The Lemon Fool

Dividends on B Shares will be paid, by default, in pounds sterling at the rate of 12.26p per B Share. Holders of B Shares who have validly submitted US dollars or euros currency elections by May 28, 2021 will be entitled to a dividend of US$0.1735 or €0.1426 per B Share, respectively.

This dividend will be payable on June 21, 2021 to those members whose names were on the Register of Members on May 14, 2021.

https://www.investegate.co.uk/royal-dut ... 0000H9322/

Shell are a mainstay in my HYP, despite the dividend cut last year.

Ian.

Thanks for posting this.

So now RDSB dividends have levelled out after 4 successive cuts, it seems like we can expect roughly 50p per share annually rather than the pre-pandemic 140p per share. That is a very large cut, and with the focus now on climate change and retiring fossil fuels, Shell will need to adapt its business model.

I am pessimistic on the oil companies. History tells us that when things fundamentally change, its is new entrants to the market that win out over old established companies that are often too large and too slow to adapt.

I will continue to hold, but I doubt I will top up again.

FD

funduffer wrote:
I will continue to hold, but I doubt I will top up again.

Shell has now become a low yielding dog share which has now lost me both capital and income!

funduffer wrote:Thanks for posting this.

So now RDSB dividends have levelled out after 4 successive cuts, it seems like we can expect roughly 50p per share annually rather than the pre-pandemic 140p per share. That is a very large cut, and with the focus now on climate change and retiring fossil fuels, Shell will need to adapt its business model.

I am pessimistic on the oil companies. History tells us that when things fundamentally change, its is new entrants to the market that win out over old established companies that are often too large and too slow to adapt.

I will continue to hold, but I doubt I will top up again.

FD

You’re welcome. I’ve mentioned here a number of times that I topped up my RDSB holdings four times last year, ditto with BP. Like you, I’m happy to hold onto my shares, and am unlikely to top up either any time soon.

Ian.

With a dividend of 50p the yield is about 3.8% at the moment. However I'm expecting very strong cash flow over the next 10 years so my hope is that they will do something productive with the cash or return it slowly.

moorfield wrote:

funduffer wrote:I will continue to hold, but I doubt I will top up again.

Shell has now become a low yielding dog share which has now lost me both capital and income!

Likewise.
I shall continue to hold because I am so far underwater and Shell along with BP is, or was, one of my largest holdings.

With any luck there will be a spike in the oil price, given the supply crunch that's coming next year, which will feed though into the SP, and then one will perhaps have an opportunity to get out.
Musings which are not very HYP, but then there is no such thing as a forever share.

As to the new emergents, there are so many... and often depending on the whim of govt subsidies, or loaded up with debt as they try to grow. Tesla, that one-share bubble, will be trounced by Ford and GM and VW and....
The good ole HYP criterion of five years' rising divis, and with decent cover I may say, would seem worth deploying here to avoid getting carried away with the novelty of the new.
I feel more inclined to retreat to ITs and let the managers try and pick 'green' winners.

As to Shell, I hope they reinvent themselves, they have forecourts for EV charging which will be some help, and oil will still be needed as feedstock and fuel into the foreseeable future so that underpins their earnings to a degree. In terms of new tech, which ones to invest in and how much to pay, Shell have the same problems of picking winners that I do, but on a rather larger scale

V8

88V8 wrote:Likewise.
I shall continue to hold because I am so far underwater and Shell along with BP is, or was, one of my largest holdings.

With any luck there will be a spike in the oil price, given the supply crunch that's coming next year, which will feed though into the SP, and then one will perhaps have an opportunity to get out.
Musings which are not very HYP, but then there is no such thing as a forever share.

As to the new emergents, there are so many... and often depending on the whim of govt subsidies, or loaded up with debt as they try to grow. Tesla, that one-share bubble, will be trounced by Ford and GM and VW and....
The good ole HYP criterion of five years' rising divis, and with decent cover I may say, would seem worth deploying here to avoid getting carried away with the novelty of the new.
I feel more inclined to retreat to ITs and let the managers try and pick 'green' winners.

