Banning Oil Speculation could drive gasoline prices down to $2/gallon

Le Jacquelope

Loves Spam
Joined
Apr 9, 2003
Posts
76,445
Another point I've been making for years that I'm apparently right about.

The bad news is $2/gallon gasoline might usher back in the age of the gas guzzling SUVs which we've actually seen before and is utterly detrimental to America...

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/gas-could-fall-2-if/story.aspx?guid={2673C102-68E0-41D9-9C9A-10EE2E723948}&dist=TNMostRead&print=true&dist=printMidSection


Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say
Limiting speculation would push prices to fundamental level, lawmakers told
By Rex Nutting & Michael Kitchen, MarketWatch
Last update: 4:24 p.m. EDT June 23, 2008
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The price of retail gasoline could fall by half, to around $2 a gallon, within 30 days of passage of a law to limit speculation in energy-futures markets, four energy analysts told Congress on Monday.
Testifying to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management said that the price of oil would quickly drop closer to its marginal cost of around $65 to $75 a barrel, about half the current $135.
Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer & Co., Edward Krapels of Energy Security Analysis and Roger Diwan of PFC Energy Consultants agreed with Masters' assessment at a hearing on proposed legislation to limit speculation in futures markets.
Krapels said that it wouldn't even take 30 days to drive prices lower, as fund managers quickly liquidated their positions in futures markets.
"Record oil prices are inflated by speculation and not justified by market fundamentals," according to Gheit. "Based on supply and demand fundamentals, crude-oil prices should not be above $60 per barrel."
Futures trading in London has not been a major factor in rising oil prices, testified Sir Bob Reid, chairman of the Chairman of London-based ICE Futures Europe. Rising prices are largely a function of fundamental supply and demand, not manipulation or speculation, he said.
"Energy speculation has become a growth industry and it is time for the government to intervene," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the full committee. "We need to consider a full range of options to counter this rapacious speculation." It was Dingell's strongest statement yet on the role of speculators.

Dingell introduced a bill on June 11 that would ask the Energy Department to gather the facts on energy prices, including the role played by speculators. See full story.
There are two kinds of speculators in the futures markets, Masters said. Traditional speculators are those who need to hedge because they actually take physical possession of the commodities. Index speculators, on the other hand, are merely allocating a portion of their portfolio to commodity futures.
Index speculation damages price-discovery mechanisms provided by futures markets, Masters added
The committee will likely consider legislation that would rein in index speculation by imposing higher-margin requirements; setting position limits for speculators; requiring more disclosure of positions; and preventing pension funds and investment banks from owning commodities.
Both major presidential candidates have supported closing loopholes that encourage speculation in the energy markets. Read more on Election Blog.
However, other witnesses said that pure speculators have had little impact on energy prices, which have doubled in the past year to about $135 per barrel. Both Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman have dismissed the impact of speculators on prices paid by consumers.
Speculators now account for about 70% of all benchmark crude trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange, up from 37% in 2000, said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the investigations subcommittee. Stupak introduced a bill on Friday that would limit index speculation.
There has been much discussion recently about how big a role speculators have been playing in the sharp rise in energy prices, though no consensus has emerged on this point.
Congress, however, has grown increasingly concerned over speculative investors' role in the energy market in comparison with those buying futures contracts to hedge against risk from price changes. Lawmakers are expected to consider legislation to set strict limits -- or in some cases, an outright ban -- on speculative trading in energy futures in some markets.
Dingell is looking into any legal loopholes that may have contributed to speculation in energy markets. In 1991, according to documents provided by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to the committee's investigators, the agency authorized the first exemption from position limits for swap dealers with no physical commodity exposure. This began what Dingell said was "a process that has enabled investment banks to accumulate enormous positions in commodity markets."
Is Congress barking up the wrong tree?
Neal Ryan, manager at Ryan Oil & Gas Partners, said that if Congress develops regulations to cut back speculative trading, speculation will just find a new home.
"Speculation is the root of capitalism," he said. "If the speculation is forced out of the U.S. exchanges, it'll simply show up on other exchanges that are OTC like the ICE, or new exchanges will pop up to allow for the spec trades to continue functioning."
Ryan said he does see a reason for Congress to look at eliminating aspects such as allowing West Texas intermediate crude oil futures to trade on foreign markets and the "Enron loophole," but "these exchanges are currently functioning as they are supposed to in a free marketplace."
The creation of a comprehensive U.S. energy policy that tackles issues of increasing domestic supply and reining in consumer demand via conservation should be Congress' focus, Ryan said. "Instead we're on bended knee begging the Saudis to put more oil on the market and talking about shutting down spec trades." End of Story
Rex Nutting is Washington bureau chief of MarketWatch.
Michael Kitchen is a copy editor for MarketWatch and is based in New York. Nate Becker contributed to this report from San Francisco.
 
