“At This Point” It’s Over: Establishment’s Last Hope Fades As Trump Leads Rubio By 23 Points In Florida

It just keeps getting worse for the GOP establishment.

The harder the Republican aristocracy tries to derail Trump, the more convincing his victories become, in a kind of self-fulfilling, status quo-destroying loop, and now that Michigan has proven just how divided the Democratic vote truly is, it seems even more likely that the brazen billionaire may indeed end up taking the oath of office.

The GOP’s preferred candidate was obviously Jeb Bush. The last name says it all. But that crashed and burned in dramatic fashion and so, the establishment shifted its support to Marco Rubio.

That worked out for all of one caucus. After a strong showing in Iowa, Rubio’s star was shot down by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who at the time was still a candidate. Here’s where it all fell apart:

On Tuesday, the upstart senator didn’t even show up. Michigan was a disaster for Rubio and now, the latest poll from Quinnipiac University shows Trump beating him in his home state by 23 points.

As Politico notes, “Rubio’s campaign is working nonstop to try and win the state. The Florida senator has essentially camped out in Florida, doing back to back events throughout the state.”

But it won’t matter. Just like it didn’t matter in New Hampshire. Or South Carolina. Or Alabama. Or Massachusetts. Or Michigan. Or anywhere else.

It’s over. The only way to stop Trump now is for the deep state to literally step in and nullify the electorate’s decision on the excuse that Americans have simply lost their minds in a (hopefully) temporary bout of nationalistic, frustrated insanity.

Which brings us to a rather disturbing conclusion: democracy in America is going to be hijacked either way. Either Trump capitalizes on the country’s deep-seated frustrations and fears to capture an office he probably isn’t prepared to hold (and we honestly don’t mean that in a pejorative way), or else the political and business establishment simply denies the will of the people and refuses to allow him to become commander-in-chief. 

Anyway, that’s another discussion. The point for now is this: Marco Rubio is about to get “schlonged” in his home state by 20+ points. And that, in and of itself, says a lot about the mood of the American electorate. 

Trump himself summed it up best: “At this point it’s pretty tough for anybody to do anything.”

Yes Mr. Trump, “at this point”, it sure is.

Florida Poll


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1R7zTV5 Tyler Durden

Despite Record Cushing Inventory, Oil Jumps To $38 On Biggest Gasoline Draw In A Year

DOE's 3.88mm inventory build confirms API's print and is the 8th weekly rise in the last 9 for overall crude levels. Cushing also saw a build (690k) — the 17th week of the last 18. But the market – for now – is focused on the 4.5mm barrel draw in gasoline inventories – the biggest in a year, as the seasonals pickup. Crude jumped on the news, seemingly ignoring the fact that Cushing inventories now stand at a record high 66.9mm barrels. Also notably, US production rose for the first time in 7 weeks.

DOE:

  • *CRUDE OIL INVENTORIES ROSE 3.88 MLN BARRELS, EIA SAYS
  • *GASOLINE INVENTORIES FELL 4.53 MLN BARRELS, EIA SAYS
  • *DISTILLATE INVENTORIES FELL 1.12 MLN BARRELS, EIA SAYS

 

The problem is… this is entirely seasonal…

 

And the reaction – surge to $38:

 

And this as production rises for the first time in 7 weeks…


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1M6Gpnw Tyler Durden

Is This Why Gold Is Selling Off And Stocks Jumped?

After having reached multi-month highs recently, gold has been declining all day and earlier today took a sharp leg lower into the mid-$1240s.

 

Since there was no news to explain this weakness, we decided to look at the latest Gartman letter: because when all else fails, Gartman usually provides the answer. He did not disappoint, and this is what he wrote:

We remain long of gold in EUR and Yen denominated terms, just as we have for years in the case of the latter and for nearly a year in the case of the former. We are looking seriously… very… into adding to that position today for although we had intended to add to the positions had spot gold in US Dollar terms traded upward through… and remained “for an hour or so” above $1275… it seemed to us never to have been there for a definitive period of time. Yes, it did indeed trade above $1275, having made it to $1277 in the “spot,” but to the very best of our knowledge it did not remain there consistently. We’d have been a willing buyer at $1280 or higher had it been there and had it remained there for a reasonable interval… and although it was close to having done so it never seemed to us to have fulfilled this obligation.

 

Trading is art; it is not precise. It is rarely definitive. This was and is one of those times. However, we are intent upon adding to the position this morning on this correction and we shall do so “upon receipt of this commentary…” a far more “definitive” instruction than that of yesterday.

Conveniently, this may explain today’s gold drop. It does not, however, explain why last week, when gold was notably lower than the level this morning after the “correction”, Gartman said that “… we ran to cover our US dollar denominated gold position mid-day and we shall argue strongly that those still long of gold in US dollar terms, as noted above, should do the same.”

So with the move in gold “covered”, here is one attempt at explaining why stocks opened stronger today and still remain in the green. Once again, courtesy of Gartman’s daily letter:

At this point it would be ill-advised to suddenly turn bullish of equities but instead at this point it might even be rational and reasonable to consider reducing long positions and become more and more neutral of equities.

Questions answered.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1pgeKMA Tyler Durden

Wholesale Trade “Gap” Reaches Record High As Sales Tumble, Inventories Rise

Worst.Case.Scenario. In 24 years, the ratio of wholesale inventories to sales has only been higher than the current 1.35x once – at the peak of the recession in the last financial crisis. Wholesale sales tumbled 1.3% MoM (worse than the -0.3% exp) and inventories rose 0.3% MoM while expectations were for a drop of 0.1% (inventories over sales difference rose from $143.6BN to $151.2BN in one month, a new record high.) And finally, automotive inventories rose to 1.78x sales – the highest since the crisis.

Keep stacking, despite tumbling sales…

 

Which leaves us firmly in the "recession imminent" section of the business cycle…

 

And there has never been a wider absolute spread between inventories and sales…

 

And as far as the automotive sector – that bubble may have a problem…

 

This cannot end well.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1TLkZVh Tyler Durden

“Where’s Our $100 Million?” – An Angry Bangladesh Holds Fed Responsible For Historic Theft

Someone at the New York Fed messed up.

On February 5, Bill Dudley was “penetrated” when “hackers” (of supposed Chinese origin) stole $100 million from accounts belonging to the Bangladesh central bank.

As we reported on Tuesday, the money was apparently channeled to the Philippines where it was sold on the black market and funneled to “local casinos” (to quote AFP). After the casino laundering, it was sent back to the same black market FX broker who promptly moved it to “overseas accounts within days.”

Obviously, that’s hilarious, not to mention extremely embarrassing for the NY Fed. Here’s what the Fed had to say yesterday about the “mishap”:

  • NEW YORK FED SAYS HAS BEEN WORKING WITH BANGLADESH C.BANK ON ISSUE OF LOST FUNDS
  • NEW YORK FED SAYS PROBLEMATIC BANGLADESH CENTRAL BANK PAYMENT INSTRUCTIONS ‘FULLY AUTHENTICATED’ BY SWIFT MESSAGING SYSTEM

Right. Someone in the Philippines requested $100 million through SWIFT from Bangladesh’s FX reserves. Nothing suspicious about that.

“Some 250 central banks, governments, and other institutions have foreign accounts at the New York Fed, which is near the centre of the global financial system,” Reuters notes. “The accounts hold mostly U.S. Treasuries and agency debt, and requests for funds arrive and are authenticated by a so-called SWIFT network that connects banks.”

Well, as it turns out, Bangladesh doesn’t agree that the Fed isn’t ultimately culpable.

“We kept money with the Federal Reserve Bank and irregularities must be with the people who handle the funds there,” Finance Minister Abul Maal Abdul Muhith said on Wednesday.

It can’t be that they don’t have any responsibility,” he said, incredulous.

