Tesla Motors (NASDAQ: TSLA), Jacobs Engineering (NYSE: JEC), Symantec (NASDAQ: SYMC), Terex Co. (NYSE: TEX), Arctic Cat Inc. (NASDAQ: ACAT), Belden (NYSE: BDC) and Cognex Co. (NASDAQ: CGNX) had ratings and price targets on them adjusted by analysts.
Tesla Motors (TSLA) had its “Buy” rating reiterated by Needham & Company.
Citigroup (NYSE:C) initiated coverage on Jacobs Engineering (JEC). They placed a “Neutral” rating on the company.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) initiated coverage on Symantec (SYMC). They placed a “Neutral” rating on the company.
BB&T (NYSE:BBT) initiated coverage on Terex Co. (TEX). They placed a “Buy” rating and a price target of $30.00 on the company.
Arctic Cat Inc. (ACAT) had its price target raised by Wedbush from $29.00 to $33.00. They have a “Neutral” rating on the company.
Belden (BDC) had its price target raised by Longbow Research from $42.00 to $46.00. They have a “Buy” rating on the company.
Cognex Co. (CGNX) had its price target raised by Needham & Company from $38.00 to $48.00. They have a “Buy” rating on the company.
Showing posts with label Goldman Sachs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Goldman Sachs. Show all posts
Monday, February 13, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Michael Kors (KORS) Ratings, Price Targets
Michael Kors Holdings (KORS) ratings and price targets.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd (KORS). They placed an “Overweight” rating on the company.
Nomura (NYSE:NMR) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed a “Buy” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
Jefferies Group (NYSE:JEF) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed an “Overweight” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
Piper Jaffray (NYSE:PJC) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed an “Overweight” rating and a price target of $33.00 on the company.
Robert W. Baird initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed an “Outperform” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd (KORS). They placed an “Overweight” rating on the company.
Nomura (NYSE:NMR) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed a “Buy” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
Jefferies Group (NYSE:JEF) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed an “Overweight” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
Piper Jaffray (NYSE:PJC) initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd. They placed an “Overweight” rating and a price target of $33.00 on the company.
Robert W. Baird initiated coverage on Michael Kors Holdings Ltd . They placed an “Outperform” rating and a price target of $34.00 on the company.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Laredo Petroleum (NYSE: LPI) Ratings, Price Targets
Laredo Petroleum Holdings (NYSE: LPI) ratings and price targets.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed a “Buy” rating and a price target of $28.00 on the company.
Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed an “Overweight” rating on the company.
Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE:WFC) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed an “Outperform” rating on the company.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed a “Buy” rating and a price target of $28.00 on the company.
Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed a “Buy” rating on the company.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed an “Overweight” rating on the company.
Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE:WFC) initiated coverage on Laredo Petroleum Holdings (LPI). They placed an “Outperform” rating on the company.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Chevron (NYSE:CVX) Acquiring Atlas Energy (NASDAQ:ATLS) for $4.3 Billion
An agreement between Chevron Corporation (NYSE:CVX) and Atlas Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ:ATLS) was announced Tuesday where Chevron will acquire Atlas for $4.3 billion. The amount paid for Atlas will include debt.
The offer will equal a value of $43.34 a share for Atlas shareholders, a premium of 37 percent over the 'November 8' close of Atlas.
Shareholders in Atlas will receive $38.25 in cash for each share they own plus a pro-rata share of a distribution of more than 41 million units of Atlas Pipeline Holdings, L.P. (NYSE:AHD), valued at $5.09 each share.
"All of our shareholders should benefit from this sale and upon its completion, Atlas will have achieved a return of well over 800% since its initial public offering less than 6 1/2 years ago. All of our employees and shareholders should know that, through Chevron’s acquisition of Atlas Energy, we will be bringing into the Marcellus Shale one of the world’s largest corporations, an energy company second to none in its skills and dedication to excellence. This augurs well for customers and suppliers, our joint venture partners, those of our employees who will be continuing with Chevron, the local communities in which we have been active – and our nation, for all of whom Chevron’s involvement in development of this resource will be of enormous benefit," said Atlas Energy Chairman and CEO Edward E. Cohen.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) advised Chevron on the deal and Jefferies & Company, Inc. was lead advisor for Atlas.
The offer will equal a value of $43.34 a share for Atlas shareholders, a premium of 37 percent over the 'November 8' close of Atlas.
Shareholders in Atlas will receive $38.25 in cash for each share they own plus a pro-rata share of a distribution of more than 41 million units of Atlas Pipeline Holdings, L.P. (NYSE:AHD), valued at $5.09 each share.
"All of our shareholders should benefit from this sale and upon its completion, Atlas will have achieved a return of well over 800% since its initial public offering less than 6 1/2 years ago. All of our employees and shareholders should know that, through Chevron’s acquisition of Atlas Energy, we will be bringing into the Marcellus Shale one of the world’s largest corporations, an energy company second to none in its skills and dedication to excellence. This augurs well for customers and suppliers, our joint venture partners, those of our employees who will be continuing with Chevron, the local communities in which we have been active – and our nation, for all of whom Chevron’s involvement in development of this resource will be of enormous benefit," said Atlas Energy Chairman and CEO Edward E. Cohen.
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) advised Chevron on the deal and Jefferies & Company, Inc. was lead advisor for Atlas.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Goldman (NYSE:GS) Shows BP (NYSE:BP) Some Love, Upgrades them to "Buy"
After generating results beyond expectations, BP plc (NYSE:BP) was upgraded today by Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) from "Neutral" to "Buy" on the stronger-than-expected quarter and valuation.
Citing the attractive valuation whereby BP is trading at a 2011E 14% EV/DACF discount after paying out liabilities after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, they see the company beginning to come back.
There is also light at the end of the tunnel for selling off its assets, which is probably more of a positive than most analysts and commentators note, as it's helping them to whittle down the non-core assets to be a much stronger company over time. So far they've raised about $14 billion, with another approximate $16 billion targeted for sale within the next year.
That puts them in a more predictable light, which makes shareholders and investors less nervous.
Goldman also likes that BP raised their earnings per share estimates for the next three years.
Finally, the reinstatement of the dividend, which is gaining steam, could end up with the income investor base returning said Goldman.
Goldman sees them reinstating the dividend at probably $0.08, and over the next couple of years increasing it to about $0.11.
BP closed Wednesday at $42.37, gaining $0.95, or 2.29 percent.
Citing the attractive valuation whereby BP is trading at a 2011E 14% EV/DACF discount after paying out liabilities after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, they see the company beginning to come back.
There is also light at the end of the tunnel for selling off its assets, which is probably more of a positive than most analysts and commentators note, as it's helping them to whittle down the non-core assets to be a much stronger company over time. So far they've raised about $14 billion, with another approximate $16 billion targeted for sale within the next year.
That puts them in a more predictable light, which makes shareholders and investors less nervous.
Goldman also likes that BP raised their earnings per share estimates for the next three years.
Finally, the reinstatement of the dividend, which is gaining steam, could end up with the income investor base returning said Goldman.
Goldman sees them reinstating the dividend at probably $0.08, and over the next couple of years increasing it to about $0.11.
BP closed Wednesday at $42.37, gaining $0.95, or 2.29 percent.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Is Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) a Crap Shoot Now?
With the battle for the truth concerning Halliburton's (NYSE:HAL) role in the failed Macondo oil well, BP (NYSE:BP), Halliburton, government officials, and investors, analysts and commentators on the sidelines have all been giving their two cents on how it all will play out for Halliburton.
That's why financial institutions like Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) view Halliburton as a buying opportunity at this time, while others such as Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) have lowered their price target on the company.
Goldman maintains their "Buy" rating on Halliburton and Morgan Stanley their "Equalweight." Morgan cut their price target on Halliburton from $50 to $45 while Goldman maintained their $40 price target.
Every story coming out in the media is a he/says, she/says situation, and then you go beyond that to the so-called scientific input and it gets even more confusing as the enormous number of variables are weighed, and in reality - guessed at, as to what this means for Halliburton.
If nothing else, this will weigh on the shares of the stock for some time, and even with the assertions of all those involved ensuring the rest of us how things will play out, we've really just begun to see the process in reference to Halliburton, and until things clear up that will remain the case for the company.
Since the news, the market seems to be reacting the same way, as the share price, once the obvious plunge in price was over, rebounded and has been flat while contradictory news continues to be the norm.
Issues that are part of the story all surround the quality of the cement mix used by Halliburton to seal the well, which according to BP, was, for the most part, the major reason for the overall failure.
The oil spill commission agreed with that assessment, and Halliburton has admitted they didn't successfully complete a test on the final mix.
You also have Halliburton saying the internal test of BP concerning the mix, as well as the independent test conducted by Chevron (NYSE:CVX), were both different mixes, and not the actual one used to seal the well.
Then you have a little sample of the original mix which was ordered to be tested by a judge, but some say is now too old to be analyzed successfully.
Evidently the situation is as messed up as the mix was, and it's uncertain if it will ever be able to be absolutely proven whether or not the mix was ultimately the cause of the event, although other oil companies have stated they believe it was a key factor as the mix was described to them.
Halliburton is now going to have this cloud hanging over them, and may have to decide whether or not to settle in order for their reputation not to take a huge battering, or the actual cost of damages could be inconsequential in comparison to the reputation lost, along with possible future business.
That's why financial institutions like Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) view Halliburton as a buying opportunity at this time, while others such as Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS) have lowered their price target on the company.
Goldman maintains their "Buy" rating on Halliburton and Morgan Stanley their "Equalweight." Morgan cut their price target on Halliburton from $50 to $45 while Goldman maintained their $40 price target.
Every story coming out in the media is a he/says, she/says situation, and then you go beyond that to the so-called scientific input and it gets even more confusing as the enormous number of variables are weighed, and in reality - guessed at, as to what this means for Halliburton.
