Shares of Club holding Devon Energy (DVN) fell sharply Wednesday, one day after delivering disappointing fourth quarter results , reducing its fixed-plus-variable dividend and barely buying back any stock. Forward guidance wasn’t that great either. It’s certainly a frustrating story for sharholders like us, and one that bares further scrutiny. Bottom line Unlike most companies, Devon holds its post-earnings conference call the morning after the release. We heard little to make us want to buy Wednesday’s more than 11% decline. In fact, we are considering whether to exit one of our three exploration and production (E & P) companies. We’re going to reserve judgment on which ones stay and which one goes until we get quarterly results from Coterra Energy (CTRA) and Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD) next week. DVN 1Y mountain Devon Energy (DVN) 1-year performance Devon management on Wednseday did reassure investors of its commitment to financial discipline and shareholder returns. But the unfortunate reality is that oil prices — and therefore Devon’s free cash flow generation and ability to return capital to shareholders — are somewhat out of management’s hands. They can certainly control investment activity and the amount of free cash flow earmarked for the variable portion of the dividend. But there’s little to nothing they can do to influence the actual price of energy commodities to which their fate is tied. It’s worth noting, the breakeven level for Devon on oil is around $40 per barrel — up from about $30 a year ago due to inflation. West Texas Intermediate crude in Wednesday’s trading went for nearly double that, providing a healthy cushion. Production guidance On Devon’s earnings call Wednesday morning, management said that the first quarter is expected to be the lowest production quarter of fiscal 2023. They cited three reasons. One, about 90 wells are expected to be brought online during Q1, so their full benefit won’t be felt until after the quarter. Thereafter, management expects a roughly 15% increase in online wells per quarter. Two, there’s been downtime in the Delaware Basin due to a late-January fire at a compressor station that severely damaged the electrical system and the unit. This is expected to hold back production by about 10,000 barrels of oil-equivalent-per-day (Boe/d). The facility is expected to be back up and running by mid-March, with no impact to second quarter production expected. Lastly, management expects to reject ethane at several processing facilities. Companies do this when demand — and therefore the price of ethane — is low and it doesn’t make financial sense to extract ethane from raw natural gas. This too is expected to be a headwind of about 10,000 Boe/d. Share repurchases Management also addressed the company’s low level of buyback activity in Q4 of just $57 million worth of shares. On the call, the team said they wanted to preserve and build back cash levels to maximize financial flexibility following large cash outlays associated with recent acquisitions. Going forward, they expect stock repurchases to be more active “especially if [they] see trading weakness relative to [their] peers,” such as what we’re seeing Wednesday. Coterra and Pioneer dropped more than 2% and over 4%, respectively. Not a good day to be sure, but a far cry from the carnage Devon is experiencing. Additionally, with about $700 million remaining under a current $2 billion repurchase authorization, management expects the remainder to be used up by the second quarter, at which point they expect to seek another share repurchase authorization from the board. M & A activity As for merger and acquisition (M & A) activity, management believes that consolidation in the E & P industry is needed, and they are always on the lookout for accretive opportunities. However, they will for now remain disciplined and weigh M & A opportunities against returning capital to shareholders via dividends or buybacks. Energy price outlook @CL.1 1Y mountain WTI crude (@CL.1) 1-year performance In line with the commentary we provided following the late-Tuesday’s earnings release, management believes the operating environment to be supportive of energy prices for several reasons. On the supply side, they cite years of underinvestment in producion capacity — a key pillar of our investment thesis in oilfield services provider Halliburton (HAL); continued sanctions on Russian production due to Moscow’s ongoing war against Ukraine; what they call a “generational low in OPEC’s spare capacity;” and financial discipline from U.S. producers. On the demand side, they cite an increase in the need for energy as global economies grow post-Covid. The most obvious example is the ongoing reopening of the Chinese economy after Beijing abruptly abandoned its strict pandanic policy of zero-Covid. (Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust is long DVN, CTRA, PXD, HAL. 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.
Pipes carry water, steam and oil at Devon Energy Corp.’s 35,000 barrel per day Jackfish Projects plant, where Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) is used to extract bitumen from oil sands, near Conklin, Alberta, Canada.
Jimmy Jeong | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Shares of Club holding Devon Energy (DVN) fell sharply Wednesday, one day after delivering disappointing fourth quarter results, reducing its fixed-plus-variable dividend and barely buying back any stock. Forward guidance wasn’t that great either. It’s certainly a frustrating story for sharholders like us, and one that bares further scrutiny.
