wazua Tue, Mar 24, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

4 Pages<1234>
Total Q3 results point to a rosy outlook for KK
Gordon Gekko
#11 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:06:57 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 5/27/2008
Posts: 3,760
1. What take over has KK been involved in to justify your outlook?

KK has been expanding regionally, spreads the risks, the margins are possibly better in the other territories.

2. Do you think that the KPRL award will afffect KK's profit?

The matching principle dictates that revenue is matched against the expenses incurred to generate it. The award goes back several years, so I'm not sure whether they will treat the payment to KPRL as a hit in this year or spread it over several years.

3. Recently, KRA has made it almost impossible to obtain an extension of transit product. Do you think that this will drive up the costs and reduce profitability?

I don't understand this comment. Suffice to say KK uses Dar extensively, so the transit cargo restrictions here shouldn't be overly significant.

milken
#12 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:37:09 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/25/2008
Posts: 192
Location: Nairobi
@ Gordon Gekko
Am very cautious for the following reasons.
From last years accounts, the Kenyan operation accounted for about 60% of th etotal profit. Consequently, unless this unit's profits increases the total group prifits will not increase materially.

KK has assumed that they are not supposed to pay KPRL hence they did not factor that cost in prior years accounts. This will mean that this year cost will rise by the value of the payment to KPRL.

To explain my third point. KRA normally grants 30 days within which product imported in transit to other countries should be exported. In case one has been unable to export, KRA can grant an extension. However, in the past two weeks or so they have been isssuing directives to oil marketers that make this impossible.
Granted that KK use Dar extensively, but the Uganda subsidiary which remains their biggest subsidiary can only be served from Mombasa. This will mean that either KK reduce the volume imported for Uganda and risk stock outs and lower profits or import product as before but risk penalties incase exportation is not done on time.

Itari muting'oe ihuragwo ngi ni Ngai
mwanahisa
#13 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:43:39 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 6/2/2008
Posts: 1,438
milken wrote:
@ Gordon Gekko
Am very cautious for the following reasons.
From last years accounts, the Kenyan operation accounted for about 60% of th etotal profit. Consequently, unless this unit's profits increases the total group prifits will not increase materially.

KK has assumed that they are not supposed to pay KPRL hence they did not factor that cost in prior years accounts. This will mean that this year cost will rise by the value of the payment to KPRL.

To explain my third point. KRA normally grants 30 days within which product imported in transit to other countries should be exported. In case one has been unable to export, KRA can grant an extension. However, in the past two weeks or so they have been isssuing directives to oil marketers that make this impossible.
Granted that KK use Dar extensively, but the Uganda subsidiary which remains their biggest subsidiary can only be served from Mombasa. This will mean that either KK reduce the volume imported for Uganda and risk stock outs and lower profits or import product as before but risk penalties incase exportation is not done on time.



KK is trading at a discount for precisely the first two reasons you have cited.

I believe KRA is applying the same rule across the board. That being so any costs will be added on to the final product price in Uganda. While this could dampen demand slightly, petroleum demand is fairly inelastic, so Ugandans will just have to grin and bear it.
mwanahisa
#14 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:45:10 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 6/2/2008
Posts: 1,438
@milken. What makes you believe that Uganda can only be served from Mombasa?
VituVingiSana
#15 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:52:11 PM
Rank: Chief

Joined: 1/3/2007
Posts: 18,349
Location: Nairobi
I feel like a proud father who sees his kids excel...

At times I felt 'alone' in defending KK... but now I am in an enlightened & growing group... Some might call a cult!

Long Story Short... KK will make the believers good money!
Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
milken
#16 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 5:09:22 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/25/2008
Posts: 192
Location: Nairobi
@mwanahisa
1.A quick look at an East Africa Map will explain that moving product from Dar to KLA is twice as long as moving product from MSA to KLA. The fact that Ug product is moved by pipeline to Nakuru, Eld or Kisumu makes Tanzania five days longer.

2.Ugandan market is very unstructured and ill regulated with a myriad of small operators who can be able to obtain small quantities for their stations from the small oil companies in Kenya. Though not operating in cohorts, they will eat in to KK market share especially when they have stock outs.

Though unrelated to our discussion, It is my view that KK and TKL are good only in the short run but five years down with Ug producing its own oil we in for a very big re-allignment.
Itari muting'oe ihuragwo ngi ni Ngai
Gordon Gekko
#17 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 5:41:15 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 5/27/2008
Posts: 3,760
@milken, when Ug begin producing, KK will just source from them and not ADNOC or wherever they currently source from. So how can KK lose?
mwanahisa
#18 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 6:01:48 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 6/2/2008
Posts: 1,438
milken wrote:
@mwanahisa
1.A quick look at an East Africa Map will explain that moving product from Dar to KLA is twice as long as moving product from MSA to KLA. The fact that Ug product is moved by pipeline to Nakuru, Eld or Kisumu makes Tanzania five days longer.

2.Ugandan market is very unstructured and ill regulated with a myriad of small operators who can be able to obtain small quantities for their stations from the small oil companies in Kenya. Though not operating in cohorts, they will eat in to KK market share especially when they have stock outs.

Though unrelated to our discussion, It is my view that KK and TKL are good only in the short run but five years down with Ug producing its own oil we in for a very big re-allignment.


I am aware that it is a shorter distance from Mombasa to Kampala than from Dar. Nonetheless, the pipeline is not able to transport all the requirements for Kenya and Uganda. Hence a large chunk of oil is ferried by road.

I presume that it is cheaper to transport product even by road to Uganda via Kenya than via TZ. There will however be circumstances where TZ is a better option e.g. during the PEV in early 2008.

I have just looked at KK's 2009 annual report and Segman wrote this:

"Tnazania continued to play its crucial role in the Distribution channels to Rwanda, Uganda, DRC (Eastern and Lubumbashi areas) and Zambia." So KK does use TZ to ferry some of their product into Uganda and I bet they have a good reason for it.

As for the oil discovery in Uganda, there will still be need for downstream marketers. In any case, Uganda will probably be 1 of more than a dozen territories in which KK will be operating in by then.
milken
#19 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 6:24:34 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/25/2008
Posts: 192
Location: Nairobi
@Gordon Gekko when Ug begin producing, KK will just source from them and not ADNOC or wherever they currently source from. So how can KK lose?

Why KK and other Kenyan companies are able to export to Uganda, Rwanda, DRC etc is because the product most comes from Kenya and foreign companies can not use the Kenyan pipeline. When the equation changes and product comes Ug all the companies in RW, DRC and Burundi will source the products from Ug on their own account.

@mwanahisa
BTW It is illegal to move petroleum products other that Fuel oil by road from Mombasa. Well some companies have exemptions bu the cost (about Kes1.5per litre more) is untenable.

I admit that there are supply challenges within the KPC system, however there has never been a challenge in moving products by road from Nairobi. Hence Kenya will always be better that TZ even with PEV. Segman is giving the shareholders hogwash by saying that product can move by road from TZ to UG. As a matter of fact even for Rwanda the government had to intervene and levy higher taxes on product from Kenya to encourage guys to go to Dar and establish another supply route. With the new budget in June moving petroleum taxes to specific from ad valorem, Rwanda customers have started trooping back to Kenya.

In Burundi, Dar is still advantageous owing to a dubious tax structure that favors product from TZ. (By the way I wonder what our Ministry of Trade does. I tried to meet the Kenyan trade attache to Rwanda over this issue and he was very unhelpful)
Itari muting'oe ihuragwo ngi ni Ngai
mwanahisa
#20 Posted : Thursday, November 04, 2010 6:36:10 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 6/2/2008
Posts: 1,438
@milken, Tell us more. You seem to be very much in the loop, so I will definitely appreciate more information. As for now, I can only quote what is in the public domain, unless I have evidence to the contrary.

Kobil Uganda, Kobil Rwanda, Kobil Burundi are registered entities in those countries. There will be no reason for them not to be allowed to do business in Uganda or to import from there. Or are you saying only Nationals will be allowed to operate in Uganda as well as in neighbouring countries?
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.