Member Info for Boyobach

well it appears people are now grasping the reality of the huge dividend cut….
What reality is that Char? Have you seen the price of O&G recently? I guess you could easily conclude from this chart that rising O&G prices are actually bad for RDS: https://invst.ly/v1704 They are not, of course - quite the opposite. And that chart merely reflects what has happened over the last few weeks, a wider view shows that both O&G are now above typical 2019 levels. When investors sold off RDS last year and the sp fell, the company naturally cut the dividend - it was hardly likely to allow the yield to rocket whilst it had the opportunity to divert the cash for better purposes, like paying down debt and pursuing energy transition plans etc etc. Is RDS in a worse position now than it was immediately pre-pandemic when an OP war was about to erupt? Almost certainly not…. and the sp then was around £20. It’s a chicken and egg situation - whilst the sp remains low there’s no need to restore the dividend and the cash can be used elsewhere - restoring investor value in other ways which will eventually be reflected in the sp.

It’s been a disappointing week, watching CWR drop sharply down from the Nasdaq CELS index : https://invst.ly/v1651
Any good reasons why?

Genelians were due a decent week, here’s the usual set of comparisons:
https://invst.ly/v15kh
Not bad for four straight days and the chance to make 12% in the short week was bound to bring out the profit takers today. I did say that 150 might prove sticky on the way back up but the week has provided something of a rebound for G, covering about half of the drop experienced after ‘dividend + KRG letter’ day: https://invst.ly/v15li
Hopefully we’ll soon be back around 170 and on track to two quid as the market sees payments matching 2019 levels: https://invst.ly/v15su

It's a nice thought Greg.

Bunks - re BSD - best say nothing do you think?

I don't take a blind bit of notice of the supply/demand side of things for oil re pricing ......
Ha!...I think that was the mistake the US Shale industry made - twice, or was it three times (too many busts for me to be sure)?
Anyway, we can be agreed that the direction is up at present and that's good for G.
Over in the US, Biden will be under pressure to limit OP somehow because the GOTP (The Grand OldTrump Party) will use OP as one of their few remaining populist angles. So I think it's only a matter of time before KSA are suddenly doing the US bidding and increasing supply to cool the price down. Time will tell.

Oh yes, bonker: Brent looks good from a chart perspective: https://invst.ly/v0yx3
If demand continues to firm up - many are saying it will outpace supply in H2 - and if US Shale remains under control then the prospects for $80+ look reasonable. Given the need to ween ourselves off oil you'd think it should be really expensive right?
But there are too many countries which need the revenue and they'll soon start pumping more if the price rises much further - so I reckon $80 would be the top but who knows?
As GregPeck says, QD could be transformational as well this year - so it could be a golden period for G although you wouldn't think so from today's sp. ATB.

The bounce, for G and big oil, happened in March, bonker: https://invst.ly/v0xv5 .There's been a bit of a glitch here since , hopefully will rectify during the next couple of months.

In terms of Chevron v RDS, most people will point to the dividend cut causing the sharp difference in sp performance, Bald Eagle. So, if RDS is now generating cash at pre-pandemic levels (Chevron presumably are) and that cash is not being distributed as dividend then it should be increasing investor value in other ways - by paying down debt or by investment in energy transition etc . etc. and this increase in value should ultimately be reflected in the sp. Either way, investors should be seeing a recovery in value but it's hardly apparent yet .

A year ago today, the sp was virtually identical to today: RDSb closed at 1334 and was climbing towards its summer peak around 1460. Brent was $40 at the time so has increased by 75% since then: https://invst.ly/v0u1-
Natural Gas (not shown here) was apparently around $2 compared to $3 today, a 50% increase.
By comparison, Chevron’s sp is now back to Jan 2020 levels - which in the case of RDS would be £20. It will be noted from the chart that BP is performing similarly to RDS.
Am I correct in thinking that the only key differences between RDS and CVX are their Dividend and Green Transition policies?
If so, which of them is serving their shareholders better and do the respective sps correctly reflect this?

