Member Info for dickupham

LW - I dare say GS has all its favourite clients short in oil

https://sputniknews.com/business/202003271078728047-saudi-oil-industry-at-risk-as-american-european-refiners-refusing-riyadhs-crude--reports/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-crude-prices/in-oil-markets-its-back-to-1998-crisis-pricing-idUSKBN21D2M2

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/03/27/russia-signals-interest-ending-bruising-oil-spat/

You're welcome to use one of mine, Wuckfit. It won't be difficult isolating yourself from me, as I haven't been able to wash properly for the last 3 weeks, apart from my hands 5 times a day (I use a standpipe outside the local food bank; it's a 5 mile bike ride - nothing to fitness icon like me). It's a bit awkward taking one's top off (exposing one's six pack and pectorals ) and trousers down (the same) in front of so many people, however. I'm sure you'll understand.

Let me know if you want to take up the offer and I'll empty the bog rolls and Calpol out of the other shed (with a roof).

Changing the subject, I wonder how many other people they infected, travelling around Europe (no doubt paid for by someone else) whilst more considerate and intelligent types were behaving responsibly: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238364-greta-thunberg-says-she-may-have-had-covid-19-and-has-self-isolated/

A health spokesperson commented: "It took the contagious to recognise she'd probably get it and pass it on to hundreds, if not thousands of others, whilst she was gallivanting around Europe causing trouble"

dyor

You're right, LW. And 3 of my sheds don't have a roof.

They're ok in the summer if you don't mind guano.

Have you got a khazi in your 5 bed shed? That would really make me jealous 'cos I'm fed up with all the brambles in the woods............bloody nightmare...........

I've got 5 sheds...............

Hey, Alibro.........I wasn't being serious. If I'd bet anything meaningful it would have ended in tears. The price was bound to go up after I'd sold - that was a given. If I'd held on, the price would have gone down.

No.......... 'long term' remains my motto.

I've worked out that the result of my long term investing activity is much the same as Warren Buffet's. His motto is: "the best time to sell a stock is never ". QED he never gets to spend any money from his stocks. He has a very frugal lifestyle, eg: he bought a five-bedroom house in Omaha in 1958 for $31,500 and has lived there ever since. He's estimated to be worth $84bn (maybe a bit less in current circumstances).

I have an even more frugal lifestyle. I never get to spend any money from my stocks either. I'm not worth $84bn though.

There's a reason for this. He picks stocks that go up and I pick ones that go down.

The result is the same.

My dog likes me - that's the main thing. And as long as I can put a roof over his head, I'm happy. There's nothing wrong with living in a shed btw. Who needs a 5 bedroom house?

dyor

.....just fyi, I closed out my small "short-term oil recoveries" portfolio yesterday morning (made £882 net of costs on £2,800 "invested" last Thurs). Yippee - more than a month's OAP. I probably jumped too early but there's no such thing as a bad profit - least of all 31% in 3 or 4 days.

I'm now switching to day trading. Sod the longer term game. It's no fun.

......in the grave - and the other on a banana skin"? They're even adjusting cash outflow (we aren't told the actual number - it's a secret).

What is the following supposed to mean?
"Adjusted operating cashflow of £16.5m (FY 2018: £17.0m) representing 100% Adjusted EBITDA to Adjusted Operating Cash conversion". Adjusted this against adjusted that? You couldn't make it up. Why not present the real numbers and let investors decide how much should be added back and what for. The bottom line is that cash is being burned at an alarming rate. What's causing this? Losses - plain and simple.

According to Doc N "The Group has access to material debt facilities should it be required in the event of a significant downturn. IQE has a long-standing and trusted relationship with our bankers HSBC who remain supportive. We are in close ongoing dialogue regarding the evolving effects of Coronavirus on supply chains and markets. In the event of a significant slowdown, we will work proactively with HSBC to ensure the ongoing liquidity of the Group".........in other words: "in reality we're dependent on HSBC's largess - particularly if we start turning in even bigger losses. They've told us they'll lend us all we need". That's ok then. What happens when (not 'if') the proverbial hits the fan - no-one's immune to the Chinese horror? "Concerns over the spread of Coronavirus (COVID-19) are currently creating significant near-term uncertainty across global markets. At the time of this announcement, IQE’s production has not been affected by any disruption. All our sites continue to operate as normal". Talk about heads in the sand.

Bet Nelson and a few close personal friends on the Board don't reduce their greedy packages though.

In a nutshell, IQE could have the most cutting edge products in the history of the planet, but that's not the real issue. The problem comes because they are reliant on a few giants of their industries for the sales they have to make to pay their huge fixed overheads. Those customers won't pay them enough to make a meaningful profit and more competitors are emerging, particularly in the far east. So they're between a rock and a hard place. Meanwhile, Dr N grows richer.
Wake up and smell the coffee.

