Oil price discussion and analysis

[Sdajii]

Just about at those low 50s I was talking about...

 

[Smurf1976]

It's tempting to reinvest in the ETF (ASX:OOO) which is even less than it was in 2015.

Looking at that chart I note that the ETF hasn't tracked the oil price too accurately over the years.

Eg Oil's roughly half the 2014 price, give or take a bit, but the ETF is far lower.

 

[Smurf1976]

Just about at those low 50s I was talking about...

We're about to find out if you're right it seems.

The sheer speed of the drop would, if it occurred with a major share index or something like house prices, be commonly referred to as a crash. Just saying.

 

[Ann]

OK folks, time for a chart. The POO fell below the $60 support line and now the potential support line is $55. It now has huge overhead resistance from the $60 level, the rising support/resistance line heading toward $60. I see $65 as another resistance line (not drawn as the chart would start to look like a cat's cradle sooner than a market chart!) Then another rising resistance going beyond $75 and finally the major long term falling resistance line heading down toward $75. The POO has a massive weight on its head.



It will be interesting to see if Saudi Arabia decides to move away from OPEC and if so what will that do to the POO? No idea myself.

 

[Darc Knight]

Ain't nothin sexier than a Woman who can chart!

 

[tinhat]

Ain't nothin sexier than a Woman who can chart!

I know you don't mean any offense with your humour and even though none may have been taken, it's worth considering that your comment would not be considered appropriate in most workplaces these days. (your preferences are set not to allow private messages).

 

[Darc Knight]

I know you don't mean any offense with your humour and even though none may have been taken, it's worth considering that your comment would not be considered appropriate in most workplaces these days. (your preferences are set not to allow private messages).

This is a community, not a workplace. From my experience Ann isn't that sensitive. My prefences DO allow messages as Joe and others can verify, unless they have changed automatically over the last few days. I have asked for post to be deleted, but no one is at the helm.

While you're there Joe, I'll have another voluntary ban pls. I've got a bit to do
Thanks.

 

[Smurf1976]

I know you don't mean any offense with your humour and even though none may have been taken, it's worth considering that your comment would not be considered appropriate in most workplaces these days.

Much as I don't like the degree to which everyone is somewhat precious these days, I do agree with the sentiment you are expressing. Some may laugh it off, others may take it seriously. Always remember that with an online forum you don't have the body language aspect so it's harder to judge someone's true reaction.

Back on topic, I note that the Saudi's seem to have found a convenient reason to cut production, that being the price falls.

I say "convenient" since if you look at the whole of the past 40 years the same pattern has played out. Daily production rates over 10 million barrels are not sustained for long and that is even truer for rates over 10.5 million barrels per day. This observation has lead many to suspect that they don't really have the 12.5 million barrels per day capacity they claim and that true capacity is somewhere around 10 million, anything above that simply being oil released from storage not taken from the ground and thus limited in duration.

That's not an original thought, the thinking has been around for many years but I do note that it has happened once again. Production hits what has historically not been sustained for long and suddenly there's a relaxation in practice of US sanctions on Iran and the oil price collapses thus justifying a production cut.

The theory is at least plausibly correct in my view. No proof that it is, but there have been many occurrences and not one single instance which proves otherwise.

Add in the emerging constraints on production growth in the US, in short they're running out of capacity in pipelines to transport the oil which puts an effective cap on production, plus the lack of investment elsewhere I'm still long term bullish. That said, the speed of the recent falls has me standing aside certainly.

 

[fiftyeight]

This may provide some insight to the recent price action

https://www.themacrotourist.com/posts/2018/11/13/chipper/

 

[luutzu]

I know you don't mean any offense with your humour and even though none may have been taken, it's worth considering that your comment would not be considered appropriate in most workplaces these days. (your preferences are set not to allow private messages).

Were you just being really cautious from experiences at work, or was it just me, and a few others, who doens't find that offensive at all?

I find woman who fixes cars, play chess or do things women "traditionally" don't do... to be sexy. It's not that I don't think women could be good at such work, just that in my experience it' rare to see and in me liking it... it's a form of admiration.

