Oil bust of 2015 worse than you thought

While much of Wall Street appears to be at peace with the ‘lower for longer’ oil price slant, new research suggests the industry slump of 2015 was not as bad as we thought stateside; it was actually much worse! 

According to ratings agency Moody's, the oil bust that began in 2015 may turn out to be on par with the telecoms industry collapse of the early 2000s, and worse still it continues to fester. 

Both in terms of the number of recorded bankruptcies, as well as the recovery rates for creditors – 2015 was annus horribilis, with 2016 showing signs of making it look tame.

David Keisman, Senior Vice President at Moody's, says the agency recorded 17 oil & gas bankruptcies in 2015, with 15 coming from the Exploration & Production (E&P) sector, one from oilfield services, and one from drilling. Furthermore, Moody's E&P bankruptcies have accelerated in 2016, with the year-till-date figure about double that for all of 2015.

"The jump in oil and gas defaults that was driven by slumping commodity prices, was primarily responsible for the increase in the overall US default rate in 2015 and continues to fuel it in 2016. When all the data is in, including 2016 bankruptcies, it may very well turn out that this oil & gas industry crisis has created a segment-wide bust of historic proportions," Keisman adds.

That’s because during the telecoms collapse, Moody's recorded 43 company bankruptcies in the three-year period between 2001 and 2003.

Revealing further data, the agency said firm-wide recovery rates for E&P bankruptcies from 2015 averaged only 21%, significantly lower than the historical average of 58.6% for all E&P bankruptcies filed prior to 2015, and the overall historical average of 50.8% for all types of corporates that filed for bankruptcy protection between 1987-2015.

At the instrument level, reserve based loans on average recovered 81%, significantly lower than the 98% recovered in prior energy E&P bankruptcies from 1987-2014. Similarly, other bank debt instruments also on average recovered much less than in previous bankruptcies. For their part, high yield bonds recovered a dismal 6%, compared to a recorded rate in the low 30% in previous E&P bankruptcies.

Finally, Moody’s also notes that “distressed exchanges did little to stave off bankruptcies. More than half of the E&P companies that completed distressed exchanges ended up filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection within a year.”

The agency's sobering take follows those of its ratings industry rivals, with Fitch noting that all European oil majors are likely to generate large negative free cash flows for the full-year 2016, and S&P observing that energy and natural resources segment has the highest concentration of global corporate defaults by sector accounting for 65 issuers, or 56%, of the 117 defaults worldwide in the year to August-end. 

Away from industry doom and gloom, and just before yours truly bids goodbye to the Big Apple, one had the invitation to attend the ICIS Kavaler Award Gala reception sponsored by the Chemists Club at the City’s Metropolitan Club. 

This year’s winner was British serial Industrialist Jim Ratcliffe, the founder of chemicals firm Ineos. According to ICIS, Ratcliffe is the first foreign winner of the award, decided by his peers in the chemicals business. 

Pre-gala, the Oilholic had a drink to that; albeit one which was shaken not stirred, quite like much of the oil & gas industry is at the moment. That’s all from New York folks, with Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania calling next! 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 IBTimes UK click here. 

To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2016. Photo 1: Wall Street Signage, New York, USA. Photo 2: The Oilholic in The Big Apple © Gaurav Sharma, September 2016

Volatile yet flat-ish Q1 points to $40-50/bbl price

The first quarter of 2016 has been pretty volatile for oil benchmarks. Yet if you iron out the relative daily ups and downs in percentage terms, both global benchmarks and the OPEC basket are marginally higher than early January (see chart left, click to enlarge). 

Brent, at $37.28 per barrel back then, ended Friday trading at $41.78, while WTI ended at $39.53, up from $37.04 in early January. That’s a fairly flat outcome following the end of a three-month period, but in line with the Oilholic’s conjecture of an initial slow creep above $40 per barrel by June, followed by yet another crawl up to  $50 per barrel (or thereabout) by Christmas (as the Oilholic opined on Forbes).

Moving on from pricing matters, a new report from GlobalData suggests crude refining capacity is set to increase worldwide from 96.2 million bpd in 2015 to 118.1 million bpd by 2020, registering a total growth of 18.5%.

In line with market expectations, the research and consulting firm agrees that global growth will be led by China and Southeast Asia. A total of $170 billion is expected to be spent in Asia alone to increase capacity by around 9 million bpd over the next four years, GlobalData added.

Matthew Jurecky, Head of Oil & Gas Research at the firm said: “The global refining landscape continues its shift eastwards; 40% of global refining capacity is projected to be in Asia by 2020, up from around 30% in 2010.

“China has led this growth, and is projected to have a 15% share of global crude refining capacity by 2020. This activity is putting pressure on other regional refiners, especially now that China has become a net exporter, and will become a larger one.”

In Europe, growth is expected to occur at a substantially slower rate. Although demand is decreasing and is less competitive, older refineries in Western Europe are being closed, these factors are being countered by investment in geographically advantaged and resource-rich Russia, which sees Europe’s capacity increasing marginally from 21.7 million bpd in 2015 to 22.5 million bpd by 2020.

Away the refining world to the integrated majors, with a few noteworthy ratings actions to report – Moody’s has downgraded Royal Dutch Shell to Aa2 with a negative outlook, Chevron to Aa2 with a stable outlook, Total to Aa3 with a stable outlook and reaffirmed BP at A2 with a positive outlook. 

Separately, Fitch Ratings has affirmed Halliburton at A-, with the oilfield services firm’s outlook revised to negative. 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

Fitch joins Moody’s in cutting oil price estimates

Barely a month after Moody’s drastically revised its oil price assumptions, rival Fitch Ratings followed suit last week. Writing to clients, Fitch said its new base case is for Brent and WTI oil prices to average $35 per barrel in 2016. 

It had previously expected oil to average $45 per barrel. However, Fitch’s long-term base case price assumptions remain unchanged at $65 per barrel. The ratings agency said its drastic revision was down to a combination of stock build-up over the mild winter, higher-than-expected OPEC production in January and increasing evidence that global economic growth for the year will be weaker than previously forecast.

“This suggests there will still be a supply surplus in the second half of 2016, albeit reduced from current levels, and that markets will probably only reach a balance in 2017. Even then, very high inventories will limit price increases,” Fitch added.

In light of recent volatility, Fitch’s reworking of price assumptions is hardly a surprise, and on Jan 21st rival Moody’s had done likewise. The latter lowered its 2016 price estimate for both Brent WTI to $33 per barrel.

In Moody’s case, for Brent, it marked a $10 per barrel reduction from the rating agency's previous estimate, and for WTI, a $7 reduction. It currently expects both benchmark prices to rise by $5 per barrel on average in 2017 and 2018. The move also represented Moody’s second revision is as many months, having already slashed estimates back in December.

Terry Marshall, Senior Vice President at the ratings agency, said, "OPEC countries continue high levels of production in the battle for market share, contributing to the current oil glut despite moderate consumption growth by key consumers such as China, India and the US.

“In addition, we expect the rise in Iranian oil output this year to offset or exceed production cuts in the US."

So more cheer for the bears it seems, but little else. Volatility is likely to persist until June, but for the record, the Oilholic expects a very gradual climb in the oil price towards $50 per barrel from then onwards, as one wrote in a recent Forbes column. 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 production facility © Cairn Energy

A crude rout & all those downgrades

Both Brent and WTI futures are trading at their lowest levels since 2008 and previous weeks have offered some spectacular declines, if there is such a thing as that!

Biggest of the declines were noted when Brent fell by 12.65% and WTI by 11.90% between Friday, December 4th and Friday, December 11th using 2130 GMT as the cut-off point for 5-day week-on-week assessment. Following that, like January, we had another spread inversion in favour of the WTI, with the US benchmark trading at a premium to global proxy Brent for a good few sessions before slipping lower, as both again got dragged lower in lacklustre post-Christmas trading.

It all points to the year ending just as it began - with a market rout, as yours truly explained in some detail via a recent Forbes post. With nearly 3 million barrels per day of surplus oil hitting the market, the scenario is unavoidable. While the situation cannot and will not last, oversupply will not disappear overnight either. 

The Oilholic reckons it will be at least until the third quarter of 2016 before the glut shows noticeable signs of easing, mostly at the expense of non-OPEC supplies. That said, unless excess flow dips below 1 million bpd, it is doubtful ancillary influences such as geopolitical risk would come into play. 

For the moment, one still maintains an end-2016 Brent forecast near $60 per barrel and would revisit it in the New Year. Much will depend on the relative strength of the dollar in wake of US Federal Reserve’s interest rate hike, but Kit Juckes, Head of Forex at Societe Generale, says quite possibly commodity markets fear even a dovish Fed!

Meanwhile, with the oil market rout in full swing, rating agencies are queuing up predictable downgrades and negative outlooks. Moody’s described the global commodity downturn as “exceptionally severe in its depth and breadth” and expects it to be a substantial factor driving the number of defaults higher on a global basis in 2016.

Collapsing commodity prices have placed a significant strain on credit quality in the oil and gas, metals and mining sectors. These sectors have accounted for a disproportionately large 36% of Moody’s downgrades and 48% of defaults among all corporates globally so far this year. The agency anticipates continued credit deterioration and a spike in defaults in these sectors in 2016.

Over the past four weeks, we’ve had Moody's downgrade several household energy companies, including all ratings for Petrobras and ratings based on the Brazilian oil giant's guarantee, covering the company's senior unsecured debt rating, to Ba3 from Ba2. Concurrently, the company's baseline credit assessment (BCA) was lowered to b3 from b2. 

“These rating actions reflect Petrobras' elevated refinancing risks in the face of deteriorating industry conditions that make it more difficult to raise cash through asset sales; tighter financing conditions for companies in Brazil and in the oil industry, coupled with the magnitude of eventual needs to finance debt maturities; as well as the company's negative free cash flow,” Moody’s explained.

It also downgraded Schlumberger Holdings to A2; with its outlook changed to negative for Holdings and Schlumberger. "The downgrade of Schlumberger Holdings to A2 reflects the expected large increase in debt outstanding related to the adjustment of its capital structure following the Cameron acquisition," commented Pete Speer, Moody's Senior Vice President.

