Member Info for IAmNotAnAnalyst

That is to say OPEC++ is exactly what Putin would want. Shale would be restrained in that scenario and prices increased. Also they've proven what could happen if the USA renegs on the deal. Finally, it would also keep a heavily indebted shale industry just afloat - exactly where they want them.

Russia wants shale restrained and prices up too. Even more so if Covid is starting to shut down their production/exports and they need to spend like the rest of the world does in keeping their economy alive. That'll certainly deplete the cash reserves from better days rapidly.

The only catch I see is prolonged low prices means less cash is generated and decommissioning is brought forward. So free cash reduces and the need to spend it on decommissioning pulls on that cash.
I find the prolonged low price the hard bit to believe but I admit nobody knows and therefore it's a gamble. The cash in the bank buys time for us to get through the low price period and/or buy some low OPEX producers.

BB, I don't disagree with what you're saying. I'm merely saying that the story is not yet over and therefore we cannot conclude success.

Yes success of immediate goals, but what is the long term goal? Is it to stay locked down for 12 months while this runs its course in the rest of the world?

Same here - it's looking more like worldwide travel inhibitions and local lockdowns for up to 12 months is.
That's got serious worldwide recession written all over it until we can figure out an efficient way for society to productively continue whilst also managing CV.

It appears to me Saudi Arabia have made oil prices binary, either c.30 or c.60. they aren't happy with middling at 45. That's because Russia forced their hand and therefore giving shale (and other high cost development) a kicking. That's going to have to be a good enough kicking to leave investors/bond buyers thinking both:
1) prices aren't just a 1 month or even 1Q flash in the pan
2) this could happen again at any time for a prolonged period
If they succeed I doing that shale will shrink and then SA/Russia can ease off and return to $60.
Just my 2 peneth

Also regarding South Korea it is far from proven that their approach is successful. Yes it may reduce transmission but then what? At a certain level are the rules relaxed and then CV will spread again? And then society is locked down again and the same thing happens for 12 months until in the end the result is the same and herd immunity is achieved?
I think DC is correct, that guardian article was an attack piece. For an epidemiologist they didn't use much of their expertise to make a compelling argument.

I was just proposing how many infected individuals might have been at the event, that was enough for me to think about. How many people get infected from one carrier is a whole different thing.

I had a guess at the number as I was speaking to colleagues about whether it will be a good decision or not.
5-20k in the UK are infected, in a pop of 66m or 76 to 303 per million. Where approx 20% are asymptomatic, so assuming only those people attend that leaves 15-61 per million who might continue their lives normally.
Attendance at Cheltenham was 250k this year, although many of those might be the same people going multiple days so we can give a range of 100-200k individual attendees.
That gives a range of 1.5 - 20 carriers attending the event...

I though the same about the stiff upper lip mentality, great for a war, the opposite for a pandemic.
I have a feeling the Cheltenham races will seem like a big mistake in retrospect. Probably there were 5-20 people unknowingly carrying the virus exposed to about 150-250k people. Time will tell.
Still it's the UK strategy to develop herd immunity, and to do that quickly you've got to spread the virus around first...

Wessex, Italy has had unconstrained community spreading of Covid for weeks until the government took serious measures.
The UK has been stepping up measures and doing many tests, which results in isolation with a positive result. I would like to see the numbers but I don't think I'd characterise the UK now as being 2 weeks behind Italy.

Previously RRE have hedged their CAPEX each year to avoid this kind of issue. The full year results should reveal what the status is.

*not been shown

Regardless it's still quite a far fetched conspiracy. Mankind has now been shown to have the level of sophistication to control the release and spread of a pathogen to that level. The chances of it going horribly wrong and getting out of control would be way too high. And what about the chance of China becoming reinfected from a corona virus ridden world over the next 12 months? What good is cheap crude when you can't export for 12 months.

DC - do you seriously think that China has the capability to control the outbreaks of a virus such that it only infects <100k people and then is cured in China so they can sell face masks to the world? Even if that's true it'd be completely dumb as the loss in trade elsewhere would completely negate the benefit in the face mask market...

Genghis - the Russia punishing shale narrative is complete nonsense. If anything the more credible narrative is that it helps trump maintain power in the elections this year by having suppressed fuel prices. If shale struggling was genuinely a problem for trump then he could just choose to bail them out as a matter of national security if he wanted. What's more perplexing is that Putin/Russia producing 10mbpd would be happy to lose, generously, 10% of gross income (difference between 50$ and 45$ PoO) rather than cut production by 400kbpd, a 4% drop in gross income. The maths just doesn't make sense unless Putin is extorting Saudi Arabia for concessions elsewhere, like Syria, and is just temporarily playing them as they have the weaker hand. If anything that's the narrative that more closely matches Russia's geopolitical game.

Oiler - I hope you have posted the same warning equally to all oil companies with BBs on this site.
If not then I wonder why you choose HUR, who of most of the oilers I look at are the least directly connected to the PoO.

I haven't read in depth about it but my understanding is that recovery rates should be higher for China as it is ahead in terms of time as the virus infected most people there first. Recovery rate = infection rate - people in treatment - death rate. Therefore, if a country has many people still in treatment the recovery rate appears lower.
Recovery figures for closes cases is more like 96% i.e. that is final recovery = infections - death rate (around 3%)

Soberman, you are also conspicuous by your presence when the SP is going down or stagnant. You seem to take pleasure in telling everyone that is what is happening.

Macro is dominating the share price moves at the moment.
We await news about the company...we have a dividend to come, drilling and field life extensions as well as fields/companies being bought potentially.
If you worry then follow your heart and get out with your money.
No there has not been a profit warning, why would you say such a thing?

Mod, that article is excellent and tells you an awful lot about shale production. The conclusion is that shale will have peaked in Jan 2020. The EIA reports on Tuesday which should verify some of the forecasts in that article. If all broadly stays as is we can expect shale oil production to drop for the rest of the year, barring any huge increase in PoO.