Cobas AM: Nueva Gestora de Francisco García Paramés

Perfecto, sera entonces cuando empiece a subir y de verdad....eso no falla nunca, y el que no lo haya vivido, no sabe lo que es la bolsa.

Hombre, yo lo que veo que es enteramente normal y humano prestar atención a lo que dice una persona que se sabe tiene opiniones interesantes y cualificadas, lo ha demostrado sobradamente.

Otra cosa será seguir al pié de la letra lo que dice, que, en todo caso será problema del lector-inversor.

Presumo que Road ha aportado y aporta de manera extremadamente rica y positiva, y sobretodo en los debates que se generan con la variedad de opiniones existentes.

Te invito a tí Alicia también a que aportes como Road, seguro que nos interesan a todos tus opiniones...porque hasta ahora....sólo me suenas "en el país de las maravillas"

Decidieron salir antes de la ampliación de capital. Y en su carta dicen que siguen viendo potencial de revalorización en la empresa y que continuarán siguiéndola por si se presenta una nueva oportunidad.

A lo mejor no ha sido mala jugada. Se han ahorrado tener que aumentar su exposición a Aryzta (con la ampliación de capital) y actualmente la acción está más barata que antes, por lo que si hubieran comprado en estos días de nuevo, tendrían todavía mayor potencial de revalorización que cuando vendieron.

La purga está hecha desde el 24 de diciembre. El que espere se va a perder la subida. Tiempo al tiempo.

seleccion 82,2921
internacional 77,3396 de ayer dia 8/01/2019

Opino igual que Persi, la venden porque no ven claro que puedan dar rentabilidad, o si la dan sería inferior a la que esperan obtener de otras empresas que tienen estudiadas.

He tirado del último informe de Goehring & Rozencwajg y es tal como dices. Estoy por vender Epsilon y comprar más TGP...

Os copio lo principal sobre Gas Natural USA y LNG del informe que no es muy largo en esta parte:

Página 5:

"US natural gas prices firmed in the third quarter and finished a touch over $3.00 /mcf. It was an extremely cold spring during which we actually withdrew gas from storage all the way through the 3rd week of April—something we have never observed in the 25 years of data that we keep. Combined with the fourth hottest summer ever here in the US this caused inventories to fall about 16% (or 600 bcf ) below 5 year averages as the 2018 injection season comes to a close. Given the relative low storage level and the strength of demand, we do run the risk of a natural gas price spike if this 2018-2019 winter turns out to be colder than normal. However, supply continues to grow relentlessly. The latest Energy Information Agency data indicates natural gas supply is growing 8.7 bcf / day--an incredible 12% year-over-year rate. At some point, North American natural gas markets will enter a bull market, but because of surging gas supply (which is now occurring with a rig-count that is down almost 90% from a decade ago) we remain neutral towards North American natural gas markets, even with inventories at below normal levels. Please read the “Natural Gas” section of this letter, where we discuss the incredibly strength of global LNG markets, and its potential long-term impact on US natural gas markets."

Página 28:

"NATURAL GAS MARKET Henry Hub gas prices rallied during the quarter, ultimately reaching $3.37 per thousand cubic feet – their highest level since January. Hotter-than-average temperatures across the US resulted in additional natural gas demand which more than offset surging production. For the quarter as a whole, inventories built by 700 billion cubic feet (bcf ) compared with 10-year average seasonal builds of 830 bcf, implying a market that was undersupplied by 1.3 billion cubic feet per day (bcf/d). According to our models, weather made up for more than 100% of this shortfall as production continues to surge. Inventories in the US currently stand some 600 bcf below their long-term averages – the largest deficit since 2014. As we have long argued, even in the face of an inventory deficit, we simply cannot get constructive on US natural gas with production growing as quickly as it has been. For example, in July (the last month with available data), US dry gas production grew by 8.7 bcf/d on a year-on-year basis, another all-time growth record (the third such record set in the last 12 months). Furthermore, these records were achieved with a rig count that is 50% below where it was five years ago and 90% below its peak in 2008. The hot summer certainly bailed out inventories, and if we have a very cold winter, Henry Hub natural gas prices could certainly see a weather-related spike. While we remain neutral on US natural gas, we are increasingly bullish on global liquified natural gas (LNG). We have followed this market for many years, though we have not written about it since the summer of 2014. At that time, we explained how global demand projections from most analysts and large consultants were dramatically understated. Most analysts take a so-called “bottoms up” approach in which they model each regasification import terminal in order to determine a country’s future LNG demand. Using such an approach, planned liquification capacity was expected to overwhelm new regasification terminals and the market was expected to be in perpetual surplus as the decade progressed. Our models used a wildly different approach and came to a completely different answer. We studied the relationship between real GDP per capita and a country’s energy mix. We noticed that countries with lower per capita GDP burned more coal, while richer countries burned more natural gas. While coal is a very dirty fuel, it is nevertheless very cheap. Natural gas is incredibly clean burning compared with coal. However, due to its low energy-to-volume ratio (i.e., because it is a gas), it requires a huge amount of infrastructure investment. As a result, a developing country cannot afford to burn natural gas, but as it gets richer its population becomes increasingly concerned about air quality and natural gas gains share. The difference between these two methodologies led to wildly different views, particular as it related to China. For example, using a “bottoms up” approach, most analysts at the time expected Goehring & Rozencwajg Natural Resource Market Commentary 28 Chinese LNG demand to reach 6-7 bcf/d by 2020. Our models told us that demand would reach nearly twice this level. Based upon the relationship between GDP and natural energy penetration and announcements of long-term guidelines made at the time by various government officials, we assumed Chinese gas would go from 5% of total energy in 2013 to 10% by 2020. This equates to 50 bcf/d of total gas demand by the end of the decade. If domestic gas production were able to double from 10 bcf/ to 20 bcf/d, and pipeline imports went from 2 bcf/d to 13 bcf/d, then total supply would equal 33 bcf/d, implying a deficit of 18 bcf/d. While 8 bcf/d would be met from planned regasification facilities, that would leave another 11 bcf/d of latent demand. If even 25% of this were met by incremental LNG imports, then total imports would reach 12 bcf/d – twice the level put forward by most analysts. After some initial delays, we think we are finally starting to see these extremely strong trends taking hold today. The delays were caused by Japan’s decision to leave its nuclear reactors offline longer than anyone expected, following the Fukushima incident. Japan turned to natural gas power plants to make up for this. With Japan as an aggressive buyer, we believe the LNG supply simply was not available for Chinese imports until Australian and US cargos came to market over the last year. At present, Chinese LNG demand is surging. For the first nine months of the year, Chinese imports are up an incredible 50% year-on-year. We think this will continue. We estimate that total 2018 LNG imports could approach 8 bcf/d – far above analysts’ expectations. However, its not just China that will drive LNG demand going forward. Using our same methodology, we expect India, Turkey, Pakistan, and Thailand will all see sharply higher demand for LNG volumes between now and 2025. Furthermore, as domestic demand comes in stronger than expected, several LNG exporting countries are facing feed gas shortages. Indonesia, Egypt, and Brazil have all run into problems and limited exports since we first identified this potential bottleneck several years ago. Indonesia’s new large-scale export terminal on Papua is now expected to entirely serve domestic gas demand and as a result no volumes are expected to reach the export market. We don’t have space in this letter, but in our next edition we will outline our full outlook for LNG supply and demand between now and 2025. As a preview, we are extremely bullish on the outlook for global natural gas. Ultimately, this will help tighten the US market as well, as additional LNG export terminals (both here in the US and in Canada) come online in 2019 and into the coming decade. Whether or not it is enough to absorb the seemingly endless growth in domestic production is up for discussion. In the interim, we remain neutral towards North American natural gas markets."

Road no debería afirmar tan rotundamente que la bolsa va a bajar, más bien debería decir que quiere que baje y sus argumentos. Las valoraciones desde luego están en su contra. Solo un no acuerdo china eeuu puede hacer que tenga razón.