Exclusive-Indian owners of three ships ask sanctions-hit Nayara Energy to release the vessels, sources say
NEW DELHI (Reuters) -The Indian owners of three vessels chartered to Nayara Energy have asked the Russian-backed firm to end their contracts following recent European Union sanctions on the refiner, six sources familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.
India-based Seven Islands Shipping Ltd and Great Eastern Shipping Co (GESCO) have asked Nayara to release the three clean products tankers, citing concerns over the sanctions, five of the sources said.
The medium-range vessels are the Bourbon and Courage, owned and managed by Seven Islands, and GESCO's tanker Jag Pooja, sources said.
The sources declined to be named as they were not authorised to speak to the media.
Mumbai-based Nayara, Seven Islands and GESCO did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Lack of access to ships is hampering efforts by the Indian refiner to sell its refined-fuel stocks, which are building up.
The EU sanctions package unveiled on July 18 against Russia and its energy sector have forced Nayara to reduce operations at its 400,000 barrels per day (bpd) refinery due to storage constraints, Reuters reported earlier on Tuesday.
Privately held Nayara, which runs India's third-biggest refinery at the port of Vadinar in the western state of Gujarat, controls nearly 8% of the country's total refining capacity of about 5.2 million bpd.
Nayara, majority-owned by Russian entities including oil major Rosneft, exports refined products and also supplies them domestically. Nayara operates more than 6,000 fuel stations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
15 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's Decision to Fire BLS Chief Echoes Putin's Strategies
President Donald Trump's firing of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Friday afternoon just after she delivered a negative jobs report echoes the impulse of many leaders to shoot the messenger. Trump declared, 'I've had issues with the numbers for a long time. We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony like they were before the election and there were other times. So I fired her, and I did the right thing.' While Trump may or may not be friends with Vladimir Putin, he is clearly following the Russian President's HR staffing guidelines to eliminate lieutenants who bring bad news. As we've documented before, the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) has a long history of manipulating official economic statistics to please Putin, 'bending over backward to correct bad numbers and burying unflattering statistics' under the pressure the Kremlin has exerted to corrupt statistical integrity, especially since Putin's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The reliability of official statistics from China has also been brought into question, leading analysts to rely on a wide range of unofficial or proxy indicators to gauge the true state of the Chinese economy. Even China's former Premier, the late Li Keqiang, reportedly confided that he didn't trust official GDP numbers. Read More: What to Know About the Jobs Report That Led Trump to Fire the Labor Statistics Chief Like other strongmen, Trump has repeatedly shown a pattern of manipulating data to suit his preferred narrative. Trump's surprise firing of BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer has quickly caught the attention of technical market analysts and economists on both sides of the political spectrum. One side cheers the push to disrupt a slow, bureaucratic federal agency. The other side shouts in dismay over concerns about yet another example of Trump politicizing an apolitical institution. Both responses are warranted. The accuracy of BLS data has long been questioned as major revisions only come in months later. To their credit, the BLS, in addition to other statistical agencies, has publicly recognized a need to modernize its methodology. Unfortunately, though, the severity of job revisions has worsened since the COVID-19 era, with no successful program to address the issue. The downward revision on Friday of more than 250,000 jobs marked the most significant adjustment since the depths of the pandemic. However, Trump's accusations against the BLS of rigging the job numbers to make him and the Republican base look bad, and his subsequent firing of McEntarfer based on a belief that BLS revisions were politically motivated, are yet another step closer to authoritarianism. Introducing his latest conspiracy theory, the President went even further by suggesting McEntarfer, whose career spans two decades across Republican and Democratic Administrations, rigged the numbers 'around the 2024 presidential election' in then-Vice President Kamala Harris' favor. Trump conveniently fails to mention that his definition of 'around' was back in August 2024. Recall, the 2024 presidential election was a full three months later in November. Revisions are not unusual behavior by the BLS. They are a critical part of the natural process for developing an accurate picture of the largest, most dynamic economy in the world. The average size of job revisions since 2003 is not insignificant at 51,000 jobs. And, despite what Trump may want Americans to believe, his tariff policies have created an unprecedented level of uncertainty in the U.S. economy, comparable only to that of 2020, with many economists expecting a recession to follow as a result. Bloomberg reporting has pointed to a possible connection between the severity of negative job revisions and recessionary economic environments. The BLS has also been subjected to DOGE-led hiring constraints and other resource rescissions. In addition, the Trump Administration's disbanding of the Federal Statistics Advisory Committee in March both eliminated one of the main engines for enhancing agency performance and, perhaps, in what should have been a concerning harbinger, abolished the canary in the data integrity coal mine. Complaints about BLS methods are legitimate, like the reliance on enumerators over scanner data, and deserve attention, but this is not how to fix it. Read More: What Trump's Win Means for the Economy This is far from the first time Trump has subordinated statistical integrity to political theater. From crowd sizes to weather forecasts, vote counts to tariff formulas, Trump has discarded facts for fictions that play to his political favor. Trump doesn't just bend the truth—he twists the numbers until they resemble propaganda and then silences those who disagree. As CBS News titan Edward R. Murrow warned 65 years ago: 'To be persuasive, we must be believable. To be believable, we must be credible. To be credible, we must be truthful.'
an hour ago
Profits drop at Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway as it writes down its Kraft Heinz investment
OMAHA, Neb. -- OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Warren Buffett's company reported less than half as much profit in the second quarter as it took a $3.76 billion writedown on the value of its stake in Kraft Heinz, as that iconic food producer considers largely undoing the merger that Berkshire Hathaway helped bankroll. Berkshire said it earned $12.37 billion, or $8,601 per Class A share, during the quarter. That's down from $30.248 billion, or $21,122 per Class A share, a year ago, because it recorded a much smaller paper investment gain this year. Berkshire's earnings can swing wildly from quarter to quarter because it has to record the current value of its massive investment portfolio even though it doesn't sell most of the stocks. That's why Buffett has long recommended that investors pay more attention to Berkshire's operating earnings, which exclude those investment gains. Although last year Berkshire did surprise shareholders by selling off a huge chunk of its Apple stake which inflated the investment gains then. By that measure, Berkshire's operating earnings were only down slightly at $11.16 billion, or $7,759.58 per Class A share. That compares with $11.598 billion, or $8,072.16 per Class A share, a year ago. Most of Berkshire's myriad assortment of companies — major insurers like Geico, BNSF railroad, a group of utilities and a collection of manufacturing and retail businesses — generally performed well despite the uncertainty about the economy and President Donald Trump's tariffs. The four analysts surveyed by FactSet Research expected Berkshire to report earnings per Class A share of $7,508.10, so the Omaha, Nebraska-based conglomerate's results were ahead of that. Berkshire owns more than 27% of Kraft Heinz' stock and, for years, it had representatives on the company's board. Buffett has said previously that he believes the company's iconic brands will do well over time, but in hindsight, he overpaid for the investment and underestimated the challenges branded foods face from retailers and the growth of private label products. This spring, Berkshire's representatives resigned from the Kraft Heinz board shortly before the company announced it is exploring strategic options that may include spinning off a large part of its portfolio of brands. Over the years since Berkshire helped Kraft buy Heinz in 2015, the company has been hurt by changing consumer tastes and a shift toward healthier options than Kraft's core collection of processed foods. Buffett's is still sitting on a massive pile of $344.1 billion in cash, although the company's reserves dipped slightly from the $347.7 billion cash it was holding at the end of the first quarter. Buffett told shareholders in May he just isn't finding any attractive deals for companies he understands. Buffett surprised shareholders at the annual meeting when he announced that he plans to give up the CEO title at the end of the year and hand over operations to Vice Chairman Greg Abel, but Buffett will remain Chairman. Berkshire shareholders might be disappointed that the company didn't repurchase any of its shares this quarter, even though the price has fallen more than 12% since just before Buffett announced his retirement. Many investors are watching Berkshire's BNSF closely after rival Union Pacific announced a plan to buy Norfolk Southern earlier this week to create the nation's first transcontinental railroad. The speculation is that BNSF needs to pursue a merger with eastern rail CSX to be able to compete. But CFRA Research analyst Cathy Seifert said it isn't Buffett's style to jump into a deal just because the market thinks he should. Over the decades, he has built Berkshire by finding strong companies selling for less than they are worth. CSX is trading near its 52-week high at $35.01 amid all the deal speculation. 'He wants to do it because he found an undervalued franchise -- not because the market says you need to do a deal,' Seifert said. 'I think one of the reasons why that cash hasn't been deployed is that valuations run through the Berkshire M-and-A model tend to be too rich. But if there's a logical case to be made they'll accept it.' And BNSF appears to be doing fine right now on its own. The railroad recorded a 19% jump in its operating profit this quarter at $1.47 billion as it cut costs and delivered about 1% more shipments.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
The Saturday Spread: How to Use Descriptive Math to Play the Hand, Not the Dealer
Suppose that you're the manager of an MLB team and it's the bottom of the ninth of the World Series. You're down to your last out. Do you go with the player who has a great career batting average but can't perform well under pressure or elect the guy who had a relatively average season but consistently comes through in the clutch? If you're into baseball or just sports in general, the answer is obvious: you go with the competitor that contextually gives you the best chance to win. Ultimately, your job is to take home championships, not dabble with math exercises. More News from Barchart How to Buy KO for a 2% Discount, or Achieve a 17% Annual Return Coinbase Shows Huge Unusual Options Volume After Lower Results Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now! However, what seems so obvious isn't that way in the financial sector. Practically every western approach — from Black-Scholes-Merton-based models to the efficient market hypothesis — utilizes prescriptive financial modeling. Essentially, these methodologies dictate what should be, which theoretically sounds enticing. However, my contention is that this prescription is flawed. In contrast, I prefer a Markovian approach, which models behavior based on a descriptive framework. Such methodologies demonstrate what has been, not what should be. As such, we don't need complicated formulas rooted in stochastic calculus and other difficult concepts. A key reason why I'm not a fan of prescriptive models like Black-Scholes (aside from its inapplicability with American options) is that the underlying probabilities are based on the entire distribution of the dataset. That's like trying to predict hurricanes based on the last ten years' worth of weather reports. Instead, to accomplish this, you would focus on the immediate conditions that cause hurricanes to be more likely. With that said, below are three stocks that are potentially flashing buy signals based on a descriptive framework. Kroger (KR) Quantitatively, Kroger (KR) makes for an intriguing idea for bullish speculators. In the past 10 weeks, the market has essentially voted to buy KR stock four times and sell six times. Throughout this period, KR enjoyed an upward bias. For brevity, we can abbreviate the sequence as 4-6-U. At first glance, it may seem silly to compress the price magnitude of KR stock into a simple binary code. But what we have accomplished here is to define KR's price discovery process as a behavioral state. Through the study of past analogs, we can determine how the market responds to the 4-6-U sequence relative to the baseline. It's just like card counting in blackjack. If the deck favors us, we bet big. If it doesn't, we bet small (or in this case, not at all). On any given week, the chance that a long position in KR stock will rise is only 51.74%. It's an upward bias but a very modest one. However, this statistic stems from the derivative probability of upside across the entire distribution of the dataset. But our contention is that because the deck is flashing a 4-6-U sequence, the odds of upside are actually 72.73%. Barchart Premier members gain full access to the platform's options pricing tools, which can be incredibly powerful when integrated with a Markovian approach. Here, we can identify that the 72/73 bull call spread expiring Aug. 29 may be the least expensive multi-leg strategy that has a realistic chance of being fully profitable. Cinemark (CNK) For extreme contrarians, Cinemark (CNK) may be an intriguing name for its implied discount. On Friday, CNK stock dropped nearly 4%, while for the trailing week, it hemorrhaged almost 11%. On a year-to-date basis, the security — which is tied to the struggling movie theater business model — is down 16.49%. It's a mess but it has the potential to be meme-able. In the past 10 weeks, the market voted to buy CNK stock four times and sell six times. Throughout this period, CNK incurred a downward trajectory. For brevity, we can label this sequence as 4-6-D. Through past analogs, we can identify that this sequence has materialized 46 times on a rolling basis since January 2019. In 58.7% of cases, the following week's price action results in upside, with a median return of 3.87%. As a baseline, the next-week upside probability is only 51.16%. Therefore, assuming that the implications of the 4-6-D hold up, there's a compelling incentive to place a wager. With CNK stock closing at $25.87, it could swing close to $27 in short order. It's a terribly risky idea but for hardened speculators, the 26/27 bull call spread expiring Aug. 15 could be attractive. Confluent (CFLT) It's no exaggeration to say that Confluent (CFLT) got obliterated this past week. On Friday, CFLT stock dropped 3%, which would be notable in and of itself. However, the real drama occurred the day before. Following a second-quarter earnings print that left investors severely disappointed, CFLT opened sharply lower against Wednesday's close. When the dust settled, the security had lost almost 38% in the trailing five sessions. Generally, it's best to avoid enterprises exhibiting such extreme volatility. However, the market has enticingly printed a relatively rare 6-4-D sequence. It's unusual because, despite the number of accumulative sessions outweighing distributive, the overall trajectory is negative. This quantitative signal has flashed 23 times since the company's public market debut in 2021. Notably, in 65.22% of cases, the following week's price action results in upside, with a median return of 3.79%. As a baseline, the chance that a long position in CFLT stock will rise is only 53.49%. Subsequently, there appears to be a clear incentive to place a wager. With CFLT closing at $17.20 on Friday, it could jump to $17.85, perhaps close to $18, in short order. With that said, the most aggressive idea that you can arguably consider while still being rational is the 17/18 bull spread expiring Aug. 15. On the date of publication, Josh Enomoto did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
