Member Info for Boyobach

PRussell:
I've explained previously why I think RDS (and other oil companies) have not responded to the recent rise in OP - basically because it is due to KSA production cuts rather than a significant recovery in demand.
In my view, any long-term shareholding needs to be managed so that the net cost per share is minimised and, ideally, kept below the prevailing market price. With £12.50 looking reasonably secure as a baseline and £14.50 the most recent top, RDS could well cycle by about £2 for an extended period, although this will hopefully develop into a steadily rising trend. This could give you trading opportunities using a portion (say 25%) of your holding for relatively modest risks and managed by setting appropriate limit orders. Trading the cycles would enable you to progressively lower the net cost per share of your holding. For example: at around £13 today and near the bottom of the range, RDS may not appear to be at the best ‘buy’ price but it would still represent a £1.50 gain for anyone re-acquiring following a sale at the recent top.
https://invst.ly/tseqt

Has PFC’s performance been very different from other oil-sector performance during February?
I think not. Here it is v RDS through January to date (15’)
https://invst.ly/trzhb
Apart from the obvious SFO fall, worth about 45p, PFC has tracked the market and, during the last week, resumed a similar upward trend to the one it was following prior to the SFO news.
It’ll be interesting to see if 125/127 p continues to offer resistance when it gets to that level.

The SFO is not able to guarantee lower sentences on behalf of those who are 'helpful' - which is why the Unaoil guys opted to be tried in the USA rather than the UK, much to the SFO's dismay. I doubt that this week's sentencing will directly result in any news regarding PFC - why would it?

Kitty: I’d have cashed out by now.....
You are a PI not a Hedge Fund trader.... different DNA and MO , which is indicated by the chart you posted: how often have short interests in PFC fallen below 4% in the last six years?
The sp will rise if and when the market is ready and by as much as the market decides, irrespective of the shorters

Neversellshell: Why are we up today if there is a lot of selling pressure.? ... Indeed, Neversell - clearly there was demand. Maybe some shorts were being closed ? Or maybe the price of Brent was a factor (although it's something of a false flag because it's due to KSA cuts rather than rising global demand).
https://invst.ly/trqd7

Yes MasterRSI, I was being a bit facetious. I often use charts to illustrate price movements and trends but I'm more sceptical of some pattern interpretations. As Shortburner says, PFC needs a few fundamental things to align: oil price being key to stimulate capital expenditure and contracts etc. As things stand currently, PFC would be defying gravity if it flew much above 160, effectively overtaking RDS and BP. But there's no denying that if Brent firms up at $60+ and the drip-feed of SFO news eases then it should start to make more significant progress.
https://invst.ly/tr5t2

The SFO investigation is a business risk that has been present for 4 years and may continue to be for years yet. It has not affected the balance sheet directly, although it may have had a negative impact on sales. It's effectively priced-in.
As Sharefall says (I think), the fine to be imposed on Mr L is relatively irrelevant, does not directly affect PFC and no further legal arguments (revelations) are to be presented in relation to this particular trial. PFC may not 'rocket' on Thursday but it should resume its prior mark cap based on the price prior to Mr L's 'guilty' plea and the market movements since then: £1.50 maybe?
https://invst.ly/tr4dq

Just keep it real: fundamentals are essential, charts provide indicators and the Hedge Funds are a reality check.
Hedge Funds succeed by testing low support levels- they challenge overvalued stocks and ease back on undervalued ones.
If PFC is genuinely good value the shorters will pull out. They'll only stay 'in' if the probability of a fall is sufficiently attractive.
I find charts useful, but I only use cups for drinking tea whilst considering the trends and the market. I agree with much of what Sharefall says about this week's sentencing etc. but I'm mindful that there are still loose ends - or rather one big loose end - in the SFO saga and it isn't Dave L.

It certainly seems that concerns about shorters are a distraction and somewhat irrelevant. Here is PFC v RDS, BP and FTSE100 since ‘SFO Day’ on 15th Jan:
https://invst.ly/tqer8
It demonstrates that, whatever the debate about shorters, PFC has managed to hold its own against the market since it first fell to 120 but has not recouped any of the 46p drop from 166 (28%) it suffered that day. So Friday’s closing price represents about 72% of the price PFC would be if the SFO news had not hit. By that calculation, PFC’s recovery price today would be around 162p.

