U.S. markets close in 2 hours 58 minutes

  • S&P 500

    3,936.99
    +2.16 (+0.05%)
     

  • Dow 30

    31,536.90
    +78.50 (+0.25%)
     

  • Nasdaq

    14,070.19
    -25.28 (-0.18%)
     

  • Russell 2000

    2,275.67
    -13.69 (-0.60%)
     

  • Crude Oil

    59.90
    +0.43 (+0.72%)
     

  • Gold

    1,795.80
    -27.40 (-1.50%)
     

  • Silver

    27.28
    -0.05 (-0.18%)
     

  • EUR/USD

    1.2112
    -0.0026 (-0.22%)
     

  • 10-Yr Bond

    1.2850
    +0.0850 (+7.08%)
     

  • GBP/USD

    1.3911
    +0.0009 (+0.07%)
     

  • USD/JPY

    105.8800
    +0.5490 (+0.52%)
     

  • BTC-USD

    48,411.36
    -45.55 (-0.09%)
     

  • CMC Crypto 200

    976.88
    -25.05 (-2.50%)
     

  • FTSE 100

    6,748.86
    -7.25 (-0.11%)
     

  • Nikkei 225

    30,467.75
    +383.60 (+1.28%)
     

IFF Plans Divestitures Following DuPont Deal

  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
Kiel Porter, Nabila Ahmed and Andrew Noël
·2 min read
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

(Bloomberg) -- International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. is pursuing two divestments after completing the purchase of DuPont de Nemours Inc.’s nutrition and biosciences unit, people with knowledge of the matter said.

The New York-based company is seeking a buyer for its microbial controls business, which could be valued at $1 billion to $1.5 billion, the people said. It’s also preparing to gauge interest in some food preparation assets that could fetch about $200 million to $300 million, the people said, asking not to be identified because the information is private.

IFF is working with Greenhill & Co. on the disposals, the people said. The company is considering divesting some other peripheral businesses later in the year, the people said.

Chief Executive Officer Andreas Fibig is starting to prune IFF’s portfolio, now one of the broadest in the ingredients industry following the company’s $26 billion deal with DuPont. Any deal would add to the $103 billion of mergers and acquisitions involving chemical businesses over the past 12 months, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

No final decisions have been made, and there’s no certainty the deliberations will lead to a transaction, the people said. Representatives for IFF and Greenhill declined to comment.

IFF’s microbial unit is a former Dow Inc. business that was transferred to DuPont during the merger of those two companies. The business makes industrial cleaning materials and hygiene chemicals as well as products used in paint formulations and the energy industry, according to its website.

Lonza Group AG saw strong demand when it sought a buyer for a similar specialty chemical business, which included a range of operations including disinfectants and sanitizers that have seen surging demand during the coronavirus pandemic. It attracted interest from buyout firms and industry rivals before agreeing to sell it this month for 4.2 billion Swiss francs ($4.7 billion), including debt, to Bain Capital and Cinven.

IFF’s food preparation business manufactures processed fruit and other preparations used in baked goods and dairy products. IFF agreed to sell some of the assets to Frutarom Industries Ltd. in 2004, then later regained them when it took over Frutarom in 2018.

For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com

Subscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.

©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

Latest Stories

  • Bitcoin Is Going to Crash. The Big Question Is When

    The blowout rally in Bitcoin (CCC:BTC-USD) continues. As I write this, the best-known and most-valuable cryptocurrency trades above $47,000, down modestly from an all-time high set on Thursday morning. Source: Shutterstock Bitcoin now has roughly tripled since November, and rallied more than 50% this year. And the optimism makes some sense. Notably, corporations are increasingly comfortable with adopting Bitcoin. BTC saw a big catalyst this week when Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) said it would buy $1.5 billion of the crypto. The electric vehicle giant follows earlier adopters like MicroStrategy (NASDAQ:MSTR) and payment companies Square (NYSE:SQ) and PayPal (NASDAQ:PYPL).InvestorPlace - Stock Market News, Stock Advice & Trading Tips The run over the last four months continues what has been an incredible rally. Bitcoin only launched in 2009. It cleared $1 (yes, one dollar) for the first time almost exactly a decade ago. Give or take, BTC has appreciated 4,700,000% in ten years. There have been few assets in the history of mankind to show that kind of appreciation. Simply put, Bitcoin has created millionaires. But the rally hasn’t been without volatility. In fact, volatility and crashes both have been a key part of the Bitcoin experience. Many of those crashes started in environments similar to this one: when all seemed well, and further upside appeared almost guaranteed. That history suggests another reversal is almost certain to occur. That doesn’t mean investors need to rush to sell their BTC immediately, but at the least they should be on their guard. The History of Bitcoin Crashes For skeptics (and I remain one of them), early 2021 looks an awful lot like late 2017. 9 Meme Stocks That Social Media Won't Shut Up About At that time, Bitcoin similarly was soaring. Bitcoin cleared $1,000 on New Year’s Day 2017. By December, it was over $18,000. $20,000 and beyond seemed guaranteed. Cryptos of all kinds were rallying. Initial coin offerings were all the rage. But as good as 2017 was, 2018 was nearly as bad. In U.S. dollars, Bitcoin had been halved by February. By the end of 2018, it was back below $4,000. As an article at the time noted, the 2018 decline was not the first huge drawdown the cryptocurrency had seen. Not even close. In 2012, BTC dropped 49% twice, with one of the declines a three-day, 57% punishment. Another three-day period the following year saw an incredible 83% plunge. On Nov. 19, 2013, BTC lost half its value. Later that month, it began a stretch of over a year in which it went from $1,163 to just $152.40. Even in 2017, a banner year, Bitcoin fell 30% or more five different times. And then there was the roughly 80% plunge that began toward the end of that year. Admittedly, of late the volatility has eased somewhat relative to early trading. Wider adoption and a larger investor base should continue that moderation going forward. Still, we’ve seen this before. Bitcoin can move north in a hurry, but it also can move, and has moved, south at roughly the same pace. Three Catalysts And there are a pair of catalysts that could trigger another decline in 2021. The first is simply the parabolic gains not just in BTC, but across asset classes. We’ve seen a number of stocks go crazy. That doesn’t just include miners like Riot Blockchain (NASDAQ:RIOT) and Marathon Patent (NASDAQ:MARA). It even goes beyond the so-called “Reddit stocks” like GameStop (NYSE:GME) and AMC Entertainment (NYSE:AMC). Commodities have taken off. Even in cryptos, DogeCoin, which started as a joke, now has a market capitalization of $9 billion. There are going to be crashes elsewhere, whether in cryptos, stocks, or commodities. And those crashes may well read across to Bitcoin. Surely there is cross-ownership between Bitcoin and other ‘hot’ assets. Those owners that see losses elsewhere are likely to de-risk by converting BTC to USD. There’s also the regulatory environment. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has repeatedly and publicly raised concerns about cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin. Certainly, Yellen can’t ban BTC trading and send its value to zero. But she can impact potentially bullish catalysts, like the long-awaited launch of an exchange-traded fund (which would need to be approved by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission). Finally, there’s the possibility that Bitcoin itself simply has run too far. It stands to reason that at least some of the incremental buyers since December are not diehard crypto adherents, who believe Bitcoin can disintermediate large financial institutions. They’re just joining in the fun. In modern trader parlance, there may be some “weak hands” that have jumped on board. They’re not necessarily the type to ride out volatility longer-term. The Case for Staying It bears repeating: these risks don’t mean an investor needs to rush to cash in their Bitcoin. In fact, for a couple of reasons, an investor can believe that both a) Bitcoin will crash again and b) Bitcoin still is worth owning right now. First, the crash may still be a long ways off — and more upside may follow. An analyst could have correctly predicted in early 2017 that BTC was going to crash within a year. A trader who listened to that advice still would have missed out on gains of at least 200%-plus. This rally doesn’t have to end immediately. Second, there’s a case that trying to time the crash (assuming it arrives) is a fool’s errand. Timing the stock market is a notoriously impossible strategy. Bitcoin’s history suggests it isn’t any different. Long-term bulls on Bitcoin (or any other cryptocurrency) can reasonably argue that immense volatility simply is a fact of life, at least for now. But if the long-term bull case plays out, the ability to ride out that immense volatility will pay off, even if there’s some short-term pain along the way. Neither is an unreasonable argument. But crypto holders need to at least understand that we’ve been here before. Short-term bursts of optimism like we’re seeing now almost always are followed by a reversal. I don’t believe this time will be any different, though it remains to be seen how steep that reversal is, and from what point it begins. On the date of publication, Vince Martin did not have (either directly or indirectly) any positions in the securities mentioned in this article. More From InvestorPlace Why Everyone Is Investing in 5G All WRONG Top Stock Picker Reveals His Next Potential Winner It doesn’t matter if you have $500 in savings or $5 million. Do this now. #1 Play to Profit from Biden's Presidency The post Bitcoin Is Going to Crash. The Big Question Is When appeared first on InvestorPlace.

  • The Single Biggest Threat To The Electric Vehicle Boom

    Toyota’s boss is predicting this could lead to the collapse of the auto industry. But one company may hold the solution...

  • QuantumScape Stock Down Ahead Of First Earnings Report After Rival's Battery Deal

    QuantumScape will report quarterly results for the first time since its trading debut, after BorgWarner announced it will buy EV battery maker Akasol.

