That 1980s feeling, Saudi Oil, Ebola & more

Brent dipped below US$84 per barrel at one point this week while the WTI is holding above the $80 level. It’ll be interesting to note how the December futures contract fares as the Northern Hemisphere winter approaches with bearish headwinds lurking in the background. From here on, much will depend on what happens at the next OPEC meeting on November 27, where a production cut has the potential to partially stem the decline.

By the time of the meeting in Vienna, we’d already be well into the ICE Brent January contract. The mere possibility of a production cut isn’t enough to reverse the slide at the moment given wider market conditions. But as ever, OPEC members are presenting a disunited front diluting any market sentiments aimed at pricing in a potential cut.

The answer lies in an interesting graphic published by The Economist (click here) indicating price levels major producers would be comfortable with. There are no surprises in noting that Iran, Venezuela and Russia are probably the most worried of all exporters. While several OPEC members prefer at least a $100 price floor, in recent weeks Saudi Arabia has quite openly indicated it can tolerate the price falling below $90.

The Saudis also lowered their asking price in a bid to maintain market share. That’s bad news for most of OPEC, excluding Kuwait and UAE. In turn, Iran responded by lowering its asking price as well even though it can't afford to. So the debate has already started, whether in not wanting to repeat the mistakes of the 1980s which left it with a weakened market share; Saudi Arabia might in fact trigger OPEC discord and a slump akin to 1986.

While the Oilholic doubts it, certain OPEC members wouldn’t be the only ones hurt by the Saudi stance which abets existing bearish trends. US shale and Canadian oil sands exploration and production (E&P) enthusiasts will be troubled too. While the oil price is tumbling, the price of extracting the crude stuff isn’t.

Fitch Ratings says Brent could dip to $80 before triggering a self-correcting supply response with shale oil drillers cutting investment in new wells. Anecdotal evidence sent forth by the Oilholic’s contacts in Calgary point to similar sentiments being expressed in relation to the oil sands. 

The steep rate at which production from shale wells declines mean companies have to keep drilling new wells to maintain production. Fitch estimates median full-cycle costs for E&P companies have fallen to about $70 in the US. The marginal barrel, not the median one, balances supply and demand and determines price, so the point at which capex falls will probably be higher.

Over the short-term, Fitch considers a resurgence of supply disruptions and positive action from OPEC as the most likely catalysts for a rebound in prices. “But without these, further declines might be possible, especially if evidence grows of further weakening of global demand or increasing OPEC spare capacity,” the agency adds.

Longer term, an uptick in economic activity in China and India will contribute to a growth in oil demand. However, what we’re dealing with is short-term weakness. IEA demand growth for 2015 has been revised by 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) and 2014’s estimate by 200,00 bpd. The Oilholic suspects Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and UAE are only too aware of this and capable enough to withstand it.

Dorian Lucas, analyst at Inenco, says, “We’re seeing the largest in over two years spurred by accumulating evidence of waning global demand, whilst buoyant supply continues to drown the market. The extent to which supply has buoyed is evident when assessing September 2014 in isolation. Global oil supply rose over 900,000 bpd to total of 93.8 million bpd, this is over 2.5 million bpd higher than the same time last year.”

What happens at OPEC’s next meeting would depend on the Saudis. The Oilholic still rates the chances of a production cut at 40%. One feels that having the capacity to withstand a short-term price shock, Saudi Arabia wouldn’t mind other producers squirming in the interest of self-preservation.

Meanwhile, the industry is also grappling with the unfolding Ebola outbreak which has claimed thousands of lives in West Africa. Unsurprising anecdotal evidence is emerging of companies having difficulty in finding engineering experts, roughnecks or support staff willing to work at West African prospection sites.

In order to get a base case idea, browse job openings at a recruitment site (for example – Rigzone) and you’ll find pay rates for working in West Africa climb above sub-zero winter working rates on offer at Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. Three recruitment consultants known to this blogger have expressed similar sentiments.

While most of the drilling is offshore, workers' compounds are onshore in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Additionally, local workers return to their homes mingling with the general population at risk of getting infected. The fear is putting off workers, and many companies have internal moratoriums on travel to the region.