If nothing else, this will weigh on the shares of the stock for some time, and even with the assertions of all those involved ensuring the rest of us how things will play out, we've really just begun to see the process in reference to Halliburton, and until things clear up that will remain the case for the company.
Since the news, the market seems to be reacting the same way, as the share price, once the obvious plunge in price was over, rebounded and has been flat while contradictory news continues to be the norm.
Issues that are part of the story all surround the quality of the cement mix used by Halliburton to seal the well, which according to BP, was, for the most part, the major reason for the overall failure.
The oil spill commission agreed with that assessment, and Halliburton has admitted they didn't successfully complete a test on the final mix.
You also have Halliburton saying the internal test of BP concerning the mix, as well as the independent test conducted by Chevron (NYSE:CVX), were both different mixes, and not the actual one used to seal the well.
Then you have a little sample of the original mix which was ordered to be tested by a judge, but some say is now too old to be analyzed successfully.
Evidently the situation is as messed up as the mix was, and it's uncertain if it will ever be able to be absolutely proven whether or not the mix was ultimately the cause of the event, although other oil companies have stated they believe it was a key factor as the mix was described to them.
Halliburton is now going to have this cloud hanging over them, and may have to decide whether or not to settle in order for their reputation not to take a huge battering, or the actual cost of damages could be inconsequential in comparison to the reputation lost, along with possible future business.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Goldman (NYSE:GS) Says Buy Halliburton (NYSE:HAL), Citing Liability Headlines
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) said investors should buy into Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) based on liability headlines which very likely won't pan out in their view.
Although there are a lot of contradictory stories emerging from the report from the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, which concluded the cement mud used to seal the Macondo well of BP (NYSE:BP) was unstable, Goldman seems sure Halliburton did what it could to provide a safe seal, and the drop in share price should be considered a buying opportunity.
"The slurry that was actually used on the well was tested, and passed, prior
to being pumped," Goldman asserted.
Goldman reminded clients in their note that "due to the low number of stabilizers that BP chose to use and urged BP to conduct all proper tests (including a cement bond log, which was not done)."
"At the end of the day, BP ran a negative pressure test and accepted the inconclusive results", Goldman concluded.
This seems to be far too optimistic, far too soon, to come to this conclusion, which bears the resemblance of cheerleading rather than a decision based upon objective response to the conditions.
It's not that Goldman may or may not end up being right about Halliburton, it's that it seems too soon to look at this as an opportunity to buy before this part of the narrative plays out.
Although there are a lot of contradictory stories emerging from the report from the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, which concluded the cement mud used to seal the Macondo well of BP (NYSE:BP) was unstable, Goldman seems sure Halliburton did what it could to provide a safe seal, and the drop in share price should be considered a buying opportunity.
"The slurry that was actually used on the well was tested, and passed, prior
to being pumped," Goldman asserted.
Goldman reminded clients in their note that "due to the low number of stabilizers that BP chose to use and urged BP to conduct all proper tests (including a cement bond log, which was not done)."
"At the end of the day, BP ran a negative pressure test and accepted the inconclusive results", Goldman concluded.
This seems to be far too optimistic, far too soon, to come to this conclusion, which bears the resemblance of cheerleading rather than a decision based upon objective response to the conditions.
It's not that Goldman may or may not end up being right about Halliburton, it's that it seems too soon to look at this as an opportunity to buy before this part of the narrative plays out.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) Sees Oil Prices Rising on Weak Dollar, Higher Demand
While oil prices could continue trading between $70 to $80 a barrel for the remainder of 2010, Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) sees oil prices rising to the $100 a barrel range by the end of 2011.
Reasons cited were the weakening U.S. dollar and stronger oil demand that originally believed.
One thing that could hinder that assertion would be the recession continuing on into 2011, which could decrease demand levels, along with oil prices.
An analyst at Goldman believes the $100 a barrel mark could be reached sooner rather than later.
If the economy actually begins to improve, existing constraints could be removed and oil prices begin to surge.
Reasons cited were the weakening U.S. dollar and stronger oil demand that originally believed.
One thing that could hinder that assertion would be the recession continuing on into 2011, which could decrease demand levels, along with oil prices.
An analyst at Goldman believes the $100 a barrel mark could be reached sooner rather than later.
If the economy actually begins to improve, existing constraints could be removed and oil prices begin to surge.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Goldman (NYSE:GS), JPMorgan (NYSE:JPM) Raise Oil Price Estimates for 2011
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM) raised their forecasts for oil prices in 2011, with Goldman saying prices in the second half of the year should move significantly higher. JPMorgan sees oil prices moving to $85 a barrel.
Nomura International say oil prices could rise to over $100 a barrel in 2011, basing their assessment on whether or not the Federal Reserve inflates again through quantitative easing.
Knowing it will happen soon, it guarantees oil prices will rise going forward.
The only question remaining for the Federal Reserve to inflate is to what degree. How much will they spend is all that's left to be determined, not if they're going to spend.
If oil does reach or surpass $100 a barrel, it would compensate producers from the weakening of the U.S. dollar. If prices don't reach that high, or remain low, which is possible from slowing demand, it could put even more pressure on the global economy.