  • GameStop Investors Who Bet Big—and Lost Big

    GameStop’s volatile ride is hitting the portfolios of individual investors who purchased the stock in a social-media-fueled frenzy.

  • Here’s what top economist Mohamed El-Erian fears will trigger a market mishap

    Not much is slowing down enthusiasm for most assets right now. Mohamed El-Erian, economic adviser to Allianz, says these things might trip up investors.

  • CVS Stock Falls On Earnings News, But Is It A Buy Right Now? Here's What Earnings, Charts Show As CVS Customers Don Masks

    What’s the prognosis for CVS stock? Here is what the fundamentals and technical analysis say about buying CVS stock now.

  • Court throws Biden’s green agenda on to horns of a dilemma

    US president Joe Biden has been handed a poison chalice. Barely a month into the job, he has to decide between saving a Georgia battery factory that promises to provide 2,600 jobs and clean power for 330,000 cars a year, or defending a foreign company to protect the principle that intellectual property rights are inviolable. It banned SKI from importing components to make EV batteries in the US using the contested technology for the next decade.

  • Citi Loses Bid to Recoup Massive Mistake in Surprise Ruling

    (Bloomberg) -- Citigroup Inc. unexpectedly lost a legal battle to recover half a billion dollars it sent Revlon Inc. lenders, after the embarrassing blunder forced it to answer to regulators and tighten its internal controls.U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman on Tuesday ruled that 10 asset managers for the lenders -- which include Brigade Capital Management, HPS Investment Partners and Symphony Asset Management -- don’t have to return $504 million that Citibank said it mistakenly transferred in August while trying to make an interest payment. He said they shouldn’t have been expected to know that the transfer, which totaled more than $900 million before some lenders returned their share, was an error.“To believe that Citibank, one of the most sophisticated financial institutions in the world, had made a mistake that had never happened before, to the tune of nearly $1 billion would have been borderline irrational,” wrote Furman, who presides in Manhattan.The decision is the latest blow to Citigroup, which is in the midst of a yearslong effort to update its underlying controls and technology after regulators slapped it with a $400 million fine for deficiencies in both areas last year. The New York-based company is also undergoing a leadership change, with incoming Chief Executive Officer Jane Fraser set to take the reins on March 1.Not Over Yet“We strongly disagree with this decision and intend to appeal,” Danielle Romero-Apsilos, a spokeswoman for Citigroup, said in a statement. “We believe we are entitled to the funds and will continue to pursue a complete recovery of them.”Robert Loigman of Quinn Emanuel, the law firm representing the investment firms, said they were “extremely pleased with Judge Furman’s detailed and thorough decision.”Citigroup briefly pared gains on the news, but its shares were up 0.9% at $64.18 at 12:33 p.m. in New York.Read More: Citigroup Execs Tried to ‘Lessen the Pain’ of $900 Million Error“The court was constrained by New York precedent favoring finality in business transactions,” Bloomberg Intelligence senior analyst Elliott Stein said. “Still, it likely isn’t the end of the road for this litigation.” In addition to appealing the ruling, the bank “may also seek to recoup the mistakenly transferred funds from Revlon, which may result in more litigation,” he said.The decision is a boon to the creditors, which have been locked in a battle with billionaire investor Ronald Perelman’s struggling cosmetics company over its May restructuring. They argued that the Aug. 11 payment -- one of the biggest banking errors in recent memory -- settled Revlon’s debt to them under a 2016 term loan, didn’t look like a mistake when it arrived and was theirs to keep. They can keep the money, pending an appeal, but can’t spend it, the judge said.Representatives of Brigade and HPS declined to comment. Symphony didn’t immediately return messages seeking comment.Impact on IndustryThe ruling could also have a lasting impact on the role administrative agents play in the syndicated loan industry by exposing them to higher operational and regulatory risks.Furman said prior court decisions forced him to conclude that the lenders were entitled to take the money.“The transfers matched to the penny the amount of principal and interest outstanding on the loan,” he said in his decision. “The accompanying notices referred to interest being ‘due,’ and the only way in which that would have been accurate was if Revlon was making a principal prepayment.”The judge said New York’s top court adopted a “discharge for value” rule almost 30 years ago, making it clear that banks making wire transfers to creditors should bear the risk of loss in case of a mistake, and fees for such payments have remained low. The “disastrous consequences” predicted in the wake of that decision haven’t happened, Furman said, proving the court’s conclusion that transferring banks are the best parties positioned to avoid errors.Read More: Citi Had ‘Six Eyes’ on $900 Million Blunder Before It Went OutCitibank “took that role seriously in adopting the six-eye approval process for wire transfers of the kind made here,” he wrote. “And while that process obviously failed in this instance, the unprecedented nature of the mistake in this case suggests that it has generally been successful. Moreover, banks could -- and, perhaps after this case, will -- take other relatively costless steps to both minimize the risk of errors and increase the probability of clawing back erroneous payments.”It isn’t yet clear how the court decision will affect Revlon’s existing capital structure. The debt-laden cosmetics company contended earlier in the case that the money sent to lenders came from Citibank alone and not from Revlon’s own accounts. The loan due 2023 is quoted at below half its face value, around 43 cents on the dollar, according to Bloomberg data. Revlon, which wasn’t directly involved in the litigation, narrowly avoided a bankruptcy filing last year.Read More: Revlon Wins Approval for Debt DealA representative of Revlon declined to comment.‘Thumbed Their Nose’At the trial in December, which was held by videoconference, executives of the asset managers testified that they had no reason to believe the wire transfers were an error. They said the sum was what they were owed, and although the credit agreement required three days’ notice for an early full payment of the loan -- notice the recipients didn’t get -- Revlon and the bank had breached the agreement before.The pair “had really thumbed their nose” at the pact, including in the May restructuring, Scott Caraher, head of loans at Symphony, testified.QuickTake: ‘Unjust Enrichment’ and Citi’s Expensive MistakeCaraher described the relationship between Symphony, Revlon and Citibank as contentious and complicated.“It’s not that we didn’t want to return the money,” he said. “We were just paid money that we were owed by a borrower and an agent who were involved in a significant game of chess.”Clear ErrorCitibank argued that the transfers were a clear error and that the firms had no right to them. Under questioning by a lawyer for the bank, a senior loan operations associate at Symphony testified that it’s standard practice to look into fund transfers made without notice and to return the money if it was sent in error. He said he had seen money sent by mistake to his firm or to counterparties before.“We would review the wire, confirm it was a mistake” and, if “money was not owed, we would send it back,” he testified. Asked whether mistaken interest payments were common, he said they were.Citi Lawyer Suggests Revlon Loan Payment Wasn’t a ‘Rational’ ActThe error was a painful lesson for the bank, which had to explain it to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve.The judge wrapped up the six-day trial on Dec. 16 with a warning.“The industry should figure out a way of dealing with these things even if this was a black swan event,” he said. “Whatever my ruling is in this case, I hope the world, the market takes notice of what’s happened here and the uncertainties that have resulted.”The case is Citibank NA v. Brigade Capital Management, 20-cv-6539, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).Read More: Citi Trial Shows Chain of Gaffes Leading to $900 Million Error(Updates with Citigroup’s vow to appeal and with analysis starting in second section.)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

