More

BP Stock Falls AGAIN On Dividend News - British Pension Funds Could Be Hit Hard

Bp Stock

JANE WARDELL   06/10/10 01:53 PM ET   AP

LONDON — The Gulf of Mexico oil spill risked turning into a trans-Atlantic diplomatic rift Thursday after U.S. threats to have BP fork out billions more for the disaster caused a precipitous slide in the blue-chip's stock, hurting retirement savings for millions of Britons.

British lawmakers are even pushing Prime Minister David Cameron to get President Barack Obama to tone down his stinging criticism of the oil company, complaining that the hostile rhetoric will have severe implications for pensioners with nest eggs in the company.

The share slide has since April almost halved BP's market value to 69 billion pounds ($101 billion), costing it the spot as Britain's biggest company – and some worry it could become a takeover target for upstart firms in Asia. BP said there was no reason for the stock drop, stressing its strong finances.

Because of the rising hysteria, Cameron is expected to discuss the issue with Obama on a routine scheduled telephone call over the weekend.

British lawmakers want Cameron to stress the blue chip company's critical role in the national economy – some 18 million Britons hold shares in the company in one form or another, many through their pension funds.

"I would like to see a bit of cool heads rather than endlessly buck-passing and name-calling," said London Mayor Boris Johnson. "When you consider the huge exposure of British pension funds to BP it starts to become a matter of national concern if a great British company is being continually beaten up on the airwaves."

Cameron and his Foreign Secretary William Hague, who are both out of the country on business trips, took a conciliatory stance. In Afghanistan, Cameron said he understood "the U.S. government's frustration because it is a catastrophe for the environment."

In Germany, Hague said he hadn't detected any anti-British rhetoric: "The important thing here is dealing with the problem ... that's more important than any rhetoric that any of us may have indulged in."

BP shares fell in London after the White House suggested that BP should pay unemployment benefits to thousands of oil workers laid off during a moratorium on deep-sea drilling triggered by the spill.

The U.S. Justice Department added that it was planning to take action when asked at a Congressional hearing if an injuction was being considered against BP's plans to pay investors a dividend, worth some $10 billion annually, this year.

"You attack the dividend and you are attacking millions of British pensioners," said Tom Watson, a member of the opposition Labour Party who planned to officially table a motion in the House of Commons supporting BP.

BP shareholders receive a dividend payment every quarter. It has held steady at 14 cents per share, worth a total of around $10 billion, since July 2008. BP is due to announce details of its second quarter payment with its earnings report on July 27, but it can make changes before then.

There are also worries that Obama, who earlier this week suggested he would fire BP CEO Tony Hayward if he could, will tap into U.S. anger as oil-coated pelicans and turtles continue to wash up on devastated beaches and impose longer term sanctions that would prevent BP from bidding for new contracts in the United States, where it is the biggest oil operator.

But markets were also beginning to heed warnings from analysts who said Wednesday's 15.8 percent sell-off of BP shares in New York was an overreaction – the company has lost around half its market value since the spill began with an April 20 explosion at the Deepwater Horizon rig that killed 11 people.

In London, the stock recovered some ground after dropping as much as 11 percent at the open to a 13-year low. It closed down 6.7 percent at 365.5 pence ($5.35).

In New York, the stock opened 9.8 percent higher at $32.05, clawing back some of the losses from a 15.8 percent rout on Wednesday.

BP said Thursday that it was capturing more oil in a containment system as it reported that costs so far had risen to almost $1.5 billion – a hefty amount but still manageable given the company turned a $16 billion profit last year.

Hayward has consistently declined to speculate on the final bill, but in an attempt to calm investors on Thursday, the company pointed to its supportive additional cash flow from other projects, its strong debt to equity ratio and its proven reserves. It had more than 18 million barrels of proven reserves and 63 billion barrels of resources at the end of 2009.

