Shell doesn’t need to bid for BP

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Shell Evaluates Potential Bid for BP Amid Ongoing Strategic Challenges"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 7.9
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

For decades, the prospect of a merger between BP and Shell has been discussed but never materialized, and the current climate suggests that this trend is unlikely to change. BP has faced significant challenges, including fluctuating green transition plans and disappointing share performance, exacerbated by the decline in oil prices. Recently, a report indicated that Shell is considering a potential bid for BP, but this would require BP's share price to fall further to make the financials more attractive. Currently, Shell's market capitalization of £146 billion significantly dwarfs BP's £56 billion, making any deal more of a takeover rather than a merger of equals. Shell's executives have emphasized the need for any acquisition to provide clear financial benefits over share buybacks, which have been a priority for the company in recent years. Shell's CEO, Wael Sawan, highlighted that the company is focused on 'value hunting' by investing in its own shares rather than pursuing large acquisitions, especially given that Shell has consistently engaged in substantial share repurchase programs totaling around $42 billion over the past three and a half years.

Despite the potential advantages of acquiring BP, such as increasing its market presence in the Gulf of Mexico and expanding its liquefied gas operations, there are significant drawbacks to consider. Analysts have pointed out that a takeover could diminish Shell's reserves from 8.9 years to 8.1 years, while also necessitating the assumption of BP's over-leveraged balance sheet. Furthermore, Shell's commitment to share buybacks remains strong, even during periods of lower oil prices, which complicates the calculus for pursuing a merger. The financial implications of acquiring BP do not appear compelling at this time, and while Shell's deal-making team may explore the possibilities, there is no pressing need for Shell to act. The current landscape suggests that without a transformative reason to engage in a merger, Shell is likely to continue focusing on enhancing shareholder value through buybacks rather than pursuing a deal with BP.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article presents a nuanced perspective on the potential for a merger between Shell and BP, highlighting the complexities and strategic considerations involved. It examines the ongoing struggles within BP, its fluctuating share price, and Shell's financial robustness, setting the stage for an analysis of the implications of a potential acquisition.

Corporate Strategy and Market Dynamics

The discussion centers on the strategic positioning of both companies in the current market environment. BP's ongoing difficulties with its green transition plans and stagnant share prices contrast sharply with Shell's strong cash flow and robust market valuation. This disparity suggests that any potential takeover would not be a merger of equals but rather a strategic acquisition driven by Shell's desire to consolidate its market position amidst challenging industry conditions.

Public Sentiment and Shareholder Interests

The article hints at a broader narrative regarding shareholder interests and corporate governance. Shell's CEO emphasizes the importance of value hunting through share buybacks rather than pursuing acquisitions, suggesting a focus on immediate shareholder returns. This could be interpreted as a move to maintain investor confidence while avoiding the risks associated with a large-scale merger. The language used indicates an intention to reassure shareholders rather than incite speculation about ambitious corporate maneuvers.

Implications for the Oil Industry

A potential merger could significantly alter the landscape of the oil industry, particularly in Europe, positioning a combined Shell-BP entity as a formidable competitor against U.S. giants like ExxonMobil and Chevron. However, the article also underscores the challenges of executing such a deal, given the current market conditions and the financial calculus involved. The mention of share buybacks suggests that Shell may prioritize immediate financial benefits over long-term strategic expansions.

Perception Management and Transparency

The article may be seen as a tool for shaping public perception around the viability and desirability of a merger. By framing the discussion around the challenges faced by BP and Shell's strong market position, it could be interpreted as an attempt to manage expectations and mitigate any potential backlash from stakeholders concerned about the risks associated with large mergers.

Market Reactions and Future Outlook

In terms of market impact, this news could influence investor sentiment towards both Shell and BP's stocks. Investors may react to the prospects of a merger, either positively or negatively, depending on their views of the companies' strategic directions. The article suggests that while a merger is theoretically appealing, practical considerations may dampen enthusiasm.

Trustworthiness of the Article

The article presents a balanced view, referencing credible sources and industry context. However, the emphasis on Shell's current cash position and BP's struggles may skew perceptions towards favoring Shell's position. As such, while it provides valuable insights, one must consider the potential biases inherent in corporate communications and analyses.

Unanalyzed Article Content

The stars never aligned for a grand merger of BP andShellover the decades, despite the deal being touted regularly as inevitable at some point. How about now?

BP has been torturing itself, its shareholders and the outside world with itson-off green transition plansand its ponderous strategic “re-sets”. Not even a hard kick from the activist boot of Elliott Management has enlivened an underperforming share price. In the background, the oil price is on the slide, which is traditionally when boardroom thoughts turn to deal-making in search of easy cost-cutting wins.

And here comesa report from Bloombergover the weekend stating that Shell isstudying the merits of a bid for BP, albeit with the important qualification that the would-be target’s share price might have to fall further to make the arithmetic stack up.

Naturally, it would have to be a takeover, rather than a merger of equals these days, because Shell’s stock market value of £146bn towers over BP’s £56bn. In the game of fantasy deal-making, one can imagine how a pitch would go: it would be sold as a final opportunity in the oil industry’s sunset years (we hope), to build a European mega-cap firm to rival US giants ExxonMobil and Chevron.

Don’t hold your breath, though. The obstacle to a deal is large and is constantly emphasised by Shell’s executives: the arithmetic of a takeover has to beat the appeal of share buy-backs, which now looks a very tall order.

“I have said in the past that we want to be value hunters,” Shell’s chief executive, Wael Sawan, said alongside last week’s first-quarter numbers. “Today, value hunting – in my view – is buying back more Shell.”

He would say that, one might say – he’s not going to speculate lazily about mega-bids and empire-building. But, actually, the point is surely correct: if you’re generating oodles of cash, as Shell is, and you think your shares are dirt cheap, you need a genuinely spectacular reason not to keep buying those shares in large quantities.

Shell’s share buy-backs have run at $3bn or more for 14 quarters in a row – call it $42bn, or £31.5bn, in total, or slightly more than a fifth of today’s market value in three-and-a-half years. In the share-repurchase stakes, that is going some.

The exercise hasn’t done much for Shell’s share price lately – it’s down 15% in the past 12 months – but that is hardly an argument for giving up on buy-backs if you can still afford them and still believe the company is undervalued.

“As the oil price has gone down, they [the shares] have actually got cheaper. So it’s an even better capital allocation for us,” said Sinead Gorman, the finance director, on the same investor call. Quite. Since the company’s charts showed buy-backs continuing even at an oil price of $50 a barrel, versus $62 today, it’s hard to see what problem a BP takeover would solve.

Sign up toBusiness Today

Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning

after newsletter promotion

Indeed, as UBS’s analysts pointed out, the life of Shell’s reserves would fall from 8.9 to 8.1 years. It would also be paying a premium price for the privilege of fixing BP’s over-borrowed balance sheet. On the plus side, Shell would be bigger in the Gulf of Mexico (or Gulf of America in Trump-speak) and have 23% of the world’s market for liquified gas plus an even more enormous trading operation. But, again, one comes back to off-putting buy-back maths.

There’s a price for everything, of course, and Shell’s deal-making department wouldn’t be doing its job unless it was weighing up possibilities. It might also have to be alert to national politics if somebody else tried to pounce on BP: even a UK government that has given up on issuing North Sea exploration licences might have a view that Shell, rather than a US buyer, would be better. But there is no need for Shell to take the initiative: the maths, even with BP’s woes priced in, still don’t look compelling.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian