Exxon Mobil ‘s (XOM) planned deal to buy Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) has sparked talk of more consolidation in the oil-and-gas industry. While we don’t own companies as mergers-and-acquisition plays, the potential for more tie-ups could have significant implications for our remaining oil name: Coterra Energy (CTRA). It’s unclear which shoe will drop next now that Pioneer — the largest independent producer in the Permian Basin, a key U.S. oil field in West Texas and New Mexico — is effectively off the market in an all-stock deal valuing the company at roughly $60 billion . But analysts expect the acquisition by Exxon, the most valuable U.S. oil-and-gas company at nearly $450 billion in market capitalization, to have ripple effects on producers of all sizes. “Consolidation is critical for the sector. It’s healthy. It’s needed, and I think you’ll see more of it,” said Gabriele Sorbara, an analyst at Siebert Williams Shank & Co. The consolidation could take multiple shapes, as companies seek scale and bolster the amount of quality land they own to drill on in the future. On the one hand, investors are looking at bigger U.S. players such as Chevron (CVX) and ConocoPhillips (COP), wondering whether they’ll follow Exxon’s lead and acquire smaller exploration-and-production (E & P) firms. Chevron’s market cap is around $324 billion, while ConocoPhillips is worth roughly $152 billion, based on Thursday’s stock prices. Another possibility could be that E & P companies further down the valuation ladder choose to pursue deals that make their own inventory positions more attractive to investors, according to Nitin Kumar, senior analyst at Mizuho Securities. Companies in this basket could include Coterra, Devon Energy (DVN) and Diamondback Energy (FANG). Coterra is valued at roughly $22.4 billion Thursday, while Devon and Diamondback are valued at $31.7 billion and $30.5 billion, respectively. “I’m not proposing there’s going to be a big wave of M & A, necessarily. But if scale is what matters, your options are limited,” Kumar said. He added: “You can choose to either go your own way…you can look at the small public guys and pick off a few assets there, or you could look at mergers of equals and say, ‘Hey look, let’s two of us get together and now we create a competitive position with 800,000, 900,000 acres into play.'” That would be roughly on par with Pioneer’s more-than-850,000 acres in the Permian Basin. “All those should be options that these guys should be thinking about strategically,” Kumar argued. Devon Energy is reportedly doing just that. In recent months, the Oklahoma City-based company has held preliminary talks with Marathon Oil (MRO) about a potential tie-up , Bloomberg reported after the close Wednesday , citing people familiar with the matter. Houston-based Marathon is valued at nearly $18 billion, as of Thursday. Devon has also eyed privately held CrownRock, which operates in the Permian, according to Bloomberg. In recent years, publicly traded E & P companies have adopted a more muted approach to production growth — bowing to investor pressure after spending heavily to pump more oil in the 2010s proved unkind to energy stocks as crude prices pulled back. Now, the priority is generating more sustainable cash flows that can be returned to investors through buyback programs and dividends. The shift has generally been positive for the stock prices of oil companies. Expense reduction is another way to satisfy investors, and is likely a major motivation behind any further consolidation that might occur in the sector, said Scotiabank analyst Paul Cheng. Smaller companies may not solve their inventory backlog problems by combining, Cheng said, “but that certainly could provide them additional room to reduce costs.” At the time the Exxon-Pioneer deal was announced, Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust owned a position in Pioneer. We sold our entire stake Monday, and will consider redeploying some of the cash into Coterra on future pullbacks in its stock price. Our investment in Coterra has been rooted in its attractive fundamentals as an E & P play with sizable exposure to both oil and natural gas — not its viability as a takeover target, or even a buyer itself. Indeed, owning Coterra in the hopes that a larger company may swoop in and offer a big premium would not be a wise strategy. That’s because a substantial premium might never materialize — as we saw with Exxon’s valuation of Pioneer. The industry’s newfound restraint on production makes it harder to justify paying up for a company, analysts say, compared with the premiums paid in the early days of the U.S. shale boom a decade ago. “If you go back to 2014, 2016, in those deals it was asset acquisition driven by growth. Today, it’s asset acquisition driven by not volume growth, but cash flow sustainability and longevity. It’s a little bit of a different motivator,” Mizuho’s Kumar said. (Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust is long CTRA. See here for a full list of the stocks.) As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust’s portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade. THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY , TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER . NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB. NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.
Permian Basin rigs in 2020, when U.S. crude oil production dropped by 3 million a day as Wall Street pressure forced cuts.
Paul Ratje | Afp | Getty Images
Exxon Mobil‘s (XOM) planned deal to buy Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) has sparked talk of more consolidation in the oil-and-gas industry. While we don’t own companies as mergers-and-acquisition plays, the potential for more tie-ups could have significant implications for our remaining oil name: Coterra Energy (CTRA).
President-elect Donald Trump reacts during a MAGA victory rally at Capital One Arena in Washington, DC, on January 19, 2025, one day ahead of his inauguration ceremony.
Jim Watson | Afp | Getty Images
President-elect Donald Trump will declare a national energy emergency after his inauguration on Monday to reduce energy costs, an incoming White House official told reporters.
The national energy emergency “will unlock unlock a variety of different authorities” to produce more natural resources, the official said, without providing specifics on which authorities Trump will use.
“The national energy emergency is crucial because we are in an AI race with China, and our ability to produce domestic American energy is so crucial such that we can generate the electricity and power that’s needed to stay at the global forefront of technology,” the official told reporters.
Trump is also set to sign an executive order specifically to unleash energy production Alaska, the official said, without providing specifics.
“Alaska is so key for our national security, given its geostrategic location, and it’s a crucial place from which we could export LNG not only to other parts of the United States, but to our friends and allies in the Asia Pacific region,” the official said.
The U.S. has been the largest producer of crude oil in the world for years, outpacing Saudi Arabia and Russia. The CEOs of Exxon and Chevron have said oil and gas production levels are based on market conditions and are unlikely to increase significantly in response to who is in the White House.
“There’s still some upside,” Chevron CEO Mike Wirth told CNBC’s Brian Sullivan in a Jan. 8 interview. “But probably not growth at the rate that we’ve seen over the last number of years as particularly some of these new shale plays begin to mature,” Wirth said.
Exxon CEO Darren Woods told CNBC that U.S. shale production has not faced “external restrictions” under the Biden administration.
“Certainly we wouldn’t see a change based on a political change but more on an economic environment,” Woods said in a Nov. 1 interview prior to Trump’s election victory. “I don’t think there’s anybody out there that’s developing a business strategy to respond to a political agenda,” he said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
As electric trail bikes like Sur Rons and Talarias gain popularity among off-road enthusiasts, a growing conflict is emerging on mountain bike trails. These powerful machines, capable of speeds and torque far beyond that of a traditional mountain bike, are raising concerns among trail users, land managers, and environmental advocates.
First though, some semantical housekeeping. The term “e-bike” is often used to cast a pretty wide net, encompassing everything from cute little folder e-bikes to much more powerful electric motorbikes. Similar to the way motorcycle riders often talk about their “bikes”, the term “e-bike” in colloquial discussion is just that: colloquial.
The term “electric bicycle”, on the other hand, is an actual regulatory designation that lets most electric mountain bikes and other commuter-style e-bikes fit under the legal definition of bicycles. To oversimplify it, the e-bike that looks like a typical mountain bike is an electric bicycle. The one that looks like a motorcycle or dirt bike is probably not an electric bicycle.
That’s an important distinction because it’s becoming a major issue on mountain bike trails all over North America and in many other parts of the world.
Unlike a typical 50 lb electric mountain bike that can output an amount of power roughly in line with a healthy adult, electric motorbikes like those from Sur Ron, Talaria, and other brands can weigh 2-3x as much while outputting 5-10x the amount of power as a typical electric mountain bike. They’re a blast to ride, but like many things in life, there’s a time and a place. Their proliferation of Sur Ron-style electric motorbikes has been wreaking havoc on mountain bike trails where such bikes are almost always illegal.
Mountain bike trails are carefully designed to handle the wear and tear of typical mountain bikes. Normal electric mountain bikes, which have electric motor power levels similar to human pedaling power, typically mesh fairly well with mountain bike trails.
However, the high torque and weight of bikes like Sur Rons and Talarias can wreak havoc on these trails. Such power motorbikes are often responsible for increased erosion, deeper ruts, and widening of trails in areas where these bikes are being used. It’s often not just a matter of normal trail wear, but rather damage that can take significant time and resources to repair.
Trail widening, often caused by riders veering off designated paths, also leads to environmental degradation, harming vegetation and wildlife habitats.
