|Bid||0.00 x 1000|
|Ask||0.00 x 3100|
|Day's range||41.10 - 42.71|
|52-week range||30.11 - 77.74|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||1.34|
|PE ratio (TTM)||16.00|
|Earnings date||31 Jul 2020|
|Forward dividend & yield||3.48 (8.16%)|
|Ex-dividend date||12 May 2020|
|1y target est||47.42|
(Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp. resumed drilling in Guyana last month, underscoring its dedication to the offshore hotspot despite the oil price crash and a messy turn in local politics.Two of Exxon’s four drillships went back to work, according to data published Friday by Baker Hughes Co. The company later confirmed that the Stena Carron and Noble Tom Madden vessels returned to full operations last month. The rigs had been shut when the country of less than a million closed its borders after the pandemic hit South America.Guyana is one of the major exploration successes for a company that has come under criticism for how it manages capital. Its oil and natural gas unit took a hit of as much as $3.1 billion in the second quarter due to the pandemic-induced price collapse, it said July 2.“Travel restrictions have impacted our ability to move workers into Guyana and will impact our ability to maintain normal operations offshore,” Exxon said in an emailed statement late Friday.The oil major “will also adjust the pace of our development projects and exploration activities” given the plunge in oil prices, but still plans to pursue “key exploration opportunities,” it said.While Exxon is overcoming operational difficulties in the South American country, a political standoff is delaying approval of a $6 billion expansion. The 220,000 barrel-a-day Payara project was slated to start production in 2023, and Exxon and its partner Hess Corp. have already said it could be delayed by up to a year.Guyana President David Granger is challenging a March 2 election that handed the opposition a narrow victory, even after a recount and international pressure to step aside. A prolonged legal battle is in store after he dismissed on Wednesday a Caribbean Court of Justice decision that favors the opposition.Caribbean Court Boosts Opposition in Disputed Guyana Vote“Having to sit on their hands because of political developments is a problem,” said Schreiner Parker, the vice president for Latin America at Rystad Energy, a consultancy. “This is a headache and it is causing delays, and will push sanctioning to the right.”Apart from drilling interruption, repairs to Exxon’s first production vessel in Guyana constrained output in the second quarter and forced it to flare natural gas, postponing plans to reach the unit’s peak production of 120,000 barrels a day. Repairs were delayed because specialist technicians were held up by Covid-19 travel restrictions, Exxon said.Prolonged political uncertainty has drawn even more attention to a region where failed-state Venezuela is a growing geopolitical disaster, and neighboring Trinidad and Tobago is suffering from the downturn in oil and natural gas prices. In Guyana, Granger lost a vote of no confidence in 2018 but managed to delay an election until this year.“The dispute in Guyana is clearly over who controls the oil money,” said Jed Baily, a director at consultancy Energy Narrative. “It’s classic resource curse type material.”(Updates with Exxon comment in second, fourth and fifth paragraphs.)For 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.
