Maybe he reads this forum and decided it's best to avoid any communication with you. As far as the post lacking specifics, did you want me to make something up like you do? A quote is a quote in my world.
I guess he's human and was caught off guard like everyone else with the dramatic fall of the stock. He did hang in there as long as he could which tells me that he had confidence that Line was oversold. I guess he just ran out of time.
17:05 EST - Kolja Rockov, chief financial officer of Linn Energy, sold nearly half of his stake in company in a margin call, the company disclosed. Rockov had pledged units of LINE as collateral for a loan, and was forced to sell 230,900 of them for an average of $9.46 as a result of their decline in value. The company's stock is down about 72% in the last year, and it recently decided to cut its payouts to investors by more than 50%. Rockov now owns 257,122 units directly.
Why don't you call him. I'm sure with all of your history and experience investing in the sector he will answer a few of your questions. Maybe an e-mail would be more appropriate.
Opec secretary general Abdullah al-Badri, also speaking at Davos, defended the group's decision not to cut output.
He said: "Everyone tells us to cut. But I want to ask you, do we produce at higher cost or lower costs?
"Let's produce the lower cost oil first and then produce the higher cost,"
"We will go back to normal very soon," he said.
Well at least this clown has a bit of clout and experience in the energy sector and was in fact the former president of one of the largest oil companies in the world. Now lets talk about your experience and résumé clown op.
"The next round of high prices is likely to start later this year, as crude rebounds to the $80s and $90s, perhaps pushing to the $100 level by late in the year or early next," Hofmeister told me the other day after a trip to Calgary, where he was promoting natural gas as a transportation fuel.
"The triggering mechanism will be global demand growth relative to how much capital constraint gets baked into future plans for production this year and next. If new production capital is deferred and demand growth continues at 2% or more, we'll see capacity constraints during 2016, an election year of course, drive prices higher. Whether we reach $4 a gallon or push past, it's too early to tell."
Moreover, Hofmeister still sees $5 gas on the horizon.
"Over the next several years, as demand growth approaches 100 million barrels a day and the industry production falls short, yes, I believe later this decade we'll see $5 a gallon and possible shortages of fuel in some parts of the world," he said.
Hofmeister paints a gloomier picture of gasoline prices than many analysts, including the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which predicts U.S. gasoline prices will average $2.33 this year and $2.72 in 2016. But he also feels that the perception of a "glut" in world oil production now is overstated, with supply outpacing demand by only 1 million barrels a day or so.
Some of his former peers in the oil sector share his sentiments regarding the oil oversupply, and its impact on oil prices.
"Most of us in the industry are surprised that it's fallen as hard and fast as it has," Ryan Lance, CEO of ConocoPhillips, said at a Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I don't know that I have a real good answer to that question, other than it doesn't feel like the fundamentals would support that kind of fall."
Like Hofmeister, Lance said oil prices could rebound faster than anticipated, as they did in 2009, following the Great Recession.
"People were worried about the glob
So Karen Finnerman isn't "fake" because she's cute, and you tell me to grow up? Go frig yourself little man.
I wonder how many of those large banks predicted the fall back in July or August I also wonder how many predicted the financial collapse back in 08, just wondering.
Thanks for toning down the condescending tude? You call satellite imagery over many years showing the build up of carbon dioxide and other gases and the increased temperature of the earth associated with this because of the greenhouse effect spin! Satellite imagery also shows, in time lapsed detail the shrinking of glaciers almost everywhere around the world as well as declining ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Ocean temps and acidic levels have risen over 30% the last 50 years well above normal range. Satellite imagery also shows the FACT that as of 2014, 2013 tied with 2009 and 2006 for the seventh warmest year since 1880. With the exception of 1998, the 10 warmest years in the 134-year record have all occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the warmest years on record. Earth continues to be hotter than it was several decades ago. How about the fact that global sea level's rose about 6.7 inches in the last century but the rise rate in the last decade is nearly double that. What other evidence do you need to support their "spin"? I do care about global warming but not for me as much as my children and all future generations to follow. I won't allow greedy, stubborn fools to deny them their right to enjoy nature and our planet the way past generations have. Please take your head out of the sand and open your mind to the possibility that this scientific evidence might be true. Your children's children will be thankful.