"We don't believe BP has a funding issue, but given the overwhelmingly hostile nature of the U.S. government the company may decide to suspend payments until the wells are capped and the clean-up sufficiently advanced to convince the U.S. that it can afford all the costs as well as pay dividends," said Evolution Securities analyst Richard Griffith. "Unilateral action against BP over its U.S. operations, be it unreasonable or illegal, hangs over BP."

Robert Talbut, the chief investment officer at Royal London Asset Management, a shareholder in BP, said "there is a lot of very irrational and short-term selling going on." But he added that talk of a potential sale of assets or takeover bid – PetroChina Ltd. has been suggested by some as a potential suitor – was not surprising.

"I can understand exactly why someone else would want to buy the BP assets because I think they are grossly undervalued at the moment," he said. "As a shareholder, it's not something I would welcome."

___

Associated Press Writer Robert Barr contributed to this story.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
LONDON — The Gulf of Mexico oil spill risked turning into a trans-Atlantic diplomatic rift Thursday after U.S. threats to have BP fork out billions more for the disaster caused a precipitous sli...
LONDON — The Gulf of Mexico oil spill risked turning into a trans-Atlantic diplomatic rift Thursday after U.S. threats to have BP fork out billions more for the disaster caused a precipitous sli...
Filed by Ryan McCarthy  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 240
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ian Matthews
01:59 AM on 06/12/2010
I could see a situation where this can escalate and everyone loses. If too much pressure is put on BP in a way that isn't about compensation etc but is about political expediency (Obama looking tough), BP could hive off it's US assets and corporation and the pressure on the UK government to allow this would be HUGE. this would mean that the vast majority of BPs assists, which are outside of the US and the reach of the US courts, would be excempt from any obligation. This would reduce the stock value of BP, but by less than at present, and would limit the cash available for clean up and compensation.

Essentially, it is giving Amoco back to the Americans.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:18 AM on 06/11/2010
"...When you consider the huge exposure of British pension funds to BP it starts to become a matter of national concern if a great British company is being continually beaten up on the airwaves..."

"Great British Company"?
No, I think not. It's a multinational profit machine run by sociopaths who would sooner destroy the lives of people and wild-life in order to realize every last penny of profit.
And instead of being beaten up on the airwaves, it should be done in the streets of London.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Puzzlr
Anything to get out of work.
08:57 AM on 06/11/2010
President Obama's rhetoric is not what is driving down their stocks; it’s the oil slick and devastation that it is causing. Can't these people see beyond their pensions? And they call us selfish.
01:44 PM on 06/11/2010
alas, if the situation was reversed, american idiots would probably be saying the same thing

but the truth is that, even with a lax regulatory regime in place, bp cut corners and lied to the american government about its safety/response capabilities . . . blaming anyone but bp is just blaming the victims
08:33 AM on 06/11/2010
It’s worth establishing who these ‘BP investors’ are:
Other than 7 large individual investors in the UK, the bulk is split between 33 institutions. Anyone who is saving for a pension, be it company or private, will find that they are exposed to BP as part of the FTSE 100 investment.
44% of BP is owned by the above UK investors; 39% is owned by US investors. So US pension pots will be affected as well.
BP employs around 20,000 US personnel compared to around 10,000 UK personnel.
I have considerable sympathy for those affected by the oil spill. I believe BP should cover the costs of clean-up and compensate those whose livelihoods have been and will be impacted. From what I understand BP have said they will ensure this will be the case.
The type of rhetoric currently being used, ‘ass-kicking’, etc. seems to be playing to a domestic audience who are rightly angry about what has happened. BP is a global company and hasn’t used the name British Petroleum for 12 years. The fact that President Obama and others in the US continually refer to the company as British Petroleum suggests political motives.
It won’t help anyone, UK or US pension savers, BP employees, or those who have been directly affected by this, if BP were to go bust.
02:59 PM on 06/11/2010
So you are saying in essence that BP deserves a pass as they are just too big to fail? Hmmm, where have I heard that one before...
06:48 AM on 06/11/2010
BP was denationalised in the 1980's, shares were sold to individuals and pension funds. Since the company accounts for 10%+ of London Stock Exchange, virtually all British recipients of private pensions will be affected by the loss of dividend payment from BP. It is not BP pensioners who will be affected, but every private and company pension fund in the UK, because they are obliged to invest in the FTSE 100.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyus
San Francisco native
03:00 AM on 06/11/2010
Better freeze their assets now while we can and spend it on cleaning up their gigantic mess.
06:51 AM on 06/11/2010
No one decided to cause the blow out. Responsibility lies with the industry as a whole,who all should be helping.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Puzzlr
Anything to get out of work.
08:59 AM on 06/11/2010
But the industry as a whole doesn't have as many infractions as BP. They had a major explosion at their Texas City plant not so long ago. Someone should tell them that this is what happens when you are not a responsible company.
01:47 PM on 06/11/2010
the bp managers who cut corners, choosing riskier, cheaper mean and methods, did indeed decide to cause the blow out
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:08 AM on 06/11/2010
hey BP investors: this is what happens when you lie down with dogs... you wake up with fleas. you made your bed, nobody twisted your arms, you weren't forced to invest your money in a dirty oil company.