Forget workers, even investors are having second thoughts for the moment. Both Reuters and USA Today have reported caginess at ExxonMobil about the commencement of offshore drilling in Liberia at the present moment in time.The company already restricts non essential travel by its employees to the region. Shell and Chevron have similar safeguards in an industry heavily reliant on expat workers.

GlobalData says of the affected African countries only Nigeria is equipped to handle the Ebola outbreak.  GDP of the said countries is likely to take a hit from loss of lives and revenue. International SOS, a Control Risks Group affiliate company which provides integrated medical, clinical, and security services to organisations with international operations, has been constantly updating advice for corporate travel to Guinea, Liberia or Sierra Leone, the current one being to avoidance all non-essential travel to the region.

Fitch Ratings says at present, the Ebola outbreak does not have any credit ratings implications for E&P companies in the region. Alex Griffiths, Head of EMEA, Natural Resources and Commodities, notes: “Our key consideration is how well the companies manage the Ebola risk. From a risk rating standpoint, we’re in early days. Fitch will continue to monitor the situation over the coming months.”

Away from Ebola, here’s the Oilholic’s take via a Forbes post on the future of integrated IOCs. Lastly, news has emerged that Statoil CEO Helge Lund has been appointed CEO of the much beleaguered BG Group with effect from March 2015. The soon to be boss said he was looking forward to working with BG’s people “to develop the company’s full potential.”

The announcement was roundly cheered in the City given the high regard Lund is held in by the wider oil and gas industry. To quote Investec analyst Neill Morton, “BG still faces challenges, but we believe it has a better chance of addressing them with Lund on board.”

We shall see whether Statoil’s loss is indeed BG Group’s gain. 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: Vintage Shell Fuel Pump, San Francisco, USA © Gaurav Sharma.

Oil, Tip TV & a ‘timely’ Bloomberg report

Brent continues to slip and WTI is along for the slide-ride too. Over the last two weeks, we’ve seen price floors getting lowered only to be breached again sooner than most expect. The Oilholic’s latest 5-day assessment saw both benchmarks as well as the OPEC basket of crudes end the week below US$90 per barrel on Friday.

One has been putting forward a short position argument on Brent since the summer to the readers of this blog and in columns for Forbes. As the tale goes, yours truly has pretty much got the call right, except for a few weeks over one month. Speculators, including but not limited to hedge funds, triumphed in June using the initial flare-up in Iraq as pretence for driving the futures price up. Market fundamentals were never going to support a price spike to $115, as was the case back then.

Those banking on backwardation were bound to get left holding barrels of paper crude on their books that they never needed in the first place for anything other than trading for profit. As the date of the paper contract got desperately close to where you might have to turn up with a tanker at the end of a pipeline, hedge funds that went long in June ended up collectively holding just shy of 600 million paper barrels on their books.

Smart, strategic buying by physical traders eyeing cargoes without firm buyers made contango set in hitting the hedge funds with massive losses. The week to July 15 then saw hedge funds and other speculators cut their long bets by around 25%, reducing their net long futures and options positions in Brent to 151,981 from 201,568 according to ICE.

Physical traders, had finally taught paper traders a long overdue lesson that you can’t cheat market fundamentals for very long. So it was a pleasure expanding upon the chain of thought and discuss other ‘crude’ matters with Nick 'the Moose' Batsford and his jolly colleagues at Tip TV, on October 6. Here’s a link to the conversation for good measure. 

Overall dynamic hasn’t altered from May. To begin with, of the five major global oil importers – China, India, Japan, US and South Korea – importation by four of the aforementioned is relatively down, with India being the odd one out going the other way. Secondly, if an ongoing war in the Middle East is unable to perk-up the price, you know the macroeconomic climate remains dicey with the less said about OECD oil demand the better.

Thirdly, odd as it may seem, while Iraqi statehood is facing an existential threat, there has been limited (some say negligible) impact on the loading and shipment of Basra Light. This was the situation early on in July and pretty much remains the case early October. There is plenty of crude oil out there while buyers are holding back.

Now if anything else, hedge funds either side of the pond have wised up considerably since the July episode. Many of the biggest names in the industry are net-short and not net-long at present, though some unwisely betting on the ‘only way is long’ logic will never learn. Of course, Bloomberg thinks the story is going. One has always had a suspicion that the merry team of that most esteemed data and newswire service secretly love this blog. Contacts at SocGen, Interactive Brokers and a good few readers of ADVFN have suggested so too.