  • 21 stocks Goldman Sachs thinks you should consider buying now

    Goldman Sachs is bullish on the economic recovery, and has offered up a list of stocks it thinks you should consider buying.

  • SocketMobile's stock rockets to a more than 13-year high after unveiling of DuraSled scanner for iPhone 12s

    Shares of Socket Mobile Inc. skyrocketed 251.9% on very heavy volume toward a more than 13-year high in morning trading Tuesday, to pace all gainers on major U.S. exchanges, after the mobile data capture company unveiled its new DuraSled offering, which is an enterprise-grade barcode scanner for Apple Inc.'s iPhone 12s. Trading volume spiked to more than 75 million shares, compared with the full-day average over the past 30 days of about 256,000 shares. The company said employers can now support workers who use the iPhone 12 series of mobile phones. "The DuraSled turns your iPhone into a one-handed solution that combines the versatility of the iPhone and the power of an enterprise-grade scanner," said SocketMobile Senior Product Manager Vanessa Lindsay. The latest data showed that short interest as a percent of public float was 0.9%. The stock, which which is trading at the highest levels seen since October 2007, has soared 373.0% over the past three months, while the S&P 500 has gained 8.9%.

  • What Is A Dividend? Plus The 5 Best Dividend Stocks Now

    What is a dividend and which companies have the best-yielding dividends? Read on for a primer on how best to approach this method of investing.

  • Palantir shares sink 9% after quarterly results

    Palantir (PLTR) shares sank around 9% in early trading this morning after the data mining software company posted a GAAP operating loss for its latest quarter, although on an adjusted basis, earnings per share came in above Street estimates.

