Predicting a $50/bbl end-2016 oil price

It’s been one heck of a volatile start to the New Year with the oil market going berserk for what is coming up to nearly four weeks now. We’ve seen 10%-plus week-on-week declines to 5%-plus intraday gains for Brent and WTI. Plenty of predictions are around the market from extremely bearish to wildly optimistic.

For instance, ratings agency Moody’s is assuming a drop to $33 per barrel for both Brent and WTI, while Citigroup calls oil the ‘trade of the year’ should you choose to stick with it. Doubtless, Moody’s errs on the side of caution, and Citigroup’s take is premised on the buying low, selling high slant. 

The Oilholic's prediction is somewhere in the mundane middle. On balance of probability, squaring oil supply and demand, yours truly sees Brent and WTI facing severe turbulence for the next six months, but very gradually limping up to $50 by the end of this year. That’s a $10 reduction on a prior end-2016 forecast. A detailed explanation is in the Oilholic’s latest Forbes column available here.  

In the event that surplus Iranian oil starts cancelling out production declines in North America and other non-OPEC production zones, there are several known unknowns. These include the strength of the dollar prolonging the commodities cycle and the copious amount of oil held in storage, the release (or otherwise) of which would have a heavy impact on the direction of the market. Nonetheless, $20 oil doesn’t sound all that implausible anymore even if it won’t stay there.  

Another key revision is the narrowing of the Brent-WTI spread to zero (twice over the course of last year), and a subsequent turn in WTI’s favour. From predicting a $5 premium in favour of Brent, the Oilholic is coming around to the conclusion that WTI would now have an equal, if not upper hand to Brent. 

The so-called premium in the global proxy benchmark’s favour was only established after a domestic US glut rendered the WTI unreflective of global market conditions back in 2008-09. Now that the global market is facing a glut of its own; oversupply sentiment is weighing on Brent too.

Even if the WTI does not regain market prominence as many commentators are predicting, the US benchmark wont play second fiddle either. The usual caveats apply, and the Oilholic would be revisiting the subject over the second quarter. But that’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2016. Photo: Oil rig in the North Sea © Cairn Energy.

Going sideways: Brent & WTI lurk above $40

The market’s huffed and puffed, issues and influences have come and gone but both oil benchmarks – Brent and WTI have done little to escape their current ranges by more than $2 per barrel.

What’s more, if you outstrip the week’s volatility, on a five-day week-on-week basis to Friday, November 20, Brent ended a mere ten cents lower while WTI rose 67 cents. In fact we've been going sideways for over a month now (see graph, above left, click to enlarge).

Expect more of this for some time yet, as oversupply - the overriding market sentiment that has prevailed for much of 2015 - dominates market chatter and will continue to do so for at least another two quarters. With as much as 1.3 to 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) of surplus crude oil regularly hitting the market, there’s little around by way of market influence to dilute the impact of oversupply.

The OPEC ministers’ meeting, due early December, is the next major event on the horizon, but the Oilholic does not expect the producers’ collective to announce a production cut. Since, all players are entrenched in their positions in a bid to keep hold of market share, it would be mighty hard to get all 12 players to agree to a production cut, more so as the impact of such a cut remains highly questionable in terms of lending meaningful (and sustainable) support to prices.

Away from the direction of the oil price, yet on a related note, Fitch Ratings unsurprisingly expects the macro environment for EMEA oil and gas majors to remain challenging in 2016. “Crude prices are unlikely to recover (soon), while refining margins will moderate from the record 2015 levels. However, cost deflation should become more pronounced and help to cushion the majors' profits,” the agency noted.

While the sector outlook is viewed by Fitch as “generally negative”, the rating outlook is "stable"  as the agency does not expect sector-wide negative rating actions. “Credit metrics of most players will remain stretched in 2016, but this cyclicality is a known feature of companies in this industry, and we will only take negative action where we expect the current downturn to permanently impair companies' credit profiles,” it added. 

That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com   

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Chart: Oil benchmark prices Jan to YTD 2015 © Gaurav Sharma / Oilholics Synonymous Report, November 2015.

The $40-50 range, CAPP on Capex & Afren's woes

The first month of oil trading in 2015 is coming to a much calmer end compared to how it began. The year did begin with a bang with Brent shedding over 11% in the first week of full trading alone. Since then, the only momentary drama took place when both Brent and WTI levelled at US$48.05 per barrel at one point on January 16. Overall, both benchmarks have largely stayed in the $44 to $49 range with an average Brent premium of $3+ for better parts of January.

There is a growing realisation in City circles that short sellers may have gotten ahead of themselves a bit just as those going long did last summer. Agreed, oil is not down to sub-$40 levels seen during the global financial crisis. However, if the price level seen then is adjusted for the strength of the dollar now, then the levels being seen at the moment are actually below those seen six years ago.

The big question right now is not where the oil price is, but rather that should we get used to the $40 to $50 range? The answer is yes for now because between them the US, Russia and Saudi Arabia are pumping well over 30 million barrels per day (bpd) and everyone from troubled Libya to calm Canada is prodding along despite the pain of lower oil prices as producing nations.

The latter actually provides a case in point, for earlier in January the Western Canadian Select did actually fall below $40 and is just about managing to stay above $31. However, the Oilholic has negligible anecdotal evidence of production being lowered in meaningful volumes.

For what it’s worth, it seems the Canadians are mastering the art of spending less yet producing more relative to last year, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). The lobby group said last week that production in Western Canada, bulk of which is accounted for by Alberta, would grow by 150,000 bpd to reach 3.6 million bpd in 2015. 

That’s despite the cumulative capex tally of major oil and gas companies seeing an expected decline of 33% on an annualised basis. The headline production figure is actually a downward revision from CAPP’s forecast of 3.7 million bpd, with an earlier expectation of 9,555 wells being drilled also lowered by 30% to 7,350 wells. Yet, the overall production projection is comfortably above 2014 levels and the revision is nowhere near enough (yet) to have a meaningful impact on Canada’s contribution to the total global supply pool. 

Coupled with the said global supply glut, Chinese demand has shown no signs of a pick-up. Unless either the supply side alters fundamentally or the demand side perks up, the Oilholic thinks the current price range for Brent and WTI is about right on the money. 

But change it will, as the current levels of production simply cannot be sustained. Someone has to blink, as yours truly said on Tip TV – it’s likely to be the Russians and US independent upstarts. The new Saudi head of state - King Salman is unlikely to change the course set out by his late predecessor King Abdullah. In fact, among the new King’s first acts was to retain the inimitable Ali Al-Naimi as oil minister. 

Greece too is a non-event from an oil market standpoint in a direct sense. The country does not register meaningfully on the list of either major oil importers or exporters. However, its economic malaise and political upheavals might have an indirect bearing via troubles in the Eurozone. The Oilholic sees $1= €1 around the corner as the dollar strengthens against a basket of currencies. A stronger dollar, of course, will reflect in the price of both benchmarks.

In other news, troubles at London-listed Afren continue and the Oilholic has knocked his target price of 120p for the company down to 20p. First, there was bolt out of the blue last August that the company was investigating “receipt of unauthorised payments potentially for the benefit of the CEO and COO.” 

Following that red flag, just recently Afren revised production estimates at its Barda Rash oilfield in the Kurdistan region of Iraq by 190 million barrels of oil equivalent. The movement in reserves was down to the 2014 reprocessing of 3D seismic shot in 2012 and processed in 2013, as well as results from its drilling campaign, Afren said. 

It is presently thinking about utilising a 30-day grace period under its 2016 bonds with respect to $15 million of interest due on 1 February. That’s after the company confirmed a deferral of a $50 million amortisation payment due at the end of January 2015 was being sought. Yesterday, Fitch Ratings downgraded Afren's Long-term Issuer Default Rating (IDR), as well as its senior secured ratings, to 'C' from 'B-'. It reflects the agency’s view that default was imminent.

Meanwhile, S&P has downgraded Russia’s sovereign rating to junk status. The agency now rates Russia down a notch at BB+. “Russia’s monetary-policy flexibility has become more limited and its economic growth prospects have weakened. We also see a heightened risk that external and fiscal buffers will deteriorate due to rising external pressures and increased government support to the economy,” S&P noted.

Away from ratings agencies notes, here is the Oilholic’s take on what the oil price drop means for airlines and passengers in one’s latest Forbes piece. Plus, here’s another Forbes post touching on the North Sea’s response to a possible oil price drop to $40, incorporating BP’s pessimistic view that oil price is likely to lurk around $50 for the next three years.

For the record, this blogger does not think oil prices will average around $50 for the next three years. One suspects that neither does BP; rather it has more to do with prudent forward planning. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Oil pipeline with Alaska's Brooks Range in the background, USA © Michael S. Quinton / National Geographic

Brent’s premium gets dents as oil price dips

It’s definitely a moment worth recording and the Oilholic was rather glad he was awake earlier today when it happened. For at one point in Asian trading, both Brent and WTI were in perfect sync at US$48.05 per barrel as the oil markets rout continues (see screen grab below, click to enlarge). What's more, for a precious few minutes, the WTI actually traded at a premium of a few cents to Brent marking only the third such occurrence since 2010.

Of course, Brent’s premium has been since been restored back to well over a dollar and rising. However, it is a far cry from 2012 when the premium was averaging around $20 per barrel above the WTI, and did touch $25 at one point if this blogger’s memory serves him well.

The near coming together of both global benchmarks shouldn’t come as a surprise as it was on the horizon. What transpired today was merely for the sake of a record which might not be all that unique over the coming weeks and months of volatility. That said, once the projected supply correction kicks in around midway point of this year, the Oilholic does see Brent’s single digit premium to the WTI climb up to around $5.

As of now, one's 2015 oil price forecast is for a Brent price in the range of $75 to $85 and WTI price range of $65 to $75. Weight on Brent should be to the upside, while weight on WTI should be to the downside of the aforementioned range.

Meanwhile, a Baron’s article is suggesting oil could fall to $20, while industry veteran T. Boone Pickens says he’s seen several slumps in his lifetime and reckons a return to a $100 level within the next “12 to 18 months” is inevitable.

Additionally, the Oilholic has called an end to the so-called “commodities supercycle” in his latest quip for Forbes. On a related note, Goldman Sachs has trimmed its six and 12 month 2015 estimates for Brent to $43 and $70, from $85 and $90, and to $39 and $65, from $75 and $80, for the WTI.

Finally, as talk of a Venezuelan default gains market traction, Moody’s has downgrades ratings of PDVSA and its wholly-owned US-based refining subsidiary Citgo Petroleum. PDVSA’s long term issuer rating and senior unsecured notes were downgraded by the agency to Caa3 from Caa1. Moody’s changed its outlook on the ratings to stable from negative. 

Citgo Petroleum's Corporate Family Rating was downgraded to B3 from B1; its Probability of Default rating to B3-PD from B1-PD; and its senior secured ratings on term loans, notes and industrial revenue bonds to B3 from B1.

Additionally, the rating on Citgo's senior secured revolving credit facility was downgraded to B2 from B1, reflecting a lower expected loss in case of default vis-à-vis other classes of debt in the company's capital structure. The rating outlook was also changed to stable from negative.

The rating actions follow Moody's downgrade of the Venezuelan government's bond ratings to Caa3 from Caa1 with a stable outlook, earlier this week. The principal driver of the decision to downgrade Venezuela's sovereign rating was "a marked increase in default risk owing to lower oil prices," the agency said. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Bloomberg screen grab as Brent and WTI futures achieve parity on January 15, 2015 © Bloomberg

Oil price dip & those tankers on the horizon

Crude year 2015 has well and truly begun with the oil price slipping several notches further, as tankers begin carrying their January cargo that is worth considerably less than it was 12 months ago.

With the full trading week to Jan 9 seeing an uptick in trading volumes back to normal levels after the festive period, the Oilholic spent a day looking at tankers in English Bay on a beautiful sunny afternoon in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Most of these behemoths (see left, click to enlarge photo) ferry Canadian crude to Asian markets finding their way to the vastness of the ocean from Vancouver's Burrard Inlet. 

As tankers disappeared away from eyesight and yet more dotted the landscape, one's first 5-day assessment of this year saw Brent down 11.44% on the week before, WTI -8.2% and the OPEC Basket a whopping -16%. For now, the Canadian oil and gas industry is holding up pretty well and strategically bracing itself for a further drop in price to as low as US$35 per barrel.

Beyond that, of course all bets are off. Whatever the price, local environmental lobby groups don’t quite like these tankers “blotting the coastline of beautiful British Columbia” to quote one. Data suggests traffic has risen seven-fold since 2001. Of course, the oil being shipped isn’t local as British Columbia doesn’t have too much of its own.

