Member Info for jmak1912

I asked this question on the latest earning call - they gave the answer that in most contracts they are protected by fluction clauses however, I was not entirely convinced in the answer. This is not typical is contracts until AFTER an high inflation environment.

Hosai, people should have objectively looked at the IPO
The tech market and general market was in overdrive. Also big IPOs rarely do well especially in the UK.

If people don't want to spend the time researching they shouldn't really be buying individual stocks and assuming no risk

That people blame their own mistakes on others e.g. shorts, IIs, banks, MM, derampers, weak hands, Putin' etc.

The market is the market and people make money if different ways and you should only hold yourself and your own research to account - sometimes you are unlucky, but bad luck can be mitigated in most cases in a matter of ways.

People here complain far too much especially when all they care about is making as much money as quick as possible. We are all self serving.

it will be a pittance - maybe even close to zero for BP considering our investment into green activities. Gov plan to make 5 billion over the year from across the industry....

Interesting anecdote from another company in my portfolio, HMLP. Not exact like for like scenarios but definite parallels in terms of SP destruction prior to takeover. Interesting it was the parent that snagged himself a great deal.

Initial Offer $4.25 (PI in uproar, well below value)
Revised Offer $9 (Received today - this will be pushed through - still undervalues the company by at least 50% but PI's will acquiesce)

From my mind the 170p is to create the base from which all other assessments are made. I can see already how many now feel 250p is palpable or even a good result. The 170 is there to sow doubt and second guess your own valuations.

thought most horses have 5 legs?

Windfall tax will most certainly not come into play as it will also put pressure on the price of O&G. On the contrary, I think the majors will now be given more fiscal encouragement to increase production closer to home.

Its ironic how BP and majors have gone from pariahs to keystones of security.

All the while Looney has played the spin well, people tend not to appreciate how well Looney can align to the zeitgeist whilst making the right moves behind the scenes. In that sense the SP hasn't really grasped where we are heading but eventually it will.

Buybacks at the current PoO could in theory be hitting nearly 10% per annum. Until the market values the company correctly I would throw as much as possible at it.

I cannot see how the West will accept anything more that full Russia demobilisation and return of lands. They are in a strong position and in any case cannot afford to provide any sort of reward for this aggression

It seems clear to me that Putin has presented a generational opportunity to the west. I think Ukraine are entrenched and motivated enough to keep this up for months. This will lead to 2 outcomes, Putin is brought down from the inside (public, oligarchs or military) or lashes out and fires first at NATO. I don't see how he backs down from this.

I don't see how ordinary Russians can stand for this much longer with no just cause.

@Happy,

I do appreciate your opinions on this board but I think you are not fully appreciating of the political situation

Russia will be benefitting from the sharp increase in O&G however we were already on course to have high prices before this conflict. Russia have seized the opportunity to strike before the west can ramp up production on the back of this.

Sanctions are far from a smokescreen - in fact the west has been very clear they do not want to engage militarily and only wish to put sanctions in place. The reason for this is to ensure that Russia people only have to decide between needlessly 'invading Ukraine and toppling Putin' rather that 'warring with NATO or toppling Putin'. I feel NATO engagement would only help in galvanizing Russian forces to keep fighting, Putin would ratchet up the rhetoric that we were somehow trying to wipe Russia out.

We have attempted diplomacy with Russia for a long time, the Crimea was their Sudetenland....since then they have proved that their intention all along was to try to reincorporate Ukraine. Just like in 1938 - Chamberlains actions granted time to prepare; the intervening years between Crimea and now has allowed the Ukrainians to prepare.

I don't think people should underestimate what may have been going on in regards to war gaming and planning for this. Its becoming quite apparent Putin already has.

These are temporary measures put in place to exert pressure, sure oil will rise but as others have said, Russia is reeling go look at RUB this morning. Oil may be increasing globally but for Russia so is every other import.

People need to understand we are all in now. The rhetoric is clear from the west, based on that O&G sanctions are only a matter of time.

BP have categorically come out and said their financial frame including the dividend increase remains.

People posting atm clearly do not understand BP or the situation

Wouldn't be surprised if it ended in the blue tomorrow

The difference with Yemen is it is a civil war. People argue it's a proxy war between KSA and Iran however people tend to forget the locals within these countries will say anything to please an outside power in order for them to be backed to power. It is no different than Afganistan in that sense. KSA is not invading but supporting the incumbent (not to say they are any good)

Ukraine is a sovereign country effectively being invaded. The Crimea was slightly different due to history hence why the response was not as severe.

