Member Info for romaron

He lives in another world. I wonder how much backing he'll get from the rest of the cabinet when Labour are ensconced?

Words are cheap and who'll remember them 6 months from now.

There is so much hysterical posturing and hyperbole that (thankfully) is reducing just in time for Labour to distance themselves from it. At the bottom of the piece there is a comment from Uplift and a legal challenge made last year regarding new licenses pushing us past hypothetical limits set by diktak and flimsy pseudo-science. I don’t consider Greta Thunberg or Al Gore scientists. Opportunists and fame hunters is a better description and useful figureheads for ideologs and professional protestors.

On Friday they again took the government to court and are claiming a “win” although the media have almost all ignored it. https://www.clientearth.org/latest/news/we-re-taking-the-uk-government-over-its-net-zero-strategy/

It looks good at first sight and will help keep the donations coming in but it really is more of a technical win and the government (and Labour) will ignore it. These pressure groups are losing relevance and this will just waste money on rebuffing their demands. Government is sovereign and if a bad law is being used they can change it. The majority of the public are unaware of it anyway. Labour won’t want to be hamstrung by the highest energy prices in Europe and/or forego O&G revenue. They [Client Earth] are using the High Court selectively. When protestors break the law that is OK but the government and the O&G industry are held to higher and in this case, impossible, standards. I’ll quote this piece because from the article because it is just ludicrous. Accusing the government of not knowing the future:

“The government was also relying heavily on unproven technologies, whilst overlooking viable current solutions that would have immediate impact, including solutions recommended by the CCC.”

So the government relies on unproven technology but isn’t that exactly what the likes of Tessa Khan and Ed Miliband have been espousing for years? The 9X cheaper and total misrepresentation of the costs and subsidies given to renewables are also full of impossible promises (tidal and geo-thermal are even dearer than hydrogen) and won’t be economic before 2050. No chance.

I even think they may have shot themselves in the foot “The High Court has now told the UK government not once, but twice, that its climate strategy is not fit-for-purpose, and is therefore unlawful.”

I agree – it is totally unfit for purpose if Poverty and Energy Security are to be addressed.

Yeah, I'm gonna miss juststopoil and Greta. It's all part of growing up. Perhaps they've been taken off the puberty blockers?

Late thought. Could 'World Peace' be at risk of being relegated?

UN's 17 Development Goals - Need updating:

1. No Poverty

2. No Hunger

.

7. Affordable Green Energy

.

13. Climate Action

I suppose it depends if you live in Burundi or Barnet. I thought Climate Action was No.1?

*World Peace is No.16

There is the point that Ed is effectively siloed and "X" is dipped into from time to time but not a main source for propaganda. Ed is being carefully curated and kept away from where he might do serious damage. Maybe, just maybe, there is a body of people in Labour more interested in helping currently living people than preventing POSSIBLE future harm from climate change. Then there is the subsidy pot - how will they top that up?

*I accept climate change. Somedays its sunny and on others cloudy. Same with temperature. From my records it started 75 years ago. My grandad said it started earlier.

The Shell CEO said yesterday that it "has no plans to list in New York, preferring to focus on its share buyback scheme to increase value" shows that he is playing a longer game. They have established the political point that Shell can be replanted in New York and that would be a tectonic shock to the UK stock market. He has also ignored the chatter. Yes, O&G companies are valued more highly in the US but why not hoover up cheap shares here instead and then possibly move? There are other lines of communication between Shell and the future Labour government. They don't have to bend over and kowtow to a hostile UK government. Both sides know this. In fact the EPL was merely a pinprick to Shell and BP.

Https://twitter.com/Ed_Miliband/status/1785987704217288756

I'm sure Rachel Reeves appreciates Ed's intervention. The guy is clueless. As most people go for bias confirmation (guilty) I'm thinking they tolerate his antics because they do appeal to a section of voters who will not change whatever the facts and the majority of Labour supporters don't follow him are pretty much unaware or uninterested in what he is spouting. Ed is useful only for this. He has a noisy and shouty base of ideologically driven supporters who also have votes.

