Member Info for Love_You

Kicking myself, anyone willing to sell for 15.3p per share today …. wish I could go back in time by a few days!!

Don't know about fake paper....however central banks have all stated openly about the massive amounts of money they have created since 2008. Most of my friends know they are working for thin air (the new money created from nothing). However the ones that believe in the economic vision that their work is creating are happy to work for thin air (freshly printed money). The ones that aren't happy in their jobs are generally the ones that don't think very deeply about where money comes from...they just accept that despite a bit of inflation it allows them to buy stuff. When the world awakens to the scale of money printing that has happened since 2008 there indeed could be another crisis....yet most people don't seem to think too deeply about what money is, who creates it, and why it even exists in the first place. However...if you find these questions interesting then we have something in common BoomerBower!

Seen too much financial fraud over the past decade not to worry about a spanner in the works....hope I'm wrong and that long suffering shareholders receive a dividend next year.

From what they said they will start paying a dividend next year. Seems only ethical to me. They have been producing the oil for years now to the benefit of everyone except the shareholders (the actual owners of the company who provided the capital to set it up). It would be very nice if there is no spanner in the works before next year and the shareholders actually see some returns ….otherwise why would anyone ever invest in oil companies again if all that happens is the service companies and governments take all of the benefits...leaving nothing for shareholders. Didn't this IPO at over £7 per share in 2011. So us shareholders have paid for 7 years of oil production to benefit Kurdistan without a cent in return so far ….. a dividend or share buyback seems well overdue....but then the market is never reasonable or fair is it? How economic activity continues at all is a mystery to me when the market behaves like a lunatic ….. continuing to fund companies that give all the profits away to governments and special interests...with not even a mere fraction returned to the people who financed the board with their jobs in the first place ….these boards in the oil industry need to take a good look at themselves and ask themselves why do they seem to enjoy enriching governments, and overpaying for service contracts, more than they enjoy authorising dividends or share buybacks? Is it because they are so closely linked to governments that they view themselves as more powerful than the shareholders...the original source of capital....this would be very dangerous because once they have burned through shareholders' capital once they will likely never receive the support of those shareholders ever again if they ever need funding for a new business venture. Bit of a rant but it's illogical how the oil industry is the source of most of the globe's economic activity (most commerce still requires moving people or goods by plane/car/lorry etc), the oil is free and only requires a bit of drilling to gush up to the surface, and yet the worst returns to shareholders over the past decade have come from the oil industry....and the best returns from companies using new technology to improve the way existing business work (such as Ocado). But without oil there would be no large scale food delivery.....yet the market won't reward shareholders in the oil sector for some reason ….must be because the oil sector just keeps accepting higher taxes and never tells governments the truth....that they are killing off investment into the industry faster than the "real economy" can switch to electric vehicles ...hence why there is economic crisis after economic crisis around the globe the past decade and why governments are perennially unpopular and constantly losing elections (especially in Europe, but even Brexit in the UK might have been a protest vote about the economy rather than a genuine desire to reduce trade with the EU).

I remember Deutsche Bank selling out of Afren in 2008...they sold all the way down from 40p to 13p. Then six months later Afren was trading at 65p a share, and less than three years later traded at £1.70 per share. I notice the Deutsche share price fell over the past decade by 90% ….not surprised when you sell the things that the citizens want more of and buy a long of green nimbies spouting media drivel thinking you can change human nature...…..all Deutsche Bank did was lose heir shareholders a fortune...it never stopped the oil from being produced....America will never leave shallow water large oil fields fallow without extracting the oil....they only tell people they might do that so that they can buy the assets at a fraction of their true value ...the US oil industry is still huge, directly employing hundreds of thousands of staff and with a total market value of over $5 Trillion....then you add on to that all of the national oil companies around the world …… the only risk here is that the crazy politicians actually believe the oil might be worthless and allow some US company to orchestrate a raid that takes it out of the current shareholders hands for a fraction of its future value....Powell said yesterday the number 1 aim of the FED was to keep the current economic expansion going for as long as possible ….does that sound like the US economy will need less or more oil in the future? Of course Powell could be lying about the FED's true intentions ...however Bernanke wasn't lying about quantitative easing.....I only hope Goldman and some other US hedge funds or banks hold a decent wedge here....that significantly increases the chances that this oil field will go into production in the next few years....as otherwise how is the US going to replace its shale output once that inevitable starts to decline at some point in the 2020s? The decline is inevitable as there are over 80,000 shale well in production currently - the average decline rate being 30%. Hence they need to drill about 20,000 new wells per year just to maintain production....and the year after 23,000, and the year after 26,000, and the year after 30,000 ….and then at some point it become impossible to drill as many new wells as are needed just to maintain production....I reckon that will happen not later than 2026. And I predict the USA will not shift away from oil consumption fast enough before 2026 to not need the oil from Barryoe when it is quite a large field - 350 million to 1 billion barrels is not to be sniffed at as it account for 3 days worth of the entire global demand currently - if you imagine all the global GDP from 3 days of commerce being the value of Barryoe then you can't really sniff at that can you?