Oh yes it can, Mr. Muhith. Because you are Bangladesh and you are dealing with the NY Fed, a thoroughly corrupt institution which can do and say whatever it wants. If you think anyone at 33 Liberty cares about a lousy $100 million that went missing from the account of a country that most Americans only know exists because they checked the care label on their laundry, you are sorely mistaken. To wit, from Bloomberg:

A Federal Reserve Bank of New York spokeswoman said on Monday there was no sign its systems had been hacked after Bangladesh Bank reported the missing funds.

 

There is no evidence that any Fed systems were compromised, the spokeswoman said.

Well, yes, there is “evidence that Fed systems were compromised” because $100 million was stolen from Bangladesh and the money ended up in Philippine casinos. 

Muhith plans to seek legal recourse to recover the funds, although it wasn’t immediately clear who he’ll target, the “Chinese” hackers, the Philippine black market FX brokers, or Bill Dudley. 

In any event, the Fed is sticking with its story. There was no “penetration.” 

“To date, there is no evidence of any attempt to penetrate Federal Reserve systems.” 

*  *  *

From Bangladesh Bank’s statement

It has been possible to recover a portion of the amount ‘hacked’ from Bangladesh Bank’s reserve account in the United States.

Bangladesh Financial Intelligence Unit is engaged with the Philippines’ anti-money laundering authority to trace the destination of the remaining amount and recover the same.

In the meantime, the Philippines’ anti-money-laundering authority filed case in that country and obtained court order to freeze the concerned bank accounts.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/24QJZOl Tyler Durden

The 30-Year Line In The (Oil) Sand

Via Dana Lyons' Tumblr,

The current test of a 30-year trendline could determine whether or not the bounce in oil stocks is sustainable.

What do all the inquiring minds want to know right now? Is the bounce in energy stocks for real? Analysts, pundits, gurus, oil tycoons and social media macro tourists all have an opinion on whether oil and oil stocks have bottomed and are on their way to boomtown again…or are in the midst of a dead-cat bounce, destined for the dusty plains of new lows. While they’re busy pouring over economic data out of China, storage reports and rig counts, parsing words out of OPEC and handicapping the U.S. presidential race for clues, we wonder, what if it merely comes down to a single line drawn on a chart?

Ah, technical analysis…we can hear the groans, not to mention the “simpleton” and “voodoo” callouts. Whatever. Drawing lines on a chart may have its flaws and drawbacks. But, I know 2 things for sure: 1) it can help objectively define the price at which one is right or, importantly, wrong on a position and 2) it is vastly more accurate than the litany of variables above. Especially if one has the correct line. And we think we have a good one, as it pertains to oil stocks.

Using a log scale chart of the most popular oil stock index, the NYSE Oil & Gas Index, better known as the XOI, we note an up-sloping trendline that has been intact for almost its entire existence. The trendline precisely connects the lows in July 1986, January-March 2009 and August-December 2015. On January 6 (remember that date?), the XOI broke the trendline for the first time, subsequently falling another 15% into the January 20 low (remember that date?).

Since then, the XOI has bounced all the way back and is presently testing that breakdown area.

image

 

If the XOI can reclaim that broken trendline, perhaps it can once again serve as support for the oil stock index as it did for 30 years. Not to mention, it would look like a compelling “false breakdown”. These factors could serve as a springboard to a major, sustainable rally in oil stocks.

Of course, should it fail here, it would confirm the January breakdown and further cement the trendline as new found resistance. It would then need to search for a new price catalyst to spark a rally, a difficult prospect when prices are probing 6-year lows.

If you have a difficult time with the concept that prices could have “memory” going back 30 years (btw, ask Exxon Mobil investors what happened once the stock broke its 30-year trendline back in June), well, the XOI is also dealing with some potential resistance levels on a shorter-term basis. Besides the January breakdown point (which occurred at the 30-year trendline), there is a close confluence of Fibonaccii Retracement lines from recent highs, specifically:

  • the 23.6% Fibonacci Retracement of 2014-2016 decline
  • the 38.2% Fibonacci Retracement of April-January decline
  • the 61.8% Fibonacci Retracement of November-January decline

 

image

 

It is not shown on this chart, but the XOI did pull back from this area by more than 4% today. So, whether one thinks of this analysis as voodoo or over-simplified or whatever, there are some chart lines that it just may pay to keep in mind – literally.

