/biz/ - Business & Finance

[/tsg/ tanker stock general No.19134154]

>Highlighted links
https://pastebin.com/yQQiZcTL
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4343722-talking-tanker-trade-podcast
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4347044-opportunities-in-tankers-interview-praetorian-capital

> Tanker education
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/012316/crude-tankers-business-transporting-oil.asp
https://lawexplores.com/the-tanker-market-current-structure-and-economic-analysis/
https://www.mckinseyenergyinsights.com/resources/refinery-reference-desk/tanker/
https://www.euro-maritime.com/index.php/navigator?id=3080

>Maritime news
https://lloydslist.maritimeintelligence.informa.com/
https://www.marinevesseltraffic.com/2013/02/tanker-track.html
https://www.freightwaves.com/american-shipper
https://shipbrief.com/
http://www.crweber.com/ (no https)
https://pastebin.com/HpGZm3dG

>Companies
https://pastebin.com/TnN1aeQz

>Oil news
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.php (look at that V, lol)
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/commodities/oil
https://www.rystadenergy.com/newsevents/
https://nhentai.net/tag/oil/

>Oil futures
https://www.investing.com/commodities/

>Past earnings reports (alphabetical)
ASC: EST EPS $0.14, actual $0.20.
DHT: EST EPS $0.54, actual is $0.44 (divvy of $0.35).
EURN: EST EPS $0.86, actual $1.05 (divvy of $1.10).
INSW: EST EPS $1.45, actual $1.49.
NNA: EST EPS $0.00, actual $0.94.
OSG: EST EPS N/A (Q4, 2019 was $0.12)., actual $0.28.
STNG: EST EPS $0.49, actual $0.82.

> Earnings report(s) expected today
None. If I’m wrong, enlighten me.

> Upcoming earnings reports calendar
NAT on 5/18, not specified
SFL on 5/19, pre-market
TNK on 5/21, pre-market
FRO on 5/29, pre-market
TNP on 6/4, pre-market

>Another important date
May 19th, 2020 (you know why)
Keep an eye on the 14th, 15th, and 18th of May too.

[Anonymous No.19134178]

Previous dread:
>>19115781

[Anonymous No.19134189]

Comfy divvies and good returns will come to you, but only if you reply "HOLD ON SEA CAT" in this thread

[Anonymous No.19134296]

What if the supply cuts worked anons. What if they got enough storage on land and the demand destruction from corona is too great causing rates to crater...

Only thing going for us is theres huge incentive to cheat on OPEC cuts and increasing price of WTI means more production

[Anonymous No.19134419]

>>19134296
We'll have to wait until May 19th to see the real impact. I still don't think they'll be handle to manage this oversupply.

[Anonymous No.19134543]

>>19134296
they didn't. Refineries can't handle all this crude, the lag time on production cuts is too much. This entire oil rally is fueled by hopium, there will be a tumble. They still have 86 million barrels to close by Tuesday, even if they manage to get it down to 20 million barrels no one is taking that delivery.

[Anonymous No.19134935]

>>19134543
>>19134419
I hope so. Then uso still needs to roll contracts which will depress price. But after that I might be out of these seas depending on what spot rates look like.

[Anonymous No.19134952]

>>19134543
Just imagine if all the bag holders this month are new money who believe they got in at the bottom and anyone who actually CAN take delivery got out so they could wait to get paid to take oil from the morons who all piled in this month...

And if sellers decide to take advantage of prices that won't come again for quite a while so a huge amount of them insist on fulfilling the contracts...

[Anonymous No.19135186]

>>19134952
Futures traders aren't that stupid, if you are trading a commodity you probably have a lot of knowledge on it or at least know what you're doing. Last month was a direct result of the USO pile in. (almost 80 million barrels more worth of contracts existed before expiration)

The general consensus is that everyone tried shorting the June contracts which led to a squeeze and a loss for money shorts.

Regardless, there are still tons of positions to close and nobody is accounting the OPEC and gasoline consumption lag time . Everyone thinks that they can just cut all the oil they're producing and that's that, which just isn't the case. There are so many different forces that should be driving price lower, I just don't understand how the market is handling it.

I know that something has to change this week, I'm just not sure what it is. Under garden variety conditions we see a drop in oil prices, however this market is anything but normal. Maybe it's a huge rollover and July prices get supressed into infinity? Contango 2?

[Anonymous No.19136180]

>>19135186
You think they'll just kick the can down the road? Would that even work? If a supplier has a contract that says almost $30 on it can't they just say YOU'RE TAKING THIS SHIT.