Argos sells cheap things that are great for people who live in cities and the aspiring middle class. So it's a great business but I do worry about the profit margin...also how much demand can there be for some items when you have a catalogue of 800+ pages to choose from? I can't see how half the things are even needed really - so I do worry that with car factories closing down, and the economy slowing, that Argos would be relatively harder hit than most by a slowdown/collapse in discretionary spending. Discretionary spending is always vulnerable to economic cycles...then again I would class phones and tablets as discretionary items for many people....and nobody worries that mobile phone companies might be cyclical or just a passing trend/fad (although one that's last twenty years). However I do think more and more of the people I know are telling their employer that they will only check emails in the hours they are paid for and that it is up to the employer to provide them the items they need to do a job which requires lots of communication (hence work laptop and work phone). I do detect people are keener than ever to protect their free time, their leisure time, and that a nice outing in the car, or a good forest bike ride, is more appealing at an evening/weekend that ordering tit-tat on their phones....just wondering if the trend towards real people, real activities, protected time away from technology with family and friends, might take off and surprise a few people over the next decade....???? What do the residents on here think of such notions?

Pound down, Sainsbury's up? That's the opposite to normal isn't it?

Hi Djones21476,

FED statement and interest rate decision today....this evening GMT.

Not sure whether the statement matters to Vodafone or not ...would their potentially be any effect on their borrowing costs. If they are borrowing money from the European Central Bank then it doesn't really matter to them what the FED do does it?

Is West of Ireland is every successful and billions of barrels are discovered then I hope the Greens/Nimbies eat humble pie once they see all the good that a booming economy can do people .... anyone would think these Greens/nimbies want everyone to be miserable just because they live in a boring miserable world themselves where economic growth is bad, business is bad, heating homes is bad, putting food in shops is bad, a few new roads is bad, more opportunities to travel is bad, small business is bad, people on benefits is good, people too poor to afford cars is good, no new houses is good, no new roads is good, no jobs is good, no fun is good ...you get the idea ...now there will be a backlash against these people most likely in future because they ran their bandwagon too far... to the point that it was starting to do far more harm to people lives than good. Yes a bit more recycling was good, controlling pollution into rivers was good, even controlling pollution generally was good, also a bit less needless waste was a good thing. But to take these ideas and then to keep pushing and pushing for further more and more extreme measures such as banning future oil production...cutting back budgets, no infrastructure spend...telling people it was all for their own good because more intelligent people knew better than them...so don't complain at wages cut, less jobs, no houses, less disposable income, less travel opportunities....this all went far too far in my opinion. Who agrees and who disagrees?

http://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/wpsrsummary.pdf

I can't believe it .... after years of double crossing oil producers regarding price USA imports have finally fallen ... perhaps economic fundamentals do matter in the end ... we shall see over the next few months ...and out to 2021.

EIA report - not a trend yet, but driving season in USA begins end of April and continues through to beginning of August traditionally. Not a good time for older giant fields to be getting tired (if indeed some are). Can't imagine the people who were positioning themselves long oil (based on very sensible quantitative models) last spring - and who Trump shafted last autumn with lower oil prices - will ride to support Trump any longer. Hence surely more chance that Trump may try the alternative of trying to stimulate the economy .... asking banks to lend more....and keeping quiet this time with oil hits $75 (if it does) as this really is a relatively fair price and encourage some new investment (whilst still not being excessively high really as long as there is not a massive austerity programme of government cutbacks going on at the same time - but surely there needs to be some new investment in infrastructure at some point - austerity can't continue forever and allow small medium sized towns to die and only large cities to prosper...which is what will happen if there is no infrastructure spend to keep the less populated areas well-connected to the rest of the economy).

http://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/wpsrsummary.pdf

Large draw reported by the EIA

http://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/wpsrsummary.pdf

Driving season begins in USA at the end of April and lasts through to end of July.

Hope these figures today are not part of a trend otherwise potentially these size of drawdowns could be part of a trend for several months. Far too early to draw any conclusions yet ...but normally oil demand rises quite substantially in the USA from April through to mid summer ...and we have not quite entered that period yet.

http://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/wpsrsummary.pdf

If you look at the IEA report then imports to the USA have fallen off a cliff .... I think Trump may have double crossed his friends one too many times in bringing about that last fall in oil prices in the autumn of last year.

