Jan 28, 2009
by Steve Smith
Why is it that the Star-Telegram gives me a headline that Chesapeake Energy made double-digit production gains in 2008, but elsewhere in the world, I get Chesapeake Energy taking a $1.8 billion Q4 charge, ending the year with $1.75 billion in cash on hand and planning a $500 million debt offering? In the S-T, I get a valentine, while the Reuters report out of Houston talks about a management team that is “losing its credibility” — analysts’ words, not mine. C’mon, S-T … is this an intention omission?
Tags: Barnett Shale, Chesapeake Energy
Related Posts on West and Clear
- January 27, 2009 -- BP Stock Jumps On Chesapeake Trade Rumors
- January 15, 2009 -- Fort Worth, Chesapeake Reach Tentative Agreement on TCU Gas Drilling Site
- January 12, 2009 -- Chesapeake Begins Fracking at Thomas Site
- January 11, 2009 -- Hey, Mitch, Nice Work!
- January 5, 2009 -- Chesapeake May Drill Near Trinity Trail
- December 29, 2008 -- 2008 in Review No. 2: Barnett Shale Bust?
- December 10, 2008 -- Slouching Toward a Drilling Ordinance
- November 28, 2008 -- Time for Chesapeake Energy’s Parade of Debt!
- November 22, 2008 -- Fort Worth’s Problem Isn’t Urban Gas Drilling, Fort Worth’s Problem Is Chesapeake Energy
- October 17, 2008 -- Chesapeake Bails Out of Crestwood
3 Comments, Comments or Pings
Austin
I tend to be harsh towards Chesapeake, but S-T really is just reporting the truth. Wall Street wants to see these companies make the production gains the have projected.
I have faith that people will come to recognize CHK for what they are. They can get it out of the ground, but they mismanage their finances, PR, and good faith.
Jan 28th, 2009
Steve Smith
Actually, I disagree. The S-T is missing the boat on this story. Industry watchers and Wall Street types are not talking about 2008 production gains, they are talking about how a month ago, Aubrey McClendon said they would not finance debt and live within their means. The fact that CHK is going back on that previous statement is viewed very dimly by analysts. Because the company has major business interests in this town, those facts should be reported. And they’re not. Shame on the Star-Telegram.
Jan 28th, 2009
Eastsider
Good for you Steve Smith for speaking your mind and bringing this issue to the frontlines. Keep up the good work. I don’t really understand the reason why the local paper tows the Chamber of Commerce all fluff line. I don’t get it. They don’t make any more money doing it that way, so what’s the point?
Jan 28th, 2009
Reply to “Star-Telegram Whiffs It on Chesapeake Energy”
By posting your comment, you agree to abide by the terms of the West and Clear comment policy.