Member Info for Ovets

This was discussed at length on the ii BB and a number of important points made, starting with how the electricity is to be generated to charge all those batteries, plus the relative immaturity of batteries/fuel cell technology, if you compare with the expectations that everyone now has, after decades of experiencing the immediacy of petrol/diesel powered engines and their long range.

Fusion was always going to be 30 to 50 years away and it still is.
Established nuclear generation is deeply unpopular because it's so expensive, takes a very long time to implement new power stations and decommissioning is proving a lot more expensive and difficult - it wasn't really given a lot of thought in the early post-WW2 years, when nuclear energy seemed so wonderful.
Also, it seems that the latest generation of nuclear power station design (as planned to be used at Hinkley Point) still can't be made to work, so that rather casts doubt over nuclear if you already have an energy source that works.

It should be remembered that there is a direct correlation between the advance of human civilisation and technology with energy consumption. If energy availability falls, you can expect serious consequences, including social unrest and perhaps even the collapse of our civilisation.
So while the politicians may want to save the planet, they also want to save their skins, which at the moment means they can't easily abandon fossil fuel, without facing the consequences.

It's not a happy picture for the future, except perhaps for RKH shareholders, who are sitting on absolutely massive reserves, which will be needed, whatever anyone else says.

Well that's even better for RKH shareholders then, although maybe not so good for the planet!

BTW, please don't take me as the authority on whether oil demand will drop and when and whether the US tried to unseat Putin by rigging the oil price, thereby destabilising the Russian economy, I'm merely repeating ideas/thoughts raised by trusted "experts", although that doesn't stop me from adding my own thoughts/opinions as well.

I agree - remember, this was during Obama's reign, who had been given the Nobel Peace Prize before he'd even been sworn-in. At the time, I thought it strange, but perhaps a manoeuvre to make the new US president think twice before making any act of war (something George W seemed to find easy).
So even after a series of very serious Russian "incidents", from the Livinenko murder to the downing of MH17, it was very unlikely that anyone would declare war on Russia, even in its weakened state (at that time).

Working out how to deal with Russia, perhaps Obama did his sums and calculated the cost of undermining the PoO would be the most effective means, which would take, say, 18 to 24 months to achieve. If so, it nearly worked, but Putin hung on just long enough.

To achieve credibility, part of the story was the inexhaustible US shale oil supply, which could be cranked-up almost instantly and indefinitely. However, trusted oil experts repeatedly said it was an illusion and that the fall in new oil discoveries was bound to have a dramatic effect on PoO sooner rather than later.

So what's this got to do with PMO & RKH? It means that the PoO collapse was an aberration, when World oil demand is actually increasing, while we're all focusing on climate change and renewables. Oil demand will eventually fall, but not just yet.

PMO/RKH were able to negotiate some very good service contract deals for the FI, when the PoO collapsed, but they are limited to around 5 years, so PMO & RKH know, that if they're to benefit from these, they've got to get a move on.

During the recent oil price collapse (remember it fell briefly to below $30 in Jan 2016), there was a theory that this was a planned operation to try to unseat Putin, after the numerous "events" involving Russia, and that was before the Salisbury nerve agent event.
Trusted experts said that the US shale production undermining the PoO was an illusion, bankrupting more than it made fortunes. If the theory is correct, then they nearly succeeded, but the collateral damage (e.g. Venezuela and in Africa) was becoming too great to continue for long enough to achieve the objective.
Anyway, whatever the truth, the consistent theme from experts seems to support the view that US shale production isn't the Golden Egg that some said/believed.

Judging by my conversation, referred to below, it seems more likely that PMO would be carrying this one, although any further investigations would be welcomed.
Regarding the subject "Worried", depending on your investment/gambling strategy regarding RKH and assuming you can afford to have the money tied up for a few more months, at the moment I think I'd rather be "in" than "out", although I accept that these days one can jump back in very quickly, even if at an added cost.

I think we know all this and agree too, but that's not going to convince the aggravated Argies, especially with elections just around the corner.

Yes we can go-it-alone and maybe they do owe us reparations, but as anyone who's tried it knows, it's a waste of time and money trying to sue a "man of straw". In any case, all their Latin American neighbours would unite over this, not least because it would be a very convenient distraction from their domestic problems, which if stupid enough, we could hand them on a plate. If you look at our politics right now, we ARE capable of being that stupid, but hopefully we won't.

