Member Info for romaron

He's on LBC tomorrow and they ask you to email in questions. Here's mine "After old diesel cars and the wood burners do you intend to outlaw outdoor barbecues due to their emission of harmful particles below PM2.5?"

KO - the BBC is not perfect but it is by and large unbiased. The problem is that you'll always get imbalance with the quality of contributor. You'll often hear them say things like "we asked the Treasury for a comment but nobody was available". Other times they'll describe somebody as an 'expert' or 'go to person' and you have to accept that at face value if you're not in the know. They do try and get the best available but that isn't always possible.
Their reporters cover a wide range of topics and they can't be on top of every subject.
A Minister or Secretary of State cannot use excuses and neither can the CEO of an oil major. They are surrounded by protection and not easy to nail down so you take what's offered.

I'm a bit p*ssed with my client "Mother Nature" she is an unpredictable cow and to cap it all she now claims to control the weather. Just who does she think she is?

"ClientEarth, which has a token shareholding in Shell, is suing under the UK Companies Act, and is supported by a group of large pension funds and other institutional investors. It argues a global transition to low-carbon energy is inevitable as world governments act to end the climate crisis and that Shell’s failure to move fast enough threatens the company’s success and would waste its investors’ money on unneeded fossil fuel projects."

"Client Earth" you don't get much more woke than that. It is an environmental charity. If their aims were embraced our present society would disintegrate. Foreign holidays would be one of the first to go and no doubt disarmament of all militaries would follow etc.
I wonder how we're going to rebuild Ukraine, Syria and now parts of Turkey without diesel and cement? Client Earth has a token shareholding (1 share?) whilst some of the Pension Funds involved will always indulge their crackpots as seen here Nest, London CIV, AP3. Others will be happy to see them waste money or opt for a quiet life.
Client Eartth is backed by American money. The home of evangelism. They are as welcome as chuggers to the average Brit but they get the headlines.

Hi Pelle - an informal chat with EnQuest might be useful but I wouldn't want their official support. It would be too parochial and for us to have any impact you need shareholders from other companies, plus any argument would be torpedoed because we would be described as paid company lackeys. I'm putting it out there because I'm surprised a lobby group hasn't already surfaced to combat the activists. I'm still hoping one exists and we could support through them. I have written to OEUK who are a lobby group but this is an embryonic stage.
My main aim is to be part of a group with a name, some officers and a go to for the media. It would definitely need a webpage.
People aren't always aware of just how desperate some outlets are to get a balancing argument and it would thrill them no end to have a lively dispute rather than the couched avoidance we normally get. I would make it my mission to get them to attack me. The companies are shackled in public; we aren't.
The climate activists aren't necessarily under one umbrella but do collude. Their chants and mantras are similar (9X cheaper) which is proof enough for me. Already that is a weakness of theirs because it proves they accept each others claims without checking. Either that or something far more sinister.
Do they have offices. I can't find an address for Uplift. Can anybody help there?
At present the industry is attacked for making a profit. Isn't that what businesses aim to do and investors look for? Then there is the demonisation of fossil fuels and no mention of their benefits. To abandon them too soon would cause starvation for 100's of millions (ammonia) and the nonsense about UK air quality totally misses the advantages that helping (say) ****stan and Africa move away from wood burning that kills 100's of thousands annually. They won't move forward without the transition via fossil fuels.
I would attack the hypocrisy.

I thought that'd get your attention. It is how I feel regarding the battering we take from all directions. I think we'll be OK and a revaluation is on its way but that doesn't make up for the coordinated attacks we have suffered over the years. I'd accept them if they were accurate and truthful but ideological activism doesn't require either in the same way that Putin's propaganda only requires bullying and chutzpah.
I was trying to research Uplift https://upliftuk.org/ and need some help. Any ideas where their financial support comes from (they have a large team)? I assume they don't exist in a vacuum but I can't find this information.
I know juststopoil have quite substantial backers and utilise the useful idiots attracted to the idea of a fossil free rapture who don't require payment.
The people who don't have any real representation are the small retail investors whose industry or company come under a sustained evangelical attack. Many of us are retired and would willingly help unpaid but where do we go? Message boards are echo chambers and all we end up doing is pleasuring the oddballs who frequent boards where they're uninvested.
The companies cannot respond in the same way that they're attacked but WE could. The activists make and repeat outrageous statements that are seldom challenged. We could demolish many of their arguments.
The Uplift webpage doesn't look complicated or even expensive but it gives them a patina of authenticity and somewhere to gather. I'm not into glueing myself to roads but I am prepared to turn up and disrupt. There is also the sheer amount of data where the activists have made claims that are impossible to substantiate or actually prove; in short a litany of lies. They have a weakness because the O&G business is complicated and the average activist knows far less than many of us here.
I doubt I'll get any traction on a message board but if anyone does know a group that is a counter to Uplift or juststopoil then I'd be very interested. I have found more interesting data and it requires the opportunity to challenge and expose. I'd happily pass it on to the right people. Alternatively we can keep on having sand kicked in our faces.