you knew the risks (or should have), but you didn't care that your money was aiding & abetting the oil barons & energy profiteers, so long as your bloated dividend cheques were in the mail every quarter, you turned a blind eye to the petroleum industry's malfeasance and environmental crimes.

so too bad - you lose. better luck next time.

same goes for all you other 'Big Oil' investors. you get what you deserve. i got no pity for any of ya, not one bit.

TIP: for your next investment(s), maybe you'd like to consider more ethical companies that put worker safety and environmental stewardship ahead of obscene profits, even if it means you'll 'earn' less money. you sought to make a quick buck, propping-up a dirty industry that poisons the environment and corrupts our government.

btw, if you need some suggestions for ethical companies, please ask me. i've invested my money in eco-friendly businesses that have made a committment to sustainability and environmental stewardship. and i'm feeling damn smug about it right now, i can tell you that.

CHEERIO! :~}
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:06 AM on 06/11/2010
hey BP investors: this is what happens when you lie down with dogs... you wake up with fleas. you made your bed, nobody twisted your arms, you weren't forced to invest your money in a dirty oil company.

you knew the risks (or should have), but you didn't care that your money was aiding & abetting the oil barons & energy profiteers, so long as your bloated dividend cheques were in the mail every quarter, you turned a blind eye to the petroleum industry's malfeasance and environmental crimes.

so too bad - you lose. better luck next time.

same goes for all you other 'Big Oil' investors. you get what you deserve. i got no pity for any of ya, not one bit.

TIP: for your next investment(s), maybe you'd like to consider more ethical companies that put worker safety and environmental stewardship ahead of obscene profits, even if it means you'll 'earn' less money. you sought to make a quick buck, propping-up a dirty industry that that poisons the environment and corrupts our government.

btw, if you need some suggestions for ethical companies, please ask me. i've invested my money in eco-friendly businesses that have made a committment to sustainability and environmental stewardship. and i'm feeling damn smug about it right now, i can tell you that.

CHEERIO! :~}
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:21 AM on 06/11/2010
Wait a minute, BP is "not aware of any reason" for a 16% plunge in the shares the day before.
This is all begin to make sense now, apparently this company is being managed by perhaps the least 'aware' group of people on the planet earth.
09:17 PM on 06/10/2010
"All this divisive rhetoric" I haven't heard anything 'anti-British' coming from Obama. BP has either been inept or distorting facts ever since the explosion on the rig. It's like watching the Wizard of Oz but don't pay any attention to the man behind the screen-BP. I hope the average stock holders and pensioners come out ok on this, but it is BP that has harmed them, not Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnInDallas
John R. Selig - Writer, Photographer & Podcaster
08:49 PM on 06/10/2010
Don't worry about BP's pension funds. We can always find jobs for B:P retirees cleaning up the mess they have made along the Gulf.
08:30 PM on 06/10/2010
Where did the bone head bail out story go.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cowboylove
08:28 PM on 06/10/2010
It should be noted that falling BP share prices have no real impact on the company, only those who hold shares of the company stock. It does not affect the company's income or profitability. Many newscasters were saying if the shares continue to decline BP may be forced to file for bankruptcy. With an annual profit of about 24 billion dollars, bankruptcy hardly seems like an option, but besides that share price has no bearing whatsoever on a company's profitability!
photo
deepintheheartoftejas
Middle o/t Road = Yellow stripes & dead armadillos
08:48 PM on 06/10/2010
Total market cap does affect their ability to borrow money. It might also set the stage for someone to buy up stock and do a hostile take-over, depending on how shares are actually available to buyers. Otherwise, the pure price of the does not have a real impact.

