• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Gas Prices: Wall Street At Fault?

Trading in derivatives and futures can have a big effect on the price of oil long before a drop of it has been produced.
 
I'm an evil speculator on oil currently. yesterday it was at $105.xx in the morning and $108.xx by night time.

$3 x 600 barrels = $1800 in a day. frankly I hope it gets to at least $8 / gallon at your pumps USA.

muah hah hah :D
 
Speculators were supposed to even out commodity prices, by pull forward future price shocks. Looking at the history of speculator activity I'd say they just make things worse.
 
I love the way speculators always get the blame for just trying to frontrun central planners policies, but price is never anyhing to do with the global liquidity tsunami is it? oh, wait..

Another suspect—one Mr. Obama doesn't like to mention—is U.S. monetary policy. Oil is traded in dollars, and its price therefore rises when the value of the dollar falls, all else being equal. The Federal Reserve throughout Mr. Obama's term has pursued the easiest monetary policy in modern times, expressly to revive the housing market. It has done so with the private support and urging of the White House and through Mr. Obama's appointees who are now a majority on the Fed's Board of Governors.

Oil staged its last price surge along with other commodity prices when the Fed revved up its second burst of "quantitative easing" in 2010-2011. Prices stabilized when QE2 ended. But in recent months the Fed has again signaled its commitment to near-zero interest rates first through 2013, and recently through 2014.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...2.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond

and its not just the US pretty much every central bank is at it.

and $109.64 currently, another $1000 - ker ching. roll on $125.
 
Last edited:
I love the way speculators always get the blame for just trying to frontrun central planners policies, but price is never anyhing to do with the global liquidity tsunami is it? oh, wait..



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...2.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsSecond

and its not just the US pretty much every central bank is at it.

and $109.64 currently, another $1000 - ker ching. roll on $125.

So what massive QE was going on in summer of '08 when oil and gasoline hit record numbers, higher than those of today?
 
So what massive QE was going on in summer of '08 when oil and gasoline hit record numbers, higher than those of today?

one could argue that unbridled credit creation in massive unsustainable bubbles (housing, consumer credit in the USA, but also globally) is the same as QE and certainly fed growing demand at the same time as stagnating oil supply.

World real GDP experienced 2-year total growth of 9.4% in 2004 and 2005.

http://www.brookings.edu/economics/...ing_bpea_papers/2009_spring_bpea_hamilton.pdf

this was clearly unsustainable, and coupled with the Saudi (and global) production peaking and declining over the period, it was basically classic supply/demand cost rise scenario.

Because the Saudis had historically used their excess capacity to mitigate the effects of short-run supply shortfalls, many analysts had assumed that they would continue to do the same in response to the longer run pressure of growing world demand, and most forecasts called for continuing increases in Saudi production levels over time.

For example, even as recently as in their 2007 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Agency was projecting that the Saudis would be pumping 12 million barrels per day by 2010. In the event, however, Saudi production went down rather than up in 2007. It is a matter of conjecture whether the decline in Saudi production in 2007 should be attributed to depletion
of its Ghawar oil field, to a deliberate policy decision in response to a perceived decline in the price-elasticity of demand, or to long-run considerations discussed below.

Whatever its cause, the decline in Saudi production was certainly one important factor contributing to the stagnation in world oil production over 2005-2007. It also unambiguously denotes the latter episode as a new era as far as oil pricing dynamics are concerned— without the Saudis’ willingness or ability to adjust production to smooth out price changes, any disturbance to
supply or demand would have a significantly bigger effect on price after 2005 compared with earlier periods

that paper concludes that without the fundamental in-elasticity of the supply, price speculation alone would not be able to cause price rises of such magnitude.

With hindsight, it is hard to deny that the price rose too high in July 2008, and that this miscalculation was influenced in part by the flow of investment dollars into commodity futures contracts.

It is worth emphasizing, however, that the two key ingredients needed to make such a story coherent— a low price elasticity of demand, and the failure of physical production to increase— are the same key elements of a fundamentals-based explanation of the same phenomenon. I therefore conclude that these two factors, rather than speculation per se, should be construed as the primary cause of the oil shock of 2007-08.

and in this I agree, politicians (and people in general) are quick to blame speculators for all the ills of the financial world, but if there had been an over supply of oil (or anything) it would not be possible to affect price like that, speculators only attempt to frontrun trends, but the trends themselves are caused by (mostly misguided) policies and central planners who don't understand unintended consequences.

edit, it is also worth noting, speculators place their funds at high risk, and often lose too. several traders I know were savagely burnt by Obama's unexpected and politically motivated release of the strategic reserve last year, if you are willing to risk large losses you should be willing to make large gains, this is not evil it is just markets at work.
 
Last edited:
I love the way speculators always get the blame for just trying to frontrun central planners policies, but price is never anyhing to do with the global liquidity tsunami is it? oh, wait..

I thought when people say "speculators" they're refering to goldman/jp morgan et al. (I thought they were by far the biggest speculators in commodity markets but I'm probably wrong lol)
didn't alot of the QE money basicly flow into commodity speculation?
not trying to argue, just still trying to wrap my head around this stuff.
 