[Anonymous No.19136256]

Looks like a lot of open interest at this point. If even 10% of this gets filled that's 5m barrels with nowhere to put it.

[Anonymous No.19136263]

>>19134189
HOLD ON SEA CAT

[Anonymous No.19136274]

>>19136256
Also looks like people are already abandoning July before it's even started to trade. Is that typical?

[Anonymous No.19136892]

https://twitter.com/nyfex/status/1261654523845771264?s=21

ah shit the doomers were right

[Anonymous No.19136934]

>>19136892
https://twitter.com/aeberman12/status/1261285238405283840

Always conflicting reports in this sector, you just have to look at all information and make up your own mind. Long tankers for me.

[Anonymous No.19137008]

>>19136934
Why long? They’re not exactly a growth industry and I don’t have enough money to make dividends worthwhile. Should I just get out and move on?

[Anonymous No.19137029]

>>19137008
I'd wait until june to see what happens. May 19th will help make things more clear. These tankers are going to have better earning q2 and some already confirmed q3.

[Anonymous No.19137140]

>>19137029
If May 19 is no help wouldn’t I just lose more money from another sell off? Earnings didn’t do anything last time and it was already known Q2 would be fantastic.

[Anonymous No.19137189]

>>19137008

I like how they have an artificial bottom in their prices due to the age of tanker fleets reaching a critical point post 2020 where if rates drop below a profitable point, the upkeep for old tankers becomes too costly and tankers start getting scrapped. Essentially, supply destruction in an already tight market that's not going anywhere. Supply creation as well takes forever and this imbalance can choke rates at a high level until supply very slowly returns. Whatever happens in the long run, we'll still need to export oil around the world for the next 20 years; Tankers are not inverse oil in a Long position.

The increasing trade war tension and possibility of Cosco sanctions has me licking my lips. It caused a massive spike in rates and valuations last year. I also like how much debt has been payed down due to current oil situation's cashflow. World goes to shit, tankers have a shield from insolvency.

I'm holding until June then will re-evaluate, if things don't look good I'll sell off half my position but go long EURN and STNG for at a 1-2 year hold. I'm confident I'll at least have multiple chances to sell at profit, but it's a patience game. Divs make the waiting easier. I like that if in theory these companies scrapped and sold eveything, I still get paid.

[Anonymous No.19137228]

>>19134189
HOLD ON SEA CAT

>>19134296
>People argue oil stays up due to high demand
>people argue oil stays up due to low demand and supply cuts
They need to pick one narrative please, people can't argue oil price should be higher due to demand while also arguing it should be higher due to supply cuts and low demand.

>>19135186
That is the thing though, this is about taking delivery right now. Who CAN take delivery for millions of 30 dollar a barrel oil this week? Who? because I sure as shit have no idea.

>>19136256
Holy moly. Remember, May's open interest that drove the price to negative 47....was 3500 going into the final day. Do we REALLY think that on Monday 50k+ orders are going to be filled and paid for at 30 DOLLARS A BARREL?! Either there is something enormous everyone is missing, or this will be a crash like we have never seen.

[Anonymous No.19137345]

>>19137228
https://www.wsj.com/articles/oil-demand-to-face-further-pressure-but-iea-sees-signs-of-recovery-11589445695

This article is really bad news on all fronts including storage and consumption.

[Anonymous No.19137596]

>>19137345
Not subscribing to read it all, but again, pick a narrative. People either have to argue for demand destruction, or for demand. For demand, you run into issues with storage as refineries are full and Cushing WOULD be full if they accepted the Saudi oil tanker deliveries already (which they are first in queue btw compared to anyone buying oil on the market, meaning storage is full right now even if demand outstrips supply and it is because of unaccepted oil deliveries....and it would be a very bad surprise for anyone buying oil on the market to find that out. If oil demand is high though...what oil is used first you think, newly bought, or stored up? Stored up. And if storage is full....the oil is worthless despite high demand. Furthermore in the future this causes backwardation which increases production as everything starts up to full making a ton of money which leads to oversupply again and a second contango, high volatility in supply and demand. If demand stays low on the other hand...well, price needs to go lower regardless but we might not have backwardation into continuing volatility. Oil would be stable in its badness rather than negative 100 one week and over 100 another.

Also in regards to your other comments, tankers are particularly attractive if you are a value investor. It isn't that they will "grow" (though they will in the sense of huge profits which some companies, such as DHT, will return 60%+ of to shareholders as policy), but the fact they are undervalued. Look at STNG. STNG is trading below 17, yet if it dissolved and sold all its assets shareholders would be entitled to over 32 dollars per share. A company making over 800% profits over the norm, rapidly deleveraging estimated 40% in Q2, and half the value of if it literally disappeared? Sign me up, market sentiment be damned. Price will correct eventually, will hold until it does for easy x2+.

[Anonymous No.19137703]

>>19137596
eh article is mostly shit we already know. Most relevant concrete facts are:

Last week, U.S. crude inventories declined for the first time in nearly three months, falling by 745,000 barrels, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said. The tally compared with expectations of a 4.1-million-barrel rise.

and

In April, the Saudi-led Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and 10 nations led by Russia agreed to collective production cuts of 9.7 million barrels a day to rebalance the oil market and mop up a swelling oversupply that threatened to overwhelm global storage capacity. The pact went into effect on May 1.

Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, has since accelerated its own efforts by curbing output to its lowest in almost two decades. The kingdom said this week that it would slash production this month to about 7.5 million barrels a day—1 million daily barrels less than it agreed to cut as part of the agreement.

The rest of the article is muh sentiment muh increased demand d/t people driving more and economy reopening

[Anonymous No.19137708]

>>19137345

Do you have full text? Here's a conflicting article.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-14/saudi-oil-rush-threatens-to-disrupt-stabilizing-u-s-oil-market

[Anonymous No.19137791]

>>19137596
http://archive.is/TFXB1

Here you go friend, it’s worth a read. It addresses most of your points including storage, demand, saudi arabia.

[Anonymous No.19137850]

>>19137708
see>>19137791

[Anonymous No.19138074]

>>19137850
Ty anon, perhaps you'll have to spell this out for me, but I don't see how the article addresses the logistical aspects of
>>19137596
that he was trying to make. Can you explain this?

As well, these cuts aren't as relevant for may as much as June, as 30 Saudi tankers are still crossing the ocean already. Point to where I'm mistaken if possible.

Also, the Wuhan data is extremely misleading in the article and has me questioning it's validity as a whole, as this is an area I do understand. Mass transportation is down, but overall transportation is down as seen here. https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/traffic-index/wuhan-traffic/

Rushhour vehicular transport is up, but overall transit has flatlined in between. This is because China has mandated work start again, but consumer behavior pattern remains very conservative, as highlighted by inbetween rushhour traffic, and as well Saturday and Sunday traffic being non existant. Remember, China exited lockdowns at least a month ahead of USA as well, so we can use this data to predict USA oil demand in the gasoline front will remain low. Pic related.

Pretty disappointed in WSJ for making that misleading point, it's a publication I trust usually.

[Anonymous No.19138273]

>>19137228
Eh, I actually wouldn't be surprised if OI drops to 10k on Sunday then to 3k on Monday, as we know Trump would do anything to save the oil market, and scooping up a couple thousand barrels into the SPR wouldn't hurt too bad.


Also, does anyone have historical OI for the May contracts? That may give us some perspective to the bigger picture.

[Anonymous No.19138310]

>>19138074
The point is that traffic has increased compared to the feb/march/april situation where it was at the lowest. Coupled with the drastic oil cuts outlined in the article means that supply and demand are scaling to a point where things aren’t deadlocked. No one is arguing we’re peak demand but that it’s increasing and will continue to do so and it’s reflected in prices.

[Anonymous No.19138352]

>>19138273
Um. 3k would be 3MILLION barrels, not 3,000 lol

Right now there's something like 60,000,000 in OI.

[Anonymous No.19138388]

>>19135186
>Futures traders aren't that stupid
Explain how we went negative in the first place.

They may not be that stupid but they sure as hell are that greedy and that's how things got fucked in the first place.

And all the oil producers are greedy as hell too and they all started right back up as soon as oil went to $25.

[Anonymous No.19138426]

>>19138310
But ofc that's the truth and nobody would argue against that, but it's incredibly misleading to say

>Chinese consumers also appear to be avoiding mass transportation. On Thursday morning, Wuhan, the original epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, had traffic congestion rates of 54%, compared with an average of 42% last year. In Beijing, congestion was 73%, versus 62% last year, according to Dutch location technology firm TomTom International BV.

While looking at their source at https://www.tomtom.com/en_gb/traffic-index/wuhan-traffic/

It's pointing at only the points in the chart that reinforce their argument without mentioning that the overall chart doesn't support that argument. A nuanced point can be fairly made with reference to the overall chart pattern, but no such point has been made. It's like looking at a chart of BTC and only looking at it's peaks; it tells you a part of the story but without the rest of the data being acknowledged it's not only not useful but incredibly misleading.

[Anonymous No.19138463]

>>19138352
I understand 1 contract is equal to 1,000 barrels of crude oil.

Obviously I wasn't being precise enough, to rephrase, I wouldn't be surprised if Donald scooped up *a couple million barrels (40 million to be exact)* into the SPR, and the rest went to exports, leaving the open interest for crude at 10k or so..

[Anonymous No.19138488]

>>19138388
Negative oil prices were a direct result of UCO and USO buying up front month contracts and rolling them over. Look at the difference between May contracts and June contracts on this graph.

[Anonymous No.19138830]

>>19138426

[Anonymous No.19138837]

>>19137791
>>19138074
>>19138310
I want to address this article now. Yes, demand is returning, yes, US oil storage saw a draw of 700k last week. However, let me address more. Article agrees that demand has recovered much less than normalcy. Furthermore, India has not yet even tried to return to normal. Chinese traffic data has been manipulated, and China is issuing mass testing as we speak to see if corona is re-spreading so they can contemplate (if it does) lockdown number 2. Our draw on Cushing right now is also due to not taking on the millions of barrels of Saudi oil sitting on our coast, which again is first in line and would be over capacity if fully accepted...which it is being accepted, just delayed by us. World supply went up by over 7 million the same week according to API report which is looking at more than just the US unlike the report your article cites (carefully see that it only addresses "US Crude Inventory").

In other words, our storage situation is worse in actuality despite the draw, and world storage has yet to see a decline. Your article does explain why SPECULATIVE prices would rise, however, in terms of barrels due for delivery it would not explain avoiding a repeat of May contracts since storage (which is the crux of price decrease) has in fact worsened and global demand (not US demand) has not risen nearly as much as US has...which is already lower than expected for US. Also note we are a huge exporter of oil, and check again global supply and demand situation.

I cannot see how oil won't collapse this week. The EIA report (which this article is based on) is both misleading and avoids examining macroeconomics which affects our price as well. This is the case I am making and sticking with it.

[Anonymous No.19138843]

>>19138830
Some examples of rates for the past 1-2 weeks.
VLCC 1y: 91k VLCC 6m: 75k Suezmax 1y: 45k Suezmax 6m: 51.5k Aframax 1y: 41.25k Aframax 6m: 41.25k LR2 1y: 42.5k LR2 6m: 47.625k LR1 1y: 29k LR1 6m: 37k

[Anonymous No.19138862]

[Anonymous No.19138868]

[Anonymous No.19138872]

$FRO earnings have been bought forward to this Wednesday.
https://twitter.com/BESv9/status/1261722968327061504

[Anonymous No.19138889]

>>19138868
>voyage
Isn't that irrelevant since they'll mostly be used for storage instead?

[Anonymous No.19138901]

>>19138889
Many are still being used for voyages. It helos show rates are still good besides storage.

[Anonymous No.19138902]

>>19138872
Oof, time to load up some more!

[Anonymous No.19138909]

>>19138902
>Frontline Ltd.’s preliminary first quarter 2020 results will be released on Wednesday May 20 2020, and a webcast and conference call will be held at 3:00 p.m. CET (9:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Time). The results presentation will be available for download from the Investor Relations section at www.frontline.bm ahead of the conference call.
https://www.frontline.bm/fro-invitation-to-q1-2020-results-conference-call-and-webcast/

H Y P E

[Anonymous No.19138980]

>>19138837
Just like to +1 this statement, I don't know why these media "analysts" try and make assumptions on topics they know nothing about. Perhaps if I saw some raw data that supports their hypothesis I'd hop off the tanker train, but it feels like every article I've read is pretty much the same:

>OPEC CUT
>PEOPLE DRIVE CAR
>ECONOMY GO UP

Everybody in this thread has accounted for these three variables. None of us are that ignorant; It just seems like all of these journalists don't have any other information support their claims. They just want to fuel the hopium because muh clicks.

[Anonymous No.19139067]

>>19138909
>Wednesday May 2020

FUTURES EXPIRATION AND EARNINGS? I AM ABOUT TO MAKE SO MUCH MONEYYYY

[Anonymous No.19139140]

>>19138273
>>19138980
Does anyone else feel that at this point our autism might have collectively made us better analysts as a general in this field than the professionals? It feels like we know the ins and outs of literally everything in the micro and macro situation for oil and tankers and such at this point between all of us. We are becoming a better resource than the publications.

But also real talk, I feel like your theory on open interest reduction can be right. Of course that will still half at least the current price, but supposing you are wrong...well, we can see ludicrous drops. Either way price will go down, this is a fact at this point unless big daddy Trump buys it all and stores them on his private golf courses or something stupid.

