Hundreds of Oil Stocks Could Go to Zero…Will You Still Be Owning One of Them?

By Justin Spittler

The largest shale oil bankruptcy in years just happened. If you own oil stocks, you'll want to read today's essay very closely. Because there's a good chance hundreds more oil companies will go bankrupt soon. As you probably know, the oil market is a disaster. The price of oil has plunged 75% since 2014. In February, oil hit its lowest level since 2003.

Oil crashed for a simple reason: There’s too much of it. New methods like “fracking” have led to a huge spike in global oil production. Today, oil companies pump about 1 million more barrels a day than the world uses.

Last year, America’s biggest oil companies lost $67 billion..…

To offset low prices, oil companies have slashed spending by 60% over the past two years. They’ve laid off more than 120,000 workers. They’ve sold assets and abandoned projects. Some have even cut their prized dividends.

For many oil companies, deep spending cuts weren’t enough…

The number of bankruptcies in the oil industry has skyrocketed….

Bloomberg Business reported earlier this month:

Since the start of 2015, 130 North American oil and gas producers and service companies have filed for bankruptcy owing almost $44 billion, according to law firm Haynes & Boone.

And that doesn’t even include two “big name” bankruptcies in the last couple weeks. Two weeks ago, Linn Energy filed for bankruptcy, making it the largest shale oil bankruptcy since 2014. It owes lenders $8.3 billion.

A week later, SandRidge Energy declared bankruptcy. It became the second biggest shale oil company to go bankrupt. The company owes its lenders about $4.1 billion. Ultra Petroleum, Penn Virginia, Breitburn Energy, and Halcón Resources also filed for bankruptcy in the past couple weeks.

Hundreds more oil companies could go bankrupt this year..…

The Wall Street Journal reported last week:

This year, 175 oil and gas producers around the world are in danger of declaring bankruptcy, and the situation is nearly as dire for another 160 companies, many in the U.S., according to a report from Deloitte’s energy consultants.

Defaults by oil and gas companies are already skyrocketing. The Wall Street Journal continues:

Oil and gas companies this year have defaulted on $26 billion, according to Fitch Ratings data. That figure already surpasses the total for 2015, $17.5 billion.

Fitch, one of the nation’s largest credit agencies, expects 11% of U.S. energy bonds to default this year. That would be the highest default rate for the energy sector since 1999.

Many investors thought the oil crisis was over..…

That’s because the price of oil has surged 80% since February. Dispatch readers know better. For months, we’ve been warning there would be more bankruptcies and defaults. We said many oil companies need $50 oil to make money. The price of oil hasn’t topped $50 a barrel since last July. Even after its big rally, oil still trades for about half of what it did two years ago.

Oil prices will stay low as long as there’s too much oil..…

Although the world still has too much oil, the surplus has shrunk in the past few months. In February, the global economy was oversupplied by about 1.7 million barrels a day. Thanks to U.S. production cuts, the surplus is now just 1.0 million barrels a day. The number of rigs actively looking for oil in the U.S. has dropped by 80% since October. This month, the U.S. oil rig count hit its lowest level in 70 years.

However, many other countries aren’t cutting production at all. Saudi Arabia and Russia, two of the world’s biggest oil-producing countries, are both pumping near-record amounts of oil. Frankly, these countries don’t have much choice. Oil sales account for 77% of Saudi Arabia’s economy. And oil accounts for 50% of Russia’s exports. If these countries stop pumping oil, their economies could collapse.

Low prices have made it impossible for some oil companies to pay their debts..…

U.S. oil companies borrowed nearly $200 billion between 2010 and 2014. If you’ve been reading the Dispatch, you know the Federal Reserve is mostly to blame for this. It’s held its key interest rate near zero since 2008. This made it incredibly cheap to borrow money. When oil prices were high, the debt wasn’t an issue. Companies made enough money to pay the bills. That’s no longer the case. Today, many oil companies are burning through cash to pay their debts.

To make matters worse, many weak oil companies have been cut off from the credit market..…

Before prices collapsed, oil companies could refinance their debt if they ran into trouble. This could buy them time to sort out their problems. These days, many banks will no longer lend oil companies money. Bloomberg Business reported last month:

Almost two years into the worst oil bust in a generation, lenders including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co. and Bank of America Corp. are slashing credit lines for struggling energy companies…
Since the start of 2016 lenders have yanked $5.6 billion of credit from 36 oil and gas producers, a reduction of 12 percent, making this the most severe retreat since crude began tumbling in mid-2014.

