Member Info for Boyobach

Interesting to see how Chevron (up 23%) has outpaced OP (up 16.5%) over the last four weeks, whilst Shell is 3% down and BP & Total are each down more than 10%. Exxon in middle territory 6% up over the period. The differences are presumably associated with the respective levels of Russian exposure.

Last 4 weeks: https://invst.ly/xmz5v
YTD: https://invst.ly/xmz6d

The line charts are based on daily closing prices given by Investing.com and rebased to 0% on the start date shown. Please bear in mind the differences in market closing times each day:
Shell (London) with approximate share price scale.
Exxon XOM (NY)
Chevron (CVX) (NY)
BP (London)
Brent (ICE)
Total Energies (London)

I don’t believe it was ‘a bubble’ in the market sense Andy, more a product/project failure.
As I understand it, Ceres at that time had been very much involved with British Gas in connection with manufacture of a grid-connected Combined Heat and Power (‘CHP’) product, which negated the need for a household to have both a hot water boiler and central heating boiler. It was not, as such, a ‘hydrogen’ project. My understanding is that they ran into technical difficulties but I don’t know how the partnership with BG ultimately ended. There was a restructuring in 2012 as covered in this interim report:
https://www.investegate.co.uk/ceres-power-holdings--cwr-/rns/half-yearly-report/201302140700078410X/
CWR then seems very much different to the business model of today, which is IP rather than manufacturing orientated. I’d also be wary of the historic share price you are seeing on that website prior to the restructuring - I have seen different values on investing.com.

Not so much a breakout as a levelling off for CWR possibly?
Although it’s entirely subjective where a comparison is rebased, the following chart of CWR v CELS index does show that CWR has nearly recovered the relationship it had with the index prior to January’s sharp drop: https://invst.ly/xmy3z and is perhaps just 50 to 100p below this level.
Whilst the recovery has been good news, it does suggest that the remainder of January’s drop was market related and may be slower to dissipate.

......When Shell's management came out in 2020 declaring oil price is not going to rise for 3 years above $60 to justify their dividend cut - it showed that this management cannot predict or doesn't have the foresight about their own industry ……..

Dividend policy can be changed at the drop of a hat but OP can change much quicker. Any O&G company must work on the basis of a prudent assessment. Besides, the current dividend yield is 3.5% which is average for a FTSE 100 company.

Shell cut the dividend (I would say rightly) during a price war that saw WTI fall to -$37 bbl (yes that’s a minus), during the onset of covid and prior to the full extent of US shale production collapse, OPEC+ policy changes, etc etc. The world’s energy bodies (EIA, IEA etc etc) were making similar predictions concerning OP even later in 2020. Exxon was borrowing money to continue its dividend policy - as, indeed Shell would have needed to, and BP also cut its dividend. OP is a volatile thing at the best of times and most of us here will already be anticipating that today’s price of $110 will, at some point, lead to oversupply and a likely drop in price. It is no coincidence that all Big Oil co's hit a low in Q3 2020. So, given the current rate of cash flow, how should Shell prioritise it differently: Investment in Transition, O&G Cap-ex, Share buybacks, debt reduction or Dividends ?

https://youtu.be/E_-9Uk3xnkU

I do agree ShellEmployee, although the rot set in when Putin retained control after his first term as President.
Russia was badly led following Glasnost and the Gorbachev era, which brought freedom and openness but, sadly, not the economic stability that the Russian people needed and deserved. The West was initially correct to trade with Russia following the dissolution of the USSR but ignored the fact that the wealth being created was misdirected. Yeltsin, the drunkard, and Putin did not serve their people well, particularly Putin in his second term as President. He has progressively reintroduced autocratic controls but this time with an aggressive right-wing capitalist agenda that benefited his small and elite circle of oligarchs. It is ironic that Putin refers to protecting people from fascists - when the label broadly describes him.

I can’t say I entirely agree with you about the divi cut, Seav, although I can see you got a good number of approvals for your post. My disappointment has come because of Shell’s share buybacks - which only have an indirect and ill-defined benefit for shareholders, especially small PI’s, and do nothing to advance a positive transition strategy. I see Shell as a business with a role to play in future energy rather than an O&G major just playing out its last few golden years. I have to say that Chevron does represent the standard by which I usually measure Shell and all the others, although they are clearly less fettered by government policy in the US - so they do operate at an advantage. However, it looks way too volatile currently.
In early 2020 there was an oil price war and the sp’s of big oil companies were already in decline prior to covid. At that point, XOM was arguably weakest, partly because of its dividend policy - check it out against CVX here: https://invst.ly/xmk8k.
Buybacks aside, I’m broadly ok with Shell’s cautious approach. One good thing about Shell’s sp not following OP too closely recently is that it should absorb the pull-backs better as they occur

Given the placing in December at 28p and the rather unenthusiastic market reception of Monday’s results, it’s been pleasant to see the best increase this year so far : https://invst.ly/xmieg With even a potential breakout.
Clearly December’s private fund-raise set a reasonable expectation for the sp but it still begs the question whether 2021 saw either too much hype or too much expectation: https://invst.ly/xmicf
The tech sector has had a tough time so far this year, so it’s perhaps worth comparing FBT with the NASDAQ Tech Sector index over a long period (and rebased at a quite conservative level when FBT was about 22p) to get a feel for that: https://invst.ly/xmj0e . Even on that moderate basis, the current sp does seem very low.