This 30-year line in the sand for oil stocks is one of them.

*  *  *

More from Dana Lyons, JLFMI and My401kPro.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1USwx88 Tyler Durden

On The Seven Year Anniversary Of “The Most Hated Bull Market Ever” – How We Got Here

As most financial media will remind you, today is the 7 year anniversary of the market’s lows hit on March 9, 2009, a day when the Wall Street Journal wondered “How low can stocks go”, which took less than a week after Obama said on March 3 that what you’re now seeing is profit-and-earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you’ve got a long-term perspective on it” (sic) and just days before the Fed officially launched its expanded QE1 asset purchasing program.

What took place since then has been the most remarkable, central-bank supported rally of risk assets in history, with the S&P rising some 200% to hit all time highs around 2,100 just one year ago, and restoring $14 trillion to stock values. In fact, the move since March 9, 2009 is now the third longest bullmarket in history, and just days away from being the second longest rally on record.

 

Now, as Bloomberg writes, “investors are awash in angst, showing little faith the run can continue. They worry about contracting corporate earnings, slowing Chinese growth and uncertainty over interest rates. And they’re walking the talk by pulling cash from stocks at almost the fastest rate on record. It’s not unwarranted – the S&P 500 has gained just 0.5 percent in the last 18 months.”

 

What Bloomberg is confused by is that despite this unprecedented rally, after a brief period of inflows in 2013 and 2014, investors have been pulling money out of stocks at a record pace, leading not only Bloomberg but many others to dub the move in the market as the “most-hated rally ever.” What Bloomberg fails to note is that as everyone else has been selling, corporations have unleashed the biggest debt-funded stock buyback spree in history, providing the natural offset to wholesale selling by virtually everyone else, and allowing the market to barely dip over the past year.

 

To be sure, what happens next is unknown; yesterday Jeff Gundlach said that at this point the most recent bear market rally, which has taken the S&P 10% from its recent lows, is over and the risk/return profile is abysmal, offering 10 points of downside for every 1 points of upside, and concluding his presentation by saying “I think we are near the end of a bear market rally with a 10:1 risk/reward ratio.”

Bloomberg promptly took the other side, and argued that just because the rally is hated, and the “wall of worry” is growing, the next big move is likely to the upside. To wit:

[W]hen people withdraw money, stocks inversely tend to rise later, according to data since 1984. In the 12 instances when funds experienced monthly outflows that were at least 2 standard deviations from the historic mean, the S&P 500 rose an average 7.1 percent six months later, compared with a normal return of 3.9 percent, data compiled by Bloomberg and Investment Company Institute show.

 

[Once] things start to turn around, bears will be forced to buy. From Feb. 11 through Monday, a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. index of the most-shorted companies outperformed the S&P 500 by almost 16 percentage points, the most in data going back to 2008.

That, too, is nothing new. Back in 2013 we said that in a manipulated market, the only way to generate alpha is to do the opposite of what everyone else is doing in “Presenting The Best Trading Strategy Over The Past Year: Why Buying The Most Hated Names Continues To Generate “Alpha” something which Morgan Stanley confirmed earlier this week when its equity strategist Adam Parker said “When You Think Of Something, Do The Opposite” according to whom the S&P500 is nothing more than a “bizarro market.”

Whether it is the “most hated rally” or merely the “most bizarro market ever”, one thing is clear: Bloomberg is eager to put as much lipstick on it as possible. After all, the “wealth effect” only works if everyone still has faith in central banks’ abilities, a faith clause which over the past 6 months has been severely tested. And there is only so much more debt corporations can incur to buyback their own stocks. This is what Bloomberg says:

Wall Street strategists see the bull market lasting at least through December, with the S&P 500 rising to 2,158, or an 9 percent increase from yesterday’s close, according to the average of 21 estimates compiled by Bloomberg. If the run lasts until the end of April, this bull will become the second oldest on record. Coincidentally or not, the last two ended near the eighth year of an election cycle.

