In a recent interview with Cape Talk, Peter Morgan, CEO of the Liquid Fuels Wholesalers Association of South Africa, provided insights into the implications of Shell’s impending exit from the country’s market. Contrary to widespread concerns, Morgan expressed optimism regarding the fate of Shell’s petrol stations, suggesting that mass job cuts and closures are unlikely outcomes.
Morgan outlined a strategic approach that Shell is likely to adopt, drawing parallels with its operations in other African nations. He indicated that rather than a complete withdrawal, Shell is poised to retain a presence through its subsidiary brand, Viva. Under this arrangement, Shell would maintain partial ownership of its petrol stations, with Viva emerging as a smaller sub-brand within the South African market.
Crucially, Morgan emphasized that Shell’s decision does not entail the closure of its extensive retail network, comprising approximately 600 forecourts nationwide. Thus, the jobs supported by these stations are not immediately endangered, and the facilities are not slated for imminent shutdown.
The proposed structure for the Viva sub-brand entails an 80% ownership stake held by partnering entities, while Shell retains the remaining 20%. This model reflects a broader trend observed among major oil companies operating across Africa, underscoring a strategic shift towards streamlined operations while maintaining market presence.
Addressing concerns over the potential impact on employment, Morgan sought to allay fears by highlighting the historical context of similar industry transitions. He noted that past actions by oil industry peers, including Caltex, Engen, and Puma, failed to elicit significant disruptions or job losses within the market.
Expressing his confidence in the resilience of South Africa’s petroleum sector, Morgan downplayed the alarm surrounding Shell’s exit. “We are not talking about losing jobs at petrol stations here,” he asserted, reaffirming the stability of employment within the industry.
Shell’s decision to divest from its South African retail, transport, and refining operations follows a comprehensive review of its global downstream and renewables portfolio. Despite its longstanding presence in South Africa dating back to 1902, the oil giant has opted to relinquish its shareholdings in response to evolving business imperatives.
Notably, Shell’s exit coincides with BHP’s acquisition of Anglo American, a prominent South African mining company. Speculation regarding the motivations behind Shell’s departure has led to conjecture about the broader investment climate in the country. However, both BHP and Shell have asserted that the divestitures are driven by strategic business considerations rather than a reflection of South Africa’s investment attractiveness.
In conclusion, while Shell’s impending exit from South Africa has sparked apprehension within the market, stakeholders such as Peter Morgan offer reassurance regarding the resilience of the country’s petroleum sector. With a strategic focus on maintaining market presence through the Viva sub-brand, Shell aims to navigate the evolving landscape of the South African energy market while mitigating potential disruptions to employment and operations.