This might not be as bad as they project, second half of 2015 could still be the timeframe that oil corrects.
From Wall Street Journal, "The market is still hovering near a six-year low in prices. Those cheaper prices are likely to lead to stronger global demand later this year, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries said in its monthly oil market report released Thursday. The cartel also lowered its forecast for the increase in non-OPEC oil supply this year, highlighting indications that lower prices are already affecting investment in the sector."
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this exact position. I'll put my faith in someone who has dedicated their life to study climactic data over a politician or talking head on Fox news. I'm curious if you are looking for medical advice, do you go to your doctor or plumber?
Here that OPEC market share thingy again.
"But with oil producer club OPEC deciding late last year to maintain its output despite slowing Asian and European economies in order to defend its market share, including against surging U.S. competition, a glut has also appeared outside the United States."
This was just posted from Reuters about an hour ago.
"However, market sentiment remains bearish due to a supply glut. U.S. crude has been cheaper than Brent because soaring North American shale oil production has pulled down prices while the rest of the world market remained more tightly supplied.
"But with oil producer club OPEC deciding late last year to maintain its output despite slowing Asian and European economies in order to defend its market share, including against surging U.S. competition, a glut has also appeared outside the United States.
"We are lowering our Brent price forecast: to $50.25/barrel from $72.25/barrel in 2015; to $67.50/barrel from $83/barrel in 2016; and to $77.25/barrel from $90/barrel in 2017," U.S. investment bank Jefferies International said on Thursday.
"Adding to the downward pressure on prices, Russian output has reached levels not since seen the end of the Soviet Union.
"ANZ bank said that it saw a 60 percent chance Brent would range between $40 and $60 a barrel in the first half of the year, a 30 percent possibility of prices falling to $35 to 45 during that time and only a 10 percent chance of prices going up to $60 to 80 a barrel."
Hey Norris your posts about Line and the energy sector can be quite informative, not if you could just manage to lighten up on that condescending tone.
I think oil reversed again. This will be a very long process, don't get too hung up on daily price movements of WTI or MCC. A trend is longer than a day or two.
"Furthermore, when an energy exploration company like Linn finds itself strapped for cash, it naturally cuts back on investments in new oil and gas fields. This will depress future earnings even if energy prices stabilize in 2015."
Hey Ron my comment was directed at this paragraph above and nothing else. I didn't say anything about this being a big deal or mention "bargain priced" companies. The Blackstone deal does give Line the financial flexibility to invest in a new acquisition without adding further debt to the balance sheet which is a positive change to the past business model. Obviously there is still risk with the unknown price of oil in the future but I like the deal with Blackstone.
I saw almost every energy stock on my watch list turn green because of WTI but what did MCC do, fell .17 cents into close. Your MCC / oil thesis just took a big hit.
I guess Jeff isn't aware of the Blackstone deal that will allow Line to make distressed acquisitions and hopefully by the time oil recovers increase revenue. I'm shocked he didn't even mention it.
By Jeff Reeves, Editor of Investor Place Jan 14, 2015
Most disturbing to me is not the dividend cut or even the big flop in share price for LINE stock over the last year.
The biggest issue investors should watch right now is the balance sheet, which shows a growing debt load that will continue to hamper any profitability.
At the end of 2010, Linn had $2.7 billion in total debt … and at the end of last year, it had $9.1 billion. While revenue has indeed soared since then, providing debt service on those obligations even as crude oil crashes is going to keep pressure on LINE stock in 2015.
Furthermore, when an energy exploration company like Linn finds itself strapped for cash, it naturally cuts back on investments in new oil and gas fields. This will depress future earnings even if energy prices stabilize in 2015.
It all adds up to a very risky stock that has nothing to offer but a big yield on paper but the risk of future cuts in your distribution.
I would steer clear of LINE stock for now despite the big-time dividend yield. Investors who think Linn Energy is worth bargain should take a good look at the balance sheet and not just the shaky potential for income.