checkAd

EXXON - zahlt kontinuierlich steigende Dividenden... (Seite 29)

eröffnet am 29.03.10 13:58:52 von
neuester Beitrag 23.06.21 05:49:04 von

Beitrag zu dieser Diskussion schreiben


  • 1
  • 29
  • 30

Begriffe und/oder Benutzer

 

Fragen

 Ja Nein
Avatar
30.03.12 10:21:41
Beitrag Nr. 15 ()
http://www.aktiencheck.de/news/Artikel-Exxon_Mobil_Aktie_Div…

Die Dividendenrendite ist mit 2,2% gar nicht so niedrig wie sie aussieht, denn man muss die Aktienrückkäufe auch noch dazurechnen.
Hinzu kommt, dass bei diesen enormen Investitionen Wachstum quasi vorprogrammiert ist. Es gibt noch viele Shale Öl/Gas Gelegenheiten in den USA und Tiefseeöl in den USA und anderswo. Es könnte wirklich Realität werden, dass sich die USA in 10 Jahren selbst mit Öl versorgen können, wie von Analysten prognostiziert. Exxon wird daran seinen Anteil haben. IMO ein klarer Kauf, insbesondere auch wegen des moderaten KGVs von 10.
Avatar
03.07.11 17:56:58
Beitrag Nr. 14 ()
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 40.019.443 von SLGramann am 20.08.10 11:40:16Kleines Update für 2010.


Durchschnittspreis 2010 für ein Barrel Brent: 79,50 Dollar

cash-flow from operations and asset sales: 51,7 Mrd.
capital and exploration expanditures: 32,2 Mrd.
Überschuss: 19,5 Mrd.


Alles viel besser als 2009 - logisch, da doch der Ölpreis im Jahresdurchschnitt von 61,67 Dollar / Barrel auf 79,50 Dollar / Barrel, also um ca. 30% gestiegen ist.

Dennoch haben sich eigentlich alle Kennziffern im Vergleich zu 2006 verschlechtert:

Der cash flow aus dem operativen Geschäft ist fast unverändert

2006: 52,3
2010: 51,6

Doch die entsprechenden expanditures sind drastisch gestiegen:

2006: 19,8
2010: 32,2

Dementsprechend wurden 2006 noch 37 Mrd. Dollar an die Aktionäre ausgeschüttet.
2010 waren es nur noch 21,5 Mrd. Dollar.

Dennoch sind die Cashreserven gesunken und zwar von 28,2 Mrd. in 2006 auf nun noch 7,8 Mrd.

Die Verschuldung ist gestiegen von 8,3 Mrd. auf 15 Mrd. Dollar.

Das alles bei einem Umsatz der etwa auf dem Niveau von 2006 liegt.

Fazit: Im Vergleich 2010 zu 2006 sind die Kosten schneller als der Ölpreis gestiegen und Exxon hat an Stärke verloren.
2011 könnte besser laufen. Aber sollte der Ölpreis einbrechen, weil die Weltwirtschaft sich verlangsamt, dann gibt es der Kosten wegen für den Kurs einen beachtlichen Hebel nach unten.
1 Antwort
Avatar
26.04.11 07:28:04
Beitrag Nr. 13 ()
Obama will Ölkonzernen Steuervorteile streichen

Bei einem Interview aus der Facebook-Zentrale in Kalifornien stand US-Präsident Barack Obama zehntausenden Facebook-Nutzern Rede und Antwort. Er sprach auch darüber, dass er die Steuervorteile für Ölkonzerne abschaffen will.
Avatar
05.02.11 04:03:16
Beitrag Nr. 12 ()


Das ist der Daily-Chart über 5 Jahre. Man sieht, dass wir am 1.2. einen uralten(seit 2007!) Widerstand geknackt haben und zwar mit einem fulminanten Spike.
"Ursache" soll die Ägypten-Krise sein. Na gut. Nun ist aber Ägypten nicht gerade das Ölland und Auswirkungen auf die weltweite Ölförderung sind wohl eher nicht zu erwarten.
Deshalb ist es wohl eher eine kurzlebige Spekulation, die den Ölpreis über die 102 $ getrieben hat. Wenn wir uns die letzten 3 Tage ansehen, so gibt es auch keine Anschlusskäufe mehr. Deshalb rechne ich mit einem Kursrückschlag bei Exxon nächste Woche. Nicht, dass ich den Ölpreis in Zukunft nicht über 100 sehe, aber das jetzt war zu schnell. Zwischen 31.1. und 1.2. hat sich außerdem ein Fenster nach oben aufgemacht. Deshalb sehe ich jetzt ein Rückschlagspotential auf 81 $ bei Exxon. Was danach kommt, werden wir sehen. Nach Fibonacci könnte es auch bis 80 gehen(50%), aber das hängt dann davon ab, wie weit der Korrekturschwung unter dem Fenster noch reicht.
Ich denke, man könnte eine Short-Position am Montag wagen.
Avatar
20.08.10 11:40:16
Beitrag Nr. 11 ()
Hi R-BgO,

