Gas Prices & Elections?

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Closer to $2 per gallon than $3 per gallon. i.e. $2.49 per gallon or less…brilliant! Regular unleaded needs to drop less than $0.30 in much of the country to get there. It is possible but not likely as there is no reason for this to occur from a supply and demand perspective.[/quote]

It’s down 25 cents per gallon in the last 3 weeks here.

I’d much rather pay 2.49 than 3.09 - but what the hell do I know?

You didn’t reply to my challenge: How high is high?

Demand will drop as the expected value of the gallon of gas is exceeded by it’s price.

I’ll go slow here: There will always be a base line demand for petrol products - construction, mass transportation, and the deliveryu of products to market, among other industries that will always be buying fuel regardless of it’s cost.

But the demand for fuel to service leisure activities will go down once the market price exceeds the the perceived value of the next gallon of gas.

But I’m sure you knew that, huh?

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
hedo wrote:
The industry is laughing their asses off at your analysts.

mmmkay

hedo wrote:
You and they would have to be foolish to ignore the impact of speculation, refining capacity and supply distribution network bottlnecks… Never mind. Sounds like I answered my own question.

Why do you think prices soared last year at this time while supply was plentiful and demand constant?

Katrina was the largest contributing factor but that was temporary. Demand increases from emerging markets are not temporary and neither is year to year US comsumption.

hedo wrote:
Oil prices peaked in July at $78/bbl. And then began to decrease…in the summer. Even after today’s news re: Iran they remained stable. The specualtion is out of the market and those traders do not want to hold a declining commodity.

Further do you realize that proven reserves are not based on today’s technology or cost structures. If your analysts can’t explain the impact that has on reserves and extraction costs then you should find new ones. They should use current models…widely avialable in the Oil and Gas industry.

Extraction costs do not change as quickly as other factors like world events and consumption.

hedo wrote:
Refining costs are not linear and the the capacity to build new refineries is much more inelastic then the ability to pump more oil. Texas proven reserves haven’t been repriced by the Govt. or industry in years.

Supply and demand will outpace other factors. We wish it was different.

You obviously are not a energy sector analyst.

You are in way over your head.

The price of a barrel of oil has nothing to do with refining costs or taxes.

Supply problems from refineries have been temporary as a result of acts of God one way or another.

Ethanol and low sulfur content cost the refinery pennies a gallon but they pass that on to us at a higher price.

What do they care? You and I are not going to cut our usage.

Oil prices have nothing to do with refining costs.[/quote]

In over my head. You are a funny man. You completely ignore the subject of the post which is gas prices. Introduce logic that is out of date and off base and then criticize my thinking. Oh well what can when expect?

You obviosuly have no undertanding of this market. Perhaps you should read those reports you are mailing out a little more closely.

You really have made some silly comments concerning currency futures, oil markets and the financialmarkets in general over the years. Perhaps some night classes are in order.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Define high prices. No one has stopped driving, so how high is high? Of course the littlerice burner cars are going at a premium, but people are still driving just as much now as they were 11 months ago.[/quote]

I forgot to add that your above statement is not true.

Usage is down this year compared to last year.

I gassed up for $2.33/gallon this morning.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Define high prices. No one has stopped driving, so how high is high? Of course the littlerice burner cars are going at a premium, but people are still driving just as much now as they were 11 months ago.

I forgot to add that your above statement is not true.

Usage is down this year compared to last year.[/quote]

You said that prices are high and will remain high. You are the one that preaches intellectual honesty - yet you ignore a simple request.

I doubt it is a coincidence.

[quote]hedo wrote:
In over my head. You are a funny man. You completely ignore the subject of the post which is gas prices. Introduce logic that is out of date and off base and then criticize my thinking. Oh well what can when expect?

You obviosuly have no undertanding of this market. Perhaps you should read those reports you are mailing out a little more closely.

You really have made some silly comments concerning currency futures, oil markets and the financialmarkets in general over the years. Perhaps some night classes are in order.
[/quote]

Are you arguing that refining effects oil prices?

