Member Info for romaron

Apologies for jumping to an assumption. It's the most common and divisive subject over here. I've no idea what you were referring to. I always shut the gate.

Pelle - how dare you suggest that angry old white men looking forward to a better yesterday is not a good look!

I ddin't know this:
"Brexit could also lure North American upstream companies to the London Stock Exchange, Lukins said, arguing EU legislation has been a barrier because of a requirement that 25% of ‘free float’ shares, meaning those not in the hands of company officers or controlling interests, be held by EU entities. The Financial Conduct Authority has said a no-deal exit would end this."
Does this explain why the shares are quoted on the Swedish Exchange?

Pelle - it is intriguing why Barclays London hasn't released the same after all it is a 35% drop. I'm sure we'll know something by end of day. I've made enquiries but that doesn't mean they'll be answered.

Excellent point E121 about the cost of hedging. Nothing is free in financial markets and when I read that debt is rescheduled and lower rates taken I chuckle. It is written to show a company in a good light but is often smoke and mirrors to extend and reduce costs near term and kick the can further. Would a "kind" lender agree to reduce the rate because you're a bit unhappy with the rate? Only if you stuck a gun to his head!

I once took an option to pieces when trading FX swaps to see how they worked. The result was that you come to the same result and paying money up front has a cost too. Swaps appear free but not all can access them. Credit limits mean that you either pay more or the market is not available to you (even Bank of England wouldn't touch BCCI for example). Arbitrage does occur and sometimes it is because accountancy rules make it difficult or compliance/management just don't like or trust the latest whizz-kid derivative. Small punters can access option and future markets but the sheer scale of forwards is a barrier to them and price makers would probably not be interested in tiny amounts. It is never as easy as it seems and all deals are a bet against a future spot price.

"Global demand for crude oil is expected to continue growing, with global GDP growth being a key
driver. Real global GDP is expected to grow at a CAGR of 3.0% from 2017 to 2030, after growing at a
CAGR of 3.2% from 2009 to 2017. Future growth is expected to be led primarily by non-OECD Asia
Pacific, with an anticipated real GDP growth at a CAGR of 5.5% from 2017 to 2030. Global crude oil
demand is expected to grow at a CAGR of 0.5% from 2017 to 2030. Growth in demand from non-OECD
Asia Pacific and other developing countries is expected to help mitigate any reduction in demand for crude
oil caused by the increasing availability of alternative energy sources, greater energy efficiency and the
emergence of new technologies in energy consumer markets, such as electric vehicles."

From P.68 of the Aramco Notes Prospectus. Not some Mickey Mouse tip sheet.

P.70 "Demand for oil is influenced by its use for energy. Oil is the world’s leading energy source, accounting for
32.1% of the global energy demand in 2017. Through 2030, oil is expected to remain the primary energy source
despite anticipated increases in energy efficiency, increased use of natural gas and renewable energy sources,
such as solar and wind power, and the introduction of new technologies, such as electric vehicles. In 2030, oil is
expected to account for approximately 30.9% of total energy consumption. The following chart sets forth the
sources of energy from 1990 to 2017 and expected global sources of energy from 2018 through 2030."

and it is unlikely to drop off a cliff in 2030.

Source: https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/6727U_1-2019-4-1.pdf

This is FT tearsheet: https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/profile?s=ENQ:LSE

MorningStar has AB with 157mio shares (9.27%) and Double A with 103mio (8.88%) and they've been this wrong for months. Holdings are to an extent a wet finger in the air. The registrars will know at a certain point but whether they are allowed to inform the company of percentages is an unknown to me. One thing for sure is that most of the Institutions have given this company a wide berth since 2014. If AB gets it right they will return.

TWalboy, IMO that article is rubbish.

