• 6 minutes Saudis Threaten Retaliation If Sanctions are Imposed
  • 11 minutes Can the World Survive without Saudi Oil?
  • 15 minutes Saudis Pull Hyperloop Funding As Branson Temporarily Cuts Ties With The Kingdom
  • 6 mins WTI @ $75.75, headed for $64 - 67
  • 2 hours Trump vs. MbS
  • 3 hours Saudi-Kuwaiti Talks on Shared Oil Stall Over Chevron
  • 7 hours The Dirt on Clean Electric Cars
  • 13 hours Uber IPO Proposals Value Company at $120 Billion
  • 4 hours Closing the circle around Saudi Arabia: Where did Khashoggi disappear?
  • 2 hours EU to Splash Billions on Battery Factories
  • 17 hours COLORADO FOCUS: Stocks to Watch Prior to Midterms
  • 14 hours U.N. About Climate Change: World Must Take 'Unprecedented' Steps To Avert Worst Effects
  • 8 hours Coal remains a major source of power in Europe.
  • 4 hours Poland signs 20-year deal on U.S. LNG supplies
  • 20 hours UN Report Suggests USD $240 Per Gallon Gasoline Tax to Fight Global Warming
  • 16 hours Nopec Sherman act legislation
Alt Text

Oil Prices Subdued, But For How Long?

Oil prices may have closed…

Alt Text

Oil Experts Divided As Iran Sanctions Loom

The world’s top oil trading…

Alt Text

Egypt Feels The Squeeze Of Higher Oil Prices

Egypt has just realized one…

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham

Nick Cunningham is a freelance writer on oil and gas, renewable energy, climate change, energy policy and geopolitics. He is based in Pittsburgh, PA.

More Info

Trending Discussions

Citi: Prepare For An OPEC Disappointment

OPEC

A week out from the OPEC meeting, everyone is assuming a rollover of the production cuts for an additional nine months will be a simple formality, putting the limits in place until the end of 2018. But what if such a scenario fails to materialize? What if the cuts are for a shorter duration, or perhaps worse, there is no consensus at all?

Russia is likely to be the key to this puzzle, and there are reports that Russian officials are not convinced that any action is needed at this time. They argue that it is too early to announce anything, and that the OPEC/non-OPEC alliance should just wait until the expiration of the current agreement (March 2018) draws closer.

That would not be a satisfactory outcome for the vast majority of oil speculators (or for other oil producers around the world), who have baked an extension into their assumptions. Record bullish bets expose the oil market to a steep selloff should OPEC and its non-OPEC partners falter.

“There is an exuberance in the market about there being a done deal to extend through the end of 2018 and I think there’s likely to be disappointment in that come Nov. 30,” Ed Morse, head of commodities research at Citigroup, told Bloomberg earlier this month. “Our base case is that we do not get a full-year extension on Nov. 30.”

Citi says it’s possible the group only extends through June 2018, which would line up with the next official OPEC meeting. Another possible scenario is simply waiting until January or February 2018 before making a decision on an extension, which sounds close to what some Russian officials are supporting. For what it’s worth, two months ago, Russia’s energy minister Alexander Novak said “that January is the earliest date when we can actually, credibly speak about the state of the market.”

Citi predicts that the production limits will eventually be extended through the end of 2018, but it will be done in a series of announcements rather than all at once next week.

Related: WTI Prices Surge On Keystone Spill

If the group doesn’t extend through 2018 at the upcoming meeting, it is hard to see any other outcome than a sharp drop in oil prices. “There’s a short-term possibility of a selloff,” Citigroup’s Morse said.

But Citi isn’t alone. A few weeks ago there seemed to be a consensus among oil analysts that the extension was essentially a done deal. Citi voiced skepticism, but more recently others have come around to that position as well. Hesitation from Moscow seems to be eroding confidence in the prospect of an extension.

Last week, Macro-Advisory made a case for why Russia should balk at an extension. At first blush, rejecting an extension that causes a selloff in oil prices seems like a “crazy position to take,” but it might actually make “perfect sense,” according to Chris Weafer, senior partner at Macro-Advisory. That is because Russia can make money with oil prices in the mid-$50s, a price level that is satisfactory while also low enough to keep U.S. shale from roaring back. Anything in the $60-$65 per barrel range would make Russian support for an extension “very unlikely,” Weafer argued. Brent has been trading in that range since the beginning of November.