Once in power their support is not needed. In fact it could become a problem and the Tory opposition will start by attacking Labour’s weaknesses. A simple tactic would be to move Ed from the cabinet. I don’t know if Keir is ruthless enough to do this but I’m sure Rachel is. She has support from the Labour right (Liz Kendall, Wes Streeting, Shabana Mahmood etc. with the guiding hand of Morgan McSweeney)

I’m not hearing the same level of outrage and daft statements from the grown-ups in Labour. Ed is looking isolated. They all support the party-line and why not as it looks like as long as they do nothing they’ll be in power before long.

*I'm sure Shell will explain global economics to Rachel. Ed has never understood them.

Good point M - however there is definite change in narrative and we are much more oil and UK based than HBR whilst ITH are Israeli owned which might make investors nervous. If we get the deal we want, which is the Bressay green light, then the price will rocket as the ingredient that has been missing will have returned. That ingredient is GROWTH. The same stuff that fuelled Tesla and tech stocks. As in everything timing is crucial. I am more positive than ever and happy to wait until the AGM which is only 20 working days away (deal makers work weekends and all hours). We have a good base for a steady rise anyway.

*Looks like your politicians don't fully trust the French: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/05/02/belgium-demands-probe-into-massive-french-power-export-curbs/#more-73125

It did cross my mind. Always gossip about but the buyback is pretty run-of-the-mill for ML. Just give the order to the trading desk to buy up to $15mio within a certain period.

ML isn't a name that jumps at me in O&G but then what do I know? It makes sense to distance it from other stuff that may be going on.

If a deal of consequence is going on then it will be bunkered. It'll have a code name and a short list of people with full knowledge. It is possible that Craig Baxter is unaware but he isn't deaf or blind. Sometimes it is better not to know as you cannot then be accused of leaking or damaging a deal. Within banks there are always people sniffing but jobs are at risk and consequences if you break confidences or an NDA.

At Citibank leakage was their own sales desk who always wanted to know the dealer's interests and would blab to their clients.

KO - ML won't want to be too predictable. If they buy every day then algos will skim even more from their thin margins if more or less guaranteed. I think we're probably stuck in a backwater on volume trading. I'm treating the buyback as a cheap sop to the PI's. Nice to have but not changing much. Even more so when a percentage was needed for options anyway. I doubt very much that this buyback will enhance ML's bonuses. It does strengthen our stock but this isn't what will move the needle. A deal will.

Https://twitter.com/BeegJj/status/1784980243247190452/photo/1

Canada is exporting AWB oil to India. AWB is a type of heavy and highly acidic diluted bitumen.

None of our business really but the climate activists should surely blockade the Indian High Commission - well within slow marching distance. On the other hand it's very promising for the oil in Bressay and Bentley.

Thanks for that Sekforde as I have no intention of diving into the rule book. You did answer my question before I asked it though. FX is largely traded electronically nowadays but there is nothing to stop banks from dealing direct with each other. This is all moot if ML is competing with another buyer who is prepared to pay a fraction more than ML or what if there is a large seller who sees this as an opportunity? I'd ring ML traders. Does this have to be recorded? The shenanigans with Premier show how loosely policed this area is.

There is always a different price to the market which is why I wouldn't get bogged down in trying to decipher the announcement. In EnQuest terms $15mio is a sizeable sum.

Just as long as they aren't trying to butter us up and announce a share in a rights issue for a new deal. A lot of deals like a small portion to be taken up by equity holders.

I'm sure AB has faced stronger pressures in the past and our bonds did reach PFC levels at one stage. I have a sneaky feeling that this buyback is just a sop to mask what is happening on the deal front.

