Petrobras: perdas patrimoniais, preco das acoes, consequencias economicas sistemicas

Um economista, Aluizio Gomes, formula, em seu blog, as seguintes considerações sobre o escândalo Petrobrás, que está longe de ser esclarecido, e provavelmente o governo não tem interesse em esclarecer o assunto.
Transcrevo suas observações, seguidas de alguns comentários recebidos nessa postagem.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida  

Petrobras: observações econômicas
Aluizio Gomes, 19/11/2014

O banco americano Morgan Stanley foi um dos primeiros a divulgar a investidores uma estimativa das eventuais perdas com os desvios citados na Operação Lava Jato, da Polícia Federal. Para o Morgan, as perdas podem chegar a R$ 21 bilhões, o que comprometeria todo o lucro de 2014 da estatal.

O Morgan Stanley fez suas estimativas com base na informação dada pelo ex-diretor da Petrobras Paulo Roberto da Costa de que as propinas representaram 3% do que foi investido pela empresa nos últimos anos. Levando em conta uma margem de erro, o banco considerou perdas de 1% a 5%, o que significariam baixas contábeis entre R$ 5 bilhões e R$ 21 bilhões.

Neste último caso, se o registro das perdas na contabilidade for feito todo neste ano, não haverá pagamento de dividendos para os detentores das chamadas ações ordinárias (com direito a voto nas principais decisões das empresas). Os bancos estão fazendo as contas depois que a própria Petrobras admitiu que terá de reduzir o valor de seus ativos caso sejam confirmadas as denúncias de corrupção. Além disso, vários analistas financeiros alertam os investidores para a redução no pagamento de dividendos este ano e retiram a recomendação para a compra das ações da Petrobrás.

Os analistas do banco Safra que até ontem acreditavam que as ações da Petrobras teriam desempenho melhor do que outras ações, sugerindo oportunidade de compra, rebaixaram a ação para "neutro", ou seja, nem comprar, nem vender. O Itaú BBA disse em relatório assinado por seus analistas que a cada R$ 1 bilhão de registro de baixa contábil que a Petrobras tenha de fazer, os detentores de ações com direito a voto, que deveriam receber R$ 0,37 por ação, vão receber R$ 0,02 menos. Na prática, se o rombo for de R$ 10 bilhões, o dividendo a ser pago cairá pela metade.

Contas públicas
Um dos maiores prejudicados seria o próprio governo federal que é dono de mais de 50% dessas ações e espera fechar as contas com esses dividendos. O BNDES tem outros 10%. Já os investidores estrangeiros, que possuem a ação negociada em Nova York, têm quase 20%. Os investidores que têm ações preferenciais serão menos afetados porque, pela lei, a Petrobras é obrigada a pagar dividendo mínimo, mesmo que tenha prejuízo.

Os relatórios dos analistas se mostram cautelosos, mas alertam para o potencial de a situação da Petrobras se agravar caso permaneça por um longo período sob investigação a ponto de impedir que os auditores avalizem seu balanço até meados do próximo ano. Se o balanço anual não for auditado e publicado até lá, a empresa não terá como refinanciar sua dívida que vence em 2015 e poderá ser forçada a pagar antecipadamente, de uma só vez US$ 57 bilhões em empréstimos, segundo dados do Morgan.

Quando a empresa faz um empréstimo, ela se compromete a manter margens financeiras do seu negócio, que servem como garantia de solvência, e também prestar informações atualizadas. Entre essas informações, estão os balanços auditados por empresas independentes. Na semana passada, a PricewaterhouseCoopers se negou a assinar o balanço trimestral antes do fim da investigação que está sendo feita para apurar as perdas com os desvios nas refinarias Abreu e Lima e Comperj.