Refining effects gas prices only.

Refineries and oil producers are looked at seperately at our firm. One has nothing to do with the other.

The consumer is taxed per gallon which is independent of price and thus taxes are a fixed cost on a per gallon basis.

The current price drop at the pump is a result of the price drop in oil not refining costs or taxes.

That is my point. It is all about the oil.

[quote]doogie wrote:

I gassed up for $2.33/gallon this morning.[/quote]

Most of the country pays more than Texas.

We deal with country wide averages and not prices wihin an hour drive of major refineries.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Define high prices. No one has stopped driving, so how high is high? Of course the littlerice burner cars are going at a premium, but people are still driving just as much now as they were 11 months ago.

I forgot to add that your above statement is not true.

Usage is down this year compared to last year.

You said that prices are high and will remain high. You are the one that preaches intellectual honesty - yet you ignore a simple request.

I doubt it is a coincidence. [/quote]

Public sentiment is that prices are still high.

I think prices are a little low for what the market can take.

I personally do not have a problem paying the current prices.

A CNN poll conducted on 8/25/06 showed that 69% of respondents said rising gasoline prices have caused severe or moderate hardship.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/0604/poll.gasprices.0424/04.24.gas.prices.gif

I have not had andy hard ship what so ever.

To me the prices are not high but to most of American they are.

Fact: Gasoline taxes per gallon are a fixed cost passed onto the consumer.

Fact: Refining is a fixed cost as the only item that changes refining costs year to year (ignoring mother nature and industrial accidents) is *natural gas costs.

*Bet you don’t know why.

Fact: Oil prices have the biggest effect on gasoline prices and will dictate gasoline price changes more than any other factor.

Cheers!

Refinery profits have yet to be discussed.

They are mutually exclusive of refinery costs.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Fact: Refining is a fixed cost as the only item that changes refining costs year to year (ignoring mother nature and industrial accidents) is *natural gas costs.
[/quote]

So you are saying that regardless of the volume of oil prcessed at a refinery - the oil companies pay the same cost.

I’m sure the accountants for Shell would love to be able to use you and your “analysts” definition of fixed costs.

This is utter bullshit, and is only a “fact” to those involved on speculating on the oil markets.

And - not that it matters, as you have ignored the request twice now, and will undoubtedly continue to dodge - but you still haven’t defined “high” gas prices.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
hedo wrote:
In over my head. You are a funny man. You completely ignore the subject of the post which is gas prices. Introduce logic that is out of date and off base and then criticize my thinking. Oh well what can when expect?

You obviosuly have no undertanding of this market. Perhaps you should read those reports you are mailing out a little more closely.

You really have made some silly comments concerning currency futures, oil markets and the financialmarkets in general over the years. Perhaps some night classes are in order.

Are you arguing that refining effects oil prices?

Refining effects gas prices only.

Refineries and oil producers are looked at seperately at our firm. One has nothing to do with the other.

The consumer is taxed per gallon which is independent of price and thus taxes are a fixed cost on a per gallon basis.

The current price drop at the pump is a result of the price drop in oil not refining costs or taxes.

That is my point. It is all about the oil.
[/quote]

No refining cost and capacity effects gas prices which was the topic of the thread.

Oil prices are determined by the market.

The assumption that all proven reserves have been found is wrong. The assumption that demand always increases is funadementally flawed.

Simple calculations of supply and demand are bound to be innacurate unless one understands what basis is used to calculate the reserves and doesn’t assume the impact of technology and price to drive supply.

Simply put the amount of reserves increase and level off at $45-55 due to increased supply. Any additional price per barrel is fear driven.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Simply put the amount of reserves increase and level off at $45-55 due to increased supply. Any additional price per barrel is fear driven.
[/quote]

Why is this so hard to grasp? Hell - that’s the way the commodity markets are run from OJ to cattle to pork bellies to crude (both sweet and bitter).

Accounting has dick to do with fear mongering and speculation.

[quote]rainjack wrote:

It’s down 25 cents per gallon in the last 3 weeks here.

