giovachapin
Madmaxista
- Desde
- 10 Sep 2013
- Mensajes
- 1.640
- Reputación
- 2.438
Un mi primo que esta en los EE UU, trabaja en la industria del Fracking y ya anda en busca de nuevos horizontes, pues parece ser que los años dorados se fueron.
Ya van 3 en 2015: Canadian drilling services compay files bankruptcy
- Autor del tema ane agurain
- Fecha de inicio
warezz
Madmaxista
- Desde
- 26 Jul 2011
- Mensajes
- 690
- Reputación
- 1.454
Petrobas no iba ser menos, un 30% menos..
Petrobras reducirá la exploración de petróleo "al mínimo necesario"
Petrobras reducirá la exploración de petróleo "al mínimo necesario"
ane agurain
Madmaxista
Statoil about to cut 500 jobs in Norway
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:03 ----------
Oilfield-services company Schlumberger to cut 9,000 jobs
The Columbus Dispatch reports that Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield-services provider, plans to cut 9,000 jobs, or about 7 percent of its work force, as it focuses on controlling costs in response to the fall in oil prices. The newspaper says that Schlumberger’s customers have slashed capital budgets and reduced the number of rigs amid a nearly 60 percent decline in oil prices in the past six months. Schlumberger has operations in Ohio, where it is involved in drilling in the Utica shale play
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:05 ----------
These Shale Companies Will File For Bankruptcy First: Goldman's "Best And Worst" Shale Matrix
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...tcy-first-goldmans-best-and-worst-shale-matri
Over a month ago we presented a ranking of "America's most levered energy companies." Since then they have all, without exception gotten clobbered, not only in their publicly traded stock but also their debt.
Today, long after the liquidation whirlwind has left junk bond owners dazed and confused, Goldman catches up, and lays out a matrix of shale companies sorted not only by leveraged (they see 2.5x as the cutoff; we used 4.0x) but also by shale asset quality. From there, it also lays out the various opportunities, if any, available to the management teams in the resultant 4 quadrants.
Readers will be most interested in the "restructuring/bankruptcy" option, most applicable for Group 4, because these are the names which, all else equal, will file for bankruptcy first.
This is what Goldman's Jason Gilbert has to say:
We believe oil market weakness presents H&Y E&P management teams with difficult decisions. For certain stronger companies, the challenge may be one of deciding if and when to high grade the portfolio through M&A. For some weaker companies, the decisions may be more stressful, with many lower-quality names being forced to consider (1) selling themselves, (2) restructuring/filing for bankruptcy protection, and/or (3) bolstering liquidity through asset sales and/or second lien debt issuance.
We have created a 2x2 matrix, shown in Exhibit 1, where we classify E&Ps according to both asset quality and balance sheet strength. In Exhibit 2, we provide the backup data on each company that justifies its classification in the chart below.
The matrix in question:
the explanation:
Group 1: Strong balance sheet/strong assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B+” or higher and leverage below 2.5x. Names that we place in this group include Chesapeake Energy (OP), Concho Resources (NC), Cimarex Energy (NC), and Diamondback Energy (NC). The average yield for this group is 6%.
From a strategic standpoint, we view companies in this grouping as having high optionality on both the buy and the sell side. In other words, these are companies we could envision as targets for IG upstream players looking to add high-quality shale exposure. However, these companies could also be acquirers of distressed assets or companies with complementary portfolios. From a bondholder perspective, we believe this group is well positioned for consolidation in the industry.
Group 2: Strong balance sheet/weak assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B” or lower and leverage also below 2.5x. Names include QEP Resources (NC), Newfield Exploration (OP), WPX Energy (OP), SM Energy (NC), and PDC Energy (NC).
Similar to Group 1 above, we see these companies as adders of acreage, with a focus on core positions in key shale plays. Unlike companies in Group 1, however, we do not view these names as likely targets for IG upstream. With an average yield of 7.1%, we believe bond pricing somewhat reflects this lack of upside optionality vs. Group 1.
Group 3: Weak balance sheet/strong assets
This group includes companies with 2015E leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B” or higher. Companies include Antero Resources (NC), EP Energy (OP), Laredo Petroleum (NC), Oasis Petroleum (NC), Range Resources (OP), Rosetta Resources (NC), and Whiting Petroleum (U).
We see companies in this group as being the most attractive targets for Group 1 and Group 2. One theme we heard consistently at the GS Global Energy Conference earlier this month is that management teams are willing to pay up to be in the “cores” of shale plays vs. buying “fringier” acreage at discounted prices. While this theme is not new, we believe it is even truer at $50/bbl WTI.
From a seller’s perspective, we believe the rationale for strategic combinations has also changed. Group 3 companies are the ones that have accumulated strong assets at the expense of limited financial flexibility. Facing likely negative ABL revisions and an unsecured HY E&P debt market that is essentially closed, we believe management teams that were previously committed to corporate independence may reconsider their options.
In short we believe the “bid/ask” spread for Group 3 has shrunk, and, as a result, we view this group as being the current sweet spot for E&P credit investors. At an average yield of 7.5% and bonds typically trading in the low/mid-$90s, we see potential for double digit returns if our $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016 plays out. However, we do not see the same downside risk as in Group 4 below if crude remains lower for longer.
Group 4: Weak balance sheet/weak assets
This group includes companies with leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B-“ or lower. Names we highlight are Approach Resources (NC), Exco Resources (NC), Goodrich Petroleum (NC), Halcon Resources (IL), Magnum Hunter (NC), Midstates Petroleum (NC), Rex Energy (NC), Sabine Oil & Gas (U), Samson Investment (NC), Sandridge Energy (IL), and Swift Energy (U).
We view management teams in this group as facing the most difficult decisions. Given the general lack of “core” assets, we believe strategic interest from a larger acquirer is less likely than for Group 3. Furthermore, with the bonds in this group generally trading below $80, we believe 101% change of control provisions act as de facto “poison pills” for acquirers.
Given high leverage and the lack of strategic interest, we believe many companies will need to seek alternative sources of capital. While the options here will vary case by case, we note that most of these names have secured debt baskets that can be used to bolster liquidity. Based on the phone calls we receive, investor interest in this type of security remains high, which suggests to us we will see robust second-lien issuance as soon as the conclusion of 1Q earnings. The bottom line is that, for now, we think investors should tread lightly in this group, despite the average bond yield of 19% (excluding obviously distressed names Swift Energy, Samson Investment, and Sabine Oil & Gas).
Worth noting: the above is actually an optimistic baseline:
Our ratings are predicated on a $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016. While we believe the consensus largely shares this view, there are clearly risks to the downside. Therefore – and all else being equal – we believe investors should prefer names with lower base portfolio decline rates. On average, we believe lower decline names will have more flexibility to cut capex and hibernate while waiting for an eventual recovery in prices.
And here is the backup data used by Goldman to justify the blessing (or curse) of any one given company in its quadrant.
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:10 ----------
$400 billion Loss for American Shale Due to Oil Price Deterioration | Egypt Oil & Gas
400.000 millones no es nada
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:22 ----------
https://es.finance.yahoo.com/noticias/el-n-mero-plataformas-petroleras-104534061.html
(Reuters) - El número de plataformas petroleras que están perforando en Estados Unidos cayó en 94 esta semana, el mayor descenso desde 1987, mostró un sondeo el viernes.
El retroceso es una clara señal de la presión que ha ejercido el desplome de los precios del petróleo en los productores de crudo.
En la octava semana consecutiva a la baja, el número de plataformas petroleras cayó a 1.223, la cifra más baja desde 2012, dijo la firma se servicios petroleros Baker Hughes Inc en un informe seguido con atención.
Esto se produjo tras la caída en el número de plataformas de 49 la semana pasada, 55 hace dos semanas y 61 hace tres semanas, en momentos en que las firmas de energía reducen el gasto, postergan proyectos de perforación y ponen fin a contratos con plataformas para ahorrar capital.
Los precios del petróleo en Estados Unidos han caído casi un 60 por ciento desde junio, a mínimos de cinco años por debajo de 44 dólares por barril previamente esta semana, debido a que la fuerte producción en Estados Unidos y la débil demanda global alentaron un superávit de suministros, dejando pasmados a los productores de crudo en todo el país.
El impacto se está dejando sentir, ya que el número de plataformas petroleras ha caído en 13 de las últimas 16 semanas desde que alcanzaron un nivel récord de 1.609 en octubre.
En Texas, el estado con la mayor cantidad de plataformas, el número de instalaciones cayó en 58 esta semana, la mayor bajada semanal desde 2000, según Baker Hughes.
El total de plataformas en tierra en Texas cayó a 695, la menor cantidad desde el 2010.
La formación de esquisto que perdió la mayor cantidad de plataformas fue Permian en el oeste de Texas y Nuevo México, la formación más grande y de más rápido crecimiento del país.
En Permian, el total de plataformas cayó en 25, la segunda mayor bajada semanal desde 2011, a 450 instalaciones, el menor número desde 2013.
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:03 ----------
Oilfield-services company Schlumberger to cut 9,000 jobs
The Columbus Dispatch reports that Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield-services provider, plans to cut 9,000 jobs, or about 7 percent of its work force, as it focuses on controlling costs in response to the fall in oil prices. The newspaper says that Schlumberger’s customers have slashed capital budgets and reduced the number of rigs amid a nearly 60 percent decline in oil prices in the past six months. Schlumberger has operations in Ohio, where it is involved in drilling in the Utica shale play
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:05 ----------
These Shale Companies Will File For Bankruptcy First: Goldman's "Best And Worst" Shale Matrix
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...tcy-first-goldmans-best-and-worst-shale-matri
Over a month ago we presented a ranking of "America's most levered energy companies." Since then they have all, without exception gotten clobbered, not only in their publicly traded stock but also their debt.
Today, long after the liquidation whirlwind has left junk bond owners dazed and confused, Goldman catches up, and lays out a matrix of shale companies sorted not only by leveraged (they see 2.5x as the cutoff; we used 4.0x) but also by shale asset quality. From there, it also lays out the various opportunities, if any, available to the management teams in the resultant 4 quadrants.
Readers will be most interested in the "restructuring/bankruptcy" option, most applicable for Group 4, because these are the names which, all else equal, will file for bankruptcy first.
This is what Goldman's Jason Gilbert has to say:
We believe oil market weakness presents H&Y E&P management teams with difficult decisions. For certain stronger companies, the challenge may be one of deciding if and when to high grade the portfolio through M&A. For some weaker companies, the decisions may be more stressful, with many lower-quality names being forced to consider (1) selling themselves, (2) restructuring/filing for bankruptcy protection, and/or (3) bolstering liquidity through asset sales and/or second lien debt issuance.
We have created a 2x2 matrix, shown in Exhibit 1, where we classify E&Ps according to both asset quality and balance sheet strength. In Exhibit 2, we provide the backup data on each company that justifies its classification in the chart below.
The matrix in question:
the explanation:
Group 1: Strong balance sheet/strong assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B+” or higher and leverage below 2.5x. Names that we place in this group include Chesapeake Energy (OP), Concho Resources (NC), Cimarex Energy (NC), and Diamondback Energy (NC). The average yield for this group is 6%.
From a strategic standpoint, we view companies in this grouping as having high optionality on both the buy and the sell side. In other words, these are companies we could envision as targets for IG upstream players looking to add high-quality shale exposure. However, these companies could also be acquirers of distressed assets or companies with complementary portfolios. From a bondholder perspective, we believe this group is well positioned for consolidation in the industry.
Group 2: Strong balance sheet/weak assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B” or lower and leverage also below 2.5x. Names include QEP Resources (NC), Newfield Exploration (OP), WPX Energy (OP), SM Energy (NC), and PDC Energy (NC).
Similar to Group 1 above, we see these companies as adders of acreage, with a focus on core positions in key shale plays. Unlike companies in Group 1, however, we do not view these names as likely targets for IG upstream. With an average yield of 7.1%, we believe bond pricing somewhat reflects this lack of upside optionality vs. Group 1.
Group 3: Weak balance sheet/strong assets
This group includes companies with 2015E leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B” or higher. Companies include Antero Resources (NC), EP Energy (OP), Laredo Petroleum (NC), Oasis Petroleum (NC), Range Resources (OP), Rosetta Resources (NC), and Whiting Petroleum (U).
We see companies in this group as being the most attractive targets for Group 1 and Group 2. One theme we heard consistently at the GS Global Energy Conference earlier this month is that management teams are willing to pay up to be in the “cores” of shale plays vs. buying “fringier” acreage at discounted prices. While this theme is not new, we believe it is even truer at $50/bbl WTI.
From a seller’s perspective, we believe the rationale for strategic combinations has also changed. Group 3 companies are the ones that have accumulated strong assets at the expense of limited financial flexibility. Facing likely negative ABL revisions and an unsecured HY E&P debt market that is essentially closed, we believe management teams that were previously committed to corporate independence may reconsider their options.
In short we believe the “bid/ask” spread for Group 3 has shrunk, and, as a result, we view this group as being the current sweet spot for E&P credit investors. At an average yield of 7.5% and bonds typically trading in the low/mid-$90s, we see potential for double digit returns if our $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016 plays out. However, we do not see the same downside risk as in Group 4 below if crude remains lower for longer.
Group 4: Weak balance sheet/weak assets
This group includes companies with leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B-“ or lower. Names we highlight are Approach Resources (NC), Exco Resources (NC), Goodrich Petroleum (NC), Halcon Resources (IL), Magnum Hunter (NC), Midstates Petroleum (NC), Rex Energy (NC), Sabine Oil & Gas (U), Samson Investment (NC), Sandridge Energy (IL), and Swift Energy (U).
We view management teams in this group as facing the most difficult decisions. Given the general lack of “core” assets, we believe strategic interest from a larger acquirer is less likely than for Group 3. Furthermore, with the bonds in this group generally trading below $80, we believe 101% change of control provisions act as de facto “poison pills” for acquirers.
Given high leverage and the lack of strategic interest, we believe many companies will need to seek alternative sources of capital. While the options here will vary case by case, we note that most of these names have secured debt baskets that can be used to bolster liquidity. Based on the phone calls we receive, investor interest in this type of security remains high, which suggests to us we will see robust second-lien issuance as soon as the conclusion of 1Q earnings. The bottom line is that, for now, we think investors should tread lightly in this group, despite the average bond yield of 19% (excluding obviously distressed names Swift Energy, Samson Investment, and Sabine Oil & Gas).
Worth noting: the above is actually an optimistic baseline:
Our ratings are predicated on a $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016. While we believe the consensus largely shares this view, there are clearly risks to the downside. Therefore – and all else being equal – we believe investors should prefer names with lower base portfolio decline rates. On average, we believe lower decline names will have more flexibility to cut capex and hibernate while waiting for an eventual recovery in prices.
And here is the backup data used by Goldman to justify the blessing (or curse) of any one given company in its quadrant.
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:10 ----------
$400 billion Loss for American Shale Due to Oil Price Deterioration | Egypt Oil & Gas
400.000 millones no es nada
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:22 ----------
https://es.finance.yahoo.com/noticias/el-n-mero-plataformas-petroleras-104534061.html
(Reuters) - El número de plataformas petroleras que están perforando en Estados Unidos cayó en 94 esta semana, el mayor descenso desde 1987, mostró un sondeo el viernes.
El retroceso es una clara señal de la presión que ha ejercido el desplome de los precios del petróleo en los productores de crudo.
En la octava semana consecutiva a la baja, el número de plataformas petroleras cayó a 1.223, la cifra más baja desde 2012, dijo la firma se servicios petroleros Baker Hughes Inc en un informe seguido con atención.
Esto se produjo tras la caída en el número de plataformas de 49 la semana pasada, 55 hace dos semanas y 61 hace tres semanas, en momentos en que las firmas de energía reducen el gasto, postergan proyectos de perforación y ponen fin a contratos con plataformas para ahorrar capital.
Los precios del petróleo en Estados Unidos han caído casi un 60 por ciento desde junio, a mínimos de cinco años por debajo de 44 dólares por barril previamente esta semana, debido a que la fuerte producción en Estados Unidos y la débil demanda global alentaron un superávit de suministros, dejando pasmados a los productores de crudo en todo el país.
El impacto se está dejando sentir, ya que el número de plataformas petroleras ha caído en 13 de las últimas 16 semanas desde que alcanzaron un nivel récord de 1.609 en octubre.
En Texas, el estado con la mayor cantidad de plataformas, el número de instalaciones cayó en 58 esta semana, la mayor bajada semanal desde 2000, según Baker Hughes.
El total de plataformas en tierra en Texas cayó a 695, la menor cantidad desde el 2010.
La formación de esquisto que perdió la mayor cantidad de plataformas fue Permian en el oeste de Texas y Nuevo México, la formación más grande y de más rápido crecimiento del país.
En Permian, el total de plataformas cayó en 25, la segunda mayor bajada semanal desde 2011, a 450 instalaciones, el menor número desde 2013.
Última edición:
Statoil about to cut 500 jobs in Norway
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:03 ----------
Oilfield-services company Schlumberger to cut 9,000 jobs
The Columbus Dispatch reports that Schlumberger Ltd., the world’s largest oilfield-services provider, plans to cut 9,000 jobs, or about 7 percent of its work force, as it focuses on controlling costs in response to the fall in oil prices. The newspaper says that Schlumberger’s customers have slashed capital budgets and reduced the number of rigs amid a nearly 60 percent decline in oil prices in the past six months. Schlumberger has operations in Ohio, where it is involved in drilling in the Utica shale play
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:05 ----------
These Shale Companies Will File For Bankruptcy First: Goldman's "Best And Worst" Shale Matrix
These Shale Companies Will File For Bankruptcy First: Goldman's "Best And Worst" Shale Matrix | Zero Hedge
Over a month ago we presented a ranking of "America's most levered energy companies." Since then they have all, without exception gotten clobbered, not only in their publicly traded stock but also their debt.
Today, long after the liquidation whirlwind has left junk bond owners dazed and confused, Goldman catches up, and lays out a matrix of shale companies sorted not only by leveraged (they see 2.5x as the cutoff; we used 4.0x) but also by shale asset quality. From there, it also lays out the various opportunities, if any, available to the management teams in the resultant 4 quadrants.
Readers will be most interested in the "restructuring/bankruptcy" option, most applicable for Group 4, because these are the names which, all else equal, will file for bankruptcy first.
This is what Goldman's Jason Gilbert has to say:
We believe oil market weakness presents H&Y E&P management teams with difficult decisions. For certain stronger companies, the challenge may be one of deciding if and when to high grade the portfolio through M&A. For some weaker companies, the decisions may be more stressful, with many lower-quality names being forced to consider (1) selling themselves, (2) restructuring/filing for bankruptcy protection, and/or (3) bolstering liquidity through asset sales and/or second lien debt issuance.
We have created a 2x2 matrix, shown in Exhibit 1, where we classify E&Ps according to both asset quality and balance sheet strength. In Exhibit 2, we provide the backup data on each company that justifies its classification in the chart below.
The matrix in question:
the explanation:
Group 1: Strong balance sheet/strong assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B+” or higher and leverage below 2.5x. Names that we place in this group include Chesapeake Energy (OP), Concho Resources (NC), Cimarex Energy (NC), and Diamondback Energy (NC). The average yield for this group is 6%.
From a strategic standpoint, we view companies in this grouping as having high optionality on both the buy and the sell side. In other words, these are companies we could envision as targets for IG upstream players looking to add high-quality shale exposure. However, these companies could also be acquirers of distressed assets or companies with complementary portfolios. From a bondholder perspective, we believe this group is well positioned for consolidation in the industry.
Group 2: Strong balance sheet/weak assets
Companies in this group have assets we rate “B” or lower and leverage also below 2.5x. Names include QEP Resources (NC), Newfield Exploration (OP), WPX Energy (OP), SM Energy (NC), and PDC Energy (NC).
Similar to Group 1 above, we see these companies as adders of acreage, with a focus on core positions in key shale plays. Unlike companies in Group 1, however, we do not view these names as likely targets for IG upstream. With an average yield of 7.1%, we believe bond pricing somewhat reflects this lack of upside optionality vs. Group 1.
Group 3: Weak balance sheet/strong assets
This group includes companies with 2015E leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B” or higher. Companies include Antero Resources (NC), EP Energy (OP), Laredo Petroleum (NC), Oasis Petroleum (NC), Range Resources (OP), Rosetta Resources (NC), and Whiting Petroleum (U).
We see companies in this group as being the most attractive targets for Group 1 and Group 2. One theme we heard consistently at the GS Global Energy Conference earlier this month is that management teams are willing to pay up to be in the “cores” of shale plays vs. buying “fringier” acreage at discounted prices. While this theme is not new, we believe it is even truer at $50/bbl WTI.
From a seller’s perspective, we believe the rationale for strategic combinations has also changed. Group 3 companies are the ones that have accumulated strong assets at the expense of limited financial flexibility. Facing likely negative ABL revisions and an unsecured HY E&P debt market that is essentially closed, we believe management teams that were previously committed to corporate independence may reconsider their options.
In short we believe the “bid/ask” spread for Group 3 has shrunk, and, as a result, we view this group as being the current sweet spot for E&P credit investors. At an average yield of 7.5% and bonds typically trading in the low/mid-$90s, we see potential for double digit returns if our $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016 plays out. However, we do not see the same downside risk as in Group 4 below if crude remains lower for longer.
Group 4: Weak balance sheet/weak assets
This group includes companies with leverage above 2.5x and assets we rate “B-“ or lower. Names we highlight are Approach Resources (NC), Exco Resources (NC), Goodrich Petroleum (NC), Halcon Resources (IL), Magnum Hunter (NC), Midstates Petroleum (NC), Rex Energy (NC), Sabine Oil & Gas (U), Samson Investment (NC), Sandridge Energy (IL), and Swift Energy (U).
We view management teams in this group as facing the most difficult decisions. Given the general lack of “core” assets, we believe strategic interest from a larger acquirer is less likely than for Group 3. Furthermore, with the bonds in this group generally trading below $80, we believe 101% change of control provisions act as de facto “poison pills” for acquirers.
Given high leverage and the lack of strategic interest, we believe many companies will need to seek alternative sources of capital. While the options here will vary case by case, we note that most of these names have secured debt baskets that can be used to bolster liquidity. Based on the phone calls we receive, investor interest in this type of security remains high, which suggests to us we will see robust second-lien issuance as soon as the conclusion of 1Q earnings. The bottom line is that, for now, we think investors should tread lightly in this group, despite the average bond yield of 19% (excluding obviously distressed names Swift Energy, Samson Investment, and Sabine Oil & Gas).
Worth noting: the above is actually an optimistic baseline:
Our ratings are predicated on a $65/bbl WTI oil price in 2016. While we believe the consensus largely shares this view, there are clearly risks to the downside. Therefore – and all else being equal – we believe investors should prefer names with lower base portfolio decline rates. On average, we believe lower decline names will have more flexibility to cut capex and hibernate while waiting for an eventual recovery in prices.
And here is the backup data used by Goldman to justify the blessing (or curse) of any one given company in its quadrant.
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:10 ----------
$400 billion Loss for American Shale Due to Oil Price Deterioration | Egypt Oil & Gas
400.000 millones no es nada
---------- Post added 02-feb-2015 at 00:22 ----------
https://es.finance.yahoo.com/noticias/el-n-mero-plataformas-petroleras-104534061.html
(Reuters) - El número de plataformas petroleras que están perforando en Estados Unidos cayó en 94 esta semana, el mayor descenso desde 1987, mostró un sondeo el viernes.