Tesla’s head of Optimus humanoid robot, Milan Kovac, announced that he is leaving the automaker after 9 years.
It leaves just as CEO Elon Musk claimed that the humanoid robot is going to make Tesla a”$25 trillion company.”
Electrek first reported on Tesla hiring Kovac back in 2016 to work on the early Autopilot program. At the time, we noted that the young engineer had an interesting background in machine learning.
He quickly rose through the ranks and ended up leading Autopilot software engineering from 2019 to 2022.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
In 2022, he started working on Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot program.
Musk claimed that Optimus could generate $10 trillion in revenue per year and make Tesla a $25 trillion company. These claims are largely unsubstantiated as the humanoid robot market is still in its infancy.
Most market research firms currently estimate the size of the humanoid robot market to be in the low single-digit billions of dollars, with growth projections through 2032 ranging from $15 billion to $80 billion.
That would represent impressive growth, but nowhere near what Musk is touting to investors.
Today, Kovac announced that he is leaving Tesla for personal reasons:
This week, I’ve had to make the most difficult decision of my life and will be moving out of my position. I’ve been far away from home for too long, and will need to spend more time with family abroad. I want to make it clear that this is the only reason, and has absolutely nothing to do with anything else. My support for Elon Musk and the team is ironclad – Tesla team forever.
Kovac has been regarded as one of the top new technical executives at Tesla, which has seen a significant talent exodus of top engineers.
Kovac is not the only Optimus engineer to leave Tesla recently.
Figure, another company developing humanoid robots, has recently poached Zackary Bernholtz, a 7-year veteran at Tesla and most recently a Staff Technical Program Manager.
Electrek’s Take
This is a significant loss for Tesla. Kovac was one of Musk’s top technical guys and literally the head of the program he claimed would bring Tesla to the next level – although I think most people have been understandably skeptical about these claims.
I’ve been bullish on humanoid robots, and I could see Tesla being a player in the field, but it’s nowhere near the opportunity that Musk is claiming, and there’s also plenty of competition with no clear evidence that Tesla has any significant lead, if any.
In the US, Figure has also been making a lot of progress lately:
I think it’s a smart space to invest in for manufacturing companies like Tesla, but there’s going to be a lot of competition.
It’s too early to say who will come out on top.
As for Kovac leaving, I’m sure his personal reason is correct. However, we often see people claim that and then they quickly turn up at another company.
If he believed that his product would soon become a multi-trillion-dollar opportunity, I doubt he would be leaving, but you never know. 9 years at Tesla is some hard work and it’s impressive for anyone. Congrats.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Former reality TV contestant Sean Duffy. Photo by Gage Skidmore
America voted for inflation, and it got it today, as republicans running the Department of Transportation bowed to their oil donors and finalized a rule to make your cars less efficient, thus costing America an extra $23 billion in fuel costs.
Sean Duffy, who was appointed as Secretary of Transportation on the back of the transportation “expertise” he showed as a contestant on Road Rules: All Stars, a reality TV travel game show, announced the rule on his first day in office.
His original memo promised a review of all existing fuel economy standards, which require manufacturers to make more efficient vehicles which save you money on fuel.
Specifically, the rule finalized today targets the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard (CAFE), which was just improved last year by President Biden’s DOT, saving American drivers $23 billion in fuel costs by meaning they need to buy less fuel overall. The savings from the Biden rule could have been higher, but were softened from the original proposal due to automaker lobbying.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Sierra Club’s Transportation for All director, Katherine Garcia, responded to the new Duffy rule’s finalization with a statement:
“The Trump administration’s deregulatory, pro-polluter transportation agenda will only increase costs for Americans. Making our vehicles less fuel efficient hurts families by forcing them to pay more at the pump. This action puts the well-being of our communities at risk in every way imaginable. It will lead to fewer clean vehicle options for consumers, squeeze our wallets, endanger our health, and increase climate pollution. The Sierra Club will continue to push back against this administration’s dangerous clean transportation rollbacks.”
The rule had been filed on Mar 16, and review was completed yesterday. Oddly enough, the rule was filed as “not economically significant,” a categorization for government rules that won’t affect the US economy by more than $100 million – which is less than the $23 billion that the DOT’s own analysis says the new rule will cost Americans.