ich halte Exxon für das stärkste private Unternehmen im Gas- und Ölsektor, aber ich bin darüber besorgt, wie schnell offenkundig ihre Produktionskosten steigen. Die (westlichen) Ölunternehmen sind extrem abhängig von recht hohen Ölpreisen, um überhaupt einen relevanten free-cash-flow zu erzeugen.
Im Jahre 2009 ist das selbst Exxon nicht wirklich gelungen. Bei allen anderen siehts natürlich im Zweifel noch düsterer aus.

Nehmen wir folgende Kenziffern, um das Problem zu verdeutlichen:

1.) cash-flow from operations and asset sales
2.) capital and exploration expanditures

Aus der Differenz ergibt sich so in etwa der ausschüttungsfähige cash-flow.

(Anmerkung: Ich finde das der free-cash-flow der entscheidende Maßstab für die Bewertung eines Öl- und Gasunternehmens ist. Denn ein großes Mengenwachstum der Produktion in der Zukunft ist eh nicht zu machen, so dass der Wert der Anlage unmittelbar aus den realen Ausschüttungen abgeleitet werden muss. Insofern sind die Aktien von Exxon und vergleichbaren Unternehmen der Branche so etwas wie Anleihen mit schwankendem Kupon. Die Höhe des Kupons hängt mittelfristig natürlich am free-cash-flow.)


Im Boomjahr 2008 sah es so aus:

cash-flow from operations and asset sales: 65,7 Mrd.
capital and exploration expanditures: 26,1 Mrd.
Überschuss: 39,6 Mrd.


Im Krisenjahr 2009 sah es so aus:

cash-flow from operations and asset sales: 29,9 Mrd.
capital and exploration expanditures: 27,1 Mrd.
Überschuss: 2,8 Mrd.

Exxon hat an seine Aktionäre übrigens dennoch ca. 26 Mrd. ausgeschüttet (Dividenden und Nettoaktienrückkäufe). Nicht verwunderlich, dass dabei der Cashbestand um 21 Mrd. Dollar geschrumpft ist. Man hat die Aktionäre aus der Substanz beglückt. Nachhaltig ist das indes nicht.

Was war 2009 anders, als 2008? In erster Linie der Ölpreis, der im Jahresdurchschnitt in 2009 nur noch bei 61,67 Dollar / Barrel lag, statt bei 97,26 Dollar in 2008 (Daten für Brent aus dem BP review).

Allerdings sind 2009 aber nicht nur die Verkaufserlöse gefallen, sondern es steigen eben jedes Jahr die Kosten immer weiter an – und das offenbar recht zügig.

Das sieht man gut bei dem Vergleich unserer Kennziffern für das Jahr 2006. Damals lag der Ölpreis mit durchschnittlich 65,14 Dollar nicht weit weg vom Niveau 2009.

Was ergab sich damals?

cash-flow from operations and asset sales: 52,3 Mrd.
capital and exploration expanditures: 19,8 Mrd.
Überschuss: 32,5 Mrd.


Der Umsatz lag 2006 etwa um ca. 20% höher als 2009 (eine Mischung aus einer höheren Ölproduktion und dem etwas höheren Ölpreis).
Bei einem um 20% geringeren Umsatz bricht nun also der free-cash-flow von 32,5 um gute 90%(!) Mrd. auf 2,8 Mrd. ein!

Schlussfolgerung: Die Kosten der Produktion sind in den paar Jahren grässlich gestiegen!

Mein Fazit ist, dass die (westlichen) Ölkonzerne, mit ihrer tendenziell teuren Förderung, schwächer sind, als sie aussehen und dass sie dringend auf hohe Ölpreise angewiesen sind.

Auf der anderen Seite ergibt sich aus höheren Ölpreisen damit natürlich auch ein beachtlicher Hebel für die Gewinne und den free-cash-flow.