Ever since the Oilholic quipped that hedge funds had been contangoed and went on to substantiate it on more than one occasion via broadcast or print, this humble blog has proved rather popular with ‘Bloomberg-ers’ (see right, a visit earlier this week). Now take this coincidental October 6 story, where Bloomberg claims "Tumbling Oil Prices Punish Hedge Funds Betting on Gains."

Behind the bold headline, the story doesn’t tell us how many hedge funds took a hit or the aggregate number of paper barrels thought to be on their books. Without that key information, the story and its slant are actually a meaningless regurgitation of an old idea. Let’s face it – ideas are not copyrighted. Some hedge fund somewhere will always lose money on a trading call that went wrong, but what’s the big deal, what’s new and where’s the news in the Bloomberg story? Now what happened in July was a big deal.

The 4.1% jump in net-long positions as stated in the Bloomberg report, only for the Saudis to adjust their selling price and cause a further oil price decline, does not signify massive blanket losses for the wider hedge funds industry. Certainly, nothing on July’s loss scale has taken place over the last four weeks either for the WTI or Brent, whether we use ICE or CFTC data.

So here’s some advice Bloomberg if you really feel like probing the matter meaningfully. In the style of Mr. Wolf from Pulp Fiction, if the Oilholic “is curt here, it’s because time is a factor” when putting these things together, “so pretty please with sugar on top” - 

(a) Try picking up the phone to some physical traders of the crude stuff, as price aggregators do, in order to get anecdotal evidence and thoughts based on their internal solver models, not just those who pay way too much for expensive data terminals and have never felt or known what a barrel of crude oil looks like. It'll help you get some physical market context. 

(b) Reconcile at least two months of CFTC or ICE data either side of the pond to get a sense of who is electronically holding what. 

(c) Take the aggregated figure of barrels held at a loss/profit to previous month as applicable, be bold and put a round figure estimate on what hedge funds might well be holding to back up loss/profit slant.

Or (d) if you don’t have the tenacity to do any of the above, email the Oilholic, who doesn’t fix problems like Mr. Wolf, but doesn’t bite either. In the meantime of course, we can keep ourselves fully informed with news about Celine Dion’s whereabouts (see above left, click to enlarge), as Will Hedden of IG Group noted in a recent tweet – the kind of important market moving news that reminds us all how good an investment a Bloomberg terminal 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 2014. Photo 1: Shell Oil Rig, USA © Shell. Photo 2: Bloomberg's visit to the Oilholic, Oct 6, 2014 © Gaurav Sharma. Photo 3: Bloomberg Terminal with Celine Dion flashes © Will Hedden, IG Group, August 2014.

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.

Buyers' market & an overdue oil price correction

Recent correction in the price of crude oil should come as no surprise. The Brent front month futures contract fell to a 26-month low last week lurking around the US$98 per barrel level.

The Oilholic has said so before, and he’ll say it again – there is plenty of the crude stuff around to mitigate geopolitical spikes. When that happens, and it has been something of a rarity over the last few years, the froth dissipates. In wake of Brent dipping below three figures, a multitude of commentators took to the airwaves attributing it to lower OECD demand (nothing new), lacklustre economic activity in China (been that way for a while), supply glut (not new either), refinery maintenance (it is that time of the year), Scottish Referendum (eh, what?) – take your pick.

Yet nothing’s changed on risk front, as geopolitical mishaps – Libya, Sudan, Iraq and Ebola virus hitting West African exploration – are all still in the background. What has actually gotten rid of the froth is a realisation by those trading paper or virtual contracts that the only way is not long!

It’s prudent to mention that the Oilholic doesn’t always advocate going short. But one has consistently being doing so since late May predicated on the belief of industry contacts, who use solver models to a tee, to actually buy physical crude oil, rather than place bets on a screen. Most of their comparisons factor in at least three sellers, if not more.

Nothing they've indicated in the last (nearly) five months has suggested that buyers are tense about procuring crude oil within what most physical traders consider to be a "fair value" spot trade, reflecting market conditions. For what it’s worth, with the US buying less, crude oil exporters have had to rework their selling strategies and find other clients in Asia, as one explained in a Forbes post earlier this month.

