Serbia expects another sanctions waiver from US for oil company NIS, official says
BELGRADE (Reuters) - Serbian oil company NIS, majority-owned by Russia's Gazprom Neft and Gazprom, is likely to get a last-minute, 30-day extension to its waiver from U.S. sanctions, the CEO of state gas company Srbijagas said on Thursday.
The previous waiver is due to expire at midnight, and if it is not extended NIS could face crude supply cuts. NIS operates the only oil refinery in Serbia, which has annual capacity of 4.8 million tons and covers most of the Balkan country's needs.
"There will be more delays of sanctions ... , but we cannot expect more than 30 days," Srbijagas CEO Dusan Bajatovic told Belgrade-based Pink TV.
He did not say how he knew this information. Bajatovic is a member of Serbia's co-ruling Socialist party and Srbijagas is also a trade partner of Gazprom.
NIS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
As part of its January 10 sanctions on Russia's oil sector, the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control gave Gazprom Neft 45 days to exit ownership of NIS.
On March 19, NIS sought a 30-day waiver of the sanctions, an extension of the first reprieve approved on Feb 27, to secure more time to find a solution with the Russian companies.
On February 26, Gazprom Neft transferred stakes of around 5.15% in NIS to Gazprom in an attempt to ward off sanctions.
The transfer follows a similar change in 2022 when the company avoided EU sanctions imposed on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.
Gazprom Neft now owns 44.85% of NIS, while Gazprom has 11.3%. The Serbian government holds 29.87%, and small shareholders the rest.
NIS imports about 80% of its needs through Croatian pipeline operator Janaf, with the remainder covered by its own crude oil production in Serbia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
28 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Zillow says it's fighting for buyers. Compass says it's fighting for sellers. What if neither is fighting for you?
As two real estate giants escalate a war over how homes should be listed for sale online, both sides say they're acting in the interest of consumers. Both sides also stand to make a lot of money if they win. The issue intensified at the end of 2024, when Compass, the country's largest brokerage by sales volume, began advising its sellers to use a three-phased marketing approach - making their homes visible only to Compass agents and clients as a "private" listing, making them viewable only via and reserving the option to later make them public on popular house-hunting sites like Redfin and Zillow. In the real estate industry, listings are currency. Faced with thousands of them disappearing from its site, Zillow punched back. The Seattle-based company, starting at the end of June, plans to block any former private listings from appearing on its site - an ultimatum it hopes brings an end to Compass's practice of selectively sharing listings before they appear on big search portals. Redfin will follow with a similar ban in September. Each of these players pitches itself as a pro-consumer brand. Compass says its selective marketing approach offers sellers privacy and control. Some sellers want to market to more exclusive groups before their home appears on big listing sites, which feature details like days on market and price cuts, which can signal a seller is willing to negotiate on price. Zillow and Redfin say they are for transparency in the market, which is good for both homebuyers and sellers. The only way to know a home's true price, they argue, is to advertise it as broadly as possible. But Brian Boero, chief executive of 1000watt, a marketing agency for residential real estate companies, says their pro-consumer stances are largely just messaging. "These companies are using the consumer as almost like a human shield here to protect their business interests," Boero said. "They may believe these things sincerely, but this is first and foremost about rational self-interest." Should Compass win the private listings war, it would upend the paradigm in home listings that buyers have grown used to over the last two decades. When Zillow and Redfin arrived in the mid-2000s, they promised to democratize the home search, pulling back the curtain on a market once controlled by agents and the local databases they operated called multiple listing services. For buyers, the experience changed overnight: Homes that were once buried in classified ads or hidden in books that could only be viewed alongside a broker were suddenly just a click away. Sellers' agents at first rejoiced - they didn't have to work as hard to advertise their properties, and listing on the sites was free. But someone was paying: buyers' agents. When a prospective buyer clicks a listing's "Contact an Agent" button, Zillow or Redfin sells that inquiry to a paying agent. They also take as much as 40% of the agent's commission if they close the sale. Brokerages like Compass have long bristled at the steep fee. But as home sales drag for a third straight year, Compass is trying to change the game. By publishing listings exclusively on it cuts out the referral middlemen. "Organized real estate has been implementing rules that have been stripping homeowners and their agents of flexibility and choice," Rory Golod, president of Growth and Communications at Compass, said in an interview. "They are trying to monopolize where inventory goes and how people sell." Redfin and Zillow, of course, have their own interests to protect - as well as the model that's come to shape the modern home-buying experience. "This isn't just about Zillow or Redfin - the internet has changed home search for the better, where every buyer can have access to all of the inventory," said Joe Rath, Redfin's head of industry relations. "Gatekeeping in any form is antithetical to the internet." Matt Kreamer, Zillow's spokesperson, said that transparency is core to Zillow's philosophy: "We believe that home listings that are available to some buyers should be available to all buyers," he said. Their calls for openness also happen to preserve their business: more listings, more traffic, more fees. Ultimately, Boero, the marketing chief, believes that Zillow's market power will force Compass to blink. "Zillow is the most powerful brand in the history of housing," Boero said. "You just can't imagine not having your home on Zillow as a home seller - it sounds like a stupid thing to have happen." But others see an opportunity for Compass to prevail in bringing traffic directly to its site. "Southwest Airlines didn't sell tickets on any of the online aggregators for years, and they're doing great," said Mike DelPrete, a real estate tech consultant. "People look at multiple sources." The dispute appears to be heading toward a compromise that would allow both Compass and the listing aggregators to uphold their business models, rather than a solution centered around buyers and sellers. Redfin's Joe Rath said his company would be open to hiding certain data, like days on market and price drops, if that's what it took to keep listings public. "We would much rather give ground there and have the listing," he said, "than not have the listing at all." Because all of these companies are paid a percentage of a home's ultimate sales price, it benefits both the brokerages and the search portals to keep buyers in the dark about details that might lead to a lower price. The battle over transparency, it seems, has limits. Whether Compass or the search portals win, both victories would also preserve an as-yet unshakable status quo in real estate: a 2% to 3% commission for buyers' agents. A landmark legal settlement earlier this year threatened that fee structure paradigm - but so far, traditional models have held, although a few flat-fee agencies have broken the mold. So why are the rules governing home listings decided by two major corporations that stand to benefit from pushing prices as high as possible? "With how important housing is to our economy, society and individuals, there is a question of why the information about homes for sale isn't federally regulated," Boero said. But government intervention in home sales isn't likely to happen at the federal level under President Donald Trump, who has promoted deregulation and free markets. The state's regulator, the California Department of Real Estate, lacks the legal authority to make a ruling on private listings that would tip the scales toward either Compass or Zillow. But it can, for example, require agents to give sellers adequate warning on the financial consequences of not appearing on the major home listing sites, said Summer Goralik, a former investigator with the department who now works as a compliance consultant to brokerages. "They'll need to explore whether brokers are breaching fiduciary duty to sellers," Goralik said. "Are they giving all of the information that seller needs to make an informed decision about listing privately?" For her part, Goralik doesn't believe the push for private sales and putting listings back into the brokerages' hands helps buyers or sellers. "A wide-scale campaign for private listings seems to do more harm than good," she said. "It seems like we'd be going back in time. I'm for the future." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is McCormick Stock Underperforming the Dow?
Hunt Valley, Maryland-based McCormick & Company, Incorporated (MKC) is a global leader in flavor, producing and distributing spices, seasonings, and condiments. With a market cap of $19.6 billion, it operates in over 150 countries through its Consumer and Flavor Solutions segments. Categorized as a "large-cap stock," McCormick's valuation highlights its dominance in the flavor industry. Its innovative products and global reach underscore its position as a leader in the food sector. Is Palantir Stock Poised to Surge Amidst the Israel-Iran Conflict? 'It Has No Utility': Warren Buffett Doesn't Care How High Gold Goes, He Isn't a Buyer CoreWeave Stock Is Too 'Expensive' According to Analysts. Should You Sell CRWV Now? Markets move fast. Keep up by reading our FREE midday Barchart Brief newsletter for exclusive charts, analysis, and headlines. McCormick touched its 52-week high of $86.24 on Mar. 10 and is currently trading 15.1% below that peak. Meanwhile, MKC stock has dropped nearly 10% over the past three months, notably underperforming the Dow Jones Industrial Average's ($DOWI) 1.4% uptick during the same time frame. McCormick's performance has remained lackluster over the longer term as well. MKC stock has dropped 4% on a YTD basis and gained 6.7% over the past year, underperforming Dow's marginal 88 bps dip in 2025 and 8.6% gains over the past 52 weeks. To confirm the downturn, MKC stock has traded consistently below its 200-day moving average and mostly below its 50-day moving average since early April. McCormick's stock prices observed a marginal dip after the release of its Q1 results on Mar. 25. The company experienced a 2% growth in volumes, but it was mostly offset by currency headwinds, leading to its net sales growing by a modest 17 bps year-over-year to $1.6 billion, which missed the consensus estimates by 38 bps. Meanwhile, its adjusted EPS for the quarter decreased 4.8% year-over-year to $0.60, falling short of Street expectations by 6.3%. On a positive note, for the full fiscal 2025, the company expects to observe a low-single-digit growth in volumes and a gradual improvement in demand from China. While McCormick has marginally underperformed its peer Hormel Foods Corporation's (HRL) 3.9% drop on a YTD basis, it has significantly outpaced HRL's marginal 69 bps dip over the past 52 weeks. Among the 14 analysts covering the MKC stock, the consensus rating is a 'Moderate Buy.' Its mean price target of $84.87 suggests a 15.9% upside potential from current price levels. On the date of publication, Aditya Sarawgi 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
