After denying reports of BP takeover, Shell is legally barred from making an offer for six months—and there are no other suitors in sight
The June 26 news comes after reports that Shell entered early talks to buy BP in what would easily represent the largest energy deal of the century—if not ever. But with Shell seemingly stepping aside to focus on internal performance—at least for now—financially struggling BP is left without any other clear suitors as the British energy giant seeks a turnaround following its 'hard reset' through cost cuts, greater fossil fuel investments, and renewables divestments.
'In response to recent media speculation, Shell wishes to clarify that it has not been actively considering making an offer for BP and confirms it has not made an approach to, and no talks have taken place with BP with regards to a possible offer,' Shell said in a prepared statement.
The statement was issued under a rule in the U.K.'s takeover code that bans backtracking on its claims for the next six months unless Shell has the agreement of BP's board, another company bids on BP, or there's a material change in circumstances. Citing the code allows Shell to better reassure its investors that it is focused on its strategy and not massive, debt-laden acquisitions at this moment.
BP declined comment.
Shell's statement followed a June 25 report from the Wall Street Journal that Shell was in early talks to potentially buy BP, which also came after previous speculation and reports that Shell was studying a possible deal to combine two of the biggest Big Oil giants.
'For now, any takeover of BP by Shell will be a 2026 story, and is unlikely to happen in 2025,' said Kathleen Brooks, research director for the XTB brokerage house. 'BP's share price is still underperforming its global peers, and now that Shell is out of the running as a potential buyer, we do not see BP repairing its position in the coming weeks or months.'
Indeed, only a small handful of companies could afford to acquire BP with its large, but underperforming, $80 billion market cap. London-based Shell is the most obvious, but the others—Exxon Mobil and Chevron—are coming off or are amid massive acquisitions of their own. And the U.S. supermajors could have greater antitrust challenges even if they were interested, said Deborah Byers, senior advisor at energy research and investment firm Veriten.
Of note is that Shell switched its headquarters to London from the Netherlands three years ago, changing the Royal Dutch Shell name to Shell PLC.
'I think the U.K. government would block a foreign purchase. Maybe Shell is a white knight, and they would be okay from a regulatory standpoint in the U.K.,' Byers said. 'You would think the U.K. would not accept anyone other than Shell—even a U.S. major.'
And that's not accounting for all of the debt, headcount, and nation-by-nation regulatory approvals Shell would have to go through to acquire another global energy supermajor, Byers said. Shell and BP each employ nearly 100,000 people, although they are both currently downsizing, while leaner Exxon Mobil, for instance, has about 60,000 employees. Then, Shell would need to undergo a prolonged period of divestments to satisfy the balance sheet and antitrust issues in different nations.
'Why would [Shell] want to do that?' Byers said. 'Do shareholders really want growth? Or do they just want capital discipline and returns—either dividends or buybacks? It's been a while since anyone has been rewarded for growth in this sector.'
She said BP shareholders 'have to be patient' as it attempts its financial reset, acknowledging that BP is dealing with investor activism from Elliott Investment Management and others.
'The challenge is, what is that patience timeline?' Byers said. 'Their patience might be two or three quarters, but they probably need a couple of years to really work through some of these issues that are strategic pivots.'
Likewise, in a recent analyst note, Biraj Borkhataria of RBC Capital Markets, said BP's debt profile, including remaining liabilities from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon tragedy, represent a 'poisoned chalice for an acquirer.'
'The deal looks dilutive to most of Shell's key metrics, and we do not see the core strategic rationale for the combination,' Borkhataria added. 'With Shell management having consistently communicated strategic priorities to the market since early 2023, the deal would also serve to contradict much of the commentary and potentially undermine credibility with its investor base. Shell would be much better served to continue with its plan and keep M&A smaller and more focused.'
