Listado de la etiqueta: México

NAFTA negotiations: Mixed feelings for US companies on Mexican border

America CGTN / Steve Mort / June 18

 

The U.S., Canada, and Mexico say talks on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) will press ahead despite Washington’s steel and aluminum tariffs. But recent tensions between the U.S. and Canada are casting doubt on whether a deal is possible.

At Allen Russell’s warehouse in the border city of El Paso, materials are processed for shipment to factories in Mexico. His company depends on those shipments being tariff-free under NAFTA, so he rejects President Trump’s claim that the trade deal is the worst ever made.

“It is not the worst trade deal. It has done more for North America than could even have anticipated.”

Russell’s business provides U.S. corporations with manufacturing facilities employing around 8,000 people in Mexico, where labor costs are lower. He fears that without NAFTA, his cost of doing business will rise.

“The American consumer is going to pay the bill,” according to Russell. “The product is just going to be more expensive. It doesn’t mean anybody is going to move from Mexico to the US to produce the product.”

The US-Mexico border region is one of the largest in the world. Its population exceeds 2.5 million, with an economy to match. Mexico is Texas’ largest export market, with cross-border trade worth hundreds of billions annually.

More than 1/5 of that trade crosses the border in El Paso.

Thomas Fullerton, a professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, studies the region’s economy and the potential impact should NAFTA talks fail.

“It will throw a monkey wrench into how things operate rather seamlessly at this point,” he explained. “Existing operations will probably remain in place, but the level of investment and business formation will plummet.”

But not everyone is so sure. Nicole Grado’s company sells packaging. Up to 90 percent of her customers ship internationally. She’s looking for ways to diversify her business and says she’s confident other US companies could thrive without NAFTA.

“There would be changes, but I think it’s like everything: you adjust to those changes and you adapt,” the CEO said. “You figure out ways to continue moving forward.”

While the outcome of the NAFTA talks remains far from certain, business on the border continues. El Paso’s economy is projected to grow two percent in 2018.

But most here hope a long-term deal can be reached soon, to avoid the lingering uncertainty hanging over this region’s economy.

 

America CGTN / Steve Mort / June 18

 

Enbridge (ENB) Commences Mex-Border Pipeline’s Offshore Work

Zacks Equity Research / June 14

 

Enbridge Inc. (ENB – Free Report) recently started construction work on its Valley Crossing natural gas pipeline’s border crossing offshore part, per Reuters. The $1.6 billion pipeline that lies between Mexico and Texas is scheduled to come online in October.

The energy infrastructure company is currently working on a 305-meter part of the pipeline’s offshore section, while the rest 165-mile onshore and offshore section is ready for operation. The company has plans to start the pipeline’s commissioning process soon.

Significance of the Pipeline

The Valley Crossing pipeline has a shipping capacity of 2.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day (Bcf/d). It will transport gas from Texas to Mexico’s growing energy market. Following the energy reform in Mexico, the country witnessed a rising interest from international oil and gas companies.

Energy-related imports have risen in the country over the past few years. Mexico’s year-to-date average gas import from the United States currently stands at 4 Bcf/d.

The pipeline is designed to supply clean burning gas primarily to the Mexican state-run utility company, Federal Electricity Commission aka CFE, which has around 37 million clients. Moreover, the pipeline is expected to open new market opportunities for the gas producers in Texas. As a result, Enbridge’s cash flow is expected to benefit immensely.

There’s More

The Valley Crossing pipeline would to be connected to the Sur de Texas-Tuxpan pipeline in the Gulf of Mexico, and is expected to create a huge pipeline network between the United States and Mexico. The Sur de Texas-Tuxpan pipeline is currently being built by a joint venture between Sempra Energy (SRE – Free Report) and TransCanada Corp. (TRP – Free Report) .

Price Performance

Calgary Canada-based Enbridge has lost 14% in the past year compared with 7.4% decline of its industry.

Zacks Rank and One Stock to Consider

Enbridge Energy carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). Investors interested in the Energy sector can opt for a better-ranked stock like Delek US Holdings, Inc. (DK– Free Report) that sports a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

Brentwood, TN-based Delek is an energy company. The company’s top line for 2018 is anticipated to improve 39.2% year over year, while its bottom line is expected to increase 230.2%.

 

Zacks Equity Research / June 14

 

El simple temor de una guerra comercial está generando tensiones en la economía global

LONDRES — Tan solo hace unos cuantos meses, parecía que la economía global era vibrante y las principales economías crecían al unísono. Ahora, las fortunas del mundo están en peligro por una guerra comercial en desarrollo.

A medida que el gobierno de Trump impone aranceles tanto a sus aliados como a sus rivales —y provoca amplias represalias— el comercio global sufre trastornos y da señales de tensiones que podrían obstaculizar el crecimiento económico. La última escalada llegó el 15 de junio, cuando el presidente Donald Trump anunció nuevos aranceles de 50.000 millones de dólares en productos chinos, lo que provocó una rápida represalia de Pekín.

Conforme crece el conflicto, se retrasan los embarques en los puertos y las terminales de carga aérea en todo el mundo. Los precios de materias primas claves se están incrementando. En las fábricas desde Alemania hasta México, se reducen los pedidos y se retrasan las inversiones. Los agricultores estadounidenses pierden ventas a medida que los socios comerciales responden con impuestos propios.

Los trabajadores de una acerería canadiense pelearon por retirar unos vagones de ferrocarril con destino a la frontera de Estados Unidos después de que este mes Trump lanzó aranceles sobre los metales importados. Un cliente de Seattle canceló su pedido con rapidez.

