OUR

 GOAL IS                                                  SMOOTH  

​     SAILING

​Oil and gas has been a rough and difficult space for investors. Even though the industry likely has a long future, the investing community hasn’t exactly been a big endorser of the companies in it. Even while all the talk is about electric vehicles, the roads are still packed with sport utility vehicles and trucks.

In the world of nothing lasts forever, Merrill Lynch has said enough is enough on at least some opportunities in the oil patch. The firm remains concerned about shale drillers as the industry matures, but it sees the floating rig segment with demand that could be up in the high single-digits in 2020 and notes that offshore equipment and services should benefit the most, even if the firm is staying negative on the offshore drillers.

The Merrill Lynch team acknowledges that there has been a prolonged and painful downturn in offshore drillers that started in 2014 and extended well beyond the shale and shallow water peers. The firm now sees that deepwater activity looks likely deliver back-to-back years of growth as the cost break-even has come down for many projects. The report said:ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE READING

For 2020, high single-digit gains in deepwater activity look possible, with growth accelerating around mid-2020. Further, a big jump in offshore FIDs this year could combine with several large projects in the queue for 2020 to keep demand intact into 2021. Optimism for deepwater appears to be growing… Subsea equipment and services companies are taking share of the deepwater capex pie at the expense of engineering and procurement, and stand to benefit most.

As far as the break-even costs being lower, the Merrill Lynch view is that a combination of extended tiebacks and project standardization has helped the break-even come down to where they can compete with shale. The firm noted that Exxon and Hess are expecting Phase 1 of the mega-project in Guyana to have a break-even if Brent crude is at $35 per barrel. Its Phase 2 break-even down there is also expected to be as low as $25 per barrel. The Carcara project down in Brazil is also expected to have a mid-$30s break-even, and Chevron’s Anchor project in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico waters is likely profitable, even if Brent crude is under $50 per barrel.

Merrill Lynch reinstated coverage on Helix Energy Solution Group Inc. (NYSE: HLX) with a Buy rating and an $11 price objective. The prior close was $8.55, and the firm even called Helix its top pick among oil services in the small-cap and mid-cap arena.

Oceaneering International Inc. (NYSE: OII) was started as Buy and assigned a $17 price objective (versus a $14.01 prior close).

In the report, other names were shown still to have Buy ratings, and they should benefit from the offshore trends, but the report does warn that they all still have shale headwinds that could limit some upside. While Merrill Lynch sees upside selectively in the sector, it has targets that are not unilaterally higher than the average analyst targets out there. These are shown as follows, with consensus price target comparisons from Refinitiv:

Schlumberger Ltd. (NYSE: SLB) with a Buy rating and $43 price objective (versus a $36.41 close and a $44.19 consensus target)
Baker Hughes Co. (NYSE: BKR) with a Buy rating and $28 price objective (versus a $22.21 close and a $28.40 consensus target)
Halliburton Co. (NYSE: HAL) with a Buy rating and $23 price objective (versus a $21.25 close and a $26.59 consensus target)
Core Laboratories N.V. (NYSE: CLB) with a Buy rating and $53 price objective (versus a $48.57 close and a $49.75 consensus target)

BLACK HOLE SPOTTED


               DANIEL CULLINANE CPA                                                              Phone:          732-516-1648

                           Certified Public Accountants                                                                                        FAX               732-516-9778

                               328 Amboy Ave, Metuchen NJ   08840                                                              

                                                                                                                                     


​                            

​NOVEMBER NEWS LETTER PAGE 2

​Luckin Coffee Inc. (NASDAQ: LK), often described as China’s version of Starbucks, reported its third-quarter financial results before the markets opened on Wednesday. The coffee chain said that it had a net loss of $0.32 per share and $215.7 million in revenue, which compares with consensus estimates that called for a net loss of $0.37 per share and $211.88 million in revenue.

Total net revenues from products in the quarter increased 557.6% year over year. In terms of the breakdown, freshly brewed drinks represented 74.3% of total net revenues, or $160.2 million.

Net revenue was primarily driven by a significant increase in the number of transacting customers, an increase in effective selling price, and an increase in the number of products sold per transacting customer.

Average monthly total items sold in the quarter were 44.2 million, representing an increase of 470.1% from 7.8 million in the third quarter of 2018. Average monthly transacting customers in the quarter were 9.3 million, representing an increase of 397.5% from 1.9 million.

Ms. Jenny Zhiya Qian, CEO of Luckin Coffee, commented:

We are very pleased with our results in the third quarter. We exceeded the high-end of our guidance range, achieved a store level profit margin of 12.5% and experienced continuous growth across all key operating metrics. These achievements follow a clear trend: an increase in volumes, efficiency and, as a result, profitability. During the quarter, product revenue grew at 557.6%, which was 1.2x, 1.4x and 2.7x the growth rate of average monthly items sold, average monthly transacting customers, and number of stores, respectively.

Shares of Luckin Coffee traded up more than 14% early Wednesday at $21.68, in a post-IPO range of $13.71 to $27.12. The consensus price target is $25.61.

​COFFEE

​HOT STOCKS

​What are Black Holes?

Einstein theorized them as huge gravitational fields that sucked in all matter and energy or light. He said nothing could escape them.

Hawking basically agreed but said a little radiation might escape them.

Now in THEORY E the New Model of our Universe says Einstein and Hawking are 100% wrong based on new observations of black holes.

Black Holes repel Protons some say they bounce off black holes.

Black Holes emit energy or light, they emit Plasma Bursts.

Black Holes have no strong gravitational field.

So what are Black Holes?

Dr. Sol Adoni the genius that has released the new large scale model for our Universe that says there was no Big Bang and the Milky Way and the Universe is very, very FLAT claims they are a new force unknown to mankind but it very simply is the opposite of Electro-Magnetic force that binds all atoms.

This new force is called Anti-Electro-Magnetic Field Theory by Dr. Sol Adoni.

You can view his new theory THEORY E the site that explains the Universe in this dimension all matter came from just protons and electrons the building blocks of atomic structure. From just those two things all phenomena in this Universe is easily explained including Black Holes that act as a natural recycling unit of every Galaxy where all atoms are stripped down to just Protons and Plasma Energy so it can be recycled into new atoms and build new hydrogen stars which can then create helium, just hydrogen and helium account for almost 100% of every thing. A tiny fraction of 1% is the rest of all elements that can be easily created with the explosion of a hydrogen sun as it exhausts its fuel source of Hydrogen Atoms.

Hydrogen atoms account for over 90% of the physical universe with Helium creating all the rest. Yet a tiny percentage of atoms do create everything else such as oxygen and gold and other elements.

You can DOWNLOAD the new book Theory E by Dr. Sol Adoni 

The website for this new theory is Theory E .org

​AR-15

​The Supreme Court has denied Remington Arms Co.'s bid to block a lawsuit filed by families of victims of the Sandy Hook school massacre. The families say Remington should be held liable, as the maker and promoter of the AR-15-style rifle used in the 2012 killings.

The court opted not to hear the gun-maker's appeal, in a decision that was announced Tuesday morning. The justices did not include any comment about the case, Remington Arms Co. v. Soto, as they turned it away.Remington had appealed to the highest federal court after the Connecticut Supreme Court allowed the Sandy Hook lawsuit to proceed in March. In recent court filings, Remington says the case "presents a nationally important question" about U.S. gun laws — namely, how to interpret the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which grants broad immunity to gun-makers and dealers from prosecution over crimes committed with their products.Remington manufactured the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle that Adam Lanza used on Dec. 14, 2012, to kill 20 first-graders and six adults at the elementary school in Newtown, Conn.Article continues after sponsor message
[Lawsuit By Sandy Hook Victims Against Gun Manufacturer Allowed To Move Forward]




























































NATIONAL
Lawsuit By Sandy Hook Victims Against Gun Manufacturer Allowed To Move Forward

The families first filed their lawsuit in December 2014, saying the Bushmaster rifle never should have been sold to the public because it is a military-style weapon. They accuse Remington of violating Connecticut's unfair trade practices law when it "knowingly marketed and promoted the Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle for use in assaults against human beings."

The closely watched lawsuit has survived many legal twists and turns, moving from state to federal court and back, and repeatedly escaping bids to quash it by Remington and gun owners' groups. While the suit initially centered on a claim of negligent entrustment — or providing a gun to someone who plans to commit a crime with it — the case now hinges on how Remington marketed the gun.

The 2005 federal law that shields gun companies from liability has several exceptions — including one that allows lawsuits against a gun maker or seller that knowingly violates state or federal laws governing how a product is sold or marketed.

In March, the Connecticut Supreme Court breathed new life into the families' lawsuit when it ruled they can sue Remington for marketing a military-style weapon to civilians. That move reversed a superior court's decision that would have ended the case. And with the U.S. high court now refusing to take up Remington's appeal, the case will return to a lower court in Connecticut.

One of the plaintiffs in the case is David Wheeler, whose 6-year-old son, Ben, was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. Wheeler told NPR earlier this year that to him, the lawsuit is about responsibility. And he recalled one of Remington's ads for a gun that carried the tagline, "Consider your man card reissued."

"What kind of society allows manhood to be defined in this way?" Wheeler asked.

The AR-15 is a close relative of the Colt company's M16 automatic rifle used by the U.S. military. Since Colt's patents for the original AR-15 expired in the 1970s, other manufacturers have been making guns based on similar designs.

In filings with the Supreme Court, the Sandy Hook families say Remington "published promotional materials that promised 'military-proven performance' for a 'mission-adaptable' shooter in need of the 'ultimate combat weapons system.' " They also accuse the company of fostering a "lone gunman" narrative as it promoted the Bushmaster, citing an ad that proclaimed, "Forces of opposition, bow down. You are single-handedly outnumbered."

NATIONAL
Sandy Hook Father Responds To Court Ruling Against Remington

Parents who lost their children on that horrible day have said it was no accident that Lanza picked the AR-15 style rifle to carry out his shooting rampage.

In 2016, Nicole Hockley, whose son Dylan was killed in the attack on his elementary school, said the gunman chose an AR-15 style gun "because he knew it would kill as many people as possible as fast as possible."