>>19138843
>91k for 1 year
This is honestly the only figure you need to know for the true sentiment of the oil market. Year contracts are typically discounted to avoid volatility, and yet during these extraordinarily good speculative moment for oil they still are charging 91k and getting it. This means those in the industry really expect oil to plummet HARD in coming times.

>>19138872
O-OH MY GOD. YES BABY, YES!
And here I was worried that they delayed it from the fourteenth to the 29th. Nope! It was all a tactical move to bring it to expiration date, holy fuck how scummy I love it.

>>19138909
UNBELIEVABLY HYPED. I WILL BE THERE. MONEY TIME!

[Anonymous No.19139154]

>>19138837
Well said. As well,
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/china-coronavirus-monday-1.5564255
shows new cases are showing up. Remember that CASES ARE A LAGGING INDICATOR. IE: 5 confirmed cases = hundreds or magnitudes more infected going through incubation periods, each spreading the virus to others and other parts of China.

>>19138980

Exactly, I'm starting to get very frustrated. I'm not a diehard tanker, but I want good evidence and good arguments to shake me off my position. It's my duty to my capital to invest based off of available facts. Tanker stocks tanking sucks, but that's not an argument.

[Anonymous No.19139224]

>>19138909
>earnings ever bumping stock price
if it’s like the others it will dump afterwards

[Anonymous No.19139262]

>>19139224
The difference is that the 19th is coming. This is the ace up the sleeve we've been waiting for. Quite frankly if that doesn't move the needle, I'll be looking out to unload all my tanker stocks. Not too quickly, just in case (plus waiting for dividends to recoup some of the cost, perhaps move some holdings into fro for that very purpose), but it means something too fucky is going on for me to keep going. I would still maintain, even when I'm completely out of my positions, that tankers should've rocketed.

[Anonymous No.19139280]

>>19139140
>holy fuck how scummy I love it
Long term I hope they don't jew us
This industry has a past of fucking over shareholders

[Anonymous No.19139396]

>>19139154
>>19139140

Everyone is critical of us for shutting out the "Brandons" but I've already responded to him so many times with valid arguments and counter points.

We're not just circle jerking, we actually have valid points if you took the time to deconstruct our views!

Like how am I suppose to respond to this?

>You don't understand how dividends work.
Yes I do? That's not the sole reason I'm investing nor is it an argument

>Tankers have never been a good industry
Yes, but IMO 2020 will start a super cycle due to the scrapping of old vessels.

>Demand is rising for oil, this will never last.
Conditions for tanker companies were already prime for a bull cycle. Wuflu and oil war was just the catalyst, I'm not epecting 300k rates for the rest of the year. Orderbooks low, etc, you know the drill.

>Every time tanker companies get money they spend it on buying new ships and accruing debt.
Yes, but if you listen to literally any conference call all of these companies are paying down debt and deleveraging. All of the companies I'm invested in have a competent management.


I've literally just started filtering these questions out because they're so boring and repetitive.
It's so hard to continue responding to the same mind-numbing statements. I think OP needs to include a common Q&A with rebuttals because it's just getting so annoying.

[Anonymous No.19139453]

>>19139154
Very nice article. Honestly, this is why I am not long in any other sector. I have no faith that we won't see a rebound in corona. And when we do, this will plummet the market yet again. Why should I long for anything but short term investments when lockdown v2 might rear its ugly head? Tankers are the only thing I am willing to long through it if that so is the case, only industry with actual legs and also isn't on a bubble (tech). I'm diehard at this point not even because I know their value, but because "fuck touching anything else right now." I will be more than happy to fill out my portfolio properly with other sectors once the market comes back to earth screaming and dying.

>>19139262
I will probably stay in personally for the divvies and "fuck other sectors right now). I agree something fucky probably is happening SOMEWHERE if they don't go up by June, but the real question is what are your alternatives right now if you aren't praying to ride momentum without underlying assets beneath it or something that during a crisis is at ATH and can come down any moment?

>>19139280
I hope they don't either, mainly because they have no reason to. Like none. Things are so good that it would be retarded to spoil it, and going forward they have the supply means to keep it good. I don't like actual scummy things, but this kind of earnings report thing is the "right kind of scummy" I meant.

>>19139396
Poor OP has already done so much, but that would be cool. There isn't much we can do about Brandons anymore, but I will respond to honest bears. Guy seemed like an honest bear, and probably went away/filled an order for Monday's pre-market since he hasn't come back with stupid quips like a Brandon. There isn't much we can do except filter now, I hate how I end up with 8+ filters a thread. But if we launch off....wonder if any Brandons will remain or they just turn into Dustin, kek.