Where is this O&G social media? BB's are a whingeathon and circular. juststopoil are a professional outfit with serious financial backing.
Extinction Rebellion get listened to as well. Look at Uplift. We're amateurs.

I already write. I don't get replies and these are letters not emails.

Hi ukbbb - we live in hope. What does "Energy Security" mean in the new name? Renewables get a mention in 'net zero' but once again a sweeping title that means FA. It is a coverall phrase that fits the obfuscation we tend to accept from this government. And to think the alternative [govt] is likely even worse from an energy perspective. I was talking to an 'expert' in the field of misinformation and they said that a problem is the approach. It is based on "sacred values" and there is a messianic quality to it. Holders of a position believe that they are in the right and refuse to compromise. That is why using 'transition' is so hopeless. Reasonable people get it but you won't hear Caroline Lucas or Tess Khan embracing it whilst Miliband will say whatever will damage the Tories or attack the O&G industry. Lies and half-truths mean nothing to a true believer. We are getting excited in London over 4k deaths from pollution (so they say). A bit worrying that death from 'natural causes' is caused by oxygen (look it up) eventually. Whilst there is an irrelevant number of people dying from pollution in Africa (only about half a million a year) caused by cooking fumes. There is some evidence that people living up mountains live longer (possibly lower oxygen) so I am feeling particularly smug today as I live in High Barnet.

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into. -Jonathan Swift, satirist (30 Nov 1667-1745)

Your Mon 21:08
I think you're being a bit hard on AB and Linda Cook. I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that either lack moral fibre. They are in a difficult position and when LC sat with the BP and Shell representatives in front of the Environmental Audit Committee in July her responses were similar to Shell and BP despite the obvious traps set by hostile questioning. I think she did quite well as she isn't British.
Caroline Lucas was particularly aggressive and offensive but then she represents the huge constituency of ONE in the House of Commons. You can see by the interrogation that they suffered against the kid glove treatment of Tessa Khan how these committees work. They're not meant to be easy but a kangaroo court would be fairer. The attacks are so obvious and the 3 O&G representatives did well not to provide them with the headlines and sound bites they were seeking.
We, however don't have the restraints that AB and LC have. I don't have a company to protect and will quite happily argue the points from a non-industry perspective as a voter and member of the public using their products. I am collecting data because that is the best way to retaliate. The action today indicates that the government is listening to someone but their recent initiatives have been largely ineffective - why should this one be any different?
The tree huggers have juststopoil; who have we got? I am confident that I can be just as obnoxious and difficult as them. If we can get the exposure people will take notice.

If you're serious I can be contacted at romaron49 on gmail.

Dunno Dumbly. If BEIS go then so does NSTA. It is a private company limited by shares and wholly owned by BEIS. I'm still waiting for an announcement on the 33rd round of NS Licensing.
"The NSTA will now make its way through the lodged bids, with a view to awarding licences “quickly” and supporting winners to “go into production as soon as appropriate”. source Energy Voice.
Results of the process are expected in late spring." Kinda goes against Marky Miliband's 28 years average.
I wonder if the response to the Licensing Round has featured in this government's interfering and tweaking of the future of Energy. I was thinking of using the Freedom of Information approach as a 'concerned citizen'. I will if answers aren't forthcoming shortly.
GA - I watched it but nothing really new. Labour trying to create wiggle room. I hardly find it reassuring that Kinnock can use language like "windfall of war" and "O&G companies are laughing all the way to the bank". Let themn keep digging. there will be opportunities to corner them.

*with the current cheaper gas prices when was the last time we heard the 9X cheaper quote? For me it was Davos.