Corporate family rating of EnQuest saw a Moody’s downgrade to B3 from B1 and probability of default ratings to B3-PD from B1-PD. Of course, it’s not just oilfield and oil companies feeling the heat; Moody’s also downgraded the senior unsecured ratings of Anglo American and its subsidiaries to Baa3 from Baa2, its short term ratings to P-3 from P-2, and so it goes in the wider commodities sphere.

In the past week, outlook for Australia’s Woodside Petroleum outlook was changed to negative, while the ratings of seven Canadian and 29 US E&P companies were placed on review for downgrade. And so went the final month of the year. 

Not just that, the ratings agency also cut its oil price assumption for 2016, lowering Brent estimates to average $43 from $53 per barrel in 2016, and WTI to $40 from $48 per barrel. Moody’s said “continued high levels of oil production” by global producers were significantly exceeding demand growth, predicting the supply-demand equilibrium will only be reached by the end of the decade at around $63 per barrel for Brent. 

While, the Oilholic doesn’t quite agree that it would take until the end of the decade for supply-demand balance to be achieved, mass revisions tell you a thing or two about the mood in the market. Meanwhile, at a sovereign level, Fitch Ratings says low oil prices will continue to weigh on the sovereign credit profiles of major exporters in 2016. Of course, the level of vulnerability varies.

“In the last 12 months, we have downgraded five sovereigns where oil revenues accounted for a large proportion of general government and/or current external receipts. Another three - Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Republic of Congo - were not downgraded but saw Outlook revisions to Negative from Stable,” the agency said in a pre-Christmas note to clients.

It is now all down to who can manage to stay afloat and maintain production as the oil price stays ‘lower for longer’. Non-OPEC producers will in all likelihood run into financing difficulties, as one said in an OPEC webcast on December 4, with Brent ending 2015 over 35% lower on an annualised basis.

Finally, the Oilholic believes it is highly unlikely a divided OPEC will vote for a unanimous production cut even at its next meeting in June. For what’s it worth, $35 per barrel could be the norm for quite a bit of 2016. So in 12 months’ time, the oil and gas landscape could be very, very different. That’s all for 2015 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. Graph: Oil benchmark Friday closes, Q4 2015 © Gaurav Sharma / Oilholics Synonymous Report, December 2015. Photo: Gaurav Sharma speaking at the 168th OPEC Ministers' Meeting in Vienna, Austria © OPEC Secretariat.

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.

Upstream woes denting midstream prospects

In wake of weak oil prices, the upstream side of this ‘crude’ world is going through the worst cyclical downturn in years. The Oilholic’s most conservative of estimates sees the situation staying the way it is, if not worsening, for at least another 15 months.

In fact, one feels fresh investment towards exploration and production (E&P) could remain depressed for as much as 18 to 24 months. Both Fitch Ratings and Moody’s have negative outlooks on the upstream industry, as 2015 looks set to end as the year with the lowest average Brent price since 2005.

National Oil Companies (NOCs), bleeding cash reserves in order to stay in the game and put rivals out of it, are maximising existing onstream capabilities. Meanwhile, International Oil Companies (IOCs) looking to cut costs, are delaying final investment decisions on E&P projects at the moment.

As one wrote on Forbes, Big Oil is gearing up for a $60 breakeven oil price for the next three years and capital expenditure cuts of 10%-15% in 2016 with far reaching consequences. Of course, the pain will extend well beyond the obvious linear connection with oilfield services (OFS) and drilling companies.

Global midstream growth is getting hammered by E&P cuts too, according anecdotal evidence from reliable contacts at advisory firms either side of the pond. Most point to a Moody’s subscriber note issued on November 6, that set out the ratings agency’s stable outlook on the US midstream sector, but also suggested that industry EBITDA [Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation] growth will struggle to cap 5% in 2016.

Andrew Brooks, Senior Analyst at Moody’s, noted: "For the past five years, the midstream industry has rapidly ramped up investment in infrastructure projects to serve the E&P industry's extensive investment in US oil and gas shale resource plays. 

"But now deep cuts in the E&P sector and continued low oil and natural gas prices will limit midstream spending through at least early 2017."

There was a sense in Houston, Texas, US when the Oilholic last went calling in February and again in May this year that midstream companies have already built much, if not most, of the infrastructure required for US shale production. Therefore it is only logical for ratings agencies and analysts to suggest incremental EBITDA growth will slow as fewer new shale and tight oil assets go into service. 

Only thing in midstream players' favour over the next, or quite possibly two, lean fiscal year(s) is the linkage they provide between producers and downstream markets. In Moody’s view this need would mitigate some of the risk of slower growth, even if gathering and processing margins remain at cyclical lows.

"And the midstream sector should be more insulated from contract renegotiation risk with upstream operators having less flexibility to force price concessions on midstream services companies than they have had with OFS firms and drillers," Brooks concluded.

So all things considered, midstream is perhaps not as deeply impacted as E&P, OFS segments of the oil and gas business, but suffering it most certainly is. 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: Pipeline signage, Fairfax, Virginia, USA © O. Louis Mazzatenta / National Geographic

Resisting $40/bbl, Russia & some ‘crude’ ratings

Following two successive week-on-week declines of 6% or over, last Friday’s close brought some respite for Brent oil futures, although the WTI front month contract continued to extend losses. In fact, the US benchmark has been ending each Friday since June 12 at a lower level compared to the week before (see graph, click to enlarge).

 

Will a $40-floor breach happen? Yes. Will oil stay there? No. That’s because market fundamentals haven’t materially altered. Oversupply and lacklustre demand levels are broadly where they were in June. We still have around 1.1 to 1.3 million barrels per day (bpd) of extra oil in the market; a range that’s held for much of 2015. Influences such as Iran’s possible addition to the global crude oil supply pool and China not buying as much have been known for some time.

The latest market commotion is sentiment driven, and it’s why the Oilholic noted in a recent Forbes column that 2016-17 futures appear to be undervalued. People seem to be making calls on where we might be tomorrow based on the kerfuffle we are seeing today!

Each set of dire data from China, inventory report from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), or a gentle nudge from some country or the other welcoming Iran back to the market (as Switzerland did last week) has a reactive tug at benchmarks. The Oilholic still believes Brent will gradually creep up to $60-plus come the end of the year, with supply corrections coming in to the equation over the remainder of this year.

Away from pricing, there is one piece of very interesting backdated data. According to the EIA, Russia’s oil and gas sector weathered both the sanctions as well as the crude price decline rather well.

For 2014, Russia was the world's largest producer of crude oil, including lease condensate, and the second-largest producer of dry natural gas after the US. Russia exported more than 4.7 million bpd of crude oil and lease condensate in 2014, the EIA concluded based on customs data. Most of the exports, or 98% if you prefer percentages, went to Asian and European importers.

Where Russian production level would be at the end of 2015 remains the biggest market riddle. Anecdotal and empirical evidence points to conducive internal taxation keeping the industry going. However, as takings from oil and gas production and exports, account for more than half of Russia's federal budget revenue – it is costing the Kremlin.

Finally, two ratings notes from Fitch over the past fortnight are worth mentioning. The agency has revised its outlook on BP's long-term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to ‘Positive’ from ‘Negative’ and affirmed the IDR at 'A'.

The outlook revision follows BP's announcement that it has reached an agreement in principle to settle federal, state and local Deepwater Horizon claims for $18.7bn, payable over 18 years. “We believe the deal has significantly reduced the uncertainty around BP's overall payments arising from the accident and hence has considerably strengthened the company's credit profile,” Fitch said.

The agency added there was a real possibility for an upgrade to 'A+' in the next 12 to 18 months, depending on how things pan out and BP's upstream business profile does not show any significant signs of weakening, such as falling reserves or production.

Elsewhere, and unsurprisingly, Fitch downgraded the beleaguered Afren to ‘D’ following the management's announcement on July 31 that it had taken steps to put the company into administration. The company's senior secured rating has been affirmed at 'C', and the Recovery Rating (RR) revised to 'RR5' from 'RR6'.

As discussions with creditors aimed at recapitalising the company failed, the appointment of administrators was made with the consent of the company's secured creditors who saw it as an “important step in preserving value of Afren's subsidiaries”. It is probably the only “value” left after a sorry tale of largely self-inflicted woes. 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. Graph: Oil benchmark Friday closes, Jan 2 to Aug 14, 2015 © Gaurav Sharma, August 2015.

Crude take: $60 Brent price is (still) about right

Does the Iranian nuclear settlement make a $60 per barrel Brent price seem too optimistic as a median level for the current year - that's the question on most oil market observers' minds. Even before delving into City chatter, the Oilholic believes the answer to that question in a word is ‘no’.

For starters, the settlement which had been on the cards, has already been priced in to a certain extent despite an element of unpredictability. Secondly, as yours truly noted in a Forbes column - it will take better parts of 12 months for Iran to add anywhere near 400,000 barrels per day (bpd), and some 18 months to ramp up production to 500,000 bpd.

Following news of the agreement, Fitch Ratings noted that details of the condition of Iran's production infrastructure might well be sketchy, but with limited levels of investment, it is likely that only a portion of previous capacity can be brought back onstream without further material reinvestment. 

“We would expect to see some increases in production throughout the course of 2016 but that this would be much less than half of the full 1.4 million bpd that was lost,” said Alex Griffiths, Managing Director at the ratings agency.

“It will require significant investment and expertise - for which Iran is likely to want to partner with international oil companies. These projects typically take many months to agree, as oil companies and governments manoeuvre for the best terms, and often years to implement.”

Thirdly, it is also questionable whether Tehran actually wants to take the self-defeating step of ‘flooding’ the market even if it could. The 40 million or so barrels said to be held in storage by the country are likely to be released gradually to get the maximum value for Tehran’s holdings. Fourthly, the market is betting on an uptick in demand from Asia despite China's recent woes. The potential uptick wont send oil producers' pulses racing but would provide some pricing comfort to the upside.