“El impacto se sintió de inmediato”, afirmó Jon Hobbs, presidente de AltaSteel en Edmonton. “En verdad nos estamos dando cuenta de lo que esto significa para los negocios de la gente”.

El gobierno de Trump describe su postura confrontativa como un medio para obligar a las empresas multinacionales a regresar la producción de las fábricas a las costas estadounidenses. Trump ha descrito las guerras comerciales como “fáciles de ganar”, mientras promete volver a equilibrar los déficits de Estados Unidos con las principales economías, como la china y la alemana.

Sin embargo, la ofensiva de Trump podría ser una táctica de negociación que amenace con provocar problemas económicos para obligar a que haya acuerdos, y no una medida que conduzca a una franca guerra comercial. Parece que los estadounidenses están mejor protegidos que la mayoría para enfrentar las consecuencias de estas hostilidades comerciales. Como una gran economía relativamente en buena forma, Estados Unidos puede encontrar compradores locales para sus bienes y servicios cuando se reduzcan las oportunidades de exportación.

Aun así, la historia ha demostrado que las guerras comerciales son costosas mientras aumentan los riesgos de hostilidades más abiertas. Se profundizan los temores de que el actual brote de antagonismo pueda afectar al resto del mundo.

Antes de que las medidas comerciales entren totalmente en vigor, los negocios ya están sufriendo las consecuencias: amenazas a sus suministros, incertidumbre acerca de los términos comerciales y un persistente temor acerca de lo que vendrá después.

“Tan solo hablar de proteccionismo crea problemas”, señaló Marie Owen Thomsen, economista jefa a nivel mundial en Indosuez Wealth Management en Ginebra. “Es un riesgo existencial para la economía mundial”.

Después de dos años de expansión, el tráfico de carga aérea se mantuvo sin cambios durante los tres primeros meses del año, según la Asociación Internacional de Transporte Aéreo. Las caídas han sido pronunciadas, sobre todo en Europa y Asia.

Los buques portacontenedores —los caballos de batalla del comercio global— no han tenido crecimiento en mercancía desde el otoño pasado en términos desestacionalizados, de acuerdo con un índice clave.

Un indicador de comercio mundial monitoreado por Oxford Economics, una empresa de investigación de Londres, registró recientemente su actuación más débil desde principios de 2017.

“No subestimemos el impacto macroeconómico”, advirtió la semana pasada la directora del Fondo Monetario Internacional, Christine Lagarde, acerca de los conflictos comerciales. “Sería grave, no solo si Estados Unidos actuara, sino en especial si otros países tomaran represalias, sobre todo los más afectados, como Canadá, Europa y Alemania”.

Están surgiendo amenazas para el comercio justo cuando la economía global se enfrenta a otros retos importantes.

La decisión del gobierno de Trump de restablecer sanciones a Irán ha aumentado los precios del petróleo, lo que aumenta la presión sobre los importadores de todo el mundo. La economía de Europa se está debilitando y la de Alemania —la economía más grande del continente— es particularmente vulnerable. Los bancos centrales en Estados Unidos y Europa están retirando el dinero barato que enviaron a recorrer el sistema financiero global después de la crisis de 2008, lo que aumenta el costo de los préstamos.

El gobierno de Trump ha involucrado a Estados Unidos en conflictos cada vez más enconados con grandes socios comerciales.

Estados Unidos importó el año pasado más de 600.000 millones de dólares en bienes y servicios de Canadá y México, los otros dos países del Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte, mismo que Trump ha amenazado con acabar. Los estadounidenses compraron más de 500.000 millones de dólares de mercancía china y otros 450.000 millones de dólares de la Unión Europea. En total, eso suma casi dos tercios de todas las importaciones de Estados Unidos.

“Si perjudicas seriamente a cualquiera de estos tres, sentirás los efectos”, dijo Adam Slater, economista principal de Oxford Economics. “Si perjudicas a los tres al mismo tiempo, sentirás los efectos considerablemente”.

Para las empresas que fabrican acero y aluminio, los aranceles de Estados Unidos han planteado un reto directo y amenazante para sus negocios.

En Alta, la acerería de Edmonton, los aranceles sobre metales provocaron una crisis inmediata. Aproximadamente una quinta parte de los negocios de la empresa tiene que ver con embarcar acero a los clientes estadounidenses.

De forma repentina, la frontera que separa Canadá y Estados Unidos en efecto se llenó de niebla. La empresa cambió el rumbo de los vagones destinados a clientes de Estados Unidos, incurriendo en cargos extras por carga que llegaron a 100.000 dólares canadienses (alrededor de 76.000 dólares).

Los abogados de algunos clientes de Alta han sugerido que se podrían clasificar algunos productos para evitar tocar los aranceles estadounidenses, los cuales se aplican solo a ciertos tipos específicos de acero. Pero por ahora, la empresa está esperando la decisión de los abrumados funcionarios de aduanas de Estados Unidos.

“No sabemos cuándo tendremos una respuesta del gobierno de Estados Unidos”, señaló Hobbs. “Nadie, incluyendo la agencia de protección de la frontera de Estados Unidos, sabe qué hacer”.

En toda Europa, los fabricantes de acero se preocupan por una consecuencia indirecta de los aranceles de Trump: el acero barato de China que anteriormente se destinaba a Estados Unidos, ahora se dirige a su continente.

“Hemos visto incrementos”, afirmó Mathias Ternell, director de relaciones internacionales en Jernkontoret, una asociación sueca de la industria del acero en Estocolmo. “Es por lo que las empresas suecas y europeas más se preocupan”.