It remains a buyers’ market where you have two major importers, the US and China who are buying less, albeit for different reasons. In short, and going short on crude oil, what’s afoot is mirroring physical market reality which paper traders delayed over much of the second quarter of this year from taking hold. Furthermore, as oversupply has trumped Brent’s risk premium, WTI is finding support courtesy the internal American dynamic of higher refinery runs and a reduction of the Cushing, Oklahoma glut. End result means a lower Brent premium to the WTI. 

However, being pragmatic, Brent’s current slump won’t be sustained until the end of the year. For starters, OPEC is coming to the realisation that it may have to cut production. Secretary General Adalla Salem El-Badri has recently hinted at this.

While OPEC heavyweight Saudi Arabia is reasonably comfortable above a $85 price floor, hawks such as Iran and Venezuela aren’t. Secondly, economic activity is likely to pick up both within and outside the OECD in fits and starts. While Chinese economic data continues to give mixed signals, India is seeing a mini-bounce. 

Additionally, as analysts at Deutsche Bank noted, “With refineries likely to run hard after the maintenance period, this will support crude oil demand and eventually prompt crude prices, in our view. This may be one of the factors that could help to eliminate contango in the Brent crude oil term structure.”

While the general mood in the wider commodities market remains bearish, it should improve over the remainder of the year unless China, India and the US collectively post dire economic activity, something that’s hard to see at this point. The Oilholic is sticking to his Q1 forecast of a Brent price in the range of $90 to $105 for 2014, and for its premium to WTI coming down to $5.

Meanwhile, Moody's has lowered the Brent crude price assumptions it uses for ratings purposes to $90 per barrel through 2015, a $5 drop from the ratings agency's previous assumptions for 2015. It also reduced price assumptions for WTI crude to $85 per barrel from $90 through 2015.

The agency’s price assumptions for 2016 and thereafter are $90 per barrel for Brent crude and $85 for WTI crude, unchanged from previous assumptions. Moody’s continue to view Brent as a common proxy for oil prices on the world market, and WTI for North American crude.

On a closing note, here’s the Oilholic’s second take for Forbes on the role of China as a refining superpower. Recent events have meant that their refining party is taking a breather, but it’s by no means over. 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 Oil Extraction Facility © Lukoil. Graph: Brent curve structure, September 19, 2014 © Deutsche Bank

‘Crude’ sanctions on others always hurt Japan

The Oilholic finds himself in a rain-soaked Tokyo one final time before the big flying bus home! How Asian importing countries cope with sanctions on major oil & gas exporting jurisdictions is an interesting topic in this region reliant on foreign hydrocarbons for obvious reasons.

Mentioning Iran and of late curbs on Russia, deliberations over the past week with market commentators here in Tokyo, as well as Shanghai and Hong Kong, resulted in a consensus of opinion that Japan’s 30-odd oil & gas companies and regional gas-fired utilities feel the pain of such curbs more than corporate citizens of most other Asian importing nations.

The reason is simple enough; of the quartet of major Asian importers – namely China, Japan, India and South Korea – it’s the Japanese who are the most compliant when international pressures surface. Now, whether or not they can afford to is a different matter. According to the EIA and local publications, Japan consumed nearly 4.6 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2013, down from 4.7 million bpd in 2012. 

Going by the IEA’s latest projections, Japan is the third largest petroleum consumer in the world, behind the US and China. Yet domestic reserves are paltry in the region of 45.5 million barrels of oil equivalent, concentrated along the country’s western coastline. Inevitably, Japan imports most of its hydrocarbon requirements as a major industrialised nation.

Given the equation, if sanctions knock out or have the potential to knock out imports from one of its major partners, finding an alternative is neither easy nor simple. Forward planning also gets thrown right out of the window. We’ll discuss the recent Russian conundrum in a moment, but let’s examine the 2012 Iranian sanctions and the Japanese response to them first.

The country, almost immediately complied with requests to import less oil from Iran when European Union and US sanctions escalated in Q1 2012. At the time, Japan accounted for 17% of Iranian exports, above South Korea and India, but below China. The Japanese phased bid to reduce Iranian oil imports was lauded by the West, whereas China largely ignored the call, South Korea asked for more time and the Indians came up with ingenious ways to make remittances to Iran, until curbs on the insurance of tankers carrying Iranian crude began to bite.

Make no mistake, the sanctions on Iran hurt all four back in 2012, but Japan had to contend with the biggest refocusing exercise based on the level and speed of its compliance in moving away from Iranian crude. In the Oilholic’s opinion, for better or worse, that’s the price of being a G7 nation; and “having internationalism factored into the thinking,” adds a contact.

Fast forward to 2014, and the potential for securing of natural gas supplies from Russia to Japan seems to be taking a hit in wake of the Ukraine crisis. At the 21st World Petroleum Congress in June, when the tension had not escalated to the current level, prior to the downing of MH17, policymakers in on both sides were cooing over the potential for cooperation. 

The Institute of Energy Economics, Japan and the Energy Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences even put out a joint white paper at the Congress contemplating a subsea gas pipeline route from Korsakov, Russia, to Kashima, Japan with an onshore Ishikari-Tomakomai section. It was claimed that technical feasibility of the ambitious project, capable of carrying a projected 8 bcm of natural gas to the Pacific Coast of Eastern Japan, had been positive.

Now it’s all gone a bit cold. One can’t directly attribute it to Russia’s face-off with the West, but currently both Japan and Russia describe the project as “just another idea”. This blogger can assure you, people were way more excited about it in June at the WPC than they are at the moment, and one wonders why?

Afterall, post-Fukushima with the rise of natural gas in Japan’s energy mix, however wild a project might be, carries weight rather than being relegated to just an idea. Contrast this with China, which has recently inked a long-term supply contract with the Russians. Quod erat demonstrandum!

With the evening drawing to a close, it’s time to digress a little and disclose the venue of this animated conversation – that’s none other than Tokyo’s iconic Hotel Okura. While a wee tipple is not cheap (average JPY1,700 for a swig of single malt), visiting this modernist institution is something special. 

When Tokyo first hosted the Olympic Games in 1964, the hotel was built in preparation to welcome the world. Since then, Hotel Okura has hosted every serving US President from Richard Nixon onwards.

Author Ian Fleming made James Bond fictitiously check-in to the hotel while in Tokyo in a chapter of "You only live twice". In recent work of fiction, the hotel also makes an appearance in Haruki Murakami’s 1Q84. It’s eclectic lobby, paneling, general sense of tranquility and overall panache of modern Japan is simply splendid (see above left). 

So here’s to 007, Murakami, Queen and Country and all the rest; but also it could be the Oilholic’s last drink at Hotel Okura as we know it. Alas, this grand place is about to fall prey to cultural philistinism in the name of progress as Tokyo prepares to host the Olympic Games once again in 2020. 

Last time around, for the 1964 games, Tokyo got the wretched Nihonbashi Expressway, a ‘clever’ project which included building an expressway over the Nihonbashi bridge, obscuring the magnificent view of Mount Fuji from the bridge and covering-up an ancient river flowering through the heart of Tokyo with steel and much more (see below left)!

Now atop a lot of flattening and rebuilding plans all over town, it seems Hotel Okura’s original main wing has been marked for demolition in August 2015, leaving only the South Tower operational. A proposed spending plan of US$980 million will see the wing open in the spring of 2019, reborn according to an employee as a “mixed-use tower” with 550 guest rooms and 18 stories of office space.

Life it seems will never be the same again for Hotel Okura and its many admirers including the Oilholic, who’d made it his mission not to leave Tokyo without visiting. Glad one got to see it before the demolition men get in. Well that’s all from the Far East folks as its time to bid a sad goodbye to the region!

Tokyo, Hong Kong, Macau and Shanghai, planes, trains, speedboats and automobiles – it was one heck of a crude ride that one will treasure forever. Next stop is London Heathrow, a reminder that all good things must end! 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 1: Tokyo Stock Exchange. Photo 2: Lobby of the Hotel Okura, Tokyo. Photo 3: The Oilholic at Hotel Okura’s Orchid Bar. Photo 4: Nihonbashi Expressway, Tokyo, Japan  © Gaurav Sharma, September, 2014.