"The higher the price of oil then raises the risk of more investment into, for example, U.S. shale and Canadian Sands projects, which, as was seen in 2014, risks a big increase in global supply," Weafer said in a research note originally published in an article for The Moscow Times. Weafer argues that if Russia backed an extension, it could merely sow the seeds of another price downturn.

Citi echoed that, making the case that “the math is indicating Russia should let the OPEC+ agreement expire,” as higher production would make up for lower prices.

Related: Tesla Completes World’s Largest Battery

Weafer of Macro-Advisory also said rejecting an extension would help Russia diversify its economy away from oil, a long-term argument that may not carry a ton of weight as Russian officials head to Vienna next week. More important are fiscal balances in the near-term, as well as the Russian presidential election early next year. Nevertheless, balking at an extension would carry benefits to Russia, Weafer argues, much more so than for the OPEC countries.

"All of this compares a lot more favorably with the typical OPEC-country model and are powerful reasons why Moscow is today more comfortable with a sustainable price in the $50s than closer to the mid-$60s," he wrote.

With all of that said, these estimates and calculations calling for Russia to reject an extension come from a bunch of economists. If anything can be concluded from the actions of Vladimir Putin over the past few years, it is that simple economic calculations are not necessarily the top priority in the Kremlin. Russia has a growing geopolitical relationship with Saudi Arabia, as Bloomberg Gadfly notes, as well as increasing influence in the Middle East. These facts probably carry a lot more weight than the fiscal tradeoff between supporting or rejecting an extension of the OPEC deal.

In that context, as Putin looks to extend his reach into the Middle East, the odds are that Russia signs onto an extension.

By Nick Cunningham of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:


x


Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • Louis Winthorpe IV on November 26 2017 said:
    Who cares what Citi thinks, the only way Citi makes money on oil is to create panic in the energy markets so their ETF's volume is high. Some people say Citi was highly responsible for the housing market crash in 2005 when they were loaning money to unqualified people for mortgages, they skipped the title search or used online title search companies based in India to cut costs. Citi has as much credibility as a Used car salesman in my opinion.
  • firstsight on November 26 2017 said:
    Simple maths indicates the Russians would favour extending the cuts. The Russian 300,000 bpd cut, if restored, would be $12M pd if oil drops back to $40 which is the price Russia has budgeted at. Conversely, if the cuts r extended n oil remains at $60, that's an extra $110M pd on exports of 5.5M bpd compared to oil at $40. The Russians don't really care if US shale comes back. That was the Saudis with their plan to kill US shale previously. Both Russia n the Saudis need the money now urgently, and that's why they will do anything to support the oil price. The loss from cuts r nothing compared to the money recvd from a strong oil price.
  • firstsight on November 26 2017 said:
    Simple maths indicates the Russians would favour extending the cuts. The Russian 300,000 bpd cut, if restored, would be $12M pd if oil drops back to $40 which is the price Russia has budgeted at. Conversely, if the cuts r extended n oil remains at $60, that's an extra $110M pd on exports of 5.5M bpd compared to oil at $40. The Russians don't really care if US shale comes back. That was the Saudis with their plan to kill US shale previously. Both Russia n the Saudis need the money now urgently, and that's why they will do anything to support the oil price. The loss from cuts r nothing compared to the money recvd from a strong oil price.
  • citymoments on November 27 2017 said:
    If you can sell your commodity for a higher price, it is absurd to assume it is wise and more fiscally profitable to sell it at a lower price.
  • SS on November 27 2017 said:
    This is simple for russia as firstsight indicated. Would the cut cost them more than the increased price. What they'll lose on the cut in production they will more than make up for with an inflated market.

    With the IPO coming up, Saudi will do anything to keep this trend going.
  • Steven J. on November 30 2017 said:
    Good buying opportunity. 90 percent of oil producing countries wants and need oil prices higher. Wonder what's keeping it down, that is not hard to figure out.
  • Huh on November 30 2017 said:
    Great prediction by Citi... what a huge disappointment today.

    Ed Morse should follow up now. Love to hear what he found wrong with the OPEC deal, I'm sure there's something.
  • Clay Aldridge on December 01 2017 said:
    I would be shocked if Citi's "predictions" on the oil market were more than 50% correct. They predict what they need to happen to make them the most money.

    Up or Down ... only Saudia Arabia and Putin really know. Everything else is either a guess or pure agenda posturing.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News