Nomura International say oil prices could rise to over $100 a barrel in 2011, basing their assessment on whether or not the Federal Reserve inflates again through quantitative easing.
Knowing it will happen soon, it guarantees oil prices will rise going forward.
The only question remaining for the Federal Reserve to inflate is to what degree. How much will they spend is all that's left to be determined, not if they're going to spend.
If oil does reach or surpass $100 a barrel, it would compensate producers from the weakening of the U.S. dollar. If prices don't reach that high, or remain low, which is possible from slowing demand, it could put even more pressure on the global economy.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC) Initiates Coverage on Chesapeake Midstream (NYSE:CHKM)
Chesapeake Midstream Partners (NYSE:CHKM) has captured a lot of attention from the financial world recently, with Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC) being the latest to initiate coverage on them, starting off with a "Market Perform" rating.
"CHKM has 100% fee-based cash flow and visible growth prospects tied to its GP's drilling plans and potential drop-down opportunities. We forecast a five-year distribution compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.3%, assuming average annual (1) acquisitions of $300 million and (2) growth capex of $510 million. However, CHKM's attractive attributes and above-average growth profile appear fairly reflected in the current valuation, in our view. Approximately 80% of CHKM's distribution is tax deferred," said the Wells analyst.
Other companies recently initiating coverage on Chesapeake Midstream are UBS (NYSE:UBS), who started them with a "Buy"; Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) and Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), with a "Neutral"; and Barclays (NYSE:BCS) with an "Overweight."
Chesapeake Midstream Partners is a provider of natural gas gathering and processing services.
"CHKM has 100% fee-based cash flow and visible growth prospects tied to its GP's drilling plans and potential drop-down opportunities. We forecast a five-year distribution compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.3%, assuming average annual (1) acquisitions of $300 million and (2) growth capex of $510 million. However, CHKM's attractive attributes and above-average growth profile appear fairly reflected in the current valuation, in our view. Approximately 80% of CHKM's distribution is tax deferred," said the Wells analyst.
Other companies recently initiating coverage on Chesapeake Midstream are UBS (NYSE:UBS), who started them with a "Buy"; Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) and Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), with a "Neutral"; and Barclays (NYSE:BCS) with an "Overweight."
Chesapeake Midstream Partners is a provider of natural gas gathering and processing services.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Citigroup (NYSE:C), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), UBS (NYSE:UBS), Barclays (NYSE:BCS) Initiate Coverage on Chesapeake (NYSE:CHKM)
It has been awhile since I've seen this many companies initiate coverage on a company at one time, but Citigroup (NYSE:C), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), UBS (NYSE:UBS) and Barclays (NYSE:BCS) have all started covering Chesapeake Midstream Partners, L.P (NYSE:CHKM).
UBS and Citigroup were the most upbeat on Chesapeake, starting them off at a "Buy." UBS wasn't as positive on its price target for the company, setting it at $25.50, while Citigroup is looking for $28.50.
Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, via Merrill Lynch, placed a "Neutral" rating on Chesapeake. Goldman has a price target of $25 on them.
Barclays rates the company at "Overweight," with a price target of $26.
Every financial institution liked the way the revenue for the company is structured, based on contracted fees over a period of 10 years.
That means there is little risk or downside to changing commodity or natural gas prices, as the fees aren't primarily based on price but on the service offered, which is transporting gas from the well head to the pipeline of the company they're doing business with.
Along with Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK), the other major customer of Chesapeake Midstream is Total (NYSE:TOT).
There is a minimum volume agreement in place over a ten-year period, which will increase on an annual basis through 2018.
Chesapeake Midstream is a venture between Global Infrastructure Partners LP and Chesapeake Energy.
UBS and Citigroup were the most upbeat on Chesapeake, starting them off at a "Buy." UBS wasn't as positive on its price target for the company, setting it at $25.50, while Citigroup is looking for $28.50.
Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, via Merrill Lynch, placed a "Neutral" rating on Chesapeake. Goldman has a price target of $25 on them.
Barclays rates the company at "Overweight," with a price target of $26.
Every financial institution liked the way the revenue for the company is structured, based on contracted fees over a period of 10 years.
That means there is little risk or downside to changing commodity or natural gas prices, as the fees aren't primarily based on price but on the service offered, which is transporting gas from the well head to the pipeline of the company they're doing business with.
Along with Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK), the other major customer of Chesapeake Midstream is Total (NYSE:TOT).
There is a minimum volume agreement in place over a ten-year period, which will increase on an annual basis through 2018.
Chesapeake Midstream is a venture between Global Infrastructure Partners LP and Chesapeake Energy.
Friday, September 3, 2010
Citigroup (NYSE:C), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Goldman (NYSE:GS) Underwriting Billions for Petrobras (NYSE:PBR)
In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Petrobras (NYSE:PBR) revealed they'll be raising about $60 billion by selling shares of their common and preferred stock. The offering is being underwritten by Citigroup (NYSE:C), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) and Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS), among others.
Petrobras said they're going to sell up to 2,174,073,900 shares of their common stock, and 1,585,867,998 shares of their preferred stock in the offering.
