That $60-floor, refining & FTSE100 oil majors

The US$60 per barrel floor was well and truly breached on Friday as the WTI dropped to $57.48 at one point. The slump is continuing into the current week as Brent lurks around $60 in early Asian trading. 

The scenario that most said would set alarm bells ringing within the industry is here. Since no one is predicting the current supply glut to ease anytime soon, not least the Oilholic, that the readers should expect further drops is a no brainer. Odds have shortened considerably on OPEC meeting well before June as was announced last month.

Nonetheless, speaking in Dubai, OPEC Secretary General Abdalla Salem El-Badri said, “The decision [not to cut production] has been made. Things will be left as is. We are assessing the situation to determine what the real reasons behind the decrease in oil prices are.” So is perhaps half the world!

In the Oilholic’s humble opinion Brent could even dip below $50 fairly soon. However, supply constriction will eventually kick-in to support prices over the second half of 2015. In the interim, we’ll see a few interesting twists and turns.

As for oil and gas companies, Fitch Ratings reckons the much beleaguered European refining sector is likely to end the year in much better shape than 2013. In the first edition of its European Refining Dashboard, the ratings agency noted that refining margins in the third quarter rose to their highest level since at least the start of 2013 as “product prices fell more slowly than crude oil prices.”

The Oilholic feels it’s prudent not to ignore the emphasis on the words “more slowly”. Fitch says overcapacity and intense competition from overseas refineries still plague European refining.

“Further capacity reductions may be needed to restore the long-term supply and demand balance in Europe, while competition from Middle Eastern, Russian and US refineries, which generally have access to cheaper feedstock and lower energy costs, remains strong,” it added.

More generally speaking, in the Oilholic’s assessment of the impact of lower oil prices on the FTSE 100 trio of Shell, BP and BG Group; both Shell and BP outperformed in the last quarter by 6% and 11% respectively, according to published data, while BG Group’s underwhelming performance had much to with other operational problems and not the price of the crude stuff. 

While published financial data is backward looking, and the slump in prices had not become as pronounced at the time of quarterly results as it currently is, it's not all gloomy. However, the jury is still out on BG Group. The company is responding with incoming CEO Helge Lund waiting to take charge in March. Last week, BG Group agreed to sell its wholly-owned subsidiary QCLNG Pipeline Company to APA Group, Australia’s largest gas infrastructure business, for approximately $5 billion.

QCLNG Pipeline company owns a 543 km underground pipeline network linking BG Group’s natural gas fields in southern Queensland to a two-train LNG export facility at Gladstone on Australia’s east coast. 

The pipeline was constructed between 2011 and 2014 and has a current book value of US$1.6 billion. “The sale of this non-core infrastructure is consistent with BG Group’s strategy of actively managing its global asset portfolio,” it said in a statement.

While largely welcoming the move, most analysts have reserved judgement for the moment. “The sale is broadly supportive to the company's credit profile. However, we will need to be comfortable with the use of proceeds and progress with BG's planned output expansion before we change the current negative outlook,” as analysts at Fitch wrote in a note to clients.

Reverting back to Shell and BP, the former has quietly moved ahead of the latter and narrowed the gap to market leader ExxonMobil. Strong downstream results helped all three, but Shell’s earnings recovery over the year, was the most impressive according to Neill Morton, analyst at Investec.

“Despite its modest valuation premium, we would favour Shell’s more defensive qualities over BP in the current uncertain industry environment,” he added. Let's not forget the Gulf of Mexico oil spill fallout that BP is still getting to grips with.

Moving away from FTSE 100 oil majors and refiners, UN Climate Change talks in Peru ended on a familiar underwhelming note. Delegates largely cheered at the conclusion (which came two days late) because some semblance of something was achieved, i.e. a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted at a summit next year.

The final communiqué which can’t be described as anything other than weak is available for download here should it interest you. Problem here is that developed markets like lecturing emerging markets on CO2 emissions, something which the former ignored for most of 20th century. It won't work. Expect more acrimony, but hope that there is light at the end of a very long tunnel. 

On a closing note, here’s the Oilholic’s latest Forbes column on the Saudis not showing any signs of backing down in the ongoing tussle for oil market share.