Trump describe las hostilidades comerciales como un correctivo necesario para los déficits comerciales de Estados Unidos con otros países. Pero los economistas y los líderes empresariales señalan que muchas importaciones son componentes que se emplean para producir bienes en las fábricas de Estados Unidos.

Para los compradores de acero y aluminio dentro de Estados Unidos, los aranceles han incrementado los precios, lo que desalienta la inversión.

Electrolux, el fabricante sueco de artículos para el hogar, recientemente pospuso sus planes de mejorar una fábrica de estufas en Tennessee, utilizando como argumento las incertidumbres creadas por los aranceles.

En los suburbios de Austin, Texas, Matt Bush, vicepresidente de una pequeña empresa que hace estructuras que se emplean en edificios de oficinas y locales comerciales, dijo que los aranceles del acero obligarían a su empresa a pagar hasta 50.000 dólares más al mes por el metal.

“Tienes que imaginar que toda la gente que está comprando aluminio y acero en bruto como insumos para su negocio está en el mismo predicamento”, afirmó. “Y quizá es sorprendente hasta dónde pueden llegar las consecuencias”.

Más allá del ámbito del metal, el impacto de las escaramuzas comerciales se está ampliando y está golpeando a pequeñas empresas y consumidores.

En México, la angustia acerca del comercio ha prevalecido desde que Trump tomó posesión, debido a sus amenazas de anular el TLCAN y sus planes de construir un muro a lo largo de la frontera. Los mexicanos comunes y corrientes han absorbido el golpe porque el peso mexicano se ha hundido y ha aumentado el costo de los bienes cotidianos procedentes de Estados Unidos.

“Ese presidente nos está llevando a la quiebra”, señaló Gustavo Ferreyra Olivares, un vendedor de fruta que ha tenido un puesto en un mercado de Ciudad de México durante 35 años. “Trump es el que ha subido los precios”.

La mayor parte de la fruta fresca de su puesto se cultivó en México, pero las manzanas Granny Smith, acomodadas en cajas de cartón, tenían la etiqueta de Estados Unidos, al igual que una pila de relucientes manzanas Gala e hileras ordenadas de Red Delicious.

Con el TLCAN, México se ha convertido en el mayor importador de manzanas estadounidenses en el mundo. Pero las ventas son bajas porque el precio ha subido casi una quinta parte tan solo durante la semana pasada.

El gobierno mexicano impuso hace poco aranceles del 20 por ciento a las manzanas estadounidenses en respuesta a los aranceles de Trumpsobre el acero, lo que dificultará más a Ferreyra vender sus productos estadounidenses. Se imagina que los agricultores del otro lado de la frontera están sufriendo también.

“México es un gran importador de manzanas”, afirmó. “Si decidimos boicotearlos, todos tendrán que mantenerse ahí”.

Los mercados de bienes básicos globales están luchando con los impactos del conflicto comercial, en especial China, que busca alternativas a los proveedores estadounidenses.

En años recientes, conforme han crecido los rangos de la clase media de China, también lo ha hecho el apetito nacional por la carne de puerco. El aumento en la cantidad de cerdos ha obligado a China a importar cada vez más volúmenes de soya de Estados Unidos.

Pero China ha apuntado directamente a las granjas de Estados Unidos como represalia a los aranceles de Trump sobre los metales y ha amenazado con impuestos a la soya procedente de Estados Unidos. Los productores de puerco de China han volteado a ver a Brasil y Argentina, los únicos países que ahora producen suficiente soya como para ofrecer una alternativa potencial al suministro de Estados Unidos.

Mexico minister calls for ‘flexibility’ in reworking Nafta

The Daily Star / Reuters, Tokyo / June 12

 

Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said on Monday the only way countries re-negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) will find a solution is through “sufficient flexibility” to narrow differences.

Guajardo said US, Mexican and Canadian negotiators will be “engaging strongly” in July to reach an agreement that is “feasible, workable and benefits the three nations involved.

“The only way we will find that solution is if countries involved have sufficient flexibility to be able to find that narrow strip where we have to land,” he said.

“An agreement that does not give us certainty, does not give us rules that have to be obeyed and mechanisms to settle disputes will not be of help for the business community.”

He said there was a “high chance” there will be an agreement on renegotiating Nafta, but the timing depends on how flexible each country can be.

The United States, Canada and Mexico have been in months of negotiations to rework Nafta, which President Donald Trump says harms his country.

White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow has said Trump will seek to replace Nafta with bilateral deals with Canada and Mexico, something both countries say they oppose.

US trading partners have been furious over Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada, the European Union and Mexico as part of his “America First” agenda.

Fears of a global trade war come as Trump’s decision to back out of the G7 joint communique torpedoed what appeared to be a fragile consensus on a trade dispute between Washington and its top allies.

 

The Daily Star / Reuters, Tokyo / June 12

 

Netherland Sewell Adds Mexico City to the 2018 Oil & Gas Property Evaluation Seminar Lineup

Oil & Gas 360º / May 29

 

NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminars coming to London, Singapore and Mexico City this summer

Netherland Sewell & Associates (NSAI) has again expanded the reach of its popular Oil & Gas Property Evaluation Seminars for financial professionals, with the new addition of a seminar in Mexico City on September 5-6, 2018.

“We are very excited to introduce the NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminars to Mexico,” said NSAI SVP & CFO Scott Frost. “With the country opening its hydrocarbon sector to foreign investors and international partners, the time is right for NSAI to host a seminar in Mexico.”

