Showing posts with label liability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liability. Show all posts

Monday, October 15, 2012

Chevron Facing Wall Street Criticism Over $19 Billion Ecuador Liability


Wall Street analysts rarely take controversial positions on publicly traded companies whose stock is doing well. But Chevron’s mishandling of its $19 billion liability in Ecuador for dumping toxins into the Amazon is beginning to look like the exception, at least to the analysts at Seeking Alpha and a commentator at the influential proxy advisor Glass Lewis.

One thing is indisputable: cracks are beginning to appear in Chevron’s determined effort to keep Wall Street in line with the idea that the Ecuador judgment represents no short-term threat to the company’s financial position.  One analyst even predicted the lawsuit eventually could lop as much as 20% off the company’s share price. Even worse, the U.S. Supreme Court just dinged Chevron’s final attempt to block enforcement around the world.

Some of these analysts are beginning to get that the judgment in Ecuador – from the very court where Chevron wanted the issues resolved– is based on overwhelming scientific evidence that proves Chevron committed what is probably the largest oil-related environmental disaster in world history. See here and here.

The fact that the plaintiffs now have launched seizure lawsuits targeting billions of dollars of Chevron assets in Brazil and Canada certainly takes the idea of litigation risk for Chevron to new and unchartered territory, leading one analyst to advise shareholders to dump the stock for now. Further, numerous U.S. courts, including the Supreme Court, recently denied Chevron’s increasingly desperate attempts to derail the litigation while several institutional shareholders and a U.S. Congresswoman have asked the SEC to investigate the company for lying about its Ecuador risk.

Consider the various analyses from Seeking Alpha, an award-winning website for stock research that has more than 800,000 followers.  Kiplinger’s recently named Seeking Alpha the Most Informative Website; it also received a “Best of the Web” award from Forbes.

Seeking Alpha recently dismissed Chevron’s fake fraud narrative and wrote in reference to the pending seizure action in Canada:
“Canada has a reputation for fair legal proceedings. This will make it incredibly difficult for Chevron to continue claiming that the lawsuit is based on fraud. I think it is highly unlikely, furthermore, that fraud is the reason for the charges against the company. In fact, I think that these recent developments may be the start of a downward trend for the company that it will struggle to recover from.” 
Another Seeking Alpha analyst, David White, said just this week that Chevron shareholders should sell. In a blog, entitled Chevron Can't Seem To Turn The Bad News Faucet Off, White devoted his entire analysis to all of Chevron’s many legal problems in Ecuador, Brazil and the company’s own home state, California.  Federal and state criminal prosecutions and hefty fines are a possibility due to safety problems at a refinery in Richmond, a small city just across the Bay from San Francisco. White wrote:

“…with all of these unexpected costs that CVX is facing, I think it is time to unload this historically strong, steady dividend payer….If you own CVX, it is time to sell it.”

Another Seeking Alpha analyst wrote that Chevron is “losing support from all corners” in its bid to evade the Ecuador judgment.  He also highlighted the growing number of courtroom setbacks suffered by Chevron’s legal team at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, which was brought in two years ago to “rescue” the oil giant from its impending liability.

The analyst also reported concerns about the lawsuit from both shareholders and Members of Congress, writing that many of Chevron’s institutional investors have “made it clear … that a settlement is the preferred course of action, as it appears increasingly unlikely that Chevron will be able to avoid paying out a significant portion of its available cash over this lawsuit.”

“Although I believe it is in Chevron's best interests to settle the suit, this may represent a huge hit for the company, which I think could force its price per share as low as $80, a level not seen since 2010,” the analyst concluded.

Another Seeking Alpha analyst wrote that the $19 billion liability in Ecuador and a separate $20 billion potential liability in Brazil resulting from an oil spill there in 2011 is “cast(ing) a long shadow” on Chevron’s stock, which “could tumble” as a result.

He wrote:
“Chevron is continuing to build its cash balance, which now stands at $21.1 billion compared to $15.8 billion at the close of 2011. I think that fears over suits brought against it in Brazil and Ecuador, despite a Chevron show of bravado in casting these litigations as fraud, are contributing to Chevron's rapid accumulation of cash.” 

Noting that other oil majors give dividend increases, buy something and/or pay down debt when they have that much cash, the analyst projected that “it’s unlikely that its cash balance will be substantially drawn down until both of these super-suits are settled or dismissed, which could be a matter of years.” That was written in early September.  Chevron has yet to do anything with its huge surplus.

