Shell Share Discussion Threads

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 18:04

I wasn't going to say any more today at all.

I only changed my mind to correct some basic facts like Seplat operates onshore not offshore so thats not why it avoids theft, and that it's different mainly because it's indigenous.

[daveofdevon] 29/10/2015 17:32

This is getting so tedious, please give it a rest

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 17:19

Oh yes, that's right you didn't say it. Just implied it. Lol.

[fangorn2] 29/10/2015 17:00

You don't seem to understand the difference between saying Nigeria has corruption problem and saying a particular person or company is corrupt.

Where did I say the company was corrupt or that a particular individual was thieving?

You seem to have a problem comprehending anything I scribble. Is English not your first language?

You maybe try denying a person employment or promotion because they are from
Nigeria and then you'll perhaps start to grasp the difference.

Eh? what's the relevance of this?

FYI I would deny a person employment/promotion if he was from Nigeria IF he had been found to have stolen in the past and his guilt was beyond a reasonable doubt.

Which was exactly my stance when we first started this pointless dialogue - the proof(or facts) that theft is rife in Nigeria at all stages of the Oil extraction,storage,transport,export process!!!!

Therefore it is not irrational to assume that Oil companies operating in Nigeria are exposed to this.

Can you see the difference?

No of course not because you are not very bright. In fact you make Baldrick look positively intellectual.

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 16:51

You don't seem to understand the difference between saying Nigeria has corruption problem and saying a particular person or company is corrupt.

You maybe try denying a person employment or promotion because they are from Nigeria and then you'll perhaps start to grasp the difference.

[fangorn2] 29/10/2015 16:38

Whiskey,

What's the difference between investing in LekOil,Seplat,Afren,Mart and Shell - all in Nigeria!

"Of course Shell has operations in many countries so your risk is spread."

Oh there ya go.

Which was Pineapple's point I suspect. And mine.

"The allegations against Shell in Nigeria includes allegations that Shell propped up the dictatorship back in the 90s and that anti-Shell activists were executed on trumped up charges. I don't know how much is true, but this is part of Shell's reputation in Nigeria. This is why I say they had/have a theft problem when indigenous companies don't."

So why has Mart Resources had theft problem? What clandestine political machinations have they been involved in??


"I'm sure Nigeria is worse than most"

Well done, you've got it!!!!!

Now you're being prejudiced yourself!(according to your definition yesterday!)

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 15:59

You are kind of struggling if you want to invest in oil and want to avoid dodgy countries.

And if you are invested in Shell, you are invested in Nigeria.

Of course Shell has operations in many countries so your risk is spread. But you can achieve the same with a portfolio.

The allegations against Shell in Nigeria includes allegations that Shell propped up the dictatorship back in the 90s and that anti-Shell activists were executed on trumped up charges. I don't know how much is true, but this is part of Shell's reputation in Nigeria. This is why I say they had/have a theft problem when indigenous companies don't.


Just recently in supposedly stable Brazil, Petrobras (Shell's prospective partner if the BG deal completes) has been rocked by an epic government bribery scandal. It's destabilized Brazil's whole political system. It must be the most notorious oil bribery scandal of recent times.

So I'm sure Nigeria is worse than most, but not sure how much comfort that is. And maybe worth pointing out Kurdistan is very popular on advfn, but comes as high as Nigeria in corruption studies.

[diku] 29/10/2015 15:02

That right header chart not looking very good...

[fangorn2] 29/10/2015 12:51

Careful now Pineapple - you might be accused of prejudice! :)

So many countries around the world simply not worth investing in as they're nothin more than scams.

