Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Business, Finance, and Investing Making money, investing in markets, and running businesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-09-2014, 11:48 PM   #1
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Thought about throwing this in Science/Math/Philosophy forum, but then I thought a few people in particular might not ever see it, ... because they don't really believe in science. Nor math, often.
Oh bummer. ... If the oil majors are suddenly cutting investment some 20-30%, because they've finally admitted they can't make a profit with oil at $105, what is the real price of oil right now? What would the "free market" set it at? ... $125? How about $140? ... That is, in order for these guys to keep their heads above water, at least, with a bit of free cash flow ...
Now imagine the world today if oil had been $130-150 this whole time, where it perhaps belonged? Or what the S&P will shrink to if oil price spikes to where it "needs to be?"

Obviously the most important question springs to mind: What does that say about global production totals going forward? Still think we'll be maintaining that mind-boggling 91M barrels per day? Are we to believe that smaller companies will ride to the rescue? Will vast US reserves of oil and gas from shale rock under U.S. neighborhoods continue to fill the ever-widening gap left behind by flat conventional production? (9 years years running, now)... Not likely. There is far more evidence unconventional production is already tightening, not expanding as the industry and big media would have you believe.

Anyone confused or skeptical about why this matters is encouraged to listen to Douglas-Westward's managing director Steve Kopits recently at Columbia Univ.
Global Oil Market Forecasting: Main Approaches & Key Drivers
Steven Kopits, Managing Director, Douglas-Westwood


The developments presented in this presentation only confirm the model talked and mocked about 5-10 years ago:

the easy oil is in terminal decline
the moderate oil is growing exhausted and near decline
the tight oil is vast, yet far too expensive

Advanced societies already can not bear triple-digit oil prices. Yet those prices clearly need to be $120-$200 for oil giants to be free cash flow neutral. Otherwise, they dump investment and assets.

With investment suddenly scaled way back, it won't be long now before conventional production begins decline (1-2 years?). At that point, no amount of desperate hydraulics under U.S. neighborhoods will calm the markets.

Ah well. Heed it, and invest accordingly. Or don't. Your call.

Last edited by JiggsCasey; 03-10-2014 at 12:10 AM.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2014, 11:56 PM   #2
Juan Bajo
enthusiast
 
Juan Bajo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 47
Interesting info... Do you work in the industry? Or just an investor doing research?



Sent from my SCH-I435 using 2+2 Forums
Juan Bajo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 01:15 AM   #3
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juan Bajo View Post
Interesting info... Do you work in the industry? Or just an investor doing research?
I work for an industry that monitors that industry.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 01:29 AM   #4
Tyrannic
old hand
 
Tyrannic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,895
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Interesting.

So what's the play? I reckon you've thought about that? 90% cash?
Tyrannic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 02:28 AM   #5
dc_publius
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,996
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

People have been predicting resource-depletion driven doom for 50 years. It has yet to come, and not only that, we have hardly noticed anything when the free market made changes and adjustments. (Copper to plastic piping/etc)

You should listen to this segment on the famous bet that a economist made with a celebrity biologist on this exact issue - in 1980.
dc_publius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 10:22 AM   #6
Green Plastic
CardRunners Sponsored Forum
 
Green Plastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,084
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_publius View Post
People have been predicting resource-depletion driven doom for 50 years. It has yet to come, and not only that, we have hardly noticed anything when the free market made changes and adjustments. (Copper to plastic piping/etc)

You should listen to this segment on the famous bet that a economist made with a celebrity biologist on this exact issue - in 1980.
just because people have been predicting things that haven't yet happened doesn't mean they won't happen. i don't have an informed opinion on this subject matter but IMO your response doesn't add anything to the discussion without significant elaboration.
Green Plastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 10:22 AM   #7
LozColbert
Pooh-Bah
 
LozColbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Philly
Posts: 3,646
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

50 years?