Hmmm..I'm a bit skeptical about any "cure-all" solution.

If speculation is the only reason, why aren't other commodities that are traded in the exact same ways behaving the same as oil?
 
Hmmm..I'm a bit skeptical about any "cure-all" solution.

If speculation is the only reason, why aren't other commodities that are traded in the exact same ways behaving the same as oil?
Because they're not the same as oil?

I can survive without buying gold ingots - if gasoline disappeared, however...
 
Another point I've been making for years that I'm apparently right about.

The bad news is $2/gallon gasoline might usher back in the age of the gas guzzling SUVs which we've actually seen before and is utterly detrimental to America...

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/gas-could-fall-2-if/story.aspx?guid={2673C102-68E0-41D9-9C9A-10EE2E723948}&dist=TNMostRead&print=true&dist=printMidSection


Gas could fall to $2 if Congress acts, analysts say
Limiting speculation would push prices to fundamental level, lawmakers told
By Rex Nutting & Michael Kitchen, MarketWatch
Last update: 4:24 p.m. EDT June 23, 2008
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The price of retail gasoline could fall by half, to around $2 a gallon, within 30 days of passage of a law to limit speculation in energy-futures markets, four energy analysts told Congress on Monday.
Testifying to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management said that the price of oil would quickly drop closer to its marginal cost of around $65 to $75 a barrel, about half the current $135.
Fadel Gheit of Oppenheimer & Co., Edward Krapels of Energy Security Analysis and Roger Diwan of PFC Energy Consultants agreed with Masters' assessment at a hearing on proposed legislation to limit speculation in futures markets.
Krapels said that it wouldn't even take 30 days to drive prices lower, as fund managers quickly liquidated their positions in futures markets.
"Record oil prices are inflated by speculation and not justified by market fundamentals," according to Gheit. "Based on supply and demand fundamentals, crude-oil prices should not be above $60 per barrel."
Futures trading in London has not been a major factor in rising oil prices, testified Sir Bob Reid, chairman of the Chairman of London-based ICE Futures Europe. Rising prices are largely a function of fundamental supply and demand, not manipulation or speculation, he said.
"Energy speculation has become a growth industry and it is time for the government to intervene," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the full committee. "We need to consider a full range of options to counter this rapacious speculation." It was Dingell's strongest statement yet on the role of speculators.

Dingell introduced a bill on June 11 that would ask the Energy Department to gather the facts on energy prices, including the role played by speculators. See full story.
There are two kinds of speculators in the futures markets, Masters said. Traditional speculators are those who need to hedge because they actually take physical possession of the commodities. Index speculators, on the other hand, are merely allocating a portion of their portfolio to commodity futures.
Index speculation damages price-discovery mechanisms provided by futures markets, Masters added
The committee will likely consider legislation that would rein in index speculation by imposing higher-margin requirements; setting position limits for speculators; requiring more disclosure of positions; and preventing pension funds and investment banks from owning commodities.
Both major presidential candidates have supported closing loopholes that encourage speculation in the energy markets. Read more on Election Blog.
However, other witnesses said that pure speculators have had little impact on energy prices, which have doubled in the past year to about $135 per barrel. Both Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman have dismissed the impact of speculators on prices paid by consumers.
Speculators now account for about 70% of all benchmark crude trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange, up from 37% in 2000, said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., chairman of the investigations subcommittee. Stupak introduced a bill on Friday that would limit index speculation.
There has been much discussion recently about how big a role speculators have been playing in the sharp rise in energy prices, though no consensus has emerged on this point.
Congress, however, has grown increasingly concerned over speculative investors' role in the energy market in comparison with those buying futures contracts to hedge against risk from price changes. Lawmakers are expected to consider legislation to set strict limits -- or in some cases, an outright ban -- on speculative trading in energy futures in some markets.
Dingell is looking into any legal loopholes that may have contributed to speculation in energy markets. In 1991, according to documents provided by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to the committee's investigators, the agency authorized the first exemption from position limits for swap dealers with no physical commodity exposure. This began what Dingell said was "a process that has enabled investment banks to accumulate enormous positions in commodity markets."
Is Congress barking up the wrong tree?
Neal Ryan, manager at Ryan Oil & Gas Partners, said that if Congress develops regulations to cut back speculative trading, speculation will just find a new home.
"Speculation is the root of capitalism," he said. "If the speculation is forced out of the U.S. exchanges, it'll simply show up on other exchanges that are OTC like the ICE, or new exchanges will pop up to allow for the spec trades to continue functioning."
Ryan said he does see a reason for Congress to look at eliminating aspects such as allowing West Texas intermediate crude oil futures to trade on foreign markets and the "Enron loophole," but "these exchanges are currently functioning as they are supposed to in a free marketplace."
The creation of a comprehensive U.S. energy policy that tackles issues of increasing domestic supply and reining in consumer demand via conservation should be Congress' focus, Ryan said. "Instead we're on bended knee begging the Saudis to put more oil on the market and talking about shutting down spec trades." End of Story
Rex Nutting is Washington bureau chief of MarketWatch.
Michael Kitchen is a copy editor for MarketWatch and is based in New York. Nate Becker contributed to this report from San Francisco.


