Sector Petróleo

Hola:

Abro este post por si alguno queréis hacer alguna aportación sobre este sector, en particular sobre las (creo) cuatro grandes: BP, Shell, Exxon y Chevron. Personalmente tengo pensado en el futuro meterme a analizarlas ya que no las he mirado, pero creo que sería interesante que los que las lleváis o las tenéis analizadas deis vuestro punto de vista sobre ventajas de unas u otras, valoración actual, sector en sí, etc. A mi personalmente me resulta complicado hacer valoraciones sobre las petroleras.

Un saludo

1 me gusta

A mi este sector me da mucho miedo, aunque sé que no debería.

En mi mente tengo la idea de que es un sector que al final va a caer y me asusta el pensar que puedo meter mi dinero ahí para que en dos días salga un mindundi por la tele diciendo que ha inventado una batería con medio calabacin y cascaras de pipa que te da energía para medio mes, se recarga en medio minuto y se puede fabricar en 2 días para todo el mundo. Miedos infundados, como ves.

Aun así, tengo ganas de saber lo que opina la gente, como dice Espoo.

Yo creo que hay tres argumentos contra la posible debilidad futura del sector:

  1. El petróleo es mucho más que energía. Hay muchos productos y materiales basados en el petróleo.
  2. Las grandes petroleras tienen muchos recursos para ir cambiando su modelo de negocio hacia otras áreas.
  3. Independientemente de la realidad objetiva, está la realidad económica. Y hay muchos intereses económicos para que el petróleo siga. Los de las grandes petroleras sin ir más lejos :slight_smile:

Luis.

Si saliera ese “Mindundi” como le llamas y entre Shell Exxon Chevron Bp Total Eni Statoi Repsol etc
le compraran su patente por 200-300-500-1000 millones de dolares… para desarrollarlas entre todos dentro de 50 años o cuando no quede petroleo…?

A mi este sector me da mucho miedo, aunque sé que no debería.

En mi mente tengo la idea de que es un sector que al final va a caer y me asusta el pensar que puedo meter mi dinero ahí para que en dos días salga un mindundi por la tele diciendo que ha inventado una batería con medio calabacin y cascaras de pipa que te da energía para medio mes, se recarga en medio minuto y se puede fabricar en 2 días para todo el mundo. Miedos infundados, como ves.

Aun así, tengo ganas de saber lo que opina la gente, como dice Espoo.

Mi participación en el sector se reduce a una pequeñísima posición en Repsol. Los miedos que planteas me parecen muy lógicos. Yo lo que pienso es que si tú y yo nos planteamos esas cuestiones, en empresas como Repsol donde hay profesionales muy cualificados también se lo habrán planteado. No sé si me paso de iluso…

Actualmente tengo 4 empresas que se dedican a esto en mi cartera: BP, RDS, BHP y Repsol. De todas ellas, la que menos me gusta es Repsol y es la que voy a rotar cuando pueda a otros sectores. Y si sube un poco más va a ser muy rápido.

Creo que hay negocio para años, en Occidente el consumo de petroleo ha bajado en los últimos años y más que va a bajar pero en otros países va a subir. Creo que no debemos confundir la visión Europea con lo que pasa en el mundo.
A lo mejor de aquí 100 años no se usa el petroleo pero creo que las grandes petroleras sabrán adaptarse a otros negocios y aún quedan años. Espero no estar equivocado porque tengo una posición importante en el sector.

A precios actuales, para mí las mejores son RDS y BP. Son las que tienen más deudas pero cotizan a mejores precios que las americanas. Las 2 deberían cubrir gastos (incluyendo dividendos) con el barril a 55 USD que hace sus altos dividendos más sostenibles.

BP se va a gastar en total 60 billions en el desastre del golfo de México pero eso la hizo ser más eficiente que las otras en un entorno de precios altos así que lo que fue una ruina para la empresa la ayudó a recortar costes antes. RDS compro BG a precios muy altos también así que las 2 están sufriendo por cosas distintas. RDS tampoco tuvo retornos brillantes en la época del boom de petroleo…

My 2 cents.

Pienso como Xaps.

Yo me cansé de Bhp y Kmi, en las que entré en mal momento y las roté por BP y RDSB que he ido aumentando de rdsb posiciones.
También llevo Chevron que hizo una vuelta en V para subir más alto.