From my own models I was convinced last autumn that on a fundamental basis t was a policy mistake to lower oil prices in autumn last year - the signs were there earlier in the year that shortages were beginning to develop n mnay areas across the globe ... I found it hard to understand how putting a few smaller companies out of business and a few US hedge funds would cut global demand by 2-3 million barrels per day. Surprisingly there did seem to be an economic slowdown globally last autumn and oil demand-supply just about balanced which I think make the oil bears extremely overconfident that low oil prices could be maintained without weakening investment into the oil industry...or annoying investors in Tesla and other companies trying to offer oil free alternatives .

It's far too early to say yet .... but Trump may well come to regret supporting that harsh dip in the oil price last autumn...it was (in my opinion) the opposite of what many investors had positioned themselves for based on their models of long-term global fundamentals ....it's not always smart to ignore the people who were advocating an alternative approach of greater bank lending (to please his supporters) and allowing oil prices to continue at $70-$80 which would have been high enough to encourage new investment and avert a possible undersupply of oil, (although it's too early to say yet), later this year or next year.

Yeah....personally if I'd been Trump last summer I would have gone for increased bank lending and keep oil price at about $75 ..keeps everyone happy really ....maybe he thought low oil prices would stimulate the economy ....but investors were positioned for the opposite and he actually caused a mini recession which masked the fact that potential he has made a massive mistake with regard to the oil supply situation.

http://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/wpsrsummary.pdf

If you look at the IEA report then imports to the USA have fallen off a cliff .... I think Trump may have double crossed his friends one too many times in bringing about that last fall in oil prices in the autumn of last year.

From my own models I was convinced last autumn that on a fundamental basis t was a policy mistake to lower oil prices in autumn last year - the signs were there earlier in the year that shortages were beginning to develop n mnay areas across the globe ... I found it hard to understand how putting a few smaller companies out of business and a few US hedge funds would cut global demand by 2-3 million barrels per day. Surprisingly there did seem to be an economic slowdown globally last autumn and oil demand-supply just about balanced which I think make the oil bears extremely overconfident that low oil prices could be maintained without weakening investment into the oil industry...or annoying investors in Tesla and other companies trying to offer oil free alternatives .

It's far too early to say yet .... but Trump may well come to regret supporting that harsh dip in the oil price last autumn...it was (in my opinion) the opposite of what many investors had positioned themselves for based on their models of long-term global fundamentals ....it's not always smart to ignore the people who were advocating an alternative approach of greater bank lending (to please his supporters) and allowing oil prices to continue at $70-$80 which would have been high enough to encourage new investment and avert a possible undersupply of oil, (although it's too early to say yet), later this year or next year.

Yeah....personally if I'd been Trump last summer I would have gone for increased bank lending and keep oil price at about $75 ..keeps everyone happy really ....maybe he thought low oil prices would stimulate the economy ....but investors were positioned for the opposite and he actually caused a mini recession which masked the fact that potential he has made a massive mistake with regard to the oil supply situation.

Apologies to day traders - however whether I buy here or not all depends, (given my preferred time-frame), of whether Kraken can produce 40,000 bopd consistently from 2020-2025.

Unfortunately I'm not convinced that without an improvement in the performance of Kraken that I will be inspired to buy here. I suppose I could day-trade it as it might head up to 25p if people anticipate Kraken being fixed in August .... but will it be fixed and then stabilise at 40,000bopd for the next five or six years is what I keep asking myself?

The trouble is why were the original production estimates so far off what is currently being achieved? If there was a sensible reason for it then it may increase my confidence that Kraken can be fixed. And a 40,000bopd I think it throws off enough cash to make a good investment cash when you consider Magnus and the other assets as well.

For example the cash flow from a Kraken producing 40,000 bopd is 40,000x365x60x0.7 = $613 million per year in revenues (suing $60 oil which I believe is what the shale industry needs if it's not to go bankrupt by 2025). Allowing $250 million per year to cover Kraken's operating expenses then that still leaves over $350 million per year in free cash flow to Enquest. Enough to pay off their debts in about 6 years if they were also investing in new projects/maintenance of fields which no doubt they will be. However the risk/reward seems okay if Kraken can be fixed and if the financing charges/rental costs of FPSO don't increase by more than 2% per year going forwards. ...And if a load of greedy bankers don't try charging us a king's randsom to refinance the debt in the future...which these greedy people also seem to do...and is a major worry given PMOs experience of having to pay about $300 million in refinancing charges to these greedy bankers who are getting 7.5% interest from them (on top of the refinancing fees).

