Member Info for Love_You

They could supply more oil to India and China - USA has to be careful not to alienate everyone in Asia as all of those countries are oil hungry, and hence it would be natural for them all to see a country which consumes 25% of global oil production (I.e. the USA) as a mutual economic enemy.

So Trump announces there will probably be higher tariffs on the trade in high-technology goods between the USA and China shortly.

So why does the price of oil drop?

High-technology goods don't take much oil to either manufacture or to transport so why is oil disproportionately affected compared to the value of other financial instruments?

Also, if high-technology goods increase in price it could in fact make the business of drilling for oil more expensive (as this sector is becoming more reliant on cutting edge technology for both exploration and production). Hence if drilling for oil becomes more expensive then that would make the price of oil rise. So again I don't understand why the oil price fell on the news that there were likely to be more tariffs imposed on USA-China trade.

Ha ha guys,

Yes I guess it would have taken a lot of effort back then with 17th century tech to discover that the Earth wasn't the centre of our solar-system. Agreed.

Hope you've had a good bank holiday.

However, the knowledge that the sun is actually the centre of our solar system seems quite useless compared to knowing whether higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would result in faster plant, fruit, and vegetable, growth. After all farmers spend a lot of time and money trying to get fruit and veg to grow faster and larger - perhaps we should all work towards increasing the carbon dioxide levels of the atmosphere from 0.04% to 0.06% to help out the farmers who provide the food we need to survive - non one can actually eat coins, bank notes, bitcoins, or gold can they?

It's all about smaller UK E&P companies getting profitable contracts from Equinor

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/equinor-first-quarter-operating-profit-beats-expectations-045722434--finance.html

This group of fields contains at least 3 billion barrels recoverable oil, and individual wells are reported to have stabilised flow rates of 80,000 bopd.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/equinor-first-quarter-operating-profit-beats-expectations-045722434--finance.html

Hence I would suggest Equinor is a cash cow for the next 20 years at least - hence smaller UK E&P companies need to try and get some profitable decommissioning work from Equinor - seems a better strategy than looking for small fields to develop when Equinor found a giant and it is now up to them to ensure the whole industry benefits from the Johan Sverdrup mega-fields (i.e. don't give it all away to Trump on the cheap).

Unfortunately the UK is on the decline and Norway is on the up - just a fact of where the oil was found - shows how random life is - if those fields were 30kms to the West and within UK waters then the UK could have a North Sea boom out to 2030 and it would be the UK on the economic up - and Norway I guess would be declining if they didn't have this production boost to their oil output.

It's all about getting profitable contracts from Equinor

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/equinor-first-quarter-operating-profit-beats-expectations-045722434--finance.html

This group of fields contains at least 3 billion barrels recoverable oil, and individual wells are reported to have stabilised flow rates of 80,000 bopd.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/equinor-first-quarter-operating-profit-beats-expectations-045722434--finance.html

Hence I would suggest Equinor is a cash cow for the next 20 years at least - Enquest need to try and get some profitable decommissioning work from Equinor - seems a better strategy than looking for small fields to develop when Equinor found a giant and it is now up to them to ensure the whole industry benefits from the Johan Sverdrup mega-fields (i.e. don't give it all away to Trump on the cheap).

But what will $100 million buy you in Capex spend when it cost circa $2.1 Billion to develop Kraken?

All taxation is taxation - can't believe people have put up with the regressive taxation policies for the past decade - does it matter whether it is described as a "green levy" or a "brown levy" - it is still a levy isn't it and it doesn't help one's wallet.

Also how did the Catholic church convince people the Earth was the centre of the solar system (or even of the universe) - I guess most people didn't have telescopes back then or simply weren't interested in observing the motions of the planets/sun.

I suppose it's the same today - although I find it sad when you can buy carbon dioxide and airtight domes fairly cheaply. Hence you can put a plant in a normal atmosphere, and put one in an atmosphere with the carbon dioxide percentage doubled for example, and observe with one's own eyes which grows better. In my opinion it would be far more useful for teachers to do this experiment in school rather than teaching our children a load of opinions which are probably about as valid as the Catholic church's view on the solar system in the 17th century.

Really surprised by this share price zooming upwards towards 700p again.

I remember in early 2016 when it briefly touched less than 400p - although I think that was perhaps in an "auction" and maybe the actual lowest price in non-auction trading was around the 400p level.

I guess HSBC is worth more now than RBS/Lloyds/Barclays combined - interesting fact as back in 2009 I think Lloyds/Barclays/RBS combined were worth a fair bit more than HSBC (in terms of their market capitalisations of their equity).

Anyway it's been an interesting lesson for me as my thought in 2009 was that the highest quality bank listed on London was HSBC - and over the next decade that has turned out to also become the market's opinion as expressed by the value assigned to their shares. However, let's not forget the horrendous dips in share price on the "journey" to hear and I empathise with the pain that these cause to any suffering fellow shareholders.

I'm wondering where the value in HSBC is being generated? Is it their ability to finance manufacturing in China which is generating the value for HSBC - it seems unlijkely any value comes from American mortgages as in the past people have been trying to sell off all the junk mortgages in the USA - being such a large country there will likely always be issues in the USA about how to value property - because to some extent the financial desirability of a large country house in the USA will depend on the oil price - and also the general economy is probably quite oil-price-dependent (fine whilst they have oil) - but looking out beyond 2035 it could become slightly riskier unless there has been either new oil fields discovered or a reduction in oil demand by then. However 15 years is a long time and probably more than enough time for the American economy to transition to wherever it wants to be - can we say the same about the Chinese economy or not?