However, the sharp drop in price is showing that people are worried long-term about the increasing liabilities of the company due to the oil spill. Bankruptcy is one way to fend off those liabilities, so the risk of bankruptcy can't be disregarded.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cowboylove
09:08 PM on 06/10/2010
The top expectations of liability do not approach 10 billion dollars, less than half of one years profits - not income - so it would not appear that bankruptcy would NOT be an option, much less a probability. As for borrowing money, with profits in the stratosphere, borrowing is not likely to be required, much less problematic. Ability to pay back the money has a higher rating than the stock price. A lower stock price would give the opportunity for the company to engage in buying back stock at a seriously discounted price to resale once things clear up - and they will clear up, eventually.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thepoliticalcat
Eradicate your microbioflora
07:57 PM on 06/10/2010
Dear British Pensioners: You should have pulled your money out of BP the minute this happened. Fifty days later is a bit late to be crying over the spilt oil.

Dear furious US citizens: Everything is connected in this world. It would be great if we could force BP to cough up enough to cover every bit of damage they caused, and if they're making so much in profit, we should be able to without impacting our own pension funds and 401(k)s too negatively. However, big business always finds a way to make the taxpayer (middle and working class, of course) to pay for it.

Note to all: This is why you don't want to vote Republicans into power ever again. Just today, John Boener said he thinks taxpayers should pay at least part of these costs. The same man who didn't want health care for us wants us to pay $$ to a corporation that makes billions in profits and has all kinds of tax loopholes and no supervision.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
clearthinker16
reads, investigates and thinks before making stupi
02:02 AM on 06/11/2010
The British pensioners are probably not aware of how bad it is and how much smoke the company is blowing in our faces. I agree, they should have pulled their money out a long time ago.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:26 PM on 06/10/2010
Sorry Briton, but your pension plans are no more important than the livelihoods of the people here going through the disaster. What about the pensions of the fisherman who are suffering? Trust me, they won't have pensions either....Why should Louisianians suffer and the American taxpayers get stuck with the bill so YOU can keep your pensions? Sorry, I really don't give a s**** about your pensions right about now. Next time buy shares in a company that doesn't have a history of destroying the planet.
07:31 PM on 06/10/2010
It would be nice if you also showed outrage towards American companies that pollute the environment of other nations. Why dont you tell Dow Chemicals and the American govt to make good the damage they have caused in Bhopal.

Over 10 000 dead, and 390 tons of toxic chemicals abandoned at the UCIL plant continue to leak and pollute the groundwater in the region and affect thousands of Bhopal residents who depend on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster

Where is the outrage in regards to this disaster that is not in your yard?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:42 PM on 06/10/2010
Who said I wasn't outraged about other issues? Don't jump to conclusions and also try to stay on point....we're talking about BP....
photo
arizonabay
they don't make enough shovels.
08:09 AM on 06/11/2010
But remember who was in power back then. Good ole Saint Ronnie. He would not do any thing against any corporate interest. People were outrage when it happen back in 84. I am sure people would be outraged about the cr@p payments made to the survivors we just saw how Exxon paid pocket change for the Exxon Valdez. But unfortunately people are focused on what is happening in their on homes right now.

Why would the US government responsible for something that a corporation did. Last time I checked the US government is not asking the UK government for compensation.