  • Yellen Shift on Vast Treasury Cash Pile Poses Problem for Powell

    (Bloomberg) -- Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is giving Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell a bit of a headache when it comes to managing the money markets.Already low short-term interest rates are set to sink further, potentially below zero, after the Treasury announced plans earlier this month to reduce the stockpile of cash it amassed at the Fed over the last year to fight the pandemic and the deep recession it caused.The move, which aims to return its cash position at the central bank to more normal levels, will flood the financial system with liquidity and complicate Powell’s effort to keep a tight grip over money market rates.“All this cash from the Treasury’s general account will have to go back from the Fed and into the market,” said Manmohan Singh, senior economist at the International Monetary Fund. “It will drive short term rates lower, as far as they can go.”While the Fed has pushed its benchmark overnight policy rate down to nearly zero to aid the pandemic-inflicted economy, a drop in short-term market rates into negative territory could prove disruptive, especially for money market funds that invest in short-dated Treasury securities. Banks may also find themselves hamstrung by effectively being forced to hold large unwanted cash balances at the central bank.The Treasury’s decision -- unveiled at its quarterly refunding announcement -- will help unleash what Credit Suisse Group AG analyst Zoltan Pozsar calls a “tsunami” of reserves into the financial system and on to the Fed’s balance sheet. Combined with the Fed’s asset purchases, that could swell reserves to about $5 trillion by the end of June, from an already lofty $3.3 trillion now.Here’s how it works: Treasury sends out checks drawn on its general account at the Fed, which operates like the government’s checking account. When recipients deposit the funds with their bank, the bank presents the check to the Fed, which debits the Treasury’s account and credits the bank’s Fed account, otherwise known as their reserve balance.Dollar PressureMarket pros are trying to parse out the implications of what could be an unprecedented surge of liquidity. Some forecast downward pressure on the dollar. Others predict buoyant stock and bond prices. Still others see it mostly as a non-event -- except when it comes to the money markets.When ex Fed chair Yellen was nominated to become Treasury secretary, many analysts saw that as presaging very close knit ties between her department and the central bank. But there are limits on how far that can go, given the institutional imperatives of each organization.In preparing to lower its cash hoard at the central bank to $500 billion by the end of June from around a gargantuan $1.6 trillion now, Treasury is merely returning to a more normal modus operandi.“Treasury had just been delaying the day of reckoning for the Fed,” said Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP LLC.Most Fed officials judge they have the instruments to deal with rising reserves, according to the minutes of their Nov. 4-5 meeting.But that doesn’t mean they won’t have to make some difficult decisions about the Fed’s interest rate tools, its bank leverage rules and possibly even its asset purchases.Tweak IOERIn an effort to provide a floor for the money markets, the central bank could lift the rate it pays on excess reserves parked at the Fed by banks and on its reverse repurchase agreements, from 10 basis points and zero, respectively. Tweaking these administered rates is something the Fed has done before.“If the Fed decides that it wants overnight rates to move away from zero, the most effective approach in my view would be to raise” those two rates together, said former New York Fed official Brian Sack, who is now Director of Global Economics for D. E. Shaw & Co.But that decision -- which could be made at next month’s policy making meeting -- would come as officials try to convince markets that they’re not about to reduce support for the economy. While any rate rise would be portrayed as a technical adjustment, there’s a risk investors wouldn’t see it that way.“The aesthetics of having to hike these rates, I’m not sure how well the market will digest that,” said Tom Porcelli, chief U.S. economist at RBC Capital Markets in New York. “It might be complicated.”What to do about the supplementary leverage ratio the Fed and other regulators impose on banks is also tricky. In order to ease market strains in March, the Fed temporarily exempted banks’ holdings of Treasuries and reserves from the ratio’s calculation. That exemption expires on March 31, just as banks’ cash balances at the central bank will be ramping up.Fed policy makers say they don’t want the exclusion, which has already been in place for about a year, to be permanent. If they do opt to temporarily extend it further, they’ll want to get agreement from rule makers appointed by President Joe Biden who may be less inclined to go along.Leverage RestrictionsIf the exemption lapses instead, banks might run the risk of bumping up against the leverage restrictions, especially as they’re obliged to hold a greater and greater level of reserves.Economists are divided over how disruptive that would be.Jefferies LLC economist Tom Simons said that banks haven’t made as much use of the exclusion as expected, so rolling it back shouldn’t have a significant impact.“It’s going to be a band aid that needs to be ripped off at some point,” he said. “Now is probably a good time to do it.”Others see a potential bond market decline if the rule snaps back as banks sell Treasuries to meet leverage restrictions and make room on their balance sheets for the increasing number of reserves they must hold.“The concern is that it would further impair banks’ willingness to make markets in Treasuries, to hold Treasuries, and to extend repo financing so that others can hold Treasuries,” said former Fed official Bill Nelson, now chief economist at the Bank Policy Institute that represents the industry.At their November meeting, Fed officials discussed another possibility for dealing with the bulge in reserves: adjusting their asset purchase program. But economists see that as a last resort, given how sensitive investors are to any changes on that front.The coming surge in reserves as the government slashes its cash pile will add to a flood of liquidity already in the system from the Fed’s ongoing bond buying.“This is going to bring to a head the consequences for the money markets of the dramatic increase in the Fed’s portfolio,” Crandall said.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Tesla Stock Falls Toward Key Support As 'Strategic' India Plans Take Shape

    Tesla fell toward key support level as it reportedly plans to build an India plant, seeking to be among the first to tap into that nascent EV market.

