Member Info for Boyobach

Article:
“Buy the fact, sell the rumor: that’s the likely course for oil as misplaced faith in an output pact achieved by major producers leads to a rebound, before underwhelming production cuts from the deal and speculation of storage tanks hitting capacity trigger a new selloff.”
Proposed OPEC++ Cuts Can't Reverse Brent's Deep Contango
https://uk.investing.com/analysis/commodities-week-ahead-global-pact-slows-inevitable-oil-crash-gold-shines-200440377

‘the agreement isn’t so much about balancing markets so much as buying time to prevent stockpiles from overflowing’.......’everyone right now is losing’

Now that the issue of Saudi ‘overproduction’ is resolved, the market will now focus on the reality that demand has collapsed and supply is still outstripping it.

Is $30+ realistic under these ‘improved’ circumstances?

From Reuters on Friday, I understood that 15% was dependent on US & Canada:
Russia and OPEC said they wanted other producers including the United States and Canada to cut a further 5%.

Yes Ocelot. The price of oil and related shares has recently, more than ever, been influenced by words and policies rather than the physical reality of supply, demand and the practicalities of storing oil until demand resumes. The worst may be over in terms of OP, although there are pundits who say otherwise, and G's sp may well remain above 80p, as the charts suggest, but, as you and I seem to agree, there is a very long way to go before OP is likely to reach $50 again.

Some context for next Tuesday:
On Thursday the five-day moving average for G v OP reached 3.6x which, ordinarily during the last twelve months, would have been viewed as an achievement. Since then OPEC+ has achieved little in terms of reassuring markets or, indeed, of doing anything to prop-up OP, which has consequently weakened - to what extent we’ll discover before markets next open.
On this Discussion Board, 1msn has meanwhile had the temerity to suggest that G might revisit the 80’s and got mocked for his/her trouble. Now, here’s the recent daily chart for G with Brent rebased (green): https://invst.ly/qevxi

Let’s just say that, unless something firmly positive happens regarding OP, there seems little chance of G progressing upwards from Thursday’s doji closing price of 124. Downwards there is the recently converted resistance turned support at 116 which offers some comfort. We also know that there has been Director, Bilgin and rumoured fund buying from the low 80s upward, which might cushion any rapid fall-back.

A 15 minute chart shows there are recently tested levels of support at 82, 90 and 98
https://invst.ly/qew0f

U.S. Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette:
“We call on all nations to use every means at their disposal to help reduce the surplus,” adding that it was “extremely disappointing” that Moscow and Riyadh had not finalised a deal.

Moscow and Riyadh being the lead countries in a wicked cartel upon which the US and its profligate Shalers hypocritically depend to stabilise prices.

So is it not even more disappointing that US regulators are not using every means at their disposal to reduce the surplus?

Oh - agreed Ocelot. I was talking about Trump's idea of a sweet spot, not what might be achieved in the near term. The Russian energy chap recently suggested $40 average over this year, which is arguably optimistic with too much oil currently around to store.

Cheers Hasiba: Underneath the ramping and joking some shrewd thoughts.

Just picking up on a few of your thoughts bunks,

‘If I put more cash in it'll be for a minimum of 18 months:’

I have never found you can ‘buy and forget’ so 18 months would be project. A portfolio is like a garden. It needs weeding, planting and - perhaps most important, harvesting and re-seeding. Did I mention recycling?

I like what I call binary shares (NOT to be confused with Binary Options). It’s not an original idea and probably not an original name for it either. Like binary stars that are in a mutual orbit, I sometimes select shares that track each other in an underlying pattern but invariably weave to opposing highs and lows. They offer the prospect of minimising risk within a given sector whilst presenting accretive opportunities. It’s pretty obvious that I do this with RDS and G, which have just recently yielded gains even over days whilst it’s more often over weeks or months. https://invst.ly/qdykg That chart is a long-term view but sometimes the principle can be applied over days. There’s no reason why it can’t be applied across sectors but then, of course, you increase the risk of missing out.

As you say, the market could turn downwards and the downside risk has to be limited. It so happens I am thinking about linking AV with Lloy (both were on my list the other day) - I think AV should do ok as the market recovers and I'm almost back in profit with it, whilst Lloy will be dragged more by the C-19 fallout, suspension of divi etc Perhaps when AV has returned to 3 or 400+, Lloy will still be cheap….