It is odd, Barrie: the sp seems to be stagnating despite the generally bullish OP.
According to Reuters: The consensus among market forecasters, including the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and its allies within the wider OPEC+ group of producers, is that oil demand will exceed supply in the second half of 2021. And the EIA reported today that U.S. oil stockpiles fell more than double the amount expected in the latest week as crude inventories fell 5.08 million barrels last week, compared with analysts' expectations for a draw of 2.443 million barrels. BP continues to forge ahead, with RDS needing to add a quid to catch up currently: https://invst.ly/v0p9h

Agreed 34adsa: our posts crossed.

Ironically, I guess RDS could comply with the court by simply selling 45% of its fossil activities/resources - thereby putting them beyond the control of the court and defeating the real objectives of the campaigners - and distribute the proceeds to its shareholders. A bit extreme but, nevertheless an indication that there seem to be plenty of options in terms of compliance with the ruling - not all of which are good from an environmental perspective nor bad from an investment perspective. Hopefully an ethical and fair approach will be pursued for all concerned.

Barrie: 'I’m wondering if the Dutch court ruling has generated uncertainty .... '
I think it has - am I right in thinking that under the ruling RDS is effectively prohibited from investing in the search for and exploitation of new resources and is now restricted to production from its existing discovered AND producing wells?
This is from https://www.rechtspraak.nl/:
The court finds that RDS is not presently in breach of its reduction obligation, as the claimants argue. RDS has enhanced the Shell group's policy and is working it out in more detail. However, seeing as the policy is not concrete, has many caveats and is based on monitoring social developments rather than the company's own responsibility for achieving a CO2 reduction, the court finds that there is an imminent breach of the reduction obligation. Therefore, the court has ordered RDS to reduce the emissions of the Shell group, its suppliers and its customers by net 45%, as compared to 2019 levels, by the end of 2030, through the corporate policy of the Shell group.

The failure of RDS to respond to rises in either OP or Nat Gas since mid March is indeed perplexing. Demand is obviously increasing and, to that extent, uncertainty is diminishing:
https://invst.ly/v0g7v

G is seeing a steady recovery towards more realistic levels, which should be underpinned by OP which, according to reports, is finally being driven by demand rather than OPEC+ supply restrictions: https://invst.ly/v0fje
G does still remain about 30p below recent performance levels and a whopping 60p below the long-time 'normal' 3x Brent ratio.

Agreed FireAnt.
Regarding the CFO, though, it’s a role that should do rather more than just manage the accounting. It should inform company policy and help ensure discipline in terms of capital expenditure and departmental budgets etc. A change of CFO when a company has been underperforming can be a good thing. TGP has faced some stiff headwinds since the IPO, bearing in mind it still has a foot in the offshore O&G industry.
Looking at the sp since IPO, https://invst.ly/v0dpd there’s clearly been a mismatch between investor expectations and reality, was that due to a certain amount of hype during the Ritchie-Bland era and have TGP investors now got a more realistic outlook?

My sentiment with TGP is quite similar to yours FireAnt, although I’m not particularly here for the very long term - I really want to see some progress over the next year. I’m not heavily invested as I do regard it as high risk. I think I’ve discovered the answer to my question regarding the relatively poor EBITDA in light of substantially increased revenue at the last FY, summed up in this line from the annual statement:
‘The biggest financial impact was due to increased supplier costs because of COVID-19 supply chain disruption, however, we feel this position will be recovered in FY21.’
So it does seem that their margins might be a bit tight. I also have a better grasp of the relative contributions to the business of ‘renewable’ energy, offshore O&G and other subsea. I don’t think TGP is going to be stellar in the near-term but it does strike me as a potentially solid plodder from here. I doubt that I’d be quite so calmly sanguine if I had invested heavily at 140 or even 80p !

Posted a note re TGP in the 'Not too bad thread' over there, Rangor.
It doesn't strike me as imminently spectacular or low-risk: could be a slow plod but possibly at or near the bottom now.

Interesting interview with Ian Ritchey - Non Exec appointed in March - covers diversity/inclusivity up to about 14’ in and then ‘industrial footprint’ and ‘anchor industry’ issues in the NE. One can see the positive contribution that he could make to TGP. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XceiVpTpeiE

Yes indeed Barrie, although Chevron isn’t faring much better looking at the post-October recovery, whilst BP is moving ahead of both: https://invst.ly/u-ryq .