It concludes with what is certainly “the biggest cliche ever”:

Tom Mangan, senior vice president of James Investment Research in Xenia, Ohio, which oversees about $6.5 billion, isn’t ready to throw in the towel. “There are too many bears versus bulls and there is too much cash on the sidelines,” he said. “That means the market can do better.

Whether there is a bubble in pessimism, or merely too much money on the sidelines, it will be up to central banks to resolve the core dilemma of which way the market goes from here, starting with the ECB as soon as tomorrow morning.

* * *

So While we wait for the conclusion, here is Deutsche Bank’s Jim reid with a summary of just how we got here.

It’s 7 years today since the S&P 500 hit it’s post GFC lows (and lowest since 1996) and it’s a year ago today that the ECB started QE. At the end today we go through a performance review of global cross asset returns since these two points. The graphs are also in the pdf in local currency and dollar terms.

7 year anniversary performance review:

Looking first at returns since the market bottom on March 9th 2009, unsurprisingly most assets have performed very well given the extraordinary stimulus thrown at markets by central bankers. In local currency terms the Micex (Russia) is the top performer (+253%), followed by the S&P 500 (+239%), Stoxx 600 (+176%) and the Nikkei (+170%). EU HY is the best FI instrument (+166%). In USD terms however, we see many assets lose ground – such as the STOXX and the Nikkei that surrender nearly one-fifth of their respective local currency gains as EUR and JPY were weaker during this period. However, this FX impact is most apparent in the case of Russian stocks, which gave up over 175% of cumulative local currency gains following the Ruble’s depreciation. So the S&P 500 takes poll position in dollar terms. The negative end of the performance spectrum is sparsely populated and dominated by the commodities complex. Oil is the worst performing commodity (-23%) and 2nd worst asset in the study, while agricultural commodities also lost big but Greek equities (-56% local, – 61% USD) are by far the standout loser. Brazilian equities (-15% USD, +34% local) join Greek equities and commodities near the bottom when dollar adjusted.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/24QD47J Tyler Durden

Behind The Trump/Sanders “Revolution”: Angry White Men

If the establishment had its way, America would be no country for angry white men. As WSJ reports, Tuesday’s primary elections underscored an emerging, central reality of the 2016 presidential campaign: This is the year of the dissatisfied white male.

Those white males are the voters who propelled Donald Trump to convincing victories Tuesday in Michigan and Mississippi, as they have elsewhere. And, as The Wall Street Journal reports, they may determine whether he can roll on next week in a series of big industrial states.

Here’s what is less noticed: Dissatisfied white males also helped propel Sen. Bernie Sanders to a stunning victory over Hillary Clinton in the Democratic contest in Michigan, and may keep him in the game for many weeks to come.

 

All of this further suggests they may be the swing voters who decide the general election in November, when the critical question could well be whether Democrats can win enough of them to supplement their big advantages among women and minority voters.

 

In Michigan, 52% of the Republican primary electorate was male, exit polls indicated. Mr. Trump won them going away, 43% to 23% for Ohio Gov. John Kasich. Meantime, he lost among women, 30% for Sen. Ted Cruz to 28% for Mr. Trump.

 

The story was similar in Mississippi. Mr. Trump won men by 20 percentage points, exit polls indicated. There, he won women, but by a mere 9 percentage points.

So, the more male the Republican electorate, the better for Mr. Trump. Also, the angrier as well.

Perhaps more interesting, angry white males are sustaining the Sanders campaign, not just the Trump campaign.

In Michigan, they kept him nearly even with Mrs. Clinton, offsetting her big advantage among women and among minorities. Among women, exit polls indicate, he finished just behind Mrs. Clinton. But among men, he won easily, 54% to 44%.