31 minutes ago
Tried and tested in war: For European drone manufacturers, Ukraine is the place to be
LE BOURGET, France -- About once a month, French drone manufacturer Henri Seydoux makes what has become a necessary pilgrimage for many in his business — he goes to Ukraine. Because for drone technology, there is no harder place to survive than the frontlines of the war against Russia's invasion, where both sides are using unmanned aerial machines of all shapes and sizes to kill and to observe, reshaping modern warfare. And because the battlefields also bristle with electronic countermeasures and weapons to confuse, jam and shoot down drones, Ukraine has also become an extreme real-life proving ground for advances in drone technology, some of which has started to spill over into non-military sectors. For manufacturers, being able to say that their drones and related equipment have been battle-tried and tested by Ukrainian forces is becoming a sales pitch as they market their wares not just to national defense departments, but also to police forces, border authorities, rescue services and civilian users. 'When we say, 'This is a good machine, it works,' people can believe us or not. But when it's guys in Ukraine and others saying they're happy, it has greater value," says Bastien Mancini, president and co-founder of French drone manufacturer Delair, which has teamed up with European defense contractor KNDS to supply Ukrainian forces with 100 exploding drones. KNDS' sales literature notes that they are 'combat-proven." Mancini says civilian users of Delair's other non-military drones 'see things that work in Ukraine and say to themselves, 'It resists jamming, it resists the loss of a radio connection and whatnot and so it's going to be fine for civilian use, like inspecting electric cables or whatever." 'It really has helped us win markets. It gives people confidence," he told The Associated Press at the Paris Air Show, a major shop-window for the aviation and defense industries. Henri Seydoux, the founder and head of French drone maker Parrot, says Ukraine is 'fascinating' from a drone-technology perspective because 'it changes so quickly, there are new ideas non-stop.' He's been making regular trips since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022 to meet Ukrainian drone manufacturers, drone software developers and the military authorities. 'Every quarter, the situation changes completely,' he said in an interview. 'Every company, let's say, that makes military equipment or every army is very interested by drones. But the ones that really use them and understand how to use them is the Ukrainians." For Ukraine, trying to defend against swarms of Russian drones that target cities and waves of drone-supported Russian troops is a matter of survival. So, too, is finding workarounds to counter electronic warfare systems that Russia deploys to jam and disable Ukrainian drones, igniting what has become a drone-technology arms race between the two sides and for manufacturers outside of Ukraine, too. Small drones that drop bombs and explode against targets — mass-produced at a fraction of the cost of other more complex weapons systems that its allies have supplied — have become increasingly vital for Ukraine's resistance. Its Defense Ministry has said that it plans to buy 4.5 million drones this year, all Ukrainian-made, that allow their operators to see what the machines see, so they can guide the flights in real time — exploding in a Russian trench, for example, or even against a single enemy soldier. That's three times more drones than the ministry bought last year, it says. 'Drones saved Ukraine,' said Alex Vorobei, the Ukrainian sales representative for Ailand Systems, a Ukrainian start-up developing a drone that detects land mines. Vorobei and others in the drone business say that manufacturers not involved in Ukraine risk being left behind. 'If you're in the defense field and still not in Ukraine, it means you are nowhere," Vorobei said at the Paris show. A micro surveillance drone unveiled by Parrot at the Paris show has a nod to Ukraine in its name — the Anafi UKR — and also has been field-tested in what Seydoux describes as the 'very harsh environment' on the frontline. It's equipped with artificial intelligence technology to enable it to find its way when radio and navigational signals are jammed. Parrot says the drone's ready-for-war resilience and features also make it a good fit for law enforcement operations, such as monitoring crowds, tracking suspects or keeping watch over borders, and for rescue services in remote areas or during fires and accidents when navigational signals might go down. Ukraine has been 'a real laboratory or test for us, to see if our products worked,' said Delair's Mancini. Its Oskar exploding drone, which has polystyrene wings, carries a half-kilogram (one pound) warhead to detonate against troops and lightly armored vehicles. Delair developed it in under a year, repurposing one of its civilian drones that was already used in France for mapping and inspecting power cables, and hardening it for Ukraine with technology to resist Russian jamming. "Five or 10 years ago, lots of people were asking themselves, 'Are drones really useful for something?' No one is asking that question today," he said.