Oil stocks are still very risky..…

But that doesn’t mean you should avoid them entirely. As we’ve said before, oil stocks have likely entered a new phase. You see, when oil prices first tanked, investors sold oil stocks indiscriminately. Both strong and weak stocks plunged. In other words, investors “threw the baby out with the bath water.” You often see this behavior during a crisis.

Exxon Mobil (XOM), the world’s biggest oil company, fell 34% since 2014. Chevron (CVX), the world’s second biggest, dropped 48%. Now that oil has stabilized, the stronger companies are separating themselves from the weaker companies. This year, Exxon is up 15%. Chevron is up 11%. The crash in oil prices has given us a chance to buy world class oil companies at deep bargains.

If you want to own oil stocks, stick with the best companies..…

If you're going to invest in the sector, there are four key things to look for: 

Make sure you buy companies that can 1) make money at low oil prices. You should also look for companies with 2) healthy margins 3) plenty of cash and 4) little debt.

In March, Crisis Investing editor Nick Giambruno recommended a company that hits all of these checkmarks. It has a rock-solid balance sheet…some of the industry’s best profit margins…and “trophy assets” in America’s richest oil regions. It can even make money with oil as cheap as $35.

The stock is up 9% in two months. But Nick thinks it could just be getting started. After all, it’s still 30% below its 2014 high. You can get in on Nick’s oil pick by signing up for Crisis Investing. If interested, we encourage you to watch this short presentation. It explains how you can access Nick’s top investing ideas for $1,000 off our regular price.

This incredible deal ends soon. Click here to take advantage while you can.

You’ll also learn about an even bigger “crisis investing” opportunity on Nick’s radar. This coming crisis could radically change the financial future of every American. By watching this video, you’ll learn how to profit from it. Click here to watch.

Chart of the Day

Oil and gas companies are losing billions of dollars, we’re in earnings season right now. This is when companies tell investors if their earnings grew or shrunk last quarter. A good earnings season can send stocks higher. A bad one can drag stocks down.

As of Friday, 95% of the companies in the S&P 500 had shared first quarter results. Based on these results, the S&P 500 is on track to post a 6.8% decline in earnings. That would be the biggest drop in quarterly earnings since the 2009 financial crisis.

Oil and gas companies are a big reason U.S. stocks are having such a horrible earnings season.

As you can see below, first-quarter earnings for energy companies in the S&P 500 have plunged 107% since last year. Keep in mind, this group includes Exxon, Chevron, and other blue chip energy stocks.

Again, if you’re looking to buy oil stocks, make sure you “look under the company’s hood” before you buy it. Steer clear of companies that are losing money and have a lot of debt.

The article Hundreds of Oil Stocks Could Go to Zero…Will You Still Be Owning One of Them? was originally published at caseyresearch.com.

Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

Russia and China’s Natural Gas Deals are a Death Knell for Canada’s LNG Ambitions

By Marin Katusa, Chief Energy Investment Strategist

In recent years, a number of Asian companies have been betting that Canada will be able to export cheap liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its west coast. These big international players include PetroChina, Mitsubishi, CNOOC, and, until December 3, Malaysian state owned Petronas.

However, that initial interest is decidedly on the wane. In fact, while the British Columbia LNG Alliance is still hopeful that some of the 18 LNG projects that have been proposed will be realized, it’s now looking less and less likely that any of these Canadian LNG consortia will ever make a final investment decision to forge ahead.

That’s thanks to the Colder War—as I explain in detail in my new book of the same name—and the impetus it’s given Vladimir Putin to open up new markets in Asia.

The huge gas export deals that Russia struck with China in May and October—with an agreed-upon price ranging from $8-10 per million British thermal units (mmBtu)—has likely capped investors’ expectations of Chinese natural gas prices at around $10-11 per mmBtu, a level which would make shipping natural gas from Canada to Asia uneconomic.

At these prices, not even British Columbia’s new Liquefied Natural Gas Income Tax Act—which has halved the post payout tax rate to 3.5% and proposes reducing corporate income tax to 8% from 11%—can make Canadian natural gas globally competitive.

These tax credits are too little, too late, because Canada is years behind Australia, Russia, and Qatar’s gas projects. This means there’s just too much uncertainty about future profit margins to commit the vast amount of capital that will be needed to make Canadian LNG a reality.

Sure, there are huge proven reserves of natural gas in Canada. It’s just been determined that Canada’s Northwest Territories hold 16.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves, 40% more than previous estimates.

