ktownag08 said:
Thoughts on APA? They've taken a beating since their earnings release, but I suspect that with them getting things moving on their Alpine High play they'll be bouncing back.
They bought in near the peak and have some Permian and Eagleford Assets. They bought Petrohawk in 2011 for $12.1 bn.Ogre09 said:
Have we talked about BHP selling shale assets? Where are they operating? Who would be potential buyers? Did they jump in at the wrong time?
http://fortune.com/2017/08/21/bhp-sell-shale/
Ogre09 said:
Have we talked about BHP selling shale assets? Where are they operating? Who would be potential buyers? Did they jump in at the wrong time?
http://fortune.com/2017/08/21/bhp-sell-shale/
Sure, all of that may be true, but they built some really nice office space on Post Oak Blvd, so they have that going for them.TommyGun said:Ogre09 said:
Have we talked about BHP selling shale assets? Where are they operating? Who would be potential buyers? Did they jump in at the wrong time?
http://fortune.com/2017/08/21/bhp-sell-shale/
The long and short of what I've heard about BHP's onshore business from employees who have worked there or suppliers who do business with them:
- Paid too much for Petrohawk
- Added too many layers of management and general overhead
- Failed to retain legacy Petrohawk employees
- Slow and sometimes unwilling to change their approach to operating
Certainly sounds over like trying to overbuild to me.Latigo said:
LNG sure seems like a risky business. This is from an article I read recently:
"The total of approved export applications amounts to more than 54 bcf/d---75% of U.S. dry gas production. Daily U.S. dry gas production in 2016 was 72 bcf/d. Are we repeating the mistakes of LNG import in reverse?"
I'm not sure you know how it works. Oil companies don't spend money to not make any profit and just break even.Latigo said:
Shouldn't the shale producers be killing it right now? A few months ago people were posting articles on here about $35 break even. Smelled like b.s. and apparently it was.
They're not bleeding cash like they were. Plenty are making money and returning crews to the field. But if your idea of killing it is the good ol' days of the $90+, don't expect to feel the killing it anytime soon.Latigo said:
Shouldn't the shale producers be killing it right now? A few months ago people were posting articles on here about $35 break even. Smelled like b.s. and apparently it was.
Joseph Parrish said:I'm not sure you know how it works. Oil companies don't spend money to not make any profit and just break even.Latigo said:
Shouldn't the shale producers be killing it right now? A few months ago people were posting articles on here about $35 break even. Smelled like b.s. and apparently it was.
I think if we see some stability around $50-$55, you'll see more spending. We just keep dipping back down lately. Some companies are still spending at these prices, but not everybody. And some hedged their production so they could have a more predictable cash flow.ColinAggie said:They're not bleeding cash like they were. Plenty are making money and returning crews to the field. But if your idea of killing it is the good ol' days of the $90+, don't expect to feel the killing it anytime soon.Latigo said:
Shouldn't the shale producers be killing it right now? A few months ago people were posting articles on here about $35 break even. Smelled like b.s. and apparently it was.
That sounds crazy. I'd tell the activists to F off. Maybe in a more PC way if I was the PR department, but it'd still be the same end result.Gordo14 said:
I mean if you overleverage yourself at the peak of the market then being able to make a lot of money and a good ROR on capital investment today might be irrelevant. They might still be making good money on wells they are drilling if you ignore the initial investment to buy the acreage.... In addition, it's my understanding that BHP is only selling the acreage due to activist investor pressure - not because they can't make money drilling the project on a well-by-well basis.
LostInLA07 said:
Chevron's CEO to step down next month per the WSJ.
Latigo said:
I understand what you are saying but that is where the B.S. comes in. I can make a profit at anything if I get to decide which expenses count and which don't.
Latigo said:
I wrote what I meant. I didn't imply anything. You stated they may be able to make money if they "ignore the initial investment to buy the acreage"
Don't fall into the trap of thinking that if a big multinational thinks it's a good investment that the deal is bulletproof. There are plenty of multi-millionaires or more who have made their money taking advantage of the fact that the big energy companies reach for the big, high-capex fruit like Tyrannosaurus Rex and forget that their arm are too short to get all of the fruit off the tree.74OA said:
All true, but the big energy companies wouldn't be rushing to complete five new export terminals at a cost of billions if they didn't see a robust overseas market for LNG. In addition to strongly growing demand in China, South America (both facilitated by the new Panama Canal) and non-pipeline countries in Europe (which is adding LNG import terminals), US domestic gas consumption appears to be growing by leaps and bounds, too: GAS
On the USWS note, where'd you hear that? This is interesting to me....Fuzzy Dunlop said:
On another note, has anyone heard about Whiting being up for sale? I've heard two things: 1)they are pulling out of North Dakota and, 2)they are for sale.
Also hearing US Well Services is up for sale.
I heard it in a sales conference call within my company. I also saw it in a sales report. I haven't gotten any confirmation so I don't see it as viable, although I could be wrong.La Bamba said:On the USWS note, where'd you hear that? This is interesting to me....Fuzzy Dunlop said:
On another note, has anyone heard about Whiting being up for sale? I've heard two things: 1)they are pulling out of North Dakota and, 2)they are for sale.
Also hearing US Well Services is up for sale.
Probably none. I think hurricanes are bearish these days anyway; knocking out demand from petchem etc has a greater effect than disruption of the relatively small amount of offshore production, at least for gas.Premium said:
So what effect will Harvey have on oil and gas? Oil isn't jumping at all...