El retroceso es una clara señal de la presión que ha ejercido el desplome de los precios del petróleo en los productores de crudo.
En la octava semana consecutiva a la baja, el número de plataformas petroleras cayó a 1.223, la cifra más baja desde 2012, dijo la firma se servicios petroleros Baker Hughes Inc en un informe seguido con atención.
Esto se produjo tras la caída en el número de plataformas de 49 la semana pasada, 55 hace dos semanas y 61 hace tres semanas, en momentos en que las firmas de energía reducen el gasto, postergan proyectos de perforación y ponen fin a contratos con plataformas para ahorrar capital.
Los precios del petróleo en Estados Unidos han caído casi un 60 por ciento desde junio, a mínimos de cinco años por debajo de 44 dólares por barril previamente esta semana, debido a que la fuerte producción en Estados Unidos y la débil demanda global alentaron un superávit de suministros, dejando pasmados a los productores de crudo en todo el país.
El impacto se está dejando sentir, ya que el número de plataformas petroleras ha caído en 13 de las últimas 16 semanas desde que alcanzaron un nivel récord de 1.609 en octubre.
En Texas, el estado con la mayor cantidad de plataformas, el número de instalaciones cayó en 58 esta semana, la mayor bajada semanal desde 2000, según Baker Hughes.
El total de plataformas en tierra en Texas cayó a 695, la menor cantidad desde el 2010.
La formación de esquisto que perdió la mayor cantidad de plataformas fue Permian en el oeste de Texas y Nuevo México, la formación más grande y de más rápido crecimiento del país.
En Permian, el total de plataformas cayó en 25, la segunda mayor bajada semanal desde 2011, a 450 instalaciones, el menor número desde 2013.
Aquí la página con los datos de las perforaciones mes a mes.
Muy interesante.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=79687&p=irol-rigcountsintl
Saludos.
ane agurain
Madmaxista
Agencia china de calificación otorga la 'AAA' a Gazprom - RT
Agencia china de calificación otorga la 'AAA' a Gazprom
---------- Post added 03-feb-2015 at 00:17 ----------
Sonde Resources Corp. Files for Bankruptcy
---------- Post added 03-feb-2015 at 00:17 ----------
BP cuts 255 jobs in Azerbaijan
Could Canadian Oil Sands Ltd Go Bankrupt? | The Motley Fool Canada
OilVoice | UK Parliament rejects jovenlandesatorium on shale gas exploration and development
Agencia china de calificación otorga la 'AAA' a Gazprom
---------- Post added 03-feb-2015 at 00:17 ----------
Sonde Resources Corp. Files for Bankruptcy
---------- Post added 03-feb-2015 at 00:17 ----------
BP cuts 255 jobs in Azerbaijan
Could Canadian Oil Sands Ltd Go Bankrupt? | The Motley Fool Canada
OilVoice | UK Parliament rejects jovenlandesatorium on shale gas exploration and development
lobomalo
Madmaxista
En el informe de "perfora chico perfora" hay datos muy interesantes... es largo... pero muy aclaratorio respecto a esto del fracking... maxime cuando hace alusion al numero de nuevas plataformas para mantener la produccion... ... en resumen viene a decir que se necesitan nuevos pozos de forma continua para mantener la produccion.. con lo cualo si la tendencia es a cerrarlos... la ostra va a ser de proporciones biblicas y en plan "the end is near"...
Perfora, Chico, Perfora: informe sobre el nuevo mito de la abundancia energética |
...
El gran problema aqui es la exposicion de la banca americana y su apalancamiento en los bonos sarama de estas empresas de fracking.
Estos fondos estaran ahora intentando quitarse de encima toda esa sarama, igual que hicieron con las hipotecas subprime, aunque puede que esta vez no lo consigan para el bien de todo el sistema financiero.
Si el precio sigue 50 $ dudo que la industria del fracking llegue ni siquiere a Octubre, todas las alarmas se encedieron con el barril a 70 $, ahora reina el silencio porque la situacion es critica.
La gran pregunta aqui es si Rusia/ Iran / Venezuela soportaran los 50 $.
Estos fondos estaran ahora intentando quitarse de encima toda esa sarama, igual que hicieron con las hipotecas subprime, aunque puede que esta vez no lo consigan para el bien de todo el sistema financiero.
Si el precio sigue 50 $ dudo que la industria del fracking llegue ni siquiere a Octubre, todas las alarmas se encedieron con el barril a 70 $, ahora reina el silencio porque la situacion es critica.
La gran pregunta aqui es si Rusia/ Iran / Venezuela soportaran los 50 $.
Sir Torpedo
Será en Octubre
- Desde
- 26 Jun 2009
- Mensajes
- 30.062
- Reputación
- 102.912
De entrada ya le aviso que EEUU NO seguro.
Nada que no se dijera ya en el foro . DEl fracking se puede obtener mucha producción de petróleo pero la rentabilidad es muy baja dada el enorme esfuerzo de tener que estar continuamente perforando para mantener la producción y todo el gasto que supone además de costes operativos.
El chollo era el petróleo convencional, pinchas y te tiras 30 años sacando petróleo... pero eso ya se acabó
El chollo era el petróleo convencional, pinchas y te tiras 30 años sacando petróleo... pero eso ya se acabó
ane agurain
Madmaxista
ane agurain
Madmaxista
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/bus...bya-risks-bankruptcy-as-oil-price-falls-.html
Western powers say Libya risks bankruptcy as oil price falls
---------- Post added 07-feb-2015 at 18:17 ----------
News from Macon and Warner Robins, GA, and beyond | The Telegraph
BP Posts Quarterly Loss Amid Oil Price Rout - WSJ
Western powers say Libya risks bankruptcy as oil price falls
---------- Post added 07-feb-2015 at 18:17 ----------
News from Macon and Warner Robins, GA, and beyond | The Telegraph
BP Posts Quarterly Loss Amid Oil Price Rout - WSJ
ane agurain
Madmaxista
ane agurain
Madmaxista
El gigante estadounidense de servicios petroleros Halliburton dijo el martes que tiene previsto eliminar más de 6.000 empleos en todo el mundo, debido a la complicada atmósfera en el mercado generada por el desplome de los precios del crudo. Halliburton es la más reciente de una creciente lista de empresas relacionadas con el petróleo que han despedido a trabajadores por la debilidad del mercado del crudo.
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:05 ----------
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/north-sea-oil-bankruptcy-risk-063925265.html
Insolvency experts say number of oil and gas businesses at significant risk up 69pc
The number of British oil and gas related companies at risk of going bankrupt has increased by almost three quarters amid a steep decline in the fortunes of the North Sea amowing a plunge in the price of crude.
Data from insolvency specialists Begbies Traynor (LSE: BEG.L - news) released exclusively to The Telegraph shows that the number of UK oil and gas businesses experiencing “significant” financial distress increased by 69pc to 486 in the fourth quarter, compared with 288 companies a year earlier.
“We expect there to be a major wave of consolidation in the industry as businesses race against time to deliver cost synergies or face falling into greater distress,” said Julie Palmer, partner at Begbies Traynor. “In the absence of successful consolidation, we expect that as many as 50 companies in the sector face administration in the next eighteen months.”
The oil industry is lobbying Chancellor George Osborne hard for tax breaks and financial incentives to boost the North Sea amid antiestéticars of cut backs by operators and falling production. Oil prices have bounced recently but remain down around 50pc at just under $60 per barrel when compared with levels achieved in June last year.
“Smaller oil and gas companies will be hardest hit by historically low oil prices and major cuts to investment in the industry as they lack the cash reserves the big players have to weather the storm. In particular, we expect service firms to face rapidly deteriorating trading as oil rigs are taken offline and extraction firms race to reduce their cash burn in an environment where it is increasingly challenging to raise new funds,” said Ms Palmer.
Around 16bn barrels of oil are thought to remain in the region, which started being exploited in the early 1970s. But rates of decline have increased in recent years as the cost of production has increased. More than 450,000 jobs in the UK are thought to depend on the industry, which is estimated to be worth £35bn to the British economy.
Industry veteran Sir Ian Wood has warned that 6bn barrels of reserves in the North Sea may go untapped unless the Government addresses the failings of the current tax regime.
"If the jobs of the 450,000 who work in the North Sea and the 1.4m barrels per day that is produced are to be safeguarded what the Chancellor is reported to be considering should only be the starting point," said John Hutchinson, managing partner for energy-focused private equity firm Epi (HKSE: 0689-OL.HK - news) -V. "With ageing fields and continually rising production costs combined with what could be a more long-lasting low oil price environment, the Chancellor could well be forced to act again either by cutting taxes further or introducing other incentives for drillers to keep the wells pumping.”
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:05 ----------
Reef Subsea parent files for bankruptcy as oil market woes scupper restructuring plan - The Journal
The parent company of Stockton-based cabling specialists Reef Subsea has filed for bankruptcy, raising questions over the future of around 80 North East jobs.
Reef Subsea AS, the Norwegian parent company of Thornaby-based Reef Subsea UK Ltd (RSUK), revealed it had filed for bankruptcy this week.
But RSUK, which posted a pre-tax loss of £15.9m in 2013, maintained it is a separate legal entity and remains under the control of its own directors.
A spokesperson said: “For the avoidance of doubt, Reef Subsea UK Limited is not in administration.”
Last year Reef Subsea AS restructured to form three independent business – X-Subsea, Reef Power & Umbilical and Technocean Subsea.
Reef’s chairman Mel Fitzgerald has been reported in the Norwegian press, as saying recent market deterioration caused by low oil prices had scuppered the turnaround efforts.
Speaking to the Norwegian newspaper, Dagens Næringsliv, Mr Fitzgerald, said: “We have worked intensively in recent years to restructure the company and reduce costs and competition.
“The recent deterioration in the market has made that we have not succeeded. We have tried to find solutions together with the central shareholders, but unfortunately we have not managed to get agreement that restructures the company.”
In its 2013 accounts RSUK said it was looking forward to becoming a “major player and market force” in 2016 and 2017, despite pre-tax losses of £15.9m.
Only weeks ago the Teesside firm announced it had completed work on the Gwynt y Môr Offshore Wind Farm – its largest contract to date.
In its 2013 accounts, Reef Subsea UK said the contract had been made difficult initially by poor conditions, a antiestéticature which had contributed to the significant losses.
Commenting on news of Reef Subsea AS’ bankruptcy, Neil relleniton, chief executive of industry body Subsea UK, said: “This hugely disappointing news will regrettably not be the only casualty in the oil and gas industry in the coming months when we expect to see more job losses and companies battling to survive.
“Those companies which are highly leveraged, which have capital intensive strategies, high-cost vessels and will be most affected if projects continue to be postponed or cancelled and they are unable to quickly re-shape and reposition themselves to adapt to the current market challenges.
“However, the fundamentals in subsea globally remain relatively strong and there will be opportunities for those companies who have a spread of international business and can demonstrate innovation and new technology which add value and increase efficiency. The UK subsea industry is globally renowned for its expertise, technology and entrepreneurialism and it will need to use these to adapt and innovate in the next year or two.”
Reef’s Stockton operation was launched in 2012 with the backing of its Norwegian group.
The business started with 40 staff and has since grown to around 80.
Last year the Reef Subsea AS group was bought by Norwegian private equity firm HitecVision in a £15.2m deal.
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:06 ----------
What Oil Companies May Need to Know About Bankruptcy | Texas Lawyer
The 1980s saw a steep decline in the price of oil, and with that came an unprecedented boom in bankruptcies. Bankruptcy lawyers were bombarded with work, and there were not that many qualified bankruptcy lawyers around to handle the load. Many lawyers from other practice areas transitioned their practices to bankruptcy law. However, as the economy improved, these same lawyers have left the practice, handing it back to the "true" bankruptcy specialists. Other bankruptcy lawyers retired when the market for their services was reduced leaving the field wide open for a new generation of bankruptcy lawyers.
While the recent oil bust is going to foster business for bankruptcy lawyers, times are different now than in the 1980s. In the 1980s, the oil bust was accompanied by a commercial real estate crisis, which coupled together, led to bank failures and a deep recession. The oil bust occurring now is not nearly as significant an event to cause bank failures and a real estate collapse. The bankers have learned from the mistakes they made in the 1980s.
However, with oil dropping from a high of over a $100 to a low of under $50 per barrel in a very short period of time, and projected by some to go even lower, there will be a significant need for bankruptcy expertise in numerous areas. Who could have predicted that the price of oil would have dropped so fast? How can an oil industry company possibly be expected to be in a position to transition into a totally new business model in such a short time with such little notice?
Although the economy in Texas, and in Houston in particular, has become more diversified, there is no doubt that a significant part of the Texas economy is energy related. The diversification may lessen the impact of falling oil prices, but there has been and will continue to be a major impact.
The oil service companies and drilling companies are going to fare badly. Producers will stop drilling, and the rig counts will (and have already) dropped dramatically. As rigs become idle, oil drilling companies, their suppliers, their workers, and related service companies will suffer. Cash flow shortfalls for these companies will make them unable to service their debt, maintain even reduced operations and pay old trade credit.
Reported job losses in the oil business have already been staggering and this is just the beginning. The companies and their creditors are all going to need restructuring counsel. The company itself may need to file a chapter 11 reorganization to restructure its debts if it is unable to do so through a voluntary work-out with its creditors. In extreme cases, the companies may need to shut down and liquidate under chapter 7 bankruptcy. In fact, some predict if oil falls below $40 per barrel, there will be a number of straight liquidations resulting in major job losses. In essence, at that low level, there is nothing left to justify a reorganization because the value simply is not there.
Oil and gas producers are going to face the same challenges. Many of them have issued high yield debt that they will not be able to pay. Since oil prices are dramatically low, there will be loan covenant defaults as the collateral value has declined significantly. Lenders will be concerned and the company's cash flow will just not be there to service the current debt. The debt will have to be restructured. Both the company and the creditors are going to need representation.
There should also be a substantial amount of acquisition activity in the oil and gas industry. Due to the high debt load, many of these transactions will need to be accomplished through the use of chapter 11. There will be opportunities to represent the asset purchaser and the asset seller. This consolidation will be prevalent in the service company sector where a bigger company will see an opportunity too good to pass up. For example, large service companies and suppliers will make strategic acquisitions of other companies. Many of these transactions will have to be handled through the chapter 11 process to give the purchaser the protections that it needs from the debts of the selling company.
It will take several months for the effects of the sharp drop to take an effect on the oil companies because many of the projects were underway and funds for same have already been allocated. Additionally, some oil industry companies learned from the 1980s and have cash reserves on hand and are prepared for the bust. The vast majority though will experience tough times. Bankruptcy lawyers should be prepared for a massive amount of work. If oil drops below $30 per barrel, the current disaster could turn into a catastrophe for the global economy.
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:05 ----------
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/north-sea-oil-bankruptcy-risk-063925265.html
Insolvency experts say number of oil and gas businesses at significant risk up 69pc
The number of British oil and gas related companies at risk of going bankrupt has increased by almost three quarters amid a steep decline in the fortunes of the North Sea amowing a plunge in the price of crude.
Data from insolvency specialists Begbies Traynor (LSE: BEG.L - news) released exclusively to The Telegraph shows that the number of UK oil and gas businesses experiencing “significant” financial distress increased by 69pc to 486 in the fourth quarter, compared with 288 companies a year earlier.
“We expect there to be a major wave of consolidation in the industry as businesses race against time to deliver cost synergies or face falling into greater distress,” said Julie Palmer, partner at Begbies Traynor. “In the absence of successful consolidation, we expect that as many as 50 companies in the sector face administration in the next eighteen months.”
The oil industry is lobbying Chancellor George Osborne hard for tax breaks and financial incentives to boost the North Sea amid antiestéticars of cut backs by operators and falling production. Oil prices have bounced recently but remain down around 50pc at just under $60 per barrel when compared with levels achieved in June last year.
“Smaller oil and gas companies will be hardest hit by historically low oil prices and major cuts to investment in the industry as they lack the cash reserves the big players have to weather the storm. In particular, we expect service firms to face rapidly deteriorating trading as oil rigs are taken offline and extraction firms race to reduce their cash burn in an environment where it is increasingly challenging to raise new funds,” said Ms Palmer.
Around 16bn barrels of oil are thought to remain in the region, which started being exploited in the early 1970s. But rates of decline have increased in recent years as the cost of production has increased. More than 450,000 jobs in the UK are thought to depend on the industry, which is estimated to be worth £35bn to the British economy.
Industry veteran Sir Ian Wood has warned that 6bn barrels of reserves in the North Sea may go untapped unless the Government addresses the failings of the current tax regime.
"If the jobs of the 450,000 who work in the North Sea and the 1.4m barrels per day that is produced are to be safeguarded what the Chancellor is reported to be considering should only be the starting point," said John Hutchinson, managing partner for energy-focused private equity firm Epi (HKSE: 0689-OL.HK - news) -V. "With ageing fields and continually rising production costs combined with what could be a more long-lasting low oil price environment, the Chancellor could well be forced to act again either by cutting taxes further or introducing other incentives for drillers to keep the wells pumping.”
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:05 ----------
Reef Subsea parent files for bankruptcy as oil market woes scupper restructuring plan - The Journal
The parent company of Stockton-based cabling specialists Reef Subsea has filed for bankruptcy, raising questions over the future of around 80 North East jobs.
Reef Subsea AS, the Norwegian parent company of Thornaby-based Reef Subsea UK Ltd (RSUK), revealed it had filed for bankruptcy this week.
