Tag Archives: OPEC

May 12, 2026 · 00:23

They have what?

Yes, that is the news we get mere hours ago ‘Aramco and stc to deploy supercomputer in Saudi Arabia’, these puppies do not grow on trees and there aren’t many of them. It’s almost the same as a country is added to the nuclear arsenal. A supercomputer is a big deal and in this case it will increase the computing abilities for over 700%, that is a lot and Aramco is seemingly sharing that ability with the stc (Saudi Telecom Company) and it isn’t entirely unexpected as we were told that this would happen in the end of March. Where we saw “solutions by stc had signed a SAR 1.4 billion (~ US$ 372 million) agreement with Saudi Aramco to provide advanced high-performance computing (HPC) infrastructure to support operations in the energy exploration and production sector.” And here we see that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is taking data exploration in the energy sector very seriously and it would enable growth of this sector could enable this US$ 372 million investment in a return of billions annually. As the expression goes it will have an interesting return on investment and I reckon that this also goes for the Saudi Telecom sector and this could assist the Kingdom in all manners from large to small. It is the benefit of having your own supercomputer and it is apparently not the first one, they already have 7, as such in the ‘rankings’ of these bad boys the Kingdom would increase to a 12th position on the global ranking list. They won’t outdo the United States who allegedly has 171 of these data devourers, but that is still a standing that will help Saudi Arabia to crunch a whole range of numbers and I reckon that it is one of the very few in the energy sector, as such they will likely have a massive advantage, because as they have had a stable partnership with IBM, they will soon have the means to crush decades of data in mere minutes. It also beckons the thought of what benefits it could bring to the stc, as data mining in the telecom groups is pretty novel. Yes, we get that telecom groups (globally) use supercomputers to see how their investment holds, but there aren’t many to have direct access to one. The top500 list doesn’t specify what or how they are used, but with Saudi Arabia soon in 12th position, they likely have a few options they dod not have before and to get the output of data crunches in no more than minutes is the beginning of a few settings that have strategic benefits and as I see it, their exploration of a muslim customer base in the surrounding African nations will reap benefits for stc as well. To get the output of ‘What can we do now’ not set in weeks, or even days but in mere hours (creating the dashboard is likely to most intense part here) is not to be overlooked. I reckon that overseeing the refinery benefits now for Aramco will be the first expected setting, because that is where a mere 4 billion per percentage increase is seen and that system (aka doohickey) will enable this with all the data it has access to in mere minutes. So, the upcoming OPEC Monthly Reports should no later then December 14th this year be showing us all a nice upgrade of the abilities of Aramco. An advantage like that will stir the emotions of places like Wall Street nicely and whilst some will trivialize what this will contain, the setting of decades of IBM data and the computer power that is added leave me with no worry of what Aramco could be achieving in 2026. 

Have a great day, it Tuesday now for me now, so enjoy whatever day you are in (only New Zealand is ahead of me in time). 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

April 30, 2026 · 14:17

The syrup of some

Deutsche Welle gave me a view, it is a optional view and I am using optional because I know much too little about this. The story (at https://www.dw.com/en/why-uaes-opec-exit-is-a-blow-to-saudi-arabia/a-76975354) gives us ‘Why UAE’s OPEC exit is a blow to Saudi Arabia’ it feels different from other views stating that the break up of OPEC is a win for President Trump, which is another view to have. But here we see “The United Arab Emirates is leaving OPEC to pump more oil on its own terms. The break strips Saudi Arabia of a key partner and adds to growing uncertainty over the cartel’s future.” Yes, the UAE could pump more, but I don’t think it will lead to the uncertainty of the oil cartel (named Open and Opec+) You see, this large blip on all our radars will come with other settings. It will give the gulf states a claim for Iranian oil (repair costs) and that could be sold directly to China and Europe, they will exclude the United States as it is the cause of all this mess. At which point others will reject offers from Brent oil as it is American oil and there is no telling how deep the rejection goes and the weird part is that this might open up European talks with Iran as it reimburses damages to the gulf states (namely: UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and Iraq) it is not the win Iran was looking for, but it is a win as they can make a case that the United States lost. Will it go that way? Time will tell.