Finally, IEA and others, while not forecasting a massive decline, are factoring in lower non-OPEC oil production over the fourth quarter of this year. Collectively, all of this is likely to provide support to the upside. The Oilholic’s forward projection is that Brent could flirt with $70 on the right side of Christmas, but the median for 2015 is now likely to come in somewhere between $60-$62.5. 

Yet many don’t agree, despite the oil price returning to largely where it was actually within the same session's trading itself on day of the Iran announcement. For instance, analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch still feel Iran could potentially raise production back up by 700,000 bpd over the next 12 months, adding downside pressure on forward oil prices of $5-$10 per barrel. 

On the other hand, analysts at Barclays don't quite view it that way and the Oilholic concurs. Like Fitch, the bank’s team neither see a huge short-term uptick in production volumes nor the oil price moving “markedly lower” from here as a result of the Iranian agreement.

“We believe that the market will begin to adjust, whether through higher demand, or lower non-OPEC supply in the next couple years but only once Iran’s contribution and timing are made clear. For now, OPEC is already producing well above the demand for its crude, and this makes it worse,” Barclays analysts wrote to their clients. 

“We do not expect the Saudis to do anything markedly different. Rather, they will take a wait and see approach.”

One thing is for sure, lower oil prices early on in the third quarter would have as detrimental an effect on the quarterly median, as early January prices did on the first quarter median (see above right, click to enlarge). End result is quite likely to ensure the year-end average would be in the lower $60s. 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

Assessing BP’s settlement with the US authorities

BP’s recent settlement with the US authorities does not end the company's legal woes related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, but it is a vital step in the direction of bringing financial closure to the accident.

When the oil major announced on July 2, that it had reached agreements in principle to settle all federal and state claims arising from the oil spill at a cost of up to $18.7 billion spread over 18 years, markets largely welcomed the move. On a day when the crude oil futures market was in reverse, BP’s share price rose by 4.69% by the close of trading in London, contrary to prevailing trading sentiment, as investors absorbed the welcome news. 

Above anything else, the agreement provides certainty about major aspects of BP's financial exposure in wake of the oil spill. As per the deal, BP’s US Upstream subsidiary – BP Exploration and Production (BPXP) – has executed agreements with the federal government and five Gulf Coast States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Under the said terms, BPXP will pay the US government a civil penalty of $5.5 billion over 15 years under the country’s Clean Water Act.

It will also pay $7.1 billion to the US and the five Gulf states over 15 years for natural resource damages (NRD), in addition to the $1 billion already committed for early restoration. BPXP will also set aside an additional $232 million to be added to the NRD interest payment at the end of the payment period to cover any further natural resource damages that are unknown at the time of the agreement.

A total of $4.9 billion will be paid over 18 years to settle economic and other claims made by the five Gulf Coast states, while up to $1 billion will be paid to resolve claims made by more than 400 local government entities. Finally, what many thought was going to be a prolonged tussle with US authorities might be coming to an end via payments, huge for some and not large enough for others, spread over a substantially long time frame.

BP’s chief executive Bob Dudley described the settlement as a “realistic outcome” which provides clarity and certainty for all parties. “For BP, this agreement will resolve the largest liabilities remaining from the tragic accident and enable the company to focus on safely delivering the energy the world needs.”

The impact of the settlement on the company’s balance sheet and cashflow will be “manageable” and allow it to continue to invest in and grow its business, said chief financial officer Brian Gilvary. As individual and business claims continue, BP said the expected impact of these agreements would be to increase the cumulative pre-tax charge associated with the spill by around $10 billion from $43.8 billion already allocated at the end of the first quarter.

While the settlement is still awaiting court approval, credit ratings agencies largely welcomed the move, alongside many City brokers whose notes to clients were seen by the Oilholic. Fitch Ratings said the deal will considerably strengthen BP’s credit profile, which had factored in “the potential for a larger settlement that took much longer to agree”.

Should the agreement be finalised on the same terms, it is likely to result in positive rating action from the agency. Fitch currently rates BP 'A' with a ‘Negative Outlook.’

Alex Griffiths, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings, said: “While BP had amassed ample liquidity to deal with most realistic scenarios, the scale and uncertain timing of the payment of outstanding fines and penalties remained a key driver of BP's financial profile in our modelling, and had the potential to place a large financial burden on the company amid an oil price slump.

“The certainty the deal provides, and the deferral of the payments over a long period, gives BP the opportunity to improve its balance sheet profile and navigate the current downturn.”

Meanwhile, Moody's has already changed to ‘positive’ from ‘negative’ the outlook on A2 long-term debt and Prime-1 commercial paper ratings of BP and its guaranteed subsidiaries. In wake of the settlement, the ratings agency also changed to ‘positive’ from ‘negative’, its outlook on the A3 and Baa1 Issuer Ratings of BP Finance and BP Corporation North America, respectively.

Tom Coleman, a Moody's Senior Vice President, said: “While the settlement is large, we view the scope and extended payout terms as important and positive developments for BP, allowing it to move forward with a lot more certainty around the size and cash flow burden of its legal liabilities.

