SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tommaso who wrote (72390)9/6/2000 8:54:47 AM
From: Tomas  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 95453
 
How high could crude prices go? Is world in for another oil price shock?

"It's not likely to be pretty -- unless, of course, you happen to own shares in oil and gas companies".

The Globe & Mail, September 6
By Mathew Ingram

How high could crude prices go? That's the question being asked by investors, money managers and commodity traders, not to mention anyone filling up their minivan or sport utility vehicle at the gas pump. At more than $33 (U.S.) a barrel, oil futures are once again bumping up against 10-year highs and all eyes are on OPEC as the cartel meets later this week.

Despite OPEC's commitment to increase production if prices get too high, there are some industry watchers who believe that those 10-year records will soon be a thing of the past and that crude oil prices will soar to the $40- or even $50-a-barrel range. That's oil shock territory and the repercussions could be felt from the gas pump to the White House.

The members of OPEC -- Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Venezuela, Qatar, Algeria, Libya, Nigeria and Indonesia -- are to meet on Sunday to discuss whether to increase production. Under a "price-band" agreement, the cartel is supposed to boost output by 500,000 barrels a day if the price of a basket of crudes stays over $28 for more than 20 days, which it will likely have done by the time the group meets.

In the world of crude oil, however, perception is almost more important than reality, and there is a perception that a 500,000-barrel hike won't be enough to sop up the demand that still exists in the global oil market, let alone account for the fact that crude inventories in the United States are lower than they have been for almost 25 years.

"We had expected for a while that OPEC would raise its production, but it is not going to be enough," Peter Young, an oil industry analyst with the Royal Bank of Scotland, told Agence France-Presse recently.

How high could prices go? "I don't think we're even close to a top in this market," one energy futures trader said yesterday. "The potential is for this market to go to ridiculous-type numbers -- $50 [a barrel] maybe."

Even OPEC president Ali Rodriguez has reportedly said that he expects crude oil prices will stay high regardless of whether production is boosted by 500,000 barrels after the meeting. "It would be dangerously naive to think today that with a simple increase in production, the problem of stabilizing the oil market will be resolved," Mr. Rodriguez told the Venezuelan daily newspaper El Nacional recently.

One OPEC source told Dow Jones that a one-million-barrel increase is required in order to bring prices back down, while some analysts say an extra 1.5 million barrels is needed -- or three times what OPEC's price-band agreement would produce. Part of the problem with defining the right amount is that the cartel is already producing more than their previously agreed-upon quotas to the tune of about 700,000 barrels.

According to a recent industry survey, OPEC supply in August rose by 670,000 barrels a day to 29 million barrels. Production for the 10 that have quotas (all but Iraq) came in at 26 million or about 720,000 barrels more than the official limit. Saudi Arabia reportedly produced 8.6 million barrels or about 350,000 barrels more than its quota, while the rest of OPEC only managed to produce an extra 80,000 barrels a day.

What all that boils down to is that OPEC oil producers have already cranked their production up to levels not seen for nearly 20 years and prices have still not come down. And the fact is that OPEC is a cartel of one at the moment, with Saudi Arabia the only major producer capable of adding production. To compound the problem, non-OPEC nations such as Mexico don't have the ability to boost their production by much, either.

And the result of all this? If Saudi Arabia doesn't act firmly enough, prices could hit levels not seen since the oil price shock of 1979, when Ayatollah Khomaini overthrew the Shah of Iran and oil markets panicked.

"The risk of an oil price shock is unusually high," Goldman Sachs analyst Bill Dudley wrote in a recent report, saying there was a "10-per-cent probability that oil prices will exceed $50 a barrel within the next year."

A price shock would have more far-reaching effects than just higher prices at the gas pumps. Market watchers point out that a hike in crude could affect Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan's decision on whether to raise interest rates. Mr. Greenspan was at the helm 10 years ago when Iraq invaded Kuwait, sending oil prices into the stratosphere and the U.S. economy spiralling into a recession.

Economists say things shouldn't be as bad this time around, because oil now plays a smaller role in the U.S. economy: about 1 per cent in 1999 compared with 2.5 per cent in 1990 and 6.5 per cent in 1979. But it's still not likely to be pretty -- unless, of course, you happen to own shares in oil and gas companies, who will be neck-deep in cash.
Mathew Ingram writes analysis and commentary for globeandmail.com; his column appears on the Web site Monday through Friday.

Readers can send e-mail to mingram@globeandmail.com

globeandmail.com



To: Tommaso who wrote (72390)9/6/2000 10:19:10 AM
From: Roebear  Respond to of 95453
 
Tommaso,

It would seem with the internet we could do a better job of acting like a democracy at least in that we could use it to provide a better selection of candidates. Of course, this is a Republic and we are all "Republicans" whether we like it or not...

I believe we should draft candidates for all the registered partys, from among all the citizens of the land. Like we used to conscript soldiers (call it a patriotic duty), then pay them a handsome salary (say ten million) and behead them in public if they are found guilty of graft or treason, VBG.

But whether even that would work is debatable, given the tendency of public information in this country to be slanted so far away from the truth. Truth is the lifeblood of a Democracy, even a Republican one, and though we suffer anemia in this respect, I suppose it has always been so.
The question is whether there is more or less of a dearth of truth in this age of light speed communications? Certainly there is no drought effecting disinformation in the media and no lack of baubles dangling to distract us from the serious issues of our times.

One of my main concerns is the serious erosion of our rights
as individual citizens which has occurred over the last 30 years or so. That runoff from those eroded freedoms of ours seems to have flown to the stagnant pond of Federal government. But then again, its hard to be democratic when few know or care about their neighbors.

All you have to do is drive on our highways and know by that experience that it's every man and woman for themselves and may the devil take the hindmost!

By all means, I agree that this is not a forum for politics and promise not to bring it up again here. At least until after the elections, ggg.

Best Regards,

Roebear