Alright, maybe you don't say "sexy" to the lady. But I would've thought it's be more offensive to women,and girl power, if men see women in such fields and goes nuts over it.

 

[Joe Blow]

This is a community, not a workplace. From my experience Ann isn't that sensitive. My prefences DO allow messages as Joe and others can verify, unless they have changed automatically over the last few days. I have asked for post to be deleted, but no one is at the helm.

While you're there Joe, I'll have another voluntary ban pls. I've got a bit to do
Thanks.

I noticed this at the bottom of your post:



Given that your post was obviously in reference to Ann's previous post and Ann liked your post, I think we can safely assume that no offence was either intended, nor taken. On that basis I'll leave it where it is and we can all move on.

My decision to leave the post intact was similarly not intended to offend and I hope none was taken.

 

[barney]

This is a community, not a workplace. From my experience Ann isn't that sensitive. My prefences DO allow messages as Joe and others can verify, unless they have changed automatically over the last few days. I have asked for post to be deleted, but no one is at the helm.

While you're there Joe, I'll have another voluntary ban pls. I've got a bit to do
Thanks.

Definitely no ban required for you @Darc Knight ….. Your above post was humorous and taken in that vein by the person responded to …… A bit of minor "flirting"/compliment to another member on a Forum over the Internet is exactly how the Internet should be ….. nothing too personal, but a bit of fun …… thumbs up from me!!

PS Ann is a good scout … She extracted $50 bucks from me a while back to help ASF

PPS Don't bet with her on the direction of GOLD lol!

 

[Sdajii]

If even Luutzu doesn't see something as offensive, you know you need to get the stick out of your arse if you think it is.

So many people are so desperate to find something to call offensive these days!

 

[Smurf1976]

So many people are so desperate to find something to call offensive these days!

Personally I'm not even slightly offended by that or indeed most things.

I'm just wary, in view of recent discussion about ASF needing more on-topic posts, more members and so on, that others may see it differently and be discouraged.

 

[notting]

Pathetic that this is even talked about as if it could be an issue.
Women are awesome traders cause they are not full of testosterone in the mornings, it's a fact. Now Ff9% 0$f and that's sexy!
Re oil. Jesus Christ the next time I hear Donald Trump call out to the Soudis on Twitter to get the oil price down. My God Go Short!!!!!
It's unbelievable how much control they have over the price irrespective even of OPEC. I heard this a while back from Exxon. I reeeeeaaaaaally believe it now!!
How much do the US frackers hate Trump now!!?

 

[ducati916]

This may provide some insight to the recent price action

https://www.themacrotourist.com/posts/2018/11/13/chipper/

That would certainly qualify in my book as a 'likely' causative factor. There have been a number of Hedge Fund blow-ups in the commodity space. If that [does] turn out to be the reason, then I would expect a return to $65'ish.

The 'fundamentals' would seem to indicate a needed readjustment from over supply and slowing growth.

Intra-day bounce currently, see what happens for the close. Still no COT numbers.

jog on
duc

 

[notting]

The 'fundamentals' would seem to indicate a needed readjustment from over supply and slowing growth

Kind of but all those hedge funds and just about everyone else on earth was saying how great the fundamentals were 6 weeks ago!! All of a sudden, what there has been a revolution in the way experts and all measure the fundamentals. NOPE
All that's happened is that the Saudis ran the taps, and Trump didn't restrict the Iranians as much as people were expecting, I should add. I suppose there is something fundamental about that!

 

[Smurf1976]

Trump didn't restrict the Iranians as much as people were expecting

Hasn’t restricted them at all in practice, the whole “Iran sanctions” thing turned out to be a non event really and that alone adds a lot more supply than had been assumed.

 

[fiftyeight]

Kind of but all those hedge funds and just about everyone else on earth was saying how great the fundamentals were 6 weeks ago!!

They would be saying how great the fundamentals are so they can unwind their positions?

 

[ducati916]

If it was a Hedge Fund unwinding, then the bounce today will signal the end of the puke.

Still no COT numbers.

jog on
duc