Are they the same experts that predicted a collapse of the economy due to the Fiscal Cliff and Sequestration? Or is this a different group of experts we're talking about? Maybe that group of experts who are hedge fund managers that are trailing the market for the entire year so far? Wait, what other group of experts are there?
TSO in the process of finalizing the buyout of BP refinery in California. They are also working on bringing domestic crude to the West Coast refineries by way of rail and switch of to coastal barges and other methods. They are not only just beginning to fully implement large scale crude slate replacement but also will be able to increase their daily throughput with the new refinery. Increased capacity could also allow them to maximize cash flow to use for financing these projects quickly, paying down debt/ buying back more stock/ increasing the dividend moving forward.
Seems like most of that is already priced into PSX due to their more favorable geographic locations and access to these domestic feedstocks. Plus, PSX needs to account for the weight of the chemicals division--- not a pure play on crack spreads, but needs chemicals growth and pricing factored in as well. Makes it more complex situation that needs to be priced. I think PSX is also talking about possible logistics MLP spin off that could add to fair value and growth rate complexity. Just easier to price TSO at the moment.
I have VLO call in Etrade from before the spin. Right now the value is posted as $0.00. Does anyone else have this and do you know when all of this will be sorted to reflect actual value on the option?
If these moves are telegraphing what is ahead, then what did the run up in both crude and the entire refining sector over the last 3 months telegraph? If anything, the drop in crude will begin to ripple through the economy in cost savings and increased consumer spending.. like it always does... until we hit the point that it becomes obvious and the market thinks consumer sentiment is telegraphing a huge uptick in demand and production.... which "telegraphs" that commodity demand is picking up and so then commodity prices get bid up to reflect what the market is supposedly telegraphing until the prices get too high and begins to undermine the demand.. which then telegraphs that the consumer is weakening and thereby demand will be light for everything including commodities... which is seen as telegraphing a return to recession, so then commodity prices drop out very quickly to "confirm the trend" only to allow enough breathing room for consumers to once again pick up their spending and etc. etc. etc. Wash Rinse Repeat.
Seems like a fairly stretched time frame for $20, though, doesn't it? If they stay on track for positive EPS in 2014 and continuing, they should hit $20 somewhere around 2015 I would think. It doesn't take much of a multiple to get them to $20.
True, bottling was a factor.
My only other guess is that there was a lot of pessimism for the sales of non-carbonated to outweigh drops in soda in the US and elsewhere where people are being more concerned about health effects of soda. Their numbers for tea and orange juice showed resiliency of the product line-up and willingness of customers to stick with Coke products while shifting product categories.
Sigh of relief and optimism that Coke can actually survive in a declining soda consumption West.
Was there significant margin expansion? If they expanded margins enough they could pull that off. If margins were flat to down, something could be amiss.
Today's pop had to be part of people looking to buy things are not levered to China, but spread out among global consumers. I have no other idea why they would be up this much since they technically missed on the quarter because those headline excluded numbers are actually numbers that hit the bottom line, and their numbers are down from 1 year ago. They cam in soft on both counts.
Sector rotation? Not sure what else to make of this.
Actually, the Fed does create "money". Treasury prints actual bills, but the FED can increase the money supply, which is more important to the banking sector. Paper/coin money are only material manifestations of "money" that is now mostly digital tallies on balance sheets anyway. If a bank is going to make at $500,000,000 loan to a business, do they hand them paper money, or a check that will allow them to transfer that amount, that number, from one account to another?
The FED increases the money supply by expanding the balance sheet and depositing that "cash" into the banks' accounts at the FED in return for the bonds they purchase from the banks. No physical printed money changes hands during this, but there is more money is the total supply. This additional money gets kept in reserves and capital pools for loans. When they make loans with this extra money, it gets deposited into the accounts of businesses most likely. The business buys materials and makes sales... the employees get paid and buy more things. A lot of transactions, and yet not very many that actually require physical printed money to change hands... and yet the money supply (M2 and the like) have increased significantly.
If the bank sells treasuries to the FED and frees up the cash and gives a loan to one of it's customers, for say $100,000, that money is transferred from an internal account at the bank to the customer's account... at the bank. They need to keep, what 10% of that amount as reserve? $100,000 deposit from the loan, $10,000 kept, $90,000 loaned back out. Say that goes to another one of their own customers. Another $90,000 deposit, 10% kept for reserve, and $81,000 lent out from that cash. Keep 10%, loan out $72,900. So on and so on. One $100,000 loan, can actually generate well over $500,000 in additional loans due to the way the banks operate, they way they keep their books and how their loans/reserves operate... all without needing any physical printed money.
Okay, no worries-- just throwing it out there. No single focus on UOP for angle on Honeywell-- just where I was lacking in points. Why would I ask questions about things I'm already familiar with?
I put the question directed to you because you had answered previous questions about the division and it's not too hard to draw at least some surface connections between UOP and UglyOldPerson (UOP).
No worries-- that was the end of the inquiries.
Do you know of any UOP technology that could be used to help Gulf Coast refiners switch to using larger amounts of domestic/Bakken crude? Is it a matter of using a different slate of catalysts to handle the different gravity of the oil/sulfur content, or do they need to completely overhaul the design of the distillation units?
You're preaching to the choir on that one-- I've got family that haul for a major oil company so I'm fairly familiar with the product side and distribution-- I get lost on some of the technical spec's on the refinery equipment. I'm incredibly interested in UOP and everything related to the petroleum but am still in the early phases of understanding that side of the business.
They buy the common and hold it in Treasury to give to employees as part of their compensation plans. They also buy and sell a mix of stock between the regular common and the voting class shares MKC-V. It's not rookie if they get to give their employees shares without dilution to all shareholders-- they can use the money to put into their 401k's and pensions subject to low interest rates or they can use it to buy and distribute shares. Obviously management believes their stock, even if bought up here, will still return solid gains for themselves and their employees-- it's a vote of confidence by proxy. Just that the process seems a bit strange.
Okay, that's looks pretty solid--- gives them exposure to the entire array of products.
Now, from a technical perspective for refinery design/configuration-- will refiners need multiple units or one single unit to handle their multiple product lines and volumes?
I was reading over the UOP Investor Day presentation from August and saw the slides covering the multiple revenue points for UOP during the life cycle of a typical 250,000b/d refinery. They have revenue listed in a range of up to $500 million for catalysts and other materials during the lifetime of the refinery for a roughly 30 year period. Can anyone verify what the margins are on that part of the deal? I would assume HON would be getting a pretty solid return on that revenue.
You're kidding! Who knew that plants grow in other countries? I bet they don't even get their vanilla bean here either!
Thank you! I was wondering if anyone here would post anything. I'm not discounting Honeywell in the least, but I'm a bit over my head with some of the technical aspects of their processes and equipment. I've been reading as much as I can get my hands on but I am not fluent in the science and engineering aspects.
I remember seeing before, in one of the "president's brunch" conference calls for Asia/Pacific I think, that they wanted to gain greater control of this interest. Does anyone know if the Chinese regulators would allow them to take 100% of the holding company with the roughly 40% stake in ShuiJingFang? Secondly, if they can get up to a 100% stake in that holding company, can they then use that platform to increase the subsequent stake in ShuiJingFang?
It looks like a very promising local brand and I would like to see them build their presence there. Further, note the comments of the CEO about using the holding company as a vehicle for acquiring other local brands. If they go that route, I would like to see their stake approach 100% for them to see the most benefit from such moves.