BSD certainly improved last week's picture. Here are the usual runners and riders v Brent and the FTSE100 over the last week (since Friday 29th close): https://invst.ly/tqebq . With FY results for the majors emerging over the last ten days, Exxon has strengthened somewhat against the others, whilst BP continues to lag the field. GKP had a good week whilst G was not too shabby and seems to be continuing its 2021 upward trend, influenced heavily by OP, which nearly reached $60 on Friday. Here’s G v 3xBrent and benchmark major Chevron since late summer: https://invst.ly/tqefd .

As Mark888 says, we should be seeing a 3x multiple on OP and be up around 180 but it seems that the disappointments summarised by Whitehat after the T&O update are holding the price back. The four month hole in payments last year and bigger gap in overrides, on top of the collapse in OP, have certainly taken their toll.

Fine agreed?
The courts decide fines in the UK, not SFO (which is why the Ahsani's went to the US to face trial)

Maybe it's a case of eye on the wrong ball? Has anyone watched what has happened to Wood Group (for example) since PFC took the SFO hit on 15th Jan ?
https://invst.ly/tnyiv

Manu: This isn't an echo chamber either. If you've got rational alternative views, backed up by some facts, then let's hear them. PFC is under the cosh, has been for years - do you see significant indications to the contrary? It's climbing back up from historic lows -Good! But unless you are a ramper there's really not much to celebrate just yet is there?

Chevron results were out last week, Paddy: Fourth quarter loss of $665 million; adjusted loss of $11 million.

Do you think the sentencing is likely to be a big deal SEA7?
It will still leave a lot of loose ends. Does anyone know what finally happened to the Ahsani’s in the US where there was speculation that they ‘have cut a deal with the DOJ as cooperating witnesses’
( https://www.spotlightcorruption.org/unaoil-a-very-complicated-win-for-the-serious-fraud-office/ )
As they were key to all of Unaoil’s activities one must be prepared for more to emerge in relation to PFC.

....then it's 140 easy.

With Big Oil down to December lows, and support lines, PFC would do well to hit 135 at the moment.
https://invst.ly/tnn7e
The FY results for the big guys haven't been going too well so far. RDS on Thursday.

Agreed Ironhide typo by me 346m not 546m.
Cheers

piohc1: Engadine Partners LLP current have 0.53% short position. What 0.53% mean? Please can someone explain?

It means Engadine have net short positions on 0.53% of PFC's total issued shares of just under 546m,
so about 0.53 x 5460000 = 2893800 shares approximately, about £3.5m worth currently

Ammu is Ammu - I think he used to wind everyone up on Genl board a long time back.

Paddy: It is hard to conceive of things getting worse for PFC, so I think there’s a fair chance that the company’s fortunes will recover. Yes, I’m sure some will take profits fairly early - someone here mentioned 135 as their target but that wouldn’t be worthwhile for me. I hope to see it progress fairly steadily to 160p (adjusted for the market drop over the last couple of weeks https://invst.ly/tnajp ) and then track it upwards with a suitable stop-loss. It’s too volatile to do that presently - look at last Thursday! Hopefully it will eventually repay the loss I made when I bailed out last year by recovering to pre-covid 2019 levels above 300p.

I do wonder whether, at the right point, the organisation would benefit from re-branding. The name Petrofac is clearly associated with fossil-based energy and perhaps does not reflect where the company’s future aspirations lay. It’s obviously not a brilliant branding in the age of green enlightenment, although a change might best be performed when the SFO business has been fully closed. When that will happen is anybody’s guess, although the Ahsani brothers of Unaoil pleaded guilty in the US nearly two years ago so it seems unlikely that there is more to emerge, although one senior person linked to both Unaoil and PFC appears to have never been charged or mentioned in the press these days.

H1 was reported as loss making but H2 has not yet been reported, so it is not yet a fact Ammu, even though you have deduced that it is likely.
I'm not sure what your point is - there's nothing new or surprising in those statements is there?