“It will also help clarify a stronger core operating and credit profile for BP as it moves into a post-Macondo era.”

The end is not within sight just yet, but some semblance of it is likely to attract new investors. BP's second quarter results are due on July 28, and quite a few eyes, including this blogger’s, will be on the company for clues about the future direction. 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 2015. Photo: Support ships in the Gulf of Mexico © BP

Maintaining 2014 price predictions for Brent

Since the initial flare-up in Iraq little over a fortnight ago, many commentators have been revising or tweaking their Brent price predictions and guidance for the remainder of 2014. The Oilholic won't be doing so for the moment, having monitored the situation, thought hard, gathered intelligence and discussed the issue at length with various observers at the last OPEC summit and 21st World Petroleum Congress earlier this month.

Based on intel and instinct, yours truly has decided to maintain his 2014 benchmark price assumptions made in January, i.e. a Brent price in the range of US$90 to $105 and WTI price range of $85 to $105. Brent's premium to the WTI should in all likelihood come down and average around $5 barrel. Nonetheless, geopolitical premium might ensure an upper range price for Brent and somewhere in the modest middle for the WTI range come the end of the year.

Why? For starters, all the news coming from Iraq seems to indicate that fears about the structural integrity of the country have eased. While much needed inward investment into Iraq's oil & gas industry will take a hit, majority of the oil production sites are not under ISIS control.

In fact, Oil Minister Abdul Kareem al-Luaibi recently claimed that Iraq's crude exports will increase next month. You can treat that claim with much deserved scepticism, but if anything, production levels aren't materially lower either, according to anecdotal evidence gathered from shipping agents in Southern Iraq.

The situation is in a flux, and who has the upper hand might change on a daily basis, but that the Iraqi Army has finally responded is reducing market fears. Additionally, the need to keep calm is bolstered by some of the supply-side positivity. For instance, of the two major crude oil consumers – US and China – the former is importing less and less crude oil from the Middle East, thereby easing pressure by the tanker load. Had this not been the case, we'd be in $120-plus territory by now, according to more than one City trader.

Some of the market revisions to oil price assumptions, while classified as 'revisions' have been pragmatic enough to reflect this. Many commentators have merely gone to the upper end of their previous forecasts, something which is entirely understandable.

For instance, Moody's increased the Brent crude price assumptions it uses for rating purposes to $105 per barrel for the remainder of 2014 and $95 in 2015. In case of the WTI, the ratings agency increased its price assumptions to $100 per barrel for the rest of 2014, and to $90 in 2015. Both assumptions are within the Oilholic's range, although they represent $10 per barrel increases from Moody's previous assumptions for both WTI and Brent in 2014 and a $5 increase for 2015.

"The new set of price assumptions reflects the agency's sense of firm demand for crude, even as supplies increase as a response to historically high prices. New violence in Iraq coupled with political turmoil in that general region in mid-2014 have led to supply constraints in the Middle East and North Africa," Moody's said.

But while these constraints exist, Moody's echoed vibes the Oilholic caught on at OPEC that Saudi Arabia, which can affect world global prices by adjusting its own production levels, has appeared unwilling to let Brent prices rise much above $110 per barrel on a sustained basis.

Away from pricing matters to some ratings matters with a few noteworthy notes – first off, Moody's has upgraded Schlumberger's issuer rating and the senior unsecured ratings of its guaranteed subsidiaries to Aa3 from A1.

Pete Speer, Senior Vice-President at the agency, said, "Schlumberger's industry leading technologies and dominant market position coupled with its conservative financial policies support the higher Aa3 rating through oilfield services cycles. The company's growing asset base and free cash flow generation also compares well to Aa3-rated peers in other industries."

Meanwhile, Fitch Ratings says the Iraqi situation does not pose an immediate threat to the ratings of its rated Western investment-grade oil companies. However, the agency reckons if conflict spreads and the market begins to doubt whether Iraq can increase its output in line with forecasts there could be a sharp rise in world oil prices because Iraqi oil production expansion is a major contributor to the long-term growth in global oil output.

The conflict is closest to Iraqi Kurdistan, where many Western companies including Afren (rated B+/Stable by Fitch) have production. However, due to ongoing disagreements between Baghdad and the Kurdish regional government, legal hurdles to export of Iraqi crude remain, and therefore production is a fraction of the potential output.

Other companies, such as Lukoil (rated BBB/Negative by Fitch), operate in the southeast near Basra, which is far from the areas of conflict and considered less volatile.

Alex Griffiths, Head of Natural Resources and Commodities at Fitch Ratings, said, "Even if the conflict were to spread throughout Iraq and disrupt other regions, the direct loss of revenues would not affect major investment-grade rated oil companies because Iraqi output is a very small component of their global production."

"In comparison, disruption of gas production in Egypt and oil production in Libya during the "Arab Spring" were potential rating drivers for BG Energy Holdings (A-/Stable) and Eni (A+/Negative), respectively," he added.

On a closing note, here is the Oilholic's latest Forbes article discussing natural gas pricing disparities around the world, and why abundance won't necessarily mitigate this. 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: Oil drilling site © Shell photo archives

Crude prices: Syrian conundrum & bearish trends

As the immediate threat of a US-led campaign against Syria recedes, some semblance of decidedly bearish calm has returned to the oil markets. The last two weeks have seen steady declines in benchmark prices as the Assad regime agreed to a Russian-led initiative aimed at opening up the Syrian chemical weapons arsenal to international inspection. Jury is still out on whether it will work, but that’s enough to keep the oil market bulls in check.

 

Supply-side analysts also took comfort from the improving situation in terms of Libyan production. However, an appreciable caveat needs to be taken into account here. Libya’s oil production has recovered, but only to about 40% of its pre-war rate of 1.6 million barrels per day (bpd), and is currently averaging no more than 620,000 bpd, according to the government.

 

A further lull in violence in Egypt has helped calm markets as well. Much of the market fear in this context, as the Oilholic noted from Oman a few weeks ago, was invariably linked to the potential for disruption to tanker traffic through the Suez Canal which sees 800,000 barrels of crude and 1.5 million barrels of petroleum distillate products pass each day through its narrow confines.

 

Furthermore, it wasn’t just the traffic between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea via the canal that was, and to a certain extent still is, an area of concern. Disturbances could also impact the Suez-Mediterranean pipeline which ferries through another 1.7 million bpd. Syria, Libya and Egypt aside, Iran is sending conciliatory notes to the US for the first time in years in its nuclear stand-off with the West.

 

Factoring in all of this, the risk premium has retreated. Hence, we are seeing are near six-week lows as far as the Brent forward month futures contract for November goes. There is room for further correction even though winter is around the corner. On a related note, the WTI’s discount to Brent is currently averaging around US$5 per barrel and it still isn’t, and perhaps never will be, sufficiently disconnected from the global geopolitical equation.

 

Shame really, for in what could be construed further price positive news for American consumers, the US domestic crude production rose 1.1% to 7.83 million bpd for the week that ended September 13. That’s the highest since 1989 according to EIA. At least for what it’s worth, this is causing the premium of the Louisiana Light Sweet (LLS) to the WTI to fall; currently near its lowest level since March 2010 (at about $1.15 per barrel).

 

Moving away from pricing matters, the Oilholic recently had the chance to browse through a Fitch Ratings report published last month which seemed to indicate that increasing state control of Russian oil production will make it harder for private companies to compete with State-controlled Rosneft. Many commentators already suspect that.

 

Rosneft's acquisition of TNK-BP earlier this year has given the company a dominant 37% share of total Russian crude production. It implies that the state now controls almost half of the country's crude output and 45% of domestic oil refining.

 

Fitch analyst Dmitri Marinchenko feels rising state control is positive for Rosneft's credit profile but moderately negative for independent oil producers. “The latter will find it harder to compete for new E&P licences, state bank funding and other support,” he adds.

 

In fact, the favouring of state companies for new licences is already evident on the Arctic shelf, where non-state companies are excluded by law. However, most Russian private oil producers have a rather high reserve life, and Marinchenko expects them to remain strong operationally and financially even if their activities are limited to onshore conventional fields.

 

“We also expect domestic competition in the natural gas sector to increase as Novatek and Rosneft take on Gazprom in the market to supply large customers such as utilities and industrial users. These emerging gas suppliers are able to supply gas at lower prices than the fully regulated Gazprom. But this intensified competition should not be a significant blow to Gazprom as it generates most of its profit from exports to Europe, where it has a monopoly.”

 

There is a possibility that this monopoly could be partly lifted due to political pressure from Rosneft and Novatek. But even if this happens, Marinchenko thinks it is highly likely that Gazprom would retain the monopoly on pipeline exports – which would continue to support its credit rating.

 

Continuing with the region, Fitch also said in another report that the production of the first batch of the crude stuff from the Kashagan project earlier this month is positive for Kazakhstan and KazMunayGas. The latter has a 16.8% stake in the project.

 

Eni, a lead member of North Caspian Operating Company, which is developing Kashagan, has said that in the initial 2013-14 phase, output will grow to 180,000 bpd, compared with current output from Kazakh oilfields of 1.6 million bpd. Kashagan has estimated reserves of 35 billion barrels, of which 11 billion barrels are considered as recoverable.

 

The onset of production is one reason Fitch expects Kazakhstan's economic growth rate to recover after a slight slowdown in 2012. Meanwhile, KazMunayGas expects the Kashagan field to make a material contribution to its EBITDA and cash flow from next year, the agency adds.

 

Increased oil exports from Kashagan will also support Kazakhstan's current account surplus, which had been stagnating thanks to lower oil prices. However, Fitch reckons foreign direct investment may decline as the first round of capital investment into the field slows.

 

What's more, China National Petroleum Company became a shareholder in Kashagan with an 8.3% stake earlier this month. Now this should certainly help Kazakhstan increase its oil supplies to China, which are currently constrained by pipeline capacity. Watch this space! 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: Oil production site, Russia © Lukoil

Saudi’s ‘crude’ range, Fitch on Abu Dhabi & more

Petroleum economists are wondering if we have crossed a gateway to crude chaos? The magnificent one pictured (left) here in Abu Dhabi's Capital Garden is certainly no metaphor for the situation. Egypt is burning, Libya is protesting and US/UK/NATO are threatening [almost direct] action against Syria.