Rather, as many of you would know, all of it is piped in from Alberta by Kinder Morgan to its Westport Terminal on the South East shoreline of Burrard Inlet in Burnaby. The company is the middle of a full on bid to increase pipeline capacity. However, standing on the beach, more than one environmentalist would tell you that a spill was inevitable, especially if you happen to declare you are an energy analyst.

Yet, both major incidents over the last ten years have been on land and weren’t down to the crude behemoths of the sea. In 2007, a construction mishap saw a Kinder Morgan pipeline break in Burnaby spilling oil into the Burrard Inlet while dousing some 50 homes in the neighbourhood with the crude stuff. 

Nearly two years later, a storage tank spilt 200,000 litres of oil on Burnaby Mountain. Thankfully, a containment bay prevented spillage into the wider environment. All this might not help Kinder Morgan's medium term public relations drive, but the volume of traffic and cargoes, even with the existing pipeline capacity, isn’t going to ebb over 2015 unless the global economy sees a severe downtown.

If the Russians, Americans and Saudis are in no mood to lower production, the Canadians aren’t going to either, according to anecdotal evidence. The Oilholic’s thoughts on how an oil price below $60 might well hit exploration and production in Canada (and elsewhere) are here in a Forbes piece one wrote earlier. 

This blogger does see an uptick in price from around the halfway point of 2015, as a supply correction is likely to kick-in. For the moment, barring a financial tsunami knocking non-OECD economic activity, the Oilholic's prediction is for a Brent price in the range of $75 to $85 and WTI price range of $65 to $75 for 2015. Weight on Brent should be to the upside, while weight on WTI should be to the downside of the aforementioned range.

Come Christmas, we should be looking at around $80 per Brent barrel. One thing is for sure, the days of a three-figure price aren’t likely to be seen over the next 12 months. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Oil tankers in English Bay, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada © Gaurav Sharma 2015

Hallelujah, it’s Bearish Brent!

Mercury is not rising (at least where this blogger is), it’s not half past 10 (more like half past four), and it’s certainly not for the first time in history, but Hallelujah it’s Bearish Brent!

Sorry, a rather crude attempt to re-jingle that ‘80s hit song, but on a more serious note there is a bit of a commotion in the oil markets with bears roaming the streets. As the readers of this blog would testify, the Oilholic has short called Brent for a while now. Being precise, the said period covers most of the past six and current Brent front-month contracts.

Aggressive yelling of the word 'risk' proved this supply-side scribe wrong for June, but one has been on the money most of the time since the summer. July’s high of US$115.71 per barrel was daft with speculators using the initial flare-up in Iraq as a pretext to perk things up.

The Oilholic said it would not last, based on personal surmising, feedback from physical traders and their solver models. And to the cost of many speculators it didn’t. As one wrote in a Forbes post earlier this week, if an ongoing war (in the Middle East of all places) can’t prop up a benchmark perceived to be a common proxy for oil prices on the world market, then what can?

Rather controversially, and as explained before, the Oilholic maintains that Brent is suffering from risk fatigue in the face of lacklustre demand and erratic macroeconomic data. In Thursday’s trade, it has all come to down to one heck of a bear maul. Many in the City are now wondering whether a $90 per barrel floor might be breached for Brent; it already has in the WTI’s case and on more than one occasion in intraday trading.

All of this comes on the back of Saudi Arabia formally announcing it is reducing its selling price for oil in a move to protect its share in this buyers’ market. The price of OPEC basket of twelve crudes stood at $92.31 dollars a barrel on Wednesday, compared with $94.17 the previous day, according to its calculations.

With roughly 11 days worth of trading left on the November Brent front-month contract, perceived oversupply lends support to the bears. Nonetheless, a bit of caution is advised. While going short on Brent would be the correct call at the moment, Northern Hemisphere winter is drawing closer as is the OPEC meeting next month. So the Oilholic sees a partial price uptick on cards especially if OPEC initiates a production cut.

The dip in price ought to trouble sanction hit Russia too. According to an AFP report, Herman Gref, head of Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, said the country could repeat the fate of the Soviet Union if it doesn't reform its economic policies and avoid the "incompetent" leadership that led to the end of communism.

Speaking at the annual “Russia Calling” investment forum in Moscow, Gref said Russia imports too much, is too reliant on oil and gas exports and half of its economy is monopolised. The dynamic needs to change, according to Russia’s most senior banker, and one employed by a state-owned bank.

Away from Russia, here is the Oilholic's latest Forbes post on the prospects of shale exploration beyond North America. It seems initial hullabaloo and overexcitement has finally been replaced by sense of realism. That said, China, UK and Argentina remain investors’ best hope.

On a closing note, while major investment banks maybe in retreat from the commodities market and bears are engulfing it for the time being, FinEx group, an integrated asset management, private equity and hedge fund business, has decided to enter the rocky cauldron.

Its specialist boutique business – FinEx Commodity Partners – will be led by Simon Smith, former Managing Director and Head of OTC Commodity Solutions at Jefferies Bache. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Disused gas station, Preston, Connecticut, USA © Todd Gipstein / National Geographic.

Crude market, Russia & fretting over Afren

There's been an unsurprising calm in the oil market given the existing supply-side scenario, although the WTI's slip below three figures is more down to local factors above anything else.

Demand stateside is low while supplies are up. Additionally, the CVR Refinery in Coffeyville, Kansas which uses crude from Cushing, Oklahoma and churns 115,000 barrels per day (bpd) is offline and will remain so for another four weeks owing to a fire. It all means that Brent's premium to the WTI is now above US$7 per barrel. Despite (sigh) the latest Libyan flare-up, Brent itself has been lurking either side of $105 level, not as much down to oversupply but rather stunted demand. And the benchmark's current price level has triggered some rather interesting events.

Brent's premium to Dubai crude hit its lowest level in four years this week. According to Reuters, at one point the spread was as low as $1.20 following Monday's settlement. The newswire also reported that Oman crude actually went above Brent following settlement on July 31, albeit down to thin trading volumes.

Away from pricing, the Oilholic has been busy reading agency reports on the impact of the latest round of sanctions on Russia. The most interesting one came from Maxim Edelson of Fitch Ratings, who opined that sanctions could accelerate the decline of Siberian oilfields.

Enhanced recovery techniques used in these fields are similar to those used for shale oil extraction, one of the target areas for the sanctions. As the curbs begin to hit home and technology sales to the Russian oil & gas sector dry up, it will become increasingly harder to maintain rate of production from depleting West Siberia brownfields.

