Member Info for Jim800

Timescale for £2 is easy. It's when sellers are prepared to sell for £2 and buyers are prepared to pay a little bit more - that's kind of how shares work!
Still some larger buys trickling through (250k shares, 100k shares etc) so nil signs of dropping back just yet.
I had buy limits set for when it dropped back below 5p as a bit of green speculation - Oops missed that one.
GLA

Bald Eagle, it wasn’t worthy of a reply.
Afraid that for some people scientific fact and a world consensus view are mere distractions from the uninformed opinion on a mate’s twitter feed
Deep breaths and rise above it.

Firstly they only need to plug them when finished - so that bill is spread over many many years assuming reserves decline as planned.
Secondly, the mandated plugging rate (State Law) is only about 70 per annum - the Oct Trading Update made a point that they were already at 144% of requirement so ahead of the game.
Think the leaks are today's pet issue so they're rightly focussed on that - meeting plugging requirements is already factored into forecasts. Can always say well isn't quite empty yet to kick teh can down the road if there's a cashflow hiccup. Am sure they'll stress that these weren't our wells so if we hadn't bought them and cleaned up you'd have no-one to fund it except the Govt.

Interesting Axa position. They’re going to stop investing in and underwriting upstream projects. Does this mean buying or holding shares or actually loaning money / providing finance?
Prior to my top up purchase yesterday I was watching DEC trades, there were lots of very small transactions (less than 10 shares) and loads of trades in both directions for 200-400 shares. I don’t see how it can be worth trading at this volume given dealing costs. Is this some weird share manipulation! Or is it just buy at the top sell at the bottom traders?

The tech for the small reactors is well understood (as long as we build older types, not insist on innovative ones). However, getting them online is going to take decades, especially if run by the public sector (read recent PAC report on MOD equipment procurement if you want to see how crap the civil service is at running big projects).
I’ve never understood why our non deployed nuclear powered subs aren’t connected up to the grid whilst they’re alongside.
Still need evil oil and gas companies to power the interim period (decades) and power requirement spikes.
It’s a step in the right direction but everyone seems to be planning the end state, not how to get there.

Bought a large tranche for trading yesterday @ 102.8 so the RNS was nice timing.
Would have bought more but my exposure to oil and gas via RDSB, Genel and DEC is making my holdings look a bit lopsided (not to mention risky if green taxes become a thing). The increasing dividend makes me think it is worth holding til it gets back to 120/130 range then reconsider.

I got out at 15.86 as I was 16% in profit (have held for a couple of years) and both GSK and FTSE at recent highs and looking like top of likely ranges for near term.
Other opportunities out there (DEC for me) but might come back if price drops again.

I got out at 15.86 as I was 16% in profit (have held for a couple of years) and both GSK and FTSE at recent highs and looking like top of likely ranges for near term.
Other opportunities out there (DEC for me) but might come back if price drops again.

Well that has solved the issue of fossil fuels, we can just all post up our travel requirements and 48ft catamarans will take us wherever we want to go.
I'm speaking at an environmental rally in the Bahamas next Summer - I can be picked up from any port between Weymouth and Falmouth (I don't even mind if it's a mono hull rather than a catamaran). Let's see how that pans out.

There are always bottlenecks in corporate hospitality! Can the Company credit card keep the drinks coming fast enough for the guests / journos / bloggers. Guess he can drink faster than they can buy!
Hopefully prospective new share buyers are less cynical than us. But, he might be right and we might all just be a bit jaundiced.

As well as pointing out how Shell (and the other Oil / Gas companies) need profits from legacy fuels to pay for green transition, they need to start pointing out very clearly how the world still needs oil and gas for heat / transport for the next 20 years. As an example they could cite how well the UK functioned for a week when the petrol / diesel was in the wrong place - never mind not available.
I'm all for a green transition but some people need a reality check on how we're going to manage it.

Think there are 2 disappointments here:
- firstly and as per a previous post, they seem at best disingenuous in the way they present info. Given the irregularities of KRG payments, comparing cash proceeds between 2020 and 2021 is meaningless unless you clearly state what was for production in the period vice recoverables - they choose not to do this). Haven't seen anyone else express free cash flow before investment in growth - tell us what the free cash flow was (compared with similar period) and then tell us what investment in growth was (compared with similar period). (Though they do give us FCF later on). Cash and net cash figures again depend on how they are treating monies owed. Operating update used to compare production this period with similar last year - this time it's just Gross vs Net for the period. etc etc etc - It's almost as though they don't want us to notice production decreasing, delays in wells coming online and "supply chain issues."
- secondly, the actual production declines and evidence of poor planning / operations.
Normal jam tomorrow type optimism in the summary (seem to have heard that since 2016 ish) but it feels like the strategy is cross our fingers and hope for things to go well! Still, if they increase the dividend they must be confident in ongoing cashflow - it's just that the words don't appear to match a dividend increase.
Think this RNS will have us amateurs calculating our individual exit points. Still, bet Malcy will get a free lunch and tell us it's all great.

Am sure that with a little bit of lobbying, cleaning up other people's methane leaks will be a tax deductible expense for O&G companies including DEC.
Minor dent on the bottom line but DEC becomes a Green transition company and is thus investible to Institutions with ESG polices.

Although to be fair to Sarah, Char333 has posted some utter tripe in the past and earned top filter status.
His continued assertions of only a few months ago that Shell shares were crap, would never make £15 and were directly comparable with Vodaphone as they both cut dividends was stupidity on a colossal scale.
Pretty hard to recover from that and have anyone take you seriously.

Given most gas /oil shares falling today on new methane caps, shouldn’t oil / gas support services companies be rallying?
Don’t think Greta is going to be capping all those leaky wells by herself. Extra expenditure on well upkeep and monitoring is surely good news for WG.
No matter how green we want to be we need oil and gas during the transition so at least 20 years.

Just shows how weasely the CE’s words were drafted to be. No factual errors and nothing he said hasn’t happened. An optimistic interpretation of his words might lead to disappointment but you can’t actually say that something he promised hasn’t happened.
Clever stuff.

Boyo, concur that pricing will drive green transition (I’ve got a ground source heat pump and solar panels). But, I still drive an old Lexus, an old Landrover and a load of old motorbikes. Even though they all now need E5 super unleaded, the extra petrol cost is less than the depreciation i’d face on newer vehicles, in fact the old bikes are still appreciating! So no change to EVs for me until fuel is around £3 a litre and there is a decent infrastructure.

Strange DEC fell more on a report by a couple of Bloomberg journalists than it did on an adverse statement by the President of the USA.
Think DEC only need to point out that if they don’t stop the leaks then no-one else is going to and they’ll become green saviours. Bet they’re re-doing the investors day presentations right now to reflect their additional spend on ending leaks to meet US methane targets.
As an aside, interesting interview on the radio just now saying that methane is just a sideshow to detract from failures to meet CO2 targets. Countries with large cattle herds far worse than well leaks. How do you plug a cow?

Nomad, if Shell can convince Institutional Investors that they are on the correct track to green ness and make a case that Shell are no longer an ESG No No for investing, that would be a miracle.
Once institutional investors take us off the naughty step then we’ll be attractive for regular dividend funds again.
Not sure how Shell manage to convince professionals of their new green credentials but it needs to happen to fully realise SP value.

Hi Boyo,
Get your point on size and scale but from an opposite perspective, I wouldn’t expect anyone to borrow £1M but £27k seems like loose change in terms of decision making for a CFO. If he ain’t willing to risk £27k of his own money then he ain’t that confident in G prospects. The 3.3% rise today would cover the annual interest on a loan if that size.