The analyst wrote that the liabilities in Ecuador and Brazil together “could wipe out Chevron's healthy cash balance as well as a significant portion of its equity. This in turn would lower Chevron's outlook across the board. Chevron is a comfortable hold, but a risky buy in the current environment.”

Glass Lewis, a leading proxy advisory firm, just this week urged shareholders to “remain vigilant” in holding Chevron accountable relative to its disclosure obligations. Courteney Keatinge, an analyst at Glass Lewis, wrote:
“As these legal battles consume considerable company resources and leave the company exposed to significant risk, shareholders should continue to remain vigilant in ensuring that Chevron is managing and disclosing these issues properly and sufficiently.” 
Another analyst, Fadel Gheit at Oppenheimer & Co., following a meeting with Chevron's CEO John Watson in 2011, wrote that "a $2-3B settlement [in the Ecuador lawsuit]... could remove uncertainty and reflect positively on the stock.”  Later, in May of this year, after the Ecuador trial judgment was upheld on appeal, Gheit doubled-down on his belief that "a reasonable settlement with the plaintiffs impacted by the oil contamination in Ecuador...could boost the stock.”

Gheit is generally pro-Chevron and he has written about the case in ways that suggest he does not fully understand how the legal process works. His recognition that Chevron now faces real liability is yet another example of the how company is beginning to lose some of its allies on Wall Street.


Become a follower of The Chevron Pit.
Also follow us on Twitter at @ChevronPit and like us on Facebook.
Visit and watch a video on ChevronToxico.com to find out more.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

New Shareholder Report Warns Chevron Investors of Risks Surrounding $18 Billion Ecuador Environmental Liability

Financial Analyst Raises Questions Over Chevron Management of Litigation & Misleading Disclosures to Shareholders

Raising the eyebrows of Chevron shareholders is a new report on the financial and operational risks to the company over its $18b legal liability for illegal dumping of toxic waste in the Ecuadorian Amazon rainforest. It warns investors about “misleading” disclosures made by Chevron’s management about the “significant risk” the liability poses to the company’s business and value.

Noted shareholder risk analyst Simon Billenness and shareholder-rights attorney Sanford Lewis authored the independent report, entitled “An Analysis of the Financial and Operational Risks to Chevron Corporation from Aguinda v. ChevronTexaco.” It was released as Chevron prepares for a May 25th annual meeting where shareholders are expected to voice their concern about Chevron’s handling of the lawsuit.

Billenness and Lewis write:
“While Chevron has admitted in sworn legal statements that the company is at risk of ‘irreparable injury to [its] business reputation and business relationships’ from potential enforcement of the Ecuadorian court’s judgment, the company has failed to characterize these risks to the company in its public filings and statements to shareholders.”

For example, the report describes Chevron’s assertion in its 10-K SEC filings that Ecuador’s courts “lack jurisdiction over Chevron” as “misleading” based on the company’s failure to disclose that the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Chevron “assured the district court that it would recognize the binding nature of any judgment issued in Ecuador…As a result, that promise, along with Texaco’s more general promises to submit to Ecuadorian jurisdiction, is enforceable against Chevron in this action and any future proceedings between the parties.”

Nell Minow, a leading expert on corporate governance and investing, reviewed the report and found it “hard to dispute … that the company’s admissions about its liability risks in court documents are inconsistent with its financial reports and that its legal and public relations strategy poses an unacceptably high risk.” See her article here.

Meanwhile, Robert Kropp, a financial writer for Socialfunds.com, reported that “Trillium and its co-filers are preparing an Investor Statement, in which the company's failure to negotiate a settlement in the lawsuit raises questions about its ability to manage risks associated with environmental and human rights issues. Echoing the findings of Billenness and Lewis, it calls on the company to provide full disclosure of the risks associated with enforcement of the judgment in Ecuador.” Read his article here

Billenness and Lewis also criticize the Chevron board of directors for their failure to fulfill their duties to oversee management and respond to shareholder concerns regarding the Ecuador liability. According to the report, the board has been “unresponsive” to approaches by shareholders to discuss concerns regarding managements and quantification of the Ecuador litigation’s risk and liabilities.
“These choices may lead some investors to question the adequacy of the company’s public statements and disclosures and whether the board and management are fulfilling their fiduciary duties to properly manage this significant risk to the company’s business and value,” the report concludes.

See these stories for more information here and here.