As brownfields are mature, major Russian oil companies are moving into more difficult parts of the existing formations. For example, GazpromNeft, an oil subsidiary of Gazprom, is increasingly relying on wells with horizontal drilling, which accounted for 42% of all wells drilled in 2013 compared to 4% in 2011, and multi-stage fracking, which was used in 57% of high-tech wells completed in 2013, up from 3% in 2011.

"In the medium term, [EU and US] measures are also likely to delay some of Russia's more ambitious projects, particularly those on the Arctic shelf. If the sanctions remain for a very long time they could even undermine the feasibility of these projects, unless Russia can find alternative sources of technology or develop its own," Edelson wrote further.

Russian companies have limited experience in working with non-traditional deposits that require specialised equipment and "know-how" and are increasingly reliant on joint ventures (JVs) with western companies to provide technology and equipment. All such JVs could be hit by sanctions, with oil majors such as ExxonMobil, Shell and BP, oil service companies Schlumberger, Halliburton and Baker Hughes, and Russia's Rosneft, GazpromNeft and to a lesser extent LUKOIL, Novatek and Tatneft, all in the crude mix.

More importantly, whether or not Russia's oil & gas sector takes a knock, what's going on at the moment coupled with the potential for further US and EU sanctions on the horizon, is likely to reduce western companies' appetite for involvement in new projects, Edelson adds.

Of course, one notes that in tune with the EU's selfish need for Russian gas, its sanctions don't clobber the development of gas fields for the moment. On a related note, Fitch currently rates Gazprom's long-term foreign currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'BBB', with a 'Negative' outlook, influenced to a great extent by Russia's sovereign outlook.

Continuing with Russia, here is The Oilholic's Forbes article on why BP can withstand sanctions on Russia despite its 19.75% stake in Rosneft. Elsewhere, yours truly also discussed why North Sea exploration & production (E&P) isn't dead yet in another Forbes post.

Finally, news that the CEO and COO of Afren had been temporarily suspended pending investigation of alleged unauthorised payments, came as a bolt out of the blue. At one point, share price of the Africa and Iraqi Kurdistan-focussed E&P company dipped by 29%, as the suspension of CEO Osman Shahenshah and COO Shahid Ullah was revealed to the London Stock Exchange.

While the wider market set about shorting Afren, the company said its board had no reason to believe this will negatively affect its stated financial and operational position.

"In the course of an independent review on the board's behalf by Willkie Farr & Gallagher (UK) LLP of the potential need for disclosure of certain previous transactions to the market, evidence has been identified of the receipt of unauthorised payments potentially for the benefit of the CEO and COO. These payments were not made by Afren. The investigation has not found any evidence that any other Board members were involved," it added.

No conclusive findings have yet been reached and the investigation is ongoing. In the Oilholic's humble opinion the market has overreacted and a bit of perspective is required. The company itself remains in a healthy position with a solid income stream and steadily rising operating profits. Simply put, the underlying fundamentals remain sound.

As of March 31 this year, Afren had no short-term debt and cash reserves of $361 million. In 2013, the company improved its debt maturity profile by issuing a $360 million secured bond due 2020 and partially repaying its $500 million bond due 2016 (with $253 million currently outstanding) and $300 million bond due 2019 (with $250 million currently outstanding).

So despite the sell-off given the unusual development, many brokers have maintained a 'buy' rating on the stock pending more information, and rightly so. Some, like Investec, cautiously downgraded it to 'hold' from 'buy', while JPMorgan held its 'overweight' recommendation on the stock. There's a need to keep calm, and carry on the Afren front. That's all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Russian Oilfields © Lukoil

Brent’s spike: Bring on that risk premium

Last week, the Brent forward-month futures contract was within touching distance of capping an 11-week high. On May 22, we saw the new July contract touch an intraday level of US$110.58; the highest since March 3. In fact, Brent, WTI as well as the OPEC crude basket prices are currently in 'three figure territory'.

Libyan geopolitical premium that's already priced in, is being supported by the Ukraine situation, and relatively positive PMI data coming out of China. Of these, if the latter is sustained, the Brent price spike instead of being a one-off would lend weight to a new support level. However, the Oilholic is not alone in the City in opining that one set of PMI data from China is not reason enough for upward revisions to the country's demand forecasts.

As for the traders' mindset the week before the recent melee, ICE's Commitments of Traders report for week of May 20 points to a significant amount of Brent buying as long positions were added while short positions were cut, leaving the net equation up by 15% on the week at 200,876. That's a mere 31,000 below the record from August 2013.

Away from crude pricing, S&P Capital IQ reckons private equity acquisitions in both the energy and utilities sectors are "poised for a comeback".

Its research indicates that to date this year, the value of global leveraged buyouts in the combined energy and utilities sectors is approaching $16 billion. The figure exceeds 2013's full-year total of $10 billion. Extrapolating current year energy and utility LBO deal value, 2014 is on pace for the biggest year for such deals since 2007, S&P Capital IQ adds (see table on left, click to enlarge).

Meanwhile, in its verdict on the Russo-Chinese 30-year natural gas supply contract, Fitch Ratings notes that Gazprom can go ahead with exporting eastwards without denting European exports. But since we are talking of 38 billion cubic metres (cm) of natural gas per annum from Gazprom to CNPC, many, including this blogger, have suggested the Kremlin is hedging its bets.

After all, the figure amounts to a quarter of the company's delivery quota to Europe. However, Fitch Ratings views it is as a case of Gazprom expanding its client portfolio, and for a company with vast untapped reserves in eastern Russia its basically good news.

In a recent note to clients, the ratings agency said: "Gazprom's challenge historically has been to find ways to monetise its 23 trillion cm reserves at acceptable prices – and the best scenario for the company is an increase in production. The deal is therefore positive for the company's medium to long term prospects, especially if it opens the door for a further deal to sell gas from its developed western fields to China in due course."

While pricing was not revealed, most industry observers put it at or above $350 per thousand cm. This is only marginally lower than Gazprom's 2013 contract price with its Western European customers penned at $378 per thousand cm. As for upfront investment, President Vladimir Putin announced a capital expenditure drive of $55 billion to boot. That should be enough to be getting on with it.

Just before one takes your leave, here's an interesting Reuters report by Catherine Ngai on why the 'sleepy market' for WTI delivery close to East Houston's refineries is (finally) beginning to wake up. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Table: Global LBOs in the energy & utilities sector © S&P Capital IQ, May 2014.