From Energy Voice. It seems that the SNP exaggerated the number of 'Green jobs' they promised with their freeports. No surprises there but weren't the media following Labour around the country recently taking pictures of Keir, Ed and Rachel in Hi-Viz jackets and helmets at ports around the country?

Is this how a pack of cards collapses?

“With the Malaysian production sharing agreement called out as one for sale, it seems to be the more volatile parts of the business that are up for grabs first.”

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/552529/petrofac-asset-sale-on-the-cards-over-debt-challenges/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Energy%20Voice%20Daily%20Newsletter%20A%202024-04-30&utm_term=Energy%20Voice%20-%20Newsletter

AB founded Petrofac Resources in 1998 and EnQuest was partly formed by PFC spin out in 2010. I imagine he knows what is going on there better than most.

It was aimed at those who think we have to accept the pseudo-science, increased costs and the brain-washed cultists who struggle to decide between puberty blockers and throwing soup at paintings.

The latter group are thinning out as there is always a new crusade around the corner. They could join others stealing from supermarkets and putting the loot in food bank hoppers which is the latest 'protest'. They haven't asked me if I'm prepared to subsidise their 'robin-hood' thievery with higher bills. They never do. They think they have the right to think for me; they don't.

*I have a sister-in-law who works at Morrison's Loughton. They used to allow people to skip dive their out of date food. They stopped because of the traffic jams it caused. The worst offenders were the Mercedes and BMW drivers.

Mr. Angry

Is gone. He accepted 2030 was impossible. The Scottish Greens still believe in it. So does the Pope. He's a believer along with Chris Packham, Greta Thunberg and Jeremy Hunt.

Has Ed joined the Trappists?

Https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/547888/increasing-comparisons-be-drawn-1980s-miner-strikes-and-epl-job-losses/

This was an article dated 16/02/2024 "Unions liken EPL job loss impact to 1980s miners’ strikes"

They presciently used a picture of striking Unite members outside Petrofac's Aberdeen office last year. I'm sure the strike didn't help PFC but neither did EPL. Unusually the Union attacked Labour and its plans to fiscally attack the O&G industry.

Today PFC announced there Accounts will be late. It almost certainly means a wipe out of equity holders. Their 15/11/2026 9.75 Bond is priced at 22. The YTM is c.99%. They lose money too.

This together with the damage done to the Scottish economy by their ideological, financially illiterate politicians deserves to be plastered across all media. PFC were drowning so the politicians threw them an anvil.

*I had PFC on a watch list. If it wasn't for EPL I'd be holding them. I really do have sympathy for their shareholders. This country needs companies in the industrial sector.

Hi Dumbly - I'm probably more naive than you. Things I can't change I normally accept. I made (and I may be wrong) an assumption that somewhere in the several hundred pages of an ARA there is a commitment to grant shares to employees as part of their remuneration/incentives. I read this as a positive in that you can't NOT give shares to the employees and these were heading in that direction anyway - that is unless theses are over and above the usual entitlement which will also be buried somewhere in the ARA. I would rather chew my right arm off than search the ARA. It may even be that they thought we would welcome this efficient use of a buyback? I'll stop now as I'm completely out of my depth.

Summer is coming.

I like that shares are earmarked for the EBT. You need employees with you. I'm not sure if Directors also get shares allotted from EBT or it is separate. There is a certain opaqueness but if it is needed to put the 'master plan' jigsaw together I won't complain. It reads to me that there is flexibility being built in.

Shares are always being gifted and options granted. I prefer the openness (as far as it goes) of this RNS. I read it as preparing for a major change in the company and removing barriers and building incentives in at this stage.

If you don't like it you can bring it up at the AGM but I doubt it'll make any difference. I read it as accepting the company is gonna be here years from now in one form or another. Or better still - load up the EBT for a deal.

We are using Merrill Lynch for the buyback for 2 months. We might not use up all the $15mio in 2 months. The end date of 30 June refers to ML not the buyback as I read it.

I think there is other stuff going on and this is a distraction.