Add the US Federal Reserve's current stance on QE to the geopolitical mix and you get a bullish Brent price. Yes, yes, that's all very predictable. But when bulls run amok, all attention usually turns to Aramco's response. It is a well known fact that the Saudis like the crude oil price to remain within what economists prefer to describe as the "middle" ground. (You want your principal export to be priced high enough to keep you ticking, but not so high as to drive importers towards either consuming less or seeking alternatives).

Investment house Jadwa's research often puts such a Saudi comfort zone in US$80-90 per barrel price range. The Oilholic has been banging on about the same range too, though towards the conservative lower end (in the region of $78-80). The Emiratis would also be pretty happy with that too; it's a price range most here say they’ve based their budget on as well.

A scheduled (or "ordinary") OPEC meeting is not due until December and in any case the Saudis care precious little about the cartel's quota. Hints about Saudi sentiment only emerge when one gets to nab oil minister Ali Al-Naimi and that too if he actually wants to say a thing or two. As both Saudi Arabia and UAE have spare capacity, suspicions about a joint move on working towards a "price band" have lurked around since the turn of 1990s and Gulf War I.

Aramco's response to spikes and dives in the past, for instance the highs and lows of 2007-08 and a spike during the Libyan crisis, bears testimony to the so called middle approach. Recent empirical evidence suggests that if the Brent price spikes above $120 per barrel, Aramco usually raises its output to cool the market.

Conversely, if it falls rapidly (or is perceived to be heading below three digits), Aramco stunts output to prop-up the price. The current one is a high-ish price band. Smart money would be on ADNOC and Aramco raising their output, however much the Iranians and Venezuelans squeal. For the record, this blogger feels it is prudent to mention that Aramco denies it has any such price band.

Away from pricing matters, Fitch Ratings has affirmed Abu Dhabi's long-term foreign and local currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) at 'AA' with a Stable Outlook. Additionally, the UAE's country ceiling is affirmed at 'AA+' (This ceiling, the agency says, also applies to Ras al-Khaimah).

In a statement, the agency said, oil rich Abu Dhabi has a strong sovereign balance sheet, both in absolute terms and compared to most 'AA' category peers. To put things into perspective, its sovereign external debt at end of Q4 2012 was just 1% of GDP, compared to Fitch's estimate of sovereign foreign assets of 153% of GDP. Only Kuwait has a stronger sovereign net foreign asset position within the GCC.

With estimated current account surpluses of around double digits forecast each year, sovereign net foreign assets of Abu Dhabi are forecast to rise further by end-2015. Fitch also estimates that the fiscal surplus, including ADNOC dividends and ADIA investment income, returned to double digits in 2012 and will remain of this order of magnitude for each year to 2015.

Furthermore, non-oil growth in the Emirate accelerated to 7.7%. This parameter also compares favourably to other regional oil-rich peers. Help provided by Abu Dhabi to other Emirates is likely to be discretionary. Overall, Fitch notes that Abu Dhabi has the highest GDP per capita of any Fitch-rated sovereign.

However, the Abu Dhabi economy is still highly dependent on oil, which accounted for around 90% of fiscal and external revenues and around half of GDP in 2012. As proven reserves are large, this blogger is not alone in thinking that there should be no immediate concerns for Abu Dhabi. Furthermore, Fitch's conjecture is based on the supposition of a Brent price in the region of $105 per barrel this year and $100 in 2014. No concerns there either!

Just a couple of footnotes before bidding farewell to Abu Dhabi – first off, and following on from what the Oilholic blogged about earlier, The National columnist Ebrahim Hashem eloquently explains here why UAE's reserves are so attractive for IOCs. The same newspaper also noted on Friday that regional/GCC inflation is here to stay and that the MENA region is going to face a North-South divide akin to the EU. The troubled "NA" bit is likely to rely on the resource rich "ME" bit.

Inflation certainly hasn’t dampened the UAE auto market for sure – one of the first to see the latest models arrive in town. To this effect, the Oilholic gives you two quirky glimpses of some choice autos on the streets of Abu Dhabi. The first (pictured above left) is the latest glammed-up Mini Cooper model outside National Bank of Abu Dhabi's offices, the second is proof that an Emirati sandstorm can make the prettiest automobile look rather off colour.

Finally, a Bloomberg report noting that Oil-rich Norway had gone from a European leader to laggard in terms of consumer spending made yours truly chuckle. Maybe they should reduce the monstrous price of their beer, water and food, which the Oilholic found to his cost in Oslo recently. That's all from Abu Dhabi, its time to bid the Emirate good-bye for destination Oman! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2013. Photo 1: Entrance to Capital Garden, Abu Dhabi, UAE Photo 2: Cars parked around Abu Dhabi, UAE © Gaurav Sharma, August, 2013.

‘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.