Well I suppose strictly it is still a HYP share (yield > FTSE100) ! Yes I'll continue to hold but very unlikely I'll be topping up for a long long time.

funduffer wrote:Thanks for posting this.

So now RDSB dividends have levelled out after 4 successive cuts, it seems like we can expect roughly 50p per share annually rather than the pre-pandemic 140p per share. That is a very large cut, and with the focus now on climate change and retiring fossil fuels, Shell will need to adapt its business model.

I am pessimistic on the oil companies. History tells us that when things fundamentally change, its is new entrants to the market that win out over old established companies that are often too large and too slow to adapt.

I will continue to hold, but I doubt I will top up again.

FD

I accept the sentiments expressed but Shell have not made '4 successive cuts' as far as I can see. The quarterly dividend was cut from 47 cents to 16 cents in June 2020, was increased to 16.65 cents for December 2020 and March 2021 and has now been increased to 17.35 cents for the payment due this month. If the exchange rate is against us in sterling terms, Shell did not do any cutting.

Dod

88V8 wrote:... but then there is no such thing as a forever share.

Probably strictly true - it seems likely that any company will eventually go out of business or be taken over. But 'eventually' could be a very long time - and for practical purposes, I regard any share that turns out to outlast me as a 'forever share'!

Which doesn't mean that I will necessarily hold my HYP shares until they go out of business, get taken over, or I die - I'm not a non-tinkering HYPer and do occasionally sell voluntarily. But that's a property of me, the shareholder, not of the shares I choose to sell, and so talking about whether those shares are 'forever shares' is ascribing the blame or credit incorrectly...

Gengulphus

Dod101 wrote:
I accept the sentiments expressed but Shell have not made '4 successive cuts' as far as I can see. The quarterly dividend was cut from 47 cents to 16 cents in June 2020, was increased to 16.65 cents for December 2020 and March 2021 and has now been increased to 17.35 cents for the payment due this month. If the exchange rate is against us in sterling terms, Shell did not do any cutting.

Dod

Yes but I was comparing each dividend with the equivalent one in the previous year.

In my mind 140p down to 50p was achieved in 4 quarterly cuts.

ReallyVeryFoolish wrote:Be under no illusion, the mostly western green lobby are handing the future hydrocarbon industry (and there will be one for several decades to come) over to the national oil companies on a plate. Whilst simultaneously doing their level best to destroy the companies in the west who are already committed by and large to a responsible energy supply future. The national oil companies (Russia, KSA, Libya, Brazil, Iraq, Nigeria etc....) have no such interest.

Great. Which ones are paying dividends ?

I agree that the gravy train has paused for breath as far as RDSB is concerned, but I am not sure that writing off oil as a HYP share is quite the thing to do just yet.

I have seen posters here for quite a number of years looking to smaller oil shares as a source of income. One of the largest of these small fish, run by a gentleman from the Middle East has turned out to be much more of a disappointment than Shell. If you are going to hold oil shares for income, I would suggest that BP and Shell are probably among the better ones. I have held Shell for quite a long time and they have performed well for me. It depends to some extent on when you buy a share, but I have no real complaint about the long term HYP performance of RDSB, and I hope the share price and yield will recover over the next 20 years, which remains my horizon even though I will probably not live that long. I do see strong cash flows coming back as the green revolution turns out to be much slower than everyone is hoping, and with the world economy recovering next year.

LTBH is the only way to decide if a share has met the income requirement. The last year is just a snapshot in the longer term view. Hopefully we can have a more positive discussion of this share 10 years from now.

Just my thoughts.

Miner

miner1000 wrote:I agree that the gravy train has paused for breath as far as RDSB is concerned, but I am not sure that writing off oil as a HYP share is quite the thing to do just yet.