Seminars deliver a basic understanding of the upstream oil and gas industry

The two-day seminars are designed to help energy finance professionals gain a deeper understanding of the various aspects of the evaluation of hydrocarbon reserves and learn how to use reserves reports and studies.  Participants can expect to gain a basic understanding of the upstream oil and gas industry, including basic geology of different plays, reservoir evaluation basics, reserves and resources definitions, understanding hydrocarbons-in-place, recovery factors and rates, operating expenses and capital costs, and more.

The seminar speakers are NSAI professionals that have significant career expertise in reserves determination methods, the economics of hydrocarbon extraction, and petroleum geology. The seminars are popular with financial institutions that invest in energy development as well as banks that are involved in making lending decisions for oil and gas exploration and production projects.

Below is the 2018 NSAI Oil & Gas Property Evaluation seminar calendar:

  • May 7 & 8 and 9 & 10, 2018 – Dallas (Both sessions had record attendance with a waiting list)
  • June 26 & 27, 2018 – London: Grange City Hotel
  • July 10 & 11, 2018 – Singapore: Singapore Exchange – SGX Auditorium
  • September 5 – 6, 2018 – Mexico City: Asturiano Polanco Banquet Room

NSAI encourages energy industry and oil and gas financial professionals to pass this information on to colleagues who may benefit from attending. “We are excited about the opportunity to meet again with petroleum industry financial professionals and would like to thank you for recommending our seminars to your colleagues,” said NSAI SVP Joseph Spellman.

Scott Rees, NSAI Chairman and CEO, told Oil & Gas 360® that the firm has graduated about 6,500 people during 38 cumulative years of seminars in Dallas, London and Singapore. “We are glad to be adding Mexico City to that list,” Rees said.

Interested parties may learn more and register at NSAI’s website.

 

Oil & Gas 360º / May 29

 

PROGRAMA INTEGRAL DE SEGUROS: LA CLAVE EN EL SECTOR HIDROCARBUROS

Contratar un seguro no basta para decir que una empresa está adecuadamente protegida contra los eventuales riesgos que pueda enfrentar; lo anterior, toda vez que un seguro sólo va a cubrir ciertos riesgos y a excluir otros. Por ello, la clave es contar con un programa integral de seguros.

Especificamente en el sector de hidrocarburos y sus derivados, la cadena de valor  es amplia y compleja, abarca distintas actividades: Exploración, Extracción, Refinación y Procesamiento, Transporte, Almacenamiento, Distribución y Expendio al público.

Se trata de actividades que son altamente riesgosas por las características intrínsecas de los hidrocarburos (explosivos  y flamables) las cuales les otorgan el potencial de causar daños y perjuicios. A dichos riesgos, se le suman aquellos que son particulares de cada actividad. Por ejemplo, en las actividades de extracción existe la posibilidad de un descontrol de pozo, lo que puede causar severos daños a personas y medio ambiente; los auto-tanques que transportan gasolina o gas licuado de petróleo pueden ocasionar pérdidas catastróficas en caso de una explosión pues transitan en zonas de alta densidad poblacional; los ductos son sujetos a actos vandálicos para sustraer los hidrocarburos, lo cual puede provocar contaminación a partir de los derrames.

Para evitar este tipo de eventualidades, las empresas generalmente implementan una serie de medidas de seguridad industrial y protección ambiental a través de un proceso de administración de riesgos, sin embargo la posibilidad de que alguna de éstas falle siempre existirá, por eso es sumamente importante contar con los mecanismos de transferencia de riesgos que otorguen respaldo económico en caso de siniestro.

Los seguros son instrumentos de transferencia del riesgo, que están diseñados para cumplir con objetivos específicos. Por ejemplo, un seguro de responsabilidad civil otorga cobertura por los daños y perjuicios que se causen a terceros en sus personas y bienes; un seguro de responsabilidad ambiental sirve para absorber los costos de remediación o compensación por contaminación ambiental; un seguro de control de pozos, como su nombre lo indica, está diseñado para asumir los costos que se deriven de un accidente en un pozo de perforación que provoque su descontrol.

La mejor manera de que las empresas de la industria de hidrocarburos estén debidamente protegidas es a través  de un programa integral de seguros que abarque todas sus áreas de riesgo.

En el contexto actual de la Reforma Energética,en la que participan activamente nuevos operadores que han comprometido su capital, las empresas  deben estar preparadas para actuar en un escenario de riesgo, donde deberán ajustar sus esquemas de aseguramiento a fin de evitar una reducción de la utilidad esperada o incluso un impacto negativo en su patrimonio.

En NRGI Bróker somos expertos  en administración de riesgos y programas integrales de seguros. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

 

Mexico’s Billion Dollar Oil Industry Ripe for the Picking

Baystreet Staff / May 22

 

It may have taken the better part of a century, but Mexico figured out that their state-owned energy monopoly, PEMEX, was a business model that just wasn’t working out. After hammering out legislation in 2013 to denationalize the nation’s oil and gas industry, the worst thing that could happen, did; oil prices collapsed, and companies globally hit the brakes on spending. What was expected to be the opening of floodgates to invest in arguably the biggest energy opportunity today didn’t happen quite as expected. With oil prices climbing to fresh three-and-a-half year highs, all that is changing and the Mexico’s oil space is starting to heat up with investment of $150 billion now secured.

As it happens, investors’ conservative approach worked perfectly in favor of Steve Hanson and his team at International Frontier Resources Corp. (TSX-V: IFR) . «We knew that we were heading to Mexico for the first onshore licensing round to build the cornerstones of our operations,» Hanson said in a phone call with Baystreet.ca. «We were in a strong financial position with a clear mission to become the next energy leader in Mexico. Others staying on the sidelines as oil bottomed in 2016 really worked to our benefit as a first-mover in Mexico’s energy reform.»