  • AutoNation blows away profit estimates, reveals $1 billion stock buyback plan

    AutoNation hit the trifecta on its latest earnings day. The company smashed analyst profit forecasts, said it divested its stake in online auto seller Vroom and announced a new stock buyback plan.

  • Amazon, Facebook, and 22 of the Most Undervalued Stocks Right Now

    Barron's screened the Russell 3000 to find stocks where the average analyst price target was significantly higher than where shares were recently trading.

  • What Keystone Pipeline Cancellation Means For Crude-by-rail

    President Joe Biden's revocation of the March 2019 permit enabling the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline will likely result in more crude-by-rail volumes, according to industry observers. But how much volumes will increase could largely depend on the price that heavy crude oil can fetch in the global market. "The cancellation of the Keystone pipeline project was inevitable once the government changed. Despite its merits or drawbacks, it is now a deflated political football," said Barry Prentice, University of Manitoba supply chain management professor and former director of the Transport Institute there. "This means that more crude will have to move by rail. The huge investments in the oil sands will not be abandoned, and the oil has to go somewhere." But crude-by-rail "has been problematic because with the low price for oil, and the relatively higher price for rail transport, nothing looks very appealing. The problem is not oil supply, it is the reduced demand during the pandemic. Once we come out of this period, demand will return, and $100-per-barrel oil will, too," Prentice said. Indeed, the oil markets serve as one highly visible factor determining how much crude gets produced and shipped. For the production and transport of heavy crude oil from western Canada and the U.S. to be profitable, the pricing spread between a heavy crude product such as Western Canadian Select (WCS) and a light, sweet crude such as West Texas Intermediate (WTI) needs to be favorable. WCS crude is typically priced at a discount against WTI crude because of its lower quality and its greater distance from the U.S Gulf Coast refineries. The COVID-19 pandemic was among the factors that contributed to WTI crude oil prices' tailspin in 2020. Why the interest in crude oil production and transport? The oil market isn't the only factor that dictates crude oil production and its subsequent transport. Another is the vast oil reserves and the amount of investment already directed into crude oil production, as well as crude oil's export prospects. According to the government of Alberta, the province's oil sands represent the third-largest oil reserves in the world, following Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Its reserves equal about 165.4 billion barrels, and capital investments to the upstream sector have equaled as much as $28.3 billion in 2016 and $26.5 billion in 2017. Furthermore, according to Natural Resources Canada, 98% of Canada's crude oil exports in 2019 went to the U.S. Those investments and vast oil reserves have also resulted in significant investments in other areas of the energy sector, including investments in pipelines. The pipelines bring Canadian heavy crude south to U.S. refineries because American refineries were built and optimized to mostly handle heavier crude oil, according to Rob Benedict, senior director of petrochemicals, transportation and infrastructure for the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association. Crude oil pipelines from Canada to the U.S. have been viewed as an efficient way to transport large amounts of Canadian heavy crude oil to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. TC Energy's 1,210-mile Keystone XL pipeline would have had a capacity of 830,000 barrels per day with crude oil originating from Hardisty, Alberta, and heading to Steele City, Nebraska, where it would then be shipped to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. Had construction continued, the pipeline would have entered service in 2023. But TC Energy abandoned the project after Biden revoked an existing presidential permit for the pipeline in January. "TC Energy will review the decision, assess its implications, and consider its options. However, as a result of the expected revocation of the Presidential Permit, advancement of the project will be suspended.The company will cease capitalizing costs, including interest during construction, effective January 20, 2021, being the date of the decision, and will evaluate the carrying value of its investment in the pipeline, net of project recoveries," TC Energy said in a release last