Skip to main content

Fidelity dumps Petrochina holdings

Reuters and FT.com are reporting that Fidelity Investments has cut its holdings in the US-listed ADRs of PetroChina.

Summary from Reuters:

Fidelity Investments, the world's No.1 mutual fund company, has cut its exposure to PetroChina Co. Ltd. (0857.HK: Quote, Profile , Research) following pressure by human rights groups over the Chinese oil firm's links to Sudan.

In a regulatory filing on Tuesday, Fidelity said it had cut its holding of PetroChina (PTR.N: Quote, Profile , Research) American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) by 91 percent in the first quarter of 2007.

Apparently, Fidelity has decided to give in to the pressure from various human rights groups who are worried about PetroChina's business operations in Sudan and feel that China's influence is obscuring the issue of genocide in that country.


Similar pressure tactics and criticisms have been aimed at Berkshire Hathaway and its highly visible chairman, Warren Buffett, for the company's investment stake in PetroChina. Buffett recently brushed off calls for Berkshire to divest its stake in the company, saying that the company had no issues with PetroChina's operations in Sudan and that the actions of Chinese government was a separate issue that neither he nor Berkshire could control.

Berkshire shareholders voted down the proposal to divest at the company's annual meeting.

As for
PetroChina's share price, it's plain to see the drop in early 2007 that would have coincided with Fidelity selling off most of its stake in the company. Would Berkshire have taken the opportunity to buy more during this time frame?

Update: Latest 13F filings reveal no change in the size of Berkshire's PetroChina holdings from quarter ending March 31, 2007 over the previous quarter. We understand that this info may not give the whole picture, as Buffett/Berkshire are known to argue for delays in sending info regarding investments holdings in an attempt to prevent investor copycatting.

More opinion on
the morality surrounding shareholder divestments and PetroChina from fund manager Cody Willard. See also, Bloomberg columnist, William Pesek's contrary stance.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dot-Com Bubble in 1 Chart: InfoSpace

With all the recent talk of a new bubble in the making, thanks in part to the Yellen Fed's continued easy money stance , I thought it'd be instructive to revisit our previous stock market bubble - in one quick chart. So here's what a real stock market bubble looks like.  Here's what a bubble *really* looks like. InfoSpace in 1999-2001. $QQQ $BCOR pic.twitter.com/xjsMk433H7 — David Shvartsman (@FinanceTrends) February 24, 2015   For those of you who are a little too young to recall it, this is a chart of InfoSpace at the height of the Nasdaq dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. This fallen angel soared to fantastic heights only to plummet back down to earth as the bubble, and InfoSpace's shady business plan , turned to rubble. As detailed in our post, " Round trip stocks: Momentum booms and busts ", InfoSpace rocketed from under $100 a share to over $1,300 a share in less than six months.  In a pattern common to many parabolic shooting stars, the s

Jesse Livermore: How to Trade in Stocks (1940 Ed. E-book)

If you've been around markets for any length of time, you've probably heard of 20th century supertrader, Jesse Livermore . Today we're highlighting his rare 1940 work, How to Trade in Stocks (ebook, pdf). But first, a brief overview of Livermore's life and trading career (bio from Jesse Livermore's Wikipedia entry). "During his lifetime, Livermore gained and lost several multi-million dollar fortunes. Most notably, he was worth $3 million and $100 million after the 1907 and 1929 market crashes, respectively. He subsequently lost both fortunes. Apart from his success as a securities speculator, Livermore left traders a working philosophy for trading securities that emphasizes increasing the size of one's position as it goes in the right direction and cutting losses quickly. Ironically, Livermore sometimes did not follow his rules strictly. He claimed that lack of adherence to his own rules was the main reason for his losses after making his 1907 and

New! Finance Trends now at FinanceTrendsLetter.com

Update for our readers: Finance Trends has a new URL!  Please bookmark our new web address at Financetrendsletter.com Readers sticking with RSS updates should point your feed readers to our new Finance Trends feedburner .   Thank you to all of our loyal readers who have been with us since the early days. Exciting stuff to come in the weeks ahead! As a quick reminder, you can subscribe to our free email list to receive the Finance Trends Newsletter . You'll receive email updates about once every 4-8 weeks (about 2-3 times per quarter).  Stay up to date with our real-time insights and updates on Twitter .