[pineapple1] 29/10/2015 11:08

Fangorn....i agree with you on Nigeria 100%. That along with any country ending in STAN you may as well just give your cash to somebody in the street to save all the anguish of investing it in companies who base their business solely around those areas. I don't care how good an oppotunity looks in Nigeria. They ain't getting a penny of my cash.
Keep getting emails from the legal advisor to the great Sani Abacha telling me i have £30,000,000 in a bank there he wants to get out of the country and split with me ....lol
imho

[losos] 29/10/2015 10:47

Damanko - Good summary, thanks. share price not dropped as much as I expected. I topped up around £18 but might add a few more now.
Fangorn2 - "Forewarned is forearmed" very apropriate IMO A long time ago I did two or three trips a year to Nigeria, up to six weeks each time. Nothing I saw then or have read about since has changed my views on the country or the people, I'll say no more LoL

[damanko] 29/10/2015 08:51

Moving along from theft of oil in Nigeria (whatever company is involved), a little like hoping that a sandstorm won't occur in the Sahara, or the Harmattan won't blow up and down West Africa, a summary of this morning's announcement:

"Royal Dutch Shell has reported a loss for the third quarter of the year, after taking a big charge to reflect the cost of halting major projects.

The oil company reported a loss of $6.1bn (£4bn) in the quarter, compared with a $5.3bn profit last year.

It has taken an $8.6bn charge to cover the cost of halting projects such as Alaskan drilling and the Carmon Creek oil sands project in Canada.

The charges also reflect its lower predictions for the oil and gas prices.

'Difficult decisions'

Shell announced last month that its was stopping Arctic oil and gas exploration off the coast of Alaska "for the foreseeable future" after "disappointing" results.




On Tuesday, Shell said it would not continue building its Carmon Creek thermal oil sands project in northern Alberta.

It blamed the decision on a lack of infrastructure to transport the oil and the need to manage costs given the low oil price.

Chief executive Ben van Beurden said these were "difficult, but impactful decisions".

"I am determined that Shell will become a more focused and competitive company as a result."

In April, Shell announced it had agreed to buy oil and gas exploration firm BG Group in a deal that values the business at £47bn.

Mr van Beurden said: "The BG deal, which remains on track for completion in early 2016, is a springboard to focus Shell into fewer and more profitable themes, especially deep water and integrated gas."

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 08:37

Price has fallen on oil price fall overnight, rather than results imo.

[quepassa] 29/10/2015 08:23

Very good results.

If any analyst adds back the one billion of fx adjustments, it's not a miss, it's a BEAT.

ALL IMO> DYOR.
QP

[whiskeyinthejar] 29/10/2015 08:11

Perhaps we shall have to agree to differ? You call it "forewarned" to judge someone as corrupt based on their origins, I call it prejudice.

Most of Seplat’s operations are not offshore. They are on shore. Again you leap to wrong conclusions.

Perhaps the main problem why Shell had difficulty with theft is many didn't see taking the oil as stealing. They think it's the foreign oil companies who are doing the stealing, taking their Nigerian oil. Local companies therefore fare better and Seplat work hard on community engagement.

Perhaps if Shell had formed local joint ventures it could have saved itself from some problems?

You'll get a better explanation from investors relations imo. I don't think their work on preventing theft is a secret.

[fangorn2] 28/10/2015 11:32

@Nobby,

Most of their operation is "Off Shore" apparently so slippery fingers of the locals cant get at it. :)

But an interesting question if they are subject to "No theft" whatsoever.

"To return to Seplat and its claims that it does not suffer from oil theft. Has the company or any other interested party offered any explanation why this should be the case."

Asking such a question makes you prejudiced though!(Apparently) :)

[nobbyx] 28/10/2015 11:26

To return to Seplat and its claims that it does not suffer from oil theft. Has the company or any other interested party offered any explanation why this should be the case.

What are Seplat doing differently (and successfully) from the other operators which are suffering serious losses through theft?

[fangorn2] 28/10/2015 10:51

Anyone wondering how large the Write OFFS are going to be at Shell this Thursday..

We've "Shell halts Carmon Creek oil sands project, to take $2bn charge"



Don't forget the $4bn odd for the Artic explo halt as well...

"Shell may post loss after taking £2.7bn Arctic exploration hit"



BP's figures surprisingly better than expected. Presumably Shell's refinery operations are running equally at full speed.

[zorija] 28/10/2015 09:29

careful
23 Oct'15 - 15:11 - 4331 of 4362 0 0

If the deal goes ahead.

We can buy bg. shares today at £10.57.
For that we get £3.83cash + .45 RDSB shares at £14.98p.(equiv)

I had some of that today, a punt on the going through.
could nor resist RDSB at £15.

looking for a min 20% here.

Hope that answers your question...

ZZZ

[stevenrevell] 28/10/2015 09:18

Can anyone help me I own 1000 BG shares can anyone tell me how many shell shares I will get if the deal goes through I'm new to this ta

[grupo guitarlumber] 28/10/2015 06:40

CALGARY, Alberta—Royal Dutch Shell PLC said Tuesday it would abandon the construction of a major oil-sands project in Western Canada and take a $2 billion write-down, a stark reflection of the challenging economics for unconventional oil projects amid a sharp slump in crude prices.

The energy giant said it would discontinue its 80,000 barrel-a-day Carmen Creek oil-sands project, citing an uncertain business environment and highlighting concerns about sufficient pipeline capacity to ship oil-sands crude to markets.

Several proposed pipeline projects connecting northern Alberta's oil sands to refiners in the U.S. and elsewhere have been delayed by regulatory issues, including the Keystone XL pipeline to the U.S. Gulf Coast.

"We are making changes to Shell's portfolio mix by reviewing our longer-term upstream options world-wide, and managing affordability and exposure in the current world of lower oil prices. This is forcing tough choices at Shell," Ben van Beurden, Royal Dutch Shell's chief executive, said in a statement.

Shell, which produces 250,000 barrels of oil a day from its oil-sands mines, first announced plans to go ahead with Carmen Creek in 2013, and it was expected to start up in 2017. Earlier this year, the company signaled problems with the cost and design of the facility when it pushed back the planned start date by two years to 2019.

Oil sands are some of the highest-cost producers of crude in the world, and have been hard hit by lower prices. They have also faced the prospect of difficulty accessing markets because of the lack of pipelines, and uncertainty about the prospect for tougher regulations on carbon dioxide emissions in Canada.

Most oil-sands projects cost billions of dollars and take years to develop, so companies have been reluctant to abandon sites already under construction or in operation. Instead, a number of future developments have been delayed pending a rebound in crude oil prices.

In January, Shell become the first major oil-sands producer to announce job cuts, saying it planned to trim 5% to 10% of its 3,000 workers in Western Canada.

The president of Shell Canada, Lorraine Mitchelmore, said last year that the company's oil-sands business needs Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, to trade above $70 a barrel to meet internal yardsticks for profitability. But prices for Brent have slumped in recent months and have traded below $50 a barrel.

Write to Chester Dawson at [e-mail]

[fangorn2] 27/10/2015 15:16

Whiskey,

WhiskeyInTheJar 26 Oct'15 - 22:20 - 4358 of 4359 0 0

It's actually slander to infer Seplat has problem with theft or corruption just because it happens elsewhere. You don't need to 'say it', inferring your lack of surprise is enough.

Do you realise that inferring something isn't actually slander. Even more so when what is being implied is backed up with evidence. You know, the "rampant theft" that Nigeria is subject to across the board...It is therefore reasonable for any rational individual to question whether theis company might also be experiencing similar.

Therefore it isn't slander to suggest that the company "might" also therefore be experiencing it - if I had of claimed the company was subject to it,and Seplat then provided evidence to the contrary, that would then be slander.There is a clear difference that onyl an idiotic would be unable to appreciate.

As I said, English is clearly not your first language as you haven't a clue what these words mean,despite throwing them our of your pram because someone disagrees with you.

[dukedosh] 26/10/2015 22:41

I've been trading in and out of SEPL almost since the initial offering. I am currently building a decent size position. Despite what I said, It's a totally different animal from Mart and far better run than Shell Nigeria.