ExxonMobil has made significant investments in algae biofuels research, but in the current oil price environment, this type simple isn’t able to compete
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Russia’s ecological watchdog has determined that a diesel spill in the country’s far north has caused nearly $2.1 billion of damage, and asked the miner MMC Norilsk Nickel PJSC for compensation. If that translates directly to what is paid up, it will be one of the largest fines levied for pollution in Russia, and could jolt other heavy polluters to start cleaning up their act. At best, though, this is a partial win for the environment.The tough approach is welcome, and it’s true that Russia’s worst such accident since the Komi pipeline ruptured in 1994 could revive long-dormant environmental rules governing aging energy infrastructure. So far, it has certainly highlighted the risks of melting permafrost to the oil and gas industry, as my colleague Julian Lee has written: Sudden subsidence appears to have caused the spill. It has also prompted official checks of potentially dangerous installations on usually frozen ground.Yet as demonstrated by Russian President Vladimir Putin personally rebuking Nornickel’s billionaire chief executive officer, Vladimir Potanin, in a televised meeting in early June, this swiftly dispensed justice is not all about protecting Siberian waterways. Days earlier, Putin had publicly reprimanded the local Nornickel boss. At least in part, the Kremlin is seizing an opportunity to keep oligarchs in check, at a time when the president is tightening his grip on power.There’s also no certainty such a big sum will ever get paid in full. Nornickel disputed the number on Wednesday, arguing it wrongly assumes the company did not act to mitigate the damage. The miner has pledged to fully fund the cleanup, estimating that cost at close to $150 million. Russia has a record of far smaller penalties, and even in the U.S. Exxon Mobil Corp. saw punitive damages for the 1989 Valdez spill cut back. Falling far short of the headline-grabbing number would send a worse signal to polluters than if the watchdog hadn't thrown it out there in the first place. Not good news in a country where many production assets are old, and lower-level damage is a frequent occurrence. Worse, even with Arctic temperatures hitting records and other accidents possible, there is no hint of change in Moscow’s willingness to tackle the underlying climate causes. Nor is there any sign it will reconsider Arctic development plans in a region that has become increasingly important to Russia’s overall oil and gas production.Nornickel, a producer of nickel, palladium and copper with a market value of $41 billion, has a dismal ecological record. The Arctic city of Norilsk is one of the world’s most polluted. In 2016, a nearby river was dyed bright red by a spill after heavy rain. More recently, the company has been one of Russia’s more progressive when it comes to environmental, social and governance issues. It began a cleanup plan in recent years, and started tackling toxic sulfur dioxide emissions in 2018. This month, it appointed an executive to oversee ecological issues. It has still moved too slowly. Assuming the eventual penalty is close to the figure detailed by the watchdog, Nornickel should be able to handle it. Such a fine would be equivalent to roughly a third of the forecast for 2020 free cash flow, according to analysts at VTB Capital, and less than half what the company paid out to shareholders last year.Equity investors have already wiped roughly $8 billion off the company’s market value since the end of May. That’s not just due to anticipation of the fine itself or ongoing compliance costs, but also to more immediate concerns that the company’s generous 11% projected dividend yield may be at risk. Potanin, who owns just over a third of the company, has already tried to cap the payout. The oligarch has long been at odds with Nornickel’s second-largest investor, aluminum giant United Co. Rusal, over the dividend policy. A 10-year shareholder deal signed in 2012 has made it hard to change, and Rusal has resisted efforts to redirect cash elsewhere because it needs the payouts to service its debt. Pressure on cash will increase the risk of fresh shareholder conflict.Yet the optics of a $2 billion-plus fine for an ecological disaster could also give Potanin enough cover to funnel cash into areas that ESG investors, relatively silent in Russia’s billionaire-run outfits, may welcome, not to mention a state desperate to create jobs and investment.For Russia, making Nornickel pay up would be a start. It has certainly been one of the country’s dirtiest industrial heavyweights. Sticking consistently to that greener path will take far longer.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.
Investor sentiment for ExxonMobil (XOM) is likely to remain poor until the company comes out with promising results from the massive long-term capital expenditure program.
Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) and ExxonMobil (XOM) issued updates on their upcoming Q2 earnings, while BP plc (BP) agreed to sell its global petrochemicals business for $5 billion.
It was a terrible six months for energy companies, and these giants weren't spared the pain. Here's why things got so bad.
The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Netflix, Exxon Mobil, Amgen, Humana and FedEx
The stock market has seen extreme volatility so far in 2020, and even after a strong second-quarter performance, the Dow Jones Industrials (DJINDICES: ^DJI) are still down almost 10% for the year. Although there've been a few stocks that have managed to buck the trend and gained ground, the vast majority of Dow stocks have given up ground. As with all falling stocks, the big question investors have is whether these three giants of their respective industries can bounce back and recover some of their lost ground.
COVID-19 has been terrible for oil, but Exxon appears to be taking the hit in relative stride. Here's a quick look at some key metrics.