OMG.

I can't believe it?

I agree with you 100%.
 
Because they're not the same as oil?

I can survive without buying gold ingots - if gasoline disappeared, however...

But some commodities are necessary, and are even perishable.

Speculation hasn't caused any huge price inflation on things like , "FCOJ".

But , maybe there are different rules for oil trading?
 
But some commodities are necessary, and are even perishable.

Speculation hasn't caused any huge price inflation on things like , "FCOJ".

But , maybe there are different rules for oil trading?

There are -- the margin requirements, for one thing. You can margin oil at 10% under the rules, where orange juice is more commonly held on a 50% margin.
 
There are -- the margin requirements, for one thing. You can margin oil at 10% under the rules, where orange juice is more commonly held on a 50% margin.

When demand drops due to sustained high prices, who gets hurt?
 
There are -- the margin requirements, for one thing. You can margin oil at 10% under the rules, where orange juice is more commonly held on a 50% margin.

Which makes sense considering the volatility and the nature of OJ being a perishable product, while oil is much more durable and comes in much more abundance?

However, maybe it is true that these margin calls were more appropriate when oil was $25 a barrel, not $135.

They could barely give the crap away. Now, after almost a decade of war, the prices have increased 5-fold.

Same old thing as always. Corporate war profiteering?
 
Assholes holding dummy-sucker high futures - speculators, in short (npi).

Same as the folks holding gold options at $2,000 an ounce.

P.T. Barnum fodder.

It would suck to be a speculator. I hope Congress is looking out for them.
 
OMG.

I can't believe it?

I agree with you 100%.

yep...me too, 100%
Which makes sense considering the volatility and the nature of OJ being a perishable product, while oil is much more durable and comes in much more abundance?

However, maybe it is true that these margin calls were more appropriate when oil was $25 a barrel, not $135.

They could barely give the crap away. Now, after almost a decade of war, the prices have increased 5-fold.

Same old thing as always. Corporate war profiteering?
I would love to see some of these assholes brought to justice...but it will never happen.
 
Assholes holding dummy-sucker high futures - speculators, in short (npi).
Except that in this case, the market is going to hold those high futures up until perpetuity. Oil will never go down from where it is now...


... unless Government(s) get involved and actually regulate the index speculators.


Now, the speculators can basically claim the free market never brought them down, which is true. What brought them down is society itself which got tired of the damage being done by their greed.


Ever wonder why all of the damage being done in the energy sector right now is due to unregulated markets?
 
What's even funnier is so do busybody and the Saudi royal family.
And as with the housing crisis, everyone here disagreed with me until the shit finally hit the fan.

I'm just waiting for Islandman to come by, do another one of his almost-famous 180s, and make some Nostradamus jokes. :)
 
But some commodities are necessary, and are even perishable.

Speculation hasn't caused any huge price inflation on things like , "FCOJ".

But , maybe there are different rules for oil trading?

The only time speculation affects FCOJ is January 2nd. Everybody knows that.
 
The only time speculation affects FCOJ is January 2nd. Everybody knows that.

Impressive.

A great quote from that movie:

[on his first day of work]
Billy Ray Valentine: "What if I can't do this job, Coleman? What if I'm not what they expected?"

Coleman: "Just be yourself, sir. Whatever happens, they can't take that away from you."


:p
 
Soros' got nothing on you, son.
C'mon, man, you know people have been giving me shit here about oil speculation and its effects on the price of oil.

Now its effects have been publicly calculated at 50% of the price of oil by experts in the field.

The gauntlets have been thrown down, but this time not by me. It's time for the free marketeers to put up or shut up.
 
If Congress passes the ban, I will return to the Democratic party, but it will never happen, they just as much in bed with big corporate energy as the Republicans.
 
The futures market, which takes into account both the present and the future availability of goods, is a vital part of a smoothly functioning economy. Unfortunately, that fact provides little comfort to people frustrated over the high prices of food and fuel. As such, it provides fodder for political demagogues, charlatans and quacks who rush in with blame and prepare "solutions" for the problems they themselves have created -- the high prices for food and fuel are directly linked to the policies of the White House and Congress.

True.

Limits the solutions somewhat doesn't it?
 
Back
Top