Together, in other words, Messrs. Trump and Sanders are collapsing what had become, in the 1990s, something of a bipartisan consensus in favor of free trade. And angry white males, many of whom feel trade has marginalized their jobs and prospects, are leading the way.

And perhaps white American men have good reason to be 'angry' after all:

 

All of this sets up a fascinating battle in the fall. In a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, Mrs. Clinton beats Mr. Trump in a hypothetical general-election matchup, 51% to 38%. But among white men? He wins comfortably, 53% to 35%.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1RRg5SZ Tyler Durden

Cheap Oil, The U.S. Dollar & The Deep State

Submitted by Charles Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

All this is to suggest that those expecting a major weakening in the USD to push oil higher shouldn't hold their breath awaiting this outcome.

That oil fell off a cliff once the U.S. dollar (USD) began its liftoff in mid-2014 is, well, interesting. Causation, correlation or coincidence? There are a variety of opinions on this, as there should be. What we do know is the soaring USD blew up a bunch of carry trades that borrowed money denominated in USD and invested the cash in emerging markets paying much higher yields. Here's WTIC oil:

And here's the USD Index:

We also know the Saudis announced that the kingdom would pump every barrel it could "to maintain market share," which is generally understood to mean crush competitors such as Russia and U.S. shale producers.

We also know that storage facilities are almost full up (Oil Fundamentals Could Cause Oil Prices To Fall, Fast!).

We also know that global growth is slowing, so demand could weaken sharply going forward.

And lastly, we know that many oil exporters are heavily dependent on oil revenues to fund their oligarchy/monarchy/ruling elites, their military and their vast social welfare programs, which keep the restive masses from overthrowing the oligarchy, etc.

Here is the U.S., heavily indebted producers must pump or die, as they need every dime of revenue to service their vast debts.

If we add all this up– carry trades blowing up, weakening demand and heavy pressures to maintain production–we get a perfect set-up for a continued decline in oil.

Many observers are expecting the Federal Reserve to pull out all the stops to weaken the dollar. They think this because a strong dollar hurts U.S. exports. If oil and the USD are indeed correlated, a weaker dollar would trigger a boost in oil prices–a welcome "saved by the bell" for indebted U.S. producers, and the bankers who lent tens of billions of dollars to them.

If you glance at the above chart of the dollar index, you'll note the Bollinger Bands are tightening. This usually presages a big move up or down. We don't know which way the USD will move, but since it's in a Bull market, we might surmise the move will be a continuation of the current trend, i.e. up.

Technically, a 20% gain to the 120 level would be quite typical of a long-term uptrend.

What would an additional 20% gain in the USD do to oil? If the correlation holds (and perhaps it won't–there are no guarantees), it would very likely crush oil to new and breathtaking lows. Analyst Art Berman recently suggested a target of $16.50/barrel, and this corresponds rather neatly with USD at 120 (a 20% gain).

Lower oil prices are not an unalloyed "win" for the U.S. The U.S. energy sector is getting pummeled, and soon its lenders will start booking staggering losses. The decline in petrodollars also means there is less demand for U.S. Treasuries from oil exporters.

Enter the U.S. Deep State, which is only marginally interested in Wall Street bankers' losses or petrodollar recycling into Treasuries. Global hegemony ultimately rests on issuing the reserve currency in size, and the sheer magnitude of financial resources that can be brought to bear to do what is viewed as necessary.

The collapse in oil has led to an unprecedented transfer of wealth from producers to consumers. Oil exporters (the number of which is diminishing, as populations and domestic consumption levels soar throughout the oil-producing world) have far fewer USD to spend on military adventures, social welfare, the tallest buildings in the world, and so on.

If global bankers wise up (and they are smart gals/guys), lending to oil producers is about to dry up like the proverbial mist in Death Valley. Why loan money to someone with $35/barrel oil in the ground if oil is heading to $20 or lower?

Who goes broke/goes home/is overthrown at sustained $20/barrel oil? You can make your own list, but it pretty much includes every oil exporter.

So who wins in a scenario in which the USD gains another 20% and pins oil to new, sustained lows? Consumers, of course, but as Zero Hedge and others have explained, this windfall isn't leading to robust consumer spending. Rather, households are saving the proceeds, hunkering down in the recessionary winds they see rising.

The U.S. oil sector will take some serious lumps, along with every other producer. We can anticipate huge writedowns of uncollectible debt, bankruptcies, and all the other collateral damage (pun intended) of a bust.

But who is left relatively unscathed in terms of financial power and hegemony? The U.S. Should the USD soar another 20%, China would be forced to devalue its currency, causing massive capital flows out of China and an immediate loss of trillions of dollars of purchasing power for all who hold yuan/RMB. Not much of a win there.

All this is to suggest that those expecting a major weakening in the USD to push oil higher shouldn't hold their breath awaiting this outcome. Maybe the USD will weaken 20%, but why would it do so when every other central bank is weakening its currency? Wouldn't it make much more sense to drain wealth and geopolitical leverage from oil exporters?


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1W8EqEQ Tyler Durden

“Output Freeze A Joke”, China Demand To Fall, And Other News That Should Be Moving Oil

In this bipolar market, where only momentum, liquidity, technicals and short squeezes matter, as well as the occasional kneejerk reaction to a flashing red headline (usually some lie out of Venezuela or Nigeria about an imminent OPEC meeting which has not even been scheduled), one thing that no longer seems to have an impact on prices is actual news and fundamentals. So to help those who are blindly following the price of oil as an indicator of what is happening, here is a brief recap of the main news and research reports that should be impacting where oil trades today, but almost certainly won’t.

Among today’s key highlights compiled by Bloomberg we learn that JBC Energy doesn’t expect China to maintain record crude imports seen in Feb. as refinery maintenance, elevated storage impact. FGE says proposed producer accord to freeze output a “joke”, while Deutsche Bank says “fading oil demand may hamper price recovery.”

Here are the top stories via Bloomberg:

JBC Energy

  • China probably can’t maintain Feb.’s record crude imports amid refinery maintenance, storage capacity limitations
  • Feb. imports likely were boosted by “continued weakness in outright prices,” higher crude runs at teapot refineries

Facts Global Energy chairman Fereidun Fesharaki

  • Deal to cap crude output at record “a joke”; production freeze is “nonsense”
  • Libya can boost output to 1.2m b/d, taking prices down to $20/bbl

CNPC Chairman Wang Yilin

  • Current $30-40/bbl oil price not sustainable; $50-60 a “reasonable” range
  • Co. drafting development plans for long-term low oil price environment

Bloomberg story

  • Oil producers slow to add hedges as they wait for higher prices
  • As prices continue to rise, “we should see producer hedging accelerate,” says BNP Paribas head of commodity markets strategy Harry Tchilinguirian

Eurasia Group global energy, natural resources director Bruno Stanziale

  • Oil at $50 will bring U.S. producers back to mkt
  • Oil prices to see “gradual” rise to around $40/bbl by yr-end, avg. $50/bbl in 2017; price “volatility will dry up”

Institute for Energy Research

  • U.S. shale oil boom makes renewable fuels standard obsolete, helped to reduce dependence on imports

JBC Energy

  • European gasoline cracks to see further upside in coming wks on higher U.S. consumer demand
  • Increased gasoline imports by Nigeria may be supporting Mediterranean market

Deutsche Bank report

  • Fading Chinese oil demand may hamper price recovery
  • Chinese fuel consumption “may begin to flatten more quickly than some long-term projections indicate.” This could reduce global oil demand growth to 800k b/d by 2024, compared w/ 1.1m b/d from 2000-2016

ESAI report

  • Libyan production will not recover as “the ongoing civil war and the rise of ISIS in Libya will carry on for years”: Boston-based consultant

* * *

And now back to your liquidity/squeeze driven melt up/down.


via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1QGCCCY Tyler Durden