Share tips thread
Discussion
gaz1234 said:
Thoughts on energy, mining and oil?
Nothing doing yet. Oil isn't going to rally in a hurry and even if it does, re-investment into the sector is going to be slow.
Commodities as a whole have been falling since Q3 2012 anyway. We are in the big deflation cycle as excess premium that was hurled into all commodities, especially those which they built ETFs for is unwinding combined with constant falling of genuine demand.
Lots of the major stocks are over leveraged and so will start to show cash strains and very many of the small stocks are essentially valueless as they were rubbish concessions and the market is closed for fund raising so once they have burned through their cash that's it. What we will soon start to see at the bottoms end is firms trying to use what's left of their equity to buy anything that has cash that'll keep them going a little longer.
Caterpillar warned this week and that pretty much says it all.
I think Barclays have published a note trying to call the floor on oil. Goldmans are due to do similar so some smart people are calling the bottom at sub $50. True value of oil is probably around $20 these days so plenty of room to go lower but even the Saudis are beginning to feel the squeeze. It has held this current level for a while and the equity markets have dislocated a little from the oil price so it does suggest that we will at least not be continuing the recent rate of falls anytime too soon.
But, even if this is the floor it doesn't mean that oil is going to rise back up anytime soon. You'll get a leap if OPEC announce they are cutting supply but they still want to set back the shale oil industry and the West still want to keep beating Russia to submission so we aren't going to see high prices for a while and during this period plenty of firms will be shutting down.
dom9 said:
DonkeyApple said:
True value of oil is probably around $20 these days...
Genuine question - Why do you say that?This gives an indication as to the real value of oil:
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=367&t...
Interestingly as almost all global consumption could be met by ME supply capabilities then there is an argument that true value is closer to £10.
Anyone who is in their 40s will have grown up with oil being under $15 for most of the time and as we have more oil reserves now than back then and supply that outstrips all demand you can begin to see just how much of a premium is running on oil.
Lots of earnings today Baba before the bell, stocks come off quite a bit from the ipo high, I think a good set of earnings and this one will fly.
Similarly Google after the bell, again been hammered recently I should think a beat and Google should have a monster move, haven't looked at what the options are indicating but Google was always a big mover on earnings before the split. If FB did ok yesterday and ad growth was up I should think Google will have good earnings too.
Amazon after the bell and no idea at all which way this one goes, except a miss and I think Amazon gets hammered big time. Hard to see that though they should have had a strong christmas.
Similarly Google after the bell, again been hammered recently I should think a beat and Google should have a monster move, haven't looked at what the options are indicating but Google was always a big mover on earnings before the split. If FB did ok yesterday and ad growth was up I should think Google will have good earnings too.
Amazon after the bell and no idea at all which way this one goes, except a miss and I think Amazon gets hammered big time. Hard to see that though they should have had a strong christmas.
DonkeyApple said:
Above I ment GBP rather than USD.
This gives an indication as to the real value of oil:
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=367&t...
Interestingly as almost all global consumption could be met by ME supply capabilities then there is an argument that true value is closer to £10.
Anyone who is in their 40s will have grown up with oil being under $15 for most of the time and as we have more oil reserves now than back then and supply that outstrips all demand you can begin to see just how much of a premium is running on oil.
I'd say a lot has changed since 2009 when those numbers were presented and some of the associated costs are a lot, lot higher.This gives an indication as to the real value of oil:
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=367&t...
Interestingly as almost all global consumption could be met by ME supply capabilities then there is an argument that true value is closer to £10.
Anyone who is in their 40s will have grown up with oil being under $15 for most of the time and as we have more oil reserves now than back then and supply that outstrips all demand you can begin to see just how much of a premium is running on oil.
However, it is true that 'older' fields in places like Saudi could supply the globe but do the Saudis want to sell all their oil in a (relatively) short space of time for a low price? Does everyone want to buy from the Saudis?
Even in the ME, if the upstream costs are $17 a barrel and then you need to add profit, transportation, broking/ trading spreads etc on...
