Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This Corona Virus business will be over some day and XOM's stock price will rebound. Meanwhile you can collect a very decent dividend.
A prophetic statement, last year! Today we're seeing the result. Barring some horrendous tragedy or reversal, in another 6 months, these trends will only burgeon. Just wait when air travel resumes at full pace. All those fracking-sites that were closed, because they're unprofitable if oil is less than $60 a barrel? Well, what happens when oil returns to >$100/barrel?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmw335xi
... you know the odds of you breaking even with this stock is very very slim... you wouldn't buy it today right? If not, then sell it ....
Exxon-Mobile is arguably one of the weaker ventures in oil-and-gas. But it is risibly idealistic to conjecture that green-everything will mean the demise of oil within our lifetime.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeApelido
...But in 5 years oil consumption will continue on a clear path downward, and the forward thinking market will see the writing on the wall and preemptively pull out from XOM.
I'll take that bet! My side: in 5 years (so, 10 May 2026), global annual consumption of oil, will be a larger number of barrels, than it is today (10 May 2021). Oil consumption may be lower in the US and other "developed" countries. But then we have China, India and so on. Not to mention Africa. As Africans get richer, they're going to replace burning wood an animal feces, with... oil. And that is going to be true for a couple billion people, in the decades going forward.
Over 80% return in like 6 months or so not counting dividend, I'll take it.
Most stocks can see a 50% difference between the highs and lows ..so pretty much catching just about any stock at its low can see a pretty big difference if you catch the low ….
Even dogs can show a nice gain if you catch the low …but that does not mean they are good stocks .. it just means it got timed well.
But that does not mean they did well for existing owners of the stock as a good stock should.
A good stock should not leave its longer term investors with a return less then a bond fund for 15 years and in fact losses for the last 10 even counting the big run up and all dividends , which xom does.
To be a good stock xom has to prove it is a good stock and not a blind squirrel that found a nut finally
Last edited by mathjak107; 05-10-2021 at 03:24 PM..
No ,especially after the below par returns Berkshire has had for more than a decade.
I would not even own Berkshire for a core position
I think Berkshire’s returns have been relatively attractive when compared to the the S&P for the past decade when comparing on a risk adjusted basis. For a pretty longtime now, Berkshire has been holding a boatload of cash….I think it is north of $120 billion right now. The cash has clearly been a drag on the returns he has generated, but he has has arguably exposed investors to less market risk than those who invested in the S&P.
I think Berkshire’s returns have been relatively attractive when compared to the the S&P for the past decade when comparing on a risk adjusted basis. For a pretty longtime now, Berkshire has been holding a boatload of cash….I think it is north of $120 billion right now. The cash has clearly been a drag on the returns he has generated, but he has has arguably exposed investors to less market risk than those who invested in the S&P.
I don’t see Berkshire being less risky being one company then 500 different companies in the s&p ..Berkshire had some nasty drops at times.
While Berkshire owns many companies most of its assets invested are in very few companies. 71% of Berkshire is in 5 companies
As an investor I certainly would have preferred a S&p fund the last 15 years .not to even mention the fact will danoff from fidelity contra did a far better job compounding investor money then Buffett did and again did it with far less individual company risk .
My opinion is the time for Berkshire and Buffett was the 1980s and 1990s
Last edited by mathjak107; 05-10-2021 at 03:55 PM..
Reason: Wasci
I don’t see Berkshire being less risky being one company then 500 different companies in the s&p ..Berkshire had some nasty drops at times.
While Berkshire owns many companies most of its assets invested are in very few companies. 71% of Berkshire is in 5 companies
As an investor I certainly would have preferred a S&p fund the last 15 years .not to even mention the fact will danoff from fidelity contra did a far better job compounding investor money then Buffett did and again did it with far less individual company risk .
My opinion is the time for Berkshire and Buffett was the 1980s and 1990s
Lol…of course you would have preferred the S&P fund over the the last 15 years….you are now looking backward and have the benefit of hindsight. Totally absurd statement.
Lol…of course you would have preferred the S&P fund over the the last 15 years….you are now looking backward and have the benefit of hindsight. Totally absurd statement.
Most stocks can see a 50% difference between the highs and lows ..so pretty much catching just about any stock at its low can see a pretty big difference if you catch the low ….
Even dogs can show a nice gain if you catch the low …but that does not mean they are good stocks .. it just means it got timed well.
But that does not mean they did well for existing owners of the stock as a good stock should.
A good stock should not leave its longer term investors with a return less then a bond fund for 15 years and in fact losses for the last 10 even counting the big run up and all dividends , which xom does.
To be a good stock xom has to prove it is a good stock and not a blind squirrel that found a nut finally
Exxon is my TOP oil pick. It is a solid company and also yields healthy dividends.
Exxon has the assets to diversify into other energy sources. Big oil should slowly become giant power companies and have the time to do it. Few have the resources like Exxon to make it reality.
Exxon is my TOP oil pick. It is a solid company and also yields healthy dividends.
Exxon has the assets to diversify into other energy sources. Big oil should slowly become giant power companies and have the time to do it. Few have the resources like Exxon to make it reality.
Don’t mention the word “dividend” to Math, he will go ballistic! Heh.
Don’t mention the word “dividend” to Math, he will go ballistic! Heh.
No , I only try to straighten out the Financially misinformed who don’t understand how things work .
100% of the Dow and 80% of the s&p pay dividends ..you can’t own large cap funds and avoid them even if you wanted to so they go with investing .
But they do nothing a draw off non payers or a draw off a portfolio doesn’t do except automate the draw
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