But RSUK, which posted a pre-tax loss of £15.9m in 2013, maintained it is a separate legal entity and remains under the control of its own directors.
A spokesperson said: “For the avoidance of doubt, Reef Subsea UK Limited is not in administration.”
Last year Reef Subsea AS restructured to form three independent business – X-Subsea, Reef Power & Umbilical and Technocean Subsea.
Reef’s chairman Mel Fitzgerald has been reported in the Norwegian press, as saying recent market deterioration caused by low oil prices had scuppered the turnaround efforts.
Speaking to the Norwegian newspaper, Dagens Næringsliv, Mr Fitzgerald, said: “We have worked intensively in recent years to restructure the company and reduce costs and competition.
“The recent deterioration in the market has made that we have not succeeded. We have tried to find solutions together with the central shareholders, but unfortunately we have not managed to get agreement that restructures the company.”
In its 2013 accounts RSUK said it was looking forward to becoming a “major player and market force” in 2016 and 2017, despite pre-tax losses of £15.9m.
Only weeks ago the Teesside firm announced it had completed work on the Gwynt y Môr Offshore Wind Farm – its largest contract to date.
In its 2013 accounts, Reef Subsea UK said the contract had been made difficult initially by poor conditions, a antiestéticature which had contributed to the significant losses.
Commenting on news of Reef Subsea AS’ bankruptcy, Neil relleniton, chief executive of industry body Subsea UK, said: “This hugely disappointing news will regrettably not be the only casualty in the oil and gas industry in the coming months when we expect to see more job losses and companies battling to survive.
“Those companies which are highly leveraged, which have capital intensive strategies, high-cost vessels and will be most affected if projects continue to be postponed or cancelled and they are unable to quickly re-shape and reposition themselves to adapt to the current market challenges.
“However, the fundamentals in subsea globally remain relatively strong and there will be opportunities for those companies who have a spread of international business and can demonstrate innovation and new technology which add value and increase efficiency. The UK subsea industry is globally renowned for its expertise, technology and entrepreneurialism and it will need to use these to adapt and innovate in the next year or two.”
Reef’s Stockton operation was launched in 2012 with the backing of its Norwegian group.
The business started with 40 staff and has since grown to around 80.
Last year the Reef Subsea AS group was bought by Norwegian private equity firm HitecVision in a £15.2m deal.
---------- Post added 10-feb-2015 at 23:06 ----------
What Oil Companies May Need to Know About Bankruptcy | Texas Lawyer
The 1980s saw a steep decline in the price of oil, and with that came an unprecedented boom in bankruptcies. Bankruptcy lawyers were bombarded with work, and there were not that many qualified bankruptcy lawyers around to handle the load. Many lawyers from other practice areas transitioned their practices to bankruptcy law. However, as the economy improved, these same lawyers have left the practice, handing it back to the "true" bankruptcy specialists. Other bankruptcy lawyers retired when the market for their services was reduced leaving the field wide open for a new generation of bankruptcy lawyers.
While the recent oil bust is going to foster business for bankruptcy lawyers, times are different now than in the 1980s. In the 1980s, the oil bust was accompanied by a commercial real estate crisis, which coupled together, led to bank failures and a deep recession. The oil bust occurring now is not nearly as significant an event to cause bank failures and a real estate collapse. The bankers have learned from the mistakes they made in the 1980s.
However, with oil dropping from a high of over a $100 to a low of under $50 per barrel in a very short period of time, and projected by some to go even lower, there will be a significant need for bankruptcy expertise in numerous areas. Who could have predicted that the price of oil would have dropped so fast? How can an oil industry company possibly be expected to be in a position to transition into a totally new business model in such a short time with such little notice?
Although the economy in Texas, and in Houston in particular, has become more diversified, there is no doubt that a significant part of the Texas economy is energy related. The diversification may lessen the impact of falling oil prices, but there has been and will continue to be a major impact.
The oil service companies and drilling companies are going to fare badly. Producers will stop drilling, and the rig counts will (and have already) dropped dramatically. As rigs become idle, oil drilling companies, their suppliers, their workers, and related service companies will suffer. Cash flow shortfalls for these companies will make them unable to service their debt, maintain even reduced operations and pay old trade credit.
Reported job losses in the oil business have already been staggering and this is just the beginning. The companies and their creditors are all going to need restructuring counsel. The company itself may need to file a chapter 11 reorganization to restructure its debts if it is unable to do so through a voluntary work-out with its creditors. In extreme cases, the companies may need to shut down and liquidate under chapter 7 bankruptcy. In fact, some predict if oil falls below $40 per barrel, there will be a number of straight liquidations resulting in major job losses. In essence, at that low level, there is nothing left to justify a reorganization because the value simply is not there.
Oil and gas producers are going to face the same challenges. Many of them have issued high yield debt that they will not be able to pay. Since oil prices are dramatically low, there will be loan covenant defaults as the collateral value has declined significantly. Lenders will be concerned and the company's cash flow will just not be there to service the current debt. The debt will have to be restructured. Both the company and the creditors are going to need representation.
There should also be a substantial amount of acquisition activity in the oil and gas industry. Due to the high debt load, many of these transactions will need to be accomplished through the use of chapter 11. There will be opportunities to represent the asset purchaser and the asset seller. This consolidation will be prevalent in the service company sector where a bigger company will see an opportunity too good to pass up. For example, large service companies and suppliers will make strategic acquisitions of other companies. Many of these transactions will have to be handled through the chapter 11 process to give the purchaser the protections that it needs from the debts of the selling company.
It will take several months for the effects of the sharp drop to take an effect on the oil companies because many of the projects were underway and funds for same have already been allocated. Additionally, some oil industry companies learned from the 1980s and have cash reserves on hand and are prepared for the bust. The vast majority though will experience tough times. Bankruptcy lawyers should be prepared for a massive amount of work. If oil drops below $30 per barrel, the current disaster could turn into a catastrophe for the global economy.
Similar threads
