(07-23-2015, 05:31 AM)ArtM72 Wrote:
(07-23-2015, 04:30 AM)Getitrt2 Wrote: I doubt FLNG has anything to do with it. It may be that, with China markets and oil prices, including the effects of oil on other companies as well as IOC along with the effects from Wells Fargo, and also debt or other requirements he might have, Chandler had liquidity pressures he had to meet; and it may be that IOC was more liquid than other sources. Perhaps he even thinks oil is going much lower. However, I have doubts about how "smart" he is being now if he sold much more IOC than he had to at these levels and this point in time.I suppose you could say Chandler sold following a great Annual Report when there was a lot of rising interest in the stock, which was not a bad move if a move had to be made. The same might be said for Wells. Meanwhile we wait for that Wahoo strike...another reefer would be fine, thank you...to experience our next catalyst..
I don't think so. He sold mostly at 46.5 and at 42, after the big drop in oil (and the Wells selling?) had driven it down, after the rise in June to the 60 level from the great appraisal results and Annual Shareholders Meeting report, and apparently significantly increased the pressure on him after the drop. The oil prices remain an important variable, but today IOC stock went up against oil prices and most energy stocks. Per trans, Technical Analysis indicates time for a recovery in IOC stock. It would appear the liquidations drove it down more than justified by oil, etc. It probably could not have been much worse for Chandler.
What is really ironic is that lower oil prices are having ZERO current effect fundamentally on IOC, except for probably actually reducing operating costs some, for fuel for example, probably will reduce its costs and competition for the Papua LNG project, and probably will be significantly higher in the next few years when it really matters for IOC on the revenue side.