EU’s ‘least worst’ gas supply scenarios & more

The Oilholic spent last Friday evening downing a few drinks with a 'civil servant' of the diplomatic variety who'd returned back from the recently concluded Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague, where the Ukrainian standoff dominated most conversations. But before you get excited, yours truly has no 'Jack Bauer'-level clearance gossip!

However, with 53 nations represented – there were quite a few suits around, and contrary to popular belief, the stiff suits do gossip! Credible intel does appear to suggest that some Europeans did a very fine 'Clinton post-Lewinsky scandal' impression in a geopolitically fresh context which kinda ran like: "We do not have relations with that man Putin." Of course, they were, as Clinton was back in the day, being a little less frugal with the truth.

The Americans already knew that but didn't say so out of diplomatic courtesy, at least not in public. The Oilholic wouldn't have been so courteous, but then yours truly isn't in the diplomatic service. From the Baltics to the Balkans, Russian exports of natural gas dominate the energy spectrum built on hitherto seemingly inextricable relations, whether amicable or not.

Despite promising to diversify their supplies when the Georgian skirmish happened in 2008, not much has changed, as The Oilholic noted earlier this month. As a direct consequence, US sanctions against Russia appear to better structured compared to European ones which look like a rag-bag of measures to accommodate everyone and annoy no one – especially President Putin, who doesn't really care about them in the first place! Most pressing question is – what now for the EU energy equation?

Just as the suits were winding up, Jaroslav Neverovič, Lithuania's energy minister made an impassioned plea to the US to export more gas to Europe as a possible answer. Just as a sub-context, the Baltic States are busy building LNG import terminals. Headline grabbing it may well have been, what Neverovič said, even if realised, would do little to curb European addiction to Russian gas over the medium term.

Supply-side diversity cannot be achieved in an instant, nor can the US solve the problem. If the capacity of all seven US FERC and DOE approved LNG export terminals (so far) is totalled and it is hypothetically (or rather absurdly) assumed that the entire cargo would be dispatched to Europe – the volume would still only replace around 35% of the current level of Russian gas imports to Europe.

But what has changed is that the Baltic nations, as demonstrated by Neverovič, are clearly alarmed; perhaps, more than they were in 2008. The Poles are mighty miffed too and even the Germans are waking up and smelling the coffee. So what's next? American LNG imports will come, while Norway, UK and the Netherlands’ pooled resources could help the trio. 

However, going beyond that, and to quote a brilliant editorial in The Economist, would mean Europeans relying on Algeria, Qatar, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan which does not seem very savoury. "But the more rogues who sell them gas, the harder it is for any one to hold Europe hostage," it adds! So here's your 'least worst' medium term scenario, preparation for which had to start in 2008 and not in 2014! 

Related to the situation, Fitch Ratings revised the corporate outlooks of nine Russian companies, including those of Gazprom and Lukoil to Negative. As with a situation of this nature there would be losers somewhere and winners elsewhere.

According to the ratings agency, BG, BP, Shell and Total would be among its EMEA rated oil & gas companies that stand to gain from a "potential shift" in EU countries' energy links with Russia over time. On the other hand, Gazprom and Ukraine's Naftogaz – no prizes for guessing – are most likely to find themselves at a competitive disadvantage.

Analysing a scenario where EU countries could be forced to "recast their approach to energy and economic links with Russia over time", as UK Foreign Secretary William Hague has suggested, Fitch said BG, BP,  Shell and Total are well placed.

For instance, BG is participating in three US projects already approved by FERC and DOE to export LNG. BP completed the final investment decision for the Stage 2 development of the Shah Deniz gas field with its local partner State Oil Company of Azerbaijan in December last year. The expansion of the southern corridor gas link to Europe puts these companies in a unique position to diversify EU gas supplies.

Meanwhile, Shell is the first company in the world to develop floating LNG (FLNG) facilities. The technology is an important development for the industry as it reduces both project costs and environmental impact. If Shell is able to replicate the FLNG model it is deploying in Australia to diversify European supplies, it could give the company a competitive advantage over peers.

Finally, Total became the first Western oil major to invest in UK shale prospection after agreeing to take a 40% stake in two licenses that are part of the prospective Bowland Shale in Northern England. The investment could give the company a head start if European shale gas production begins to ramp up in a meaningful way, even though its early days. In fact, its early days in all four cases, and Fitch agreed that supply-side benefits would accrue over time, not overnight.

Going the other way, Gazprom, which supplied around a third of European gas volumes in 2013, faces the prospect of diminishing market share if the EU seeks alternative gas supplies, instead of simply alternative gas routes from Russia around Ukraine. "Europe may finally find the political will to reduce this percentage," Fitch adds.

As for Naftogaz – it's in big trouble alright. Not only could the Ukrainian company face higher prices for gas supplies from Russia accompanied by reduced volumes for internal consumption, the road ahead is anything but certain!

Away from the EU and Ukraine, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne dropped a few crude morsels in his annual budget on March 19 to help British consumers and the industry. Fuel duty was frozen again, while passengers on some long-haul flights originating in the UK are set to pay less tax following a revamp of Air Passenger Duty (APD).

Passengers travelling more than 2,000 miles will pay the band B rate, which varies from £67 to £268, Osborne told parliament. The two highest of the four APD tax bands are to be scrapped from 2015, he added. At present, it is cheaper to fly from the UK to the US than the Caribbean, despite often similar distances, a situation Osborne described as "crazy and unjust". So passengers on long-haul flights to destinations such as India and the Caribbean can expect to pay a lower tax rate soon.

Coming on to industry measures, Osborne also put forward a new incentive for onshore prospection, wherein a portion of profit equal to 75% of a company's qualifying onshore capital expenditure will be exempt from supplementary tax charge.

This portion of the profit will then be subject to tax at 30%, while the remaining profit will be subject to a marginal tax rate of 62%, as is usually the case with oil & gas companies operating in the UK. The bold and much needed move went down well in the currently charged geopolitical atmosphere, unless you happen to be opposed to fracking on principle.

Robert Hodges, director of energy tax services at Ernst & Young, said it was welcome news for the shale gas industry which needs to commit significant investment to prove commercial reserves in the UK.

"The Government also announced it will work with industry to ensure that the UK has the right skills and supply chain in place. This is an important commitment, which will be welcomed by industry, to ensure that the UK maximises the benefit from the development of its indigenous oil and gas resources," he added.

As for the North Sea, we saw some moves on ultra high pressure, high temperature (HPHT) fields with Osborne providing an allowance to exempt a portion of a drilling company's profits from the supplementary charge. The amount of profit exempt will equal at least 62.5% of qualifying capex a company incurs on these projects. The Chancellor also said he would launch a review of the tax regime for the entire sector.

Some were pleased, others not so. Maersk Oil and BG, lead operators of the Culzean and Jackdaw fields, are the first to benefit. Both were cock-a-hoop saying it would lead to the direct creation over 700 jobs, with a potential for up to 8,000 more further down the supply chain. However, the International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC) claims changes over drilling rigs and accommodation vessels would cost firms an estimated £145 million in the coming year. Lobby group Oil & Gas UK also expressed concerns on cost escalation, but welcomed other bits thrown up by Osborne.

Away from it all, there's one tiny non-UK morsel to toss up. According to a recent GlobalData report, it appears that Kenya's first oil & gas licensing round is not expected Q4 2014 at the earliest. The first licensing round was originally scheduled for June last year with an offer of eight blocks up for bidding. Then all went a bit quiet. Now GlobalData says it will happen, but plans have temporarily stalled pending the passage of a new energy bill.

Moving on to the price of the crude stuff, last fortnight was pretty much a case of steady as she goes for Brent, while supply-side issues caused a mini spike with the WTI. And, that can only mean one thing - another narrowing of the Brent-WTI spread to single figures.

Factors in the WTI rear-view mirror included supply shrinkage at Cushing, Oklahoma; down for the eighth successive week last Friday and the lowest in two years, according to the EIA. Libyan, Nigerian supply outages had a bearing on Brent, but it's nothing to write home about this fortnight. Much of the risk is already priced in, especially as Libyan outages are something City traders are getting pretty used to and Nigeria is nothing new. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here

To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2014. Photo: Oil pipeline © Cairn Energy

Speculators make the oil price belie market logic

The fickle crude oil market is yet again giving an indication about how divorced it is from macroeconomic fundamentals and why a concoction of confused geopolitics and canny speculation is behind the recent peaks and troughs. To give a bit of background – the WTI forward month futures contract surpassed the US$106 per barrel level last week; the highest it has been in 16 months. Concurrently, the spread between WTI and Brent crude narrowed to a near 33-month low of US$1.19 in intraday on July 11 [versus a high of US$29.70 in September 2011].

 

Less than a couple of weeks ago Goldman Sachs closed its trading recommendation to buy WTI and sell Brent. In a note to clients, the bank’s analysts said they expected the spread to narrow in the medium term as new pipelines help shift the Cushing, Oklahoma glut, a physical US crude oil delivery point down to the Houston trading hub, thus removing pressure from the WTI forward month futures contract to the waterborne Brent.

 

Goldman Sachs' analysts were by no means alone in their thinking. Such a viewpoint about the spread is shared by many on Wall Street, albeit in a nuanced sort of way. While Cushing's impact in narrowing the spread is a valid one, the response of the WTI to events elsewhere defies market logic.

 

Sadly Egypt is in turmoil, Syria is still burning, Libya’s problems persist and Iraq is not finding its feet as quick as outside-in observers would like it to. However, does this merit a WTI spike to record highs? The Oilholic says no! Agreed, that oil prices were also supported last week by US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's comments that economic stimulus measures were "still" necessary. But most of the upward price pressure is speculators' mischief - pure and simple.

 

Less than two months ago, we were being peddled with the argument that US shale was a game changer – not just by supply-side analysts, but by the IEA as well. So if that is the case, why are rational WTI traders spooked by fears of a wider conflict in the Middle East? Syria and Egypt do not even contribute meaningfully to the global oil market supply train, let alone to the North American market. Furthermore, China and India are both facing tough times if not a downturn.

 

And you know what, give this blogger a break if you really think the US demand for distillates rose so much in 10 days that it merited the WTI spiking by the amount that it has? Let's dissect the supply-side argument. Last week's EIA data showed that US oil stocks fell by about 10 million barrels for a second consecutive week. That marked a total stockpile decline of 20.2 million barrels in two weeks, the biggest since 1982.

 

However, that is still not enough to detract the value of net US inventories which are well above their five-year average. Furthermore, there is nothing to suggest thus far that the equation would alter for the remainder of 2013 with media outlets reporting the same. The latest one, from the BBC, based on IEA figures calmly declares the scare over 'peak oil' subsiding. US crude production rose 1.8% to 7.4 million barrels per day last week, the most since January 1992 and in fact on May 24, US supplies rose to 397.6 million, the highest inventory level since 1931!

 

But for all of that, somehow Bernanke's reassurances on a continuation of Federal stimulus, flare-ups in the Middle East [no longer a big deal from a US supply-side standpoint] and a temporary stockpile decline were enough for the latest spike. Why? Because it is a tried and tested way for those who trade in paper barrels to make money.

 

A very well connected analogy can be drawn between what's happening with the WTI and Brent futures' recent "past". Digging up the Brent data for the last 36 months, you will see mini pretexts akin to the ones we've seen in the last 10 days, being deployed by speculators to push to the futures contract ever higher; in some instances above $110 level by going long. They then rely on publicity hungry politicians to bemoan how consumers are feeling the pinch. Maybe an Ed Markey can come alone and raise the issue of releasing strategic petroleum reserves (SPRs) and put some downward pressure – especially now that he's in the US Senate.

 

Simultaneously, of course the high price starts hurting the economy as survey data factors in the drag of rising oil prices, usually within a three-month timeframe, and most notably on the input/output prices equation. The same speculators then go short, blaming an economic slowdown, some far-fetched reason of "uptick" in supply somewhere somehow and the Chinese not consuming as much as they should! And soon the price starts falling. This latest WTI spike is no different.

Neither the underlying macroeconomic fundamentals nor the supply-demand scenarios have altered significantly over the last two weeks. Even the pretexts used by speculators to make money haven't changed either. The Oilholic suspects a correction is round the corner and the benchmark is a short! (Click graph above to enlarge)

 

Away from crude pricing matters to some significant news for India and Indonesia. It seems both countries are reacting to curb fuel subsidies under plans revealed last month. The Indian government agreed to a new gas pricing formula which doubled domestic natural gas prices to $8.40/million British thermal units (mmbtu) from $4.20/mmbtu.

Meanwhile, the Indonesian government is working on plans to increase the price of petrol by 44% to Rupiah 6,500 ($2.50) per gallon and diesel by 22% to Rupiah 5,500. With the hand of both governments being forced by budgetary constraints, that's good economics but bad politics. In Asia, it's often the other way around, especially with general elections on the horizon - as is the case with both countries.