I thought when people say "speculators" they're refering to goldman/jp morgan et al. (I thought they were by far the biggest speculators in commodity markets but I'm probably wrong lol)
didn't alot of the QE money basicly flow into commodity speculation?
not trying to argue, just still trying to wrap my head around this stuff.

those banks likely do have very large positions, but "speculators" is really anybody looking to profit from it from a one man band trading at home, up to the biggest of investment banks.

in my opinion JPM and GS are not really speculating so much as the smaller guys because I personally think they would get advance information on an Obama release of the strategic reserve for example, and be selling in advance of that, which of course the smaller traders wouldn't.

the big guys also have a huge advantage, what with their HFT capabilities and co-located computers in the trading exchanges for speed advantage etc.

speculation implies risk, the largest of the trading units have ways of reducing their risk considerably, compared to everybody else's
 
yea, was going to say alot of people make a strong argument that they(GS/JPM) are the central planners (revolving door) so I guess it wouldn't be speculation :p
 
I was watching the ABC story, Gas Prices: Wall Street At Fault?

I don't get it. So I found the article, Global Energy Weekly for March 21, 2011.

Nope. Still don't get it.

The only way speculators can drive up the cost of oil is if they offer
a portion of the winnings to suppliers to keep oil off the market.
It is simple. When people quit paying the prices, they will tumble.

Exactly as they did last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, in spite of the supertitious jibberish and pseudo-expertise about 'excess production', 'insufficient production', 'unseen market forces' 'volatility' and so on.

Unless someone invents a way to eat gasoline.
 
It is simple. When people quit paying the prices, they will tumble.

Exactly as they did last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, in spite of the supertitious jibberish and pseudo-expertise about 'excess production', 'insufficient production', 'unseen market forces' 'volatility' and so on.

Unless someone invents a way to eat gasoline.

which people quit paying which prices?
 
which people quit paying which prices?
The last time gas in the US climbed to record levels, and the time before that, and the time before that...

Did you really think that gas prices had gone up in a straight line?

http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

Or maybe it was really those magical unseen geopolitical market forces at work, instead of one of the fundamental principals of business.
 
The last time gas in the US climbed to record levels, and the time before that, and the time before that...

Did you really think that gas prices had gone up in a straight line?

http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

Or maybe it was really those magical unseen geopolitical market forces at work, instead of one of the fundamental principals of business.

do I understand correctly, are you saying that the price of a barrel of oil globally is driven by the price of gasoline paid (or not) by US consumers?
 
do I understand correctly, are you saying that the price of a barrel of oil globally is driven by the price of gasoline paid (or not) by US consumers?
The topic is prices at the gas pump, the question was if Wall Street had caused the recent spike in the US.
Last time this happened, the media reported that local pump prices were climbing because of 'concerns over production' (up or down), and 'unseen market forces' (such as Wall Street investment and speculation - up or down). There was quite a bit of blaming SUVs even though their popularity was climbing outside the US as well.

Prices are going up again dramatically. Is the real cause 'concern over uncertainty in the Middle East', or Hugo Chavez' tumor?

Or just plain old profit motives?
 
It is simple. When people quit paying the prices, they will tumble.

Exactly as they did last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, in spite of the supertitious jibberish and pseudo-expertise about 'excess production', 'insufficient production', 'unseen market forces' 'volatility' and so on.
Unless someone invents a way to eat gasoline.
Well no wonder the economists keep on getting it wrong. They have this silly notion that prices have something to do with supply and demand.

Now we know that demand is the only factor in determining the price of oil.
 
Well no wonder the economists keep on getting it wrong. They have this silly notion that prices have something to do with supply and demand.

Now we know that demand is the only factor in determining the price of oil.

And that is of course, why everyone with an economics degree is a multi-billionaire, because they know the magic formula for 'unseen market forces', and can predict the stock market well in advance with such impressive accuracy.

Oh,and we really didn't need you to advertise that you were trolling by turning someone's point around backwards.

You've already sold out of credibility with that one.

Should anyone hold their breath waiting for you to honestly address what was said?

Or to explain how businesses become successful by pricing their product out of reach of their customer base?
 
Last edited:
Should anyone hold their breath waiting for you to honestly address what was said?
Your the one who described excess or insufficient production as "supertitious jibberish and pseudo-expertise" (something you still stand by apparently). It is difficult to give a more "honest" answer because like most angry posters, you believe that an honest post is one that agrees entirely with your own POV.

Nevertheless, I'll try. Petrol is a grudge product - people buy it because they have to. They won't stop driving their cars just because the price at the pump has gone up. So demand for petrol is pretty inelastic. This means that it is the supply (production) that will determine the price paid for petrol at the pump.
 
Your the one who described excess or insufficient production as "supertitious jibberish and pseudo-expertise" (something you still stand by apparently). It is difficult to give a more "honest" answer because like most angry posters, you believe that an honest post is one that agrees entirely with your own POV.

Nevertheless, I'll try. Petrol is a grudge product - people buy it because they have to. They won't stop driving their cars just because the price at the pump has gone up. So demand for petrol is pretty inelastic. This means that it is the supply (production) that will determine the price paid for petrol at the pump.
So when the media announces randomly on alternate days that prices, or the stock market is going up, or down because of 'fears of excess production', and 'concerns over insufficient production' and 'unseen market forces', you are claiming that is what 'supply and demand' means in real life?

And you really think that everyone is gullible enough to fall for that woo?

Or to think that you are 'honest' when you edit words out of my posts and claim that the resulting forgery is actually what I said?

:rolleyes:


ETA: The research suggests that a 10 percent increase in the
retail price of gasoline would reduce consumption by
about 0.6 percent in the short run.5 Over a longer period,
consumers would be much more responsive to an increase
in the price of gasoline (should the higher price persist)
because they would have more time to make choices that
took longer to put in place, such as buying an automobile
that gets better gasoline mileage. Estimates of the longrun
elasticity of demand for gasoline indicate that a sustained
increase of 10 percent in price eventually would
reduce gasoline consumption by about 4 percent.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8893/01-14-gasolineprices.pdf
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom