|Bid||5.19 x 0|
|Ask||5.20 x 0|
|Day's range||5.14 - 5.25|
|52-week range||2.73 - 9.07|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||2.47|
|PE ratio (TTM)||16.17|
|Earnings date||21 Aug 2020|
|Forward dividend & yield||0.16 (3.16%)|
|Ex-dividend date||25 Feb 2020|
|1y target est||5.04|
Today we'll look at Santos Limited (ASX:STO) and reflect on its potential as an investment. Specifically, we're going...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Large institutions resist change, and nowhere more so than in the way they pay their bosses.Despite scandals and crises, executive compensation has remained too generous, too opaque and too loosely linked to long-term goals. The upheaval wrought by the Covid-19 pandemic provides the opportunity for a remake: Simpler, smaller packages with a more significant non-financial component would mark a welcome shift.The figures are stark. Inflation-adjusted pay for chief executives at the largest U.S. companies climbed 940% between 1978 and 2018, the Economic Policy Institute found, using the more conservative of two methodologies, in a report published last year. The S&P rose about 700% over the same period. Worker wages, meanwhile, increased by less than 12%.The size of pay packages is only the most eye-catching part of the problem: Far more important is how corporate leaders are remunerated, and whether that lines up with long-term goals, financial and otherwise. As a gauge, consider the increase in attention paid to environmental, social and governance, or ESG, targets. This has permeated incentive plans in only a minority of cases. A mere 9% of FTSE All World companies link executive pay to ESG criteria, mostly occupational health and safety concerns, according to Sustainalytics. Even for those, only a tiny proportion of total remuneration is affected.The good news is that the current cataclysm is prompting better behavior than we saw during the 2008 financial crisis, with at least some leaders moving swiftly to share the pain of employees. Qantas Airways Ltd. Chief Executive Officer Alan Joyce, whose airline has furloughed most of its workforce, won’t take any salary until the end of the financial year in June. Elsewhere in aviation, Ryanair Holdings Plc CEO Michael O’Leary has taken a steep pay cut, along with staff. General Electric Co.’s Larry Culp will forgo his full wage for the rest of 2020.Granted, they have better cushions than most employees and there is self-interest here, given the outsize importance to corporate valuations of intangible assets like reputation. Yet these are welcome gestures, not least when compared to those who have rushed to cut costs and take government help without trimming at the top. They aren’t markers of real change, though. It will be far more significant to see how boards manage short- and long-term incentive decisions for 2020. Shareholder advisers are already warning against excesses in variable pay. There is one bigger reason to anticipate substantial change: timing. The coronavirus has hit at a critical moment for shareholder capitalism. It’s been two years since BlackRock Inc. co-founder Larry Fink told CEOs to contribute to society. The Business Roundtable last year had executives pledge to build companies that serve “all Americans.” ESG demands are louder, as seen at last month’s annual general meeting of Australian oil and gas outfit Santos Ltd. It was happening already; now it’s happening faster.Xavier Baeten, professor in reward and sustainability at Vlerick Business School in Belgium, says companies are likely to see pressure from at least two quarters. First, shareholders may well balk at remuneration that rises when dividends dissipate. Second, governments could make aid dependent on firms not paying bonuses. Society may also find hefty bonuses more unpalatable after months of clapping to support underpaid nurses and carers.So what are the changes to aim for? Pay is inherently complex, and investors can make multiple and often competing demands of one board. It’s also true that despite plentiful research demonstrating that pay isn’t a significant motivating factor for chief executives, the quantum is unlikely to change dramatically. There is, though, plenty of scope to improve structure.Most obviously, a post-pandemic world could do with a stronger push from board members (and investors) for increased transparency and simplicity, with fewer, more individually tailored goals. Then, we need share allocations that encourage executives to think over longer time-frames, and don't just result in colossal pay awards in boom years. This could mean more restricted stock that has to be held for a period even once employment has ceased. It could mean extending ownership requirements. There are plenty of pitfalls: Proxy advisers will need convincing, and long holding periods can mean executives discount the perk. The advantages are significant, though.A third step could be to increase the non-financial portion of targets to as much as half of the total. Again, these aren’t popular with advisers who dismiss what they see as soft goals. Still, as compensation consultant Seymour Burchman of Semler Brossy argues, they reinforce strategy if tailored, specific and measurable. Dutch bank ING Groep NV, for example, uses retail customer growth as one measure. Others might use customer satisfaction, investment targets, total recordable injury frequency rate or, as Semler Brossy’s Kathryn Neel points out, corporate reputation, as gauged by a third party. ESG would be part of this, in a testable and appropriate form that measures opportunity as well as risk. For resources companies, that could be a multiplier that nullifies all bonus in the event of an accident. For a drinks company, it might be water management, or reducing plastic. Combined with the obligation to hold shares for longer, the incentives align.Shareholders’ meetings globally have been delayed or moved online because of the coronavirus, but there is plenty more disruption to come. Boards, the ultimate arbiters, will find decisions this year have lasting consequences. In a crisis, underestimate pay at your peril.This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Clara Ferreira Marques is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering commodities and environmental, social and governance issues. Previously, she was an associate editor for Reuters Breakingviews, and editor and correspondent for Reuters in Singapore, India, the U.K., Italy and Russia.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Santos (ASX:STO) shareholders are no doubt pleased to see that the share price has bounced 37% in the last month...