 

Elsewhere, yours truly recently had the chance to read a Moody's report on the outlook for the global integrated oil and gas industry. According to the ratings agency, the outlook will remain stable over the next 12 to 18 months, reflecting the likelihood of subdued earnings growth during this period.

Analyst Francois Lauras, who authored the report, said, "We expect the net income of the global oil and gas sector to fall within the stable range of minus 10% to 10% well into 2014 as robust oil prices and a slight pick-up in US natural gas prices help offset ongoing fragility in the refining segment." 

 

"Although oil prices may moderate, we expect demand growth in Asia and persistent geopolitical risk to keep prices at elevated levels," he added.

 

The agency anticipates that integrated oil companies will concentrate on reinvesting cash flows into their upstream activities, driven by "robust" oil prices, favourable long-term trends in energy consumption and the prospects of higher returns.

 

However, major projects are exerting pressure on operating and capital efficiency measures as they are often complex, highly capital intensive and have long lead times. In the near term, Moody's expects that industry players will continue to dispose of non-core, peripheral assets to complement operating cash flows and fund large capex programmes, as well as make dividend payouts without impairing their balance sheets.

 

Finally, the agency said it could change its outlook to negative if a substantial drop in oil prices were triggered by a further deterioration in the world economy. It would also consider changing its outlook to positive if its forecast for the sector's net income increased by more than 10% over the next 12-18 months.

Moody's has maintained the stable outlook since September 2011. In the meantime, whatever the macroeconomic climate might be, it hardly ever rains on the speculators' parade. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com
 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Pump Jacks, Perryton, Texas, USA © Joel Sartore / National Geographic. Graph: WTI Crude Futures US$/barrel © BBC / DigitalLook.com

‘9-month’ high to a ‘9-month’ low? That's crude!

In early February, we were discussing the Brent forward month futures contract's rise to a nine-month high of US$119.17 per barrel. Fast forward to mid-April and here we are at a nine-month low of US$97.53 – that’s ‘crude’!

The Oilholic forecast a dip and so it has proved to be the case. The market mood is decidedly bearish with the IMF predicting sluggish global growth and all major industry bodies (OPEC, IEA, EIA) lowering their respective global oil demand forecasts.

OPEC and EIA demand forecasts were along predictable lines but from where yours truly read the IEA report, it appeared as if the agency reckons European demand in 2013 would be the lowest since the 1980s. Those who followed market hype and had net long positions may not be all that pleased, but a good few people in India are certainly happy according to Market Watch. As the price of gold – the other Indian addiction – has dipped along with that of crude, some in the subcontinent are enjoying a “respite” it seems. It won’t last forever, but there is no harm in short-term enjoyment.

While the Indians maybe enjoying the dip in crude price, the Iranians clearly aren’t. With Brent below US$100, the country’s oil minister Rostam Qasemi quipped, "An oil price below $100 is not reasonable for anyone." Especially you Sir! The Saudi soundbites suggest that they concur. So, is an OPEC production cut coming next month? Odds are certainly rising one would imagine.

Right now, as Stephen Schork, veteran analyst and editor of The Schork Report, notes: "Oil is in a continued a bear run, but there's still a considerable amount of length from a Wall Street standpoint, so it smells like more of a liquidation selloff."

By the way, it is worth pointing out that at various points during this and the past week, the front-month Brent futures was trading at a discount to the next month even after the May settlement expired on April 15th. The Oilholic counted at least four such instances over the stated period, so read what you will into the contango. Some say now would be a good time to bet on a rebound if you fancy a flutter and “the only way is up” club would certainly have you do that.

North Sea oil production is expected to fall by around 2% in May relative to this month’s production levels, but the Oilholic doubts if that would be enough on a standalone basis to pull the price back above US$100-mark if the macroclimate remains bleak.

Meanwhile, WTI is facing milder bear attacks relative to Brent, whose premium to its American cousin is now tantalisingly down to under US$11; a far cry from October 5, 2011 when it stood at US$26.75. It seems Price Futures Group analyst Phil Flynn’s prediction of a ‘meeting in the middle’ of both benchmarks – with Brent falling and WTI rising – looks to be ever closer.

Away from pricing, the EIA sees US oil production rising to 8 million barrels per day (bpd) and also that the state of Texas would still beat North Dakota in terms of oil production volumes, despite the latter's crude boom. As American companies contemplate a crude boom, one Russian firm – Lukoil could have worrying times ahead, according to Fitch Ratings.

In a note to clients earlier this month, the ratings agency noted that Lukoil’s recent acquisition of a minor Russian oil producer (Samara-Nafta, based in the Volga-Urals region with 2.5 million tons of annual oil production) appeared to be out of step with recent M&A activity, and may indicate that the company is struggling to sustain its domestic oil output.

Lukoil spent nearly US$7.3 billion on M&A between 2009 and 2012 and acquired large stakes in a number of upstream and downstream assets. However, a mere US$452 million of that was spent on Russian upstream acquisitions. But hear this – the Russian firm will pay US$2.05 billion to acquire Samara-Nafta! Unlike Rosneft and TNK-BP which the former has taken over, Lukoil has posted declines in Russian oil production every year since 2010.

“We therefore consider the Samara-Nafta acquisition as a sign that Lukoil is willing to engage in costly acquisitions to halt the fall in oil production...Its falling production in Russia results mainly from the depletion of the company's brownfields in Western Siberia and lower than-expected production potential of the Yuzhno Khylchuyu field in Timan-Pechora,” Fitch Ratings notes.

On a closing note, the Oilholic would like to share a brilliant article on the BBC's website touching on the fallacy of the good biofuels are supposed to do. Citing a Chatham House report, the Beeb notes that the UK's "irrational" use of biofuels will cost motorists around £460 million over the next 12 months. Furthermore, a growing reliance on sustainable liquid fuels will also increase food prices. That’s all for the moment folks. Until next time, keep reading, keep it crude! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here. 

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com 

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo: Oil Rig © Cairn Energy Plc.

Crude thoughts from 141 West Jackson Blvd

A visit to Chicago would not be complete without setting foot inside 141 West Jackson Boulevard – the Chicago Board of Trade’s (CBOT) iconic abode – and gathering the pulse of the market straight from the world's oldest futures and options exchange. Over 50 different options and futures contracts are traded here, including ‘cruder’ ones, via close to 4000 member traders both electronically and through open outcrys; so plenty to observe and discuss.

