Member Info for romaron

It was 4 years ago that Russia invaded Ukraine. I went to an Intelligence Squared event last night to listen to Fiona Hill in conversation with John Sopel. Most of what she said is stuff we already know but she did highlight the fact that in modern warfare electricity power stations are important infrastructure and their destruction is a priority. Today I listened to Dieter Helm and he said the same in a podcast. He said that attacking enemy infrastructure is the core to any aggressive military campaign. I find it laughable that Miliband is in charge of a Ministry that has Energy Security in its title.

We are an island with many pipes and cables that will come under attack. We need a variety of energy supply and it is not only crass stupidity to run down our O&G but reckless too. Surely it is time for kneeler Starmer to stand up to him?

She did (FH) unequivocally say that Ukraine blew up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and that Trump has a crush on Putin who knows that rebuffing him [Trump] and acting hard to get gives him the upper hand in negotiations.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jY8k8iMrOE

12:00 "Neo-colonialist and hubristic" - Ed Miliband's position

26:20 "Martin Copeland in attendance" - KP knows him from a Focus Group

42:00 Why we ignore Scotland

BUT the real goodie is at 33:25 - Would investors come back? Cautiously optimistic and the killer from KP is DECOMMISSIONING. AND what are EnQuest good at?

This is possibly the most encouraging video I've seen to date and reinforces my decision to stay invested here and add.

Https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/denmark-becomes-latest-country-to-rethink-oil-and-gas-phase-out

When are they arresting Miliband?

Interesting statistic: "In 2024, Norway was the UK's largest supplier of natural gas, accounting for approximately 43% to 50% of total UK gross gas supply. Over 343 terawatt hours (TWh) of natural gas were imported via pipeline from Norway in 2024, representing about 76% of all UK gas imports."

This is little changed from the Strategic Defence Review which stated in 2021 77% of gas imports came from Norway.

Maybe $66 is more accurate as Brent will be irrelevant in 4 years if Ed has his way? It is too glaring to be accidental. Maybe enticing Labour into an admission that Brent will be so insignificant that we'll be ever more reliant on other countries. Norway is tied to Brent so it raises a complicated argument. We have decided to crater a successful industry whilst Norway value their reserves. It'll be interesting to see if Ed answers. I think he'll just ignore it as he did when questioned 17 times at the DEINZ (it is now official- we have change Security to INSECURITY) about the small print on the China deal for renewables. At times there is more democracy in Iran.

Excuse the pun but with Magnus we had BP over a barrel. Who else would have bought it? BP have now almost completely exited the Northern NS and I've a feeling in my water that we should be taking more notice of Culzean which although not NNS is on the border. Maybe not as an asset for us but does the pre-emption by Neo Next mean that a revised deal with Serica is now on the cards. Steve Bowyer left for a reason and the anodyne response from EnQuest was meaningless.

"so M&A remains a blackbox for now." - nicely put!

Depends on your view towards Net Zero, EPL and Ed Miliband's intransigence. We've just bought an asset i.e. Magnus at what I consider the bottom of the market. Have BP a view on the NS. They obviously have but they also have far bigger fish to fry and may themselves be at threat of being taken over. If you are optimistic about the NS and removal of EPL going forward then this was an ideal time to BUY. Magnus was not core for BP and the difference to having or not having the interest would be lost in rounding adjustments in their accounts.

Excellent summary. I ignore Net Debt in the sense that how are we meant to make a significant reduction when the price of oil and the EPL are beyond our control? With the wind behind us we could eliminate it in a short while.

I'm thinking that with Magnus it is an irritation that BP feels it can do without. The EPL is not a hill-to-die-on for them but it is for us. Politically it is too much time and trouble for a Major - and it doesn't have the scale they look for. I think this argument can be extended to Bressay and Equinor to a lesser extent.

I don't think I'd like to play cards with AB and Penny.

"2026 has begun with the UK North Sea being impacted by severe weather. Storm damage to the third-party-operated Ninian Central Platform (‘NCP’), which was caused by a once-in-a-decade wave, resulted in an unplanned outage for all system users, including Magnus, in mid-January. Following the completion of remedial works, Magnus production was reinstated in the early hours of 22 February. "

This was only yesterday and means they didn't have to put in a 'concern'. Well done to the whole team and the excellent timing.. So our price held up during a time of restricted production that was not a secret to those involved and it wasn't only EnQuest. I'll take that as a win. A "once-in-a-decade wave" reinforces what a harsh environment the NS is. Only Ed thinks we can control the climate and weather.

I'm not gonna try and understand the effects of the Magnus revenue sharing system ending but imagine if it cleans up our balance sheet then it probably does the same for BP. Be interested in what the numbers guys think of it.

All this and we've done it ALONE. Our ammunition has been kept dry and added to. Exciting times ahead.

"renewables investment in the north of scotland is under pressure as high transmission charges make projects less competitive than those in the south of england."

https://www.agcc.co.uk/news-article/north-wind-projects-at-risk-as-grid-charges-threaten-billions

is this a "gotcha". we make it impossible for the o&g industry to survive in scotland. we mollify the natives by promising "well paid green jobs" and then take away the main source of renewable energy [wind] because transmission costs are too expensive.

looks like scotland will have to rely on sunshine (solar) for those jobs. i reads that aberdeen had only one cloud in the sky last week. problem was it covered the whole sky.

does wearing tartan make you a *****?

I'd turn the heating on!

Hi Hunbah, I was just chewing the fat. But once again you've explained it better than I could. My main point was that they play during the day and go home square. Even more important when an RNS is due to land.

I'm going down Memory Lane today meeting up with two old spot traders from Midland Bank. I'll be reminded of stories I'd forgotten.

EnQuest has 2 price quotes, and it was particularly evident (imo) today. I’ve a position with City Index and it jumped at the end of the day. It didn’t move on LSE simultaneously. This indicates there is presently sod all going on in the main market as we await the update imo. I think the algo must go home square and avoid an RNS. I’d argue that the solid advance of the previous week was to do with actual real buying interest rather than punters and the algo is sensitive enough to analyse and not challenge – it could even go the other way if a trend develops. The buyer clearly wasn’t buying today, and we are used to a drip down to be more common when there are few other market drivers.

So often the spread-better pricing will be lower than the main market because there isn’t news every day, but the 3D’s never disappear. This is bread and butter for the algos and the companies running them.

I use an experience of mine to support this. In days of the steam-engine the Barclays Forward Lira trader also looked after Barclaycard’s foreign currency demand for travellers. He was given the role as a kind of Chinese Wall against the Spot trader. It meant each evening he had to leave a price that was available to Barclay’s branches in the r.o.w. The catch was to avoid gouging he had to keep the same spread as when London was open. So, he marked it down so that his buying side was below the offer in the regular market. It was a risk, but holiday makers do not tend to bring much money back and it was basically a one-way trade but a risk did technically exist.

My argument is that in the doldrums the algos tend to rule but are not necessarily a reflection of the value of any stock. To an extent they’re parasitical but if there is not an infestation relatively harmless; but irritating

If the main market avoids the sector, then algos rule. Tail wags dog due to the abandonment of strong fund and institutional investors.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yBPb5geE_I

We've been saying this for some time.

Do you have the author M? I got the paper edition today and the article wasn't in it.

Pressure must surely be building and if it does hit the fan I expect a lot of CYA emails and letters will appear. If I worked for Ofgem (or any associated bodies) I'd want something on record that I had warned about my 'concerns'.

Glad to see you're still around L7 and your attention to detail hasn't waned. I had a slight concern regarding the recent announcements (RNS) from SEA. It is not unknown for companies to put out some good news just before some bad news. It is a timely reminder that the NS is a harsh environment and equipment doesn't last forever. Maybe this week we'll get the update and all will be revealed. The recent price movement suggests that there isn't anything serious impacting our progress. In fact - could it be the arrival of the Ingrid Knutsen the reason for the rise?

Bang 'em up! Easiest to access the Report here https://x.com/7Kiwi/status/2022970236656566501

I have been following David Turver for several years and this report was for the GWPF who I am also in contact with. In the conclusion DT wrote this:

"The new Generation Cost Report from DESNZ is closer to the truth than ministers or the government agencies. This shows that somewhere, deep in the bowels of DESNZ there are at least some people who are close to understanding the truth. This sham cannot be allowed to continue and there must be legal penalties for telling lies and misleading the nation."

Unlikely to happen but does he [DT] know something we don't and is there rebellion fermenting in DESNZ. NBobody who considers themselves and doing a professional job enjoys being used and abused politically. Cracks appear to be surfacing.

Mr Miliband, like the rest of his cabinet colleagues, has never run a serious company. His promise of £300 lower domestic energy bills has evaporated along with thousands of jobs in the O&G industry who are casualties of his other great obsession: ending exploration in the UK sector of the NS.

Mr Miliband prefers the NZ bit of his job to the energy security one. Surrounded by dedicated green advisers, he suffers from a delusion common among Britain’s “progressives”: that this country can alter global behaviour by setting a good example. This conceit is the only faintly plausible explanation for Mr Miliband’s barnacle-like attachments to the 2030 goal. As we only account for 1% of emissions a cursory look at China, US and India’s vast reliance on fossil fuels suggests Mr Miliband’s Jiminy Cricket strategy isn’t working.

Some common sense has finally arrived from the Tony Blair Institute confirming what many have understood for years that Mr Miliband’s obsession in running down the NS is a clear and present danger to future prosperity and is OBSOLETE because the policy was formed before energy security became a dominating international issue. The policy prizes the wrong thing, putting the installation of renewable capacity to meet an artificial deadline above the affordability and energy security.

Mr Miliband’s prejudice against gas extends to production: while NORWAY and the NETHERLANDS MAXIMISE remaining reserves, Britain is abandoning 7.5 billion barrels of remaining NS O&G worth £165 billion. It will sit under the seabed even as the UK continues to import gas from Norway and others. Such is Mr Miliband’s grand scheme, the supposed completion of which coincides with the next election. Good luck, as they say, with that.

----------------

My personal view is that Miliband still thinks he has the TU's who got him the leadership in 2010. Like the Labour NEC the TU's can be manipulated by outdated rules and a small and dedicated number of organised votes. Maybe, even as the MSM weakens in reaching its market they can be leap frogged and the workers can be reached directly. I have met Grangemouth, Lindsey workers and the bin-men and they will vote Reform. We're still over 3 years away and I'm confident it'll get a lot dirtier than it is now. Does Ed want to be known as the man who split Labour and the Unions? He might not care but others do. I think Ed is imprisoned by the logic of his rhetoric. He thinks he's ahead of the game - he isn't; neither is he as clever as he thinks he is.

I think you've misread the situation M. It was true but is now changing rapidly. I was listening to a podcast last week where Jacob Rees-Mogg commenting on the latest attack on Starmer and EM being sent out on the morning rounds had delivered "a masterclass in how to be loyally disloyal". I think you have to take notice of what is not being pushed or said. Ed is almost alone and many NZ type organisations are staying quiet and keeping out of the spotlight. For example Dale Vince is openly against heat-pumps now and there are few champions for them. They just about work in new builds where building regs can make them unavoidable and costs are hidden in the overall price.

4 of your examples are from the DT. It isn't read by the centre or the left and is similar to the Mail. It goes for clickbait and you can predict the comments and the ones that get many likes. Sadly it was the same in a recent DT for an article about the BBC. Comments were 99% slagging the organisation as though Netflix and Sky are FREE. Heckling and ignorant comments do not add anything. I think the BBC is cheap in the scheme of things and you don't have to watch it. My wife watches Strictly, soaps and the Winter Olympics whilst I don't mind waiting a few hours for Match of the Day. So don't assume that the DT has got the country's mood even though I agree with what they've published. Younger people hardly watch the BBC and certainly not the DT (or any 'inky' source). X is a waste of time and Facebook is for older people. People go to sources where they're comfortable and get confirmation of their views. For the DT that is a small sample which is why traditional sources are having such a hard time. People pick up their news away from MSM in many cases or return to their regular choices for bias confirmation. Even Trump faces headwinds when he tries to steal headlines.

There was a superb article in today's Times and I'll try and give a shorter version in my next post. It was in the'Leading articles' column and most people skip it. It goes some way towards answering your question.