It all reminded me towards an old feud (1985) where a colleague accused me from hoarding the ‘Rinse Appelstroop’ on my sandwich, all whilst the sandwich can only contain a mere part of the entire tub. So when we see “For years, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has clashed with Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s most powerful member, over these quotas. The UAE has invested heavily to expand its oil industry and grow its market share, but OPEC limits have repeatedly held it back.” And it reminded me of the feud my co worker gave me over the syrup, almost like oil. I have no idea on where it is all set in the oil industry, but the idea to give into America is nothing less than a joke. They claimed that they have all the oil they need, so why would they need some handhold over oil? The one commercial thing I do know is that as the offer of oil increases the price goes down, as such the Middle East needs to take care of how they deal with this, because oil even as a commodity has a lifespan, once you get to the bottom of the barrel, the amount of oil you can still produce come close to that number shaped like an ‘O’ (hint: it is zero). 

So whilst I get that they all have needs, the idea that there might be an imbalanced amount towards one country is dangerous, but I get it, the UAE must do what is best for the UAE, Saudi Arabia must do what what is best for Saudi Arabia. But underneath all that we see “The UAE currently produces roughly 3.2 to 3.6 million barrels per day (bpd) under quotas but holds spare capacity of nearly 4.8 million bpd, Reuters news agency reported. Plans call for a hike in output toward 5 million bpd by next year.” And no one is looking at the amounts that might still be available for drilling. So what happens when that finishes? Everyone claps to attention but there is no clear vision for the future. And all the ‘influencers’ giving us the YouTube version of what comes tomorrow better find a good news source, because no one has an answer toward the ‘what now’ equation when the oils run out. 

So whilst we are getting “OPEC has already been under strain from repeated quota breaches by members such as Iraq and Nigeria, and from Russia’s inconsistent compliance within OPEC+. The UAE’s departure adds to that sense of fragmentation. In his analysis for Capital Economics,  Oxley warned that, in the medium term, if other producers with spare capacity “see the UAE successfully gaining flexibility and market share” outside OPEC, “others may follow.”” I understand that point of view, but I don’t think I can agree. The bully tactics of the United States will also give strength to Saudi Arabia as they might want to get issues resolved through Algeria, Libya, Nigeria, Gabon and the Congo. There is definitely data that OPEC will be slightly weaker, but the oil that is gained in output will most likely go to China and the setting as of 9 April 2026, the UAE has intercepted and destroyed 537 ballistic missiles, 2,256 drone attacks and 26 cruise missiles fired from Iran, and that is mostly due to the acts of the United States. It is hard to hold them accountable as Iran attacked with the missiles, as such it is on Iran and as some state over 90% were allegedly aimed on civilian targets, as such the UAE demands reparations and so they should, but after that, should oil still be delivered to the instigator of these attacks? I don’t think it is that clear cut even as some state that Iran’s nuclear options were ludicrously limited (I don’t believe they were non-existent). So whilst the UAE could benefit from their withdrawal from OPEC, I see that the weak response from the gulf states towards the UAE is partially to blame for this. 

The conversation had some additional things (at https://theconversation.com/the-uae-is-leaving-the-opec-oil-cartel-what-could-that-mean-for-oil-prices-281734) here we see ‘The UAE is leaving the OPEC oil cartel. What could that mean for oil prices?’, we see here “the UAE is one of the world’s top ten oil producers. The country also has the capacity to increase its output by about one million barrels per day”, which amounts to 6 million barrels a week (one day of rest) and that gives us at least and additional half a billion dollars a week, something the UAE can likely use, especially if it goes towards a solution avoiding the Strait of Hormuz which I wrote about in ‘Sinking a dilemma’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/02/01/sinking-a-dilemma/) I have no idea if that is the path the UAE will sail, but that makes sense, the Strait and the issues with Iran are massively out of play and it also helps with the other gulf states as they (for a fee) use that solution and that is all before the massive attention the harbours of Abu Dhabi and Dubai will enjoy with all these loaded skippers who can now avoid Iranian waters. I only see upsides here, but that channel will require a serious amount cash, there is no doubt about that and it is not merely now, whenever Iran throws a tantrum, the strait becomes the bottleneck for all gulf states. Better to remove that problem completely.

So whilst we are given “OPEC’s influence on the oil price depends on coordinated changes in production. By agreeing to collectively limit, or to expand, the supply of oil in the market, OPEC can manipulate the price to meet its objectives. The UAE alone is the world’s eighth-largest oil producer, and accounts for about 4% of the world’s oil production.” As such I might imagine that the UAE has an issue with the imposed limits and that is before we consider if Das Island is under limits as well. As such it makes sense that the UAE ight want to leave OPEC, but let it be clear, Iran forced this on the rest of OPEC and as such their desperation will also amount to the wrath that these members have as their grip on maximized profits wane. 

Merely a small view on the setting and I get that not everyone agrees, not everyone is charmed by Appelstroop (a Dutch product). Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

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