SpeederD
28 Feb 2018
Re: Results tomorrow I think as long as it is "stable" with no negative shocks and 2017 performance is as analysts expects then more confidence in the business continuity should return after the battering from 570p to 400p.
Jack_Walsh
28 Feb 2018
Results tomorrow Should be exciting!
Jack_Walsh
27 Feb 2018
Re: JP Morgan Note I totally agree.That said, I am dreadfully prone to liking the ones that agree with my holdings and ignoring the ones that don't!Certainly loving the JP Morgan note - as is the market (up around 5% atm).
SpeederD
27 Feb 2018
Re: JP Morgan Note That's true Jack, and for one's that are long there are others that are short. However, they are valuable to help the thought process and weigh up the pros vs the cons. Plus they do a lot of the heaving lifting in terms of compiling historic accounts etc.
Jack_Walsh
27 Feb 2018
Re: JP Morgan Note If I had unlimited time (or could wind back the clock 20 years to Dissertation time) I would love to analyse all of the broker notes for all companies to assess the level of accuracy and any particular trends.I fear that there would be no positive correlation whatsoever between predictions and outcomes!
SpeederD
27 Feb 2018
JP Morgan Note JPM note on 22 Feb rates this a buy with a target price of 590p.Essentially they see asset sales of the IES upstream book reducing debt and strengthening the balance sheet, and the discount placed on the SFO consequences as overdone.
Bloodshot
23 Feb 2018
Interesting that theres a lot of consolidation going on now in oilfield services. Does anybody have a good guess at what PFC would likely go for. Id be happy with anything around £6 plus
marktime1231
23 Feb 2018
Morgan Stanley review via the FT"Morgan Stanley downgrades Petrofac to “underweight” as part of a review of engineering companies exposed to the Middle East gas market. It cited International Energy Agency forecasts for Middle East gas demand to grow 38 per cent to 2030, making the region the second-largest growth area globally for gas behind China.With around $100bn of outstanding Middle East tenders to be awarded and a further $358bn of planned projects, 2018 should be a record year for the industry, Morgan Stanley said. It named Saipem and Hyundai Engineering among the likely beneficiaries but argued that Petrofac is likely to underperform the sector given the overhangs of a Serious Fraud Office investigation and refinancing worries."
Boyobach
21 Feb 2018
Re: The SFO or oil or what My comparison to RR solely concerned the SFO DPA and the reputational impact etc. - which I felt was more useful as a guide than the food hygiene case (interesting as that was). I understand that RR represented the largest SFO investigation into a UK company and so it should provide some indication in terms of possible penalties for PFCAlthough they weren't issues I had in mind, it's perhaps worth responding to some of the other points: Global oil demand is still rising and it has at least a couple of decades to go, PFC also 'do' gas - which remains vital for the foreseeable. So to say that demand for PFC services will accordingly never increase is very sweeping and quite possibly incorrect. Even to sustain existing oil supplies, requires ongoing maintenance and the development of new resources to replace the decline of 'mature' production fields. Bearing in mind PFC's sp was over 700 in 2016 when POO was only $35, so the current oil price is healthy. Views vary but the consensus seems to be that $60-$70 provides enough incentive to produce without triggering US over-production eg: [link] debt level was certainly a concern last August and, given the rebasing of the divi , progress on that will certainly be expected. A reminder of what was said then:"The board recognises the importance of a sustainable dividend to our shareholders. Consequently, the board intends to target a dividend cover of between 2.0x and 3.0x business performance earnings as we transition back towards a low capital intensity business model. It is further proposed that the interim payment each year will be approximately 33% of the prior year total dividend,"
SpeederD
20 Feb 2018
Re: The SFO or oil or what The problem Boyo, is that unlike rolls Royce it is NOT business as usual for PFC:- the new contracts haven’t been great- POO has halved and with the US shale has plenty of supply- generally oil is a legacy technology- there’s more of a risk to a further POO slump- demand for PFC services will accordingly never increase and there in a new world - debt is high and was taken on during a POO peak and associated asset strategy - 1 March results won’t be great but reflect a portfolio run off which may not even be sustainable - SFO: none of us know the truth about the honesty or integrity of PFC employees/BOD. SFO mediocre track record is not an argument that they are wrong in this case. What are people’s expectations for March results?
Boyobach
19 Feb 2018
Re: The SFO or oil or what I guess where Food Hygiene is concerned and large numbers of people could become ill, maybe even die, you get a natural, quick and justifiable reaction from clients, protecting reputation as much as anything.PFC's investigation by SFO is more about a business hazard that many might think goes with the territory. No one has died, I believe, although corruption does grievously harm a country's economy and citizens. Rolls Royce survived their 'Unaoil Connection', entering into a DPA a year ago, after a four year SFO investigation. At it's worst the RR sp was down around 60% from its peak whilst PFC has been down a maximum of 70% at one point (from 950 to 350) though it's hard to imagine that the scale of wrongdoing can be anything like RR, even in relative terms.
Norman Barrington
19 Feb 2018
Re: The SFO or oil or what Slightly off topic, but this shows the effect of an investigation where issues and timeframe are unclear:A meat supplier being investigated by the Food Standards Agency has fallen into administration with the loss of almost 270 jobs. KPMG has been appointed as administrators to Derby-based Russell Hume Limited.Its meat products were recalled last month and chains including Wetherspoon took them off their menus. The FSA said its investigation concerned Russell Hume's failure to comply with food hygiene regulations. The firm's directors called the decision to call in administrators "heartbreaking", but said the regulator's action had "created impossible trading conditions for us".Chris Pole, partner at KPMG and joint administrator, said the recent product recall and halt in operations had resulted in a customer exodus. As there was little prospect of production restarting, he said a total of 266 people had been made redundant. "Our priority over the coming days will be to work with all affected employees to provide the assistance they need in claiming monies owed from the Redundancy Payments Office," Mr Pole said. "We will also be seeking buyers for the business and its assets. Any interested parties are advised to contact us as soon as possible."Russell Hume's directors said they would continue to work with the FSA over the issues it had raised, but added: "We still feel its action has been out of all proportion to the concerns it says it has identified. "The fact that its investigations have become industry-wide and a number of other firms have also had issues strongly suggests there is a lack of clarity in the industry and in current FSA guidelines. "Prior to this, we had a long, unblemished record for supplying quality meat products."Russell Hume supplied meat to a range of hotels, restaurants and pubs across the UK and had six production sites in Liverpool, Birmingham, London, Boroughbridge, Exeter and Fife.
Boyobach
11 Feb 2018
Re: The SFO or oil or what £3-4M damages springs to mind to compensate the Tchenguiz brothers ....That particular case may not be a good one to base present day SFO performance on. It drew High Court criticism in 2012, was started under the SFO's previous head and dropped by the current one, David Green, who reportedly said at the time of a settlement with the brothers: "the SFO has changed a great deal since March 2011, and I am determined that the mistakes made over three years ago will not be repeated.”Green is due to step down in April and I guess the handover to the new head would be the time for any review of the investigation's merits. A few recent words on his legacy can be found here:[link] far as strain on execs goes, presumably the only ones genuinely experiencing strain should be any that have something to hide. For the rest it should be just an inconvenience, especially if they have adequately increased resources to help deal with SFO enquiries.
Boyobach
09 Feb 2018
Re: RNS Yep - although I don't recall anyone officially trying to put a timescale on the SFO process. There was a lot of speculation at the time ranging from months to years. In any case, for those who have been concerned at the length of it, it could mean that they are having a tougher job building a case. Any fine will be proportionate to the dirty deeds - not the length of investigation.PFC's RNS appears to have been an attempt to draw a line for the time being and to signal - in the ' quiet period' leading up to the annual results - that nothing further would be reported on the matter until there is something substantive to say. The only problem with that is that they now can't easily pass any comment on the interpretation placed on that RNS by third parties. PFC may well be regretting that the RNS was issued if it wasn't entirely necessary. On the other hand, maybe the crash has nothing to do with the RNS.....
Hardboy
09 Feb 2018
Re: RNS I agree, boyo, the only real news in this RNS was the SFO enquiry has longer to run. So apart from time frames it told us nothing we didn't really know.
