Amaal oil fields in east Libya. The privatization of the industry is taking place after the counter-revolution against Col. Muammar Gaddafi., a photo by Pan-African News Wire File Photos on Flickr.
Oil slightly higher in Asia, still above USD105/bbl
By Investing.com
Jul 26, 2013 01:01AM GMT
Investing.com - Oil futures traded slightly higher in Friday’s Asian session with West Texas Intermediate clinging to the psychologically important USD105 per barrel level.
On the New York Mercantile Exchange, light, sweet crude futures for September delivery inched up 0.02% to USD105.51 per barrel in Asian trading Friday.
During Thursday’s U.S. session, upside for oil was capped due to some disappointing jobs data. In U.S. economic news out Thursday, the U.S. Labor Department said initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 7,000 to 343,000 last week. Economists expected a reading of 340,000 new claims. The unemployment rate among people eligible for benefits dropped to 2.3 percent in the week ended July 13 from 2.4 percent the prior week, according to Bloomberg.
Durable goods orders jumped 4.2% in June after a revised 5.2% increase in May. Analysts expected an increase of just 1.4%.
Core durable goods orders, which exclude volatile transportation items, were flat in June, missing expectations for a 0.5% increase.
Elsewhere, Halliburton, the world’s second-largest oilfield services, admitted earlier Friday that it destroyed evidence related to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, according to the Justice Department. In another matter, Baker Hughes and Halliburton confirmed they are being investigated by the Justice Department for anti-competitive practices in the U.S. fracking industry.
U.S oil giant Marathon is reportedly mulling the sale of its stake in offshore partnership in Libya. Libya, home to Africa’s largest oil reserves, has seen production hampered because of violence near oil assets.
Meanwhile, Brent futures for September delivery inched down 0.02% to USD107.65 per barrel.
Should U.S. Oil Producers Give up on Northern Africa?
by Matt DiLallo, The Motley Fool Jun 25th 2013 3:29PM
Northern Africa has seen its share of violence over the past couple of years. From the Arab Spring to the Benghazi and Amenas attacks, it seems like the whole region is becoming less stable. At the same time, the region is blessed with vast oil and gas reserves, which have attracted several U.S.-based oil and gas producers. Given the increased violence, one has to wonder if it's really worth the true cost of developing these resources.
The attack on the Amenas natural gas facility in Algeria, which is operated by BP , led to the deaths of about 40 foreign workers. Worse yet, the attack could mark just the beginning of what could become increased violence and bloodshed against foreign workers in the region. The threat of further violence is one of the reasons why BP has been withdrawing some of its personnel from Libya.
The question is whether U.S. oil producers in the region should do the same... if not pull out of the region all together. One thing that is becoming increasingly clear, operating in the region certainly doesn't sit well with investors. The value of many companies with ties to region have been weighed down simply because the companies have operations in Africa.
This can be seen when looking at companies with operations in Libya. Both Marathon Oil and Occidental Petroleum , for example, have operations in the country, which could be part of the reason why both stocks are trading cheaply when compared to their U.S.-centric peers. Marathon, for example, trades at just three times enterprise value to estimated 2013 EBITDA making it one of the cheapest, large-cap, independent, exploration and production companies in the market. Occidental isn't quite as cheap, but at 5.4 times it's still at the lower end of its peer group.
Marathon's exposure to Libya consists of its 16.2% working interest in the Waha Group, which has exploration and production rights in the country. However, the unrest in the country had caused production to cease in 2011. Marathon has been basically pulling out Libya of the equation when reporting its production numbers because of uncertainty around sustained production and sales levels. Because investors don't like uncertainty, the company's Libya operations are likely keeping a lid on its stock.
Occidental's history in Libya dates all the way back to the 1960s. More recently the company was the first to restart operations in the country after the U.S. lifted sanctions in 2004. Overall, Libya isn't a focus of the company, as Occidental participates with the national oil company as well as in several onshore exploration blocks. That being said, Libya could be one of the factors weighing down its share price.
The dilemma for both investors and oil and gas companies is that Libya has a lot of oil. In addition to its conventional resources the country has an estimated 26 billion barrels of technically recoverable shale oil. That makes it the fifth-largest holder of shale oil reserves in the world. Despite the challenges, the country's potential is just too tempting to pass up.
It's a similar story in Egypt, where Apache operates. Like its peers with a presence in Libya, Apache's Egyptian operations are likely one reason why the company has a very cheap stock price. Many investors would like to see the company shed these assets to unlock value. The thing is that the company is the top oil producer in the country and has grown its production for the past 17 years. That helped it to produce about $2.7 billion in cash flow last year.
While production growth has slowed in recent years, Apache has made several recent discoveries and is spending about $1.1 billion this year to grow production. The company has great assets in the country but the market isn't recognizing the value because of the instability in the region.
Despite the promise for continued production growth and profits, violence still looms as a threat. So, that begs the question: Should producers just call it quits? Let's face it, these companies have more than enough opportunities to grow production in the U.S. thanks to our own shale boom that it might not be worth the headaches in northern Africa. All three could follow in the footsteps of fellow U.S.-based large-cap explorer and producer Devon Energy , which decided to completely exit its international business by selling it off piece by piece a few years ago. The company was able to add billions to its balance sheet as well as de-risk its operations.
Another option is for each company to simply split off its international operations into a separate company. Marathon is quite familiar with that process having spun off its refinery business. Occidental is already considering a similar move with its international operations.
That would take the focus of both management and investors off of its international assets so that the focus is on North America, a market which has the potential to really grow over the next few years.
While breaking up is hard to do, these companies really do face tough choices when it comes to deciding whether or not to hold on to international operations, especially those in North Africa. It's quite clear that both Apache and Marathon are being weighed down by holding these businesses. I'd be willing to bet that, if Occidental moves forward with its plans to split off its international operations, both companies will be pressured to follow suit.
There are many less risky ways to invest in the energy sector, and The Motley Fool's analysts have uncovered an under-the-radar company that's dominating its industry. This company is a leading provider of equipment and components used in drilling and production operations, and poised to profit in a big way from it. To get the name and detailed analysis of this company that will prosper for years to come, check out the special free report: "The Only Energy Stock You'll Ever Need." Don't miss out on this limited-time offer and your opportunity to discover this under-the-radar company before the market does.
The article Should U.S. Oil Producers Give up on Northern Africa? originally appeared on Fool.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment