SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TobagoJack who wrote (63890)5/16/2005 4:52:16 AM
From: elmatador  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 74559
 
ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans for a combined air and ground attack on targets in Iran if diplomacy fails to halt the Iranian nuclear programme.

Israel plans strike on Iranian nuclear plant
Posted: 05/16
From: The Times

mathaba.net

by Uzi Mahnaimi

ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans for a combined air and ground attack on targets in Iran if diplomacy fails to halt the Iranian nuclear programme.

The inner cabinet of Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister, gave “initial authorisation” for an attack at a private meeting last month on his ranch in the Negev desert.

Israeli forces have used a mock-up of Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment plant in the desert to practise destroying it. Their tactics include raids by Israel’s elite Shaldag (Kingfisher) commando unit and airstrikes by F-15 jets from 69 Squadron, using bunker-busting bombs to penetrate underground facilities.

The plans have been discussed with American officials who are said to have indicated provisionally that they would not stand in Israel’s way if all international efforts to halt Iranian nuclear projects failed.

Tehran claims that its programme is designed for peaceful purposes but Israeli and American intelligence officials — who have met to share information in recent weeks — are convinced that it is intended to produce nuclear weapons.

The Israeli government responded cautiously yesterday to an announcement by Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, that America would support Britain, France and Germany in offering economic incentives for Tehran to abandon its programme.

In return, the European countries promised to back Washington in referring Iran to the United Nations security council if the latest round of talks fails to secure agreement.

Silvan Shalom, the Israeli foreign minister, said he believed that diplomacy was the only way to deal with the issue. But he warned: “The idea that this tyranny of Iran will hold a nuclear bomb is a nightmare, not only for us but for the whole world.”

Dick Cheney, the American vice-president, emphasised on Friday that Iran would face “stronger action” if it failed to respond. But yesterday Iran rejected the initiative, which provides for entry to the World Trade Organisation and a supply of spare parts for airliners if it co-operates.

“No pressure, bribe or threat can make Iran give up its legitimate right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes,” said an Iranian spokesman.

US officials warned last week that a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities by Israeli or American forces had not been ruled out should the issue become deadlocked at the United Nations.

Additional reporting: Tony Allen-Mills, Washington

Natanz
images.google.com



To: TobagoJack who wrote (63890)5/16/2005 4:53:22 AM
From: energyplay  Respond to of 74559
 
COnsidering buying major integrated oil companies and want to evaluate risks - sounds like a long term buy & hold.

Elroy Jetson, Big Dog and some others on the Boom Boom Room thread could give good answers to this.

Kurt Wulff's accouting based assesment would also be useful

**********

A few notes :

I would look for diversity, buying at least 5 different companies.

Top tier -
The largest companies, Top 4, made from the Seven Sisters, are heavily Anglo Saxon, with some Dutch interest in in RD.
XOM, BP, RD, Chevron-Texaco.

Problem these companies have is replacing their oil. XOM did, RD didn't

These guys are so big as to be _almost_ unsinkable. They have lots of clout with governments all over the world.

Since they have the distribution systems and assets - tankers, storage, gas sttions, pipelines, refineries, etc. - they can make money if the price of crude oil is up or down.

Lots of diversity in assets also means they are in every trouble spot - all 4 are in Nigeria, for example.

They have a depth of experience - If you have drilled ultra deep Gulf of Mexico (all 4), and the North Sea (3 of 4), moderate depth drilling off West Africa is a walk in the park.

More good news - since they have seen Many more geological configurations than their competitors, the can find the best spots worldwide, including spots that the 'local' miss.

They often have special knownledge which they don't share for free - which is why you will see national governments willing to partner with them

The bad news is they are a bit pricey. See Kurt Wulff's take on this.

*****************

Second tier integrated majors, non US
There is another tier which are still very large and capable, but have different origins.
Total Elf (French), Repsol-YPF (Spain, Argentina), ENI (Itay)
These have operations in many countries.
They have some experience with geology and operation in different locations.

With these you can get some currency diversity, geological spread, and they are associated with different economies, so they may have lower stock prices / higher payouts.

Often, their national governments will help them if needed.

*******
There is a group of mostly North America based Second tier companies - Connoco-Philips, Amerada Hess, Unocal (soon to be bought)Encana, PetroCanada, Kerr-McGee, Occidental, Devon, etc.
Most of these have emphasized growth over dividends. Some have issues like Occidental (CEO compensation, guerilla attacks) or resources which are high cost and need high oil prices, like Cononnoco-Phillips with heavy Alaska and North Sea properties, both with sky - high costs and some depletion.

Recent pricing for these companies may have been based on the assumption of takeovers and mergers, so the stocks could be over priced.

I would avoid most of this group for now. If we get much lower oil prices, it would be time to revisit.

*********

There are developing country oil companies, Petro China, CNOOC, Petro Brasil, etc.

These tend to be very heavily based in one country.
So they depend on one economy, one currency, and one area's resources, with maybe a few overseas developments.
Their experience tends to be concentrated with the geology of one region.

These companies have smaller shareholder bases, and will rise and fall with fashion (Buffet buys into PetroChina)

If the prices come down, could be worth while for a small peice of the portfolio.

***************************************8

For a conservative portfolio -

first slice :about 35-50% in top 4

I would put 80% of this slice into XOM and BP.

Chevron is betting on Central Asia, which could blow up.
Shell has reserve replacement and management issues, and lots of Nigeria interests.

BP has a lot of assets in North America, having bought Ammoco and later ARCO. XOM and BP look somewhat similar in terms of which countires they are in now.

Beyond this, all of the top 4 are close to being everywhere, often partenerd in the same projects, and their exposure to country and political risk is similar.

second slice : about 25-35 % in the non-US second tier majors.
Get at least 3 different names.

Third slice : 0-10% in either Country based and/or North Amrican second tier.

I would be willing to sit on cash for a few months to see if a lower price would be availible.

The remainder : There are some closed end funds for oil and gas which often sell at a discount -
PEO Petroluem and Resources is one.
There are one or two decent mutual funds. FSTEX is one I have used in the past.

***********

Notice no Russia.
Also, no oil sands - they need sustained high prices.

There is some degree of currency and national origin diversity, but mainly buying size, experience, clout, expertise.

************
If suitable (and prices come down) a slice of energy royalty trusts may fit well....



To: TobagoJack who wrote (63890)5/16/2005 5:17:10 AM
From: energyplay  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 74559
 
Hi Jay - Re: Major oil companies for stable income -
Note thar all four - XOM, BP, RD, CVX - have been in a strong down trend since about March 6-9, 2005.

Safety is affect by a numeber of factors, not just the countries where they get oil. Having expetise and distribution provides leverage to negotiate with host countries.

Being associated with the major warlike Anglo Saxon nations also provides options.....

If ENI, an Italian company gets their oil fields in Ecuador grabbed, what can they do ? Get a settlement for the international court eventually ? The US and to some degree the UK could increase th echances of the government being replaced.
Or apply presure indirectly by taking pressure of the Columbian rebels in the south of Columbia, near Ecuador.

Having refining and distribution means they can make money even if the world price of oil drops. When oil prices were really low, the money made from the food stores attached to the gas stations was a large fraction of profits.

When gasoline prices are low, J6P can buy more beer, and XOM, BP, RD, and CVX will be happy to sell it to him. Also bottled water.

******************

The down trend is there, so waitng may pay off....