But the fact is that Canada will remain a high-cost producer of LNG, and its shipping costs to Asia will be much higher than Russia’s, Australia’s, and Qatar’s. So unless potential buyers in Asia are confident that Henry Hub gas prices will stay below $5, they’re unlikely to commit to long-term contracts for Canadian LNG—or US gas for that matter—because compression and shipping add at least another $6 to the price.

Shell has estimated that its proposed terminal, owned by LNG Canada, will cost $40 billion, not including a $4 billion pipeline. As LNG Canada—whose shareholders include PetroChina, Korea Gas Corp., and Mitsubishi Corp.—admits, it’s not yet sure that the project will be economically viable. Even if it turns out to be, LNG Canada says it won’t make a final investment decision until 2016, after which the facility would take five years to build.

But investors shouldn’t hold their breath. It seems like Korea Gas Corp. has already made up its mind. It’s planning to sell a third of its 15% stake in LNG Canada by the end of this year.

And who can blame it? The industry still doesn’t have clarity on environmental issues, federal taxes, municipal taxes, transfer pricing agreements, or what the First Nations’ cut will be. And these are all major hurdles.

Pipeline permits are also still incomplete. The federal government still hasn’t decided if LNG is a manufacturing or distribution business, which matters because if it rules that it’s a distribution business, permitting is going to be delayed.

And to muddy the picture even further, opposition to gas pipelines and fracking is on the rise in British Columbia and elsewhere in Canada. While fossil fuel projects are under fire from climate alarmists the world over, Canadian environmentalists are also angry that increased tanker traffic through its pristine coastal waters could lead to oil spills.

Canada is now under the sway of radical environmental groups and think tanks like the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation, which take as a given that Canada should shut down its tar sands industry altogether. For these people, there’s no responsible way to build new fossil fuel infrastructure.

Elsewhere, investors might expect money and jobs to do the talking, but Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party, which has called for greenhouse gas limits on oil sands, is now leading the conservatives in the polls. (Just out of curiosity, does Trudeau plan on putting a cap on the carbon monoxide concentration from his marijuana agenda? But I digress.) If a liberal government is elected next year, it might adopt a national climate policy that would cripple gas companies and oil companies alike.

Some energy majors are already shying away from Canadian LNG. BG Group announced in October that it’s delaying a decision on its Prince Rupert LNG project until after 2016. And Apache Corp., partnered with Chevron on a Canadian LNG project, is seeking a buyer for its stake.

Not everyone is throwing in the towel. Yet. ExxonMobil—which is in the early planning phase for the West Coast Canada LNG project at Tuck Inlet, located near Prince Rupert in northwestern British Columbia—has just become a member of the British Columbia LNG alliance.

But Petronas was a key player. It was thought that the company would be moving ahead after British Columbia’s Ministry of Environment approved its LNG terminal, along with two pipelines that would feed it.

Instead, Petronas pulled the plug. We can’t know how many things factored into that decision nor whether it’s absolutely final. All the company would say is that projected costs of C$36 billion would need to be reduced before a restart could be considered. (That $36B figure includes Petronas’s 2012 acquisition of Calgary based gas producer Progress Energy Resources Corp., as well as the C$10 billion proposed terminal, a pipeline, and the cost of drilling wells in BC’s northeast.)

This latest blow leaves Canadian LNG development very much in doubt. In fact, most observers believe that Petronas’s move to the sidelines probably sounds the death knell for the industry, at least for the foreseeable future.
For more on how the Colder War is forever changing the energy sector and global finance itself, click here to get your copy of Marin’s New York Times bestselling book. Inside, you’ll discover more on LNG and how this geopolitical chess game between Russia and the West for control of the world’s energy trade will shape this decade and the century to come.

The article Russia and China’s Natural Gas Deals Are a Death Knell for Canada’s LNG Ambitions was originally published at casey research

Get our latest FREE eBook "Understanding Options"....Just Click Here!

Obama’s Secret Pipeline

By Marin Katusa, Chief Energy Investment Strategist

Isn’t it odd that an 800 mile pipeline that runs across environmentally sensitive land has been permitted without any mention in the media? Not a word about it from President Obama either.

Obama’s Secret Pipeline will be built over land that’s much more sensitive than that of the Keystone XL pipeline, which gets nothing but front page coverage. It will actually be 17% (six inches) larger in diameter than Keystone XL (36 inches) and it will transport natural gas, not oil.