I can't see the price dropping below $40 a barrel, based on how the industry has changed over the last 10yrs but that's just my opinion and I have been wrong before (despite this being part of my job) and with all of us cutting costs (reducing staff, discounting rates/ work etc), the upstream costs/ numbers will no doubt drop back from their crazy highs of the last couple of years to something more in line with those 2009 numbers to put more profit into oil for the operators with the falling price of oil.
In other words... who knows?
dom9 said:
I'd say a lot has changed since 2009 when those numbers were presented and some of the associated costs are a lot, lot higher.
However, it is true that 'older' fields in places like Saudi could supply the globe but do the Saudis want to sell all their oil in a (relatively) short space of time for a low price? Does everyone want to buy from the Saudis?
Even in the ME, if the upstream costs are $17 a barrel and then you need to add profit, transportation, broking/ trading spreads etc on...
I can't see the price dropping below $40 a barrel, based on how the industry has changed over the last 10yrs but that's just my opinion and I have been wrong before (despite this being part of my job) and with all of us cutting costs (reducing staff, discounting rates/ work etc), the upstream costs/ numbers will no doubt drop back from their crazy highs of the last couple of years to something more in line with those 2009 numbers to put more profit into oil for the operators with the falling price of oil.
In other words... who knows?
Indeed. It was just to show that the true value of oil is much, much lower than most ever think. However, it is true that 'older' fields in places like Saudi could supply the globe but do the Saudis want to sell all their oil in a (relatively) short space of time for a low price? Does everyone want to buy from the Saudis?
Even in the ME, if the upstream costs are $17 a barrel and then you need to add profit, transportation, broking/ trading spreads etc on...
I can't see the price dropping below $40 a barrel, based on how the industry has changed over the last 10yrs but that's just my opinion and I have been wrong before (despite this being part of my job) and with all of us cutting costs (reducing staff, discounting rates/ work etc), the upstream costs/ numbers will no doubt drop back from their crazy highs of the last couple of years to something more in line with those 2009 numbers to put more profit into oil for the operators with the falling price of oil.
In other words... who knows?
I don't think much has changed cost wise since 2009 that cannot be attributed to either profiteering, wastage or the mass printing of USD.
However, it's worth trying to contrast with the the period of 15 years from '84 to '99 when oil just ranged from $9 to $20.
Post 2000 new discoveries have dwarfed demand growth and today we have far more short, medium and long term supply than true demand can match over those time frames. So it shows what commoditisation and leverage combined with manipulated supply and artificial pricing floors from cartels can achieve!
It is amazing what invading major oil producers and applying sanctions to others as 'rogue states' has done for our perceptions of what the actual value of oil is. Oil is actually really cheap it's the cost of trying to politically control it that is so expensive.
gaz1234 said:
Qpp again then...
Dear god, no. It is utterly depressing the display of immense thickness displayed by punters on that one. It is a window into everything that is wrong with modern retail investing. I've not bothered looking at AIM since seeing first hand how corporate finance was done when AIM first launched. If the brokers weren't drunks they were criminals and nothing has really changed. It's a total monkey market run by illiterates, drunks, criminals, inbreds and charlatans.
Ultimately, it only exists to mug off retail investors as funders of last resort and the people who scurry around AIM as 'market specialists' are just about the worst creatures. It's depressing reading their absolute s
t and the whole QPP mess sums it all up. Anyway, some people may just think that I don't respect it as a market nor the abject scum that make a living from it.
DonkeyApple said:
gaz1234 said:
Qpp again then...
Dear god, no. It is utterly depressing the display of immense thickness displayed by punters on that one. It is a window into everything that is wrong with modern retail investing. I've not bothered looking at AIM since seeing first hand how corporate finance was done when AIM first launched. If the brokers weren't drunks they were criminals and nothing has really changed. It's a total monkey market run by illiterates, drunks, criminals, inbreds and charlatans.
Ultimately, it only exists to mug off retail investors as funders of last resort and the people who scurry around AIM as 'market specialists' are just about the worst creatures. It's depressing reading their absolute s
t and the whole QPP mess sums it all up. Anyway, some people may just think that I don't respect it as a market nor the abject scum that make a living from it.