And no, I'm not short - I wouldn't know how to do it. I have been commenting about what IQE is all about (on another board) for years and have been constantly abused for telling the truth by people who see themselves as true fans. IQE is not a football team.

Nelson sold a big chunk of his (still huge) undeserved holding at just over £1 not so long ago, shortly before he and others convinced a few dopey funds to part with 145p a share in a placing to raise yet more money. How many times has IQE tapped the market for more money to cover losses? Is it reasonable to expect them to make a profit at some stage after more than 20 years of booking unadjusted losses?

It's your money .............

all imo
dyo

last week:
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Saudi-Arabias-Oil-War-Could-Bankrupt-The-Kingdom.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Trumps-Ultimate-Weapon-To-End-The-Oil-War.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Saudi-Arabias-Oil-Price-War-Is-Backfiring.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Saudi-Arabias-Oil-Price-War-Is-Backfiring.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Trumps-Ultimate-Weapon-To-End-The-Oil-War.html

"Should there be an agreement POO should stabilize at c$30 one hopes"............

..........I assume you meant $50, NK. Nothing works for anyone (except China) at $30

Fwiw, it doesn't make much sense to me for two companies that are under no strain cash-wise, to be engaged in merger/takeover talks, when world conditions are as they are and the future is so uncertain. It would be very difficult for the respective boards to convince shareholders, some way down the line post takeover/merger, that best value had been delivered, irrespective of how a deal had been presented. One or other party always emerges as the dominant force and in the case people on here are envisaging, it seems unlikely it would be SQZ, given the age profiles of the respective boards and the cash resources in each company.

I'm not saying such a deal can't or won't happen, just that having sat through a period when SQZ's true value could at last be seen to be approaching something closer to fair value (when the SP reached 140p) I would not welcome a deal being done at the bottom of a dip caused by short term factors that most would imagine won't last more than 2 or maybe 3 years.

SQZ is strong on cash, is soon expected to announce a dividend I hope will result in a yield approaching 10%, when a rate of 0% is what is available from a bank so why rush into someone else's arms? The Company looks safe enough to me as an investment, always acknowledging it's in O&G and risk can never be fully eliminated. Iran's ownership of 50% of Rhum is the fly in the ointment. My preference would be for SQZ to use some of its increasing cash pile to buy oil production where there's clear value to be seen in the medium to longer term. There will soon surely be some good bargains to be had?

GLAL

jmofwiw
dyor

https://www.thebalance.com/oil-price-forecast-3306219

............"$60 .... would be fine if it's still around that level when JOG starts producing"...........

..........it's the price when JOG is acquired that interests me more, LW :-)

Questions for Jasehem:
1. How much cash do you think SQZ will have in the bank by 31 May 2020?
2. How much would a dividend of (say) 5p cost?
3. Would what's left after paying such a dividend leave SQZ in a materially weaker position?

MBS?? You've got me there, LW.........

I'm with you on RRE's cash, but nearly 400MMboe of discovered oil and prospective resources in the Central North Sea with an API in the 30s having a minus value takes some beating.

I get the fact that at under $30pb there's presently no justification for oil exploration, let alone spending hundreds of millions on development, but you can't suddenly mothball activities until things improve. If it seemed likely the oil price was going to stay where it is longer term (or lower according to the honorable Goldman Sachs, many of whose clients have no doubt taken their advice to go short before telling everyone $20pb is next) then hundreds, if not thousands, of oil cos would either be shutting up shop or being forced into bankruptcy (or equivalent.

The simple fact is that the world is incredibly reliant on oil and will be for a few decades yet (until it runs out, in fact). So however KSA/Russia/US are behaving at present, sense will prevail before it comes to the point that people at the top start incurring the wrath of the people who give them their power and money (KSA), debt piles on top of debt because production costs are high (US), damage is caused to individual economies (all three) and, worst of all in my book, more grist is added to China's mill, because it can buy as much cheap oil as it wants to power its economy and continue to build its position as the world's most powerful country (militarily speaking). I mostly blame the Arabs for reasons I could articulate but would take too long and wouldn't interest most people.

The above are the reasons I'm putting forward as to why an oil price of $50+, more likely $60+ , is what we're likely to see as an average in the medium to longer term. With so much surplus oil kicking around this year it might take a while to reach indicated levels. This might make JOG's objectives more difficult to achieve in the timescale indicated and it will likely affect the price at which deals are struck. But JOG has plenty of room for negotiation. The positive thing is that the industry always thinks long term. It's illogical to think the oil JOG owns won't interest a number of oil cos that are looking to add to their reserves - which they have to do constantly to replace the oil they're extracting on a daily basis.

GL

dyor

Questions for Jasehem:
1. How much cash do you think SQZ will have in the bank by 31 May 2020?
2. How much would a dividend of (say) 5p cost?
3. Would what's left after paying such a dividend leave SQZ in a materially weaker position?