Also over past few weeks, this blogger reviewed a few ‘crude’ books, namely – Energy Trading and Risk Management by Iris Marie Mack, Marketing Big Oil by Mark Robinson, Putin and the Oligarch by Richard Sakwa and Ownership and Control of Oil by Bianca Sarbu. Here’s hoping you find the reviews useful in deciding whether (or not) the titles are for you. 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:  Refinery, Quebec, Canada © Michael Melford / National Geographic

‘Petroleum Club’, policy choices & ‘crude’ control

Several nations are about to join the ‘Petroleum Club’ of crude oil producers where they’ll rub shoulders with well established patrons of the hydrocarbon exporters' fraternity.

The policymaking choices they face today could have a massive bearing on the future direction of their economies and overall management of national oil wealth. Every national market’s direction is ultimately shaped by the level of control its government wishes to have over domestic exploration and production.

Some do not have a national oil company (NOC), yet others give most of the decision-making and clout to a state entity. Factoring in developments and case studies till date, academic Bianca Sarbu delves into the key issue of state influence in her book Ownership and Control of Oil published by Routledge.

The author discusses different decisions taken by governments, subsequent outcomes, emerging themes and industry trends in their wake. In a book of just under 200 pages, split into six detailed chapters, Sarbu substantiates her arguments by pulling in case studies – both recent and historic – and puts forward conclusions confronting theoretical explanations.

The text is peppered with figures, tables and charts lending veracity to Sarbu’s scrutiny of government decisions in key oil producing countries. Her painstaking analysis of upstream policies on a pan-global level helps the readers compare and contrast what’s afoot, where, and why.

An entire chapter is dedicated to profiling Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi based on Sarbu’s in-depth research and direct interviews with over 30 energy experts on both countries. Holistic examination of NOCs’ role in oil production since the nationalisations of the 1970s from sheikdoms to democracies, leads the author to some interesting conclusions.

Sarbu opines that technical expertise of the NOC plays an important role in “explaining upstream policy choices,” especially when limits on the executive are low and “ruling elites are more likely to take economically rational decisions.”

From first impression to midway scrutiny, all the way up to ultimate conclusion, Sarbu’s treatment of the subject at hand is solid. Its an invaluable contribution towards wider understanding and contextualisation of policy frameworks within emerging and established oil producing countries and the impact they have had or are likely to have for better or worse.

The Oilholic would be happy to recommend this title primarily to industry consultants. That said policymakers, oil and gas sector professionals in general, as well as students of petroleum economics and the Middle East would appreciate it in near equal measure.

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: Front Cover – Ownership and Control of Oil © Routledge, May 2014.

The difficult art of marketing ‘Big Oil’

Given the historical and perhaps customary negativity surrounding oil and gas majors in the best of times, working on their marketing pitches and brand equity enhancement is not for the faint hearted.

Environmental disasters and subsequent public relations fiascos in wake of incidents such as Exxon Valdez and BP’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill have only reinforced negative perceptions about ‘Big Oil’ in the minds of many. 

It all dates way back to Standard Oil, a company often castigated for its practices in the last century, writes Mark Robinson, professor of marketing at Virginia International University, in his recent work Marketing Big Oil published by Palgrave Pivot.

With pitfalls aplenty for oil and gas marketing professionals, the author has attempted to offer guidance on the arduous task by going well beyond the mundane 'do’s' and 'don’ts' in a book of just under 160 pages, split into five parts and 17 splendidly sequenced chapters. As it happens, Robinson knows more than a thing or two about marketing Big Oil, having been an industry executive at Deloitte’s Global Energy & Resources Group and ExxonMobil.

His book provides adequate subjective treatment, lessons from history and what approaches to adopt if marketing Big Oil is what you do or intend to do. Starting with the historical context provided by Standard Oil, the author leads readers on to present day challenges faced by oil and gas companies as we’ve come to know them.

The Oilholic really liked Robinson’s no holds barred analysis of marketing and branding exercises undertaken by industry participants and his detailed examination of what worked and what tanked given the millions that were spent. The author says throwing money at a campaign is no guarantor of success as many companies within the sector have found out to their cost.

Managing pitfalls forms an integral part of Robinson’s message; just ask BP with its ‘Beyond Petroleum’ slogan. Perceived disconnect between the slogan, what the company was up to, and subsequent events made it sound farcical. The saga, what went wrong with the campaign and lessons in its wake are described in some detail by the author.

Additionally, a part of the book is dedicated to managing a brand crisis. The entire text is well referenced and accompanied by 14 brand lessons treating various crucial marketing facets. Analysis of the industry's use of social media, e-commerce, mobile apps and digital advertising is fascinating too.

Overall, Robinson’s engaging and timely book on a complex marketing arena brings forth some 'crude' home truths, backed up by historical context and lessons from the corporate world, all weaved into a balanced industry perspective on the state of affairs in a digitally savvy world.

Budding marketing professionals as well as industry veterans, and those interested in how some of world’s biggest oil and gas companies succeed (or fail) in etching their global brand equity would find this book to be a thoroughly good read.

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: Front Cover – Marketing Big Oil: Brand Lessons from the World's Largest Companies © Palgrave Macmillan, July 2014.

‘Yukos Affair’ and its shadow over Putin’s Russia

President Vladimir Putin and what colours his vision of modern Russia are under the spotlight like never before. As Ukraine burns and western sanctions hit the Kremlin, Russia’s president remains defiant spewing yet stronger nationalistic rhetoric with a coterie of supporters in tow. Many would find internal politics in Putin’s Russia to be fascinating and repugnant in equal measure.

Yet, in order to understand the present, a past occurrence – the downfall of Yukos and its former chief Mikhail Khodorkovsky – would be a good starting point. In his latest work published by I.B. Tauris, academic Richard Sakwa not only describes the episode in some detail but also contextualises power struggles and insecurities that shaped one of the most controversial episodes in contemporary Russia.

This book isn’t merely Khodorkovsky's story from an unceremonious arrest in 2003 to a surprising release in December 2013. Rather, the author has taken that backdrop to give the readers an insight into the beginning and subsequent evolution of ‘Putinism’ as we know it. 

In just under 300 pages split by 12 chapters, Sakwa, an expert on Russian affairs with half a dozen works under his belt, has portrayed the event as an extraordinary confrontation between the two great forces of modernity – the state and the market – with Putin and Khodorkovsky as antagonists. 

“It was about their associated conceptions of freedom and at the same time – a struggle for Russia,” he writes. Putin’s determination to clip Khodorkovsky’s petrodollar powered wings marked a turning point. The oligarch’s controversial trial(s) attracted widespread international condemnation and ended in one of the world's richest and most powerful men becoming the state's prisoner. 

Far-reaching political and economic consequences in its wake left an indelible black mark about the quality of freedom in Putin's Russia. It also laid bare the complex connection between the Kremlin and big business during Russia's troubling transformation from a planned economy during the Soviet era to capitalism.

Being an outsider, it is easy to feel sympathetic towards Khodorkovsky and castigate the Russian way. However, by not overtly romanticising Khodorkovsky's resistance to Putin’s view of modern Russia, Sakwa paints a convincing picture of how the oligarch turned prisoner himself was no stranger to the contradictory essence of the country's democratic evolution.

As the author notes, Khodorkovsky was not only Putin’s antagonist, but also at the same time a protagonist of the contradictions that the president's regime reflected. Ultimately, it all leads on to how subversion of law and constitutionality has become commonplace in today’s Russia.

While the said subversion started taking hold in post-Soviet Russia, and Khodorkovsky most certainly used it to his advantage when it suited him; it was the oligarch’s ultimate downfall that made the state of affairs manifestly obvious beyond the country’s borders. It resonates today with Putin’s modus operandi as entrenched as ever. 

Through his brilliant, balanced description of a key episode in Russia’s rise towards becoming an oil and gas powerhouse, Sakwa has charted a warning from history on what to expect and where it might lead. The Oilholic would be happy to recommend Putin and the Oligarch to energy analysts, those interested in geopolitics, Russia, Yukos Affair or the oil world at large.

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: Front Cover – Putin and the Oligarch: The Khodorkovsky-Yukos Affair © I.B. Tauris, February 2014.