I have sympathy for PFC when you look at some of the stuff over here, especially in banking but their problems also tied in with the destruction of value across anything to do with oil and gas. There's a lot of skill and knowledge out there that is threatened. Losing a company like PFC is the equivalent of a library burning down imo. Some stuff is irreplacable.
I was thinking again about the Miliband 28 year quote. There has been a decade of underinvestment and EnQuest has been a bit of an outlier [Kraken] and I dare say you could argue that investment was severely curtailed from 2010 in the NS with next to none of new major fields being started. That would mean that there's only 15 years left in his jaundiced and prejudiced understanding of how O&G works. EM has never had a "proper" job but thinks his view and other tree huggers should hold sway. It also means there is a preponderance of fields entering higher declines after plateauing. If we listen to Labour the NS is finished as a viable O&G basin by 2030 imo. That is a disaster and nobody seems to care. There isn't a snowball's chance that renewables can fill the vacuum so we're gonna have to import oil from some quite dodgy regimes.
I know the Tories are the government on paper but we know the alacrity they have for saving their owns skins by pushing the individual (or industry) under the bus. There is a high chance that Miliband will be seen for his singular lack of talent and workable ideas. I don't see a lot of difference between him and Diane Abbot. He is fast becoming a liability to Labour. I'm hoping they'll ditch him before he can cause real damage.

I have cast the Tories on the dung heap of history and they deserve no less. Labour will probably get my vote but not if Miliband is allowed free rein.

Hi Auson - in this space I only hold EnQuest and a small amount in Energean (ENOG) and that was a hedge against my gas bill. I threw in PFC because they are under attack and is also the alma mater of AB. The crossover within the industry gives incest a bad name but goes to show the connections and his go back to the Middle East which isn't running out of money any time soon. I like Harbour but knew too much about Premier and not 100 per cent sure that the cancer was eradicated. Tullow just seem to be unlucky.
I stay away from property. The signals aren't good.

We run the SVT Terminal but don't own it 100 per cent. There's a breakdown here but I don't think it's up to date :
https://www.offshore-technology.com/marketdata/sullom-voe-liquids-storage-terminal-the-uk/
From memory we've bought more from BP and a few others may have moved on. So even if we owned a quarter that would be £6.5m max and as it doesn't impact the company in a major way doesn't require a RNS.

I hope you've emailed AB and IR with your message Juan. From those I've canvassed the balance is quite evenly spread between buyback and dividend. For UK investors if it is in a SIPP or ISA then dividend is preferred. The tax on dividend deters those who get taxed at a lower rate on capital gains which also applies to Sweden (I'm guessing).
We've been patient for years and you have my support Juan.

"Stock on loan does not always indicate short-selling activity – think total return swaps, inter-bank lending and banks holdings shares on inventory. In most cases, however, the borrower is hedging against a fall in the share price of the borrowed equity." google
There is also some allowance for market makers though I imagine that would be quite small. They want to be flat at the end of the day.
It is mainly short selling when it goes crazy (Premier Oil 29%) but the level we're at now probably accomodates the day traders/spread betters. It can even be not EnQuest specific. I remember when Marshall Wace had a short in PFG and the price had tumbled massively yet they still had a residual short for years. They don't usually wait for zero so I assumed it was a swap/arbitrage that cancels out a long position elsewhere. I regret not placing a trade some years ago to short Tullow and Buy EnQuest. The amounts don't have to match and it would have been a hedge but I would have been a tiny percentage of the TLW stock on loan but wouldn't even have shown in their shorts as below a half per cent. I think there will always be a residual amount of stock on loan and you'll never ever get to the bottom of it . Some is (imo) bookkeeping of deals that could even be entered wrongly or not corrected.
For comparison last month stock on loan for BP was 3.4%, Shell 2.02%, Harbour 8.69%, TLW 8.47%, Petrofac 15.78%

I have a suspicion that Harbour involves swaps that enable founders and associates of EIG use to get around time barriers for selling. I think it is a good stock but gas isn't wanted at present.

This also from today's ST by Rod Liddle:
"Then I heard the shadow climate change secretary, Ed Miliband, insisting thatnobody at all in the countryshould ever have their power cut off, for any reason. One commends Ed's generosity with other people's money, but can you imagine what would then happen? When the Netflix bill and the gas bill arrive on the same day, which one do you think will get paid, given that non-payment of the gas bill will result in the gas, er, staying on? There would be a tsunami of non-payments.
Miliband's largesse contributes to the culture of absolute entitlrement. I have the right to power whether I pay my bills or not just as I have the right to raise a family of six despite not being able to pay for them - the state can do that.
You wonder what effect all this entitlement has on those people who 'do the right thing' - the ones who forgo Netflix for a while to pay for their energy bills, who save before having kids, who take two jobs to make life a little better for themselves and the kids they do have. Isn't Ed Miliband telling them that they are mugs?"
---------
I think prepayment meters work. Growing up on my estate we had them. They should be on the lowest rate and means tested. I have no objection to subsidising those in genuine need.
I'm not really into politics but my simple assumption is that Starmer includes Miliband to keep the extreme left happy as a sop to his denying the whip to Jeremy Corbyn. EM is a dangerous ideological individual imo.

Thanks for that Battle - the majority of us here aren't neutral but it would be a mistake to say we're anti-renewables. More that we're anti lies and against groupthink. You can also add a modicum of experience and common sense. Some here really know their stuff whilst most are well researched amateurs imo. I think we are growing in influence and it will heat up after the March 15 Spring Budget if the government continue not to listen. Interestingly, BP and Shell make around 5% of their profits in the UK and will pay the windfall tax on this amount. We all know the transition requires the next level down from the majors who have all but abandoned the North Sea and the biggest independent (Harbour) aiming to do the same. Who gets hit the worst? Companies that have supported the NS and made a commitment to energy security. That's us. Almost impossible to predict but if natural gas remains around these levels a lot of companies left will struggle to pay the windfall tax. Was that intentional? The good news is that it blows the 9X argument out of the water but they will conveniently forget it if we let them.

Whilst we await developments there will be opportunities to fight back and I think you're already seeing it from different quarters. I expect our resistance to grow. I've some ideas of my own but that's for down the road and will mean a group of likeminded individuals meeting away from this message board. It could also be useful to recruit from other companies, firstly via the message boards. It is impossible to conduct a discussion with anonymous trolls interfering but there are ways around that.

*interesting fact - the collective noun for a group of trolls is "a plankton".

From an article by Oliver Shah in today's Sunday Times:
"Tight-jeaned Bernard Looney has been the frontman for BP'S reinvention. In 2020, he told us that oil was "becoming socially challenged" and said BP would struggle to attract top talent, without pledging to go net-zero by 2050. The Irishman is guilty of insufferably saccharine social media activity, cranking out endless electric car-charging selfies on Instagram and Linkedin. His liking for playing to right-on gallery incurred an almost immediate cost last year when he said BP WOULDN'T cancel any projects in the UK if the government imposed a windfall tax. "Kerching" went the fruit machine in ministers' SHORT-TERM minds.
BP's husky hugger faces an unusual problem this week. Even as it reports a $5bn 4Q underlying profit, taking the annual total to a record $27.9bn, Looney is expected to WATER DOWN its green messaging. A source close to the company admits there was an "oversimplification" in the original narrative and says: "You always have to tweak a strategy. If you say it will stay unchanged in every detail for ever you're getting into Ed Miliband carved-stone territory.

*also mentions the earlier experiment of two2 decades ago, 'Beyond Petroleum' when BP prematurely splurged $8bn on renewables. Want a money-pit?: Invest in renewables.

I don't know if it is a misprint but our US$ HYNs just jumped. The 144A by 2% and the RegS by 2.50%. 99.50 and 100.00 respectively.

Tullow flat, small down.

I'm not invested but follow the story. I hardly ever post on other boards but use them as a comparator and obviously want them to do well. HBR used to be a decent board but is now infested by trolls and conspi******s and sensible discussion there is impossible imo. HBR is important to us as they (I imagine) are the 3rd/4th biggest producer in the UKNS and an independent like us. The production figures seem to be a state secret but I'm guessing BP, Shell, Equinor, Harbour then ? We are certainly in the mix for top 5 placing as a UK oil producer.
I was just browsing shorts and stock-on-loan and they have shorts (over .50%) of 2.65% and stock on loan 8.69% (January). We've seen the Premier/ARCM débâcle and the resultant slap on the wrist ARCM received. It actually encourages duplicity.
I don't think it is the same but I'm guessing that the stock-on-loan was borrowed to get around the restrictions placed on manged vehicles and proprietary ownership. A common excuse/reason for selling is 'tax obligations'. It possibly means they haven't actually sold them in this tax period but it does get around some of the loose rules to protect shareholders.
It makes other PE nervous to see this and as many are US based then why bother with the UK which by now they'll see turning into a kinda Zimbabwe with energy capital being resettled. Tullow have a similar situation but I think that is a reflection of their debt.
We have no reportable shorts and 2.47% stock-on-loan which I'm happy with. With the current FCF and EBITDA ratios the downside is limited but incessant demonisation by flailing politicians doesn't help.