Member Info for Boyobach

BEagle: I think that if you hold shares, or almost any investment for that matter, then you have to be proactive. Years ago I naively thought I could ‘buy and forget’ . That led to two fundamental mistakes:
Not paying enough attention to the ‘buy’ price and the timing of it.
Thinking that it would ultimately accumulate in value without further management.

No matter how good a given stock is, it does need to be managed - if only to check and confirm that it is performing. It’s so easy to watch a share drift ever lower with the harder decisions invariably about selling rather than buying, especially when that involves accepting that a loss has been made. The notion that sp’s must ultimately return to previous highs traps a lot of investors.

I find the very simplest chart of an sp’s trends, supports and resistances is sufficient to tilt the odds just a bit more in my favour - the common mistake is to regard them as predictive rather than indicative: it’s when the price breaks from the trend or a support/resistance line that it indicates a change of direction that might need some attention.

As mentioned, I’m in top-up mode at the moment. With the downward trend continuing today, the next level of support in the region of 1560 and a previous trend (blue) currently at about 1575, I feel my target of £1 gain on my last ‘sell’ at around 1680 is in range. https://invst.ly/ww7yw
The dilemma, of course, is whether, assuming it reaches my target, I should simply be content with that or wait to see if it drops further. 1540 is clearly possible if Brent slips below $70 again. Below 1520 would point to a more serious and widespread market correction IMV. Cash is handy in those circumstances - and I'm keeping a prudent amount of that back.

Prussell: 2k shares at say 2275? , so you are approximately £6.50 down per share or £13k? It was, of course, double that loss at one point - so things are getting better. Also the divi is worth nearly £1400 per year - so around £4k has been earned. You’re then about £9k down on that basis. Even if the dividend remains at current levels it should nearly halve that gap over another three years, whilst the sp will hopefully rise too. Trading is then the only way to make further improvements and, if you are convinced that 1600 does not represent the top, then trading a proportion of your 2000 - say 25% in two tranches of 250 could represent a good strategy - as two tranches allow a second bite of the cherry if the first trade misses the mark. Given the comments in this thread and this morning’s move, the consensus seems to be that RDS may be heading lower currently (so it may not be the best time to buy) and it is also below recent highs (so not the best time to sell either). The next opportunity might therefore be to add. I’m currently waiting to reacquire a tranche of shares I sold at about 1690 and will aim to make at least £1 per share but will settle for less if the trend convincingly turns against me. Four RDSb trades per year worth £1 per share should not be too demanding and relatively low risk IMV - but it's not for everyone and it carries risk. As always, DYOR.

RDSb appears to be four days into the ‘sell’ half of a trading cycle already:
https://invst.ly/wvpqp
So interest will naturally be turning to where the bottom might be. O&G Supply remains much tighter than it was back in early 2020, when covid first struck and there was a glut of oil in inventories. I very much doubt that the market will sink to levels seen then.

This is simply going to keep dropping until more contracts commence….

On its first day, MGC opened trading at 2.01. Allowing for the bid/offer spread, it hasn't fallen below that value since then. So there is, so far, a solid base of investors. The drops have occurred from a speculative high that was hit early on. Having said that, the recent fundraise poses the question of whether MGC properly assessed the cash burn - is that because they are pursuing too many directions too early? It’s not simply a question of needing more contracts commencing, rather it is about whether established demand and revenue adequately covers production costs with sufficient margin to justify further expansion and the additional cash injection(s) that this may well require. The fact that the sp is still on the floor relative to its launch price indicates that the market has yet to see a tangible reason to raise it.

Well today’s RNS stirred up that tumbleweed, Bunks. I had to google that reference of yours, a nice lyrical quote but the original was surely a bit before our time??

I’ll need to digest the BB/Miran Update RNS and the consequential write-down and prospects for compensation - although the market seems to have made its assessment already https://invst.ly/wuzar as it appears to have been priced-in since it was announced. It will need to get out from under that red-trend rather sharpish though !! So let's hope 120 is solid.

For me it removes one of the unknowns - and a potential sink-hole for capital expenditure, which, ten years ago, G would have been robust enough to tackle (especially with Taq Taq as assessed at that time). It’s potentially a good outcome - it certainly seemed an inevitable one, given the mood music. I agree with points by Tartine and others in similar vein. Also the references to Dana/Pearl - which have continued profitably within the KRI. There’s scope for a deal here as an alternative to making lawyers wealthy for no good reason.

I’m also waiting for December’s payment summary as it will give us some clue as to what 2022’s revenue might be. This year’s looks set to be around $280m with only 10 monthly payments received. So next year should be north of $350m, even allowing for the end of overrides but assuming that Sarta starts to deliver and OP averages about $70. There’s not much meat (in terms of resources) left on the plate compared to the appetising RTO menu that Mr Wayward and pals offered us all those years ago.

Whatever happens, G is unlikely to ever be more than a punt for me - not the serious investment it once was. Why take the risk if it performs no better than RDS? : https://invst.ly/wuzer (G vRDS vBrent last three months)

BE - Re: green washing: A risky game when there' s lots of scrutiny.
caipi - Re late posts: I just have a random sleep & reading pattern, can't even blame insomnia.

oil and gas are indispensable and will continue to be indispensable for the observable future and beyond it....
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/World-Leaders-Have-To-Face-The-Truth-About-Oil-Demand.html

Is it better to demonise the Big Oil Companies or to recognise that they are a key transition component?

Tumbleweed here?
G = 1.9x Brent on a good day and 1.6xBrent on a bad day, so today’s about average as things go currently.
https://invst.ly/wu65y

I’m still 'out '- so no surprises there either. Best Regards to all those still 'in' .

It’s not necessarily true that more shares issued makes your holding worth less....

The Issuing of new shares will decrease your percentage holding in the company (unless you buy a compensating proportion of them, as in a rights issue). However, if the new shares increase the value of the company in proportion to the new cash injected, then the value of your holding remains the same even though your percentage holding has been diluted.

The new shares were sold at a discount and the market price naturally fell to near that level. Meanwhile cash was added to the balance sheet which increased the book value - which is attributable to all shareholders.

'With this stock PATIENCE IS needed…..'
( was this an MGC joke or a typo btw?: 'We are all here to make money so make it pot' )

That 'patience' argument is all very well, however it does not address what investors' legitimate and realistic expectations should be. A chart of MGC’s sp since the launch less than a year ago shows that market expectations have varied wildly:
https://invst.ly/wu4l-

Has this been due to misconceptions, misinformation or poor performance by MGC? They recently returned to the market, within nine months, to get more cash, as they are apparently burning it rather faster than they are earning it. Does this point to lack of foresight or does it indicate the way they plan to progress? Can we expect them to periodically tap the market for more cash whilst their prospects and value per share continue to remain on the launch pad? Clearly there was some hype back in February and the ‘get rich quick’ brigade appear to have stormed in until the cold breeze of reality blew away the smoke from the mirrors. The next leap of faith came in August with the announcement of MGC’s deal with US AMC Holdings. How is that doing exactly? At least some capital growth might ordinarily have been envisaged before the hat was passed around again. Wouldn’t it have been reasonable to see some tangible results, reflected in a proportionate increase in market cap before they came back for a new injection of funds? Patience is one thing, trading is another but idly watching your cash erode with inflation is not as smart as either.

It seems plain that OPEC+ are steering a path that aims to stabilise oil in the region of $75 (Brent). Although they would undoubtedly like it higher, that carries consequences and risks which, for the moment, they do not seem keen to test.
So how representative of ‘normal’ are the current prices of Oil and Natural Gas?
This chart rebases the two from an arbitrary date - 8/8/2015 - when Brent was about $50 and NG was about $2.8 (the 0% line):
https://invst.ly/wu1rj
Comparisons like this can be very selective, but it seems to show that the relationship between NG and Brent is currently near a ‘norm’ (if there is such a thing), with both near the upper end of their price range of the last six years. However, it’s unusual to see Brent above $70 in December (it fell back to $50 in Dec 2018 after hitting the last peak) and the price usually climbs through Q1/Q2 whilst, for NG, the seasonal effect is weighted differently as it is more dependent on Northern hemisphere heating. 2022 looks set to be interesting.

Cheers -just thinking out loud, which helps me assess how RDS is performing .
BP is very similar, it has to be said.

With Brent back up to $76, it’s interesting to see how RDSb compares today with its performance back on Sept 22nd - when Brent was also at $76: https://invst.ly/wts-h .
This chart of RDSv Brent demonstrates that RDS has gained about £1.70 relative to Brent since it peaked at 1520 intraday on the 22/9. Much of that relative gain has occurred since Brent fell sharply in November, with RDS finding support around 1560 despite Brent’s continued plunge. The last three days, however, have seen Brent making a sharp recovery and this has presumably helped to keep the RDS rally going, although there were signs today that it may be peaking. For its part, Brent may yet latch back onto the 19 month trend (blue) that it dramatically dropped through when it fell: https://invst.ly/wtsv5 , although that does seem unlikely given seasonal and covid factors.

DarthInvestor: ' Wouldnt be surprise to see near 2p or below tomorrow ... '
Agreed: there hasn't been much point in adding since 30th November. It's not unusual to see prices dip below placement levels, so it's been best to wait and see imv....

The downtrend in sp since October 20th (red) is over, so the question turns to the current uptrend (green) and how far that will take the sp: https://invst.ly/wtacl
With Brent proving more resilient than some pundits supposed, the obvious target for RDSb (according to that particular chart) of 1715 might turn out to be short of the mark.

Kenj: Thanks, but you can keep Greta!
Greta isn't talking to you or us, which is one good reason to not ignore her.

Well last Friday’s gap got filled and RDS went from a low near 1540 to a high today above 1660. What a terrific week! I took some profits and held onto another tranche quickly acquired at the bottom , thus returning to ‘equal weight’. This is all despite a $12 cooling in Brent from around $82 to $70, which has effectively seen RDS re-rated against OP. https://invst.ly/wsnck
Just to put that ‘re-rate against Brent’ into perspective, it would put RDS at £19.89 if Brent returned to $86 and the ratio was maintained.
It’s worth repeating the above chart from Sept 1, with Brent and the FTSE100 added in comparison:
https://invst.ly/wsng7 . This plainly shows how well RDS has performed over the last five days.

I believe Shetland is a good spot for wind….
I think you are right Nomad: Scotland, in general, seems to be blessed with an abundance of wind emanating from a wide variety of sources both natural and political. It is surely no accident that, after failing to catch on in Thebes and nearly everywhere else around the world, bagpipes found a permanent home there.

Whilst UK market share is of interest to Shell, it probably makes no difference to them where that oil originates from. Shell is well out of Cambo - why incur ongoing costs associated with something that may never happen and which attracts such toxicity in the meantime? If it is ever needed then the politicians will quickly change tune and beg for a major to jump back in. In the meantime, I assume it could be a ‘write down’ which might favourably impact tax liabilities whilst not affecting ongoing cash flows.

Ha! I was quoting stevebt's post ... the 'make money' opportunity came and went in October. For those who took profits, it will be about re-loading for the next round.
No one knows how this will play over the next few days but events of the last week are certainly discouraging an increase in oil production in the US and amongst OPEC+ producers. It's been perfectly timed for the OPEC meeting this week. The glut of supply that was building in 2019, prior to Covid, is gone -so I think the next recovery wave should be pretty solid. But, in the meanwhile, the 19th month rising Brent trend (blue) is now dead - having 'kissed the line' and fallen back this morning: https://invst.ly/wr7zy