Based on their September 1 closing price of $35.07 a common share, and $31.12 for each preferred ADS on the same date, the overall potential total of the offering would come to $62,798,491,875.38. That's before underwriter fees, other expenses and taxes.
Existing shareholders will be offered the first 80 percent of the shares on a priority basis.
While bookmaking should start today, pricing should be confirmed on September 23, 2010.
Petrobras said they're going to sell up to 2,174,073,900 shares of their common stock, and 1,585,867,998 shares of their preferred stock in the offering.
Based on their September 1 closing price of $35.07 a common share, and $31.12 for each preferred ADS on the same date, the overall potential total of the offering would come to $62,798,491,875.38. That's before underwriter fees, other expenses and taxes.
Existing shareholders will be offered the first 80 percent of the shares on a priority basis.
While bookmaking should start today, pricing should be confirmed on September 23, 2010.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
John Paulson Acquires 9.2 Million Exxon (NYSE:XOM) Shares in 2nd Quarter
John Paulson, who runs the Paulson & Co hedge fund, acquired 9.2 million shares of Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM) in the 2nd quarter, a new position for the fund.
After being extremely bullish for some time concerning the U.S. economy, Paulson told his investors at the end of the latest quarter the he is modestly less bullish than he has been in the recent past. Still, he believes it's going to rebound.
But continuing to hold strong positions in gold miners, and now investing big in Exxon Mobil, confirms he is definitely not as positive as he has been, and in fact could be expecting a slowdown in the U.S. economy, which is in reality already here, if it ever left in the first place.
Oil investments helped a number of investors and companies do far better than they otherwise would have during the harsher parts of the recession, and buying large stakes like Paulson has in the sector, shows he has real concerns going forward.
Even so, other actions like adding to his holdings in Beazer Homes USA (NYSE:BZH) seems to be schizophrenic with the Exxon strategy, so we'll see how that plays out for him in a week home market.
Paulson also added 1 million shares of Goldman Sachs to the portfolio in the second quarter (NYSE:GS).
After being extremely bullish for some time concerning the U.S. economy, Paulson told his investors at the end of the latest quarter the he is modestly less bullish than he has been in the recent past. Still, he believes it's going to rebound.
But continuing to hold strong positions in gold miners, and now investing big in Exxon Mobil, confirms he is definitely not as positive as he has been, and in fact could be expecting a slowdown in the U.S. economy, which is in reality already here, if it ever left in the first place.
Oil investments helped a number of investors and companies do far better than they otherwise would have during the harsher parts of the recession, and buying large stakes like Paulson has in the sector, shows he has real concerns going forward.
Even so, other actions like adding to his holdings in Beazer Homes USA (NYSE:BZH) seems to be schizophrenic with the Exxon strategy, so we'll see how that plays out for him in a week home market.
Paulson also added 1 million shares of Goldman Sachs to the portfolio in the second quarter (NYSE:GS).
Friday, August 13, 2010
Goldman (NYSE:GS) Maintains "Neutral" Rating on Anadarko (NYSE:APC)
Citing less political risk now that the Macondo oil well has been plugged by BP (NYSE:BP), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) analyst said they're maintaining their "Neutral" rating on Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (NYSE:APC).
Goldman analysts said, "We remain Neutral rated as we see balanced risk/reward after recent outperformance, reflecting in part apparent more benign Gulf of Mexico political risk and progress sealing the Macondo well."
Anadarko Petroleum owns a 25 percent stake in the oil well in the Gulf that had been spilling oil into the ocean, which is what Goldman was referring to when talking about less political risk.
BP owns 65 percent of the well, and MOEX, 70 percent owned by Mitsui (Nasdaq:MITSY), owns the other 10 percent.
Goldman analysts said, "We remain Neutral rated as we see balanced risk/reward after recent outperformance, reflecting in part apparent more benign Gulf of Mexico political risk and progress sealing the Macondo well."
Anadarko Petroleum owns a 25 percent stake in the oil well in the Gulf that had been spilling oil into the ocean, which is what Goldman was referring to when talking about less political risk.
BP owns 65 percent of the well, and MOEX, 70 percent owned by Mitsui (Nasdaq:MITSY), owns the other 10 percent.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) Raises Price Target on Murphy Oil (NYSE:MUR)
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) raised their price target on Murphy Oil (NYSE:MUR) from $61 to a hefty $67 a share, while maintaining their "Buy' rating on the energy company.
Murphy Oil was upgraded from "Neutral" to "Buy" on July 16.
Goldman's continued support of Murphy comes from their belief they'll become the first integrated oil business to be acknowledged for their expansion strategy in North America.
Murphy was down to $56.02 a share, a loss of $1.22, or 2.13 percent, as of 3:17 PM EDT.
Murphy Oil was upgraded from "Neutral" to "Buy" on July 16.
Goldman's continued support of Murphy comes from their belief they'll become the first integrated oil business to be acknowledged for their expansion strategy in North America.
Murphy was down to $56.02 a share, a loss of $1.22, or 2.13 percent, as of 3:17 PM EDT.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Murphy Oil (NYSE:MUR) Selling Off Entire Refining Business
Murphy Oil Corporation (NYSE:MUR) said on Thursday that their Board of Directors has given the go ahead to sell off all their refining units, as they exit the business entirely.
Included in the sale will be refineries located in Milford Haven, Wales; Meraux, Louisiana; and Superior, Wisconsin. Also being sold off will be a retail system located in the UK.
CEO and President David Wood said, “Murphy’s Upstream and U.S. Retail businesses have demonstrated marked growth and financial performance over the last several years. By exiting the refining business, we can fully focus our attention and resources on continuing that growth, developing a premier international upstream business and a top quartile U.S. retail franchise.”
Murphy, which is being advised by Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), expects the units to be sold in the first quarter of 2011.
Included in the sale will be refineries located in Milford Haven, Wales; Meraux, Louisiana; and Superior, Wisconsin. Also being sold off will be a retail system located in the UK.
CEO and President David Wood said, “Murphy’s Upstream and U.S. Retail businesses have demonstrated marked growth and financial performance over the last several years. By exiting the refining business, we can fully focus our attention and resources on continuing that growth, developing a premier international upstream business and a top quartile U.S. retail franchise.”
Murphy, which is being advised by Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), expects the units to be sold in the first quarter of 2011.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) Lowers EPS for EXxonMobil (NYSE:XOM)
Citing their recent acquisition of XTO Energy (NYSE:XTO), Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) has lowered their earnings per share estimates for EXxonMobil (NYSE:XOM) through 2012.
The reasoning is the extensive dilution of earnings the company should experience as a result of buying XTO.
Goldman maintains a "Neutral" rating on ExxonMobil, along with a $65 price target.
The reasoning is the extensive dilution of earnings the company should experience as a result of buying XTO.
Goldman maintains a "Neutral" rating on ExxonMobil, along with a $65 price target.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Goldman (NYSE:GS) Preparing BP (NYSE:BP) Defense? Why?
News reports allege Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) is preparing a defense on behalf of BP (NYSE:BP) in case of takeover attempts, but that seems so far fetched at this time as not to be taken seriously.
Even if a CEO and board or directors gave the go ahead to attempt to acquire BP, think of the shareholder lawsuits that would line up to rightly combat it.
At this stage it's incredulous to think anyone in their right mind would want to acquire BP, as there's no way some type of government bailout would help it be accomplished, as it would devastate the already devastated Obama administration and Democrats if they were to even hint as such a thing.
Even so, this seems similar to the military practicing potential scenarios and how to deal with them rather than anything based in reality.
Now once the fallout is better understood and the costs related to the oil spill are accurately portrayed, at that time it would make possible sense, because similar to the banking industry, huge institutions were taken over by others, even with heavy liability attached to them.
With BP being the major company demonized here, anyone else taking over would probably be given a better deal and opportunity to settle a variety of claims.
BP will probably be punished all along because of the media portrayal of them and their being the major stakeholder in the oil well that is leaking.
Again, this could all be a preparation for some time down the road, but it wouldn't apply to anything at this time, as no one would touch BP at this stage of the game, but months down the road, once things are managed and the leak is under control, questions as to whether to allow BP to continue to be a company will probably emerge, and then the sharks will be circling because of the blood in the water, and that is probably what the preparations are for, not for anything in the near term.
Even if a CEO and board or directors gave the go ahead to attempt to acquire BP, think of the shareholder lawsuits that would line up to rightly combat it.
At this stage it's incredulous to think anyone in their right mind would want to acquire BP, as there's no way some type of government bailout would help it be accomplished, as it would devastate the already devastated Obama administration and Democrats if they were to even hint as such a thing.
Even so, this seems similar to the military practicing potential scenarios and how to deal with them rather than anything based in reality.
Now once the fallout is better understood and the costs related to the oil spill are accurately portrayed, at that time it would make possible sense, because similar to the banking industry, huge institutions were taken over by others, even with heavy liability attached to them.
With BP being the major company demonized here, anyone else taking over would probably be given a better deal and opportunity to settle a variety of claims.
BP will probably be punished all along because of the media portrayal of them and their being the major stakeholder in the oil well that is leaking.
Again, this could all be a preparation for some time down the road, but it wouldn't apply to anything at this time, as no one would touch BP at this stage of the game, but months down the road, once things are managed and the leak is under control, questions as to whether to allow BP to continue to be a company will probably emerge, and then the sharks will be circling because of the blood in the water, and that is probably what the preparations are for, not for anything in the near term.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Was Gulf Oil Spill an Inside Job?
Could the catastrophic Gulf of Mexico oil rig explosion be part of a larger scheme to “reform” the energy industry, just as the Obama administration has “reformed” healthcare, banking and automobile manufacturers? Worse, is “cap and trade”—possibly the worst legislation ever penned—the ultimate endgame behind this spill, which they are now capitalizing upon?