Everyone may stay at home instead and watch David Attenborough telling them how his own lifestyle has contributed to destroying the planet (think of all the carbon his own travels have used especially back in the 1960s/1970s when everything was burning loads of petrol/oil). Muppets in charge.

I'm wondering whether I should find a holiday company to invest in that uses zero oil - all electric cars/buses and planes? It would probably receive massive subsidies from the government and hence the business model would be subsidised by general taxation - wait a minute, perhaps too much taxation and too many subsidies for "niche ideas" is why people don't have the money to spend on holidays with TCG? Just an idea?

When the politicians/bankers are constantly orchestrating the media to tell the citizens the economy needs to use zero oil/petrol/diesel then people become severely worried about the future of companies like TCG - as how can they possible run their business using zero petrol/diesel/jet fuel - yet this is what the politicians think the people want (or otherwise why say what the citizens don't want - as surely you would only expect to be voted out if you keep telling people the economy needs to use zero fuel and if the citizens don't actually want such an economy then logically you would expect to be voted out - hence I expect a Labour win at next General Election). Otherwise the Cons need to tell the media to stop going on about a zero oil economy as it is flippin' depressing and why would anyone buy shares in TCG as clearly it will be very hard for them to transition to a zero oil/fuel business model

All of the outcourcers were worrying me a few years ago when I looked at the figures.

I am just an average person and I knew back in 2015 that Capita, Serco and Interserve had way too many intangibles and good-will on their books that was likely to be worth far less than accounted for (good-will at some point always turns out to be worth far less than accounted for as in the real world their is very little goodwill).

Also these companies I assumed were only able to make "accounting profits" because they were increasing the intangible value of their assets (look up what the word intabgible means and it never filled me with confidence when a company announced an increase in "intangible assets", and also goodwill was increasing every year and being counted as an asset - but as I've already said at some point in the business cycle "goodwill" nearly always turns into a liability and not an asset).

Hence these companies have been making far lower cash flow than their profits suggested for years. It was always a worry. Hence I never went long after looking at their accounts - although wish I'd gone short (as that seemed the rational thing to do) but I never did that either.

But someone always has to organise the election (even in a city state) and someone has to write/shout out the question to be voted on. So even this is not a truly equitable system - as the most ebullient egos will probably add bias by the number of questions to vote on or in terms of how they phrase the question.

Isn't giving the people what they want how a democracy should work?

How the system currently works is that people with money get the laws they want.

However, I do have a certain nostalgia for the Greek times when actually everyone voted on every single local issue - and hence the people truly got what they wanted (or the majority did at least).

Because of the governments / Bank of Englands economic policies - lunatics running the economy!

It's hard to calculate the equity value here as it increases depending on whether PMO develop all of their 2P resources (i.e. undeveloped oil in the ground), or whether they sit and do nothing for another five years and perhaps oil demand will be far lower and oil will be worth far less - hence PMO have already done a huge disservice to their investors by basically not progressing any significant project for a decade except for Catcher - nothing in Indonesia, offshore Vietnam, or Solan, as a stand-alone project contributes more than 20,000 bopd - therefore none of these projects on their own were significant except for Catcher.

It's just not good enough for a company of Premier's size to only progress one project of sufficient economic scale to be really worthwhile during an entire decade.

Also there seems to be a complete absence of realisation amongst the BOD at PMO that economies of scale matter in oil just as much as anywhere else. Hence they should look to only progress projects where the total recoverable oil (or gas equivalent) will exceed 300 million barrels. They have several projects of this scale on their books - and it was a huge mistake to waste their efforts on projects like Solan (only 50 million barrels) which never had enough economy of scale to be justified as a development - yet it cost an absolute fortune - about a fifth as much as Lundin is paying to develop the Johan Sverdrup fields which together contain over 60 times as much oil as Solan - yet for some strange reason are only costing five-times as much to extract the oil from (that's the importance of economies of scale I guess from an economic perspective).

HI Lex1,

Thanks for giving me a good chuckle. However, it is slightly concerning that what you've said is basically a summary of all policymakers talk about. I'd love the hear the Chancellor for example say that he believes the UK economy should be a bustling place where businesses thrive and obviously it will require fossil fuels but that isn't a problem as carbon dioxide is plant food and only represents a miniscule 0.04% of the atmosphere in any case. I would just love it if the chancellor said that and encouraged people to work together to grow the UK economy.

So what we need is a takeover offer at £6.50 per share - that would provide confidence to investors that some sort of reasonable valuation (albeit still cheap) can still be agreed by the various banks involved in the Western economies.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/thousands-uk-shops-left-empty-134208717.html

I don't just believe what I read online - but this is true of what I see in my local area/local towns. There are hundreds of shops that have closed and either been replaced by charity shops/betting shops, or not replaced at all.

Does anyone really think hoards of charity shops and betting shops give people who live in that area a good lifestyle?

I'm probably not using the best language to win friends - but really sometimes people do need to hear that other people think they are going wrong - anyone who is too defensive in local government to consider it may be best to outsource some of their work to someone with a PhD in maths/engineering is possibly rather too defensive over the purse strings - after all in a democracy it shouldn't be that central government gives a bag of money to someone in a local council who distributes it only to their cronies. However this sort of thing isn't going to stop until people make the effort to regularly meet new people and to sometimes tell someone that actually in this instance, although they are a respected and valued member of the community, they are not the best person for the job - and in fact the work is going to someone you have never heard of but they fully deserve their chance and that is that.