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: Crimson Ghost who wrote (37892)2/20/1999 12:20:00 PM
From: Mike from La.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
George,
I think you hit it on the head. The key is expanding OPEC's base to include other producers. Norway and Mexico have lined up. If Russia joins in, and there are a lot of good reasons for them to do that, then we have big news. Many possible outcomes. Just to throw out another theory, could the US's decision to put oil in the SPR be partly for the purpose of contributing to the cut back pot, as a result of the discussions Richardson had with the Saudis right before the decision was announced? Maybe, maybe not.

Mike from La.



To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (37892)2/20/1999 2:48:00 PM
From: A. Geiche  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
It has been reported a couple weeks ago that while other oil producing countries are losing, US PROFITS from the current oil glut and cheap oil -- something in amount of one and a half billion dollars a month. Do you consider this in your theories?



To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (37892)2/21/1999 1:25:00 AM
From: Pete Young  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
George,

Some here seem to forget that the Saudis are US puppets in many repects. They would never undertake to drive oil to $8 without US approval. I doubt very much the US wants to see $8 oil, but I have been wrong before.

I sometimes wonder if the Saudis have been pushed by the U.S. to lower oil prices in order to stimulate the world economy, acting in a way, much like a world central bank would. Aren't lower energy prices, at the base of every economic process in the world, like lowering interest rates? The Saudis have a large stake in the world economy--having it crash into a worldwide depression would be catastrophic to SA's main export. (In the Great Depression, I believe that oil went as low as $.10/b, equiv. to $1/b now.) As an aside, ex-oil minister of SA, Yamani was concerned in the salad days of OPEC that the more militant members, (Saddam's Iraq and Qaddifi's Libya) were going to seriously damage the world economy (maybe they did) with their anti-American feelings and greed to the detriment of all the oil producers.

As to your assertion that SA is an American puppet...absolutely. For quite some time. Here's an excerpt from David Yergin's The Prize pp642-3 supporting the view that the US has considerable input on oil prices (or used to).

But Washington did not want to aggressively force prices down. "The only chance to bring oil prices down immediately would be massive political warfare against countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran to make them risk their political stability and maybe their security if they did not cooperate," Kissinger, Ford's Secretary of State, explained in 1975. "That is too high a price to pay, even for an immediate reduction in oil prices. If you bring about on overthrow of the existing system in Saudi Arabia and a Qaddafi takes over, or if you break Iran's image of being capable of resting outside pressures, you're going to open up political trends that could defeat your economic objectives." Indeed there was some concern that the oil exporters might themselves suddenly drop the price substantially and thus undermine expensive new developments, such as those in the North Sea. As a result, there were discussions among the members of the International Energy Agency about establishing a "minimum safeguard price" to provide a floor to protect higher-cost energy investment in the Western world against an abrupt, perhaps politically motivated, slash in world prices.

Oh, International Energy Agency, where are you now? <grin>

Consider the ramifications of a fundamentalist takeover in SA, due to the stresses caused by low oil. We'd be stuck with a pretty hostile ME; Saddam's Iraq, Qaddifi's Libya, Iran's mullahs, Saudi's ??. Big percentage of the world's oil, correct? Then we could deal with ahhh, Russia, Nigeria... Nope, in a sane world, policy makers would prevent it...but then again, we did end up with Iraq, Iran, and Libya not being our best of friends under the care and feeding of the "best and brightest".

Pete