I have seen posters here for quite a number of years looking to smaller oil shares as a source of income. One of the largest of these small fish, run by a gentleman from the Middle East has turned out to be much more of a disappointment than Shell. If you are going to hold oil shares for income, I would suggest that BP and Shell are probably among the better ones. I have held Shell for quite a long time and they have performed well for me. It depends to some extent on when you buy a share, but I have no real complaint about the long term HYP performance of RDSB, and I hope the share price and yield will recover over the next 20 years, which remains my horizon even though I will probably not live that long. I do see strong cash flows coming back as the green revolution turns out to be much slower than everyone is hoping, and with the world economy recovering next year.

LTBH is the only way to decide if a share has met the income requirement. The last year is just a snapshot in the longer term view. Hopefully we can have a more positive discussion of this share 10 years from now.

Just my thoughts.

Miner

Well said Miner, have a rec/thank you. Your views regarding BP. and Shell RDSB are very much in line with my own. It was because of my view on these two that I was happy to top up both four times last year. However, none of us can tell the future of any share, so my topping them up might turn out to be mistakes. Only time will tell. I've no intention of selling my oilies, and am happy to just let them be in my HYP, and look to the long term.

Ian.

miner1000 wrote: Hopefully we can have a more positive discussion of this share 10 years from now.

However RDSB may well not be a new HYP selection for the next 10 years unless its divi growth outruns its sp growth, so that discussion could be limited to a diminishing number of LFs here ?

While my overall portfolio income remains on target RDSB will stay and likely become a smaller holding. As soon as overall income begins to lag, it could become a candidate for disposal.

Shell is certainly a disappointment and shows the folly of the 'forever' share concept. The yield is now only around 3.5%. That is the sort of yield one would hope to get with a steady growth share and I am not sure that many of us would call Shell that at the moment. It does though indicate that the share price has held up quite well, otherwise we would have the sort of yield that the tobaccos have. It probably has the resources and vision to reinvent itself; that seems to be what the market thinks anyway. I can see nothing to tempt me to add to it though, especially with the Dutch hammering it in Court about its green credentials. And it is not that long ago that it embarked on an enormous share buyback exercise.

Thank goodness that Unilever did not succumb to the Dutch two or three years ago.

Dod

moorfield wrote:However RDSB may well not be a new HYP selection for the next 10 years unless its divi growth outruns its sp growth, so that discussion could be limited to a diminishing number of LFs here ?

Possibly, but (a) do you consider that a problem? (b) if so, why?

Gengulphus

Gengulphus wrote:

moorfield wrote:However RDSB may well not be a new HYP selection for the next 10 years unless its divi growth outruns its sp growth, so that discussion could be limited to a diminishing number of LFs here ?

Possibly, but (a) do you consider that a problem? (b) if so, why?

(a) No.

Dod101 wrote:Shell is certainly a disappointment and shows the folly of the 'forever' share concept. The yield is now only around 3.5%. That is the sort of yield one would hope to get with a steady growth share and I am not sure that many of us would call Shell that at the moment. It does though indicate that the share price has held up quite well, otherwise we would have the sort of yield that the tobaccos have. It probably has the resources and vision to reinvent itself; that seems to be what the market thinks anyway. I can see nothing to tempt me to add to it though, especially with the Dutch hammering it in Court about its green credentials. And it is not that long ago that it embarked on an enormous share buyback exercise.

Thank goodness that Unilever did not succumb to the Dutch two or three years ago.

Dod

I think the hope is - indeed the probability is - that Shell is a company which we need as part of the solution rather than being part of the problem. It has huge muscle and technical knowhow which will be brought to bare in solving future energy problems.

Of course, nothing is guaranteed and it might drop from life overnight like the Pony Express. It is quite possible that entirely new companies will be the first to exploit thoroughly new technologies - in today's market it's amazing how new mega-companies arise on a wing and a prayer and then become "worth" more than established companies like Shell.
Was it Klarna mentioned the other day which will be as big as established banks like Barclays when it is quoted on the stock exchange? A youngster suddenly bigger than a household name.

Arb.