The first red flag receiving virtually no attention is that Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) (of Dick Cheney fame) had finished a cementing process only 20 hours prior to Deepwater Horizon erupting in flames. Lawsuits have already been filed, with Reuters reporting on April 29, “Halliburton improperly and negligently performed its job in cementing the well, increasing the pressure at the well and contributing to the fire, explosion and resulting oil spill.”
As a result, a high-pressure pocket of deep oil 30,000 feet beneath the ocean floor erupted with the force of a gigantic, non-stop fire hose. A surviving worker on the rig, John Kersey, said it sounded “like a war zone” as alarms were triggered, electricity shorted out, and flames shot 300 feet into the air. The inferno-like blaze could be seen 35 miles away.
CONNECTIONS
Suspicions arise when an ownership paper trail is followed. Halliburton subcontracted for a company named Transocean, which leased and operated Deepwater Horizon for British Petroleum (NYSE:BP). Transocean is a subsidiary of Sonat Inc., which merged with the El Paso Corporation (NYSE:EP) in March 1999. Douglas Foshee, EPC’s chairman, president and CEO, was hired away from Halliburton. The interim CEO prior to his arrival was Ronald Kuehn of Sonat.
Another previous CEO of EPC was William Wise, who served with Cheney on the influential National Petroleum Council. EPC was the largest single contributor from Texas for Bush-Cheney’s 2000 presidential campaign. Similarly, Wise helped Cheney raise $8 million for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
These incestuous relationships aren’t limited to the GOP. Barack Obama and his Chicago crime network expect to reap handsome profits in the future. Step No. 1 in this process began with Chicago’s Joyce Foundation, which had John Ayers (brother of terrorist William Ayers) on its board. Another board member was then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.
The Joyce Foundation created the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which in turn received financing from Franklin Raines, former head of Fannie Mae, a prime mover in our recent housing market collapse and economic recession.
Of vital importance is CCX’s role as the sole “carbon trading system” under Obama’s cap-and-trade bill. CCX would act as a quasi-stock market to buy and sell energy emission allowances. Richard Sandor, CCX founder, estimated a $10 trillion potential for this easily manipulated market.
BILDERBERG INFLUENCE
With that much money at stake, a host of high rollers enter the picture. Namely, one company with a huge ownership interest in CCX is Generation Investment Management (GIM), whose chairman is former Vice President Al Gore. Four other GIM founders include Henry Paulson, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris—all of Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS). Not surprisingly, Goldman Sachs purchased 10 percent of CCX in 2006.
One other individual on CCX’s board of directors is the controversial Maurice Strong, a New Age occultist with direct ties to the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.
Since Goldman Sachs has now become part of the equation, we next need to examine its non-executive chairman, Peter Sutherland, who formerly filled the same role at BP, the company at the center of this debacle. As the third-largest global energy company in existence, BP has four direct links to Bilderberg: former CEO John Brown, chairman Carl Henric Svanberg, chief executive Tony Hayward and Sutherland. In addition, Sutherland formerly served as the World Trade Organization’s director general, EU commissioner and chairman of the European Trilateral Commission.
This background information is important because the top recipient of BP donations during the 2008 presidential campaign was Obama. Similarly, the second highest political action committee contributing to a political candidate in 2008 was Goldman Sachs. The beneficiary of their largess: Obama.
Undoubtedly, one of Obama’s primary big government missions is to enact cap-and-trade legislation. To implement this plan, influential decision makers such as Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Paul Volcker and Timothy Geithner are all members of the financial mafia. In this vein, David Mayer Rothschild stressed that last year’s Copenhagen environmental summit was “an attempt to establish a world government.”
Likewise, AFP editor Jim Tucker reported on March 24, 2007 that General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, said political leaders should “address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide.”
The Rothschilds have spent huge amounts of money promoting the global warming hoax. Goldman Sachs is obviously an arm of their empire, whereas BP is among a host of companies in Nathan Rothschild’s portfolio.
A TEAM EFFORT
Considering the nature of these prominent players, one factor binds them all together. Cap and trade, via the CCX, will tax carbon-dioxide emissions and generate trillions in revenue. Only a month ago, however, this legislation sat dead in the water with virtually no support from Congress or the American public. But now, with an environmental catastrophe at hand, could it be resurrected and enacted in a way that mirrored President Clinton’s counter-terrorism bill following the OKC bombing?
Ironically, big oil and global bankers are two of the most ardent supporters of climate change legislation. In this sense, seeming adversaries such as “environmentalist” Gore and BP are on the same team; as are Cheney’s Halliburton, Goldman Sachs and Obama’s CCX. It should also be noted that prior to their demise, the corrupt Enron Corporation lavished huge amounts of praise on cap and trade legislation.
Lastly, if gasoline prices surge this summer due to the Gulf of Mexico spill, one obvious benefactor will be the new green-friendly “smart cars” owned by GM (Government Motors).
As AFP goes to press, all containment efforts have failed as millions of gallons of oil continue to gush into the Gulf of Mexico on a weekly basis.