month. The Keystone XL pipeline "is an essential piece that would have allowed Canada and the U.S. to continue the very good relationship they have with transporting energy products across the border," Benedict said. However, suspending pipeline construction doesn't necessarily translate into a one-for-one increase in crude-by-rail volumes, according to Benedict. "The gist of the story is, it's going to have some impact on crude-by-rail. It's not going to shift all 830,000 barrels per day onto the rails, but any additional amount is potentially going to have some impact," Benedict said. Several factors will influence how much crude moves by rail. In addition to the WCS/WTI price spread, the railways' capacity to handle crude-by-rail is crucial. Not only are there speed restrictions for crude trains and possible social ramifications, there also capacity issues. The Canadian railways have reported record grain volumes over the past several months, and crude volumes must compete with grain, as well as other commodities, for the same rail track. There are also other pipelines between Canada and the U.S. that could take some of the volumes that would have been handled by the Keystone XL pipeline, Benedict said. Those include Endbridge's (NYSE: ENB) Line 3 pipeline, which runs from Canada to Wisconsin; Endbridge's Line 5 pipeline, which runs under the Strait of Mackinac and Lake Michigan to the Michigan Peninsula; and the Trans Mountain pipeline that's under development in Canada. It would run from Alberta to the Canadian West Coast and then potentially south to U.S. refineries. And one other factor that could influence crude-by-rail is how much crude oil volumes go into storage, Benedict said. "It's not just a simple question of, does one pipeline being shut down ship all to rail? It's complex because you have to consider all the different nodes of the supply chain, including storage that would come into play," Benedict said. The Canadian railways' views on crude-by-rail For their part, Canadian Pacific (NYSE: CP) and CN (NYSE: CNI) have both said they expect to ship more crude volumes, but neither has indicated just how much volumes will grow. CP said during its fourth-quarter earnings call on Jan. 27 that it has been seeing increased activity as price spreads have become favorable. The railway also expects to begin moving crude volumes from a diluent recovery unit (DRU) near Hardisty, Alberta. US Development Group and Gibson Energy had agreed to construct and operate the DRU in December 2019. As part of that agreement, ConocoPhillips Canada will process the inlet bitumen blend from the DRU and ship it via CP and Kansas City Southern (NYSE: KSU) to the U.S. Gulf Coast. "These DRU volumes will provide a safer pipeline-competitive option for shippers and will help to stabilize our crude business into the future," CP Chief Marketing Officer John Brooks said during the earnings call. CP President and CEO Keith Creel also said he sees U.S. actions on the Keystone pipeline as benefiting crude-by-rail and the DRU volumes. The actions "bode for more strength and more potential demand for crude. We think it creates more support for scaling up and expansion of the DRU. So, we're bullish on that opportunity," Creel said. He continued, "We still see the short-term, not long-term ... pipeline capacity [eventually] catch up [but] we just think there is a longer tail on it right now. So, we think there's going to be a space for some potential upside in both spaces." Meanwhile, in a Jan. 27 interview with Bloomberg, CN President and CEO JJ Ruest called crude-by-rail a "question mark" in terms of what energy outlook the railway is seeing for 2021. Ruest said low oil prices, decreased travel and the Keystone pipeline cancellation are among the factors influencing CN's energy outlook. However, crude-by-rail could be a "slight positive bump on the rail industry," Bloomberg quoted Ruest as saying. CP and CN declined to comment further to FreightWaves about crude-by-rail, and CN directed FreightWaves to the Bloomberg article. Subscribe to FreightWaves' e-newsletters and get the latest insights on freight right in your inbox. Click here for more FreightWaves articles by Joanna Marsh. Related articles: Social risk trumps financial risk for Canadian crude-by-rail Transport Canada issues new speed restrictions for trains hauling dangerous goods Construction of Alberta crude unit expected to start in April Commentary: Railroad tank cars take a hit See more from BenzingaClick here for options trades from BenzingaForward Air Doubles Down Amid Heightened Interest From ActivistsDrilling Deep: Reviewing Q4 Earnings; How Did Werner Do So Well?© 2021 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

