69.14 +0.08 (0.12%)
Pre-Market: 8:21AM EST
|Bid||69.00 x 1400|
|Ask||69.23 x 1200|
|Day's Range||68.70 - 70.15|
|52 Week Range||64.65 - 83.49|
|Beta (3Y Monthly)||1.00|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||20.12|
|Earnings Date||Jan 30, 2020 - Feb 3, 2020|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||3.48 (5.00%)|
|1y Target Est||78.36|
Exxon Mobil did not mislead investors on the true cost of addressing climate change. That’s according to a New York judge, who ruled on Tuesday that state attorney general Letitia James failed to produce any evidence that suggested otherwise. James had argued that Exxon - one of the two largest U.S. oil companies - falsely stated that it had properly evaluated the impact of future climate regulations on its business, causing investors to lose $1.6 billion. In dismissing the case, Judge Barry Ostrager wrote: "Nothing in this opinion is intended to absolve Exxon Mobil from responsibility for contributing to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases…" But he added that it was a securities case, not a climate change case. The lawsuit - filed in October 2018 - was the first of several climate change lawsuits against major oil companies to go to trial, which saw testimony from former Exxon CEO - and former Secretary of State - Rex Tillerson, who denied the allegations against the company.
FT subscribers can click here to receive Moral Money every Wednesday by email. Welcome to Moral Money. This week we have a multitude of exclusive news: Harsh words for passive managers from a former US ...
STOCKSTOWATCHTODAY BLOG Three numbers to start your day: Goldman Sachs’ Target Price for an Ounce of Gold is $1,600 The precious metal currently trades for about 8% lower than that. The price of gold rose in the first nine months of the year—it was pushed higher by rising trade war tensions and worries about a global economic slowdown.
According to the stock exchange’s website, Aramco shares most recently changed hands at 35.20 Saudi riyals ($9.39), after debuting at 32 riyals.
RIYADH/DUBAI, Dec 11 (Reuters) - Saudi Aramco shares surged the maximum permitted 10% above their IPO price on their Riyadh stock market debut on Wednesday, in a move hailed by the government as a vindication of its towering $2 trillion valuation of the state oil company. The company sold just a 1.5% stake and relied on mainly domestic and regional buyers.
While the ruling was a victory for the oil giant, it raises questions about how environmental groups and institutional shareholders will handle environmental issues with the company going forward.
Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE: XOM) got a win Tuesday in an important securities fraud lawsuit when a judge ruled the state of New York failed to prove the company tried to hide the cost of climate regulations from investors. New York State Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager found the plaintiffs failed to prove Exxon broke state security laws by misleading investors on the costs of meeting future climate-related regulations. The state alleged Exxon effectively kept two separate sets of records on those costs: one internal and one public.
A New York State Supreme Court judge wrote that the attorney general’s office had "failed to prove" wrongdoing.
Exxon Mobil Corp won a major victory in a closely-watched lawsuit on Tuesday when a judge ruled that the company did not defraud investors out of up to $1.6 billion by hiding the true cost of climate change regulation. The ruling by Justice Barry Ostrager in Manhattan Supreme Court followed a trial featuring testimony from investors, experts and former Exxon Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson. The judge found that the New York State Attorney General's case failed to produce evidence that investors were misled.
Exxon Mobil won a sweeping court victory against charges the oil giant pulled the wool over the eyes of investors regarding the dangers of climate change for its business.
(Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp. won a closely watched securities-fraud trial that delved into its internal accounting for the financial risks of climate change, a striking rejection of New York state’s claim that the company misled investors for years.The ruling Tuesday by New York Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager in Manhattan is a blow to the state’s attorney general, Letitia James, who accused the energy company of lying about its use of a “proxy cost” for carbon to account for future climate-change regulations.“The office of the Attorney General failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that ExxonMobil made any material misstatements or omissions about its practices and procedures that misled any reasonable investor,” Ostrager wrote in a 55-page ruling. The AG “produced no testimony either from any investor who claimed to have been misled by any disclosure,” the judge said.Exxon said in a statement that the ruling affirmed that the company gave its investors “accurate information on the risks of climate change” and that New York “failed to make a case even with the extremely low threshold of the Martin Act in its favor.”New York’s Martin Act empowers officials to target a wide range of corporate behavior that could hurt shareholders. While New York claimed Exxon intentionally misled shareholders, under the act it didn’t have to prove intent to win, or that any investors were misled.Read More: Exxon’s Climate Trial Is Over, But the Bigger Fight Is Starting“Lawsuits that waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money do nothing to advance meaningful actions that reduce the risks of climate change,” Exxon spokesman Casey Norton said in the statement. “ExxonMobil will continue to invest in researching breakthrough technologies to reduce emissions while meeting society’s growing demand for energy.”The attorney general’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.Exxon got a hint of victory on the last day of the trial when the attorney general dropped the two most damning of four claims without explanation during his closing statement. The abandoned claims had been crucial elements of the state’s case because they held that Exxon’s misstatements were part of a scheme to mislead and that investors had relied on them when buying the company’s stock.After the AG’s retreat, what remained for Ostrager to decide was whether Exxon had violated the Martin Act by issuing public statements about proxy costs that were materially misleading. The state couldn’t show that it had.New York claimed Exxon used two sets of numbers -- one public, one secret -- to account for greenhouse gas emissions. Exxon said the state, to cook up a discrepancy where none existed, was conflating two figures that served different purposes.On the last day of the trial, Wells called the entire case a “cruel joke.”Read More: Exxon Calls N.Y. Climate Case a ‘Joke’ on Last Day of TrialExxon “disclosed its use of both the proxy cost and the greenhouse gas metrics no later than 2014,” Ostrager wrote in his decision.New York initially claimed that former Exxon chief executive officer Rex Tillerson had spearheaded the scheme to dupe investors and that the plan was readily adopted by his underlings. Tillerson rejected the claim under oath, while Exxon’s lawyer said New York had dragged the names of the company’s executives and engineers “through the mud” by advancing such a claim and then dropping it at the last minute.During his opening statement to the judge, Exxon’s lawyer, Theodore Wells, said the state had been swayed to investigate the company by talks with environmentalists and billionaires who wanted to vilify the company at the expense of facts.“It’s almost like the Russians trying to interfere with the election,” Wells said on the first day of the trial. “I mean, think about what’s going on here.”The case is People of the State of New York v. Exxon Mobil, 452044/2018, New York State Supreme Court (Manhattan).(Updates with Exxon statement)To contact the reporter on this story: Erik Larson in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at firstname.lastname@example.org, Peter JeffreyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
For left-leaning economists such as David Harvey, the term “neoliberalism” perfectly sums up the mix of laissez-faire economics, centrist politics and market supremacy that has held sway in the west for 40 years. While in 2016, the IMF said neoliberalism could be of enormous benefit where it conferred “financial openness”, but acknowledged some of its elements were overplayed and potential causes of instability. It never appeared in the FT’s old Lexicon and other commentators, including our very own Martin Wolf, continue to doubt its usefulness.
with New York state over the oil company’s disclosures regarding its vulnerability to climate change, in a ruling that could damage similar legal challenges filed by other states. In a rebuke of New York’s case, state supreme court judge Barry Ostrager said on Tuesday that the attorney-general’s office failed to prove that ExxonMobil “made any material misstatements or omissions about its practices and procedures that misled any reasonable investor”. centred on Exxon’s use of a proxy cost of carbon, which was presented by the company as a way to incorporate expected future curbs on emissions into its business planning.
As the calendar turns to 2020, investors need to appraise the stock markets in a new light. 2019 came and went with three interest-rate cuts - not the hikes many suspected at the start of the year - and the longest economic recovery of the postwar era continued. The market has subsequently shot to sky-high prices, setting up a 2020 in which value stocks should be ... well, valued.The S&P; 500 trades at more than 23 times its trailing 12-month earnings - a level seen only a few times in the market's history. The index also trades at a sky-high 19 times analysts' estimates for future earnings. That's sustainable as long as investors have enough reasons to be bullish. But several things - another breakdown in trade relations, the U.S. entering recession and more - could spark an exodus from expensive stocks.It's not all bad. The market's best value stocks - which often have defensive qualities, including paying significant amounts of dividend income - would likely thrive in a flight to quality.Here are 10 of the best value stocks to buy heading into 2020. It's a short list, to be sure, as 2019's rally has driven a wide swath of stocks into frothy territory. But each of these stock picks offers value and a favorable fundamental outlook heading into the new year. SEE ALSO: 20 Best Retirement Stocks to Buy in 2020