There was only one man though whom the Oilholic had in mind – the inimitable Phil Flynn of Price Futures Group, veteran market analyst and the doyen of the business news broadcasters. The man from the “South Side” of Chicago has never been one to sit on the fence in all the years that yours truly has been mapping his market commentary. And he wasted no time in declaring that the WTI could reassert itself in the Battle of the Benchmarks pretty soon.

“First, let’s take the Brent-WTI differential into perspective. It narrowed to US$13 at one point today [March 28] and it will continue to narrow, albeit in fits and starts. We’ll come back to this point. WTI’s claw-back in terms of market stature could be down to simple nuts and bolts stuff! The US could – and I think will – become a treble impact jurisdiction – i.e. one of the world’s largest consumer, producer and exporters of crude oil somewhere between 2015-2018; if you believe the current market projections. So what could be a better way to get a sense of the global energy market than to have all of that rolled into one contract?”

Flynn reckons people were behind the curve in awarding Brent a victory in the Battle of the Benchmarks. “Everyone says these days that Brent is more reflective of global conditions. My take is that they should have reached this conclusion five years ago and it’d have been fine! Yet now when the clamour for Brent being the leading benchmark is growing, market supply and demand dynamics are changing for the better here in the US and for the worse in the North Sea.”

The veteran market commentator says the period of Brent being a global benchmark will be akin to the "rise and fall of the Roman Empire" through no fault of its champions but rather that of "late adopters" who missed the pulse of the market which was ticking differently back in 2007-08 with the rise of Asian crude oil consumption.

“There is a lot of politics in anointing the ‘favoured’ benchmark. As a trader I don’t care about the politics, I go with my gut instinct which tells me the problems associated with the WTI – for instance the Oklahoma glut – are being tackled while Brent’s are just beginning. WTI is liquid, has broad participation and also has the backdrop giving an indication of what supply and demand is. Therein, for me, lies the answer.”

Flynn also feels the technicals tell their own story. In December, he called a WTI low of US$85 and the top at US$97 and was vindicated. “It is flattering to look like some kind of a genius but it was pure technical analysis. I think there was a realisation that oil was undervalued at the end of 2012 (fiscal cliff, dollar-cross). When that went away, WTI had a nice seasonal bounce (add cold weather, improving US economy). It’s all about playing the technicals to a tee!”

Flynn sees the current WTI price as being close to a short-term top. “Now that’s a scary thing to say because we’re going into the refining season. It is so easy to say pop the WTI above US$100. But the more likely scenario is that there would a much greater resistance at about the price level where we are now.”

Were this to happen, both the Oilholic and Flynn were in agreement that there could be a further narrowing between Brent and WTI - a sort of “a meeting in the middle” with WTI price going up and Brent falling.

“The WTI charts look bullish but I still maintain that we are closer to the top. What drives the price up at this time of the year is the summer driving season. Usually, WTI climbs in March/April because the refiners are seen switching to summer time blends and are willing to pay-up for the higher quality crudes so that they can get the switchover done and make money on the margins,” he says.

His team at Price Futures (see right) feels the US seasonal factors are currently all out of whack. “We’ve recently had hurricanes, refinery fires, the Midwest glut, a temporary gas price spike – which means the run-up of gasoline prices that we see before Memorial Day has already happened! Additionally, upward pressure on the WTI contracts that we see in March/April may have already been alleviated because we had part of the refinery maintenance done early. So barring any major disasters we ‘may not’ get above US$100,” he adds.

As for the risk premium both here and across the pond, the CBOT man reckons we can consider it to be broadly neutral on the premise that a US$10 premium has already been priced in and has been for some time now.

“The Iran issue has been around for so long that it’s become a near permanent feature. The price of oil, as far as the risk premium goes, reflects the type of world that we live in; so we have an in-built risk premium every day.”

“Market wizards could, in theory, conjure up a new futures gimmick solely on the “risk premium in oil” – which could range between US$3 to US$20 were we to have a one! Right now we have a US$7 to US$10 premium “near” permanently locked in. So unless we see a major disruption to supply, that risk premium is now closer to 7 rather than 10. That’s not because the risks aren’t there, but because there is more supply back-up in case of an emergency,” he adds.

“Remember, Libya came into the risk picture only because of the perceived short supply of the (light sweet) quality of its crude. That was the last big risk driven volatility that we had. The other was when we were getting ready for the European embargo on Iranian crude exports,” he adds.

With the discussion done, Flynn, with his customary aplomb, remarked, “Let’s show you how trading is done the Chicago way.” That meant a visit down to the trading pit, something which alas has largely disappeared from London, excluding the London Metals Exchange.

While the CBOT was established in 1848, it has been at its 141 West Jackson Boulevard building since 1930 and so has the trading pit. “Just before the Easter break, volumes today [March 28] are predictably lower. I think the exchange record is 454 million contracts set 10 years ago,” says Flynn.

As we stepped into the pit, the din and energy on the floor was infectious. Then there was pin drop silence 10 seconds before the pit traders awaited a report due at 11:00 am sharp...followed by a loud groan.

“No need to look at the monitors – that was bearish all right; a groan would tell you that. With every futures contract, crude including, there would be someone who’s happy and someone who’s not. The next day the roles would be reversed and so it goes. You can take all your computers and all your tablets and all your Blackberries – this is trading as it should be,” says Flynn (standing here on the right with the Oilholic).

In July 2007, the CBOT merged with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) to form the CME Group, a CME/Chicago Board of Trade Company, making it a bigger market beast than it was. Having last visited a rather docile trading pit in Asia, the Oilholic was truly privileged to have visited this iconic trading pit – the one where many feel it all began in earnest.

They say the Czar’s Russia first realised the value of refining Petroleum from crude oil, the British went about finding oil and making a business of it; but it is the United States of America that created a whole new industry model as we know it today! The inhabitants of this building in Chicago for better parts of 80 years can rightly claim “We’re the money” for that industry.

That’s all from the 141 West Jackson Boulevard folks! It was great being here and this blogger cannot thank Phil Flynn and Price Futures Group enough, not only for their time and hospitality, but for also granting access to observe both their trading room and the CBOT pit. More from Chicago coming up! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: The Chicago Board of Trade at West Jackson Boulevard (left) with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (right), Chicago, USA. Photo 2: Phil Flynn (standing in the centre) with his colleagues at Price Futures Group. Photo 3: Phil Flynn (right) with the Oilholic (left) at the CBOT trading floor © Gaurav Sharma 2013.