Pokerchips: just in case there was any misunderstanding, the word I used was apposite, not opposite . So I was expressing general agreement with your comments

.......increasingly dominated, since 2020, by the downward pressure of orange and now red....

Remembering that rising trends are generally defined by rising ‘lows’ and falling trends by falling ‘highs’, OCADO presents a tale of three trends currently:
https://invst.ly/xmg55
Whilst shorter term trends have played a part, the green, orange and red here tell the story, with the picture increasingly dominated, since 2021, by the downward pressure of orange and now red. It’s rather like the ordinarily bullish ‘cup and handle’ pattern but, because the sp broke downwards rather than up, many will have bailed out when the sp fell below 1550, which was also the 50% retrace point from the top down to 220 (Fib retrace levels shown for those who use them - I don’t). The net effect is the precipitous fall in the red lane which has yet to find the bottom. The first sign of reversal should come in the form of lows tracing a rising track (no sign of that yet) and highs breaking above red: (15’ view): https://invst.ly/xmgj- . Until then, buying on the lows is more an act of faith rather than of judgement.

It seems that Canada Pensions yesterday joined MW in the shorts list with 0.59%, bringing the two of them to a total of 1.49%. Of course, this is the stock on loan rather than the actual amount shorted at any given moment. Also, the shorts are sometimes there as a hedge for something else. So don’t be too sure that the professionals are burning - they rarely do as far as I can make out.
Meanwhile the sp closed above both 770 and the red ceiling trend I mentioned earlier, so the breakout still looks very promising at the moment: https://invst.ly/xm5lm

I rather stupidly forgot to mention the breakout possibility.... https://invst.ly/xl-m9

I see MW short level increased to 0.9% on Monday but, nevertheless, it’s been a good week for selling another trading tranche, with CWR chasing its more ‘normal’ (2021) relationship with CELS index: https://invst.ly/xl-65 .
Wider view: https://invst.ly/xl-e9
Today could see a pause or even a temporary pull back. Whilst I’d prefer it to continue upwards, a pull back might give me the chance of another trading cycle.

Phoey: It seems I posted the wrong chart when discussing the Shell divergence with XOM, so just to put that right: https://invst.ly/xlzjg
The divergence occurred after Shell issued its first RNS about exiting equity partnerships in Russia. Exxon then announced that it is doing similar but I don’t know whether the impact is of similar scale. XOM remains ahead at this point.
Chevron apparently has very little exposure in Russia, which is presumably why it has moved ahead of all the others. Of course, Shell pulled out of US Shale, which seemed like a good idea at the time.

We can agree to disagree about the benefit of share buybacks to pi’s, Longterm, I happen to think they represent poor value, especially for small PIs, but the essential point in The Independent article is not about that: it’s whether buybacks would help or hinder Shell’s legitimate objections to a windfall tax. I have little doubt that they would be unhelpful.

Has XOM announced any withdrawal from business relationships or purchasing contracts connected with Russia?
Shell and XOM sp's were tracking each other up to the days following Shell's RNS, posted after the market closed on Feb 28th. https://invst.ly/xlmkc . The difference you mention only occurred in the last four trading days.

I guess your £26 is based on something like this, Pernix: https://invst.ly/xlmkc ?
I don't think things are quite that simple.
The net effect of war in Europe, O&G shortages and costs appear to be beyond many people's comprehension.

Gioviano is correct. Since dropping through the red here: https://invst.ly/xllu1
OCDO is not in any discernable upward trend, which implies there is very little upward pressure and it is reliant on support levels: https://invst.ly/xllwt

“We are acutely aware that our decision last week to purchase a cargo of Russian crude oil to be refined into products like petrol and diesel – despite being made with security of supplies at the forefront of our thinking – was not the right one and we are sorry. As we have already said, we will commit profits from the limited, remaining amounts of Russian oil we will process to a dedicated fund. We will work with aid partners and humanitarian agencies over the coming days and weeks to determine where the monies from this fund are best placed to alleviate the terrible consequences that this war is having on the people of Ukraine,” said Shell Chief Executive Officer, Ben van Beurden.