The savvy leadership at IFR, formed an equal partnership with a Mexican petrochemical giant, as a result, this Canadian company became the first foreign-owned joint venture (JV) and independent oil company to actively explore onshore opportunities in Mexico in over 80 years. Through its strategic JV, IFR is also the first foreign company to complete the regulatory review and drill onshore conventional oil in Mexico under license contract. You’d think it would have been a major like Halliburton (NYSE: HAL) or Baker Hughes (NYSE: BHGE) or Schlumberger (NYSE: SLB), companies that were already working in the area as service providers to PEMEX, but it wasn’t. It was a little $30 million market cap. company that was nimble enough to beat everyone to the punch.

«We weren’t afraid of the price of oil. Not even at the $40 per barrel that oil was fetching at the time; we knew we could still make money based on our expertise and interpretation of the geology,» said Hanson. «At $70 oil, we’re obviously excited with our position, » he added.

Confident for Good Reason

Hanson’s confidence isn’t unfounded. He has over two decades of well-grounded experience in finance and corporate development, serving as chairman and managing director at the award-winning equity money management firm Van Arbor Asset Management before selling it with a sizable payout to the ZLC Private Investment Management in 2008. Next he was the CEO and president of PanAsian Petroleum that was sold profitably to Ivanhoe Energy, shortly after Hanson took charge. Likewise, that was followed by serving as a director at Lion Petroleum, a company focused on oil and gas in East Africa which was then acquired by Taipan Resources.

IFR’s management team is the embodiment of success and has experience across the finance and energy spectrum throughout the globe, including COO and director Andy Fisher, who has a history of taking companies with negligible assets to robust oil and gas production. For instance, he founded Arcan Resources and grew it from no production to 4,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day (boe/d), before the company was sold to Aspenleaf Energy Ltd., in June 2015 for CDN. $300 million. He was also VP, international contracts and negotiation, at Pacalta Resources Ltd. («Pacalta») in Ecuador, where he helped in growing the company from 100 boe/d in production to roughly 45,000 boe/d. In 1999, Alberta Energy Co., the predecessor to EnCana’s (TSX: ECA) (NYSE: ECA), bought Pacalta in a deal worth approximately CDN. $1.0 billion!

For the sake of brevity, the profiles of everyone contributing to IFR’s future can’t be covered; however, it certainly is worth mentioning that Colin Mills, an independent director at IFR, has more than three decades of diverse international experience in power generation, including building two power plants in Mexico, which adds to the local advantage of IFR in terms of navigating the regulatory environment in Mexico.

The commitment and confidence of these individuals to IFR is best recognized based on the fact that insiders hold more than one-third of the company’s outstanding shares.

It’s this experience and dedication at IFR that led to the formation of Tonalli Energia, a 50-50 JV between IFR’s Mexican subsidiary, Petro Frontera S.A.P.I de CV, and Mexican petrochemical giant Grupo IDESA. As a first mover, the partnership and its in-country experience gives Tonalli a serious competitive edge to catapult it forward into becoming the next energy leader in Mexico.

The Tecolutla Project – Now a Producer!

Imagine every bit of oil in Texas was controlled by one company for the last 80 years. That’s a rough analogy for what has been going on in Mexico. It’s explored enough (both on- and offshore) to know that there are tremendous reserves, possibly comparable to the all-resilient Permian Basin, but woefully little with respect to extracting oil and gas. Right now, Mexico ranks as the Western hemisphere’s third largest oil producer and host of the fourth largest known oil reserves.

Those could be conservative positions in the future considering Premier Oil last summer made a major offshore discovery in a block next to Talos Energy and Sierra Oil and Gas that is estimated to hold in excess of one billion barrels of oil that possibly extend into the adjacent block. This was discovered through the first shallow water offshore exploration well drilled since denationalization. Shares of Premier rocketed higher with the find. «Few think of Mexico in the same terms as Saudi Arabia, despite the fact that Mexico has similar quantities of hydrocarbon resources,» argued a recent report published by Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. However, this is about to change with higher oil prices and growing investor interest.

Lending further credence to Mexican oil potential, IHS Markit thinks the country’s untapped Tampico-Misantla Basin on the east coast of Mexico could be one of the world’s next «super basins.» Part of the basin includes the massive Poza Rica oil field, estimated to contain 3.8 billion boe, and IFR’s Tecolutla project which has now commenced completion operations for its recently drilled TEC-10 well.

The Tampico basin is known to have geology similar to the prolific North American basins, with stacked conventional and unconventional pay zones. In fact, IFR recently drilled 138 meters of reef thickness at its directional evaluation, TEC-10 well. It is also known that such basins tend to have «halo» zones of tight oil (light oil that is easily produced) surrounding them, this may be supported by the limited amount of exploration that has so far occurred at Tecolutla.

Seven wells were drilled between 1956-1972, with a well with last recorded production rates in January 2016. IFR announced the completion of a successful workover of a legacy TEC-2 well which was tested for production for a total of seven days and far exceeded management expectations. The well reported an average flow of 125 barrels of oil per day which was more than 13 times higher compared to last recorded production on the well! Newly drilled TEC-10 is next to test for production rates which is the most exciting moment for IFR JV since its inception!

IFR was awarded the block in May 2016 with no cash payment, merely a royalty agreement which offered one of the most favourable terms in comparison to the royalties on other blocks offered during the bid round. Furthermore, Export Development Canada (EDC) backstopped IFR by putting up the company’s portion of the performance bond required by Tonalli, allowing the company to conserve its cash, while lending a great deal of validation to the project. IFR ended the first quarter of 2018 with $2.81 million in cash and cash equivalents and no debt.