It would be much better if the Argentine economy could be in better shape, so that such distractions are less likely.

Oh dear!

This isn't anything new and it's TONY Durrant (even says so at the top!), so don't get carried away.

The news is as positive as one could hope for, with an outfit $2.5Bn in debt and having to find another $1.5Bn for this escapade in the FI.

However, if a company in this degree of debt reckons it's worth committing to ANOTHER $1.5Bn (even if others will be taking some of the risk), I think that tells you just how important the FI region is expected to be.

PMO doesn't have the bags of gold, that the Big Oilies do, to squander on a fool's errand, so you're going to have to expect the occasional delay while they get their act together, but I repeat, they're not trying to raise this sort of money on the off-chance they might find something in the region - THEY KNOW what they're going for, and I'm afraid, if that means we shareholders have to wait, then we just have to wait.

Look at it another way, if you're £1Million in debt with a mortgage you can just about service and the Mrs/kids start clamouring for a new Merc and a holiday cottage in the Cotswolds and while we choose the cottage, have that holiday in Australia and maybe get the kitchen re-fitted, wouldn't you be just a little bit careful about how you commit to all that?

Think you're missing the point - the issue here is "Las Malvinas" and while things don't look too bad right now with Macri at the helm, as we've seen elsewhere, it doesn't take much for things to go wrong and very quickly.
When they do go wrong, one sure way of winning over support and deflecting attention away from the real domestic issues, is to revive nationalism and if you've got a convenient nearby distraction like the FI, occupied by an old colonial power that not only nicked your islands, but are now nicking your oil reserves too, that could become a very compelling story.

If, on the other hand, the old colonial power helps Argentina to increase its wealth, not only does that improve relationships, but helps prevent the collapse of the economy, as we're seeing in Venezuela.
Fiona doesn't have to worry about any of this, but the FIG might have to consider such issues as it plans for the future, which stretches way beyond Macri's next term of office, assuming he gets re-elected next year.

Argentina may have enough oil and gas on shore, but exploiting and exporting even more is never going to be bad idea, especially if these commodities have a limited future.

Very good article and a topic we've discussed, with Art Berman at the centre, many times before.
At least this one repeats the same story, perhaps even more robustly.

There is absolutely no doubt that the FI resources will be needed before long - perhaps sooner than many believe, but one remaining cloud is the relationship with Argentina and their Latin American pals and all the more if this article is right.
Perhaps a solution to this is for the FIG/HMG to help Argentina develop their own off-shore resources?

You've clearly got your head well into the numbers (apart from your "2013" typo error!), so what you write makes very reasonable sense.

Maybe, like your "2013", it's just fat finger problem?

I agree, but it would be irresponsible for Edison to quote inflated/speculative valuations, which later come back to haunt them and discredit subsequent research documents.

Everyone has to decide what they believe is correct.

You have to think about the reasons for a takeover, what figure the majority of shareholders would be prepared to vote in favour and whether any other predators might then move-in on the prey.

On balance, I'd say the probability of a takeover is low, but not impossible.
The prospect of a bidding war might make the sp go completely bananas, even if only briefly, as those with shares hang on and those without try to get their hands on what's available.

I've experienced this quite a few times and the trick is whether to hold on for more (which sometimes works and sometimes leads to disappointment), or get out during the scuffle. At this point, it usually becomes more of a gut-feel gamble than a properly researched investment.

Say no mooore - nod nod wink wink!

I'm with him, particularly coming from Purley.
If that doesn't cause the penny to drop, the probable explanation is that you're not a Monty Python fan.

Careful Comertoes, I come form Purley - honestly!

Assuming this means that PMO will be paying-down its debt even faster, that's only good news for us and particularly finding the financing of Sea Lion.

We all want our winnings now, but Durrant seems to be doing a capable job.
The dissidents don't seem to understand what £2Bn (or was it £3Bn?) of debt actually means and what it takes to steer out of such a crisis.

Just to repeat what I wrote, the Export Credit finance was never expected to cover all the outstanding project funding and as no announcement has been made about the details, we can't yet say that " the export finance may be less than hoped".

Keep up the good work!

hallelujah! - well it is Sunday!

I don't see why RKH need be "marked down".

It's PMO which ought to be more affected, but we'll have to wait and see, as usual!