Au contraire, dc_publius, this is a rare error on your part. People have been predicting the end of petroleum since at least immediately after Titusville in 1859. Daniel Yergin's The Prize does a very good job of illustrating how "Peak Oil" is a cyclical theory that rears its head every few years.
LozColbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 10:24 AM   #8
LozColbert
Pooh-Bah
 
LozColbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Philly
Posts: 3,646
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

OP's entire argument is silly to anyone who knows much about oil and gas.

Expected price and sensitivity to risk drive CapEx.
LozColbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 10:27 AM   #9
Green Plastic
CardRunners Sponsored Forum
 
Green Plastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,084
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

i should add that i hope dc & others elaborate. didn't mean to come off as rude in my post so i hope it wasn't taken that way
Green Plastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 11:03 AM   #10
ToothSoother
adept
 
ToothSoother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,014
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LozColbert View Post
OP's entire argument is silly to anyone who knows much about oil and gas.

Expected price and sensitivity to risk drive CapEx.
Not that I buy into peak oil, but $50 billion to $260 billion move in capex, in combination with flattening or dropping production, should make you sit up.

Quote:
Expected price and sensitivity to risk drives CapEx.
The capex spending indicates that companies with the most knowledge about available reserves and extraction methods believe that price will go up, substantially, in order to make these hugely increased bets. Either that, or this is the price of staying of in the game, which indicates that oil extraction is becoming permanently significantly more expensive.

Which is basically OP's point. The only point of disagreement you could is that there is plenty of oil at higher (non economy killing) price levels, and it can be extracted in large volumes at those price levels (much larger volumes than today). If you believe this to be true, then ok, I'll listen to you, but so far OP has won this argument and you've backed him up.
ToothSoother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 11:33 AM   #11
econophile
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
econophile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: (X'X)^(-1)X'Y
Posts: 10,762
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

didn't see any discussion of bakken, marcellus, etc.
econophile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 12:03 PM   #12
grizy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
grizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Looking for Rush HU Poker
Posts: 15,495
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

We should just merge this thread with

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/41...briefs-701083/

Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master View Post
This thread was peak jiggs.
grizy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 12:23 PM   #13
Stake Monster
Pooh-Bah
 
Stake Monster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 5,941
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Oil and coal are relics of the past. Clean energy is the way forward. It's not like we have a choice anyway, our planet won't handle many more years of the current energy sources.
Stake Monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 12:45 PM   #14
kimoser22
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: the land of pleasant living
Posts: 3,233
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Douglas Westwood also said this...So in the near-term it looks like the forecast for new drilling rigs is bullish?...don't know the breakdown on who is buying rigs though, Jigs is the multi-national's reduction is Capex being replaced by National Oil companies?

Quote:
Energy industry analyst Douglas-Westwood is forecasting that nearly $100 billion will be spent worldwide on floating production systems (FPS) between 2014-2018, according to a company market report. That would be an increase of 138% over the previous 5-year period.

The report says that long-term growth will be spurred by continued deepwater development, marginal fields, and fast-track, short-term deployments. The increase in deepwater deployments will account for $68 billion in value, or two thirds of the total spend over the next 5 years.

Floating production, storage, and offloading systems (FPSOs) will make up the largest segment of the market in units installed and capital expenditure. And Latin America will account for 29% of the 139 installations forecast by the report as well as 38% of the capex.

The FPS sector has seen a steady recovery since the downturn in 2008-09. However, there has been little growth in the annual value of installed units over the last 4 years. Douglas-Westwood sees 2014 as the first year of a significant increase in the value of units deployed.
kimoser22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 12:50 PM   #15
ToothSoother
adept
 
ToothSoother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,014
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stake Monster View Post
Oil and coal are relics of the past. Clean energy is the way forward.
There is no such thing as clean energy that can come anywhere near meeting human demands at our current or medium term future technological capabilities. You are parroting nonsense fed to you by greenies. Nuclear & fossil fuels are the only viable power sources right now, and there is no alternative. That won't change without decades worth of accelerating technological breakthroughs.

