Tag Archives: OPEC

January 25, 2025 · 05:31

How does commerce work?

That is at times the question. As I see it President Trump has a flawed nd warped view of one. We get that from the Middle East Monitor, aka MEMO (at https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20250123-trump-calls-for-1-trillion-saudi-investment-lower-oil-prices/) where we are given ‘Trump calls for $1 trillion Saudi investment, lower oil prices’ And I thought it was an error, but it was not (several publications give me a similar view). The weirdest part is “US President Donald Trump, on Thursday, said he will demand Saudi Arabia and OPEC bring down the cost of oil and will ask Riyadh to increase a planned US investment package to $1 trillion from an initial reported $600 billion” (source: Reuters). And the weird part is set in fact. When we see that USA exports 10.15 barrels of oil daily and IMPORTS 8.53 million barrels of oil, we come to the conclusion that America want cheap oil so that they can get a better margin on selling their oil (which will not be cheaper). So why would Saudi Arabia and Aramco do that? Would anyone do that? As such I think that America is thinking of getting the (speculated) $40,000,000 a day margin to settle their mega trillion dollar debt. It also makes me wonder how close are they to becoming bankrupt? And beside that, they want Saudi Arabia to invest a trillion dollars over 4 years. To be honest it seems like a radical stupid notion to get someone to invest a trillion dollars and lower the price of oil so that Saudi Arabia will be regarded as a friend? Sounds a weird approach to business to me. The quote given is ““But I’ll be asking the Crown Prince, who’s a fantastic guy, to round it out to around $1 trillion,” Trump told the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “I think they’ll do that because we’ve been very good to them.”” So exactly how has America been good to Saudi Arabia? Saudi Arabia has not been able to acquire the F35? Whilst Saudi Arabia civilian targets were hit by Houthi Terrorists, America did not come forward to sell necessarily equipment. So how has America shown themselves as a worthy ally?

You see, in my books an ACTUAL ally will aid when needed and supply hardware when needed (and paid for in some cases). There is also the notion that Iran have been circumventing the US Navy in several cases to deliver hardware to Houthi Terrorists, some navy. The funny part that MEMO describes “he will demand Saudi Arabia and OPEC bring down the cost of oil”, so now Saudi Arabia is seen separate from OPEC? OPEC is called that as it is the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. So, Saudi Arabia is not part of OPEC? A weird setting as I see it and if America is as broke as it seems to be, it makes some sense, but this would be regarded as a desperate knee jerk move (as I see it).

And on this setting, it has every notion of driving the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia straight into the fold of China and their plans for the world according to China. So how does that help America?

Just a thought to have this lovely Saturday morning.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 14, 2023 · 19:52

Our menu: Delusional stew for all.

Yup, a meal that is free of charge, but that is how it feels to me (and I am hungry). This has started some time ago for me and the blablabla is nice, but it distracts me. On the up hand I came up with the pilot of yet another TV series, but I have enough at present. You see, what set me off today (off being a big word), was ‘No ‘phase-out’, but Dubai deal puts oil and gas sector on notice’ (at https://www.climatechangenews.com/2023/12/13/no-phase-out-but-dubai-deal-puts-oil-and-gas-sector-on-notice/), you think it is delusional, think again. We are also given “The “UAE consensus” did not go so far as to call for a “phase-out” as more than a hundred countries wanted. It settled on “transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems”.” You want to see how delusional this is? Lets take a look. In the first OPEC removes their delivery by 1,000,000 barrels of oil per day, they keep on producing for China, but the West (USA, Canada, UK, EU) get that less per day, this is not phasing out, but it is moving that way. Now consider that impact

USA 450,000 bpd less, Canada 100,000, United Kingdom 100,000 an the EU loses 350,00 bpd. I give it less than 60 days before all hell breaks lose. Brent will export less than 5% as all goes to America and with that change America collapses broke in 60 days, Canada will lose most of its shit, UK will become too expensive to live and the EU breaks down on its own issues. 60 days is all that is required for chaos to unfold in the west. That is what you are celebrating, aren’t you?

I am not against diminishing oil, but at present it isn’t realistic. Alternative solutions were stopped for the longest of times and the funny part here, when that comes back the crows will shout All hail Musk. That is the reality. You see, the internet without powers is not a nice thing and that makes the Musk solution the only internet on the planet. With that much less oil fuel prices will double and with proper isolation (example London), the people will freeze to death. I am game for all that, are you?

You see, the second part is “One delegation not joining in the ovation was Saudi Arabia. Oil-exporting states fought hard against the phase-out language that appeared in earlier drafts.” This makes sense, but what does not is that EVERYONE steered clear from the noise by Brent crude oil, the one American supplier to hundreds of nations and that stops soon after the limitations are reached. And with that all on the table you see that Crude becomes nationalistic and the rest suffers and drowns (or chokes) on a lack of oil.

All these people, all collectively talking on what needs to be done and nothing is being done. I saw it before COP26 and with the animosity against Elon Musk, the one solution holder this merely goes from bad to worse. I reckon that he has his solutions in place in has house and that people like Bill Gates have similar solutions in place. As such when this goes south really far, we have America and about 2000 houses with power. The rest? I think it was the Roman senate who said in unity ‘fuck the poor’ and that will be a simple repetition. 

As such when we get to “Samoa complained they were not yet in the room when the deal was adopted. Small island states had pleaded for a rapid fossil fuel phase-out to hold global warming to 1.5C, seen as critical for their survival.” Their is your first example of the world screwing over the poor. So why were they not in the room? Anyone? Anyone? 

I already stated that this point would be broken at the end of COP26, and so far my numbers hold up (partial coincidence) and that larger stage is merely fuelled by the joke that we see is presented now. Phasing out oil sounds nice, but the four players mentioned earlier cannot see the reality of that ever happening, on the upside, when America collapses, all the eyes will suddenly look at Brent oil for the first time and wonder what will happen there, because a collapsed America implies that Brent will have to export nearly all its oil making life in the USA a lot harsher. The only thing I found was by Reuters giving us “Brent crude futures edged back down towards $97 a barrel on Tuesday because (whatever reason) after two days of back-to-back speeches by world leaders, the COP28 climate” You don’t think Brent has its extensions and override policies in place? That is the reality of things and board of directors tend to be greed driven, so that was easily seen. 

A stage that has a restaurant, it serves a delusional menu. It is free and you can have as much as you like.

That is what is happening and when the world settles bak in 2-3 weeks the issues start arriving on how impossible these goals really are. I reckon the ‘depending’ media already have speakers in place for that event.

Enjoy your day. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

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

October 11, 2023 · 03:55

The number is three

Weirdly enough, my mind came up with something that was out there and for some reason it matters. The rhyme goes like “They touch, they break, they steal. No one here is free. Here they come, they come for three, unless you stop the melody.” You see, there is a second meaning to steal, it can also mean ‘move somewhere quietly’, we forget that sometimes, we all do. And with this I saw a few articles. 

The first step
The first article is seen (at https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/oct/05/australia-fifa-world-cup-2034-bid-saudi-arabia-challenge) where we hear ‘Australia given 25-day deadline to challenge Saudi Arabia’s 2034 World Cup bid’. It is here that we see “Football Australia, state and federal governments and potential Asian co-hosts have been given 25 days by Fifa to decide whether they will bid for the 2034 men’s World Cup”. Other articles give us that Australia is pissed.  The why part is out there and it is not asked. Consider that I wrote some time ago regarding “Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions secretary Tim Ada told the inquiry that the event’s costs had nearly doubled from $2.6 billion in March 2022 to $4.5 billion a year later.” As such, they already fumbled the ball once, so now they want to give that another try, now with FIFA? And why is 2034 so important? We have 2026 (USA, Canada, Mexico) and in 2030 we get that on October 4th 2023 it was announced that Spain, Portugal and Morocco would host the majority of the 2030 FIFA World Cup in an unanimous decision from the FIFA Council, with one “celebratory game” each being held in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. The game is evolving, it is too big for one place, so who would be able to afford to host the games? The general costs were in 2014 (Brazil) $19.7 billion, in 2018 (Russia) $16 billion, and 2022 (Qatar) had a $229 billion cost message. We can agree that the last one was outlandishly big, but a country that could not fork over $5,000,000,000 for the Commonwealth Games will share well over triple that with New Zealand? What is wrong with people? I am not debating that this event is good for a nation who hosts this, but Australia and a few other places are not in a financial sound place. Saudi Arabia is one of the few nations who have that kind of money available. The 2030 innovations that the kingdom is showing could (or should) show the world that Saudi Arabia has what it needs to make it work. 

We are all in the need for games, but these games (FIFA, Commonwealth Games, Olympics) are slowly pricing themselves out of a global market and no one is asking serious questions here. I get why the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wants this and lets be clear, they can afford it. Australia? I am not certain, yet the errors made last year and the triple costs now make me wonder if some politicians have any idea the amount of money that they are spending. 

The second step
The second step is not that clear, we are given (at https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/hamas-strike-israel-force-market-190723900.html) ‘Hamas’ strike on Israel will force the market to ‘beg’ Saudi Arabia to pump out more oil, famed crude trader says’, so when the market begs. How sturdy are they? The fact that this event is used as an excuse to beg for more oil. How shoddy as their position to begin with? The USA and EU are not reliant on either Hamas or Israel for oil and their oil needs are not on the USA or EU. OK, perhaps Israel might benefit, but Gaza does not. So when I see “the militant group’s raid will disrupt longer-term supplies, with Riyadh unlikely to start pumping out more crude until Brent hits $110 a barrel.” I wonder who believes that setting. I get that oil prices will increase that was already a given, but that is mostly due to the fact that OPEC has decided to decrease outputs. It was the hard lesson the USA had to learn from being politically utterly stupid. The price it had in June 2022 will be returned to and most likely get surpassed, neither of the two Gaza players had a hand in that. Yes, these tanks will require fuel, but that would be on Israel. 

The third step
The last step comes from Business News Australia. The article (at https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/blog/trademark-group-connects-aussie-businesses-to-saudi-boom) gives us ‘“Like Dubai 20 years ago”: Trademark Group connects Aussie businesses to Saudi boom’, we get the notion and the act to get close to any business boom that can be ‘exploited’. As such we are given “Australian businesses that missed out on the Dubai growth story of the past 20 years have been urged to take a closer look at Saudi Arabia, a country that Trademark Group founder and CEO Sam Jamsheedi describes as the sleeping giant of the Gulf region.” Yes, I agree. But I saw that essential setting over two years ago and I wrote about that in this blog on numerous occasions. As such it is nice that Sam Jamsheedi woke up to the notion two years late. My issue with the article is not the notion. It is also accepted that we see “Each industry that the Saudis are trying to develop provides massive opportunities for Australia businesses to capitalise on – from construction and agriculture to food, beverage and even sport.” In this I agree, yet my thoughts are where the article failed. You see the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a Muslim nation, it largely acts and reacts as the Quran inspires them. Yet the article does not even once mention ‘Islam’ or ‘Muslim’ settings. That was my first stage when I was testing my IP. Yet Muslim rules are all over Saudi Arabia, they are in advertising which is a first hurdle ANY business needs to overcome. They need to test that their advertising adheres to those rules. The article makes no mention there either. It reads like a wishful thinking article, all whilst basic needs are not mentioned. It reads to me that these are ‘small’ hurdles that they will overcome in due time. That is an entirely wrong setting to take. 

We see three settings, They touch (oil), they break (FIFA), they sneak (Business) and they all want a piece from Saudi Arabia. Yes, the second one is flimsy, but when we see the cost part, I am almost clueless that Australia is setting it all up. It is my speculative view that with Qatar players like Coca Cola missed out on too much and now they are anxious and eager to make sure that FIFA is set in a place where their interests are larger like in Australia. All at the same time we see a setting of 5G and a few other settings where Australia is not in the best place and I feel 99% certain that the drain on 5G will be enormous in 2034 and I am not entirely certain that Australia will be ready at that point. They politicised too much, which made them massively non acting, merely talking loud. As such, when we were given in May 2023 the setting of New guidelines, we were also given “These renewed warnings come amid the Australian government’s plan to strengthen national security and make Australia one of the most secure countries in the world by 2030” that sounds nice, but the fact that the nation is lacking security settings for 8 years is flimsy to say the least. But no one is looking at that, are they? I still get 4G mentions all over Sydney today, as such I fail to see that they are ready by the time it matters and it mattered yesterday. We are presented several issues and no one is looking at the picture we should be seeing. As I personally see it “unless you stop the melody” refers to presentations given and these presentations are lacking on several levels. Feel free to disagree, but when you look behind the presentations you need to see a solid setting, solid numbers and solid facts. We aren’t given those. Why not?

Enjoy the final part of the first half of the week.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, sport

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

September 12, 2023 · 03:00

The future is today

That is a small reference to Beaker, the assistant of Muppets lab where the future is being made today. The thought came to me after seeing an article which took me back to one of my articles. The article in question is ‘On the way to……’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/07/28/on-the-way-to/). In that article I give the readers “Yet the larger part is how the prices (allegedly) dip a little in early 2024, as I see it as these settings continue, the world (EU and USA) will face oil prices of $90+ from December 2023 onwards. I have no idea how high they will get, but the larger setting no matter how managed it is, the shortage will continue and press pressures up to weird levels all over Europe.” So that was my prediction at the end of July, two months ago. I was called all kinds of things, including Arab buddy and wog friend (whatever that is). So now we get ‘Oil prices ease after Saudi, Russian output cuts but hold above $90’ (at https://ara.tv/24w46), so basically we are already at the $90+ point and it was (as I personally see it) clearly visible. And when we add “The supply cuts overshadowed continuing concern over Chinese economic activity last week, but investors looked to be focusing on demand drivers on Monday, with the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) due to release monthly reports this week.” It is more than the simple demand drivers. Yes, these drivers are a first, but the environment, the effects are now becoming a second. The larger setting is that the hot summers are likely going to be the fuel for a drastic and much colder winter. If that is true (and it is pure speculation) the west and especially the northern hemisphere could require a lot more oil for heating and that will drive up the oil price ever further. I have no idea how high it will get but it is already above $90, as such $100 per barrel is not out of the question, but this is not my ballgame. I saw the increase, but how high is less my issue, or my interest as I do not own any oil wells. 

So what will happen next? Well, there is some confusion on that. The EU and US have alienated Saudi Arabia as well as some of the other OPEC nations and with Russia in the state it is in a lot of oil is no longer available to the EU, yet the US is the largest producer at present and where it all goes is up to all of you, but it comes at a price. What that price will be is anyones guess but the demand of oil keeps on pressing and the needs during coming winter could reach new heights. But that is pure speculation from my side. I have no information that could be ruled as acceptable evidence. What does matter is that whilst I saw this moment two months ago, too many were in doubt or flat out denying this and we are now entering a stage where denial is the start of disastrous folly. For me the fun part was that I was right all along (yet again) and I am perhaps Beakers twin or assistant and I predicted the present two months ago. OK, I expected this to happen in a few months, but we are already there, all whilst others were playing possum with the reality of events.

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

June 5, 2023 · 21:12

Slam-dunk for the blogger

Yup, I got to call the slam-dunk in my name, on my name and for my name. Now, I am no basketball fan, not when there is the NHL. But I have to give it to the NBA, that term they got right. So this all happened in the morning as I was pondering what was next on the table. Then the BBC gave me the heads up (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65804768) with the ominous ‘Oil prices rise as Saudi Arabia pledges output cuts’. I had made mention of this danger a few times over the last month alone and now we get “Oil prices have risen after Saudi Arabia said it would make cuts of a million barrels per day (bpd) in July” and remember it is only a million barrels a day, my scenario was a little less nice. This is the exact danger that I predicted and now that it is going to pass, I wonder what the trolls will shout at me. I made mention yesterday that oil prices would be on the calendar of Blinky Tony (Anthony Blinken) and now it actually is there and it will be a rather not so nice meeting coming up, I reckon that Iran is no longer the main focus. This and the stage of BRICS implies that hard times are ahead for the US and I reckon to some extent the EU too. Because now the US is driven to make the million less be a larger setting for the EU than for the US. A stage well predicted and now it is coming to pass. 

It is Sameer Hashmi, the BBC Middle East business correspondent who gives us “it was widely expected the oil cartel would make production cuts to prop up prices. It appears most members were against the idea, as any cuts would impact oil revenues, which are crucial to keep running their economies.” He is not wrong, but the oversimplified setting is that they are going from 4 barrels at $3, to three barrels at $4. They all still get their $12 (and then some), but the larger stage  comes into play when the equation turns towards 2 barrels for $6, they will still get the same, but now their supplies will last twice as long. The larger problem for the US is that they get 50% for the same price and they still haven’t considered muzzling Brent Oil, those people export over 80% and now something will have to give and that is the stage we are coning to now. So when the UK and EU start feeling the pain of less oil there economy will impact to a much larger extent and as the Just Stop Oil people start shouting victory, the impact of people who cannot pay for heating bills, tradies that can no longer work because their prices need to keep going up, the setting of losses all over rural nations (UK, Germany, Italy and France the most) will be seeing much larger impacts. A stage that was clearly out there. The clearest recent mention I made was on April 13th (almost 2 months ago) at ‘The song remains the same’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/04/13/the-song-remains-the-same/) it was clear that reductions were in the focal point of OPEC members and in this Russia is merely sitting back, for them it works out nicely. But the larger stages of economy are not set to the drawback of oil lacks, no scenario was set to that and that is the largest political failure in the west. In this the one solution they had with Elon Musk is now slipping from their fingers. So not only did the US bite both hands that could be feeding them, whatever comes next might not be in time for the next debt ceiling, implying that default is the only thing that Americans have to look forward to. 

So in the end one player wins, the other player loses, but I get my slam-dunk. Is it fair? That is not the question, I saw this and I predicted this, so why did these high paid politicians not see this? It wasn’t rocket science (well perhaps the Musk solution was). And as options run short the west needs to rethink the political egotistical needs they had and how they will sail with a lack of vision. All that and more hardships will be coming soon and they did this all to themselves and that setting was clear long before Trump took office. A setting of cogs and the first cog will not care what the second and third cog faces. That is the oversimplified truth of the matter, so whilst we watch the news this month, also look at how much enough the people have with the ‘Just stop oil’ movement. As I personally see it, the UK got directly hurt by them and the CAAT all on moral grounds that were massively one sided and based on a fake moral high ground. So remember them when your pump price goes from 189.9p to 293.4p. Don’t blame the pump owner, blame the people who made this happen. 

Enjoy the day (consider a bicycle).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

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

April 11, 2023 · 13:01

It’s a point of view

This happens all the time, we all have a point of view and others have their point of view and they do not completely align. There is no right versus wrong issue, or there could be, but there is every chance that some views are based on three points. Consider a rectangle or a square, they both have points A,B,C and D, but we only see three of them, and with three you can tell whether it is a square or a rectangle, you merely miss one point and base your view on the other three points. It does not matter which point is missing, you get a decent view, but someone who sees A,B and D will draw slightly different conclusions than someone who has B,C and D. Neither is wrong, but they do not complete align because the events that surround these 4 points are different. This is how I see it and as such I took great interest in the Australian Financial Review (at https://www.afr.com/companies/energy/opec-s-gamble-can-the-global-economy-cope-with-higher-oil-prices-20230410-p5cz7f) where we see ‘OPEC’s gamble: can the global economy cope with higher oil prices?’, so whatever you see next, whatever difference I have, I am not dismissing THEIR view. I like their view, I might not completely agree, but they will have another point plotted towards their view. 

And we start with “the risks for the Saudis and the global economy are high if they push it too far. “We have high inflation, economies potentially going into recession, and this is a situation where you need lower oil prices for a short period of time for the economy to recover,” says Adi Imsirovic at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies (OIES), who once ran oil trading at Russia’s Gazprom.” It is not the first part of the story but it matters. You see, the UK, EU and US are in the metropolitan areas a mobile workforce. Adi Imsirovic can cry for chap oil all he likes, but the setting of ‘lower oil prices’ all you like, but people have been playing that tune for too long and NO ONE is looking at Brent oil on this. You all became a import commodity economy and that comes at a price, especially when you piss off the exporters. In the UK take a look at the laughable CAAT, they were all crying and not to mention Just stop oil group. Now you see the impact of higher oil prices and the players did this to themselves. You cannot push around an ally (Saudi Arabia) and then demand cheap oil, a commodity supplier who can close their own supply valve. 

This also impacts “Abdulaziz also managed to confound those speculators who had bet on falling oil prices after the recent banking crisis sparked new fears about the global economy.” In a stage I warned for for well over two years, the term “confound those speculators who had bet on falling oil prices” is a joke (and a bd one at that). You see, this danger was out there for some time and betting? That is what you do in Las Vegas where the odds are wild and when the US and EU (UK too) decided to make the odds wilder by insulting their proclaimed ally the writing of higher oil prices and less oil was on the wall. And all this was BEFORE China saw its path clear to give the bird to the USA (that gesture with the finger). As such Saudi energy minister Abdulaziz bin Salman did exactly what was required for the good of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, it might not reflect on the needs of the cheap oil deliverers, but they could go cry at the fountain of Brent oil but the media does not report on that, Brent Crude (operating on behalf of ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell) might be ‘too big’ for the media. Yet I have not seen anything regarding Darren Woods and Wael Sawan regarding dropping oil prices. Why is that? We see all the fingers towards Saud Arabia, yet Shell beat profit expectations towards $40 billion and ExxonMobile  beat it with $56 billion. And both broke expectations above 150%, as such I have issues with the entire OPEC setting. And when it comes to ‘lower oil prices’ who bet on this on Brent Crude lowering them? I am willing to set whatever I have at present ($0.70) that the amount of gamblers will add up to ZERO. Which makes me $25.2 (not enough for my new apartment). 

So when we get to “Now the question is if OPEC’s surprise cut will raise prices too quickly for the health of a fragile global economy, especially as central bankers continue their quest to tame inflation” no one is looking at the one element EVERYONE is ignoring. Inflation is also tamed buy banks having their donkeys on a row and with Credit Suisse and a few American banks we can say that this is not the case. So when we consider last week revelation by the BBC ‘Swiss probe into UBS takeover of Credit Suisse’ as well as the news only 2 hours ago that there is something brewing with the Viva Energy deal at $1.15 billion, I reckon that inflation issues are a lot larger than merely through oil and it is time that banks are properly looked at, because they are the so called power players in any inflation deal and no one is stopping certain players. Why is that? And when you consider the larger station, no one is acknowledging that commodities are at the power of the supplier and pissing off one of the biggest suppliers whist you shun two others for whatever decent reason (Iran and Russia), you need to reconsider the stupidity of any action against the third player who basically has had enough and now that China sees a larger playing field, they will take that option, especially if they can do it for a few Yuan more. That too is missing from the equation. That gives us a new discussion or consideration. So here is the new setting, it is not whether we were looking at a square or a rectangle, but we were looking at three points of an octagon/polygon. We were seeing the points correctly, but the stage was not properly marked and that makes neither wrong, it makes us both incomplete and consider that I am a mere blogger without a economics degree and the other player is the Australian Financial Review (and many other newspapers), who has the better excuse for not seeing the whole field? Consider that for a moment and consider the people pointing fingers at Saudi Arabia, why are they pointing there and not in other directions as well. In all this I believe that they have the proper reasons, can the same be said for Brent Crude? I will let you decide.

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 17, 2023 · 05:23

Confirmation and standards

That is what I was confronted with over the last 5 hours. I got a message a little before that and we will talk about it. I mentioned it in my previous article. It connects to more, but that is not important right now. What set me off was the article (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2268696/saudi-arabia) where we are given ‘Saudi energy minister: Kingdom will not sell oil to any country that imposes a price cap’. In this I agree, even if it hurts me badly. You see the US has been crying on expensive oil, but the price is set as well by Brent oil, an American firm. One that has the BIGGEST production of oil on the planet.

So when we are given “Spare capacity and global emergency stocks are the ultimate safety net for the oil market in face of potential shocks. I have repeatedly warned that global demand growth will outpace current global spare capacity, while emergency reserves are at a historic low.” I have no other thought but to agree. This has been going on for the better part of 2 decades. No one was complaining when oil was $40, but the setting differs. The US will not buy from Russia (which makes sense) and neither is Venezuela an option. The Arab nations are united in getting the best deal FOR THEM, which is done on a global scale in many commodities, but oil is not the US point of trade, it is THEIR anchor, yet no one looks at Brent oil and what it does, weird, isn’t it? We have seen the massive need to drop dependency on oil and in 2 decades nothing was done. The blame is all on governments for not acting, then 5 years ago an optional sidestep could be made, but the US government pissed of Elon Musk, whilst giving a free ride to that previous Twitter owner, that Dorsey thingamajig. But the Media on a global level REFUSED to ask him the hard questions. And now that it is too late, now that we see that a battery change was required 3-4 years ago, the Governments (especially America) start crying like little bitches. 

When a well can pump 10 cups of water an hour, and there are at any given moment 25 people needing water, some will go thirsty and that setting has been clearly there for over 2 decades. Why was nothing done? So when I see “NOPEC refers to a No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels bill, proposed US legislation that could leave members of OPEC+ open to prosecution under American antitrust laws. The bill, which has been periodically proposed for several years, was revived this month by a bipartisan group of senators in Washington amid ongoing concern about high energy prices.” And here the thought “Are you insane?” pops up. In the first why is Brent Oil not mentioned? And it is so easily fixed. Saudi Arabia (Aramco) could deliver 20% less oil to the US and Europe and sell that to China, everyone happy, or not? It is not a concern for high energy prices, it is the bloody mess of inaction which can be clearly shown for well over a decade and when there was a solution, you pissed off the industrial that could have aided you. So how is that for stupidity?

The second reel
The second reel is different, it is not connected to oil, but optionally to stupidity (as I personally see it). I have seen now confirmation on two of the branches that this will work and due to a few changes, there would be a growing need for the third branch as well. For me it could be good, and could is the operative word as Google was asleep at the wheel and let it pass and Amazon doesn’t seen to be waking up to the billions they can get in this. At present my hope lies with Kingdom Holdings and one other party. That one might not give me the full price, but it is better than nothing, in addition, keeping Microsoft away from there is prime concern, they can only screw up the IP, blame others, point fingers and then refer to miscommunications. I can do without that. There is a small option that Apple might pick it up, but it is not really their turf, so I feel uncertain about that thought. So it is in some regard inverted from oil. Oil everyone wants, and seemingly my IP no one wants. I reckon that the first one that buys it and see what they stand to gain, at that point everyone will come calling, like a Credit Suisse banker with an empty wallet, but that is my weird sense of humour.

The idea that I am right is nice, but I have seen enough confirmations in several directions to know I am right, but that is just me. I still check all forms of verifications, not merely to proof that I am right, but to confirm I was never wrong. That too matters, because I am where banks and oil consumers needed to be, in a place of checks and balances, something both parties require very very fast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 13, 2023 · 22:05

The first letter

Yes, sometimes the connection between articles is merely the first letter, it is what connects Aramco and Amazon. I had several articles to look at but they both started with the first letter. The first article is about Aramco. 

Aramco
The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-64931074) gives us ‘Aramco: Saudi state-owned oil giant sees record profit of $161bn’ in this, I can tell you right upfront that there are days that I have nowhere near that amount in my wallet (weird eh?) Even as we are given “Aramco rode the wave of high energy prices in 2022,” said Robert Mogielnicki of the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington. “It would have been difficult for Aramco not to perform strongly in 2022.” We might think all kinds of things, but the one that matters is missing. You see, the world removed Russia as a delivery agent of Oil and after that the choices were rather slim and Saudi Arabia was a natural first choice. But then we get a small stab. It is seen with “Aramco – the world’s second-most valuable company only behind America’s Apple – is a major emitter of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change”, which might be correct, but was it not America and England begging like little chihuahua’s to deliver more oil cheaper? Would that not be a contributing factor to the emissions? So when I see “Responding to Aramco’s announcement, Amnesty International’s secretary general Agnès Callamard said: “It is shocking for a company to make a profit of more than $161bn in a single year through the sale of fossil fuel – the single largest driver of the climate crisis.”” Another partisan response from everyones United Nations joke Eggy Calamari. The individual who seems to be a Saudi hater right of the bat, like her best friend who is a Guardian ‘investigative’ journalist named Stephanie Kirchgaessner. I have written several pieces in this in the past. You see, Eggy can yap like the chihuahua she is all she likes, but lets see what happens when Aramco lowers output by 20%-30%, what BS ballad will she utter then? And towards the Guardian, like the BS articles on private jet owners. The Environmental report a little over 1 year back, when we were given that 50% of all damage came from 147 facilities in Europe, who of them spend any time looking into that? 147 facilities creating 50% of the damage, now that does not put Aramco in the clear, but they are not alone in creating climate issues, but leave it to these two individuals to spin BS. In the meantime lets see what happens when the Saudi government decides to shut the valves if that Calamari individual does not clean her act. Just a thought. Then we get “Saudi Arabia is the largest producer in the oil cartel Opec (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries).” Now this is true, yet the larger truth is that Saudi Arabia is not the greatest producer in the world, that is the USA by a fair amount. As such the Calamari shit becomes a debatable issue on a few sides. As such we need to consider what the Saudi government does when it had enough, when they close the taps by as little as 5%, there will be widespread economic issues for both the US and EU, as such we need to start looking at the actual image, not the image from some hating dodo in the UN building. 

As such in the first yes, Saudi profits are up and the war has something to do with that, but mainly because people stopped buying Russian oil, so how much more oil did Aramco sell because of that? Oh and tanks are expensive they need 3 gallons per mile, how far does one tank go? Now consider that Ukraine has over 400 tanks. That implies 1200 gallons per mile and the war has been going on for over a year. They are not guilty, neither is Aramco. Russia started that event and they are still playing that game. So when we take a look at the bigger picture, Aramco has a commodity that everyone needs, everyone wants and most of them desire. Prices go up especially when Aramco has 100,000 barrels per hour (simple speculation) and each hour people are trying to buy 125,000 barrels. It is a simple economy and it as in place for several decades. So stop whining like chihuahuas and either come with an alternative, buy less oil or shut up. That is my simplistic view on the matter.