I could not agree more.
DSLiverpool said:
Surely Stobarts and other hauliers are making more net profit with low oil - I see the shares are recovering.
Yup. That's the sort of play that once sentiment rebased to accept a lower oil price and selective trading comes into effect will be argued to benefit. The flip side however is the counter argument that oil is falling because industrial demand is declineing and so there are fewer things needing to be moved around. Even airlines have the counter that less oil demand means less business so less business travel etc.
The stock that should really benefit is something like Carnival. Their highest single cost is oil. But they have the added benefit that their typical customer is a pensioner who will be getting more spending power as their core costs of heating and transport are falling (with the added separate bonus of looming rate rises meaning they will start to get Income inflation on top).
walm said:
DonkeyApple said:
gaz1234 said:
Qpp again then...
Dear god, no. It is utterly depressing the display of immense thickness displayed by punters on that one. It is a window into everything that is wrong with modern retail investing. I've not bothered looking at AIM since seeing first hand how corporate finance was done when AIM first launched. If the brokers weren't drunks they were criminals and nothing has really changed. It's a total monkey market run by illiterates, drunks, criminals, inbreds and charlatans.
Ultimately, it only exists to mug off retail investors as funders of last resort and the people who scurry around AIM as 'market specialists' are just about the worst creatures. It's depressing reading their absolute s
t and the whole QPP mess sums it all up. Anyway, some people may just think that I don't respect it as a market nor the abject scum that make a living from it.
I could not agree more.
It's like a local authority swimming centre. At one end you have an Olympic sized pool, divided into lanes where strong swimmers can power away or sensible plodders can plod away and at the other end you have a smaller, shallow pool that is specifically for kids and retards and is surrounded by perverts and paedos looking bum rape anyone they can lay their hands on.
The only real differences are that the Local Authority makes an attempt to regulate what's goes on. Plus, when someone inevitably launches a floater everyone gets out, whereas as on AIM everyone rushes towards it and worships its greatness and passes it around.
trashbat said:
Do you have a view on whether anything will ever happen to AIM?
To be honest, I was hoping the Quindell balloon would come down in a giant fireball and force a shakeup, but it looks like it's going to slowly plod away with only the terminally stupid as the real endgame losers.
I've really no idea. Some of the first ever listings on AIM were total frauds and it's just continued in that vein ever since. It's the direct result of effectively placing the act of regulation in the hands of those who make the money. That aspect is totally insane. There is a good argument to be made that AIM is in effect totally unregulated as a result. To be honest, I was hoping the Quindell balloon would come down in a giant fireball and force a shakeup, but it looks like it's going to slowly plod away with only the terminally stupid as the real endgame losers.
All the frauds get quietly buried by the brokers, auditors and the FCA. The most insane element and the key as to why so many fraudsters operate scams repeatedly is the baffling phenomina that the retail investor who has been ripped off proceeds to deny any of it and instead of blaming the individual who suckered them they blame things like short sellers, foreigners or anything but the person who has abused them. There is probably an actual name for this as it seems to be the same mechanism that sees abused children absolving their abusers.
As you say, QPP was so big that you'd like to think that there was no option but for it to trigger the event that lead to AIM being properly regulated and known repeat fraudsters being banned but it does look like it is just going to follow the usual path of burying any dubious aspects, selling off some decent bits and all the while being fully protected by an army of investors who have lost a fortune.
Well, that's basically Stockholm Syndrome, mixed in with groupthink and a whole bunch of other psychological failings, like making emotional bonds with financial decisions. I could probably write a passable book on it by now.
It surprises me that the media is basically uninterested in a multi-billion pound fraud with its amazing history, never mind the broader systemic corruption. Only the FT gives it any real time, and most of that comes from one Alphaville writer.
Of late, the more I see of UK regulation - and not just AIM - the more I worry about it.
It surprises me that the media is basically uninterested in a multi-billion pound fraud with its amazing history, never mind the broader systemic corruption. Only the FT gives it any real time, and most of that comes from one Alphaville writer.
Of late, the more I see of UK regulation - and not just AIM - the more I worry about it.
