I appreciate your criticism of all the BP bulls on this board, however, I have the following question I want to get your input on:
1. Under current reality, is there a price you would buy BP today? I mean everything can make a buck when it is cheap enough?
2. If the Gulf oil spill had never occurred, would you own BP today?
Sounds to me that the oil spill and fear of future legal settlements is the only thing that is holding you back from picking up this stock?
Smreitz, Vikki is playing BP short. could you possibly expect her to say she would go long had there been no spill? are you kidding me?
She responded she holds COP amongst other oil stocks. there you have it... I dumped all my COP just after the markets opened today. a great company but, oil is dropping. projections are crude to be in the 80's before year end. gasoline is dropping. but for the spill, I would not be in BP at all. I fully expect to capitalize as uncertainty on spill payouts lessen and as more time lapses. in the meantime, the stock buyback and yield help protect the PPS. the P/E is incredibly low. all signs of a stock being under valued and over sold.
my strategy is the opposite of Vikki. I am confident of my positions. incidentally, COP is down $.80/share since I liquidated my position less than 2 hours ago.
Vikki is ignorant.
I think if Barbier finds gross negligence, the stock drops to around $35, so any price that would be appealing would have to get under that number (though my research of this company led me not to like it). The problem is the settlement claims will be a drag on earnings for the next couple years, so I don't see a quick turnaround with the stock. If you have a multi-year time horizon you might be ok I would say.
If Macondo didn't happen I might be a buyer. I'm bullish on the sector. I mentioned before that I'm long COP and RDS-B. COP is really good. Shell has underperformed though.
Where is Eric Holder? Amazing, this much fraud, corruption and racketeering on his watch and nothing. Is the man dead? We need another Katrina in Lousiana to clean that state up. Cannot wait for it to be here. Perhaps this fall.
Raising the court's consciousness -- and the public's consciousness, via coverage by the press (which seems to have an insatiable appetite for news associated with the spill, and the resulting litigation, and the settlements, etc.) -- regarding what BP sees as overreaching strikes me as a reasonable thing to do (except when that occurs via full page ads or CEO interviews trashing the administrator, and by extension the judge, but that doesn't seem to be happening any more). So I wouldn't call asking for more detail on a $140M invoice a "scare tactic", and even if the magistrate judge has denied that request, and even though the trial judge who approved the settlement declined BP's request to stay the payments while Mr. Freeh's investigation is underway, I would imagine that sharper corners are being turned now that some light is being shined on the claims administration process. That seems like a more prudent approach than just shutting off the spigot as many posters have suggested.
I see it a little different. First, BP can't "shut the spigot" on settlement payouts, since those are handled through a third party trust (though there's only $300M left in the Trust). As to BP's scorched earth strategy with claims, I see it alienating the court and can't see how frivolous filings helps. BP's request for a stay filed this week is frivolous, since the judge denied basically the same thing two weeks ago (unless BP has evidence of systemic fraud they haven't told us about). BP's refusal to pay the claims center forced the court to order BP in to pay -- one step short of contempt.
What is a "scare tactic" is the form letters BP attorneys have been sending lawyers, businesses and others in the gulf region that any claims that might not be "valid" will be prosecuted. Refusal to pay the bill until ordered by the Court is just an extension of BP's nasty approach to the settlement they authored.
At the end of the day, it's about a CEO, CFO and GC trying to cover their behinds from the BOD's who will want answers why they so badly misjudged the settlement costs, so they are blaming the victims as loudly as possible, diverting all eyes from the real cause.
The 5th Circuit is very pro-business and pro-energy industry (something like 15 of the judges represented oil and gas companies before being appointed by republicans). Just wait till they issue the order affirming Barbier and explaining to the world that BP only has itself to blame. Then what will BP say??