I’d much rather pay 2.49 than 3.09 - but what the hell do I know?
[/quote]

Month over month, crude oil prices are down 5.58% since 7/31/06. Strangely enough, that is a bigger swing than for gold, but in the same direction – gold was down 1.31% for the month. Could be that some people were looking to commodities as inflation hedges, and that part of the demand may weaken if people are seeing less worry on inflation.

Commodities as used products are just supply and demand w/r/t use – but commodities as investments reflect the demand of investors as well…

[quote]rainjack wrote:
hedo wrote:
Simply put the amount of reserves increase and level off at $45-55 due to increased supply. Any additional price per barrel is fear driven.

Why is this so hard to grasp? Hell - that’s the way the commodity markets are run from OJ to cattle to pork bellies to crude (both sweet and bitter).

Accounting has dick to do with fear mongering and speculation. [/quote]

It’s simple enough that’s for sure and easily proven where it counts…in the market.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
So you are saying that regardless of the volume of oil prcessed at a refinery - the oil companies pay the same cost.[/quote]

Refineries nationwide have been operating at or near 100% capacity for a long time as which makes it possible for the refineries to get an average fixed cost to their operations.

The only thing that changes the cost of refining oil into gas is the refineries energy costs (ignoring mother nature and industrial accidents which happen from time to time but are not factored in by analysts until they occur).

Refineries typically generate their own energy for the refining process by operating natural gas generators. The price of natural gas can change the cost of production a few pennies per gallon which is minor when you consider the over all cost of refining. Refineries often sell the surplus energy they create back to the grid which is mutally exclusive of what they spend to refine all the products they create.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I’m sure the accountants for Shell would love to be able to use you and your “analysts” definition of fixed costs.[/quote]

I already told you what their accountants use as fixed costs.

They are publically traded companies and their GAAP submissions to the SEC are available for public review. Knock yourself out and get back to me :slight_smile:

[quote]rainjack wrote:
This is utter bullshit, and is only a “fact” to those involved on speculating on the oil markets.[/quote]

My firm does not ‘speculate’ in the markets but invests their debt in our institutional accounts and mutal funds.

We are a buy side, fixed income, instituional money manager.

Capital market debt does not respond the same to oil and gas prices as the stock market does.

You are in way over your head.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
And - not that it matters, as you have ignored the request twice now, and will undoubtedly continue to dodge - but you still haven’t defined “high” gas prices.[/quote]

Once again…Wall Street analysts without exception have deemed gas prices as ‘high’ in relation to where they were just a few years ago (I do not think they are high but I would agree if and when we ever top $5 per gallon)and American consumers via polls and reduced usage have deemed prices too high (FYI - Demand does not decrease immediately when prices rise…you should know better than that).

You are the intellectually dishonest one.

I do not think prices are high but I am stating that as a preception of the vast majority of Americans and analysts in the financial industry.

I want to suggest you give up this arguement as you are in way over your head and have been owned in this thread but neither situations have stopped you before so I fully expect you to ignore my factual responses and ask the same ignorant questions.

Cheers dufus!

Major U.S. oil source is tapped
Successful test by Chevron partners in deep Gulf waters could rival Alaska in potential supply; U.S. reserves may swell 50 percent.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
September 5 2006: 1:31 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) – Chevron and its partners have successfully extracted oil from a test well in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, an achievement that could be the biggest breakthrough in domestic oil supplies since the opening of the Alaskan pipeline.

The news sent oil prices lower, with U.S. light crude for October delivery sinking 69 cents to $68.50 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The announcement helped dampen fears that oil supplies would be swamped by growing global demand, a concern that helped lift oil to record highs this summer, unadjusted for inflation.

But experts cautioned that relief at the pump from the breakthrough is many years away.

“It sounds terrific, but this means nothing for the near-term period,” said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service, which surveys gasoline prices daily for AAA.

“But it should remind everyone that before they buy into the reckoning of $100 a barrel oil that all those estimates don’t take into account tremendous amount of money can be spent on exploration when prices are at these levels.”

Shares of the three partners in the test well known as “Jack 2” rose sharply in trading Tuesday. Chevron (up $2.10 to $66.93, Charts), which owns a 50 percent stake, jumped 3 percent, while Devon Energy (up $8.21 to $72.36, Charts) soared nearly 12 percent, and Norwegian oil company Statoil (up $0.57 to $28.08, Charts)'s U.S. shares added about 2 percent. Devon and Statoil each own 25 percent stakes.

Shares of other major oil companies with rights to this area of the Gulf, including Exxon Mobil (Charts), BP (Charts) and Royal Dutch Shell (Charts), rose modestly on the news.

Neither Chevron nor Devon would say how long it would take for oil from the well to reach market. Experts say it will take billions of dollars to build the deepwater oil platforms and pipelines needed to extract the oil and get it into world markets.

“At best we’re not going to see a drop of oil for five years, maybe seven years,” said Fadel Gheit, oil analyst for Oppenheimer. “It’s great news for Chevron and even more so for Devon. But you can’t hold your breath waiting for it.”

A boon for the United States
Almost all the oil platforms in the Gulf are relatively close to the shore, on a shelf that puts them in less than 1,700 feet of water.

In recent years, oil has been found in the deeper waters of the Gulf known as the “lower tertiary” area, where the water is between 5,000 to 10,000 feet deep, but it had yet to be proved that oil could be extracted in enough volume to make such finds practical.

The Jack 2 well, which is 175 miles offshore, is in more than 7,000 feet of water and then drilled through more than 20,000 feet of rock below the sea floor, or about five miles below the surface of the Gulf. Chevron said the test had a flow rate of more than 6,000 barrels of crude oil a day.

Chevron would not estimate how much its reserves would be increased as a result of the test, nor would Devon. But Chevron said that it now believes the lower tertiary region of the Gulf could hold reserves of 3 billion to 15 billion barrels of oil. Total established U.S. reserves are estimated at less than 30 billion barrels.

“Until now no one was sure if the oil in this play would flow,” said Zoe Sutherland, North American oil exploration analyst for Wood Mackenzie, a global oil research and consulting firm. “It doesn’t matter how many large discoveries you have if you can’t produce it. This is very exciting news.”

Sutherland said it is fair to compare the breakthrough with the opening up of the North Slope of Alaska in terms of U.S. supply.

Ohio Northern University Professor A. F. Alhajji said the implications of this successful test could also help to open greater offshore supplies at other fields around the globe. He said that could mean even greater addition to worldwide reserves than those that now seem to be within reach in the Gulf.

“Whatever technology they used, I can tell you companies are scrambling right now to try to use it,” said Alhajji.

Gheit said that it is only with oil at its current historically high prices that exploration at these depths really became economically practical.

“This is the silver lining of higher oil prices,” he said. “If we didn’t have higher oil prices, they wouldn’t have dared to risk this much capital here.”

[quote]hedo wrote:
Major U.S. oil source is tapped
Successful test by Chevron partners in deep Gulf waters could rival Alaska in potential supply; U.S. reserves may swell 50 percent.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
September 5 2006: 1:31 PM EDT[/quote]

Unfortunately the statement below says it all:

“At best we’re not going to see a drop of oil for five years, maybe seven years,” said Fadel Gheit, oil analyst for Oppenheimer. “It’s great news for Chevron and even more so for Devon. But you can’t hold your breath waiting for it.”

My PMs are thrilled because they hold Chevron bonds and BP bonds in our mutal funds and institutional accounts.

The location of the deposit and the ability to pump it will stabilize prices and begin to quell fears.

A large deposit, in US, waters will be a reliable source for the world markets to benchmark against.

[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:
I mean let’s face it, the oil companies and refineries love the new price and we still buy gas like it’s $0.99 a gallon, so where is the incentive for them to lower it? Until we, as a nation, cut our usage in half or more, there will be no price drop. The demand has to fall to nil.

[/quote]

Absolutely! I’d start walking more.