(CVX) has been one of the top large-cap energy stocks in a lackluster year for the sector. Citi’s Alastair Syme downgraded shares to Neutral from Outperform on Sunday, and dropped his price target to $120 from $135. Owning energy stocks has been a losing bet in general over the past decade, and particularly over the past year.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Even now, the figure of $1.71 trillion is surely dramatic enough to fire the odd synapse in our jaded, zero-rate-numbed hive mind. That is the value at which Saudi Aramco will enter the stock market this week.Yet it still isn’t quite enough for some folks — Saudi Arabian royalty specifically. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman famously put a value of $2 trillion on Saudi Arabian Oil Co. when he first announced plans to float it, almost four years ago. Speaking on Friday at the end of a contentious OPEC+ gathering, Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman (the Crown Prince’s half-brother) voiced displeasure at the media’s coverage of the IPO. He went on to say:… We decided to lower the valuation that we were seeking. But on the 11th [of December] the shares will be trading. And a few months from now, I’ll remind — I wouldn’t call them by name — but I think they will probably like to not have written those pieces that they have written. Because we will get Aramco and it will be higher than the two trillion, and I can bet that this will happen.Even the sell side usually gives it 12 months on a price target, but I have to concede Saudi officials have taken to the oil sector’s investor relations style with aplomb. High spirits are understandable, though; how often do you get to float the biggest company ever (not to mention one that also provides more than half your country’s public budget)? Don’t forget the political benefits, either: At this point, $2 trillion feels less like an actual dollar amount and more like a patriotic rallying cry.The energy minister may well soon be crowing to all who put Aramco’s value somewhere below $2 trillion (myself included) that we were wrong. Not that it would really matter. Having been scaled way back from the global offering envisaged originally to a minimal domestic listing, Aramco’s IPO puts the “market” in market value. Average daily trading volume for the entire Tadawul All Share Index over the past year is actually slightly less than that of just one oil major, Exxon Mobil Corp, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.Aramco’s imminent inclusion in emerging-market indices will undoubtedly suck some passive money toward it (a potential headwind for other emerging-market oil champions as well as fellow Tadawul constituents). However, while Aramco’s market cap is far bigger than that of the big five Western majors combined, its implied free float of about $28 billion is less than that of just one U.S. fracker, EOG Resources Inc. Speaking of which, the context of Prince Abdulaziz’s price target is interesting. He had just announced that Saudi Arabia would voluntarily keep another 400,000 barrels a day off the market beyond its new (reduced) supply target. It was this that pulled the OPEC+ meeting back from the brink of failure and halted a sell-off in oil on Friday.Saudi Arabia’s de facto crude-oil production target is now just over 9.74 million barrels a day, which is below its average for the year so far. Based on my math, and assuming $65 Brent, that would net Aramco free cash flow of about $70 billion in 2020, $5 billion shy of its minimum dividend payment(3). Of course, the new batch of minority shareholders wouldn’t suffer; the government has guaranteed their payout. But it re-emphasizes just how pricey Aramco is: A valuation of $2 trillion based on that $70 billion figure would imply a free-cash-flow yield of just 3.5%. That is not only far below what most of Aramco’s peers offer, it’s less than the yield on Aramco’s 30-year bonds. Taking this a step further, when I valued Aramco at just under $1.5 trillion, I assumed (among many other things) average crude oil production of 11 million barrels a day, $65 Brent and a dividend yield of 5.85%. But say production averages something less than that. At 10.5 million barrels a day, my math implies Aramco would need long-term oil prices north of $100 a barrel to justify a $2 trillion valuation. As it stands, the IPO implies a dividend yield of just under 4.4%. At 10.5 million barrels a day, even at that lower yield, a $2 trillion valuation needs $69 a barrel; at 10 million a day, it requires $74.Needless to say, the higher the oil price, the more breathing room for U.S. frackers (among other competitors); Prince Abdulaziz acknowledged as much on Friday. It would also have the opposite effect on demand. All of which matters, especially when an oil company has 60-odd years of reserves to monetize. Hence, even if markedly higher oil prices juiced Aramco’s near-term cash flows, they could also erode its long-term value.So when it comes to the dream of $2 trillion, focus less on oil prices going up and more on keeping those yields down. It’s the mismatch between the cost of capital on offer from global fund managers and the more generous terms provided by local and regional investors that explains Aramco’s valuation. On that basis, beyond scratching some emotional or political itch, it’s tough to say what hitting the magic number would really mean.(1) This assumes the target holds through 2020, although OPEC+ will meet to assess things in March.To contact the author of this story: Liam Denning at email@example.comTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Gongloff at firstname.lastname@example.orgThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Liam Denning is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering energy, mining and commodities. He previously was editor of the Wall Street Journal's Heard on the Street column and wrote for the Financial Times' Lex column. He was also an investment banker.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Saudi Aramco’s initial public offering is set to begin trading Wednesday, and expect the financial media industrial complex to go into overdrive.