Amazon
The second article touches Amazon. I saw it (at https://www.thegamer.com/nobody-wins-if-amazon-luna-succeeds/) it was a debatable article from beginning to end. I have personal connections here, as such, I am a little biased. The title ‘Nobody Wins If Amazon Luna Succeeds’ was like a red flag to a bull. It is wrong on many levels. You see we all win when Luna succeeds. Luna is the beginning of a new stage in gaming. Streaming gaming can up the ante for gaming in many ways, I have written about it several times. It allows for much larger games, it allows for more versatile games and for an evolving game line. Now this is all possible on a PS5 (a console I love), but only in limited way at present. Nintendo cannot go near this because it is limiting in other ways. Still the Nintendo Switch is a system I love and now that Metroid Prime remastered is released I play it a lot more than anything else. That too is gaming. After 21 years Metroid Prime is just as addictive and beautiful as it ever was and I still claim that no FPS can get near this game, this game is a reason to buy a Switch, even as aSony fat with my PS4 and PS5 I make that claim. Gaming is seen in many stages and many ways and the Luna is merely the next wave towards gaming. The next issue is “Amazon Luna and Google Stadia have the same problem – there simply aren’t enough games to guarantee success” that is a mistake that both Amazon and Google had, I set the premise to almost guarantee 50 million subscriptions (one essential rule comes into play) and they had the option to win this, but Google dropped the cloth and evicted the stage, now Amazon has the option to rule it all alone with plenty of games too, so whomever is making that claim (a Tessa Kaur), she is not looking at the field, there is a lot more and some makers had a starting advantage, but apparently they squandered the advantage and now indie developers could end up with the larger stage. So as we get to “It’s the same with game hardware – they’ll discontinue the PlayStation 4 one day, I won’t be able to repair it when it gasps its last gasp. That will be that, all my games will be unplayable.” We get the first element. The article mentions NOTHING about Microsoft, why is that? Yes, they will discontinue the PS4 at some point, yet at present I will have had a PS4 for well over 11 years and several of these games can be played on the PS5, so I could have that one game for another decade, that part is missing too. The element also missing is that any streaming system will need a proper 5G connection, in many cases there are issues with 4G and 5G is still in a deployment stage in some countries a hell of a lot more then in others. The other element missing is that streaming gaming sucks in rural areas which amount to well over 35% of Europe. We do not see that either. I believe that the Luna is the next generation and with a fully deployed 5G it becomes a hell of a lot better and when developers start thinking of streaming as the ultimate goal, not some game that ALSO plays on the Luna, the game changes a lot more in favour of the Amazon Luna. Streaming is the future and we are only seeing the start of it at present. Microsoft is making their Xbox cloud gaming claims and they are hopelessly lost. Even as they are betraying their population, even as their consoles are not getting it done, they stand to lose a lot against Sony (console) and Amazon (cloud) and that is their real fear. Google might have bailed, but that doesn’t mean that Amazon will too, they actually have a few additional options that they might not have considered yet (speculation on my side). And that is where Apple comes in. If Apple (in their own way) starts in this field, Amazon will have a tough opponent. Microsoft is hopelessly lost and when Apple comes into play they will be doomed. But that is for 2024 I reckon. So far I have faith that Amazon will deliver in the end and create forward momentum in cloud gaming. They need not spin anything, they merely have to create the titles and the population, a setting they have a better hand on then Microsoft ever did. But that is merely my view on the matter.

Leave a comment

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

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

January 23, 2023 · 00:08

A national consequence

I saw the news earlier, but I had to consider a few things, one of them not so really pro-Turkey, another set to the stage of me wondering what was going on. It all started with the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64360528) where we are given ‘Turkey condemns ‘vile’ Sweden Quran-burning protest’, and as I was wondering what was going on I saw “Rasmus Paludan, a politician from the far-right Stram Kurs”, it made me wonder what was needed. And then it occurred to me, why was Turkey the only one protesting? What if Egypt, the UAE, Iraq, optionally Iran, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey all combined their protest? What if the EU had to deal with retributions from the OPEC nations closing the oil tap a little (500K barrels a day less for the EU), the other nations stopping import of Danish and Swedish goods? Would that wake them up? We might think that a person like Rasmus Paludan can insult islam again and again, but why allow it? We have rules and laws on religious prosecution, religious discrimination and should it end there? What if we make anti religious protests that continue to insult a religion (like burning a Quran) as well. Perhaps we need to state that they need to burn bibles as well, how does that go over?

I cannot claim that I have any solution here, but the levels of inactions that I see against Rasmus Paludan are getting out of hand. As such I think inaction becomes a larger issue and there is actually no real option, so what happens when the EU gets a 10% fuel rise, does that wake them up? I do not care what religion you like, and what religion you hate, but if you go as far as openly insulting that religion things get out of hand and it becomes time to act, inaction is no longer acceptable. If you allow a chaos and hatred seeder like Rasmus Paludan to continue, I reckon you get whatever is coming to you. I personally believe that when civility goes missing to this degree nations have failed on several levels. That whilst we need to realise that Sweden has 5%-10% Muslims, that is up to a million, Denmark has roughly the same percentage size, in numbers it is about half that size, but the population of Denmark is about 50% smaller. When you go out to insult that size of a population there needs to be consequences and even as people like Rasmus Paludan think that it is merely up to 10%, so that they can easily win such fights, they need to consider that there is a larger consequence and that needs to be shown to that kind of people and I reckon that Turkey alone cannot do that, it might block NATO access for Sweden, but a larger lesson needs to be taught and that is where OPEC comes in, where the bulk of its population is Muslim, so what happens when the tap is closed even just a little? For Sweden with its shortages it might become disastrous quickly, I am not sure about Denmark at present. 

Do we need to act? Yes, we all need to act. We cannot let people like Rasmus Paludan to spread hatred to the degree they do, the consequences are too dire to consider, as such I reckon it is time to fight such hatred by letting these nations be overwhelmed by shortages and make sure that everyone knows WHY this was done. You see if you hate muslims THAT much, you can get the oil from Russia or Venezuela or America. But that gets you into other deep waters, does it not? No matter how it plays out, we are too far beyond the levels of inaction we see now and consider that OPEC could close the tap by 1 million barrels of oil a day, or more. What does that give you? Not much and until summer that impact might end up being disastrous.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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