Ich gehe davon aus, dass der gegenwärtige Ölpreis nicht ausreichend ist, um das hohe Ausschüttungsniveau der Ölgesellschaften langfristig sicherzustellen, auch wenn er zumindest bei Exxon ausreichen dürfte, die CapEx zu finanzieren und eine gewisse Dividende zu ermöglichen.

Was der Ölpreis in den nächsten Jahren treiben wird, ist sehr schwer zu prognostizieren. Das wird vom Wachstum der Weltwirtschaft einerseits und von der Erschließung weiterer Quellen vor allem im Irak abhängen.

Ich werde an dem Thema dranbleiben und dabei versuchen, die Verbindung mit Exxon nicht aus dem Auge zu verlieren.
Insbesondere werde ich mir demnächst mal anschauen, wie die Situation zum HJ 2010 aussah.
2 Antworten
Avatar
20.07.10 15:04:29
Beitrag Nr. 10 ()
Vanguard (Lagos)
Nigeria: New Oil Finds Getting More Challenging, Says Exxonmobil Boss

Clara Nwachukwu

19 July 2010

Equating supply to meet rising energy demand particularly in the industrialised nations and Asia is becoming increasingly challenging, Rex Tillerson, the Chairman and Chief Executive, ExxonMobil Corporation has said.

Mr Tillerson, who spoke in the corporation's 2009 Corporate Citizenship Report, recently made available to journalists, noted that the implications for the rising demand will be significant for all stakeholders.

In the case of Nigeria, where the Federal Government is seeking greater take from oil and gas resources, which constitute the bulk of its revenue earnings amid strong resistance from multinational operators, part of the challenge for ExxonMobil will also include reducing flaring through continued investment in infrastructure.

Mr Mark Ward, the Lead Country Manager, ExxonMobil Affiliates, Nigeria (Esso Exploration and Production Company Limited; Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited; and Mobil Oil Nigeria Plc), in his remarks affirmed ExxonMobil's commitment to Nigeria for the long haul.

He said that despite the global economic downturn, compounded by Nigeria's peculiar security and policy-related issues, which contributed in changing the scope and structure of the oil and gas business in Nigeria, ExxonMobil was able to overcome these challenges and even made "tremendous progress in many areas" particularly with regard to production levels.

For instance, in 2009, ExxonMobil's net production averaged at 391,000 barrels per day, while the corporation has already produced about 950,000 barrels in the first half of 2010, due to a combination of factors including production restrictions by the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

Furthermore, ExxonMobil notes that government's support, through the long term renewal of its oil leases under joint venture operations with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), will sustain its oil and gas investments in the country.

Operational issues

ExxonMobil chief executive, Mr. Tillerson, who spoke on, rising to the Sustainability Challenge, said, "Meeting the challenge of sustainability requires that we effectively address complex environmental, economic, and social issues of our time, while delivering on our primary responsibility - finding and providing the reliable supplies of energy needed by future generations for progress and development."

He highlighted some of the operational issues further compounded by global economic downturn to include:

* How operators can develop the vast potential of unconventional resources or operate in areas like the arctic without compromising safety or the environment - the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico by BP is a case at hand.

* What are the legitimate roles and boundaries between government, the private sector and civil society, particularly in developing countries such as Nigeria undergoing targeted economic reforms.

* Addressing the risks of climate change, while also ensuring that policy proposals focused on finding lasting solutions and not short term expedience or political acceptability.

Future finds:

While seeing "many opportunities for economic growth, improved living standards, and exciting new energy technologies," for its Outlook for Energy, the ExxonMobil Report equally foresees "tremendous challenges, and how to meet the world's growing energy needs to support and expand prosperity while reducing the impacts of energy use on the environment."

The report said, "Fundamentally, our energy future is about people and how they use energy to foster economic development and human progress." it added that meeting future demand, say by 2030, will push up global energy demand by almost 35 percent from the 2005 base line.

"This expansion will result in increased demand for energy in all major end-use sectors - transportation, power generation, industrial and residential/commercial," the report added.