Strongest sell signal out there... some moron blaming short sellers.
For some highly amusing tin-foil-hattery, I give you Dr Parick Byrne CEO of Overstock.com.
http://www.overstock.com/naked-short-selling.html
I was on the Q404 conference call when this happened...
Quoting a blog:
"a caller named Bob O'Brien hijacks the Q&A, with Dr. Bryne politely listening, and describes a massive conspiracy against Overstock and other small companies by short-sellers led, in this case by David Rocker of Rocker Partners. "I know this probably sounds a lot like the X-Files," Mr. O'Brien says, before launching into an X-Filian conspiracy theory that concludes that these companies "have been gang raped by mountain men... ""
Not the usual kind of commentary from the earnings results call of a $1.5bn mkt cap company.
The stock subsequently tanked from $60 to $20 but you know - that was all a conspiracy.
For some highly amusing tin-foil-hattery, I give you Dr Parick Byrne CEO of Overstock.com.
http://www.overstock.com/naked-short-selling.html
I was on the Q404 conference call when this happened...
Quoting a blog:
"a caller named Bob O'Brien hijacks the Q&A, with Dr. Bryne politely listening, and describes a massive conspiracy against Overstock and other small companies by short-sellers led, in this case by David Rocker of Rocker Partners. "I know this probably sounds a lot like the X-Files," Mr. O'Brien says, before launching into an X-Filian conspiracy theory that concludes that these companies "have been gang raped by mountain men... ""
Not the usual kind of commentary from the earnings results call of a $1.5bn mkt cap company.
The stock subsequently tanked from $60 to $20 but you know - that was all a conspiracy.
trashbat said:
It surprises me that the media is basically uninterested in a multi-billion pound fraud with its amazing history.
100% agree.Terry should be in jail.
If someone had mugged thousands of people out of literally millions there would be an outcry.
But somehow lying to your investors is perfectly legitimate.
I can't remember if I've posted it here before, but the Fiat (+70% overall, whoop!) AGM has a similar nutjob, who owns exactly one share.
It's the typist I feel sorry for.
AGM minutes said:
Marco Geremia Carlo BAVA (shareholder) said that he was speaking both on his own behalf and that of shareholder Pier Luigi ZOLA, who gave him a proxy, since he solicited proxies also in the name of an association being established for a new development model and he invited others to join either directly during the meeting or through the sites www.marcobava.it,www.marcobava.eu and www.omicidioedoardoagnelli.net;
he asked the chairman to open the tomb of Edoardo AGNELLI given that it had been requested but denied;
...
he stated that the attachments to the prospectus also contain the acquittal of the shareholder himself in the lawsuit filed by Sergio MARCHIONNE for having called him a reckless and arrogant illusionist and for saying that FIAT security was responsible for the death of Edoardo AGNELLI
...
he is of the opinion that the agreement between FIAT and CHRYSLER will help Barack OBAMA develop TESLA and, when it has grown, it will buy CHRYSLER and the FIAT brand will be given as a dowry to TESLA for the Italo-Brazilian market; he noted that this would never have happened to Gianni AGNELLI
...
With the time available to him having expired, the shareholder Marco Geremia Carlo BAVA continued to talk with the microphone switched off
Plenty more - search this for 'Bava': http://www.fcagroup.com/en-US/investor_relations/s...he asked the chairman to open the tomb of Edoardo AGNELLI given that it had been requested but denied;
...
he stated that the attachments to the prospectus also contain the acquittal of the shareholder himself in the lawsuit filed by Sergio MARCHIONNE for having called him a reckless and arrogant illusionist and for saying that FIAT security was responsible for the death of Edoardo AGNELLI
...
he is of the opinion that the agreement between FIAT and CHRYSLER will help Barack OBAMA develop TESLA and, when it has grown, it will buy CHRYSLER and the FIAT brand will be given as a dowry to TESLA for the Italo-Brazilian market; he noted that this would never have happened to Gianni AGNELLI
...
With the time available to him having expired, the shareholder Marco Geremia Carlo BAVA continued to talk with the microphone switched off
It's the typist I feel sorry for.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff