Tag Archives: economy

December 3, 2024 · 22:58

Bully tactics

The BBC (LinkedIn also) gave us a story. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgrwj0p2dd9o) is giving us ‘Trump threatens 100% tariff on Brics nations if they try to replace dollar’. We are given “US President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to impose 100% tariffs on a bloc of nine nations if they were to create a rival currency to the US dollar. “The idea that the BRICS Countries are trying to move away from the Dollar while we stand by and watch is OVER,” Trump wrote on social media on Saturday.”Now we can shout high and low, but the simple setting is that this is merely the second setting on the line that the good times are over in the US and things are about to get a lot worse. The simplest setting to consider is that if these facts present themselves the first hurdle will crash the little economy that they have. Let me explain. If President elect Trump goes through with that. Stuff in a place called Walmart will become close to twice as expensive. This implies that Walmart will drop all goods from China and India. As such others will have to provide, which will turn out to be close to impossible. Consider that Walmart employs 2,100,000 people and as I see it close to 60% will be out of a job then. Walmart has a net income of 16 billion dollars. It comes from $648 billion dollars. Now all these Chinese and Indian goods would get a 100% Tarif. So what happens when all those goods get a 100% surcharge? The American administration will drown Walmart into oblivion. Add to that the Google issues and China will get near clean run on running the global economy. So why wouldn’t they push for a Yuan to become the new central currency? And in that process slam the American administration as well? I reckon that China is chomping at the bits to get started on that. With the hardships given to Google, Huawei gets a smashing option to take market shares from Google in Europe the Middle East and Asia. Apple will get hit, but not as much. Then we get the Walmart and its wannabe’s who rely on cheap goods from China and India and they will all pretty much lose whatever they had. When we see Walmarts closing all over America many will realise that the game for America is up. I did mention this danger for well over a decade. When you let the debt run out of control with no exit strategy there is no real solution coming. I saw that a mile away, so why didn’t these overpaid economists? Now we get the new AI bubble and soon people will realise that it is merely another gimmick. When the revenue stays away from the books, when these revenues get pushed back again and again the third step will be reached. So president elect can bully as much as they can, but the pole position was missed and whomever is in control have no solutions to offer other then austerity that goes beyond anything Wall Street could ever have predicted and the party is over now. Don’t worry the family members to Sam Walton and Bud Walton will be fine. They can relocate to a nice place where they can spend their money. The other 2.1 million are royally screwed. I will not blame any Walton. They played the economy game and they played it well, they have options. The bulk will not. And when the dollar is replaced, banks, retirement companies will as I suspect buckle as well. The impact of a $36,000,000,000,000 debt. The impact will go slow but it would be undeniable. As BRICS decides on another currency they will attract several other players and the European parties will consider the change and they will do what is in the best interest of their Euro, they will not care about the US dollar for one second. That is the reality that was pretty much spelled out half a decade ago. I get that America will try to do what is best for America, but that option was nulled when parties decided to break up Google. That was the first step towards the end. And now Huawei will be the best option for many players. So as the economic map will be redrawn, we will see a new horizon with India, China, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia at the head of this new horizon. In that new map there is no longer a mention of America, the US dollar will remain a little while longer until all other nations have dumped trillions in dollar bonds. That will be the trigger that ends the world economy as it currently is. 

Have a great day today, tomorrow is the midweek and a mere three weeks until Christmas.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 27, 2024 · 17:06

Saudi Fun craft

That is on the agenda. Most people are hauling what they can to see their name in COP29, but the others (or those who put their name down already) are trying to be seen as the anti-China voice in the middle east. Because that is what Trump wants, right?

That is the setting of the next wannabe, the next facilitator or the next service provider. Saudi Arabia, Aramco, the UAE and ADNOC’s next need, that is what their limited view states. I cannot agree. That was what the region needed, the next iteration however is as subtle as a maul to a shin.

You see, most are ‘reacting’ to ‘Better offer needed if the US wants to pull Saudi Arabia away from China’ (Amwaj media) or ‘Saudi Arabia seeks mining deals with Chinese, Indian and Canadian firms in industry push’ (AL-monitor). There are more headlines, but the cautious player notices that America (or USA) is in several instances no longer mentioned. That is the actual play. President  elect Trump has a problem. His library is not on the mind of those who need to have it on their minds and that is a plural issue. Microsoft might be ‘offering’ the world to the UAE in AI, but the critics who know a thing or two are skeptical. I cannot tell if there is a silence delay, or an actual disregard in play for the USA. You need to be in the know with China and a certain palace in Riyadh to know the actual setting. And in this Amwaj gives us “if Washington truly wants Riyadh to join the US camp, it should come up with a better offer—instead of a proposition with strings attached.” Funny that, I said something similar on March 11th 2020 in ‘Who is Miss Calculation?’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/03/11/who-is-miss-calculation/) the words are not the same, but the spirit was. As most would embrace Good business is where you find it, others went for Money talks, bullshit walks. So who was president then?

It does not matter, policies are always on a turntable, but the disc hits that direction 33 times a minute. Faster if you play a CD. No matter whose president when this matter resurfaces. China had a while to set his ducks in a row and he merely needs to watch the fallout whilst he takes shelter regarding the massive boink the Americas show when things turn sour.

America needs a positive hit and that implies being close friends with the Arabian allies UAE and Saudi Arabia. All whilst they know that they need to be friends with China as well. And that is a bitter pill to swallow for America. The tables turn even further as elemental deals (where America would have been the A-team for Arabia) we now see China, India and Canada taking slices of that pie as well. I send stern warnings in 2020 and now we see it happen. So consider that America had the biggest part of that pie until 2015, now we see that America (with $36,000,000,000,000 debt) ends up with a suspected mere 45% of that pie, 55% went into other directions. Add to that the deals Europe and Australia expects to make before Jan 1st 2025 and you see that Saudi Arabia is doing what it needs to do for its country. It might not look nice, but that is the reality of it all and I gave the people heads up for over 4 years. Now it all ‘looks like a crises’ that does not mean it is. It is merely a crises when you were unaware of it all and America was very aware. So seeks the sands with COP29 all whilst there are over 41000 flights each day and many are not needed. So how is that for “biologically formed organic matter”. Yes they will stop some of this all whilst a massive chunk of of these 41000 flight each day could be deleted. So where is COP29 now?

And it gets to be bad, or worse for America. The Tariff deal for Canada is seen as disastrous. But when it can deal with China and Saudi Arabia, what Canada loses on one side, it will gain more on the other side, America painted itself in a corner. And for the sweeter deal? It might be too late for that. China has gained about 15% of the pie that was meant for America, as such the bills will be pushed along forward and there is actual consideration that America would have to lease its land to others to make a shilling and it is not shillings that America needs. It needs a wheelbarrow of these coins. As I see it, America now has less than 4 turns until it can no longer make any moves. It wont be able to afford the entry fee to make a move. As such I personally believe that America has been playing the wrong game. They were playing chess whilst Chinese chess was needed. They never used the board optimal and now that they figured out the game, it is too late for that.

In my own view (optionally a wrong one), the friends of Trump are heading for the hills. They will not get away Scott free, but they will get away. The rest gets saddled with the biggest invoice in human history and they cannot foot the bill. And don’t think that this is not on you all. Your pensions are about to go the way of Lehman Brothers 2003. The loans that are still outgoing will be foreclosed by the banks foreclosing your banks and you end up having nothing to live upon. That too was blatantly obvious before the end of 2023. Now it matters to whom have the flexibility to make moves with whatever capital they have. Don’t rely on the stock markets. Have investments that are mobile, or optionally real estate. I feel certain that it will come to blows in 2025 when America shows that it has issues settling the bills they have. That is when panic goes global. And when you see this unfold those with a decent penny in Aramco and ADNOC will have a return on investment, the rest? Whatever of these rest players will be left alive in Q2 2025, because there is no reality that this will be true.

And when you ask how come? That would be fair and the answer wa staring you in the face. Country 1 gave payment to a debt of country 2 and Country 2 gave payment to a debt of country 1. So what is that called? And this had been going on for decades. I thought the barn was done away with when we learned of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic going south on the debit line. However, the worst was dealt with. This time around it might be worse. The USA would need to call themselves bankrupt and the impact of that is beyond my ability to see, but I am willing to place a bet that China knows exactly what to do. You see, when this comes to pass China and others can vie for the 6,278,000 billion barrels a day it imports. It might be cheaper then getting their own oil, but that is where it is headed. India and China will try to get the largest chunk of it. As such Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Colombia will need new customers and I reckon India and China will be chomping at the bits to get these slices of oil. It will impact global economy to a much larger extent. And that was merely the first part. Consider that Huawei is taking over another slice of technology and you have one country falling short on several fields, merely because they did not think things through. So wanna seen what happens when you owe a bank a massive amount of cash and you can only cover 60% of the monthly payments?

How long until this party is over?

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 22, 2024 · 20:41

The end is nigh

Yup, it is. And not in a normal way. There is no demon sprouting on the land. You see Lucifer Morningstar has greed driven politicians doing his dirty work and what is more satisfying than any person digging his own grave? So how did this setting deploy? Well as the DoJ decided that there agenda matters most they are about to force Google its Chrome browser. (At https://www.itnews.com.au/news/google-must-sell-chrome-us-doj-argues-613298) We see “Google must sell its Chrome browser, share data and search results with rivals and take other measures – including possibly selling Android – to end its monopoly on online search, prosecutors argued to a judge” Its always the stupid and greedy that redefines the borders of hell. Anyway, whatever his ‘personal’ reasons are the game is literally afoot. In this instance whist that is considered Europe and the Middle East will select the dollars for donuts option and in this we need to consider the second cog in this wheel. It is given to us by Politico (at https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-china-huawei-ban-2029-5g-networks-government-greens-lawmaker-4g-strand/) which they gave us in July. There we are given ‘Germany goes soft on China, dragging out Huawei ban until 2029’ and this ban will be delayed again and again. Lets not forget that American anti-Chinese actions led to this. And no matter how we feel about it. The Americans NEVER gave ample evidence for any of it. So as one start to ferment the sentiments of how stupid this American administration is, Huawei will add to this. You see Huawei now has HarmonyOS and it has a few other arrows in its quiver. The larger setting for the internet of things was ignored for too long. And as Germany delays, so will France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands and the Nordic regions. Like domino stones they will tumble each other. All whilst this administration will find another person to take a metal briefcase to the European leaders like a pop star and we saw that before. So the evidence better be real this time around. Still that will take time and in the meantime we are given by Huawei Central (at https://www.huaweicentral.com/huawei-matepad-pro-13-2-2025-will-reshape-office-experience-ceo/) We are “shown” ‘Huawei MatePad Pro 13.2 2025 will reshape office experience: CEO’ and this is the larger setting. For when Google loses market share, in that same instance Microsoft loses market share as well. The Huawei MatePad Pro 13.2 2025 is now only 4 days away. With HarmonyOS it will be able to connect nearly all other devices. As we are shown that the “Multi-Window enables users to open several apps in split-screen mode for multitasking. One can also swipe an app inward from the left/right edge to bring up the Multi-Window dock. It’s a useful tool for office work, meetings, and more.” That is precisely why politicians should stay away from technology decisions. Basically they are too stupid to see the forest through the trees and in this instance there will be a massive jolt to Google, Microsoft and I reckon that Apple will also see a dip in revenue. Or as some will say “It sucks to be you” to the Attorney General. 

So am I right or am I wrong?
That remains to be seen, but as I see it, the demand for the Google ‘simplification’ will open the doors of HarmonyOS to Europe and for a much stronger setting to the Middle East. And with the uncertainty of the Google stage. Huawei and their data centres. The setting of Google will make a lot of people nervous and that works for Huawei. We were given last year “The launch of the Huawei Cloud Riyadh Region was announced at the Huawei Cloud Summit Saudi Arabia 2023. The new cloud region, located in an STC/Center3 data centre in Riyadh, offers three availability zones. It is the company’s first region in the Middle East.” How long will it take for the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to follow suit? And how happy do you think Microsoft will be to do their ‘AI’ work in a Huawei data centre? All this will come to pass (unless someone muzzles the AG). There is a setting to it all and one brick will stumble the next one and the next one. It is the result of the internet of things. And with the Huawei MatePad Pro there is more than just the connectivity. It will slow iPad sales and from there Microsoft will find themselves in more hot waters (some they did to themselves) and the UAE will demand that Microsoft will do its AI work wherever it needs to be and as such Microsoft will enable Huawei even more. All this because someone has anti-Google feelings. For 15 years Google found and created an innovative road. It is not up to the DoJ to reward stupidity to the competitors of Google. They forgot the basics and these settings will now work for China as well. 

And as we see that Politico gives us “Under the agreement, components manufactured by Huawei, China’s leading 5G equipment maker, are to be banned from sensitive core network infrastructure by the end of 2026, rather than by the end of 2025 as previously envisaged, as reported by POLITICO. When it comes to the radio access networks (RAN) such as antenna masts, Huawei components would have to be removed by the end of 2029 instead of the end of 2026. This is a satisfactory outcome for German operators, who were in the process of upgrading these networks anyway, thus limiting extra costs.” You see one thing, but I see that there is no real America by 2027, as such the ban becomes moot. Add to this the expansions that Saudi Arabia is making with the STC. The Saudi Telecom Company is already making waves in Egypt and now it seems Portugal as well all this enables Huawei more and more growth and as Google starts to falter the European politicians will try to divert whatever they can as to not be eaten by their ‘allies’. As the west falls to Huawei and the STC the more hardship America will face. It all started by attacking its own base and by attacking Google they basically drowned their own livestock and  from there the business opportunities they had. Funny for me, not so much for Microsoft who basically let it happen and now that the office suite is under attack (from next week) we will see all kinds of spin by one player on how hard it will be for the shifters. The overt setting was that (an oversimplified setting) the Department of Justice should have stayed out of matters. They hide behind ‘monopoly’ but that game states that all players are equal whilst that setting hasn’t been true for decades. The world had Adobe, Amazon, Apple, Google and Oracle. The others are spinning, making presumptuous presentations on whatever wasn’t real yet and now there will be a tap on the door. How will it end?

I honestly have no idea. The only thing I foresee is that with the breaking up of Google the end will be nigh for those relying on ‘scripted’ settings for the better things that it will bring. Because that just ain’t so. For things to become better true innovators are needed. And the bigger part of those are not in America. The 5 I mentioned has them, but when the For each of those China might have an alternative. Huawei could now replace Google (in part), Tencent with Huawei will be able to replace parts of Apple. As I see it only Oracle has a steady foundation and it all depends on the DoJ waking up what they are about to unleash and still if they do not Credibility towards Google will wane, that much the DoJ already achieved. I wonder if they realise what they are about to achieve. 

The world seems to become more and more Chinese oriented. Well, that is what this administration seemingly wanted.

Have fun with the fallout.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 20, 2024 · 18:43

Puzzlement

That happens and it does not matter how bright you are. At times you get the message and it makes no sense (at that moment). I had that yesterday with an article by Fortune (at https://fortune.com/2024/11/17/luxury-goods-lvmh-kering-bain-broken-promises/) we get ‘50 million people have stopped buying luxury brands like Dior and Burberry after ‘broken promises’ to customers’. The first question that pops into my head was ‘How do they get to these numbers?’, lets be clear I am not accusing anyone of anything. Yet that gives us the 100% of Tokyo and Sao Paulo together. To collect that amount of data requires a mind boggling amount of data. I lost track to the article as Fortune hides behind a paywall and I am not that stupid to fall for the ‘disaster’ sales technique. The article gives us brands like Burberry and Dior. As such Simple questions become apparent. 

What form of verification was used?
Data in itself is the biggest liar of all. A simple mistake of cleaning and verifying the data is essential. Example is the question ‘Are you pregnant?’ Is a nice one, when the men are not cleaned out of this setting we get an astounding 50% offset (if we are lucky). The man (always trying to be funny) will answer no, because it is the truth. 

Then we get the broken promises. 

What evidence is there?
I get that Fortune gives us “On some level, brands have broken their promises to consumers” the voice (read: writing) of Marie Driscoll an equity partner. So what evidence are we given. The to some degree aggregated setting gives us LVMH, Burberry and Kering. There is a mention that they missed revenue targets. And suddenly we see that they are surpassed by Ozempic (a Pharma solution). We see not mention of any broken promises. We see all kinds of excuses and no actual mention of broken promises. At best we get the term brand fatigue. Actually I made mention of this in an article in January 2024 called ‘That one sided conversation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/01/27/that-one-sided-conversation/) my issue is that malls (and brands) need to set their focus to engagement. I even created the setting to do just that And I had the Toronto Eaton Centre as an example as well as the Dubai Mall (and a few other places in Dubai). I never considered broken promises, and as I see it Fortune has no real setting for that either. If you have 50,000,000 consumers. You have data. Whether the consumer told a porky pie (read: lie) or there is another reason like they ran out of cash. The simple setting is data and the article does not give us any. The article is (as I personally see it) a sham. We are given “an equity Analyst told Fortune” the name appears later. Yet, if I had this to say you mention that name EVERYWHERE. And the article goes one step further “Now 50 million luxury consumers have either ditched buying designer bag, scarves, watches and more — or have been priced out, Bain & company’s new annual luxury report warns”

I personally believe that LVMH, Burberry, Gucci (et all) need to demand that data from Fortune. I wonder how long I need to shift through that data to see an astounding amount of gaps that could get Fortune into hot waters? 

I got to see the article in my mobile, but not my laptop (another fine mess I got myself into). 

In these troubled times I have no issue with missed revenue targets and I feel certain that their investors do not have that issue either. The very rich know how they are doing and for the most they also know that of their peers. So if only 2 get their numbers that quarter, they are certain that about 80% will not go shopping everywhere. Optionally they will push back their Burberry suit or dress. There is no shame as I personally see it (and for the record I have never had enough money for a Burberry suit). 

As such my puzzlement. Fortune was always seen by me as a straight error in ‘reporting’ and this article basically threw their credibility in the trashcan.

The Second sight
That comes from the reference to Bain and Company and the stage that was referred to. The headline there was ‘Global luxury spending to land near €1.5 trillion in 2024, remaining relatively flat as consumers prioritise experiences over products amid uncertainty’ an article by Claudia D’Arpizio and Federica Levato. There we see “And yet, 50 million luxury consumers have either opted out of the luxury goods market or been forced out of it in the last two years. This is a signal for brands that it’s time to readjust their value propositions. To win back customers, particularly the younger ones, brands will need to lead with creativity and expand conversation topics. Simultaneously, they must keep their top customers front and center, surprising and delighting them while rediscovering one-to-one human interactions. For all customers, it will be critical to double down on personalisation, leveraging technology to achieve it at scale.” That is a view I can get behind and there is no mention at all of ‘Broken Promises’ (anywhere in the article). These two youthful young sprouts basically confirms my believes that it is about engagement. It does not matter how (I personally chose a generic setting) to engage the consumers in a much larger setting of a place and not a specific brand. I do not disagree with “rediscovering one-to-one human interactions” but as a technologist I prefer my Chicken Shawarma in a one to many configuration. And I do get that to address the very wealthy (aka filthy rich), a one on one setting is likely preferable. But that was never the reason for the IP I created in that setting.

And I for one personally believe that you can ditch the Fortune story and go straight for Bain & Company (at https://www.bain.com/about/media-center/press-releases/2024/global-luxury-spending-to-land-near-1.5-trillion-in-2024-remaining-relatively-flat-as-consumers-prioritize-experiences-over-products-amid-uncertainty/) the article is quite remarkable. And it was a pleasure to read too. I get that the numbers game can be nerdy and dry, but this story is uplifting and a good thought to address, for anyone in retail that is.

In the end what did Fortune do? Very little, all praise to Bain & Company here.

Have a great day all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 8, 2024 · 21:00

All the way from Ottawa

Yup, that was the question mark that I had. I saw it at the CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/guilbeault-china-saudi-arabia-climate-1.7376007) where we get ‘China, Saudi Arabia should pay up to help the planet cope with climate change: Guilbeault’ OK, I like my sarcasm with plenty of Maple Syrup (a personal choice). A wholesome breakfast as it says. We are given “Guilbeault wants emerging economies to contribute to a new climate goal”. This sounds nice on paper, but it doesn’t hold the pastrami. I feel uneasy as the idea sounds nice, but it seems to have all kinds of unforeseen complications. And as we consider “Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said Wednesday he wants China and Saudi Arabia to contribute money to international efforts to help poorer countries struggling with the worst effects of climate change.” You know, America and Europe take its own share of decades of looting in wealth the established setting of the commodity of oil. Oh, and why give OPEC and China that bill? Where is Am Erica for that bill? I am pretty sure that some president of the US give Steven Guilbeault the finger the moment he states that out loud. There is a larger setting. You see, we could decrease the allowed oil for any nation by 10%, then there is my favourite, decrease global flights by 15% (taken in account that there are way too many flights happening). You see, the last 15 years we have seen a million flights per year more. I did a calculation once (in 2021) where I stated “That amounts to 41,000 flights a day, every single day.” I did this on November 13th 2021 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/13/a-cop26-truth/) in ‘A COP26 truth’ As I see it, this will have a better result. But Steven Guilbeault does not want that. He merely want to point the finger at China (to get the blessing of some president), he’ll also point the finger at Saudi Arabia which will not go anywhere. As I personally see it, this is a limelight piece. Get the shiny lights thrust upon him whilst the solution goes nowhere, and those poor poor emerging economies? Ad when we consider ““China will become, in fact, one of the biggest historic polluters in the coming years,” Guilbeault said.” What data does he have? In the coming years is speculation, as I see it, Russia will have to become a much larger polluter to get any fingers over the edge of disaster at present. There is no real data to consider that China will be anything like that. I wonder where he got the data, as the ‘data’ in march gave us all “India was declared as the third-most polluted country in 2023, after Bangladesh and Pakistan, according to a report released by Swiss air quality monitoring body, IQAir.” Which is interesting as they have a significant loss of longevity They went from eight position in 2022 to third position in 2023. Of that list of 50 cities 42 are in India. As such I call his bluff and wish him a nice day with what he has. Yes something needs to be done, pretty much everyone agrees with that. What it is, remains the question. Giving the Ace of Spades to China and Saudi Arabia is folly as I see it. The issue with any fire is to take away the air for a fire to breath, take away the fuel that propels the fire or put out the fire (the third is the lamest idea). As such you can limit oil to everyone, which will drive the price up, or take away the air for oil to burn (extremely hazardous to people). As such we are in a bind. Making this about emerging economies is just a bad option, or we lessen EVERYONE’S access to oil and the the emerging countries get their 100% and the largest economies get that limit decrease as well. I wonder how long it will take for everyone to ‘diminish’ the emerging economies. You see Steven Guilbeault blasted his statement to ‘merely’ include China and Saudi Arabia. In 2021 the United States used 20.4% of the petroleum-consuming countries it was number one with 5% more then number 2 (China), as such why didn’t Steven Guilbeault mention America? Oh, and Saudi Arabia isn’t even in that top 5. India (4.8%), Russia (3.8%) and Japan (3.5%) had those positions. As such it makes kinda sense to hand the spade to China, but not before America gets the spade as well. They both Amount to 36.1% of the petroleum-consuming countries. As such, when you consider these numbers. Is he anything more than a windy politician (like the ones from Chicago)?

It’s not all seemingly bad news. We are also given “According to one estimate, $2.4 trillion US in climate finance is needed by 2030 for investments to meet the Paris Agreement targets and related development goals.” Yes, that works with any nation with a gross federal debt surpassing $35,000,000,000,000. That really seemingly works and don’t blame President-elect Trump for that, Harris wouldn’t have been able to do that either. This is the result of sitting on your hands and too many presidents have done that going all the way back to President Clinton, which was 21 years ago. The easiest option is that we allow climate change to kill 27.8% of the population, making the decrease of 49,000 flights a day and 24.1% less oil used a manageable achievement. You see, the solution is very simple if you see the problem as simple as an arithmetic problem. Take away the people using oil and you get the same result. Oh, as a bonus consider that less food is required at that point. All simple solutions towards a conundrum that people aren’t willing to see as a real problem. Did I oversimplify the problem for you?

Have a lovely day and consider how much oil you used this week. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 29, 2024 · 15:28

Laughing Out Loud

Yup this happens too and in this case it was an article that Bloomberg showed its paying customers. I am not one of them. As such I am attaching the image that made me laugh.

I saw it about 8-10 hours ago and it had me rolling with laughter. So what gives? First the setting of ‘Consider Re-entering’ as I see it Barclays and other banks are strapped for capital and bleeding a client dry (service fees and commissions) is a tell tale story towards any bank trying to make a living. There is no consideration, there is merely the trap they put themselves in 10 years ago. As for the “capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets” is even more hilarious. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has options to consider HSBC, JP Morgan, Bank of America and the 5 largest banks in China. All stronger and more able than Barclays. There is also Credit Agricole and the Citigroup. All in the top 12, Barclays stands at 18. So there is the first part. In addition I can hand you Rothschild & Co. The one bank no one mentions. It’s value was around €18.1 billion a year ago, as such I reckon it is pushing well over €20 billion at present. Barclays has nowhere near that capital or those connections. I reckon that Rothschild can access around 20% more clients than Barclays can (a casual speculation by little old me). 

So why this action?
Well it started in 2012 when we were given “Barclays is fined for manipulating the benchmark Libor interest rate in 2012, after revelations stretching back to 2005” It’s CEO C. S. Venkatakrishnan didn’t forget about that, did he? Then we get 2014 when Reuters gave us ‘Barclays sued by Saudi developer for $10 billion’, so how did that end? We got “A Saudi real estate company has sued Barclays for $10 billion (6.24 billion pounds), claiming the bank ceased pursuing lease payments due from the Saudi government on military complexes in the kingdom in order to obtain a lucrative banking license there” when we were given (source: Reuters) “The company, Jadawel International, a unit of London-based MBI International Holdings Inc., claims Barclays “hatched a fraudulent scheme” to secure the rare Saudi banking license, selling out Jadawel in the process, according to the lawsuit filed in New York state Supreme Court on Tuesday” One says potato and the other claims tomato. In the end as far as I can tell Barclays won the dismissal. It doesn’t make them innocent, but the claimant could not prove guilt (as far as I can tell). And last but not least only this year we were given that Barclay was one of the players in getting Andrea Orcel “derivatives linked to Commerzbank for the Italian lender in the weeks before Berlin sold a stake earlier this month, sources familiar with the matter said. Barclays and Bank of America subsequently helped Orcel to effectively expand UniCredit’s holding in Commerzbank to the current level of about 21 per cent, they said asking not to be named discussing the private information” now, this last bit does not seem to be illegal, but the stakes against Barclay (all over Europe) are increasingly high and now they hope that Saudi Arabia gives them a chunk of business before they are forced to hand over their bank to any of the upper 15 banks. I say good luck to them. Yes there is all kinds of banking issues I am not familiar with, but governments need to work with banks that are cleaner then clean and as such I am entertaining howls of deriving laughter if Barclay thinks they are that. The LIBOR scandal took care of that. 

And lets be clear Barclay didn’t (as far as I know) hand the statement “Mistakes were made in the past and we have sanitised our structures and people to meet the challenge that a customer the size of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brings”, nope, none of that. We were given “Barclay plc is considering re-entering Saudi Arabia as it looks to capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets”. I actually wonder if they would be allowed in the country at present. There are seemingly better viable candidates and that is before you consider Rothschild as a contender. 

I get it. I also tried to access Saudi Arabia as a partner (read: future owner) of my IP. I merely wanted 50 million, a Canadian passport and 2% of the revenue for 20 years. With my believe (a presented believe) that the idea would give them 6 billion annual and their investment to that would be 50 million (for happy old me). And this is about as decent as it gets. A mere 0.8% risk and that is at the time of the presentation. A mere trivial amount and I feel certain that this would have worked. There was one condition Microsoft was not allowed near it. Amazon would be OK, but Microsoft is a no go.

This is why I contacted Kingdom Holdings and Tencent Technology as well. They can drive the innovation I brought. As such I feel a stronger contender than Barclay ever could be (Yes, I am blowing my own horn).

So as I see it, re-entering a market when the others have seemingly had enough of you isn’t re-entering. It is running for the hills to avoid being taken over. But I am not a banking person, so what do I know.

Have a fun day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 9, 2024 · 01:07

When the credit card stops

That is the setting for the US of A. The BBC gives us ‘US debt would increase under Harris and soar under Trump – study’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro). We are given that there is basically no escape for America, I have articles going back to 2018 where I give sight of what is coming. Oh, and by the way at what point do you cancel someones credit card? We are given “Donald Trump’s campaign proposals would increase the US national debt by double the amount Kamala Harris’s would, according to a new analysis by a non-partisan group.” We are also given “Trump would add $7.5tn” now consider that the interest on this would be around 450 billion, just on the increase alone. Now consider that the total debt is 500% larger and now consider that the US economy needs to come up 2.25 Trillion EACH YEAR to deal with the interest alone and I saw that coming 5 years ago and the news media and these so called financial experts never saw this? I do not believe this. We were all told and presented a story. And they are about to lose whatever leeway they thought they could hang over us. The media was the tool some were able to use (with what I speculatively see) as stake holders to ‘bring’ the presentation. And the media seemingly was left in the dark, or were they?

The problem is that we cannot see or prove any of this. But consider that I saw this coming for over 5 years and I do NOT have an economic degree. What makes you think that I am more clever than these financial wizard in the media (CNN, BBC, WSJ, the Guardian) and many more? Do you really think that they made a miscalculation? They isn’t nickel and dime stuff, this is about 35 trillion dollars. How much sneaky bookkeeping is involved to put such an amount under the tables? This would require the cooperation of media, banks and governments. So when your retirement falls away, who will you blame? The media? The Banks? The Governments? Seems ludicrous, almost some crazy conspiracy. But consider the facts. Consider the evidence and the avoidance of the media to address certain economic facts. That is not some cooky setting, the evidence is out there on the internet. Consider all the media and consider what the media never gave us. I can tell you more, but it is time to consider what I am telling you here and make your own mind up. 

Now consider that the EU had six trillion euros in taxable revenue in 2022. Now we see that America is optionally about to increase its debt more that the taxable income of 27 countries and it does not raise an issue? Now we know that plenty of EU countries have a GDP that equals an apple and an egg. But together they should amount to a fair amount considering that these countries have a total population of 449.2 million, which is a lot more than America (about 34%). Now consider that people pay taxation, companies pay taxation as well. But the tax breaks are mostly for companies. As such I look at the people. There is a baseline that extremely roughly applies and when that baseline is applied the numbers do not match up as I personally see it and I have seen this setting for over 5 years and the media ignores it all. 

Could I be wrong?
Yes definitely, but overall certain numbers create levels of equilibrium and I see that these numbers aren’t here at the moment. And the media seeing these debt levels fail them could also be seen as optional evidence. So how does it work? It seems clear that the media can no longer be trusted (in my opinion). So how to get the numbers? I cannot give you my sources, so you are a little on your own in that regard.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 6, 2024 · 20:05

Is it merely political?

That was the thought I had. It came from Politico, as such I would believe that it was political. Yet the larger premise is on the setting of circumstance. This sounds weirdly spooky, but it is the best I can offer. The story (at https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-war-economy-pain-saudi-arabia-sink-global-oil-prices-energy-russia-opec/) starts with ‘Putin’s war economy faces pain if Saudis sink global oil prices’ which is a partial truth, but it goes further then that. We are given “A Saudi move to grab market share will squeeze the Kremlin’s finances, experts argue” which is only a partial truth. The entire part is followed by “Riyadh is increasingly frustrated with other petrostates’ failure to coordinate on cutting supply to raise oil prices to about $100 per barrel — up from the current $70. Oil traders say Saudi Arabia is now set to respond by flexing its muscles and turning the tables on smaller producers, exporting more oil itself to grab market share and profits, even as prices fall.” We are also given “The Financial Times reported last week that Saudi Arabia could abandon its long-held ambitions to limit the crude supply to push prices to around $100 a barrel. Oil market experts have little doubt that Saudi Arabia has the enormous production and export capacity to change tactics and gun for market domination through volume instead.” In this view I need to align a few positions. What is missing is that America (the United Kingdom also) are depending in keeping oil cheap. So that is missing. Hanging it on the Russian needs is a bit dorky. Yes, they both matter, but the US an EU need for cheap oil missing as a pre-made need, is just dorky (I can’t find a better word for this). You see when there is a lack of a commodity prices go up and now this fails? The world requires (at present) that 2.4 million barrels per day pumped more than now and that is not done. I actually speculated this a year ago when I stated that we can pump 4 barrels at $3, or 3 barrels at $4. The amount gained is still the same but at 25% less oil. It is a simple equation (and an incorrect version) but the the premise remains. I went through to the next stage that Saudi Arabia could pump 2 barrels as the price goes up to $6, still the same revenue but now at half the oil delivered. This is how commerce works on commodities. I still doubt the statement that the $100 per barrel cannot be reached, I merely believe that certain stakeholders want the premise to keep their pockets lined. How? I cannot tell, I am not an oil person, I merely use it through various means. So what gives? 

When we get to ““The global economy is fairly sluggish and oil demand is not as high as the Saudis would want,” said Ajay Parmar, director of oil markets analytics at commodities intelligence firm ICIS.” I have issues here. You see, this means that the Russia delivers all oil. There is not a lack of demand, some people are playing a high end game to keep their pockets lined. If I had it my way (pretend that I am the new CEO of Aramco, a very fake one) I would stop 5.5 million barrels a day from reaching the US, EU and UK, in the combination 3,2 and .5 it would take less than 90 days for it all to implode. As Tesla is more and more lacking is quality, the other nations will need 2-3 years to overcome their downfall and in that time China is the new superpower with America stumbling over the edge of the abyss. That is clear in my (optionally wrong) point of view. The setting that Politico gives is too partial and slightly too flawed. 

Yes Russia has a problem and they are welcome to the problems they get to harvest now. A second problem is “Russia’s fossil fuel profits have also risen by 41 percent in the first half of this year alone, according to Moscow’s finance ministry, despite Western sanctions imposed over the war in Ukraine.” I don’t doubt these numbers, but who paid for that oil? I doubt is was merely China, North Korea and India. Although these countries were involved. I saw last year that India was buying some of the oil, China is a definite and I guess that North Korea had to pay for their weapons and it seems like a logical choice for them to accept oil as payment. So who more? 

Politico should have stated “Russia’s fossil fuel profits have also risen by 41 percent (from 1M barrels to 1.41M barrels)” but they didn’t if Russia only sold 50,000 barrels it will not be an issue, but that is not the case, is it?

Now if you doubt my reasoning. That is fine. But we have seen plenty of issues where prices go up the moment that commodities has a higher demand. Yet the article does not give us that does it? And who is Ajay Parmar? This article leaves me with plenty of questions and no answers. So in all this, Is Russia in actual trouble? To some degree, but I see this as an alternative way for Saudi Arabia to give in to the west requiring cheap oil. I personally believe that Politico missed their mark and as such loses credibility as such. The one part that I do see is “A loophole allows middlemen in countries like Turkey, China and India to refine Russian oil in petrol and diesel before selling it elsewhere — exempt from sanctions. According to a report first seen by POLITICO, Western countries spent $2 billion on this rebranded fuel in the first half of 2024” As such that should be the story and the story is that more and more nations are fuelling Russian revenue through refining Russian oil and filling their pockets. As such there is a momentum being built, one that is not addressed and one that is trivialised as such I expect that plenty of newspapers will fuel their revenue by posting this story. The 41% is now shown to be big business, especially when we see Turkey and India and how they are short on cash pretty much all of the time.

So we are seeing a larger stage. In the first on where is Russian oil going to and in the second what countries are fuelling their demands for cheap oil? A nice spreadsheet would have been nice, but that was a part that Politico oversaw (I guess).

Still as we see one part, we also see the part that some want us to see, appointed awareness. A combination of social awareness and the influence of appointing. A formal arrangement to create a designed social awareness. The ability to understand a situation as the offical parties would like others to see them. But as I see it, this will be at the expense of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Is that fair all whilst Russia is handed loophole after loophole, as long as the west gets its oil cheap. How is this not exploitation? 

Consider what is being done and at what expense? The question is simple enough. 

Enjoy the Sunday you have left to you.

4 Comments

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 28, 2024 · 22:22

How I fall short

That is the stage, that is the setting. I do not know everything (too boring anyways) and even as I see how things develop and are optionally staged. The fact that I do not know everything gets in the way of some things. Now, I know very little about oil. It is a commodity everyone needs, it is a commodity only some countries have and the two biggest players in that field are Aramco and ADNOC, oil is black and it is needed for the production of petroleum. That’s about all I know. The current price is about $68 dollars per barrel. So when I saw ‘Oil price drops, and BP and Shell shares slide, as Saudi Arabia ‘prepares to abandon $100 crude target’’ I didn’t think too much of it. The story comes from the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2024/sep/26/european-reconstruction-bank-cuts-growth-forecasts-energy-ukraine-elon-musk-uk-investment-summit), there were more sources, but I am handing you this one. We get “Saudi Arabia is reportedly ready to abandon its unofficial price target of $100 a barrel for crude as it prepares to increase output” yet Oil&Gas journal gives us “Saudi Arabia is preparing to abandon its informal target of $100/bbl for crude oil as it plans to increase production, signalling the kingdom’s acceptance of a period of lower prices and intentions to take back market share, according to sources cited by the Financial Times”, now in my book the shortage of one commodity means prices go up. I do understand that any player will protect market share, as such I get the increase of product to protect your market share. That makes sense. And as such we see Saudi Arabia deciding an increase for about 1 million barrels per day as per December 2024. There are a few players on this field and I like the idea that the increase will make sure that Russia has less customers to get it from Russia is not happy. And as several media are giving us the goods, there is no other way for me than to agree with the setting. In overall there is still a larger concern I have. Oil is a commodity with a finite supply, so how much supply is there? I believe that the middle east has the bulk of it, but the finite session gives us the dangerous setting that at some point, the three countries with supply will be Russia, Iran and Venezuela. That is not a setting I want to wake up to, although at present it is highly unlikely that I will be around the morning we get that piece of news. In the meantime there is a larger issue at stake. How will Aramco increase its creation of oil with an additional 159,000,000 litres of that black fluid. You see everyone is looking at the end result and no one is looking at the how. What is required to that level of increase? I feel certain that it will require a lot more than one pump. It is the increase of 10% (near to that) and comes from 300 rigs. The simpleton in me sees this as an additional 30 rigs. It takes 18 months to five years to commission a rig, the construction timeline for an oil rig can vary significantly depending on several factors and that is if the oil comes from rigs. Saudi Arabia has one hundred oil and gas fields, so if it comes from there, other means are needed. The largest oil field is the Ghawar field. So how can you increase the production there? And is that the only place? We are so desperate for oil that the basic security is overlooked and there is at present Iran, Houthi forces and a few others who are very willing to hurt Saudi Arabia. So what more is needed, because when by November that increase is realised, some will take offence to this and that problem will possibly create all kinds of new problems. And we do not see enough information on that side of the equation.

And advice from me? Nope, I know next to nothing on that topic. I can merely see hurdles and optionally a personal belief that I see options, but that is not what the actual expert on the topic has. And the media? Solutions do not make their digital wallet fat, flames do that and in that view it is not a good idea to put flames close to oil, a mere personal view on the matter.

Have a great weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 4, 2023 · 08:56

Three voices

I have ‘complained’ about the media before and this time I come with an example. Weirdly enough none of them are doing anything wrong, but when you see the example you might wonder what the fuzz is about. As I see it is more than merely one stating the bottle is half full and the other stating the bottle is half empty. But I will let you decide. I got there because I am investigating a setting that is approaching maturity and I want my share. Google walked way from well over 5 billion a year and Amazon is leaving it on the floor. Both are entitled to do so, yet now Tencent Technologies is coming and there is every chance that they will not pay me a dime. I am not willing to hand it to Amazon with Andy Jassy stating ‘Thank You’ and pocketing all that revenue for himself. I am not THAT nice. As such I am in a state of worry and the battle arena seems to be Dubai. Amazon has options if it is forced to break up. I think its setting will be stronger if a layer like the Kingdom Holding Company would champion the stage, especially with someone like Al Waleed bin Talal Al Saud overlooking the stage. A setting that brings benefits but might not be essential. I do believe that a strong setting could be presented from Dubai, it is a personal feeling. So at times I look at the UAE and that is where the three voices got hold of me. So lets begin.

Voice One: Arab News
Here we see (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2348896/business-economy) ‘UAE’s non-oil economy remains strong in July as PMI stands at 56’ this is good, someway. I like to think that it will be better soon enough, but the Arab News gives us “According to the seasonally adjusted S&P Global UAE Purchasing Managers’ Index, the country’s PMI stood at 56 in July compared to 56.9 in June. This still indicates a positive trend as any readings above 50 are considered a growth in economic activities, while figures below 50 show contraction.” Overall a strong message, there is a little fallback, but the story gives us that is still in the growth margin. The message has the added “Higher business activities were driven by an upturn in new orders, which continued to be boosted by strong customer demand and improving market conditions, the report stated, citing survey panelists. However, it noted that growth eased since June as several firms faced greater competition which dampened sales in the process.” OK, greater competition is a little vague, but that is fine a positive approach to a story.

Voice Two: Khaleej Times
Then we get the article (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/uae-non-oil-sector-continues-to-grow-at-a-strong-pace-creating-more-jobs-in-july) here we are given ‘UAE non-oil sector continues to grow at a strong pace, creating more jobs in July’, which makes sense as it is a UAE newspaper. Here we get “The S&P Global UAE Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) – an indicator designed to give an overview of operating conditions in the non-oil private sector economy – dropped from 56.9 in June to 56.0 in July but remained well above the 50.0 no-change mark and the series long-run average. The reading indicated a sharp improvement in the health of the sector, supported by a marked expansion in output.” It basically gives us the same we saw in the Arab News with the added “S&P said driving activity higher was an upturn in new orders, which continued to be boosted by strong customer demand and improving market conditions, according to survey panellists.” I personally would have a few question marks, but in the end it is how the painting is made. I would state that this critic is looking at the painting, giving the summary and looking at the use of blue paint in the process. This happens, we all have our ways of looking at a painting and it is probably the best way to describe it. 

Voice Three: Reuters
It was the first article I saw (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/lower-sales-weigh-uae-non-oil-business-activity-july-pmi-2023-08-03/) making me look at the setting a little deeper. The start ‘Lower sales weigh on UAE non-oil business activity in July’ with the added “The slowdown was attributed in part to an easing of growth in new orders, although demand remained strong, with the sub-index falling to 57.4 in July from 61.0 the previous month, which was the fastest rate of expansion since June 2019.” Now we get an interesting sight, this article is cautiously pessimistic (headline) but the overall message is still positive. Yet the numbers are not matching. It might not be wrong as they use ‘sub-index’, but which one? Then we get the added “Owen added that the “the easing of sales growth was substantial and, if accelerated in future months, suggests that the demand boom could have reached its peak.”” The reference is to David Owen, senior economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence. Yet the station is how does ‘substantial’ apply? Is this fear-mongering for investors, is it biased negativity towards the Middle East? You tell me, I have no clue. But the fact that we have these three voices is important because it shows us that there is a media flaw. Now, there are all kinds of flaws and flaws due to arbitrary interpretation is nothing new and optionally not a flaw but the stage is there and now we have ourselves a ballgame. So which one is true? They might all be true but the anarchy in the three voices tend to impact us all. My gut tells me to go with the Arab News, but that is instinct and not a given view of evidence. I will let you decide which one is more apt.

Enjoy the day, Friday is about to start in Vancouver, the rest of us are already there. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,