I'm so tired of reading references to an oil "price war" between Russia and Saudi Arabia. There has never been any such price war. What there actually was was simply a disagreement amongst OPEC+ as to best strategy for dealing with global oversupply (continued).
Saudi Arabia believed OPEC+ should cut production to reduce global oversupply. Russia believed this would merely encourage more shale production and would thus be futile long term, and believed high-cost marginal US shale producers needed to bear the burden of supply adjustment.
This disagreement has been ongoing for several years, and continued early into the pandemic. However, after it became apparent how severe the near term demand impact would be from covid-19, Russia acknowledged a need for output reductions given the extraordinary circumstances.
Pandemic aside, I think Russia is in the right. There is little point reducing supply to support prices at US$60-70/bbl if the outcome is merely more shale barrels, which was the case prior to covid-19. Russia's view is long term, while Saudi's view is more short term.
What it isn't is a price war. Neither Russia nor Saudi Arabia want low oil prices, or to take market share off each other. It's simply a disagreement about the best practical course given prevailing circumstances and their inability to control US shale supply.
Anyone that refers to a "price war" between Saudi Arabia & Russia therefore doesn't know what they are talking about.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Lyall Taylor

Lyall Taylor Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LT3000Lyall

7 May
Afterpay & its cheerleaders love to highlight that BNPL increases merchant sales.

The reality is that whenever consumers increase their aggregate debt levels, whether by CC, BNPL, or other means, merchant sales increase. But consumers' leveraging up is not a sustainable boost. Image
If you give someone access to $500 in credit they didn't previously have, and they go and spend it, their spending will of course increase by $500 in the short term. However, they have to pay the $500 back, so it will reduce their future consumption. It simply pulls sales forward
The only other way in which it can boosts merchant sales is if they take market share off other merchants that don't offer APT. This cannibalistic benefit will only last as long as BNPL is not widely available. 100s of coys now offer BNPL services and that point won't take long.
Read 9 tweets
6 May
There are two aspects to investing: return and risk.

After a long bull market investors tend to forget about risk & focus only on return. This one a key reason why value investing tends to go out of favour, because value investing places a lot of emphasis on risk reduction.
An emphasis on a margin of safety, scrupulously avoiding overpayment, and being humble/realistic about the degree to which you can foresee the future, seems unduly conservative during boom times.
However, when the shit eventually hits the fan, which given enough time it always does, certain stocks & investors loaded up in them can see losses of 50-90%, and investors are reminded about the importance of risk. Value investing tends to then come back in vogue.
Read 8 tweets
6 May
Great research on NEA.

This is why for most companies, profits are important. Profits validate the narrative management is spinning - they prove the coy has a product customers are willing to pay for in a competitive marketplace, that is priced above the cost of provisioning it.
Anyone can grow a company by throwing money around and signing on customers at a loss, hoping to upsell them later. It's called buying market share. It's as old as capitalism. Only in rare situations is profitless growth a sign anything of genuine value is being created/exists.
If you're willing to lose more money than your competitors, you will grow/take share. But it's not a sustainable competitive advantage to have price < cost. It's a fake competitive advantage that leads to fake/false price signals in the marketplace.
Read 4 tweets
6 May
Afterpay traded sub $100 today, almost 40% off its highs. The APT gif brigade seems to have vanished.

Valuation still in loon down. While label solutions offered by merchants will crush margins long term. ADS is one company offering this functionality to merchants (long ADS).
"I'd like to pay with APT"

"Did you know our membership card can offer you the same BNPL terms, but you get free points you can redeem for 1% off your next purchase".

"Ok cool that works too".

BNPL is just rebranded POS consumer finance. Will be rapidly commoditized.
Merchants have every incentive to switch to offering white labeled solutions. They save on 4-7% merchant fee charged by APT; control the data collection on their customers; and share in the financing economics. They will still offer external BNPL but steer customers off it.
Read 4 tweets
5 May
The world's total wind resources are 100TWy/y. Harvesting 100% of it would require we stop all wind blowing on earth (converting it to rotating wind blades) - not remotely possible. Global energy use is currently 19TWy/y, and will likely double in the next 30-50yrs.
You can therefore forget powering the world's economy purely with wind. Hydro resources are limited to 3.5 TWy/y, and are mostly already exploited. Anyone that suggests tidal as a possible solution - at just 0.3 TWy/y - knows laughably little about energy economics.
Energy resources across fossil fuels & uranium above are understated as they are only currently known/proved reserves & resources. We will find a lot more if and when there is a need and financial incentive to do so. But they will eventually run out/EROI will fall below 1x.
Read 8 tweets
2 May
How many people have given any thought to fact that credentialed climate scientists need climate change to be a thing to make a living.

For them to believe otherwise would be like a psychologist arguing there are no psychological disorders and hence no need for psychologists.
They have already self-selected into a profession - presumably because they are already environmentally conscious - and already have huge sunk costs in terms of their selected career path. They are pre-committed to a designated conclusion irrespective of the facts & evidence.
Stop being cowed by degrees. Anyone can get a degree. It really isn't very difficult. It doesn't mean you are right. It doesn't mean you're not emotional, political, or biased. Quality varies. Scientists argue with each other. Learn some science and it will demystify it for you.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(