  • Morgan Stanley Storms Into the EV Space; Offers 2 Stocks to Buy

    We are indeed living in interesting times – and in many ways, that’s a good thing. Take the automotive industry, for example. Technology is changing a rapid pace, and when it settles, it will dramatically change the way we drive. In 2030, our concept of ‘car’ will likely be unrecognizable to drivers from 1980. The biggest changes are coming from power systems and artificial intelligence. AI will bring autonomous tech to our cars, making self-driving vehicles a reality. But the power systems changes will hit us first. In fact, electric-drive vehicles are already on our roads, and electric vehicle (EV) companies are proliferating rapidly. For the moment, there are several roads to potential success in the EV market. Companies are working to position themselves as leaders in battery tech, or electric power trains, or to maximize their range and performance per charge. It’s a fact-paced industry environment, offering both opportunity and excitement for investors. Smart investors will look for companies capable of meeting scaling demands, once they have settled on marketable models. Investment firm Morgan Stanley has been watching the EV industry, seeking out innovative new design and production companies that are positioning themselves for gains as the market matures. The firm’s automotive analyst, Adam Jonas, has selected two stocks that investors should seriously consider buying into, saying “As we survey the EV/battery startup landscape, we are prioritizing highly differentiated technology and/or business models with a path to scale at a reasonable level of risk.” Opening up the TipRanks database, we’ve pulled up the details on both of Jonas’ picks to see whether they could be a good fit for your portfolio. Fisker (FSR) First up, Fisker, is based in Southern California, the epicenter of so much of our ground-breaking tech industries. Fisker’s focus is on solid-state battery tech, a growing alternative to the lithium-ion batteries that most EVs depend on. While more expensive that the older lithium-based systems, solid state batteries are safer and offer higher energy densities. Fisker has been busy patenting its moves into solid-state batteries, a sound strategy to lock in its advances in this field. For EVs, solid-state batteries offer faster charging times, longer range per charge, and potentially lower battery weight – all important factors in vehicle performance. Every car company needs a flagship model, and Fisker has the Ocean – an EV SUV with a mid-range price ($37,499) and a long-range power system (up to 300 miles). The vehicle features stylish design and room mounted solar panels to supplement the charging system, and is scheduled to enter serial production for the markets in 2022. The stylish design reflects the sensibilities of the company’s founder, Henrik Fisker, known for his work on the BMW Z8 and the Aston Martin DB9. Fisker entered the public markets through a SPAC merger agreement last fall. Since completing the SPAC transaction on October 29, shares in FSR are up 112%. Morgan Stanley’s Jonas is impressed by this company, describing the ‘value proposition of Fisker’ as “…design, time to market, clean sheet user experience and management expertise,” and saying that the 4Q22 launch schedule for the Ocean is likely to be met. “Fisker is specifically targeting the personal owned/passenger car business as opposed to commercial oriented end markets, where emotive design and user experience matter more. Additionally, the company wants to create an all-digital experience from the website to the app to the HMI in the car and continued customer engagement through its flexible lease product,” Jonas added. In line with his upbeat outlook on the company (and the car), Jonas rates Fisker an Overweight (i.e. Buy), and sets a $27 price target suggesting an upside of 42% for the coming year. (To watch Jonas’ track record, click here) Turning to the TipRanks data, we’ve found that Wall Street’s analysts hold a range of views on Fisker. The stock has a Moderate Buy analyst consensus rating, based on 7 reviews, including 4 Buys, 2 Holds, and 1 Sell. Shares are currently priced at $18.99, and the $21.20 average price target implies a one-year upside of ~12%. (See FSR stock analysis on TipRanks) QuantumScape (QS) Where Fisker is working on solid-state batteries in the context of vehicle production, QuantumScape is setting itself up as a leader in EV battery technology and a potential supplier of the next generation of battery and power systems for the EV market. QuantumScape designs and builds solid-state lithium-metal batteries, and the key advantages of the technology are in safety, lifespan, and charging times. Solid-state batteries are non-flammable; they last longer than lithium-ion batteries, with less capacity loss at the anode interface; and their composition allows faster charging, of 15 minutes or less to reach 80% capacity. QuantumScape is betting that these advantages will outweigh the technology’s current higher cost, and create a new standard in EV power systems. The company’s strongest tie to the EV production field is its connection with Volkswagen. The German auto giant put $100 million into QuantumScape in 2018, and an additional $200 million in 2020. The two companies are using their partnership to prepare for mass-scale development and production of solid-state batteries. Like Fisker, QuantumScape went public through a SPAC agreement late last year. The agreement, which closed on November 27, put the QS ticker in the public markets – where it promptly surged above $130 per share. While the stock has since slipped, it remains up 47% from its NYSE opening. For Morgan Stanley’s Jonas, involvement in QS stock comes with high risk, but also high potential reward. In fact, the analyst calls it, "The Biotech of Battery Development." "We believe their solid state technology addresses a very big impediment in battery science (energy density) that, if successful, can create extremely high value to a wide range of customers in the auto industry and beyond. The risks of moving from a single layer cell to a production car are high, but we think these are balanced by the commercial potential and the role of Volkswagen to help underwrite the early manufacturing ramp," Jonas explained. Noting that QS is a stock for the long haul, Jonas rates the shares an Overweight (i.e. Buy), and his $70 price target indicates confidence in an upside of 28% for one-year time horizon. Granted, not everyone is as enthusiastic about QS as Morgan Stanly. QS's Hold consensus rating is based on an even split between Buy, Hold, and Sell reviews. The shares are priced at $54.64 and their recent appreciation has pushed them well above the $46.67 average price target. (See QS stock analysis on TipRanks) To find good ideas for EV stocks trading at attractive valuations, visit TipRanks’ Best Stocks to Buy, a newly launched tool that unites all of TipRanks’ equity insights. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the featured analyst. The content is intended to be used for informational purposes only. It is very important to do your own analysis before making any investment.

  • Citigroup cannot recoup Revlon payouts after nearly $900 million gaffe - U.S. judge

    A federal judge on Tuesday said Citigroup Inc is not entitled to recoup half a billion dollars of its own money that it mistakenly wired lenders of Revlon Inc, in what he called "a banking error of perhaps unprecedented nature and magnitude." U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan said the Aug. 11, 2020, transfers were "final and complete transactions, not subject to revocation." Citigroup plans to appeal.

  • Palantir Stock Falls As 2021 Revenue Growth Outlook Lags Expectations

    Palantir reported fourth-quarter earnings and revenue that topped estimates. Palantir stock fell in early trading as full-year 2021 revenue guidance came in slightly below expectations.