The first drill rig penetrated the ground in April, reached depth of 2,453 meters total vertical depth and was cased for production testing this month which was a historic moment for the Mexican oil and gas sector. Several points stand out when looking at the disclosed results, namely the fact that visible oil was noticeable from the core and the fact that oil was hit at deeper levels than oil was ever produced in the zone historically, indicating the El Abra reservoir at Tecolutla could have greater volume than ever believed.

Moreover, IFR, via Tonalli, is using modern exploration technology at Tecolutla for the first time. IFR is using the first-ever 3D seismic data shot for the whopping 81-billion-barrel Chicontepec formation with the aim of helping better understand Tecolutla field.

The beauty of the rock, according to Hanson, is not just that it is apparently flush with oil, but naturally fractured as well, making horizontal drilling easy, without the need for fracturing that draw the ire of environmentalists. These characteristics mean that the drilling is low cost, to the extent that Hanson believes the company can produce profitably at a cost of less than $20-$25 per barrel.

The Upcoming Catalysts

IFR is presently working on production testing, continuing analysis of the wireline, image logs and core analysis, refining the 3D seismic model and identifying the next drill target. The JV is looking ahead to the second tender of Round Three of bidding for projects (scheduled for September 27, 2018). Given the surge in value that Premier Oil experienced with its find, any positive data regarding the initial drill hole underpinned by historic production, should energize IFR shares and likely drive the attention of the investment community.

«We started IFR and moved aggressively in Mexico with the purpose of building a billion-dollar company,» Hanson added during the call. He continued, «We are very proud of being a first-mover in what we believe is going to quickly emerge as one of the most vibrant energy markets in the world and we’re not going to relent in our efforts to build value just as we have with previous companies.»

It’s difficult to disagree with anything Hanson says. They have nailed all of their milestones so far and certainly have plenty of running room to add to their portfolio. They have an outstanding partner in Grupo IDESA, the backing of EDC, are fully-funded for the existing work program, all the necessary infrastructure is in place, and they have outstanding experience across the entire supply chain that should allow IFR to sell oil at a price that couldn’t be realized anywhere else in the Western hemisphere.

Now, if they just start to prove the oil and the economic viability of the resource as they believe, IFR should be off to the races as the company looks to notch the next major success in their already impressive accomplishments.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be considered as personalized financial advice. We are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular financial situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decision. This is a paid advertisement and is neither an offer nor recommendation to buy or sell any security. We hold no investment licenses and are thus neither licensed nor qualified to provide investment advice. The content in this article is not provided to any individual with a view toward their individual circumstances. Baystreet.ca has been paid a fee of four thousand dollars for International Frontier Resources Corp. advertising. This compensation constitutes a conflict of interest as to our ability to remain objective in our communication regarding the profiled company. Because of this conflict, individuals are strongly encouraged to not use this article as the basis for any investment decision. While all information is believed to be reliable, it is not guaranteed by us to be accurate. Individuals should assume that all information contained in this article is not trustworthy unless verified by their own independent research. Also, because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected, there will likely be differences between any predictions and actual results. Always consult a licensed investment professional before making any investment decision. Be extremely careful, investing in securities carries a high degree of risk; you may likely lose some or all of the investment.

 

Baystreet Staff / May 22

 

NAFTA Sticking Points: 9 Issues Standing In The Way Of A Deal

Huffington Post / Alexander Panetta / May 22

 

From cars to milk to pharmaceuticals, there’s plenty left to resolve.

WASHINGTON — The NAFTA negotiations could continue for a while, with U.S. trade czar Robert Lighthizer signalling he wants significant changes in multiple areas and isn’t interested in a quick, limited deal.

Here are some key flashpoints involving Canada:

—Autos: This is the sticking point countries have spent the most effort trying to solve. The U.S. wants to stem the loss of manufacturing jobs to Mexico. Canada broadly shares that goal. However, the issue has prompted some concern, and not only from Mexico. While the U.S. has significantly softened its earlier demands, it still wants 40 per cent of every car built in a high-wage jurisdiction; 75 per cent of all parts to be North American; and 70 per cent of steel to be North American.

Critics of the plan say it could backfire: if auto-makers decide they don’t want to deal with all this red tape, they can just ignore NAFTA and simply pay the 2.5 per cent U.S. tariff on cars. Critics say that won’t create jobs — just more expensive cars, and less economic activity.

—Pharmaceuticals: It’s the stated goal of U.S. trade policy to make other countries pay more for drugs, so that foreigners shoulder more of the burden of research and development costs. The U.S. has a particular gripe with Canada: it’s reduced Canada’s ranking in an annual report card on intellectual property, partly over policy changes at Canada’s Patented Medicine Prices Review Board.

The U.S. wants more transparency in how drug prices are set in Canada. Its industry is also pushing for greater ability to appeal pricing decisions. Such objectives place it in direct conflict with the Trudeau government, which wants to create a national pharmacare plan and intends to argue that its policy is consistent with that of President Donald Trump, who campaigned on controlling drug prices.

—Dairy: The U.S. has two problems with Canadian dairy policy. First, Canada limits imports and sets fixed prices under a supply-management system, and does the same for poultry and eggs. Second, Canadian producers who are protected from competition are at the same time selling surplus ingredients onto the world market for cheese-making, contributing to a global glut.

