Member Info for casapinos

Jed ....oil prices are volatile but OPEC which to a large extent controls them, act as a balancing producer, when prices are high they produce more- WHY ? because if they don't oil use falls and so do their profits. This press release

https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/press_room/6882.htm

shows that they intend to raise daily production by 432k bbls (though they often fail to meet increase targets 'cos it's hard to switch on production quickly)
IMV we are in for a year or more of $100+ oil (buy Shel!) but airlines as large users often have long-term contracts at fixed prices which will be below (maybe well below) the Spot price.
I intend to help by flying to OZ to see my family this winter-it'll be cheaper than putting the central heating on!!!

Opec controls oil prices because they produce almost half of the world's output and have 90% of the world's known reserves. Saudi has an average lift cost of $10 per barrel, so if they chose they could drive every other producer out of business by lowering the price 'till they all went bust!

Convb .......

"Mate Im pretty sure Rolls Royce make cars...hence why we are all here.

Seriously do you have any idea how stupid you sound??"

posted by convb on this board in April!!!!
Unsurprisingly after this post I'm ignoring you.

Have read the article and it reflects the astonishing fact that interest rates have fallen progressively for ..........5000 years. The best reference is "debt - the first 5000 years"by the late, much-lamented, David Graeber from which Lewis appears to have gleaned much of his info. The article's title "History tells us UK interest rates will go up and up" is exactly counter to the reality described in the content, FT sub-editors clearly don't bother to read the articles they headline!
I don't breach copyright but in essence, Lewis is predicting interest rate rises, modest by the standards of the fairly recent past , which has been an outlier driven by wilful mismanagement of the economies of the US, UK and EU by their central banks.
As a LLOY shareholder, I am comfortable that the positive effects of a return to low single figure interest rates for a few years will comfortably outweigh the risks of default by borrowers.LLOY has the strongest capital position it has had for years and only an excess of caution is preventing a more generous return to holders.

JTT... fine, if I'm wrong (ie a SP rise of >5% over say 1 week in anotherwise stable market) I'll give £50 to a charity of your choice, if I'm right you promise never to mention the cat again!
Are you on?

Convb - then you have missed one of the very few useful bits of info on this board!

Sorry guys ,the market knows all about the ITP deal and its completion is (almost )entirely factored into the SP, only a change in the terms would make any difference and that is more likely to be negative than positive.The deal was essentially forced on RR as a condition of the R.I. /debt issue in late 2020, in which , according to my sources, RR were required by the underwriters/ senior note buyers to find some cash by disposals. ( see RNS 16 Sep 2020) The ITP deal if/ when it comes will discharge that commitment but WILL NOT have a significant positive effect on the SP.

Is it just me who sees the situation of multiple suppliers to each household for data as ludicrous when we have managed to create a single household service for sewage, water, gas and electricity, isn't data the latest of a set of provisions which are seen as fundamental to modern life? I'm a believer in competition in general but logic insists that the waste of cash in providing multiple providers for a basic service is IMV , a nonsense. Even as a lapsed Marxist the inefficiency of this bit of the capitalist structure appals me!

Value - the disparity shown in your last two posts demonstrates aptly how utterly useless analysts' estimates are!

Just to correct my previous post , jackdaw is estimated to produce 100-200 m BOE - it is a gas field!!

The last figure I saw quoted for Jackdaw was $500 mill , following the tax changes announced recently that saves Shel $455 million of the development cost, so 100-200mbbl to flow for a very low upfront cost . I suspect there will be a few more previously mothballed prospects in the North sea re-examined, looks like a serious outbreak of common sense. Long overdue and needed a war to prompt it.!!!!
I see nothing inconsistent between net zero in 2050 and extraction of gas in 2025, we need to keep the lights on until we have reliable, consistent, clean energy sources.

WG has effectively sold a quarter of the company(by revenues) for a little under the market cap of the whole company. The markets are weird and no doubt much of the cash return from this sale was priced in, but logic(yeah I know)suggests a sharp bounce this morning, I hold here and will continue to do so, the world's view of energy has changed fundamentally in the last few months and IMV WG is set for a major re-rate.

" I'm raising my price to 126 from today and expect them to hit that within the next 4 weeks."
Today's quiz question -- who posted the above on this board on 2 March?(SP then 98p)

Answer..........

Pullmylever!!

I spent a couple of hours over the weekend viewing the presentation from 25 May, some notes to follow but first a comment on the sudden and subsequent sharp rise in the SP.On 25 may the sp was ~700p it is now ~930p, a more than 30% rise on increased volume . IMV the presentation is the primary driver of that rise and i hope to explain why.
There was an audience of 30+ analysts and all the heavy hitters were there, a wide range of generally positive questions were well-answered and the mood of the audience was clearly positive.
IMV the key takeaways were these.
First and most crucially was the fact that OCDO are publicly committing themselves to a significantly ebitda positive future within a few years .
Second that future is based on executing against a contractually committed rollout , no prospective client wins are needed (although some are expected)
Third a clear path to significant expenditure reductions was laid out , over and beyond the natural benefits to accrue as fixed costs are offset against a growing retail estate.
Fourth a restructuring of the reporting arrangements to make the contribution of the various elements of the comapny clearer.
Some numbers (my interpretation in some cases , particularly WRT share prices and PE but all the rest from the slides on view. )All based on a five year horizon.
Retail (the M&S JV)
Sales expected to reach £4.5 bill generating an EBITDA of £270mill pa
UK solutions (the bit of OCDO which services the JV)
An ebitda of £35 mill pa
Solutions (the worldwide enabler)
This is where the bulk of the growth will come, an expectation of 10 CFC's rolled out pa , each generating a client payment of £16mill and a middle single digit figure of revenue as a percentage of sales.
Stable Cash expenditure of ~£200 mill pa to drive an ebitda of £450 mill pa within five years
TOTAL for the company an ebitda of ~£750 mill in26/27
ALL regarded as conservative estimates , expectation of in-house savings are NOT included.
MY assumptions , an ebitda of £750 mill pa at a P/E of 15 (low for a high growth comapny)produces a prospective market cap of £11-12 bill , or an SP of £16+.
None of that was lost on the analysts present and the sharp subsequent SP rise may well be the consequence.

