Shareholder Valuations of Petroleum Companies and Oilfield Services During the 2008 and 2014 Oil Price Shocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study analyzes the impact of the 2008 and 2014 oil price falls on the shareholder returns of diversified oil and gas majors, Canadian oil sands producers, US shale oil and gas producers and oilfield service companies. The 2008 an 2014 oil price shocks lead to capital book losses for investor TSR at year end. In both years, the TSR losses were disproportionately large as compared to the actual slow down (which was very modest) in retained earnings growth. Our recommendation is that investors should not only use P/E ratios to identify value growth stock investment opportunities. An alternative methodology quantifies the degree of speculative valuation involved in the TSR component of capital gains (losses). When negative speculative valuations are large, future TSR growth is most likely. Companies that want to mitigate unwarranted erosion of their market capitalization due to stock price declines should ramp up advertorial efforts and point out value growth opportunities to attract investors, especially in times of depressed stock prices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".