By Victor Thorn
Credit: American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
The first red flag receiving virtually no attention is that Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) (of Dick Cheney fame) had finished a cementing process only 20 hours prior to Deepwater Horizon erupting in flames. Lawsuits have already been filed, with Reuters reporting on April 29, “Halliburton improperly and negligently performed its job in cementing the well, increasing the pressure at the well and contributing to the fire, explosion and resulting oil spill.”
As a result, a high-pressure pocket of deep oil 30,000 feet beneath the ocean floor erupted with the force of a gigantic, non-stop fire hose. A surviving worker on the rig, John Kersey, said it sounded “like a war zone” as alarms were triggered, electricity shorted out, and flames shot 300 feet into the air. The inferno-like blaze could be seen 35 miles away.
CONNECTIONS
Suspicions arise when an ownership paper trail is followed. Halliburton subcontracted for a company named Transocean, which leased and operated Deepwater Horizon for British Petroleum (NYSE:BP). Transocean is a subsidiary of Sonat Inc., which merged with the El Paso Corporation (NYSE:EP) in March 1999. Douglas Foshee, EPC’s chairman, president and CEO, was hired away from Halliburton. The interim CEO prior to his arrival was Ronald Kuehn of Sonat.
Another previous CEO of EPC was William Wise, who served with Cheney on the influential National Petroleum Council. EPC was the largest single contributor from Texas for Bush-Cheney’s 2000 presidential campaign. Similarly, Wise helped Cheney raise $8 million for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
These incestuous relationships aren’t limited to the GOP. Barack Obama and his Chicago crime network expect to reap handsome profits in the future. Step No. 1 in this process began with Chicago’s Joyce Foundation, which had John Ayers (brother of terrorist William Ayers) on its board. Another board member was then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.
The Joyce Foundation created the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which in turn received financing from Franklin Raines, former head of Fannie Mae, a prime mover in our recent housing market collapse and economic recession.
Of vital importance is CCX’s role as the sole “carbon trading system” under Obama’s cap-and-trade bill. CCX would act as a quasi-stock market to buy and sell energy emission allowances. Richard Sandor, CCX founder, estimated a $10 trillion potential for this easily manipulated market.
BILDERBERG INFLUENCE
With that much money at stake, a host of high rollers enter the picture. Namely, one company with a huge ownership interest in CCX is Generation Investment Management (GIM), whose chairman is former Vice President Al Gore. Four other GIM founders include Henry Paulson, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris—all of Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS). Not surprisingly, Goldman Sachs purchased 10 percent of CCX in 2006.
One other individual on CCX’s board of directors is the controversial Maurice Strong, a New Age occultist with direct ties to the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds.
Since Goldman Sachs has now become part of the equation, we next need to examine its non-executive chairman, Peter Sutherland, who formerly filled the same role at BP, the company at the center of this debacle. As the third-largest global energy company in existence, BP has four direct links to Bilderberg: former CEO John Brown, chairman Carl Henric Svanberg, chief executive Tony Hayward and Sutherland. In addition, Sutherland formerly served as the World Trade Organization’s director general, EU commissioner and chairman of the European Trilateral Commission.
This background information is important because the top recipient of BP donations during the 2008 presidential campaign was Obama. Similarly, the second highest political action committee contributing to a political candidate in 2008 was Goldman Sachs. The beneficiary of their largess: Obama.
Undoubtedly, one of Obama’s primary big government missions is to enact cap-and-trade legislation. To implement this plan, influential decision makers such as Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Paul Volcker and Timothy Geithner are all members of the financial mafia. In this vein, David Mayer Rothschild stressed that last year’s Copenhagen environmental summit was “an attempt to establish a world government.”
Likewise, AFP editor Jim Tucker reported on March 24, 2007 that General Lord Guthrie, director of N.M. Rothschild & Sons, said political leaders should “address the global climate crisis with a single voice, and impose rules that apply worldwide.”
The Rothschilds have spent huge amounts of money promoting the global warming hoax. Goldman Sachs is obviously an arm of their empire, whereas BP is among a host of companies in Nathan Rothschild’s portfolio.
A TEAM EFFORT
Considering the nature of these prominent players, one factor binds them all together. Cap and trade, via the CCX, will tax carbon-dioxide emissions and generate trillions in revenue. Only a month ago, however, this legislation sat dead in the water with virtually no support from Congress or the American public. But now, with an environmental catastrophe at hand, could it be resurrected and enacted in a way that mirrored President Clinton’s counter-terrorism bill following the OKC bombing?
Ironically, big oil and global bankers are two of the most ardent supporters of climate change legislation. In this sense, seeming adversaries such as “environmentalist” Gore and BP are on the same team; as are Cheney’s Halliburton, Goldman Sachs and Obama’s CCX. It should also be noted that prior to their demise, the corrupt Enron Corporation lavished huge amounts of praise on cap and trade legislation.
Lastly, if gasoline prices surge this summer due to the Gulf of Mexico spill, one obvious benefactor will be the new green-friendly “smart cars” owned by GM (Government Motors).
As AFP goes to press, all containment efforts have failed as millions of gallons of oil continue to gush into the Gulf of Mexico on a weekly basis.
By Victor Thorn
Credit: American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