I'd also point out that Russia is much more of a threat with its nuclear arsenal so it's no wonder why it garners much more focus.

At the end of the day this is all geopolitics - Putin has presented the west an excellent opportunity to weaken Russia and potentially shift the whole country to face west. We are not just doing this out of the goodness of our hearts....

As for BP, let's see how our strategy aligns with government announcements

From an ethical point of view I am more than happy to share in any temporary pain of this measure.

I'm sure discussions have been had already with government and others for mitigation measures.

This can go one of two ways.

1) Putin is toppled due to the immense internal pressure, more moderates come in and BP reverse this to keep cooperation between old friends.

2) Putin entrenches, West move away from Russia for O&G. Western Oilers including BP are backed to the hilt to replace the lost barrels via any means necessary.

Will interesting to see how the rest follow. Once again BP the first movers

adv11 - what a time to make such a comment, why not post it on every single board of every single stock.

Not everyone trades their investments. Not everyone cares more about their stock portfolios rather than bloodshed in neighboring states.

Until Oil drops below $60 I wouldn't be too concerned.

Chandley,

I don't think anyone is conditioned to say Russia is bad, rather, Putin's Russia is bad. As much as we rightly bemoan our own government, Putin is a different story.

Ironically I think Russia has more chance of going to war with China once they decide to take back what they deem their lands....

I thought the call today was excellent in relation to outlining BP's shareholder returns policy based on the PoO.

My takeaway's are;

1) CFO feels excess of 2bn of BB's per will be difficult (note, circa 6-7bn per annum is estimated @$80bbl
2) Outlined that if the SP increases then BB's will be reassessed accordingly.
3) Debt reduction would be a priority with any further surplus - there was talk of net cash within the decade. It's looks like they would be able to reduce debt by circa 5bn per annum based on $80bbl.

I really don't see any dividend raise for 22 or 23 however, if oil remains @$80+ I don't see what else they would be able to do with the cash especially if the SP increases limiting the BB's.

Overall, I thought the presentation was clear in regards to strategy and has very good transparency across the whole of the business. I think a lot of the other big oilers will try and copy (for those who already have not). I think those who doubted Looney have been humbled.

Most EV's are being hit hard on the assumption they have lofty valuations like Tesla.

Arrival actually (relative to its peers) has a more reasonable valuation based on most metrics (especially now) naturally there's the big 'if' on delivery of their strategy.

People also speculate the Russia link (owner) is not helping the SP with ongoing tensions, but that just an unfortunate coincidence and surely wont materially effect the company....alas markets are also driven sentiment, geopolitics and tea leaves.

I think the recent delays have also caused the concern although they did post recently about the bus road trials in Spain.

@Chandley "FTSE100 shares simply don't get that undervalued" au contraire as of Oct 20 this was at 200p. August '21 300p....

They may be using optimistic assumptions but that doesn't make them wrong. Historically BP has been held by the finite nature of its business but with the green transition the company in theory could be around for another 100 years with steady revenues. The great irony is the pressure to transition from the powers that be also benefits its current circumstance of the legacy business.

To be clear 700p is pie in the sky for me ....

I do not have the ability to predict spot prices are provide forecasts on prices, however I can study the data on the supply side, in regards to China it is clear their appetite for iron ore has wained due to reduced steel production. Some argue this is for a clear air Olympics others say this is caused by a reduction in construction activity which is an effect of the Evergrand crisis. I'm inclined to agree with the later.

The point I was initially responding to was all commodities are going to do great....this is too general and I argued the counter point by providing an example from a demand perspective.

You mention copper, this is a good example, as unlike oil the demand is predicted to significantly increase over the coming decades (some say 100%+ in 10 years) also unlike oil there has been significant investment (https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/metals/120721-feature-copper-market-to-be-well-supplied-in-2022). So maybe prices will decrease based on this.....

At this point I'll be honest and admit I do not understand the ins and outs commodities, however I know that they are not all equal.

My logic for oil is demand will exceed maximum supply for maybe the first time in history (for a prolonged period) and underinvestment in the past 2 years will exacerbate this issue for the foreseeable.