The U.S. has demanded an end to these surplus sales, and also an end to supply management within 10 years. Canada’s counterpoint is that the U.S. engages in its own protections, supporting farmers during boom-bust cycles; it argues that Canada’s system at least has the benefit of being stable, and not requiring periodic bailouts. If past history is any guide, a middle-ground compromise might be possible: in agreements with Europe and the TPP countries, Canada opened up its dairy market by several percentage points.

—Dispute settlement: NAFTA is enforced by three main systems for settling disputes: Chapter 11 lets companies sue governments for unfair treatment, Chapter 19 lets industries fight punitive duties, and Chapter 20 lets countries sue countries.

The U.S. wants to weaken two of the three, and entirely end Chapter 19. It’s a historically emotional issue for Canada, as Chapter 19 was the original make-or-break condition for free trade with the U.S.; it’s also been used to fight softwood lumber duties. However, some observers question the relevance of Chapter 19 today, as other forums exist for fighting duties.

Take the spat against Bombardier, in which duties were overturned in the U.S. court system. As for Chapter 11, Canada has less of a historical attachment, although it’s extremely popular with those business allies in the U.S. fighting to preserve NAFTA.

The Trump administration’s trade czar dislikes all these systems — Lighthizer sees them not only as a violation of national sovereignty: he argues that Chapter 11 helps companies do the dirty deed of outsourcing jobs. He argues that if companies want to shift plants elsewhere, the U.S. government should not be in the business of protecting their legal rights in, for instance, Mexico.

—De minimis: Americans are allowed to spend $800 online before they pay duties on a foreign purchase; Canadians can spend $20. It’s one of the lowest rates in the world. Lighthizer says it might not be necessary to match the U.S. amount, but he says that 40-fold difference is unreasonable. Retailers argue that shifting the de minimis level would fuel a commercial real-estate crisis, and disproportionately benefit American tech companies which enjoy economies of scale.

—Intellectual property: The U.S. complains about Canada’s border controls on counterfeit goods. It says it’s concerned that Canada doesn’t provide customs officials with the ability to inspect, seize, and destroy pirated goods moving through Canada to the United States. It complains that there were no known criminal prosecutions for counterfeiting in Canada in 2017, calling Canada an outlier among developed countries. It also bemoans what it calls excessive use of education-related exceptions to copyright laws, which it says have damaged the market for educational publishers and authors.

—Procurement: Canada’s aim is to increase companies’ access to public-works contracts abroad, expanding that access from federal contracts to state/provincial and local ones. Currently, subnational procurement rights are negotiated on a case-by-case basis. The U.S. has the opposite goal: It wants to limit the access Canadian and Mexican companies already enjoy at the federal level, restricted to whatever amount of contracts American companies win in the other countries.

—Sunset clause: One of the most controversial ideas of this negotiation. The U.S. has pushed for a clause in the deal that would cancel NAFTA after five years, unless every country agrees to keep it. Critics say this is a recipe for permanent uncertainty. They ask how a car company, for instance, is supposed to invest in all the assembly-line changes demanded in this deal, when the whole deal could be over in five years. They also point out that NAFTA already has a termination clause, which countries can invoke if they’re unhappy.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau ridiculed the sunset idea in a public event in New York. He used a real-estate metaphor and made clear he was addressing President Donald Trump: What developer would build a skyscraper on a piece of land, Trudeau asked, if access to that land was only guaranteed for five years?

—Professional visas: Canada wants to modernize the list of professions eligible for a NAFTA work visa under Chapter 16. The current list of jobs eligible for these visas is decades old, and features almost nothing for the tech industry. Companies complain this makes it hard to send their own employees to branches across the border. The U.S. has put up some resistance, as any expansion of work-related migration risks being wrapped into the heated U.S. immigration debate.

 

Huffington Post / Alexander Panetta / May 22

 

 

Proveedores y prestadores de servicios para las operaciones de Exploración y Extracción de hidrocarburos en el mar

En un sector tan complejo como el de los Hidrocarburos, las empresas no pueden ser autosuficientes, por lo que requieren que terceros les provean de bienes y servicios que les permitan llevar a cabo sus actividades.

La exactitud, prontitud y calidad con la que proveedores y contratistas presten sus servicios son factores indispensables para el adecuado funcionamiento de una organización.

En el caso específico de las empresas que realizan actividades en el Sector Hidrocarburos, al desempeñarse en un ámbito de alto riesgo requieren la certeza de que sus proveedores y prestadores de servicios desempeñarán sus tareas con los más altos estándares de seguridad, para evitar la ocurrencia de accidentes, que pongan en peligro la vida y/o integridad de personas, daños a bienes o al medio ambiente.

Por eso, de acuerdo con las Disposiciones Administrativas de carácter general que establecen las reglas para el requerimiento mínimo de seguros a los Regulados que lleven a cabo obras o actividades de exploración y extracción de hidrocarburos, tratamiento y refinación de petróleo y procesamiento de gas natural (DACGS), emitidas el 23 de junio de 2016, las empresas del Sector Hidrocarburos que realicen las actividades antes mencionadas, deben requerir a sus contratistas, subcontratistas, proveedores o prestadores de servicio que cuenten con pólizas de seguro con las coberturas y montos necesarios y suficientes para amparar la responsabilidad por los daños que pudieran generar con motivo de las obras, servicios y/o actividades que realicen.

En este sentido, es responsabilidad de las empresas titulares de las licencias para operar, asegurarse que sus proveedores y contratistas podrán responder por los daños que llegaran a causar en el desarrollo de sus operaciones, además de que deberán contar con las coberturas de control de pozos, responsabilidad civil y responsabilidad ambiental, de acuerdo con la regulación aplicable.