Mountain bike trails are often designated for non-motorized use, and electric trail bikes with such high-power motors and large tires are almost never allowed. Some mountain bike parks have begun accepting Class 1, 2, and/or 3 e-bikes, but Sur Rons and Talarias are almost always prohibited due to their much higher performance. Their power and speed far exceed what’s allowed for e-bikes under most regulations, putting them squarely in the category of motorized vehicles like dirt bikes and ATVs.
Weight also plays a major role. The risk of serious injuries is also higher due to the mass and momentum of these larger machines. With top speeds often exceeding 40 mph (64 km/h), electric motorbikes are significantly faster than traditional electric bicycles or pedal bikes. This speed disparity creates hazardous conditions for slower-moving trail users.
When combined with the fact that many riders of powerful electric motorbikes are new to the sport after buying or being gifted a Sur Ron-style bike, that high speed can be even more dangerous in the hands of a novice rider.
Just last week, two riders on Talarias were kicked out of Quiet Waters Park Mountain Bike Trails in South Florida, a volunteer-maintained mountain bike trail system that permits Class 1 electric bicycles (e-bikes that are pedal-assisted up to 20 mph or 32 km/h and 750W of power).
As a lead volunteer in the trail building and maintenance team at the park, Nick Calabro was there when the riders were confronted by a county worker and asked to leave. “Multiple riders reported interactions with them, from encountering them riding in the wrong direction to not wearing required helmets, and of course not even being allowed to ride those bikes on the trails,” Calabro explained to Electrek.
According to Calabro, the pair had purchased trail day passes for mountain bike riders, but then brought their much larger and more powerful Talaria motorbikes into the park.
The two were seen on video attempting to fight the trail volunteers after being asked to leave the park. The interaction took place just a few yards from a sign with the posted rules of the park (seen at 0:11 in the video below).
Such interactions represent a small but growing phenomenon on mountain bike trails, where traditional mountain bike culture and trail etiquette clash head-on with Sur Ron riders unfamiliar with the practices and terrain.
Fortunately, many other locations exist that are ideal for electric motorbikes that fall outside the realm of traditional electric mountain bikes.
Off-highway vehicle (OHV) trails that are designed for motorized vehicles like UTVs, ATVs, and dirt bikes, are ideal locations to ride powerful electric trail bikes. Such trails are built with higher power vehicles in mind, and aren’t as delicate as mountain bike trails.
Forestry/backcountry dirt roads, gravel roads, and fire roads can provide a mix of typical off-road riding and exploration, though don’t offer the same type of topography.
Motocross tracks are also excellent locations for Sur Ron and Talaria-style bikes, which can use the features for more thrilling jumps and berm riding.
Private land (with the landowner’s permission) is perhaps one of the best places for these powerful electric motorbikes due to their ability to overland and explore areas beyond the beaten path.
As the popularity of powerful electric trail bikes continues to rise, the question of how and where they should be ridden remains a contentious one. But with their ability to ride much rougher terrain as well as their increased impact on that terrain, one thing is for sure: delicate mountain bike trails aren’t the place for such powerful bikes.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The Rio Tinto Group logo atop Central Park tower, which houses the company’s offices, in Perth, Australia, on Friday, Jan. 17, 2025.
Bloomberg | Bloomberg | Getty Images
The mining sector appears poised for a frantic year of dealmaking, following market speculation over a potential tie-up between industry giants Rio Tinto and Glencore.
It comes after Bloomberg News reported Thursday that British-Australian multinational Rio Tinto and Switzerland-based Glencore were in early-stage merger talks, although it was not clear whether the discussions were still live.
Separately, Reuters reported Friday that Glencore approached Rio Tinto late last year about the possibility of combining their businesses, citing a source familiar with the matter. The talks, which were said to be brief, were thought to be no longer active, the news agency reported.
Rio Tinto and Glencore both declined to comment when contacted by CNBC.
A prospective merger between Rio Tinto, the world’s second-largest miner, and Glencore, one of world’s largest coal companies, would rank as the mining industry’s largest-ever deal.
Combined, the two firms would have a market value of approximately $150 billion, leapfrogging longstanding industry leader BHP, which is worth about $127 billion.
Analysts were broadly skeptical about the merits of a Rio Tinto-Glencore merger, pointing to limited synergies, Rio Tinto’s complex dual structure and strategic divergences over coal and corporate culture as factors that pose a challenge for concluding a deal.