Accordingly, ExxonMobil, the world's biggest oil company by asset base noted that meeting the demand will not be easy, as this will require "an integrated set of solutions that include improving efficiency, expanding supplies of all economical energy sources, including renewables; and mitigating emissions through a variety of approaches, "which it said will require trillions of dollars in long term investments and constant technological innovation.
Avatar
19.07.10 18:26:46
Beitrag Nr. 9 ()
Habe heute mal aufgestockt; aktuell 3% Div.Rendite:

19.07.2010 17:59
ExxonMobil Announces Multi-Year Supply Agreement With Caterpillar

* ExxonMobil is the exclusive supplier for 33 Caterpillar® lubricants
* Long-term cooperative research enables development of advanced lubricant technologies
* Lubricants offer highest performance while lowering operating costs for Caterpillar customers

As part of a multi-year agreement, ExxonMobil will manufacture and supply Caterpillar® branded lubricants to Caterpillar factories and dealers worldwide. With this agreement, ExxonMobil continues as the exclusive worldwide supplier for 33 Caterpillar® lubricants used in engines, transmissions, hydraulics and final drives.

Since 1987, when ExxonMobil began supplying private label lubricants to Caterpillar, the two companies have worked together on world-class product research. That research has resulted in the creation of lubricant technologies that work as a system with the machine and engine to provide the highest performance, while lowering the operating costs for Caterpillar customers. In addition, they provide sustainability-related benefits through extended oil drain intervals and protection of engine emission reduction systems.

"Through ongoing cooperative research, our teams have designed and produced lubricants that meet Caterpillar's high performance standards," said Jim Hennessy, vice president of sales for ExxonMobil Lubricants&Specialties. "It's a rigorous process: before these lubricants are manufactured, the products and performance specifications are tested and approved by Caterpillar. As part of our global relationship, a dedicated ExxonMobil support team provides technical and marketing training to Cat dealers and facilities worldwide."

ExxonMobil and Caterpillar are already developing the next generation of lubricants and exploring technologies that will further help reduce emissions as well as extend component life.
Avatar
18.07.10 16:15:44
Beitrag Nr. 8 ()
Avatar
07.06.10 18:15:02
Beitrag Nr. 7 ()
Exxon Eyes China Gas
By: Zacks Equity Research
June 07, 2010 | Comments: 0


ExxonMobil Corp. (XOM - Analyst Report) is in advanced talks with Chinese national oil firms for several upstream partnerships. The resources in question include unconventional properties both inside and outside of China.

Exxon said that the company is encouraged by China's recent gas price increase and is moving towards a more market-based pricing. Effective from June 1, China announced a 25% hike in benchmark onshore gas prices. China believes natural gas is the most efficient way to reduce its carbon footprint, and it is planning to increase its share of natural gas in its energy needs pie to 10% by 2020 from the current 3%.

While oil, natural gas and coal will continue to meet most of the world's needs, Exxon emphasizes on natural gas as a major source of energy in its program, reflecting its abundance, versatility and economic advantages as an efficient and clean-burning fuel. Exxon anticipates a 55% increase in global natural gas demand by 2030, driven primarily by the power-generation sector.

Despite the challenging business environment, Exxon's businesses have been delivering strong performances. It remains focused on its business plan, a robust exploration program, record capital investment and a persistent focus on operational excellence.

Though Exxon has been providing assistance in response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM), it is concerned about the uncertainties and costs associated with the future deepwater GoM drilling scenario. However, we believe that Exxon’s business will be least hampered as the company has very little exposure in the GoM.
Avatar
02.06.10 21:56:12
Beitrag Nr. 6 ()
ByGlenn Williams, RealMoney Contributor , On Wednesday June 2, 2010, 2:15 pm EDT

There's a lot of smart money in the Marcellus Shale belt in search of natural gas. Some big names with heavy coffers are involved: Shell, Total, Exxon Mobil, National Fuel Gas, Atlas Energy, and so many others. Recently, there was a suggestion that these companies are betting that natural gas will be used, "somewhere, anywhere," but not in the U.S., which will become a net exporter of the fuel.

I agree this is a lot of smart money. I also agree these companies believe a lot of natural gas will be consumed. But, there is no chance the U.S. will become a net exporter of natural gas anytime soon. I believe the smart money is betting that all the Marcellus Shale natural gas will be used domestically.

The U.S. has been a net importer of natural gas for the past 30 years, according to the Energy Information Administration. Over the past two (recession) years, we have been a net importer at an average rate of 235 billion cubic feet per month. Earlier this year, as the domestic natural-gas process touched historic lows, the EIA reported that the U.S. continued to import natural gas from Canada, Mexico, Egypt, Nigeria, Qatar, Trinidad, and Yemen.