En el caso de los montos, por ejemplo, una empresa que lleve a cabo la exploración y extracción de hidrocarburos que requiera de lanchas rápidas y embarcaciones menores de servicio y para ello contrate los servicios de otra empresa que se dedique al transporte marítimo, deberá solicitarle sus pólizas de seguro de protección e indemnización (P&I) por un monto no menor a USD 5´000,000 (cinco millones de dólares de los Estados Unidos de América), de conformidad con  el artículo 29, fracción II de las DACGS. En caso de que las embarcaciones que sean utilizadas no estén listadas en el artículo antes mencionado, la fracción V del mismo dispone que la póliza de seguro sea por un monto no menor a USD  100,000,000.00 (cien millones de dólares de los Estados Unidos de América).

En NRGI Broker somos expertos en seguros de protección e indemnización y en regulación en materia de seguridad industrial y protección ambiental. Acércate a nosotros, con gusto te atenderemos.

 

NAFTA countries set to blow through Paul Ryan’s May 17 deadline without a deal

Bloomberg.com / Financial Post / May 14

 

The three countries’ ministers working on the deal aren’t scheduled to meet this week, sources say, though lower-level talks continue and may yield a breakthrough

NAFTA negotiators from the U.S., Canada and Mexico are poised to miss the deadline this week cited by House Speaker Paul Ryan, the latest blown marker for reworking the 24-year-old deal.

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo and Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland aren’t scheduled to meet together in person this week, according to three government officials familiar with talks who spoke on condition of anonymity. The trio met at least bilaterally every day last week.

The Trump administration is increasingly preoccupied with its efforts to reach a peace deal with North Korea and avoid a trade war with China. Senior economic adviser Liu He will be in Washington this week for talks with the administration on ways to resolve the trade dispute between the two countries.

Lower-level NAFTA talks will continue and could yield a breakthrough and a ministerial meeting, but none has been scheduled so far, according to the people. The three officials said the ministers could meet next week, or later in the month. Chief negotiators are scheduled to hold a conference call early this week to assess the status of the talks and whether a ministerial meeting is feasible later this week, one of the people said.

While the ministers will keep in touch by phone, the lack of a face-to-face meeting after such a big push last week would show how far apart the sides remain on updating the North American Free Trade Agreement. Ryan injected a sense of urgency when he said lawmakers need notice of intent to sign a deal by May 17 so they can vote before this Congress ends in December.

The Canadian dollar pared its gain in Monday trading, while Mexico’s peso extended its losses, falling 0.7 per cent to 19.5585 per dollar at 1:45 p.m. in New York.

WORK CONTINUES

Although Ryan’s comments put the firmest deadline yet on NAFTA talks, many analysts have said U.S. deadlines are murky, and that a deal reached later in May or even in June could theoretically get passed. A spokeswoman for Ryan, AshLee Strong, said the May 17 target is due to timelines set out in U.S. trade law, not an arbitrary political date. “This is not a statutory deadline, but a timeline and calendar deadline,” Strong said by email Friday.

Whether Lighthizer could seek to notify Ryan by Thursday of his intent to sign, without an actual deal in place, is somewhat unclear. Lighthizer cited the House speaker’s deadline to pressure his Canadian and Mexican counterparts during a trilateral meeting Friday, according to two people familiar with the talks. President Donald Trump’s trade chief has indicated he needs a deal this month but hasn’t publicly identified a particular day.

Emily Davis, a spokeswoman for Lighthizer, referred to a written statement he released Friday when asked for comment Monday. In it, Lighthizer said talks have “covered a large number of very complex issues” and the U.S. “is ready to continue working with Mexico and Canada to achieve needed breakthroughs on these objectives.” The statement made no mention of any deadline.

‘TOO STUBBORN’

Former Mexican President Vicente Fox said Mexico will only sign on to a good NAFTA deal, otherwise it could withdraw and pivot to expanded trade with countries such as China, Argentina and Brazil.

“Mexico is not weak on this negotiation. We have leverage, and this should be understood on the U.S. side — which, by the way, everybody understands how this can be solved except Señor Trump,” Fox said Monday in an interview with Bloomberg Television. “He’s too stubborn. He just wants to win, he wants all the marbles for himself and nothing for the rest.”

Freeland is in Mexico City Monday for talks on Venezuela and hasn’t said if she will meet Guajardo privately there. In a sign of the dimming odds for an imminent deal, Guajardo and his team told dozens of stakeholders from Mexico’s private sector they should return home from Washington because no breakthrough was expected, according to two people familiar with the meeting. Stakeholders from all three countries are cancelling or delaying visits to Washington this week, four other people familiar with the talks said.

The existing NAFTA remains on the books unless a country withdraws, which would require six months notice. No country has given that notice, though Trump has threatened to do so. On Friday, the president called NAFTA a “horrible disaster” for the U.S.

Lighthizer has said the political calculus for passing a new NAFTA would change if it had to be voted on by the next Congress. Mexico and Canada have downplayed the urgency to reach a deal this week.

The countries have been holding periodic discussions since August. They had initially sought a deal by December, and then by March, and are now in what they consider a continuous round of negotiations. Talks have focused recently on the auto sector, with Canada hailing progress but with big gaps still remaining. Even if the sides agree on auto rules, they remain far apart on issues such as a sunset clause and dispute-settlement panels.

Ryan is pushing for a deal because of timelines in U.S. trade law, but another deadline looms. Mexico’s election will be held July 1 and looks set to usher in a new president who could seek changes to anything not yet finalized.

 

Bloomberg.com / Financial Post / May 14