Yes indeed Ocelot - the thing is that the US, KSA, Russia etc. all have different sweet spots. Trump can influence but not control. Indeed, none of the main players has control except for the ability to take the market down by overproducing, the top is always set by the one most under pressure to sell (invariably the independent US Shale producers)
If we knew what each of the three dominant states' 'sweet spots' were we could hazard a guess as to what the compromise would be, based upon an average weighted in terms of 'essential' supply capacity. I say 'essential' because US Shale is produced in abundance but is not what many US refineries are geared up to use - hence US still imports oil....
The sweet spot probably $40-$50 (WTI) for Trump - $45-$55 Brent. Moscow would be Ok with that, apparently. Not brilliant for KSA but better than $25 provided their market share is sufficient. What do you think?

So you'll exit G in May, Hasiba?
If the market turns down - and I agree it's a strong possibility - then it would be illogical to retain G, which tends to react strongly to such influences.

Forgot to add chart showing why I mentioned low 90s -
https://invst.ly/qdu45
Which is the next floor down if G does not get off here, at 116.

Having hopped back onto the 'down' escalator today, will G drop back through 116? It's a potential buy-back point for traders who maybe took profits yesterday and should now provide some support:
https://invst.ly/qdu18
A return to the low 90's hardly seems likely - unless KSA & Russia talks go TU.
Jack: I think G's recent performance has little to do with the G:Brent ratio (which has got rather stretched) and is more about anticipation of an OP boost to $40+ . That, in itself, seems to be a potential bubble with minimal global demand and storage capacity brim-full. Spot prices and near futures currently appear to be influenced by market sentiment rather than the reality of physical supply. Odd.

Yeah - I've traded and acquired some Aviva.
I have some LLOY which I'm not bothering with right now.
Separately, I've gone back into SOLI which is proving to be a keeper.

....that's why spot and front month futures prices have become disconnected from reality - they are more expensive than the physical commodity can warrant because much of it may will end up being stored at a loss.

The EIA publish these reports monthly based on data and scientific /objective models and projections. They are a reference source of estimated data based as far as possible on known facts. It follows that there is no room in their numbers for speculation about what the outcome of OPEC+'s meeting will be - that can be incorporated in next month's report. The market, meanwhile, is working on pure speculation that OP will strengthen in the near term and may well be fuelling an illusion according to this article:
"Traders seeking to store oil have put their plans on hold this week after prompt Brent crude futures surged against future months and made storage uneconomical, despite overwhelming supplies in the market, industry sources said on Tuesday."
"The market is totally disconnected from supply and demand fundamentals."
"Some companies will have to store oil at a loss as they're unable to sell their cargoes even at depressed prices,..."
https://uk.investing.com/news/commodities-news/oil-storage-uneconomical-despite-hefty-supplies-as-brent-futures-strengthen-2090799

In other words, there is already way too much oil and the spread of futures prices is unrealistic because it is controlled by funds rather than by physical oil quantities .

A few shares appear to be hovering near the gap that occurred when the market fell sharply on Monday 9th March, having started to fall quite heavily the week before. However, G has recovered better than the other KRI companies and has effectively caught back up with the majors and the FTSE:
https://invst.ly/qdejp

G poised on the edge of that gap to 137 - interesting:
https://invst.ly/qdclg
In theory, G would be rather stretched - is already stretched - v OP but that hasn't stopped it today.

150+ or is this a bit of ramping?

Not ramping, Hasiba, but probably the top end at $40 Brent

It may be worth remembering that before Coronavirus and shortly before the KRG delayed payments, before production cuts and before KSA fell out with Russia and OP collapsed, G managed to get to 225p at $62 Brent. The best price it achieved in 2019 was 233p at an OP of $73. Its two twelve month bests v OP could therefore be averaged to 229p at $67. So, in my view, you’d be lucky to see G at more than 140p at $40 Brent or 175p if Brent gets to $50. Still, I won't complain if it exceeds those numbers.

Correct Hasiba - always essential to try to do valid comparisons. G has performed better than RDS since it hit its low but, of course, it lost much more heavily on the way down. Ultimately they are fairly even since the price crash. One offers less risk the other offers quicker gains. Both offer a good dividend. RDS doesn't have a single hard-pressed client, of course.
I choose to ride both horses (swapping between when advantageous) and, here's the important bit, they are both lining up to break above their respective resistance levels. What are they waiting for? What could they possibly have in common?
https://invst.ly/qc-5z
It doesn't matter much to me which one jumps first - but there may be a chance to switch rides with the profit.

G appears to be champing at the bit today the ‘bit’ being the resistance around 117. But so, it seems, is RDS where the equivalent resistance is about 1480 and RDS arrived at it on Thursday - waiting for G to catch up?

Here’s G: https://invst.ly/qcyf2
Here’s RDS: https://invst.ly/qcyd2

Where one goes the other often follows, it seems.