You say: "No one knows if a dividend is going to be paid"
Nothing that is yet to happen can be guaranteed to, but one is entitled to rely on statements made by listed companies indicating what is intended will happen. On 14 Jan 2020 it was stated: "Serica expects to announce its maiden dividend at the time of the 2019 Annual Results in April 2020". What was not added was: ".....however, we don't know if one will be or not".

It would be decidedly "un-clever" (given the turmoil that's been going on in the markets - particularly affecting oil cos - for quite some time now) to leave it until the last minute before dropping a bombshell on investors that would cause the SP to bomb, by backtracking on what's been said on more than one occasion. Were I in SQZ's position, and having watched the Company's SP lose almost half its value in such a short period, I would be more inclined to surprise on the upside with the dividend, not cancel it. he directors might add something like: "this maiden dividend should not necessarily be regarded as maintainable, because recent events have shown the effect of volatility on earnings. Maintaining healthy cash reserves will always be our No 1 priority and this might take precedence over dividend yield in the future".

Ref: "There are only two prices that mean anything to me - the price I pay and the price I sell - what happens between is of little relevance".............

...........I think the price one pays and the price one sells at is the main focus of about 100% of shareholders, both short and long-term. What goes on (in) between is mainly of relevance to those born with a functioning cerebrum.

Ears and what is between them is of relevance to some. It's been difficult for some in the past to establish this, not least Davy Crockett, who had three ears: a left ear, a right ear and a wild front ear.....

I'll stick my neck out and go for 6p, giving a yield of c.8%, dropping to about 3% on a SP that's closer to making sense than it is at present (say £2ps). Buy @ 75p and lock in the yield, assuming the dividend isn't reduced. Directors tend not to reduce dividends because makes them unpopular. Fat packages and bonuses are put at risk

dyor

LW - for a bit of interest (I'm full up with JOG & SQZ) I decided yesterday to put together a small "short term oil recoveries" portfolio", based on recent SP falls + what I know of the cos involved. I narrowed down a list of 10 oil cos to 5 and pressed the buttons (I'm not talking much money as cash is somewhat restricted at present).

The oil cos I chose were: RRE, HUR, TLW, PMO & GENL and sofar, so good. I'm up 20-25% on paper although I'm not counting any chickens. My aim is to close out at the end of next week, but this might have to change! A total departure from the norm for me but I needed the interest, even if the amounts involved are small ( although a few times bigger per co than this morning's pitiful 100 JOG shares). It's quite bizarre, because I'm much more excited about my latest wizzo scheme than I am in the industrial-sized investments I have in JOG & SQZ.

It might all go tits up of course (plus ca change). Making predictions about share prices is a mugs' game. In current times it's madness. As JM Keynes said in the 1930s: "Markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent”...........

I'm reconciled to the concept of having to wait for the returns when/if JOG's plans come to fruition.

GL

dyor

LW - with the only trade showing by 10am this morning a sale of 20k shares, one would have thought the MMs would be keen to mark the SP down, not up. As I speculated yesterday, could there be someone waiting in the wings to buy a few shares for once and the MMs are waiting to collect enough shares to fill the order?

Learning of your experience and finding I had £79 in cash in a share ISA I placed a buy order (for 100 shares - how embarrassing). AJ Bell dealt at 54.999p. Goodness knows what the 0 .999 of 1p is all about. No doubt someone who shouldn't, gets to benefit from it.

I see the bid has since moved up to 53p, which suggests the MMs have a buyer/s waiting. Hope so, because whether in for long or the short term, all holders need some encouragement. The damage done to JOG's SP by the share overhang evident since the middle of last year (thank you Mr G) is imv enormous. The level the price had been taken down to by the time C19 and the OPEC nonsense meant all fundamentals were out of the window in favour of slavishly looking only at price. Were it not for the fact I'm out of cash, I'd have been backing up the truck. Picking the bottom is notoriously difficult. But so what if you don't if the eventual return is good? You didn't pick last Tuesday's Euroswindle either.

A quick recovery to a price that's less insane is always possible whereas, to me anyway, the downside now has to be very limited. Who knows, though - we aren't living in normal times. The feeding frenzy of the hedge funds and investment banks is astonishing - they just don't know what to turn to next, so much is on offer - currency, stock markets, commodities, particularly oil - you name it.

Interesting that our new governor of the BoE (Andrew Bailey) doesn't think we've yet reached the stage where a ban on shorting is necessary. Printing £330 billion (£5,000 for every man, woman and child in the UK), yes - but shorting, no.

Got to keep the taxes flowing in. Those hedge funds making their profits via employees based in the City, and all those decent and honest investment banks aren't half profitable. Pity about the small people losing their savings.........

dyor