“I think everyone’s a bit surprised,” Maxime Kogge, equity analyst at Oddo BHF, told CNBC via telephone.
“Honestly, they have limited overlapping assets. It’s only copper where there is really some synergies and opportunity to add assets to make a bigger group,” Kogge said.
Global mining giants have been mulling the benefits of mega-mergers to shore up their position in the energy transition, particularly with demand for metals such as copper expected to skyrocket over the coming years.
A highly conductive metal, copper is projected to face shortages due to its use in powering electric vehicles, wind turbines, solar panels and energy storage systems, among other applications.
Oddo BHF’s Kogge said it is currently “really tricky” for large mining firms to bring new projects online, citing Rio Tinto’s long-delayed and controversial Resolution copper mine in the U.S. as one example.
“It’s a very promising copper project, it could be one of the largest in the world, but it is fraught with issues and somehow acquiring another company is a way to really accelerate the expansion into copper,” Kogge said.
“For me, a deal is not so attractive,” he added. “It goes against what all these groups have previously tried to do.”
Last year, BHP made a $49 billion bid for smaller rival Anglo American, a proposal which ultimately failed due to issues with the deal’s structure.
Some analysts, including those at JPMorgan, expect another unsolicited offer for Anglo American to materialize in 2025.
M&A parlor games
Analysts led by Dominic O’Kane at JPMorgan said the bank’s “high conviction view” that 2025 would be defined by mergers and acquisitions (M&A), particularly among U.K.-listed miners and global copper companies, was coming to fruition just two weeks into the year.
The Wall Street bank said its own analysis of the mining sector found that the current economic and risk management environment meant M&A was likely preferred to the building of organic projects.
Analysts at JPMorgan predicted the latest speculation would soon thrust Anglo American back into the spotlight, “specifically the merits and probability of another combination proposal from BHP.”
Prior to pursuing Anglo American, BHP completed an acquisition of OZ Minerals in 2023, bolstering its copper and nickel portfolio.
The company logo adorns the side of the BHP gobal headquarters in Melbourne on February 21, 2023. – The Australian multinational, a leading producer of metallurgical coal, iron ore, nickel, copper and potash, said net profit slumped 32 percent year-on-year to 6.46 billion US dollars in the six months to December 31. (Photo by William WEST / AFP) (Photo by WILLIAM WEST/AFP via Getty Images)
William West | Afp | Getty Images
Analysts led by Ben Davis at RBC Capital Markets said it remains unclear whether talks between Rio Tinto and Glencore could result in a simple merger or require the breakup of certain parts of each company instead.
Regardless, they said the M&A parlor games that arose following merger talks between BHP and Anglo American will undoubtedly “start up again in earnest.”
“Despite Glencore once approaching Rio Tinto’s key shareholder Chinalco in July 2014 for a potential merger, it still comes as a surprise,” analysts at RBC Capital Markets said in a research note published Thursday.
BHP’s move to acquire Anglo American may have catalyzed talks between Rio Tinto and Glencore, the analysts said, with the former potentially looking to gain more copper exposure and the latter seeking an exit strategy for its large shareholders.
“We would not expect a straight merger to happen as we believe Rio shareholders would see it as favouring Glencore, but [it’s] possible there is a deal structure out there that could keep both sets of shareholders and management happy,” they added.
Copper, coal and culture
Analysts led by Wen Li at CreditSights said speculation over a Rio Tinto-Glencore merger raises questions about strategic alignment and corporate culture.
“Strategically, Rio Tinto might be interested in Glencore’s copper assets, aligning with its focus on sustainable, future-facing metals. Additionally, Glencore’s marketing business could offer synergies and expand Rio Tinto’s reach,” analysts at CreditSights said in a research note published Friday.
“However, Rio Tinto’s lack of interest in coal assets, due to recent divestments, suggests any merger would need careful structuring to avoid unwanted asset overlaps,” they added.
A mining truck carries a full load of coal at Glencore Plc operated Tweefontein coal mine on October 16, 2024 in Tweefontein, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa.
From a cultural perspective, analysts at CreditSights said Rio Tinto was known for its conservative approach and focus on stability, whereas Glencore had garnered a reputation for “constantly pushing the envelope in its operations.”
“This cultural divide might pose challenges in integration and decision-making if a merger were to proceed,” analysts at CreditSights said.
“If this materializes, it could have broader implications for mega deals in the metals [and] mining space, potentially putting BHP/Anglo American back in play,” they added.