The 2011 report is simply the latest in a long series of concerns expressed by shareholders over the company’s management of its environmental liabilities in Ecuador. As early as 2003, shareholders filed the first in a series of shareholder resolutions on the issue, culminating in a 2010 shareholder resolution asking Chevron to nominate an independent board member with a “high level of environmental experience” to oversee the company’s environmental actions, including the Ecuador liability.

Despite efforts by Chevron’s management to defeat the 2010 resolution and to downplay the environmental liability in Ecuador, the resolution garnered the support of more than 25% of the outstanding Chevron shares, equal to approximately $38 billion in shareholder value. Typically, any shareholder resolution opposed by management that gains more than 10% of shareholder support is considered a success.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Fox News: Chevron Shares Held Down by $27b Ecuador Environmental Liability

Chevron has been desperate to downplay its potential $27 billion environmental liability in Ecuador. It employs dozens of lobbyists and lawyers to distract attention from the fundamental fact the company's financial picture is materially and adversely affected by the Ecuador liability. It spends millions on a widespread legal and public relations assault against the affected indigenous communities, directed by the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. But it appears that the markets aren't buying what Chevron and its law firm are selling. According to this article that appeared on Fox Business, Chevron's shares have been shedding value due in part to the massive liability the company faces in Ecuador. The Gibson Dunn lawyers clearly need to step up their game if they hope to continue billing massive amounts of money in an increasingly futile effort to get their client off the hook for its human rights violations in the Amazon. Read on:


Chevron Down as It Continues to Fight $27B Environmental Lawsuit in Ecuador

By Jennifer Booton

Published August 24, 2010

FOXBusiness

Despite tripling its second quarter profit last month, Chevron (CVX: 73.74 ,-1.32 ,-1.76%) has since fallen nearly 2.46%, as it remains under the grip of a $27.3 billion lawsuit, the largest environmental damages lawsuit ever tried.

The company reported quarterly earnings last month of $2.70 a share on sales of $48.9 billion, beating estimates by 24 cents, though missing revenue expectations by $9.7 billion.

The strong results catapulted Chevron's stock to a 10-day winning streak, peaking on Aug. 10 at $79.32.

But the oil company has lost much of its gains over the past few weeks as it continues to fight a lawsuit in Ecuador that alleges Texaco, acquired by Chevron in 2001, wrecked portions of a jungle while drilling for oil in the 1970s and 1980s.

Chevron has fought the accusations, filing a petition earlier this month before the Provincial Court of Sucumbíos in Lago Agrio in Ecuador seeking dismissal.

The court's decision, expected in the months ahead, may be appealed to Ecuador's Supreme Court, and the energy giant has vowed to do so if it loses the case.

Chevron traded in the red Tuesday, down about 1.20% to $72.15 at 2:40 PM EST

Friday, May 14, 2010

Gulf Oil Disaster an Ominous Sign for Chevron

In what can only be interpreted as an ominous development for Chevron in its 17-year odyssey to escape liability for dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste in Ecuador's Amazon, The Economist reported this week that BP faces complete liability for the Deepwater Horizon disaster and that the event has already reduced the capitalization of the company by $30 billion, or roughly 16% of its market value.

Specifically, the magazine reported that:

The costs fall to BP because, as the majority shareholder in the consortium leasing the Deepwater Horizon (the junior partners are America's Anadarko and Japan's Mitsui) and the project's operator, it is liable under American law for the costs of cleaning up.

(Under U.S. law either being the majority shareholder OR being the operator is sufficient to make a company liable for the costs of cleaning up).

Why is this ominous for Chevron? Because one its main excuses to avoid a potential $27.3 billion liability in Ecuador is that it doesn't currently own the oil fields where it contaminated, even though it operated them alone for 25 years from 1965 to 1990.

Nice try, John Watson (Chevron CEO) and Hew Pate (Chevron General Counsel).

What Watson and Pate try to hide from the public markets is what the Economist recognizes: under the law, the operator of the oil fields is 100% responsible for any pollution caused under its watch, regardless of the overall ownership structure.

So as BP is responsible for the damage caused in the Deepwater Horizon disaster, it is setting a harrowing precedent for Chevron – one that must have the lawyers and executives in the company casting a wary eye at the company's toxic legacy in Ecuador. A damages assessment in the trial there (taking place in Ecuador at Chevron's request) places the cost of clean-up at roughly $27 billion, with a final decision expected later this year.

Chevron has refused to fully disclose this potential liability in its SEC filings. Stay tuned.