ExxonMobil (XOM) plans to slash 2020 capital spending and cash operating expenses to make up for the massive shortfall in cash flows, while managing to avoid any write-down so far.
Exxon Mobil Corporation said in its regulatory filing on Thursday that it has incurred an unprecedented second straight quarterly loss from the fall in oil and natural gas prices after coronavirus lockdown restrictions dampened energy demand worldwide.
Oil markets slipped Friday as the resurgence of Covid-19 cases, particularly in the U.S., the largest consumer in the world, threatened the recovery of crude demand. At 7:30 AM ET (1130 GMT), U.S. crude futures traded 1.2% lower at $40.15 a barrel. The U.S. has recorded around a quarter of the almost 11 million cases worldwide, according to data from Johns Hopkins University, and the number is growing rapidly.
Top Research Reports for Netflix, Exxon Mobil & Amgen
The Dow's rally drove shares of Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), McDonald's (NYSE: MCD), ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), and Boeing (NYSE: BA) higher despite mixed news. Apple and McDonald's pulled back on store reopening plans due to a surge in COVID-19 cases, Exxon disclosed that it would take a large earnings hit in the second quarter, and the FAA completed certification test flights for Boeing's 737 Max.
Exxon Mobil is warning investors of more huge losses to come. The energy giant signaled Thursday it will slide into the red again when it posts its second quarter results. In a filing, Exxon Mobil said sharply lower crude prices will wipe out billions in operating profit. It also warned that refining results will plunge by around $1 billion compared with the first quarter. Oil prices have plunged 35% since January. The pandemic has crushed demand, and the global glut has forced the industry to cut production. Refnitiv IBES sees Exxon Mobil losing $2.3 billion in the latest quarter. But Exxon will have company. Edward Jones says the second quarter for all energy companies will be “dismal” due to oil and gas prices, refining margins and production. Rivals Royal Dutch Shell and BP have said they’ll massively cut spending and take write downs. Exxon Mobil shares, which have tumbled 36% this year, rose in early trading Thursday.
ExxonMobil Renews Collaboration with Princeton Energy Center to Advance Low-Emission Research and Energy Solutions
(Bloomberg) -- America’s biggest oil companies are coming under increasing pressure from climate-conscious investors to disclose their long-term forecasts for crude prices as the Covid-19 pandemic injects fresh uncertainty into the demand outlook for fossil fuels.Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. don’t publish such estimates, meaning that shareholders are less able to scrutinize how the companies’ investment plans square with expectations for a global transition to clean energy. That needs to change, according to the New York State Common Retirement Fund, California State Teachers’ Retirement System, and Ceres, a Boston-based coalition of investors with $30 trillion of assets.In Europe, major oil companies are sharing their long-term forecasts, with dramatic results. Two weeks ago, BP Plc said it had radically reduced its long-term price assumption for Brent crude, causing a writedown of as much as $17.5 billion. Royal Dutch Shell Plc warned Tuesday that it would write down as much as $22 billion in the second quarter as the pandemic hammers demand for everything from oil to liquefied natural gas.Long-term price assumptions are critical because they’re used by Big Oil to determine whether or not a resource will be economically viable and at what value it’s held on a company’s books. Activists and some investors say companies are at risk of being overly optimistic in their assessment of future crude prices. That could lead to them to build expensive projects that effectively become worthless — so-called stranded assets — in a world transitioning toward low-carbon fuel sources.“Exxon and Chevron should be more transparent and disclose long-term price forecasts and other information that investors need to assess their companies’ low-carbon transition plans,” said Mark Johnson, a spokesman for the Office of the New York State Comptroller, which oversees the New York State Common Retirement Fund. “Without this information, investors cannot assess whether Exxon and Chevron are serious, or just paying lip service to the threat of climate change.”Chevron compiles “multiple forecast scenarios” informed by third-party information and its own analysis, spokesman Sean Comey said in an emailed statement. “We continue to view this data as proprietary since it contains sensitive business information that would be of interest to our competitors.”Exxon evaluates annual plans and major investments across a range of price scenarios, and it discloses guidance on the impact of price fluctuations in annual regulatory filings, spokesman Casey Norton said in an emailed response to questions. The company supports the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change, Norton said.