Y en tema de pipelies de gas gnl etc llevo Oneok Enterprise Product Partners (EPD) media posición; y un Reit atípico high yield : Correnegy. Por suerte estas tres últimas ya se dieron la Vuelta totalmente, de forma espectacular Oneok.
Me equivoqué al vender Spectra Energy por “miedo”, cuando todos los recortes de dividendos.

Tambien llevo Repsol.

Las predicciones son una locura:
De repente dicen que el Gas Natural Licuado se va a comer el mundo…
Ultimamente dicen que no… ¿?
Que el petroleo no…
Que va a ser lo Electrico.
Y las electricas esta bajando (ibe gas ena ree eon enel…¿?)

Las renovables que Si, que No, que son caras, que el coche de Tesla, que las renovables no porque al estar el petroleo barato, que si no las subvencionan…
que si el petroleo se usa para muchos otros fines…

Pero es que es igual en todos los sectores: bebidas azucar tabaco automoción concesionarias de autovia alimentación telecos bancos educación retail monopolios (ree enagas) mercados regulados transporte y drones … dónde no hay dudas?

Espectacular la acumulación de largos en el petróleo a nuevo récord histórico

Completamente de acuerdo, en todos los sectores hay dudas o en muchos de ellos. Si alguien conoce algún sector o empresa sin dudas y con una buena valoración, le agradecería que la comente y nos la miramos con cariño a ver si entramos :slight_smile:

Un saludo a todos.

6 Me gusta

https://elperiodicodelaenergia.com/las-grandes-petroleras-rompen-con-paris-tras-invertir-50-000-millones-de-dolares-desde-2018-en-nuevos-proyectos-de-petroleo-y-gas/

También afecta a las otras petroleras, pero parece que Exxon es la que más incumple invirtiendo en nuevos proyectos

2 Me gusta

https://www.elmundo.es/internacional/2019/09/14/5d7c8b0221efa0ca778b4626.html

"Ataque al corazón del crudo saudí"

Un atentado con drones de los hutíes paraliza la mitad de la producción nacional de Riad

Saludos.

3 Me gusta

Pues… que sí, que son inversiones y por y para los accionistas, pero la parte medioambiental y que tenemos que tener planeta para gastar los beneficios de esa inversiones lo veo incluso más necesario.

3 Me gusta

Hoy puede darle la risa floja a más de uno … a estas horas el Brent +10% arriba y el Light +9% arriba.

Un saludo.

7 Me gusta

Pues por ejemplo a gobiernos que hacen proyecciones en sus presupuestos (los hay que ni los tienen) con precios que vete tu a saber de donde los sacan.
Menos mal que tendran innumerables reservas…jaja
S2

2 Me gusta

What the Saudi Oil Attack Means for Energy Stocks

10:00 AM ET 9/17/19 | MORNINGSTAR

After an attack on Sept. 14, Saudi Arabia has lost about 5.7 million barrels per day of oil production capacity. This is more than half of its capacity and about 6% of world capacity. Two major oil facilities–Abqaiq, an oil processing complex with a capacity of 7 mmb/d, and processing trains with a capacity of 1.2 mmb/d in the Khurais field–have been damaged. Houthi rebels have claimed responsibility for the drone strikes. But the United States–specifically the secretary of state, among others–has cast doubt on that and says the attacks were directly from Iran. The Saudis have been predictably optimistic about being able to partially restore production within days. However, a more realistic scenario is weeks and potentially months, given the complexity of the equipment and testing required, the release of U.S. satellite imagery showing extensive damage, and the lack of even a preliminary assessment of the damage from the Saudis. The potential impact of the attack hinges on how quickly operations can be fully restored, and on whether the kingdom or its allies–including the U.S.–choose to retaliate.

Saudi inventories are not officially reported, but the Joint Organisations Data Initiative estimates the kingdom has 188 mmb held in reserve, which means it can theoretically maintain domestic consumption and exports at the prior level for about 37 days before shortages take hold. So if capacity is restored within that time frame, the availability of supply should not be threatened and the maximum impact on annual supply would be capped at roughly 0.5 mmb/d. The implied drain on global inventories translates to roughly two days of forward supply, or 4% of the current OECD stockpile. In that scenario, we would expect prices to slightly exceed what’s in our current valuation models for one to two years, but our long-term outlook would not change as the West Texas Intermediate threshold to encourage the appropriate level of U.S. shale activity would still be $55 a barrel. As a result, our fair value estimates would not dramatically increase for most of our energy coverage. The degree of any change would depend on a company’s financial and operating leverage.

However, there are reasons to be more pessimistic. For starters, there could be a quality mismatch, with a shortage of lighter grades. Reuters reported that buyers of Saudi crude are already being asked to take Arab heavy instead of Arab light. And according to CBS News, citing the Center for Strategic International Studies, a Washington think tank, the satellite imagery released by the U.S. government shows that the Abqaiq damage limits Saudi Arabia’s ability to process high-sulfur crude into more desirable sweet crude. This could have profound ramifications, given that the IMO 2020 regulations preventing global maritime operators from using high-sulfur fuel take effect in January 2020.

If the capacity of the facility cannot be restored before Saudi inventories are exhausted, we can expect persistent worldwide shortages. There is very little spare capacity for crude production globally, which means that a reduction in Saudi exports cannot be easily replaced. Among OPEC producers, only Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela are operating below capacity. The Abqaiq outage certainly prevents Saudi Arabia from responding in this case, and the latter pair have limited access to international markets anyway due to U.S. sanctions. Iran has the technical ability to ramp its exports quickly, but as the likely instigator of the Abqaiq attacks, according to U.S. officials, there is no chance that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia will allow it to be the primary beneficiary by easing sanctions. A rapid turnaround in Venezuela is impossible, given that output there has collapsed in the last few years as a result of chronic mismanagement of the oil industry coupled with the wider economic malaise.

The U.S. does have the ability to eventually increase production to a degree, if producers–primarily shale companies–expect sustainably higher crude prices that would justify reversing the 15% decline in drilling activity that we have observed since the beginning of 2019. However, even though shale volumes are considered short-cycle supply, there are still large lags between pricing shifts, changes in activity levels in the field, and any associated production response. Therefore, it would take at least 6-12 months for shale producers to start compensating for global shortages, and even with a large increase in drilling activity, we would expect output to increase only by 1-2 mmb/d at the most–much less than what Saudi Arabia has taken offline after this attack.

Instead, for a quick reaction the U.S. could choose to tap its Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which contains 645 mmb and could be released into the marketplace within two weeks. That could offset the current Saudi shortage for up to 113 days, theoretically. But there is a huge catch: The U.S. ability to export crude is already close to full utilization, following the rapid expansion of the shale industry in the last few years. Therefore, the U.S. could use the SPR to offset the 630 mb/d of current Arab light imports from Saudi Arabia, but that would only account for 11% of the capacity loss at Abqaiq. Any attempt to further stabilize the market with U.S. reserves would probably just create a domestic surplus while leaving the rest of the world undersupplied, merely widening spreads between domestic and international benchmarks.

As the rest of the world cannot fully compensate for a supply shortage of this magnitude, it is vital for Saudi Arabia to restore production volumes quickly to avoid a significant global oil shock. Early commentary and media speculation suggest that this is possible, but satellite imagery reveals extensive damage and it is not unrealistic to expect full repairs to drag on for months. Saudi inventories could provide some insulation initially, and its exports to U.S. and Europe could be redirected elsewhere as storage levels in those regions are currently substantial. But global inventories cannot mitigate the impact of a 5 mmb/d loss of supply indefinitely, and the consequence of this level of shock has not yet been priced in by the oil markets. Energy investors should therefore be cognizant that a further spike in prices is plausible, pending further detail from Saudi Arabia on the extent of the damage and the time frame for recovery.
Dave Meats, CFA

Our long-term outlook for midstream oil and gas companies is unchanged, but we could change our fair value estimates depending on whether new and material investment projects are sanctioned in response. We think midstream companies that could benefit from higher demand for export infrastructure and related pipelines, wider differentials, and higher demand for liquefied natural gas, given oil-linked contracts, include Enterprise Products Partners (EPD), Magellan Midstream Partners (MMP), and Cheniere Energy (CQP)/(LNG). Other companies that could benefit include Plains (PAA)/(PAGP) and Targa Resources (TRGP).

We see the increase in oil prices since the attack as a modest response for a disruption of this magnitude, suggesting that the market expects a quick resolution. We think the situation remains fluid and sensitive, with heightened tensions in the Middle East and potential reprisals from Saudi Arabia as well as the U.S. (President Donald Trump has tweeted that the U.S. is “locked and loaded”�) under its “maximum pressure”� policy against Iran.

As the rest of the world cannot fully compensate for a supply shortage of this magnitude, it is vital for Saudi Arabia to restore production volumes quickly to avoid a significant global oil shock. Early commentary and media speculation suggest this is possible, but satellite imagery reveals extensive damage, and it is not unrealistic to expect full repairs to drag on for months. Saudi inventories could provide some insulation initially, and its exports to U.S. and Europe could be redirected elsewhere as storage levels in those regions are currently substantial. But global inventories cannot mitigate the impact of a 5 mmb/d loss of supply indefinitely, given only 37 days of Saudi inventories, and the consequence of this level of shock has not yet been priced in by the oil markets. Energy investors should therefore be cognizant that a further spike in prices is plausible, pending further detail from Saudi Arabia on the extent of the damage and the time frame for recovery.

From a midstream perspective, we think there are several takeaways.

First, U.S. oil export infrastructure has a limited ability to respond in the short term, with recent export levels at 3.2 mmb/d in June compared with effective capacity in the 4.2-4.5 mmb/d range. Trump has suggested that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve can be used if needed, but any releases are more likely to be useful to offset any reductions in the 630,000 barrels a day of Saudi Arabian light crude being imported currently, which would be a fairly modest offset. This means that even if U.S. supply can respond appropriately to price signals (which will take 6-12 months), it will be constrained by infrastructure, creating the opportunity for wider differentials in the short run, given the greater U.S. surplus. Material export infrastructure additions are in process, mostly in the permitting stage, and are not likely to be available until 2021 and 2022. Broadly, for the companies already in the lead on adding export infrastructure, we see this as positive for Enterprise Products Partners and Magellan Midstream Partners. U.S. exports now have the potential to be perceived as more reliable going forward, increasing demand.

Second, Trump suggested that permit approvals for Texas pipelines and other pipelines should be accelerated. This is useful to the extent that it could accelerate the ability of U.S. supply to move to the Gulf Coast for export, as Texas pipelines might only need a few months for permit approvals. However, export infrastructure permits could take up to 18 months, meaning there would need to be a substantial change in the pace of the regulatory agencies, which Trump may be suggesting. The acceleration in Texas permits, primarily Permian-related, would be beneficial primarily for the owners (Plains, MPLX (MPLX), ExxonMobil (XOM), and others) of the Wink-to-Webster pipeline, currently due online in early 2021. Companies with large positions in the Permian, such as Enterprise Products Partners, Plains, and Targa, would also indirectly benefit because of the potential to extract larger marketing profits via higher differentials.

Third, the sharp increase in the price of oil makes U.S. LNG more attractive, given the still extensive usage of oil-linked contracts for LNG. We think this suggests a more favorable environment for Cheniere Energy to land European partners for new contracts while it continues to pursue additional Chinese partners amid U.S.-China trade tensions.
Stephen Ellis

Concerns about the disruption of Saudi oil supplies have increased oil prices, but with the likelihood that supply should normalize in about four weeks as reserves enter the market, we see a limited impact on our fair value estimates for the Chinese oil companies we cover. We think the event could lift geopolitical risk premiums in oil prices, especially with the potential for further attacks, and this may keep crude oil prices slightly elevated for longer. However, our long-term view remains that crude oil prices will be constrained by excess supplies. We are keeping our midcycle forecasts for West Texas Intermediate and Brent oil at $55 and $60 per barrel, respectively.

Our preferred stock pick of the three Chinese oil companies remains CNOOC (CEO). Despite its recent share price rise, we think CNOOC is currently undervalued with long-term weakness in oil prices largely priced in, while the company’s dividend yield of over 5% is attractive. The company has been effective at managing costs, and the weakening yuan actually benefits CNOOC because its output is priced in U.S. dollars while costs are partly yuan-based. Also, we would not rule out a further rise in oil prices once information on the extent of damages to Saudi supplies is revealed.

PetroChina (PTR) and Sinopec (SNP) are unlikely to benefit much from the higher crude oil prices because of their downstream operations. Sinopec may find it difficult to pass on the sharply higher input costs to its refined petrol products, especially in the current competitive environment. We have already factored in a normalization of refining margins from previously high levels, but the prospect of this additional lag puts more pressure on margins. For PetroChina, given its more evenly distributed activities, where it is self-reliant on its oil input needs, we anticipate a marginal benefit.

Industry sources have indicated that they expect Saudi supplies to normalize in about four weeks, but we think most of this comes from tapping reserves while inventories provide an added buffer for some customers. Much of the bottleneck will be due to a lack of oil tankers to get the supplies to clients. We anticipate a greater logistics challenge for Asia because of this shipping constraint.
Lorraine Tan, CFA

3 Me gusta
1 me gusta