Re: Recovering Losses Elsewhere Thanks for your thoughts chapsMuch appreciated ATB
Re: Recovering Losses Elsewhere I am glad to say I have most of my AIMs money in Atalaya (the old Rio Tinto mine in Spain) reopened a couple of years ago. Its steadily risen about 4 times from its low point value since it went into production 12 months ago and is now a conveyor belt for profit. Not quite compensated for my losses in QFI but it is well on the way to steady growth from here on.It has been very volatile in the past, prior to going into production, I can only say the management team have done fantastic, now making profit every month, under promising and over delivering, a painful 4 years but now very steady and I am well into profit by 60%.I have learnt to reduce my AIMs activity and focus on a few longer term opportunities rather than a shot gun approach as most AIMs companies follow a similar profile, normally a quick rise followed by a steady, sometimes dramatic drop in value over a couple of years with a few up and down spikes along the way, plenty of promise with little delivery of results.My only other real AIMs investment is in Sirius Minerals, a potentially massive opportunity still 18 months to 2 years away (DYOR).I am still invested in QFI, its a sleeper as far as I am concerned, if it dies no major loss to me, more a disappointment. If it does win contracts then I will be happy. More a pocket money share now.All the best everyone.
Re: Article today A good article, but there are more competitors than I was aware of.
Article today Global Emulsified Fuel Market Report 2018-2022 - Projected to Grow at a Significant Rate of 134.97% CAGR - ResearchAndMarkets.com[link]
Re: Recovering Losses Elsewhere You might wish to take a look at FRR. Starting to motor today ahead of first well results from a four well campaign. All very low risk wells which have been drilled before, so just being deepened or sidetracked to target and frack formations which are known to be productive. The first well has already been fracked and production tubing is being installed (see twitter pictures and commentary here:[link] of the wells Ud2 is a gas well whose results could be transformational in establishing the commerciality of a massive gas field. It had a workover last year and heavy duty pumps and a large quantity of ceramic proppant are now enroute there to assist with well stimulation which should take place within the next few days. This should not be construed as investment advice though, and as ever you will need to DYOR.ATB,T
Recovering Losses Elsewhere Clawed back a chunk on PMO - cold comfort seeing the gains there when they don't offset losses here.Perhaps it's time to jump back in!!
Aramco profit trails behind big oil "State firms who sell refined oil products at below-market value on the domestic market often lose money, according to Bloomberg.[link] for a new Saudi business model perhaps?TH2
Today's i paper - page 25 Why is the country with the worlds largest oil reserves importing crude?States production is failing to meet domestic needs. Paula Rinconi Newspaper17 Apr 2018AFP/GETTYA woman walks past an oil pump in Caracas. Petrol remains the only cheap commodity left in Venezuela but the industry is still strugglingDespite having the greatest oil reserves in the world, Venezuelas government is being forced to spend millions of dollars a day importing crude to prop up its ailing industry.Petrol remains the only cheap commodity left in Venezuela amid the collapse of most of its economy, but the oil industry is also struggling to meet basic domestic demands.Experts say the industry is operating below 40 per cent of its potential output. Last month, the International Energy Agency reported that Venezuela is and will probably remain the biggest risk factor in a global supply crisis that may soon tip the market into deficit.
Re: CEPSA Now that does make sense. Thank you.
Re: CEPSA Waterskier "CEPSA already has an up and running MMU that has already produced a lot of MSAR so it does not make sense that it is CEPSA and so must be another new facility (presumably in KSA."I believe during the conference call it was made clear that the production refinery is not in KSAThe MMU at CEPSA is a 1000 tonne per day unit. The trial burn was intended to use approx 1 million barrels of MSAR (I believe), which is about 159,000 tonnes, so almost 160 days of MMU production. Obviously that would take too long, so my thoughts were that perhaps a 2nd MMU has been recently commissioned at CEPSA, to cope with the volume required for the trial. If it was paid for by Aramco, then QFI presumably didn't have to inform us. It would also explain why CEPSA have lost patience with the delays, and and our now looking for other customersJust my own surmising , and as usual I look forward to being corrected by those more knowledgeable than I
SA Sign Mega Deals [link] RegardsKrazzy
Re: Cepsa It's all in here Bobson if you care to read it:[link] but Ministerial intervention now seems to be taking place with the Finance Ministry having become involved. The Energy Minister is currently on his way home from the extended Royal tour which ended in Spain yesterday, so one would hope that there might be something on his desk for him to sign off. It simply can't go on forever or the SEC would have no fuel supplies for the new power stations which are now being built, so a sensible solution has to be found imho.It still makes a lot of sense to me for the MSAR for the trial phase to be produced at the existing facilty in CEPSA using the residues from the Saudi crudes which they process. However they (the Saudi companies) would have to move pretty quickly if they still wished to take advantage of that opportunity since CEPSA clearly have other options for the fuel tanks which the MSAR would be stored in. We can but hope that those options involve the production of MSAR for other customers of CEPSA, in which case it's then a win win scenario, albeit that KSA would take a bit longer to pan out if a MMU has to be installed in one of their refineries.I'd happily settle for that if the company were to get some short term cash flow from the CEPSA operations.T
Re: Cepsa Thanks for your response th2. Should there be a reference in ToTs post to a residential tariff/rate? So if I am understanding this correctly the Saudi Electricity Company has attempted to charge Aramco for both industrial and domestic use, the domestic being at a higher rate than the industrial? So I can understand the SECs position but wonder how the situation was allowed to arise, but can guess that the SEC effectively saw loads of domestic users (mostly ex pats) getting a cheaper electricity deal than native Saudi`s, tried to put the rate up but Aramco refused to pay.It will only be a quid pro quo if the SEC really do owe Aramco for fuel supplied, which no doubt they will dispute. This could run and run, and the lights still come on with or without the use of MSAR fuel.It is becoming a little clearer, no doubt Aramco own and run the refinery and supply the oil. Perhaps the reference to another party is the one who produces the MSAR from the MMU at the refinery, perhaps CEPSA. Still a mushroom.This is no way to run a railroad.
Re: Cepsa Tot a little more patience will be rewarded?? With what exactly....a company that will fold. Is that your end goal/aim?
Re: Cepsa Bobsson,I refer you to ToT's post of the April 6th:"Further to my earlier post in this thread I have been digging a bit deeper. In its consolidated financial statements for the year ending 31st December 2016:[link] the SEC has inserted a note on page 31 regarding a financial dispute with Aramco. As it's a PDF I am unable to copy it here but the gist of it is that the SEC had been charging Aramco at the industrial rate for the electricity it supplies to its residential properties (think of the many thousands of ex pats it houses in its compounds) but Aramco objected and paid only the industrial tariff. The Council of Ministers issued a resolution to end the dispute but there were issues of definition etc, and numerous meetings were held between the parties and the regulator in an attempt to resolve it. This seemed to result in some resolution but as at the date of the accounts the SEC was still chasing Aramco for payment.Going back to my original post as at 31/12/17 the parties are now in dispute over payments to Aramco for fuel supplied and it has been referred to the Ministry of Finance. It appears to me that there is a quid pro quo situation here whereby, given the history, the SEC wants this dispute resolved before it enters into any new agreement with Aramco. From what we heard in the conference call it would appear that the British Embassy have become involved in helping QFI and one would hope that some heads have been banged together whilst MK has been out there this week.Hopefully a little more patience will be well rewarded.Tot"