“The world will continue to require significant investment in liquids and natural gas,” he said.Covid-19 has brought the issue of future pricing into sharp relief. Before the pandemic, peak crude demand was thought to be at least a decade away. But the virus has caused such a savage drop-off in oil consumption that some, including BP CEO Bernard Looney, are questioning if global usage of fossil fuels will ever return to pre-pandemic levels.“At the heart of investor concern is that they’re planning for a future that’s not likely to come to pass -- a future of high demand and high prices,” said Andrew Logan, senior director of oil and gas at Ceres.Speaking to investors in March, Exxon and Chevron both gave their long-term cash flow projections at $60 a barrel, roughly the average of the past five years. But the projections aren’t a long-term price forecast and don’t provide insights into climate planning or potential writedowns. Meanwhile, crude is currently trading around $40 a barrel, with lingering uncertainty over the recovery in global demand or whether OPEC can maintain supply cuts.Both companies regularly tout their new projects as having low break-even costs that make them more competitive than those of their rivals. For example, Exxon has said its projects in Guyana and the Permian Basin on West Texas and New Mexico will make “double-digit returns” at $40 a barrel. But it may be a different story for other parts of its portfolio. If oil was at $30, Exxon would own 60% of the oil majors’ 30 lowest-margin assets by production, according to researcher Wood Mackenzie Ltd.“There’s a bit of opaqueness to the disclosure” from American oil companies without the long-term price assumptions, said Brian Rice, a fund manager at California State Teachers’ Retirement System, also known as Calstrs. “From an engagement perspective, it can be frustrating,” he said, adding that it could be a data point that more investors push for in the future. Calstrs and the New York State Common Retirement Fund manage about $453 billion between them including shares of Exxon and Chevron.While there’s no specific regulation than prevents U.S. companies from publishing long-term price forecasts, many are reluctant to do so for fear of exposing themselves to lawsuits accusing the companies of trying to influence oil prices, according to Ed Hirs, an energy fellow at the University of Houston.For investors, the risk they face is that price assumptions are too rosy. But it’s also a critical issue for the environment. Much of Canada’s oil sands, among the most carbon-intensive parts of the industry, were developed with the expectation of prices above $80 a barrel, according to Kathy Mulvey, a campaign director at the Union of Concerned Scientists.“We need more scrutiny at the front end of these projects,” she said in an interview. “They pose systemic risks to the environment if they get it wrong.”For 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.
While hopes of a global economic recovery have kept oil markets afloat, the fear of a second wave of COVID cases is threatening to send oil prices lower
(Bloomberg) -- Tesla Inc.’s market value has surpassed Exxon Mobil Corp.’s in a sign that investors are increasingly betting on a global energy transition away from fossil fuels.Elon Musk’s Tesla, now at $201 billion in market capitalization, is surging on the billionaire’s optimism that his company can avoid a second-quarter loss. Exxon, which dropped to $185 billion, is reeling from the worst crude-price crash in history. The largest oil company in the Western Hemisphere is preparing to cut some of its U.S. workforce.Tesla also is on the verge of passing Toyota Motor Corp. to become the most valuable automaker in the world by market capitalization. The company topped Boeing Co. in March to become the most valuable industrial company in the U.S. and reached the No. 2 spot among car manufacturers in January by passing Volkswagen AG.Exxon is the world’s second-biggest energy company after Saudi Aramco went public late last year. But even the status of Saudi Aramco as the world’s most-valuable company is in danger now after Apple Inc. reduced the valuation gap to $150 billion, down from about $750 billion at the time of the initial public offering of the Saudi state-controlled oil giant six months ago.For 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.
ExxonMobil, Employees and Retirees Contribute More Than $1.3 Million to New Jersey Colleges and Universities