Member Info for bald_eagle

"I guess it was too much for Barclays investors to be exuberant..."
==========================================================
What does 'exuberant' mean?!
An unemployed Uber driver perhaps....not common amonget BARC holders I suspect!!

Tricky, how did you come by an intrinsic value of £10?....is that the consensus valuation from analysts?

"I don't think that we did anything wrong at Autonomy, but let me remind you that HP, of its own free will, decided to pay 70% more for Autonomy than its price on the London stock market,....It was an astronomical amount of money, but it was their choice - not ours." Mike Lynch told Radio 4.
I wonder if Mike has thought about renting a villa next to Mr Goshn in Lebanon

Rising revenue, presumably rising profits, exploratory potential at Teren-sai but falling share price.
Market doesn't believe or see the potential at Altyn. Probably the message from the company is unclear at the moment. Even their own analysis - promoted by them - seems to have put a cap on production for next few years.

Grade is king.

Q2 production update/results are earlier than 'normal', almost 3 weeks. Last year they were 10th August.

BARC have been slow to reward shareholders (based on my experience). There are much more deserving recipeints for that money (seemingly in the eyes of management)....investment bankers & the law firms that handle their law suits. I hope I am proven wrong.
I agree with 1.5p guesstimate.

I'm thinking 'Logan's Run' or Roman decimation.

"For the majority of the world's population feeding your children tomorrow is a much greater concern than global warming in a decade or two."
=================================================
Jim, as you may be trying to say....the majority of people are stupid. Global warming (if it comes to pass) would make it harder for people to feed their children. If they are struggling to feed them tomorrow then a warmer planet will make it many times harder in 10 years or so. That is where leadership is needed to plan for the future....unfortunately most politicians can only see as far (but no further) than the next election. Telling people they have to pay more now - or they cannot fly as much (for example) - isn't a vote winner.

"Not sure we can discuss this in global terms...."
======================================================
Jim, I reckon you are correct. The poorer nations aren't going to be able to afford to go green on their own very quickly and the richer nations aren't going to want to subsidise them. However global warming is a global phenomenon. Not much point smug people in London driving EV's and planting trees when they fly away on holiday if the rest of the world keeps on burning coal.

Similar with Covid vaccinations....the scientists keep repeating that it is a PANDEMIC. Until all the world is involved the risk isn't over.

Unfortunately I'm not sure we have the leaders to solve the problems we face. And more than likely Trump will be back in power in a few years....which would be 'good' for RDS.

" In ten year's time the percentage of our energy coming from wind and solar won't be much higher than it is today because in that time world population will have grown by 800 million and consumption with it."
=============================================================
Ed1, where did you get that bit of information?

Common sense would tell me that IF the cost of solar & wind power continues to drop then the poorer parts of the world will use it more.....why use more expensive forms of energy when cheaper alternatives are available. However just like COVID vaccines the richer countries may monopolise the 'cheap' & clean technologies at least until they have decarbonised.

Gas power stations are a cleaner option than coal and could be used more. I believe there was talk about small nuclear plants recently (possibly fusion).

"It’s not clear yet how the Treasury will fill the looming hole in its coffers when it loses more than £30bn a year currently collected through fuel taxes on conventional cars. "
(https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57830168)

"The demand for oil and gas is likely to remain for our lifetimes, and quite possibly several others after us, the demand for these assets will always remain."
===============================================================
If I was being polite I would say that is wishful thinking.
I suppose, given the number of classic cars & motorcycles locked away in UK garages there will always be some demand for petrol....although given the number of miles they do per year I'm not sure Shell can rely on that revenue.

Some of the people on here could be youngsters, someone in their 20's would expect to live for another 60 years (if not a lot more). So towards the end of this century there will still be enough demand for hydrocarbons to support a progressive dividend policy for SHell?... Dream on.

"Watch out for the Red Ink- we'll all be in trouble. :-)"
================================================
Is that some coded reference to the Russians or the Chinese?

Char333, I could never understand Vodafone. People on that board were always talking about 'free cash flow' but there never seemed enough profits to cover the dividends. I suspect people were just trying to justify their investment in VOD by talking FCF mumbo jumbo.

RDSB seems to be facing headwinds....it has to transition away from fossil fuels and that could be very costly. But short term they will be making money. Potential problem for shareholders is that more & more of that profit will be 'invested' in transitioning and less for dividends.
Also the assets they have may become effectively worthless....and there is nothing worse than having an 'asset' that nobody wants to buy (isn't that a liability). Ever seen that film 'Margin Call'...scary!!
The gamble is that the management have a sensible & workable plan to transition. If they do then RDS may emerge strong & profitable in 10 years time. If not then the management will retire with huge pensions and say they 'gave it their best shot'.

I'm not joining any side. But isn't char333 - in his own inimitable way - providing balance to the views on this board. Some suggest SP is gonna be over £20 next week and Char333 thinks Chapter 11 is more likely. Ying & Yang.
If we all sang from the same hymn sheet it would just be an echo chamber. Ultimately the market seems either undecided about RDSB or Char333 is more influential than we would hope!

"....we think will be around in five years.“
==========================================
The IC attempting humour....presumably?!

Regarding hydrogen, I saw something on the telly a day or so ago about Centrica working on converting the 'Rough' oil platform into a hydrogen storage facility....hydrogen stored under the sea bed.
Idea was that hydrogen in the future will be needed in vast quantities to heat our homes....replacing our gas boilers. Not sure if SHell was involved.

"Most cars built after 2001 can cope with 10% Ethanol without any modification,..."
===================================================================
To be pedantic, it is the engine that is the important factor not the car. The same model can have different engines. One needs to check that the engine in the car has been designed to handle 10% ethanol fuel.
I agree that most modern engines will have been designed for the 'new' fuel....but not all engines. Best to check before the 'new' fuel reaches the pumps.....whenever that is!!

HD?....is that referring to Harley Davidson?
If so does that mean because HD tell us their post 1980 models are OK with 10% ethanol we can take it for granted that all UK cars & motorbikes are also OK?....OR that the majority of vehicles in UK are powered by post-1980 HD designed engines?
Useful stuff to know.