Quote:
It's not like we have a choice anyway, our planet won't handle many more years of the current energy sources.
Also nonsense.
ToothSoother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 01:20 PM   #16
de captain
veteran
 
de captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Been around
Posts: 2,578
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

I sure hope we start working on those decades worth of accelerating technological breakthroughs soon.
de captain is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 02:03 PM   #17
jws43yale
veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New York, NY (In the boardroom)
Posts: 3,193
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

I really hope the capex to crude production graph includes gas and equivalents. If not the whole thing is garbage because much of the capex has been on gas plays.

Also tons of capex being spent on tight oil using horizontal drilling on a pad setup which requires higher capex dollars per barrel but it still profitable at today's prices.

Everyone has backed off capex budgets over last few years as gas prices have come down and resource plays are becoming more expensive. May mean oil goes a bit higher unless tech gains offset this but definitely not implying $130-$150 oil.
jws43yale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 03:58 PM   #18
Duffman08
grinder
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 425
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

All about nailing the timeframes.

Will inflation get us near those 130-150 prices sooner than just the fundamentals of the industry?

I had to do tons of research on a train company and my focus was on frac sand, crude by rail, Nat gas impact on chemicals industry and train companies were very bullish about the future of the North American energy industry.

Even though coal has long since been considered a relic...it is still a major part of our energy economy. There's generations of money, corporations, interests etc... that have vested interests in letting these things linger around until all utility is depleted. How long coal will linger around, I think you can multiply that considerably when determining how long we will be dependent on crude oil.
Duffman08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 04:17 PM   #19
thenewsavman
old hand
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,331
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

I am not at all qualified to comment on the veracity of the reports in the OP, but I am somewhat familiar with the OP's posting history. He has been sensationalizing peak oil for as long as I was lurking/posting in Politics (pre-hack account), and it quickly became evident that any claim he makes re: peak oil should be taken with a grain of salt; and that is putting it charitably.

Having said that, the Oil and Gas Journal seems to disagree with the OP's premise that capex is being slashed in the oil industry. From 3.3.2014: (E&P means exploration and production)

Quote:
Oil and gas industry capital spending in the US will increase 5.2% in 2014 to $338 billion, according to Oil & Gas Journal's annual spending report. Capital expenditures also will climb in Canada this year, up 2.4% to $80 billion (Can.).
Quote:
Worldwide E&P spending is expected to continue solid growth this year, led by the Middle East, Latin America, and Russia, according to the most recent Barclays E&P Capital Spending Survey released Dec. 9, 2013.
Quote:
Upstream spending outside the US and Canada is forecast to continue solid growth this year, particularly in the Middle East, Latin America, and Russia, according to the aforementioned Barclays E&P spending survey.

The survey expects international E&P spending to reach a record of $524 billion in 2014, 6% higher than last year. Sustained high oil prices, the sanctioning of major projects, and the delivery of a large number of offshore rigs in both 2014 and 2015 are driving the increase in spending. This is partially offset by transitory Chinese spending slowdown and limited growth by the majors.

Led by strong growth in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, E&P spending in the Middle East is expected to climb 14% this year, Barclays said. Expenditures in Latin America and Russia will register increases of 13% and 11%, respectively.
In the absence of an expert on the matter, I am inclined to believe Barclays and the Oil and Gas Journal over a poster with a track record of sensationalizing peak oil. Take that fwiw.
thenewsavman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 08:46 PM   #20
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by thenewsavman View Post
I am not at all qualified to comment on the veracity of the reports in the OP, but I am somewhat familiar with the OP's posting history. He has been sensationalizing peak oil for as long as I was lurking/posting in Politics (pre-hack account), and it quickly became evident that any claim he makes re: peak oil should be taken with a grain of salt; and that is putting it charitably.
There's nothing "sensational" about it.

