"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
>
> At 08:55 PM 1/11/04, Julia Thompson wrote:
> >"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
> > >
> > > At 09:45 AM 1/11/04, Steve Sloan II wrote:
> > > >Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't know about financial models, but I do know that
> > > > > judgement, especially when
At 08:55 PM 1/11/04, Julia Thompson wrote:
"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
>
> At 09:45 AM 1/11/04, Steve Sloan II wrote:
> >Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know about financial models, but I do know that
> > > judgement, especially when immediate judgement on critical
> > > issues is necessary
"Ronn!Blankenship" wrote:
>
> At 09:45 AM 1/11/04, Steve Sloan II wrote:
> >Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know about financial models, but I do know that
> > > judgement, especially when immediate judgement on critical
> > > issues is necessary, is affected by fatigue. For one thing,
At 09:45 AM 1/11/04, Steve Sloan II wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> I don't know about financial models, but I do know that
> judgement, especially when immediate judgement on critical
> issues is necessary, is affected by fatigue. For one thing,
> tired people tend to be grumpy people, and may
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
> I don't know about financial models, but I do know that
> judgement, especially when immediate judgement on critical
> issues is necessary, is affected by fatigue. For one thing,
> tired people tend to be grumpy people, and may do things
> they later regret.
I think both
--- Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A lot of well-run companies put those
> sorts of demands on their employees. Every
> consulting
> company (not just us), every investment bank, every
> venture capital fund, every hedge fund - and that's
> just in the financial sector. I've seen o
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One of the things that I think I've learned the last two years
(I've written about this on my blog at greater length) is that the
basic decisions to be made are not, generally, all that hard.
Right. But the question is whe
Gautam wrote:
> That's also the reason why the odds that I'm going to
> be able to go have dropped - just because they can't
> support any more personnel over there right now.
Well, here's hoping you beat the odds on this one.
Reggie Bautista
No Second Line Maru
___
At 10:20 AM 1/7/04, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Last February, the former chief of staff of the US
> Army claimed
> otherwise. He figured an additional 250,000
> Americans could go into
> Iraq.
I frankly don't think Shinsecki was write about this,
an
--- "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Last February, the former chief of staff of the US
> Army claimed
> otherwise. He figured an additional 250,000
> Americans could go into
> Iraq.
I frankly don't think Shinsecki was write about this,
and I don't know anyone else who agrees wit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
Maybe they should sell tee-shirts?
(According to a different thread)
Hey-ohhh!
;-)
__
Steve Sloan . Huntsville, Alabama =>
The reason there are limits on the number of people
there is _logistic_. The Bush Administration is
desperately trying to squeeze as many people as it
possibly can into Iraq. The "long pole in the tent"
is that we are currently at capacity for the number of
people we can _
--- Jan Coffey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it not better to do a few thing right thn many
> things wrong?
> Jan
I don't think so, actually. One of the things that I
think I've learned the last two years (I've written
about this on my blog at greater length) is that the
basic decisions to be m
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 5 Jan 2004, Gautam Mukunda
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
> > In other words, the Bush Administration has limited
> > the numbers of
> > people available to the Coalition
"Robert J. Chassell" wrote:
> When people work long weeks under extreme time pressure, they are more
> likely to make mistakes. That is why the Royal Air Force grew so
> concerned about pilot fatigue during the Battle of Britain. That is
> why nuclear plant operators are limited in the amount of
> From: Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Rather than arguing about this in detail, let me point
> you to Dan Drezner's articles on the topic, which are
> quite persuasive and well-researched. Drezner is
> hardly a Bush partisan - he wrote an article titled
> "Bush the Bumbler" for Slate.
--- "Robert J. Chassell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5 Jan 2004, Gautam Mukunda
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
> In other words, the Bush Administration has limited
> the numbers of
> people available to the Coalition Provisional
> Authority and to
> contractors. It has placed a handicap on past U
--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But, few of the stockholders will be at personal
> risk. I'm guessing that
> we will not see the board of directors of
> Halliburton in Iraq for any
> prolonged period of time either. They will not be
> working longer hours for
> Iraq. So, the compens
- Original Message -
From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> --- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
On 5 Jan 2004, Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
We are also asking people working in Iraq to work under
extreme time pressure. People in the CPA routinely work 100 hour
weeks, as do the contractors there.
In other words, the Bush Administration has limited the number
--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If these folks were to tell me, for reasons X,Y,Z,
> Halliburton actually
> made a lot less than they expected to from the Iraq
> contracts, then I'd be
> inclined to believe them...since they've given me
> good information in the
> past. However, I wil
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
>
> So, in other words, it seems to me that yo
From: "Reggie Bautista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
And the oil patch isn't the only place this kind of bookkeeping takes
place,
of course. Here are a couple of other examples of how money gets moved
around and accounted for in, shall we say, interesting ways. Back in early
2000 there was a discussion
> Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
Maybe they should sell tee-shirts?
(According to a different thread)
Vilyehm Teighlore
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> At 02:21 PM 1/4/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
> &
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "John
> From: John D. Giorgis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> At 02:21 PM 1/4/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
> >In addition, if there is anything like a cost plus bidding with a poor
> >paper trail, it becomes a cost sink. Anyone who can get their costs
> >association with that project can make their division b
At 02:21 PM 1/4/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
>In addition, if there is anything like a cost plus bidding with a poor
>paper trail, it becomes a cost sink. Anyone who can get their costs
>association with that project can make their division balance sheet look a
>lot better. There are bonuses rid
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> At 06:46 PM 1/3/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
&g
At 06:46 PM 1/3/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote:
>Any corporation worth its salt can have small or zero profits from certain
>international operations.
So, so you are saying that you disagree with the conclusions of the NY
Times' investigation?
If so, on what grounds?
If not, then what *are* you s
At 07:46 PM 1/3/2004, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 5:31 PM
Subject: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> Here is the NY Times Article that found that so f
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 5:31 PM
Subject: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> Here is the NY Times Article that found that so far there have been,
quote
> &quo
Here is the NY Times Article that found that so far there have been, quote
"minimal profits" for Haliburton.
JDG
December 29, 2003
Halliburton Contracts in Iraq: The Struggle to Manage Costs
By JEFF GERTH and DON VAN NATTA Jr.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 28 - The Qarmat Ali water treatment plant in south
33 matches
Mail list logo
