idpickering wrote:I do get where you're coming from. I only hold Sainsbury's in the overall sector because I think they're the best one available, and people have to buy food somewhere. Much like the fact that smokers have to buy their chosen fix.
I find this a puzzling argument. Are you suggesting that people do not need to buy clothes? Household Goods? Furnishings? Are we all going to be setting up our workshops like manic elves and making all these other items? And all the while we will refuse to make bread? Bake a cake?
Do not misunderstand me, the retail sector is definitely going through some troubles thanks to our changing shopping habits but I would suggest that we will still be looking to shopkeepers to provide most or even all those products, however we choose to shop for them.
Likewise, to get back to the topic of this thread, the need or otherwise for Royal Dutch Shell ‘B’ (RDSB), oil remains a fundamental driver of our economy. Changes are afoot for sure but slowly and in any case, why won’t companies like RDSB, an energy company with decades of experience, be involved in those changes? In the forefront of whatever type of energy our economy turns to, if oil becomes too costly? I tend to think that Company Directors and Senior Management are savvy enough to see a changing world and make plans to adapt the businesses they lead and work for, to continue making a contribution
I cannot see into the future but I feel confident that companies like RBSB and, in the Retail Sector, Marks & Spencer (MKS), will more than likely still be around. That is not to say one should invest in these companies blindly, nor that there will not be some casualties, there surely will be. But, do not refuse to invest because of unsubstantiated opinions of a future world and the equally unsubstantiated feelings that companies cannot or will not adapt.
Ian