=========
 Por Gil Vasco, 19/11/2014

Cosme, a quebra da Petrobras e do País é fruto do "jeito petista de governar". É provável que o STF seja "compreensivo" com as malfeitorias petistas. Os agentes econômicos, porém, não perdoam: a Dilma terá de adotar as medidas ditas "neoliberais" pelos petistas, para decepção/frustração destes ... O perfil do ministro da Fazenda terá que passar pelo crivo do mercado. A Dilma está agora consciente de que governar é mais do que distribuir bolsa família.

=========
Por cosme,19/11/2014

Caro Osíres Costa. A eleição acabou mas não sou nem cego e muito menos insano. Estou achando que você é do PT. Como falei e falo sempre o PT representa o câncer do Brasil. Sou consciente que corrupção sempre existiu e existirá, mas igual a corja do PT ainda está para nascer na face deste planeta. Obs: meu amigo Osíres eu sou Cosme e Tenho um irmão que é Damião. O pior cego é aquele que não quer enxergar. Se você acredita em : Papai Noel. Tudo bem. Respeito.

 ==========

Por heraldo,19/11/2014

Como foi dito em comentário anterior. : A eleição ja acabou. De fato, acabou, o Brasil perdeu e os bandidos, ladrões e corruPTos ganharam e vão continuar saqueando o Brasil.

 ==========

Por heraldo,19/11/2014

E a Sra Dilma Yousseff , no comando da Petrobrás como presidente do Conselho de Administração durante os anos da roubalheira não " sabia de nada". Só existem duas hipóteses, ou ela era conivente com tudo, ou era uma figura meramente decorativa a quem ninguem prestava satisfações. E o papel de bobos fazemos todos nós.

Apple: delicias e tragedias da volatilidade nas bolsas

Quando as ações da Apple sairam do patamar de 300 dólares para mais de 400, eu já achava que havia uma bolha pronta para estourar...
Pois é: demorou. As ações foram a mais de 700 dólares e muita gente comprou na alta, achando que o paraíso estava próximo. Muita gente vai amargar prejuízos e perdas irrecuperáveis, pelos próximos anos, pois não acredito que chegue a 800 dólares any time soon.
Bem vindos ao mundo real...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Coping With the Pain of Souring Apple Shares

Some Investors See a Cheap Stock, but Others Have Sold Everything; 'Headache, Not a Cancer'

By JOE LIGHT

The Wll Street Journal, February 3, 2013

As the U.S. stock market flirts with record highs, investors who hold big stakes in Apple Inc. AAPL -0.41% are taking a beating.
Since peaking at $705.07 during the day on Sept. 21, Apple shares have fallen 36% to close at $453.62, erasing more than $236 billion in market value—a figure equal to about 35 times the current value of BlackBerry RIM.T +0.70% maker Research In Motion Ltd.
The pain has been widespread. About 60% of actively managed U.S. stock mutual funds that invest in big companies owned at least some Apple shares at the end of the year, according to investment-research firm Morningstar Inc. MORN +0.53% Ninety funds had 10% or more of their portfolios in the stock.

No one blinked when Apple shares headed towards $700 but now that the stock has dropped below $450-with some analysts saying it could be headed well below $400-people are complaining. 

But Apple's plunge is affecting investors in different ways. While some are getting out for good, others are staying put or even buying more. And some are glad they avoided the stock altogether.
Most mutual funds disclose their holdings quarterly, but the 145 actively managed U.S. stock funds that hold Apple and reported monthly results sold a net 223,402 shares, or 3% of their Apple holdings, in December, according to Morningstar, a time when the stock was between 16% and 28% off its peak. Sixty-one funds sold shares, while 45 funds bought.
That doesn't mean all of them took losses. Even with the setback, Apple has generated a total return, including dividends, of about 28% annually over the past five years, versus 4% for the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index. In four of the past 10 years, Apple's stock price has more than doubled, and its only full-year loss over the past decade occurred in 2008.
Here are some examples of how professional money managers and small investors have reacted:
• Bailing out. Some investors, feeling burned by the steep drop, are selling their stakes.
Frank Sansone, a retired college professor in Pensacola, Fla., bought 40 Apple shares during the first half of last year. As its stock price breached $700 in September, Mr. Sansone said he intended to sell but missed his chance while on vacation.
As Apple's stock dropped, he sold most of the shares in November and December, locking in losses of about $2,800.
"I left it alone, and it turned out to be a bigger mistake than I ever expected," he said.
Among mutual-fund managers, one of the biggest sellers was the $857 million Brandywine Fund, which last quarter dumped its entire Apple stake of more than 143,000 shares, according to Morningstar.
In a year-end note to investors, fund manager Bill D'Alonzo cited tightening profit margins, among other worries, as reasons for selling. A spokesman for Friess Associates, which manages the fund, declined to comment.
• Staying the course. The $406 million Matthew 25 Fund landed in the top 2% of funds that invest in large, growth companies for each of the past three years, largely because of its huge stake in Apple. As of September, when the fund last disclosed its holdings, Apple comprised 15% of its portfolio.
That has come back to bite manager Mark Mulholland. The fund has had a total return of 4.5% this year through Thursday, 0.7 percentage point less than the S&P 500 and in the bottom 41% of its peers, according to Morningstar.
"It's been a headache, but not a cancer," Mr. Mulholland said, noting that since November he has fielded a handful of emails and phone calls from investors asking about his Apple stake.
• Seeing a cheap stock. John Barr, portfolio manager of the $67 million Needham Aggressive Growth Fund, last quarter bought 100 shares, increasing his stake to 5,350 shares, even though the fund invests mostly in small-capitalization stocks. At the end of the year, Apple was Mr. Barr's fifth-largest holding, with 4.3% of the fund.
Mr. Barr said he still believes the stock is cheap and that the company might see hot earnings growth as it introduces new products, such as a rumored cheaper iPhone or television set.
Apple's price/earnings multiple based on expected earnings over the next 12 months is eight, compared with 13 for the S&P 500, according to Morningstar.
"It's an inexpensive stock that is growing much faster than the market as a whole," he said. "We're happy to own something at a reasonable price."
Needham Aggressive Growth, which first bought Apple shares in 2006, has never sold shares, Mr. Barr said.
Bob Turner, manager of the $223 million Turner Large Growth fund, said that his firm "would be more buyers than sellers" of Apple; it had about 13% of its portfolio in the stock at the end of 2012, according to Morningstar. Through Thursday, the fund has had a return of 3%, about 2.2 percentage points below that of the S&P 500, according to Morningstar.
Given how widely owned the stock is, Mr. Turner, whose fund first bought shares in 2004, said he thinks Apple simply ran out of investors looking to add shares at its peak in September.
"What's always befuddled me is valuation," he said, adding "You can be right with your thesis all day, but it doesn't stop you from losing money."
• Sitting out. Apple's drop provides some vindication for the few money managers who didn't hold Apple during its bull run and saw their portfolios trail because of it.
Robert Zagunis, who co-manages the $4.3 billion Jensen Quality Growth fund, has never owned Apple shares. The fund invests only in companies with a decadelong history of high returns on equity, a test Apple doesn't meet yet.
In the last three years through Thursday, the fund has had an average annual return of 12%, 2.5 percentage points lower than the S&P 500, according to Morningstar.
Last summer, Mr. Zagunis devoted a note to investors explaining why he didn't hold Apple. "We had times when [much] of the underperformance was due to one stock that we didn't hold," he said in an interview.
But when Mr. Zagunis was recently a guest speaker at an investment class at a university, he said, the students showed him a chart of their portfolio, which has performed poorly this year.
"They said—it was almost apologetic—'We owned Apple.'"
Write to Joe Light at joe.light@wsj.com

Apple: muita gente vai perder dinheiro...

Durante toda a minha vida computacional -- que se estende desde a segunda metade dos anos 1980 -- nunca tive, e nunca comprei para mim nenhum outro computador que não fosse Apple; comprei todos os modelos, quase todos eles, ao longo desse período, mesmo pagando um pouco mais caro do que os modelos da linha MS-DOS e depois (R)Windows. Ou seja, eu sou um MacAddicted, e orgulhoso de sê-lo.
Mesmo assim, eu não compraria uma ação da companhia a 600 dólares. Acho que isso não vai se sustentar, e quem está comprando a esse preço, se não vender antes da debâcle, vai perder dinheiro...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Apple

A good Cook

Tim Cook’s first year as the technology giant’s boss has been a success. But the toughest test lies ahead

Aug 25th 2012 | SAN FRANCISCO | from the print edition

TALK about a hard act to follow. When Tim Cook replaced an ailing Steve Jobs as Apple’s chief executive on August 24th last year, he took over from the nearest thing the tech world had to a rock star. Some people wondered out loud how Jobs’s more humble second-in-command would fare in the absence of the firm’s brash and brilliant co-founder, who died in October. They need not have worried. As Mr Cook celebrates his first anniversary at Apple’s helm, the company continues to smash records.

On August 20th Apple’s market capitalisation reached over $623 billion, making it the most valuable listed company (if you ignore inflation) of all time. That title was previously held by Microsoft, another tech titan, whose market worth hit $615 billion in December 1999. Much of the credit for Apple’s phenomenal success goes to Jobs, the father of the iPhone and the iPad tablet computer. But Mr Cook also deserves praise for the way he has handled a tricky transition.

In this section

• The ineluctable middlemen
• Printers sink
• »A good Cook
• Delivering the goods
• Another click on the wall
• Upwardly mobile
• The mommy track

Reprints

The process has not been without hiccups. In July Apple’s share price fell sharply after the company’s quarterly earnings disappointed investors, even though its net profit rose by 21%, to $8.8 billion. And earlier in the year Apple was lambasted for its use of Foxconn, a supplier under fire from labour activists for failings such as excessive working hours at its Chinese facilities. Mr Cook promptly went on a highly publicised tour of a Foxconn factory in China. Apple and Foxconn subsequently pledged to improve workers’ conditions there. This week the Fair Labour Association, a non-profit group that audits workplaces, said progress had been made, but more still needed to be done to cut overtime hours without unduly harming workers’ incomes.

Veteran Apple-watchers say this and other episodes are a sign that Mr Cook is more likely to pay attention to opinions outside Apple than his predecessor. “I think he’s a little bit more sensitive to criticism than Steve Jobs was,” says Tim Bajarin of Creative Strategies, a consultancy. Apple’s boss has certainly listened to calls from Wall Street for the company to hand back some of its cash hoard, something Jobs was notoriously reluctant to do. Earlier this month, Apple paid its first dividend since 1995.

In addition to disarming critics and delighting investors, Apple has been dishing out lawsuits. As The Economist went to press, a testy court battle in America between the firm and Samsung over various patents connected with smartphones and tablet computers was drawing to a close. Like his mentor, Mr Cook is clearly not afraid of a fight. He also seems to be developing other Jobs-like traits, including a penchant for pithy put-downs. Asked on an analysts’ call whether personal computers and tablets could one day merge into a single device, Mr Cook shot back: “You can converge a toaster and a refrigerator, but those things are probably not going to be pleasing to the user.”

The big question is whether Apple’s boss has also learnt enough from his predecessor to keep the creative juices at the company flowing freely. In a blog post earlier this year George Colony, the boss of Forrester, a research firm, noted that the fortunes of companies such as Sony and Disney faded after their charismatic founders departed. He predicted that Apple would suffer a similar fate after coasting for a while on the back of existing products. But if Mr Cook can keep the firm’s talented senior executives on board and inspire them to conquer new markets like digital TV, where Apple has yet to make much of an impact, the firm could buck this trend. His big screen test awaits.