(Bloomberg) -- Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, under fire for his climate policies amid a devastating bushfire season, announced a A$2 billion ($1.3 billion) energy deal with the country’s most populous state on Friday that will seek to reduce emissions and lower power bills.The federal government will provide as much as A$1 billion in funding to clean energy initiatives, jointly underwrite investment in two new interstate transmission links to bolster grid stability, and support new generation projects in New South Wales. In return, the state government committed to facilitating investment into gas supply into the east coast market and ensuring coal supplies to its biggest power plant until 2042.The deal may buy the premier some breathing space from the backlash over the bushfires, which scientists have warned are likely to become more extreme as a result of climate change. Still, industry analysts see the package as a costly way to tackle the issue that could serve to crowd out private investment.“Doing negotiated bilateral deals between governments is a very strange way to run an energy market,” said Tony Wood, energy program director at the Grattan Institute think tank. “This is what you do when you can’t, or you’ve chosen not to, have a policy to steer the industry toward lower emissions in an efficient way.”Morrison’s center-right government has steadfastly refused to bring in a carbon pricing mechanism, a step many in the industry see as the lowest cost way to bring about the transition to cleaner energy. Meanwhile, a plan to underwrite generation has been criticized for favoring projects, potentially deterring investment in alternative ways of boosting grid capacity.By prioritizing more gas supply the deal would “lock in higher power prices, reduced reliability and higher emissions for New South Wales,” climate-focused policy think tank Australia Institute said in a Twitter post, adding that renewable power was already cheaper than gas.New South Wales premier Gladys Berejiklian said developing Santos Ltd.’s Narrabri coal seam gas resource was one option to meet the state’s supply commitment. Narrabri, which has been the subject of strong environmental protests, is going through the state’s approvals process, with a final decision expected in the first quarter of 2020. Berejiklian added that there were other options, including two projects being developed to import gas from overseas.The Morrison government has championed gas as a transition fuel from coal to renewables, and pushed for states including New South Wales and Victoria to ease restrictions on developing new resources.Morrison’s deal with New South Wales may at least sketch out the beginnings of an energy strategy, Wood said. Given the prime minister is hamstrung by his party on stronger climate targets, “the clever way out is to start to find some projects that he can work on with the states” that would have some impact on emissions reduction and fill the policy vacuum, he said.To contact the reporter on this story: James Thornhill in Sydney at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Ramsey Al-Rikabi at firstname.lastname@example.org, Rob Verdonck, Aaron ClarkFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
Sydney, Australia, Oct 31, 2019 - (ABN Newswire) - Empire Energy Group (ASX:EEG) (OTCMKTS:EEGUF) CEO Alex Underwood is interviewed by Mining Executive Julian Malnic on the new Northern Territory energy ...
(Bloomberg) -- Cell C Pty Ltd. is in advanced talks with MTN Group Ltd. to gain more access to its network as South Africa’s third-biggest mobile-phone company strives to overcome mounting losses and add products such as financial services.An extended roaming deal could be concluded within the next month, Chief Executive Officer Douglas Craigie Stevenson said in an interview. Cell C will gain additional access to MTN’s network in major cities such as Johannesburg and Cape Town.“We are not a tower-owning company, our profits have to come from the services that we are able to offer customers,” said the CEO, who took charge on a permanent basis last month to replace the ousted Jose Dos Santos.Cell C is struggling under 9 billion rand ($596 million) of debt, while full-year losses have ballooned to 8 billion rand from 656 million rand a year earlier. Its management team is in weekly calls with lenders to update them on plans and ensure the company pushes through a re-capitalization by the end of the year.MTN confirmed it’s in discussions with Cell C. “We believe there are still opportunities to pursue, to the benefit of both businesses,” spokeswoman Jacqui O’Sullivan said in an emailed response to questions.Liquidity LifelineA group of local banks have committed to provide temporary liquidity and extended the maturity of 1.2 billion rand of debt that was due to be repaid last month, Cell C said in a presentation on Thursday.South Africa’s telecommunications market is dominated by Johannesburg-based rivals MTN and Vodacom Group Ltd., meaning smaller rivals such as Cell C have struggled. The carrier has come close to collapse on previous occasions, and in 2016 was rescued by a funding plan led by Blue Label Telecoms Ltd.“It’s always been a stressed investment and a company that has not been performance-managed,” said Craigie Stevenson. “Deals were done to fix a funding gap, and did not have thought-out longevity.”Other investments, such in TV-content platform Black, have absorbed cash without generating appropriate returns, the company said.New management is examining all costs and looking to get the most out of Cell C’s assets, Chief Financial Officer Zafar Mahomed said in the same interview. The company wants the bad news out of the way so as to enable the start of a growth plan, he said.Blue Label shares have slumped 45% this year, valuing the group at 2.7 billion rand.(Update with graph and MTN comment in fifth paragraph)To contact the reporter on this story: Loni Prinsloo in Johannesburg at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Rebecca Penty at firstname.lastname@example.org, John Bowker, Thomas PfeifferFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Sydney, Australia, Aug 22, 2019 - (ABN Newswire) - Santos Ltd (ASX:STO) today announced its half-year results for 2019, reporting both record EBITDAX and underlying profit. 22 August 2019 2019 Half-year ...
Brisbane, Australia, Aug 13, 2019 - (ABN Newswire) - As recently announced by Central Petroleum Limited (ASX:CTP) (HAM:C9J) (OTCMKTS:CPTLF) , the Dukas-1 exploration well, located approximately 175km south ...