Boyobach
08 Feb 2018
Re: RNS Being somewhat pedantic, could someone please tell me what Monday's RNS contained that is strikingly different to what PFC announced in May of last year? I refer to the update given by PFC on the 25th of that month (full text on the PFC website):....On 12 May 2017 the SFO confirmed that it is investigating the activities of Petrofac, its subsidiaries, and their officers, employees and agents. The investigation is related to the SFO’s ongoing investigation into the activities of Unaoil. Ayman Asfari and Marwan Chedid were arrested, questioned under caution by the SFO, and were released without charge. Since 12 May 2017 the Company has provided large volumes of information in response to very broad requests made under section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 1987. The Company notes that the SFO will also have access to other information in the context of its wider investigation.....I am curious as to what made the Times journalist feel that the RNS contained a new and newsworthy warning, when it seems to be a fairly straight reiteration of a nine month old statement. I especially note the term 'wider investigation' used in May. Either the Times this week is exaggerating or the investigation must indeed be wider than an already wide thing.
Boyobach
08 Feb 2018
420 Ha! Well I did say 'wake me up at 420'. It certainly gets interesting from now.....
shugg1e
08 Feb 2018
Re: RNS markets hate uncertainty and this has left things wide open i can see previous lows being revisited
Boyobach
08 Feb 2018
Re: RNS You could be right Speeder but then it begs the question as to whether the company's RNS and announcements have been misleading. Under those circumstances they might be accused of being economical about the facts. I don't recall them actually saying that the investigation was widening - merely that it was wide, in strict terms that means that the fundamental reasons for it have not changed. If there are significant new accusations (ie beyond the known Unaoil connection), then the company is arguably withholding information.Regarding the sp, it's hardly been drip feeding this week. But chart-wise it has twice paused near my theoretical support points and is close to what I consider to be a likely base. Yes, it may drift lower although that would indeed imply a worse situation than the market priced for in the summer. It's also getting back into bid-speculation territory.For those who exited in profit in the 540-580 range, today's price is potentially attractive as it would have to get to 340 or less before they were back under water. I certainly found it so. But, to be fair, I don't need to see 500 in order to be pleased with the outcome.A perfect storm - an ambiguous RNS, market slump, PoO down, plenty of shorting and a strongly negative story in the Times. It certainly bears watching closely.
SpeederD
08 Feb 2018
Re: RNS Boyo,However you read the RNS is definitely negative news.The situation is worse than before as the investigation has broadened in scope.Before it was possible to try to gauge the worst case of a Unaoil Kazakh contract and I though fair value to be around 550-600p if its business as usual for the rest of the company, but now it is not possible to know what the downside is as it is not clear if it is in relation to more than the above contract and the SFO has in fact found more rotten practice at PFC. There is not way to gauge the scope.Before it was clear that (with amortised payments) PFC could manage a hefty fine without an equity raise and it could refinance its debt.Now it is not clear that this is the case.I think the market will drip feed this down to the 300s now and I don't see it returning to the mid 500s any time soon.
Norman Barrington
07 Feb 2018
Re: SFO case against Tesco fails due to hear... Veksi, I am hoping you are not suggesting, our ceo has a quick heart attack, and therefore all investigations are stopped! Or maybe pi's could do a class action against the sfo for causing us post stress syndrome because of trhe effect on the sp.
veksi
06 Feb 2018
SFO case against Tesco fails due to heart attack [link]
Boyobach
06 Feb 2018
Re: RNS Ha Ha! So the RNS that some of us thought was an uninformative but necessary step to separate and downgrade the ongoing but operationally irrelevant SFO matter was a 'warning to shareholders' according to the Times. What a rag! - was there a similar analysis in the pink one? The words 'warning, widening and deepening' are all embroidery stitched together by the Times hack, of course. We always knew it would be wide ranging etc last summer - the SFO is hardly going to gingerly turn over a small number of stones in a tightly defined area. Until the Times 'sexed yesterday's news up' the market was happy with an sp of 500 - although I confess to anticipating a brief chance at 470 might arise.Given the global market and the natural pull back from recent highs, the timing of the article could hardly have been better for those (like me) who took profits and have an interest in topping back up. Did anyone notice how the volumes picked up after it bounced sharply back up from 440? Speaking of which...'All supports gone' according to someone here.... really? What is 470 and what was 440? Yes , it might get pushed back to the 300s if folks panic enough. Wake me up at 420 maybe.
Hardboy
06 Feb 2018
Re: sold The drop of the last few days is nothing to do with Petrofac - in case you've not noticed markets all round the world have plummeted. As far as the SFO case - it makes sense that the scope has widened as it is going on so long. The only thing the recent RNS did was say the uncertainty remains, which is never good for any share. As for the markets - as far as I can read it, with my simplistic head on, it started with a good jobs report from the US. Jobless were down more than expected and salaries up more than expected - so good for the economy, so good for shares - Right? You'd think; but as I can read it markets interpreted it as the economy doing well, therefore interest rates are likely to rise higher sooner, which means 1) Debt payments increase - bad for shares, and 2) bond yields rise - good for bonds. so it triggered a switch from equities into bonds, share prices fell, and started triggering automated sell signals by the barrel, which escalated the fall. I could be wrong, but I don't think anything serious has happened to equities; and it's exasperated by all the technical traders who only look at charts and don't understand the basics of companies they invest in.
SpeederD
06 Feb 2018
Re: sold It's the widening of the SFO invetigation beyond Unaoil. The Unaoil Kazakh contract and a sense of fine was possible to estimate and conclude that PFC was underpriced at around 400p.Yesterdays RNS had zero comfort or push back from the company, and today's Times article paints a much bleaker possible outcome which is harder to guess-value, and the market isn't giving them the benefit of the doubt in a macro sell off.
shugg1e
06 Feb 2018
sold I do not like what i am seeing all supports gone on the technical s and news uncertainty leads to sub 400p again
SpeederD
06 Feb 2018
Times Article They're reading between the lines suggesting the SFO investigation is now much broader than just Unaoil.[link]
Boyobach
05 Feb 2018
Re: RNS Yes - the message seems to be 'we are cracking on with business as usual and the SFO investigation is a sideshow that we don't intend to comment upon further, especially within the 2017 annual report as it has no relevance to it.A necessary but satisfyingly boring RNS.As HB indicated: Good old ii data failure - lots of useless zeros on a quite significant day for price movements.
Boyobach
05 Feb 2018
Re: AQR So today gives an object lesson in why AQR are still in the game.Let’s remember that the published declarations of ‘net short positions’ are end of day summaries, which reveal nothing of the many intra-day trades undertaken. Whilst AQR have maintained net short levels of 2% or more for ten months, the value of them is another matter. Furthermore, rather than close out when it may have seemed obvious to, AQR appear to have increased their net short position after the major drop of May/June - why? Well there were quite probably going to be more opportunities along the way - and so there were, continuing through to the last few weeks.Even on a simplistic basis, the current price is still well below that of 23rd May when AQR first reached net short positions of 2%. I believe they are currently at under 3%.I sincerely doubt that they are ‘under water’. On the contrary, I’d be astonished if their strategy hasn’t worked out rather well so far.
Hardboy
05 Feb 2018
RNS I'll avoid the temptation to moan about ii's data with 0s everywhere, and concentrate on today's RNS.As updates go it has to be just about the least informative I've ever seen, telling us what we already know (except that they don't intend to update us again.) What I conclude from it however, is that the SFO investigation will not be finishing any time soon, which is not good news.