Re LordAdam,

sometimes other countries make mistakes by over-investing in manufacturing and ending up with a surplus of products. There is no harm in printing money to buy these in the knowledge that the other country will shut down some of the industry that was producing a vast surplus of products. Once that industry has been cutback then due to global growth the products will be in demand again...hence the chance to sell for a good profit and use that profit to buy something else which the UK needs.

As an anology with you family imagine that someone in the next village was going to paint a lot of garage doors (because that was their business painting garage doors). Then imagine demand for their services suddenly fell because people such as yourself tightened up spending. Now that other person needs to free up liquidity/cash to survive from day to day - ergo they put a lot of their paint on the open market for sale. Now you have also been affected by tightened finances and have no spare cash either. However would it not now make sense for you to take a loan from your bank (equivalent to printing money really) to buy the paint at a very low price. In future people will have better things to do than painting garage doors and demand will return for someone to paint them for the. Admittedly you probably would have better things to do yourself also. However you could now sell the paint into the market at a profit (to allow someone else to start up a business painting garage doors). And you could use that money to pay back the loan you took out and use the profits to do something else you wanted. Such as enjoying a nice ice cream out whilst you pay someone else to plant a bed of roses with a couple of miniature cherry trees above them....the cherries will produce something to sell in the future as well as looking pretty with the roses.

Still think it's a bad idea to print/borrow money if there is a chain of events which is relatively predictable where the newly printed money will do some good to all involved?

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-majors-rush-dominate-u-051917604.html

Workers at its Remuda lease near Carlsbad - part of a staff of 5,000 spread across New Mexico and Texas - are drilling wells, operating fleets of hydraulic pumps and digging trenches for pipelines.

The sprawling site reflects the massive commitment to the Permian Basin by oil majors, who have spent an estimated $10 billion buying acreage in the top U.S. shale field since the beginning of 2017, according to research firm Drillinginfo Inc.

The rising investment also reflects a recognition that Exxon, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP Plc largely missed out on the first phase of the Permian shale bonanza while more nimble independent producers, who pioneered shale drilling technology, leased Permian acreage on the cheap.

You have Shell and Petrobras investing offshore Brazil, the Chinese ploughing money into the Canadian oilsands, NOCs boosting output in Iraq, Libya and Saudi.

The giant Johan van Sverdrup fields offshore Norwary are coming online later this year

Personally if governments keep cutting, cutting, cutting (cutting staff, cutting budgets, cutting everywhere and not spending on infrastructure) then there is more likely to be a repeat of the 2016 oil glut rather than a shortage of oil.

Time for governments to start spending more on infrastructure to avert a massive global economic slowdown?

Workers at its Remuda lease near Carlsbad - part of a staff of 5,000 spread across New Mexico and Texas - are drilling wells, operating fleets of hydraulic pumps and digging trenches for pipelines.

The sprawling site reflects the massive commitment to the Permian Basin by oil majors, who have spent an estimated $10 billion buying acreage in the top U.S. shale field since the beginning of 2017, according to research firm Drillinginfo Inc.

The rising investment also reflects a recognition that Exxon, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP Plc largely missed out on the first phase of the Permian shale bonanza while more nimble independent producers, who pioneered shale drilling technology, leased Permian acreage on the cheap.

You have Shell and Petrobras investing offshore Brazil, the Chinese ploughing money into the Canadian oilsands, NOCs boosting output in Iraq, Libya and Saudi.

The giant Johan van Sverdrup fields offshore Norwary are coming online later this year

Personally if governments keep cutting, cutting, cutting (cutting staff, cutting budgets, cutting everywhere and not spending on infrastructure) then there is more likely to be a repeat of the 2016 oil glut rather than a shortage of oil.

Time for governments to start spending more on infrastructure to avert a massive global economic slowdown?

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-majors-rush-dominate-u-051917604.html

Workers at its Remuda lease near Carlsbad - part of a staff of 5,000 spread across New Mexico and Texas - are drilling wells, operating fleets of hydraulic pumps and digging trenches for pipelines.

The sprawling site reflects the massive commitment to the Permian Basin by oil majors, who have spent an estimated $10 billion buying acreage in the top U.S. shale field since the beginning of 2017, according to research firm Drillinginfo Inc.

The rising investment also reflects a recognition that Exxon, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and BP Plc largely missed out on the first phase of the Permian shale bonanza while more nimble independent producers, who pioneered shale drilling technology, leased Permian acreage on the cheap.

Why is the UK so keen on cutting budgets when other countries are boosting their economies?

Thanks Daniel.f,

But leaning into trends that I don't approve of to make money will only accelerate me into a future that I don't like. Best to lean away from stupid ideas and try and draw people with me.