OPEC just about gets the basics right

On occasion, signs around Austrian bars and shops selling souvenirs humorously tell tourists to get one basic fact right – there are no kangaroos in Austria! In more ways than one, last week’s OPEC meeting in Vienna was also about getting its 12 member nations to recognise some basic truths – not so much about the absence of marsupials around but rather about  surplus oil in the market.

Assessing demand, which is tepid in any case at the moment, comes secondary when there is too much of the crude stuff around in the first place. Of late, OPEC has become just a part player, albeit one with a 30% share, in the oil market’s equivalent of supermarket pricing wars on the high street, as the Oilholic discussed on Tip TV. Faced with such a situation, cutting production at the risk of losing market share would have been counterproductive.

Not everyone agreed with the idea of maintaining production quota at 30 million barrels per day (bpd). Some members desperate for a higher oil price were dragged around to the viewpoint kicking and screaming. Ultimately, the Saudis made the correct call in refusing to budge from their position of not wanting a cut in production.

Though ably supported by Kuwait, UAE and Qatar in his stance, Saudi Oil Minister Ali Al-Naimi effectively sealed the outcome of the meeting well ahead of the formal announcement. Had OPEC decided to cut production, its members would have lost out in a buyers’ market. Had it decided on a production cut and the Saudis flouted it, the whole situation would have been farcical.

In any case, what OPEC is producing has remained open to debate since the current level was set in December 2011. The so-called cartel sees members routinely flout set quotas. In the absence of publication of individual members’ quotas, who is producing what is never immediately ascertained.

Let’s not forget that Libya and Iraq don’t have set quotas owing to leeway provided in wake of internal strife. All indications are that OPEC is producing above 30 million bpd, in the region of 600,000 barrels upwards or more. Given the wider dynamic, it's best to take in short term pain, despite reservations expressed by Iran, Venezuela and Nigeria, in order to see what unfolds over the coming months.

After OPEC’s decision, the market response was pretty predictable but a tad exaggerated. In the hours following Secretary General Abdalla Salem El-Badri’s quote that OPEC had maintained production in the interest of “market equilibrium and global wellbeing”, short sellers were all over both oil futures benchmark.

By 21:30 GMT on Friday (the following day), both Brent and WTI had shed in excess of $10 per barrel (see right, click to enlarge). That bearish sentiment prevailed after the decision makes sense, but the market also got a little ahead of itself.

The start of this week has been calmer in part recognition of the latter point. Predictions of $40 per barrel Brent price are slightly exaggerated in the Oilholic’s opinion.

Agreed, emerging markets economic activity remains lacklustre. Even India has of late started to disappoint again after an upshot in economic confidence noted in wake of current Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s emphatic election victory in May. Yet, demand is likely to pick-up gradually. Additionally, a price decline extending over a quarter inevitably triggers exploration and production (E&P) project delays if not cancellations, which in turn trigger forward supply forecast alterations. 

This could kick-in at $60 and provide support to prices. In fact, it could even be at $70 barring, of course, the exception of a severe downturn in which case all bets are off. Much has also been said about OPEC casually declaring it won’t convene again for six months. Part of it fed in to market sentiment last week, but this blogger feels saying anything other than that would have been interpreted as a further sign of panic thereby providing an additional pretext for those going short.

Let’s put it this way - should the oil price fall to $40 there will definitely be another OPEC meeting before June! So why announce one now and create a point of expectation? For the moment, OPEC isn’t suffering alone; many producers are feeling different levels of pain. US independent E&P companies (moderate), Canada (mild), Mexico (moderate) and Russia (severe) - would be this blogger's pain level call for the aforementioned.

The first quarter of 2015 would be critical and one still sees price stabilisation either side of the $70-level. One minor footnote before taking your leave - amidst the OPEC melee last week, a client note from Moody’s arrived into the Oilholic’s inbox saying the agency expects Chinese demand for refined oil products to increase by 3%-5% per annum through 2015. This compares to 5%-10% in 2010-2012.

It also doesn’t expect the benchmark Singapore complex refining margin to weaken substantially below the level of $6 per barrel because lower effective capacity additions and refinery delays will reduce supply, while “the recent easing in oil prices should support product demand.” 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: No Kangaroos in Austria plaque Graph: Weekly closing levels of oil benchmark prices since Oct 3, 2014 to date* © Gaurav Sharma.