Both we at Electrek and the Sierra Club had a meeting with the government to point out this inconsistency, but both of our meetings were scheduled for today and were cancelled late last night. There seems to have been no public comment period regarding this change in regulations.
DOT isn’t done raising your fuel costs, it wants to do more
Duffy’s original DOT memo says he wants to target all similar standards, rather than just the improvements made last year – so in fact, our headline likely underestimates how much higher Duffy wants to make your fuel costs.
A recent analysis by Consumer Reports shows that fuel economy standards are enormously popular with Americans, and that maintaining the current standards could result in lifetime savings of $6,000 per vehicle, compared to current costs, by 2029. And that fuel economy standards implemented since 2001 have already saved $9,000 per vehicle. Now, imagine the net effect of removing all of those standards, which Duffy has directed the DOT to examine doing.
As we’ve already seen to be the case often with Trump’s allies, the DOT memo lied about its intentions. Just like EPA head Lee Zeldin, who said he wants to make the air cleaner by making it dirtier, Duffy, says he wants to make fuel costs lower by making them higher. The memo attempts to argue that your car will be cheaper if it has lower fuel economy, even though it wont, because buying more fuel will mean you spend more on fuel, not less.
Unequivocally, over here in the real world, dirtier air is actually dirtier, and higher fuel costs are actually higher.
The result of this increased fuel usage also inevitably means more reliance on foreign sources of energy. The more oil America uses, the more it will have to import from elsewhere. Other countries looking to exercise power over the US could certainly choose to raise prices as they recognize that the US has just become more reliant on them.
And, as we know from the most basic understanding of economics, adding more demand means prices will go up, not down. Reducing demand for a product in fact forces prices down, and EVs are already displacing oil demand which depresses oil prices.
Meanwhile, Biden’s higher fuel economy standards would mean that automakers need to provide a higher mix of EVs, which inherently get all of their energy to run not just domestically, but regionally as well. Most electricity generation happens regionally or locally based on what resources are available in your area, so when you charge a car, you’re typically supporting jobs at your local power plant, rather than in some overseas oil country.
But these are just attempts to follow-through on the dirty air, inflation causing promises that the republicans made during the campaign. Mr. Trump signaled he intended to raise your fuel costs (and costs of everything else) during the 2024 US Presidential campaign, when he asked oil executives for $1 billion in bribes in return for killing off more efficient vehicles.
However, whiplash changes in regulatory regimes like this are typically seen as bad for business. Above all, businesses desire regulatory certainty so they can plan products into the future, and there are few businesses with longer planning timelines than automakers.
This is why automakers want the EPA to retain Biden’s emissions rules, because they’re already planning new models for the EV transition. They went through this once before, in the chaos of 2017-2021, where they originally asked for rollbacks but then realized their mistake, and now still complain about the broken regulatory regime caused by the last time a former reality TV host squatted in the White House.
Further, if American manufacturing turns away from the EV transition, or continues to make tepid movement towards it, this will only hand more of a manufacturing lead to China, meaning more decline of American manufacturing (compared to the huge manufacturing boom seen under President Biden).
But all of these harms will happen to real people. This isn’t reality television, where the intent is to make up drama for views. This is actual harm that’s actually going to be done to Americans, who are having a rough time as the global economy continues to grapple with the long-term disruptions resulting from a pandemic that was exacerbated by the same reality TV host, and of course the ever-present worsening climate change.
And so, Mr. Trump is now trying to follow through on his campaign promises – which, in so many ways, will only make your life costlier, more unhealthy, less stable, and less secure from foreign influence. This is what 49% of America voted for.
Want to have *actually* lower fuel costs? Then charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
In the Electrek Podcast, we discuss the most popular news in the world of sustainable transport and energy. In this week’s episode, we discuss Tesla being in the crosshairs of the Musk/Trump divorce, EV sales in Europe, a new Hyundai electric minivan, and more.
As a reminder, we’ll have an accompanying post, like this one, on the site with an embedded link to the live stream. Head to the YouTube channel to get your questions and comments in.
After the show ends at around 5 p.m. ET, the video will be archived on YouTube and the audio on all your favorite podcast apps:
Advertisement – scroll for more content
We now have a Patreon if you want to help us avoid more ads and invest more in our content. We have some awesome gifts for our Patreons and more coming.
Here are a few of the articles that we will discuss during the podcast:
Here’s the live stream for today’s episode starting at 4:00 p.m. ET (or the video after 5 p.m. ET:
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.