The security issue is fundamentally about "hybrid war" or the use of "cyber warfare" to interfere with transport, payments and the banking system, propaganda, ransomware attacks, military and government comms......future wars will not be about "boots on the ground".. or even terrestrial military hardware.The UK telecoms system has to be invulnerable to attack, or as near as we can make it.

Even having read the government docs behind the chancellor's WFT announcement today it's not all that clear what the effect on Shel will be, but here are some sections of the announcement:
The bracketed bits are my insertions for clarity.

"The Energy Profits Levy is an additional 25% tax on UK oil and gas profits on top of the existing 40% headline rate of tax, taking the combined rate of tax on profits to 65%.
In future years, if oil and gas prices return to historically more normal levels, the Government will phase out the Energy Profits Levy, and also the legislation will include a sunset clause, effective at the end of December 2025.
To encourage this(investment in the North Sea), a ‘super-deduction’ style investment allowance will be introduced within the levy to provide an immediate incentive for the oil and gas sector to invest in UK extraction.
The new investment allowance rate is 80% and means the total tax relief on investment nearly doubles - for every £1 businesses invest they will overall get a 91p tax saving.
The current 10% Supplementary Charge provides companies with an investment allowance that can only be claimed once income is received from the field subject to the investment (which can take several years).
In contrast, the new 80% Investment Allowance for the Energy Profits Levy will be available to companies at the point of investment, making it both more immediate and more generous."

So it's quite clear that despite the furore, the most likely effect of the charge is to increase north sea explo and production>from a cursory survey I have identified that Shel have at least three projects available to move forward to take advantage of the investment allowances, they are
Joint venture with Cairn in the JAWS explo with potential 30m bbls
Jackdaw where the stumbling block appears to be Gov concerns about gas flaring, which one would expect to be capable of early resolution and
Pensacola which is scheduled for drilling this summer.
Logically there must now be momentum behind all of these and maybe other prospects, which in essence can now be advanced on a nett low cost (theoretically 9% of actual)once the tax clawbacks are taken into account.
Sunak , while bowing to pressure (inappropriate IMV ) has produced a sensible and elegant proposal, let's hope the ignorance of the media doesn't frustrate it!

Value...... thank you for your gracious response to my post which, perhaps, it didn't deserve!!

OK sorry Value, that was a little unkind BUT if you'll forgive my intrusion into your investment strategy I would like to offer some constructive comments. Others here will know you better than me, but casual examination shows you have posted 2000+ comments, predominantly on this board or in the retail space and almost uniformly positive on OCDO over the last few years, unfortunately, while I think your instincts were largely right in that OCDO is a disruptor and likely to grow into a major player in a rapidly expanding market, I suspect you allowed your optimism to cloud the very obvious fact that the SP was on an a long-term downward trend. As I have posted before, I have been invested here twice (and I am by nature a long-term, cautious investor) but once when I thought the SP had run way ahead of the company's medium-term prospects and once when I saw the writing on the wall presaging a fall ,I sold.
It's a pity that you didn't do the same, but having not done so I guess you have sold out lately? and accepted a loss.BUT that doesn't now mean that you were wrong before and right to do so now , your recent conversion to a negative stance is possibly more predicated on frustration than reason.Succesful investing depends on good analysis, good timing and a bit of luck.
OK enough from me and if you want to tell me to ***** off(feel free to fill in whatever letters you like in place of the asterisks!). As is always (I hope ) with me I post to offer a positive contribution, whether that be on share news, my analysis or my position on a share . I won't pursue the matter and leave you to rebut my post should you wish. I have no intention to offend and wish you better luck in your other investments.

"Online grocery tech is a huge, expanding industry, room for many different players/solutions."

posted by valueplay 27 January 11.14.

I.m puzzled .. having read bits of the act it says ...........
Meaning of “trigger event” and “acquirer”
(1)For the purposes of this Act, a “trigger event” takes place when—
(a)a person GAINS CONTROL(my caps)of a qualifying entity, as set out in section 8, or
(b)a person gains control of a qualifying asset, as set out in section 9.
(2)In this Act “acquirer” means the person who gains the control referred to in subsection (1) (or in relation to a trigger event that has not yet taken place, would gain that control).

I cannot see that acquiring 18.1% of BT means that Altice has "taken control" and hence I can see this as no more than a warning shot by HMG, and a warning shot which is outside of the powers granted by the act.
As someone who spent one of the worst years of my life helping to draft a government act of parliament, I know how much effort goes into them, and I also know how little the relevant minister and his staff understand them!!
This at first glance looks like a little bit of distraction strategy or "muscle-flexing" which is pretty much irrelevant to BT's immediate future, though I think we all know that a takeover of BT is not and never has been on the horizon.It may cause a short term drop in SP (and if it does I may add) otherwise no big deal.