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Errore nel recupero dei dati
Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio
Errore nel recupero dei dati
Errore nel recupero dei dati
Errore nel recupero dei dati
Errore nel recupero dei dati
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fabrizio Romano confirms Liverpool talks for England star
Liverpool are continuing their talks with Crystal Palace over a deal for Marc Guehi. That's according to a new report from Fabrizio Romano. It strongly suggests that sporting director Richard Hughes and head coach Arne Slot are not currently satisfied with their central defensive options. 🔴 Shop the LFC 2025/26 adidas home range 🚨2025/26 LFC x adidas range🚨 LFC x adidas Shop the home range today! LFC x adidas Shop the goalkeeper range today LFC x adidas Shop the new adidas range today! Right now the club have got only three senior options at their disposal including Virgil van DijkIbrahima Konate and Joe Gomez. Another central defender, Giovanni Leoni, was added last week from Parma for around £26m. However, the Italian is just 18 years old - and has played only 17 top-flight games in his career. Konate doubts Would it be a gamble to throw him in at the deep end rather than letting him settle into life at the club? Then you need to factor in the complications over Konate's contract. With the defender's current deal expiring in 2026, it's been suggested he's planning on running down his contract. Real Madrid of course are lying in wait - prepared to offer the Frenchman an €18m signing-on fee. If he is to go this summer, then some succession planning will be required sooner rather than later. Guehi can solve the problem Palace are facing a similar conundrum over Guehi - with their captain's contract also up in 2026. It makes sense therefore to ship out Konate if he won't sign a new deal and bring Guehi in as a ready-made, high-class replacement. Even so, that would leave Liverpool exactly where they were numbers-wise. With Jarell Quansah having left the club, there is probably call for at least one more senior centre-back even if Konate stays through this summer. Liverpool require centre-back options And that's before we get to the issues faced by Konate and Van Dijk on Friday night against Bournemouth. Neither covered themselves in glory on Antoine Semenyo's goals and it would be nice for Arne Slot to have increased options. It is Liverpool's partnership out of necessity - and doesn't legislate for injury, suspension or a loss of form. With much of the transfer focus still on Alexander Isak at the other end of the pitch, it is Liverpool's threadbare options at centre-back that is the real issue. Slot and Richard Hughes would do well to act accordingly and push through the signing of the England international.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's The Share of Gold or Crypto Ray Dalio Says Investors Should Hold
In light of the United States' precarious fiscal situation, Ray Dalio, the founder of Bridgewater Associates, has advised investors to consider dedicating approximately 15% of their portfolio to either gold or Bitcoin. What Happened: In a recent interview, Dalio expressed his apprehension about a looming US debt crisis. He pointed out that the US dollar is being undermined due to excessive borrowing and deficit spending, leading to currency debasement. 'If you were neutral on everything and optimizing your portfolio for the best return-to-risk ratio, you would have about 15% of your money in gold or Bitcoin,' Dalio stated. Dalio also emphasized the need for effective diversification in a portfolio, recommending allocating about 15% as a protective hedge. During the discussion, he clarified that although he has a preference for gold over Bitcoin, the real economic issue is the devaluation of fiat money, which is currently affecting markets and investors. Also Read: Ray Dalio Shares Crucial Investment Advice for Those Who Want to Invest Well While some financial experts advocate for a higher allocation towards crypto, Dalio's balanced approach aligns with his brand. Dalio's recommendation comes at a time when the US is grappling with a burgeoning debt crisis. The rapid borrowing and deficit spending by the government are causing a devaluation of the US dollar, which is impacting markets and investors. By suggesting a 15% portfolio allocation to gold or bitcoin, Dalio is offering a potential solution for investors to safeguard their investments against the devaluation of fiat money. While some experts suggest a higher allocation to crypto, Dalio's measured approach provides a balanced perspective. It offers investors a solid foundation to profit in unexpected circumstances, thereby mitigating the risks associated with the current economic situation. Read Next Ray Dalio's Timeless Stock Market Advice: 'Don't Try to Time the Market Yourself Because You'll Probably Lose' Image: Shutterstock Up Next: Transform your trading with Benzinga Edge's one-of-a-kind market trade ideas and tools. Click now to access unique insights that can set you ahead in today's competitive market. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Here's The Share of Gold or Crypto Ray Dalio Says Investors Should Hold originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lyft Generates Huge FCF Margins - LYFT Stock Is Too Cheap
Lyft, Inc. (LYFT) generated strong free cash flow (FCF) growth in Q2, and its FCF margins have risen. Even though LYFT stock has risen, it's still off recent highs. It looks too cheap here. Investors may want to buy in-the-money calls and short OTM puts. This article will show how to play LYFT stock. LYFT closed at $15.82 on Friday, Aug. 15, up +8.2% on the day and also up +13.0% ($13.99) since it released the Q2 earnings results on Aug. 6. But it still may have further to go. More News from Barchart The Saturday Spread: These 3 Stocks Statistically May Be Cooking Up Something Special (GILD, WMB, XPEV) Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now! Given its strong FCF margins, the LYFT stock target price could be worth +24.4% more at $19.68. Let's look at this further. Strong LYFT FCF and Margins Lyft's revenue was up 11% year-over-year (Y/Y) and bookings rose 12%, which led to $40.3 million in net income vs. last year's $5.0 million. However, more importantly, it has now been free cash flow (FCF) positive for 5 straight quarters. It generated $329.4 million in FCF in Q2, which was +17.3% higher than Q1 and +28/5% higher Y/Y. That also led to very strong FCF margins, over 20% of revenue, as can be seen in the table below, taken from page 16 of Lyft's Q2 supplemental slide presentation. Moreover, Lyft highlighted its trailing 12-month (TTM) FCF. The company said on page 6 of its prepared remarks that it encourages looking at the TTM FCF figures, as the timing of insurance payouts can make the quarterly FCF figures vary. It generated $993 million in TTM FCF. That was +7.9% higher than last quarter's $920 million TTM FCF. More importantly, that worked out to a TTM FCF margin of 16.25% of TTM sales of $6.111 billion. That was much higher than the 15.44% TTM margin last quarter and the 13.22% FCF margin in 2025. These numbers can easily be seen on the Stock Analysis Trailing 12 Month Cash Flow data page. The point is that the company is continuing to squeeze out higher levels of cash from its operations as its revenue rises. That is clear evidence of operating leverage, since its costs don't rise as fast as revenue. That means we can predict higher levels of FCF for the company going forward. Forecasting FCF Using FCF Margins For example, analysts are now projecting revenue will rise to $6.52 billion this year, up from $6.48 billion three months ago (see my May 13 Barchart article). They also foresee $7.40 billion for 2026 (up from $7.20 in May). As a result, we can project FCF for both years, using a 16.25% annual FCF margin (even though it made a 20.7% margin in Q2 and 19.4% in Q1, or an average of 20.05% in H1): $6.52 billion revenue 2025 x 16.25% FCF margin = $1.0595 billion FCF 2025 $7.40 billion 2026 x 16.25% = $1.2025 billion FCF 2026 As a result, for the next 12 months (NTM), the average FCF will be $1.131 billion. Keep in mind that if FCF margins rise to 19% or more, this could skyrocket to between $1.2388 billion in 2025 to $1.406 billion in 2026, or $1.322 billion over the next 12 months. So, on average, let's assume it rises to $1.23 billion, or 23.9% higher than the $993 billion in TTM FCF. This could lead to a significantly higher stock price. Target Price for LYFT Stock One way to value a company's FCF is to assume that it pays out 50% of the FCF to shareholders. In fact, management has already said it is on track to buy back $500 million for shareholders by next May. That's roughly half of the $1.05 billion it may generate in 2025. Moreover, let's assume the market may eventually give LYFT stock a 15.0% FCF yield (i.e., FCF divided by the market cap). For example, the $993 million in TTM FCF in Q2 represents 15.4% of its present $6.43 billion market cap. This is the same as multiplying the FCF by about 6.5x (i.e., 1/0.154 = 6.493). So, let's multiply our FCF estimate by 6.5x: $1.23 billion NTM FCF x 6.5 = $8.0 billion market cap That works out to +24.4% more than today's market value of $6.43 billion, according to Yahoo! Finance. In other words, LFYT stock could potentially be worth +24.4% more than its price today over the next 12 months: $15.82 price 8/15/25 x 1.244 = $19.68 target price Analysts Agree LYFT is Undervalued For example, Yahoo! Finance reports that 40 analysts have an average price target of $17.05. Other surveys include Barchart's survey mean of $17.06, and Stock Analysis ($16.98) for 31 analysts. However, which tracks recent analyst write-ups, reports that 36 analysts have an average of $20.80 per share as their price target. That is over 31% higher than Friday's close and is closer to my price target of $19.68. The bottom line is that the average of these analyst surveys is $17.97 per share, or +13.6% potential upside. What is the best way to play this. Let's look at this. Buying In-the-Money Calls and Shorting Out-of-the-Money Puts ITM Calls. For example, the March 20, 2026, call option chain shows that the $13.00 call option contract has a midpoint price of $4.25. This contract expires 216 days from now, or over 7 months in the future. That strike price is $2.82 below Friday's close of $15.82, so it is 17.82% 'in the money.' Effectively, it means an investor can control more shares than just buying LYFT stock outright. It also means that the investor is betting that LYFT stock will rise to at least $17.25 (i.e., $13.00 + $4.25) by 3/20/26. That is +9% higher than today's price. But given our projection that the stock is worth $19.68, that looks possible. In fact, if LYFT rises 24.4% to that target price, the investor would over double that amount, at least 57.2%: $19.68-13.00 = $6.68 intrinsic value $6.68 / $4.25 price paid = 1.572 = +57.2% upside OTM Puts. One way to pay for this call option purchase is to sell short (i.e., 'Sell to Open') one-month away put options in out-of-the-money (OTM) strike prices. That means the investor would have an obligation to potentially purchase shares at a significantly lower price. ' The idea is to set a low enough price that there is a low chance of having to buy in, but to collect a premium to help pay for the long call position. For example, the Sept. 19 put option contract at the $14.00 strike price has a midpoint premium of 21 cents. That means the investor can make an immediate yield of 1.50% (i.e., $0.21/$14.00) for the next month. This strike price is 11.5% below Friday's close of $15.82. Its delta ratio is very low at just 16.67%, implying less than a 17% chance that LYFT will fall to this price. If an investor were to short the $15.00 strike price as well, the income would be 3.267% (i.e., $0.49/$15.00). So, using a mix of these two plays, an investor could potentially make between $1.47 and $3.34 over the next 7 months (assuming these plays can be repeated 7x). That would cover a good portion of the long call play above (i.e., $4.25 cost), and reduce the overall risk with that play. The bottom line here is that LYFT stock looks like it's very undervalued. One way to play it is to buy in-the-money calls, and/or short out-of-the-money puts. On the date of publication, Mark R. Hake, CFA did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on