Admittedly, I took some heat for acknowledging NYC had no evacuation plan in advance of Hurricane Earl. I also took some heat for losing a bet that at least one member nation would leave the EU by the end of 2012. Not being right 100% of the time, those are the pitfalls of someone willing to forecast the future and talk about it, unlike others who sit back and criticize while maintaining a desperate (and baseless) "no problem" outlook on world events.

But nothing that I've said about global net oil depletion has been "sensational" in the connotation you're attempting here. Sorry, but the extrapolated production data going forward, the the elevated price point, and the affects that price point is already having on the global economy are all easily verifiable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thenewsavman View Post
Having said that, the Oil and Gas Journal seems to disagree with the OP's premise that capex is being slashed in the oil industry. From 3.3.2014: (E&P means exploration and production)

In the absence of an expert on the matter, I am inclined to believe Barclays and the Oil and Gas Journal over a poster with a track record of sensationalizing peak oil. Take that fwiw.
It's not really worth much, considering 1) you're not really siding with OGJ over me, you're siding with OGJ over data from Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs, BP statistical review, and the independent assessment of all that data by Douglas-Westwood's managing director; 2) Your Barclays claim talks about E&P, not Capex. E&P is not Capex, and doesn't cover most refinery and delivery costs. Kopits addresses that distinction around the 42-minute mark.

You didn't watch the presentation? It's fine. It's an hour long, and not a lot of investment gumdrops and lollipops, like most people prefer.

Last edited by JiggsCasey; 03-10-2014 at 09:06 PM.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 09:03 PM   #21
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSoother View Post
There is no such thing as clean energy that can come anywhere near meeting human demands at our current or medium term future technological capabilities. You are parroting nonsense fed to you by greenies. Nuclear & fossil fuels are the only viable power sources right now, and there is no alternative. That won't change without decades worth of accelerating technological breakthroughs.
Agreed, there is no alternative remotely close to being ready. Oil is king for a reason - efficiency and affordability (to this point, anyway). Green energy also won't move freight, nor run our global food conveyor belt and it's "just in time" delievery system.

That being said, I'm 100% in favor of a Marshall Plan towards expanding renewable infrastructure ... Even heating a few million additional homes with it takes us off the fossil fuel grid that much more. Beyond that, in the mid-term future, when conventional production begins it's long-predicted decline, renewables will be desperately needed, not just preferred. May as well have the infrastructure largely in place now while we have (kind of) the capital investment to pull it off.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 09:12 PM   #22
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LozColbert View Post
50 years?

Au contraire, dc_publius, this is a rare error on your part. People have been predicting the end of petroleum since at least immediately after Titusville in 1859. Daniel Yergin's The Prize does a very good job of illustrating how "Peak Oil" is a cyclical theory that rears its head every few years.
"The Prize" is a fine novel about the history of 19th century oil production. But, Yergin is laughably off-base (and roundly dismissed) in his assessment that "plenty" in the ground means that "plenty" will easily be brought to market. Yergin is deeply mired in the belief that oil forecasting is a demand-constrained model. It isn't. It's supply-constrained, as Kopits shows here in clear demonstration.

As we always say:

We can pretend a trillion barrels of light crude exists behind the moon. Even prove it exists. But that says nothing of the logistics of bringing it to market, nor the consumer's ability to afford the price.
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 09:26 PM   #23
BrianTheMick2
Need a ride?
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 14,124
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JiggsCasey View Post
I work for an industry that monitors that industry.
Are you the guy who has to change the numbers on the sign out front?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToothSoother View Post
Not that I buy into peak oil, but $50 billion to $260 billion move in capex, in combination with flattening or dropping production, should make you sit up.
I agree. You should sit up and do some quick research:

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/Lea...s=MCRFPUS1&f=M

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9010us2m.htm

Scroll down to page 148 (although you should probably read the entire document): http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf

Quote:
The capex spending indicates that companies with the most knowledge about available reserves and extraction methods believe that price will go up, substantially, in order to make these hugely increased bets. Either that, or this is the price of staying of in the game, which indicates that oil extraction is becoming permanently significantly more expensive.
They were expecting world demand to drive prices higher. They were wrong. They weren't expecting nat gas plays to drive world demand for oil lower. They were wrong.

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/Lea...PET&s=RWTC&f=D

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/Lea...ET&s=RBRTE&f=D

I mean, seriously, look at those charts and compare them to general inflation over the same time period.

They are now betting that maybe oil demand won't go through the roof.

Quote:
Which is basically OP's point. The only point of disagreement you could is that there is plenty of oil at higher (non economy killing) price levels, and it can be extracted in large volumes at those price levels (much larger volumes than today). If you believe this to be true, then ok, I'll listen to you, but so far OP has won this argument and you've backed him up.
He didn't make an argument. Gail Tverberg did http://ourfiniteworld.com/ Actually, technically, Gail didn't. Malthus did and Hubbert applied it to energy. What Gail** did was approximately the same as all doomsday cults do when a prediction goes awry.

What the argument doesn't take into account is that the economy doesn't give a rat's ass about the price of petroleum, or nat gas, or wind energy, or solar, or geothermal, or nuclear, or cow flatulence, or wee people on bicycles*. What it cares about is disruption if it overbets on one of them, or if they all blow up suddenly.

*I do not endorse converting sunlight to corn to electricity through child labor.

**I think that Gail is a fairly nice and concerned citizen of the world and she actually isn't a nutter.
BrianTheMick2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 09:31 PM   #24
JimAfternoon
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JimAfternoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: On Location
Posts: 6,904
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

I work in the oil business.

In my area of the country, oil can be drilled profitably at $56/barrel.

Newer places like ND need about $85/barrel to drill profitably.
JimAfternoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2014, 10:35 PM   #25
JiggsCasey
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
JiggsCasey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: 2+2 energy editor
Posts: 7,239
Re: Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
Are you the guy who has to change the numbers on the sign out front?
Are you the guy who thinks - with time - oil from algae is a viable process on a mass commercial scale?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
They were expecting world demand to drive prices higher. They were wrong. They weren't expecting nat gas plays to drive world demand for oil lower. They were wrong.
That's because the forecasting operates on a supply-constrained model, not demand-constrained as you're suggesting. We've known the unconventional gas and oil reserves have been there for quite some time. We're only turning to it now out of desperation. Doesn't change the equation.

Any way you slice it, the consumer eventually can't afford the marginal costs of oil, and demand is destructed. It has little to do with the consumer "preferring" NGPLs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
He didn't make an argument. Gail Tverberg did http://ourfiniteworld.com/ Actually, technically, Gail didn't. Malthus did and Hubbert applied it to energy. What Gail** did was approximately the same as all doomsday cults do when a prediction goes awry.
The problem is that Hubbert's core thesis hasn't gone awry, just delayed about 7-10 years. Conventional production still reached peak in 2005. And the refined and nuanced forecasts of the many analysts since then have been largely spot on as well:

Quote:
The Oil 'Revolution' Story Is Dead Wrong
http://www.peakprosperity.com/podcas...ory-dead-wrong
Natural gas isn't oil, doesn't do most of the things oil does, and doesn't burn nearly as efficiently as oil. It's a petrol-dollar. Not a NGPL-dollar. Crowing that NGPLs resurgence (which are showing more signs of buckling rather than expanding into the mid-term) counters the general thesis behind peak oil is, well, flat wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
What the argument doesn't take into account is that the economy doesn't give a rat's ass about the price of petroleum
Actually, it kinda does, considering every oil price shock (cept one?) has been followed by recession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2 View Post
What it cares about is disruption if it overbets on one of them, or if they all blow up suddenly.
Which is basically another way of saying it cares very much about the price of oil. Modern capitalism has always had to "bet" on oil. Ultimately, it's the only thing (the promise of more tomorrow) keeping the entire ponzi scheme in place.

Last edited by JiggsCasey; 03-10-2014 at 11:00 PM. Reason: minor edits... clarifications
JiggsCasey is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2010, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online