Bill 138

The Senate of Alaska, the state in which the pipeline will be built, has just passed Bill 138, which makes the state a partner of three of the world’s largest oil companies, including one that has a horrible environmental track record on U.S. soil. In a nutshell, Alaska’s government is now partners with BP, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips.

Only one more signature is required—Governor Sean Parnell’s—and it’s expected that he will sign the deal.

Not Even the US Government Wants US Dollars

For more than 100 years, the U.S. government has been receiving a royalty and tax revenue paid on the amount of oil or natural gas produced on American soil—a fee that is paid in U.S. dollars. Bill 138 has changed this forever.

Instead of Alaska receiving its dues in U.S. dollars, the state legislature has decreed through Bill 138 that the state will be paid “in kind.” In other words, the state will be getting its share of royalty and tax revenue in natural gas instead of U.S. dollars.

For the record, this is the first time ever that a US state has entered into a partnership like this. Essentially, Alaska is now a 25% equity partner with BP, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips—which also requires the state to cough up cold, hard cash to build the entire project, including the 800 mile long, 42 inch wide pipeline.

Overall, the project is currently estimated to cost north of U.S. $50 billion, and we expect that when all the capital expense overruns and government inefficiencies are accounted for, the whole project will come in at more than U.S. $75 billion, using the total costs of similar projects for comparison.

But it will be 2015 before the final negotiations and the specific details of the partnership are agreed on, and remember, the devil is in the details. Who do you think will get the better end of the deal—a bunch of government bureaucrats with zero oil and gas experience, or the world’s top oil and gas producing companies? I know whom I’m betting on.

Which leads us to the point of this weekly missive.

And the Winner of Obama’s Secret Pipeline Is…

We already know which company will be building and operating Obama’s Secret Pipeline. The company I’m talking about has a lower price to earnings (P/E) ratio and a better yield than all of its peers. That’s good, because shareholders get paid a monthly yield for owning the stock while sitting back and watching the share price rise as well.

The Ultimate Oil Toll Booth

Think of it this way: this company charges the world’s most powerful oil and gas producers for every barrel of oil that passes through its “road network,” and now it can also charge the state of Alaska. Regardless of the price of oil or natural gas, this company gets its fee.

It’s a low-risk way to benefit from a high risk enterprise. This company is a current Buy in our Casey Energy Dividends portfolio. The Energy team is currently working hard on the upcoming issue, which will in detail cover the company that’s bound to gain big from Obama’s Secret Pipeline.

I know you haven’t heard about this pipeline yet, but you will soon enough.

That’s what we do here at the Energy Division of Casey Research: We’re the first to uncover breakthrough stories, and the first to uncover the best energy investment opportunities in the world. Doug Casey and I just got back from a whirlwind European tour, where we visited many of Europe’s most promising energy projects.

Here’s a picture of Doug Casey and me at Europe’s largest onshore drill site. This drill rig is 15 stories high and uses about 16,000 liters of diesel a day to turn the drills—which Doug and I are holding in this picture. As a side note, just the crank shaft that we’re holding costs U.S. $2 million—this rig is expensive and gigantic.

For you to get a better perspective on the true size of Europe’s largest onshore drill rig, here is a picture of Doug Casey and me with our friends Frank Holmes, Frank Giustra, and Matt Smith.

(From far left to right: Frank Holmes, Doug Casey, Marin Katusa, Frank Giustra, Matt Smith)

 

Do Your Portfolio a Favor and Try Out the Casey Energy Report

Doug Casey and I have done all the hard work for you. The current issue of the Casey Energy Report is a compilation of our Europe trip, including in-depth descriptions of our site visits and a new recommendation with a hugely promising project in an out-of-the-way European country that we personally checked out. The company is backed by mining giant Frank Giustra, and you bet he knows what he’s doing.

The Casey Energy Report comes with a free one year subscription to Casey Energy Dividends (a $79 value), including, of course, the upcoming May issue with our “Obama’s Secret Pipeline” pick.

There’s no risk in trying it: You have 90 days to find out if it’s right for you—love it or cancel for a full refund. You don’t have to travel 300+ days a year (as we do) to discover the best energy investments in the world—we do it for you.

If you don’t like the Casey Energy Report or don’t make any money within your first three months, just cancel within that time for a full, prompt refund. Even if you miss the cutoff, you can cancel anytime for a prorated refund on the unused part of your subscription. Click here to get started.

The article Obama’s Secret Pipeline was originally published at Casey Research

Sign up for todays Free Trading Webinar "Why HFT Firms Have a Competitive Advantage"....Just Click Here!