."
I hate to be overly conspiratorial, but why else have these trivial matters become constant front page news stories? Which has better governance, CHK or FB? Which has a more attractive valuation?


Taylor Conant said...

Having studied with the future journalism gendarmes of America when I played a role as a journalism student several years ago at one of America's finest institutions of news-learning, I can with confidence say to you the following:
1.) The average journalist is an ignorant fool who does not understand the technicalities and nuances of that which he covers, even when its his beat and he's spent his entire life becoming an "expert" and even writing a book or two about it; the superficiality of this animal's "knowledge" only grows with time.
2.) The average journalist is eternally lazy-- the depiction in the movies and on TV of the dogged, patriotic and impassioned public-servant-in-the-private-sector who won't rest until he's dug up all the dirt there is to dig, is akin to the excrement of a bull; journalists are running in their own little rat races that keep them fully occupied, where the buzzword is the deadline and the trophy is the byline... if they get it in on time and it has their name on it, they don't care where the story comes from, who it benefits and whether or not it's accurate.
3.) The average journalist is HIGHLY idealistic; they tend to suffer from wounded and/or incomplete egos and there are many crusaders, martyrs and world-savers in their ranks, not to mention midget Napoleons and, every now and then, a Stalin or a Mao, ie, they don't care how many insignificant, pathetic and not to mention born-in-sin lone individuals need be crushed to aid their agenda or the agenda of that person or group of persons to which they serve as a hanger-on.
4.) Related to #3, the average journalist is a bit of a narcissist. Like a musician who plays instruments because he likes his own sound, many journalists write because they think everyone should see what they're saying. When you combine narcissism with power-tripping, you have a deadly combination, because now you have someone who is capable of getting off to the idea that they're making the world tremble along with the other movers and shakers.
5.) The average journalist tends to lose himself in his story. He's an elitist, in other words. He believes in "we", believes he is part of the schemes he reports on, or those which are behind his decision concerning what to report on, and in what nature.

So, could there be a conspiracy behind the media coverage of CHK?

Of course there could. It'd be unreasonable to suggest there couldn't be.

One way to potentially confirm it is to look up the journalists involved in the majority of the stories, see what books they've written, see what conferences they've spoken at, see who they're connected to and see what other kinds of stories they've written. If you find a pattern, you've found a hack. This person is more than a two-bit grunt filing stories no one else at the office wanted to deal with. This is a seasoned hitman on an assigned mission.

Journalists protect their sources like the CIA protects its budget sources-- and for similar reasons!

Allan Folz said...

For a minute there I thought you were taking about George Zimmerman...

Allan Folz said...


Fortunately it's not an either-or choice between an unproven 28 y.o. billionaire helped along by who-knows-who (ahem, speaking of CIA) and a prima-donna 59 y.o. billionaire with a penchant for financial complexity. ;-)

Taylor Conant said...


One day, maybe one of these "connected" (ie, lapdog) "journalists" will write a "tell-all" about just how much of this global economy CIA, Inc., actually owns. The declassified bits, anyway.

World government already exists and the CIA are the enforcers assigned to the US.

CP said...

We are going to have a "best use of sarcastic quotes" award.

Has anyone read this?

Do you know of anything more undervalued than CHK?

The pure arbs that I have mentioned on the blog are better trades, but you can only put so much in those. I have six good ideas right now and CHK is one of them.

Allan Folz said...

One last thought that just occurred to me. CHK is notable for the dog that hasn't barked. Where are all the brand-name short-sellers?

Obviously they were all over Enron, AIG, MBIA, Countrywide, et al. Now that I think about it, I haven't seen any on CHK. At least, not since after Nat Gas did it's cliff dive.

CP said...

Exactly! Not only is no one smart bearish, but there is no intelligent bearish argument.

It's almost like the worthless stock inefficiency trades, where there is just a vacuum on the other side of the trade.

Allan Folz said...

One day, maybe one of these "connected" (ie, lapdog) "journalists" will write a "tell-all"

Well, I haven't read any of his books, but John Perkins has written a few.

Taylor Conant said...

John Perkins is a plant. His solution to all the problems he uncovers is more of the same-- "smart" regulation and a less criminal CIA/global elite. Yeah, that'll work, Mr. Perkins.

He's a red herring.

Josh said...

It isn't a conspiracy. The reality is that Americans (makes me sound like a foreigner but I am not) love the rich and famous. They love both the good and bad. People are clamoring for more and more info on the CEO shenanigans.

I was checking out at the supermarket today and the random conversation went something to the effect of 'there isn't any job where you get paid too much'. I immediately thought of CHK and all of the executive (and board) compensation.