From Rights Issue prospectus Sept 2018 Notifiable interest in 3%

Aberforth 105,292,001 8.88
Double A 103,141,033 8.70
Baillie Gifford 69,934,972 5.90
EnQuest $Employee Benefit Trust 51,628,456 4.35
Hargreaves Lansdown Asset management 51,375,063 4.33
Swedbank 48,204,048 4.06
Dimensional Fund Advisors 43,236,786 3.65 total 39.87%

You can also use FT and Morningstar (which I don't trust) and still ill not reach the number quoted by Simply wall Street.

*Latest FT 30.71% not including AA

The good news is that as the company reduces debt and MC climbs the Institutional investors will arrive. It's what is called WIN/WIN as it is partly self fulfilling. Institutions tend to be accountant led imo.

The new posters are very welcome but a little bit of me resents them. It's a bit like when an unspoilt holiday destination or favourite restaurant of yours gets a good write up and the hordes arrive. They're often rowdier and less sophisticated but their money is as good as yours. Most likely younger than many of us too not that we're Brexiteers but grumpiness is one of the joys of getting old.

It also takes away the need to post corrections to the outright lies and half-truths spouted by certain posters who by and large disappear when a stock starts to become popular. I can only assume they move on to weaklier shares. I use the filter a lot and today have an almost total absence of the red lines which is a pleasant surprise.

For the newbies. Amjad Bseisu has a strong team and is himself something of a genius and this is certainly his baby. Most posters plead for CEO's and founders to have more "skin in the game" and I feel few can match his commitment. It does of course mean that he has more autonomy than most and the result is a quasi private company. If this means he can do a Jim Ratcliffe then stay aboard for the ride. We are uniquely positioned to take advantage of decommissioning work and squeeze more oil out of existing fields. It is after all an oil industry adage that the best place to find oil is in an oil field. I think there will be less discoveries leading to FDP in the future and in a declining sector it will be managed decline as new field development fails to find risk funding. AB has the ambition and the talent to grow this company into the FTSE 250 in double quick time. The share price is almost an irrelevance (to him it seems) as he plots the future strategy of his company. He doesn't play to the crowd and is remarkably composed when facing challenges. A true leader.

Build it and they will come. Be Lucky.

You couldn't have missed it. Driving from Whetsone towards A1 it's on the left with huge Paladian pillars. It is after Nigel Wray's house on the junction of Barnet Lane. Always lots of builders vans in attendance. Off now to get a Stansted flight to Santiago de Compostela for 5 day break.

Be Lucky.

O/T Mike Ashley lives (or lived) not far from me and I drove past his house in Totteridge regularly. It was at one time (perhaps still is) rumoured as the biggest house in the country. He bought it from the music mogul Mickey Most. Around Christmas time he would festoon the house with lights. If you drove past it was brighter than Heathrow at night.
The neighbours were up in arms and tried to stop him but every year he repeated the show. Neighbour from hell.

Sorry to hear of your travails Brad and hope you can recover. I know how attached you can get to a dog and how nice it is to have at least one resident always happy to welcome you. I have filtered GCCR because he never added anything. I also filtered most of the detractors including HIS. I just can't be bothered with the childish point scoring. I agree with you that at this stage there is little point in worrying about a recovery or collapse. The US bond holders that are now shareholders will only be aligned with us if it suits them to remain shareholders and there is another chunk of bonds that will have to be dealt with in the future.. There is a frisson of interest in satellites and ISAT appears to be in play. AVN have been hiring and refusing to lay down so there is always hope. Sensible holders have written this stock off but it continually shows flickers of life. We shall see. If it goes down, I shrug my shoulders. At this price it is like having an outsider in the National.

Keep your chin up Brad, you sound a decent chap.

I feel there's stuff we don't understand and it isn't simply a long/short story. I've never really got my head around all those RNS Form 8.3 and 8.5 that you get at different times. Some have straight forward holdings whilst others mention derivatives. I've a suspicion that to do some you need cover if you're effectively shorting for a certain time period and the stock on loan is to cover certain operations such as the Chevron deal. They'll be unwound eventually but some of it is recording transactions which inflate certain figures and is almost a book-keeping exercise. It is not always easy to pigeonhole transactions and it certainly doesn't seem to worry holders of PMO. There is a lot of terminology that means sod all to me such as: Stock-settled derivative transactions (including options) Writing, selling, purchasing or varying etc....

If PMO was 20% short the price wouldn't be where it is now. The recorded shorts are 2.84% which bears little relation to the stock on loan. I'm not sitting stock exchange exams so I'll basically ignore stock on loan from now on.

Auson 11.32 - I looked at PMO's stock on loan, wow! Assuming it's not a misprint what is the consensus for such a high figure (c.20% or 1/5th) as I don't follow PMO.

*Incidentally at an AGM you get the attendance of Registrars who have huge computer run outs listing shareholders. There are always investors turning up without a letter of authorisation and they check with the run out. Unless they are trade/data protection secrets/issues then I assume the company could access the holders at least once a year. Can anybody throw some colour on this otherwise I'll ask myself at the next AGM I attend if a company is allowed access to the run out.

I would even argue that some stock on loan is unlikely to change too much if it relates to an arbitrage deal where a fund has gone long of one stock/asset and shorted EnQuest. As long as the long stock goes up in a bigger percentage than EnQuest you're on a winner.

I'm sure you mean well gregpeck7 but there has been a lot of water under the bridge since the end of February. I wouldn't guess at the amount on loan but a photoshot of Feb could easily bear no relation to the current amount on loan. It's a bit late getting historical figures. I did once use a favour and got a Markit subscriber to get the latest numbers and they were very different to the Euroclear due to the fact that if there is a reason for volatility or an update from the company (RNS) there is quite a lot of room for divergence. I'm not that bothered TBH but month old figures don't really tell the current story but better than nothing I suppose. However, saying that is a bit like saying a half truth is worse than a lie.

Thanks to hitman for bringing these to our attention. I'd forgotten about them and certainly don't have the forensic skills to try and extract the numbers. I am not surprised that trade creditors were so accommodating as as in a cyclical market like oil this they probably have a more sensible approach unlike the retail trade. It does however release another thread that leaked into the market and gives succour to shorters. I doubt it carries quite as much weight as in the retail trade because work on rigs/wells etc.normally bring immediate returns. I take the fact that credit was forthcoming and the analysts didn't zero in on the carry overs as being too onerous on the balance sheet etc...
It helps me understand that at the bottom of the cycle it was all hands to the pumps and we were doing the equivalent of going down the back of the sofa for spare cash. We have had a massive vote from these creditors and they would know more about the oil market than any analyst. I also accept that the creditors were also over a barrel to an extent. Whatever your view we are past this now and cash flow is growing.

Build it and they will come.

Hi Ben - those figures look wrong. It is never easy to get exact holdings and it's possible that different divisions of a financial company hold opposite views and positions. You often get the reply from directors that the holdings are reliant to the holders informing the company of their holding. If you look at (say) Morningstar or the FT you get conflicting numbers so I would suggest the most accurate are the holdings reported in the the Rights Issue prospectus September 2018.
They were:
Aberforth 105,292,001 8.88
Double A 103,141,033 8.70
Baillie Gifford 69,934,972 5.90
EnQuest $Employee Benefit Trust 51,628,456 4.35
Hargreaves Lansdown Asset management 51,375,063 4.33
Swedbank 48,204,048 4.06
Dimensional Fund Advisors 43,236,786 3.65 total 39.87%

As we are to all intents and purposes a US company it could be that they're waiting for the US to open is my best guess.

WEny - Good find. Talking to the organ grinder is always better than talking to the monkey. A controlled performance by a man in total control of his brief. Less is more. The antithesis of a David Lenigas. AB is a class act.

Should have posted EBITDA ratio. Point is that the ratio can be lowered whilst debt can remain largely unchanged. Another way of looking at debt.