If multinational investments are an indicator of market trends, then there is consensus that growing volumes of natural gas will be consumed in the U.S. According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, dozens of companies are each betting billions of dollars that there will never be enough natural gas production in the U.S. They back up their bets with costly plans to build, own, and operate up to 40 liquid-natural-gas import facilities.

It is more than plans. Ten LNG off-loading, regasification, and storage facilities, many new or expanded, are already operating on the East Coast. These represent tens of billions in capital expenditures and huge bets by individual players. Like the Marcellus play, there is a lot of smart money on net imports. These facilities are owned, or partially owned, by companies such as Sempra Energy, Dominion Resources, El Paso, GDF Suez SA, Southern Union, Cheniere Energy, Dow Chemical, RWE AG and Repsol YPF .

These LNG facilities are large, modern, and efficient. Many, have 3 to 16.8 Bcf storage tanks, send-out capacities of 0.5 to 4.0 Bcf/day, and are connected to a major pipeline hub that provides access to large parts of the U.S. natural-gas markets. Some of the newer offshore terminals, like Northeast Gateway and the Gulf Gateway Deepwater Port are 10 to 120 miles off the coast and have a send-out capacity of 0.5 to 0.6 Bcf/day.

Joining the existing fleet is Exxon, which is building additional LNG import facilities, including 2.0 Bcf/day capacity in Sabine, Texas, and planning a 1.2 Bcf/d floating facility 20 miles off the New Jersey coast. El Paso is adding 0.9 Bcf/day on Elba Island, Georgia, and building a 1.5 Bcf/day in Mississippi.

That's a lot of multinationals using independent analysis to make similar multibillion-dollar bets. Not one of them decided to build an export facility. There isn't a single export facility anywhere in the lower 48 states, and there are no applications before the FERC to build one. There isn't a single penny to back up the notion that the U.S. will become a net exporter of natural gas.

If this massive investment in LNG isn't enough to kill the argument, consider why they are making this bet and what it would take for the U.S. to export Marcellus Shale gas. First, neither the Canadians nor the Mexicans are interested in U.S. natural gas -- they have plenty of their own and are shipping their surplus to the U.S. The Asian market is out of reach for Marcellus and is better served by Alaska, Mexico, Peru, and Russia. Only Ireland, the U.K., and Europe offer practical markets for U.S. shale gas, but only if the price is right.

And the price is not right; Marcellus Shale natural gas isn't competitive internationally. Methane from most oil-producing regions is a byproduct. In the Middle East, wet gas is often flared off. In these areas, the LNG production costs approach zero. It is hard to compete against zero.

Worse, unlike the Middle East variety, Marcellus Shale natural gas isn't a byproduct. It is expensive to extract, and approximately 30% of its value is lost when liquefied, transported, and regasified. There is no economic argument that positions Marcellus Shale natural gas favorably against LNG from oil-producing regions, since cost-leading Middle East oil producers can undercut U.S. prices anytime they want.

The massive investments in the Marcellus Shale and LNG-receiving terminals suggest the multinationals are betting on the Pickens Plan; they believe the U.S. is migrating to a natural-gas economy. It may not be overnight, but the U.S. will need all the natural gas it can get and it will be forced to pay top dollar.

The only people who don't seem to appreciate the trend are the Americans, some of whom argue that the Obama administration "hates natural gas." These critics believe the U.S. isn't pushing hard enough to accelerate consumption. The evidence suggests otherwise; all of a sudden, it is virtually impossible to build new coal-power plants. The only practical choice for utilities to build base-loaded power plants is to use natural-gas as fuel. Nevertheless, the "hate natural gas" drum beat continues.

What the Obama administration should be concerned about is over-dependence on a single fuel and on natural gas. If the U.S. relies too much on natural gas and the Marcellus field fails -- and it can easily fail -- then the U.S. will find itself facing a new OPEC situation with the same unfriendly faces. Only this time, it will be natural gas.

Don't believe it? Last year at the Gas Exporting Countries Forum, 14 natural-gas-rich nations, including Russia, Iran, and Qatar, Algeria, Indonesia, Libya, and Venezuela, attempted to form a new cartel called "gas OPEC." It isn't a threat to the U.S. now, but it could be later; particularly if we are as hapless with Marcellus as we have been with oil in the Gulf.
  • 1
  • 29
  • 30
 DurchsuchenBeitrag schreiben


EXXON - zahlt kontinuierlich steigende Dividenden...