[Anonymous No.19139516]

>>19139453
>what are your alternatives right now if you aren't praying to ride momentum without underlying assets beneath it or something that during a crisis is at ATH and can come down any moment?
Riding the covid pump and dump craze in the biomed sector, swinging a few stable stocks, buying straddles on upcoming retail earnings, buying oil producers for a very-long-term play to "get out the market" with guaranteed upside. There are many ways to profit even though tankers are absolutely the safest bet by a wide margin if going by fundamentals right now.

[Anonymous No.19139571]

>>19139396
I actually appreciate
>>19138310
for trying to come up with cogent arguments, and he seemed like a a critical investor which we all should be. Brandon on the other hand I actually think may be a Goldman Shill. The pure insanity of the volume and consistency of his FUD is nothing I've ever seen on the internet, ever. It only makes sense if there's financial interest involved.

>>19139453
Long gold and silver miners. Easiest investments of my life.

[Anonymous No.19139610]

>>19139571
In my opinion, it's too late for precious metals. Many of them (if not most) are beyond ATH already. They might have some leftover steam but I don't think there would be all that much, and I expect a very fast dump when recovery (((news))) is released.

[Anonymous No.19139843]

>>19139516
That's the point, all else you can do is ride or VERY long term. I am going to be honest, I got jack shit experience day trading to ride momentum and I am way too bearish to swing trade the pump and dumps as in my head I am like "we gonna dump any day now, but WHEN." Straddles, yea, good play I can go with that but really I just don't see what else I could play but tankers right now.

>>19139571
I feel like I missed the train. I wasn't educated enough to go "well, time to long gold and silver!" at the start, and I should of been it is a great play. I don't feel confident now though like >>19139610 says, feels too late for me. But props to you for getting into that.

[Anonymous No.19139951]

>>19139843
I share your general sentiment anon, i'm likely in tankers for the foreseeable, regardless of the short term price action (unless it's genuinely mental). Profit turning companies paying down debt instead of accumulating it during a global economic crisis is at a serious premium. I'm actually tempted to go heavy on maritime stocks from now on; if you can follow the cycles there's clear winners and losers in whatever scenario crops up.

[Anonymous No.19140060]

>>19138488
So, with USO and UCO no longer buying front month contracts, the market continues on with zero hiccups?

[Anonymous No.19140095]

so global demand for oil is down almost 30%. the "big" cut in oil production promised opec+ and others is less than 20% and this was announced only a week or so ago
how is anyone claiming that the oil oversupply situation has been solved? how hasnt oil tanked this past week? none of this makes any sense

[Anonymous No.19140168]

i got memed into buying DHT at $7.45 and now im down $100. should i dump my bags and take the loss or hold until i can make a profit?

[Anonymous No.19140200]

>>19139610
>>19139843
I'm only doing this cause I like you guys.
my personal strong recommendation is to start dollar cost averaging in. We've barely begun to peak. Take a look at the barron's gold mining index to show where the sector has been and where it's likely going to go.

http://www.goldchartsrus.com/chartstemp/free/fchart-BGMI.php

Our current highs are nothing when inflation adjusted.
https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-year-chart

Notice the cup and handle formation.

Check out pic as a comparison of all gold bull markets.

>but what if this bull market ends soon?
Current FED intervention around the world has drastically decreased all confidence in fiat. All currencies are devaluing heavily against USD, which is growing stronger and stronger until it'll break the system as almost all world debt is valued in USD. Essentially, the debts are growing bigger and bigger and the currency system is in it's first stages of a long break down. Gold as currency likely isn't the solution, but it's an escape that many are taking to get out of the fuckery and to protect their money. Right now is still early in this, and you haven't missed the boat. You've likely missed the bottom though. The precious metals sector runs on it's own bull and bear trends in an almost inverse to the SP500. When confidence is lost in the broader market, roughly speaking the precious metals market begins it's own bull market.

See https://images-ext-1.discordapp.net/external/WGXEKgCda2T_QM1pmJC2MISbkmaNWYR7Afq2POy0vmY/https/www.macrotrends.net/assets/images/large/gold-to-silver-ratio.png?width=780&height=481,

which shows the Gold to silver ratio. Gold lunges forward every recession, spiking the ratio upwards, but it eventually flattens as silver will make it's own move to follow. The ratio has been consistent for 3000 years in it's balancing, and I don't see why it won't be true this time.

[Anonymous No.19140255]

>>19140200
So what do you suggest we buy into to catch this train? I know not a whole lot when it comes to metals so I don't know what's good to buy into.

[Anonymous No.19140278]

>>19140200
>discord link to macrotrends image
>goldchartsrus, known to manipulate data to attempt to increase gold prices
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm just not buying it. Thanks for trying though.

[Anonymous No.19140329]

>>19139951
I concur. I will capitalize on something ludicrous and re-enter, but I am feeling long as in "I might hold past a year" for some potentially. Like STNG which I ranted with earlier, how is this not a profitable investment especially considering they basically have the clean product tanker market CORNERED by being the only real competitor with serious capacity in there, a new fleet which won't need expensive surveys, regulation compliances, or additions for YEARS while already being the largest in the world, the contango spread for gas and refined products which they are the only real tankers capable of carrying for widening more than crude and being charged for at higher rates, AND suffered a 10 for 1 reverse stock split during its downturn meaning those "highs" you saw previously...are NOTHING compared to what they can grow to. They have NAV of 32, will deleverage everything responsibly which will double NAV, after which they then will return to shareholders value extra, low order book keeps supply limited to know within their market dominance, their product tanker rates AREN'T diminishing even during "good" times speculatively, and you can get this company set to dominate their niche with soon to be no leverage and high rates for rest of the year where in 1 2 month contract would pay the expenses of the ship for the rest of the year trading SO MUCH BELOW NAV, for 16.8 dollars a share. How the fuck am I NOT supposed to buy that? Market. Sentiment. Be. Damned. That is a gold mine waiting to happen.

[Anonymous No.19140371]

>>19140168
Hold for divvies then sell during the raise

[Anonymous No.19140411]

>>19140168
Well its going to be down a lot more on monday so you might as well hold for next week and see what happens and reassess. I'm in a similar position at 6.80 and will offload as soon as I get close to breaking even.

[Anonymous No.19140549]

>>19140329
Based. I cannot stress enough to these threads how fucking amazing STNG is as a company, I have shilled it so hard. Once they pay of their debt they're going to $55/share. New fleet, new scrubbers for IMO2020 & 2030, and at a 60% discount.

But be careful, it's the most volatile tanker in the sector and probably won't level out until spot rates get less fucked.

Also Bugbee is a champion CEO in the tanker sector.

>32k/2 months for delivering vegetable oil to Argentina

[Anonymous No.19140574]

>>19140200

What's interesting is in all of history the GS ratio has never been this high, but as well at least in recent history, we haven't seen a recession of this magnitude. Fun correlation but doesn't prove anything.

>why did the 2011 bull market end?

We were promised QE1 would be a one time thing, and people believed it. In 2008 it was considered an "unconventional measure"; that is, we're only going to be tampering with money just this once. However, as we've been able to see, their tampering with money was a "kick the can down the road" type of measure that lead to markets never ridding the system of the garbage companies like Ford and GE. This unconventional measure now has become convention as we've experienced QE2 QE3, and my favorite, QE: Infinity.

I like to think of Bear and Bull markets as natural forest fires, the damage is what helps the forest grow healthy in the long run. And an overgrowth without fires will eventually harm the forest more than any fire. Funny enough, the bear markets that miners have been through have made them completely lean and efficient. Equinox Gold breaks even at $1250/oz. Most garbage companies in the sector have been run out of business.

>>19140278
anon I appreciate a critical mindset but you can literally look up those charts on your own on a variety of websites if you don't trust my links. suit yourself.

>>19140255
Here's my own picks, PureGoldMining, LibertyGold, Goldmining, equinox Gold; all have low or NO DEBT, fully funded, All have management I like, all have good mining jurisdictions(Don't buy a company who's mines have to be protected by dudes with AK47's.), and some are extremely cheap as they haven't begun heavy production. After production, they will be re-valued and you'll have missed the boat. I invite those who are not convinced to track these companies on a watchlist and watch as I get rich. Lol. Or just buy the physical gold and silver, you're going to make money for sure there too.

[Anonymous No.19140602]

My God you tankies are retarded.

Huge profits don't matter. It could make 1000x and it won't raise the stock price. See DHT for example.

Dividends don't matter either. It will not offset your loses at this point.

The only way to make $$$ is from another lockdown....which will not happen again.

Welcome to hell, tank cucks.

SELL SELL SELL

[Anonymous No.19140631]

>>19140574
How about making calls here sharing your positions and current price, then we can all take a screenshot and make fun of you if you fail or cry if you don't.
Simple, clean, effective, no memery.

[Anonymous No.19140643]

>>19140602
Oh, hi there brandon! Where have you been? I haven't seen you in a while! I thought you left us for good and I was feeling all lonely.

[Anonymous No.19140656]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I82iGHr3Xg

[Anonymous No.19140834]

>>19140631

I don't play options.

I'll make a thread exactly 6 months from now, 2020 16 November 5PM Pacific Time with screenshots to the post and my brokerage. I'm still dollar cost averaging into and swing trading my positions for max value so no screens available for now. No memes, I'm setting an alarm on my phone right now. If you're in, I'll be on the lookout for you in November 16 at this time later this year, and we'll roll the thread forward another 6 months and another 6 months if you guys want to keep playing.

[Anonymous No.19140887]

>>19140834
Thanks for proving you're a retarded larper for the class. Some seemed to be tricked by your wiles until now.

[Anonymous No.19140969]

>>19140602
I want reasoning with complete paragraphs and math at a 9th grade level minimum, not "tankers are a fuck" and first link on google tier reasoning. The numbers I have say oil storage is full NOW and somehow millions of barrels of oil are just disappearing without entering or affecting the market.

Go ask your friends upstairs at GS if they know all the oil is going, because I sure as hell don't; unless literally the whole oil commodities market is lying about *everything*, and not only are the estimates bunk but so are the supply / demand numbers.

[Anonymous No.19140974]

>>19140834
how much of your portfolio would you say to dip into miners?

[Anonymous No.19141128]

>>19140549
Yea, I am not all-in on them but I wish i had more, wish I could afford more. I am pretty damn happy with my tanker spread though, got 500 DHT, 500 FRO, 200 EURN, 200 STNG. Only the best of the best, and everything is set to rise based on inherent value alone regardless of business. STNG is the only one I REALLY wish I had more of, but least I can capitalize off this. Your shilling helped me research it more, I didn't favor it as much as the other tankers but boy was I wrong.

[Anonymous No.19141202]

>>19140887
I don't know why you're getting so mad at me but okay. I hope to see you in my thread lol.

>>19140974
I'm playing a high risk portfolio of 75%+ likely into the future. I've got about 40% in after buying in at March 20, most of these are in physicals and silver miners, which is why I haven't screen shotted my brokerage. Personally am expecting SP500 to sell off in near future so that's why I'm personally buying in traunches and staying extremely careful. However, I still come from the perspective that my picks are all extremely cheap compared to their future valuations. I'm pinching pennies essentially trying to maximize my gains, but Im playing from a perspective that the gains are locked in. However, I'm hedging against the potential that SP500 does not sell off or in the event that it does, my miners stay near current valuations (unlikely but deserving of a hedge anyway) so I've dipped in here and there and moved money around my gold miners from the ones who seem well valued to undervalued. Ex. I recently moved all my shares of PGM to Goldmining as I think goldmining is undervalued by a bit.

This is really hard to answer for you anon as I personally have spent my 100s hours researching miners so I'm about 95% confident in my own research. If I had to throw a number out there, you'd want 15% physical 10% miners. Miners have far higher leverage to the increase of price; ie physical is x2, then gold miner is x4 and silver miner is x8+. Their danger is that mining itself is very complicated and you can get fucked over by things like jurisdiction and nationalisation. However, the downside risk/ upside potential of mining can adjusted positively if you pick good companies with good jurisdictions with management that is extremely cautious and cheap. You want the guys buying Costco coffee for the main office lol.

[Anonymous No.19141244]

>>19140200
>>19140574
I admit, this is interesting. I am too heavy into tankers though to have enough to average precious metals right now. I don't disbelieve you, but I won't act...since tanker play. I will keep and take note though in case I feel the need to sell some tankers off. Thanks anon, don't get mad at those getting mad you are just trying to help and your case isn't bad at all. I will keep my eye out though only for now due to logistical reasons.

[Anonymous No.19141314]

>>19141244
Best regards to you too, hope it all goes well. My original reason for getting into tankers is because I saw the exact similarities they have to miners, e,g, "destroyer of capital", long secular bear market, market has no confidence in sector (fundamentals for miners are amazing with current QE, they've barely moved compared to where they've gone in the past) allowing for cheapies

>>19140974
>>19141202
Example of jurisdiction jewing you over. Mexican cartels robbed Alamos Gold at gunpoint and flew off in a heli topkek.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/thieves-flee-by-air-after-stealing-gold-bars-from-canadian-mine-in-mexico-1.4890666

[Anonymous No.19141509]

>>19140200
>if that doesn't move the needle, I'll be looking out to unload all my tanker stocks
Literally the worst possible time. It's highly likely that we'll see some crazy BS happen. I would only watch where institutional money is going. TANKER. CHADS. MAN THE FUCKING DECKS.

>>19141202
thanks anon, I'll go digging. I was sitting on GDX for March and April. I grabbed a small box of physical. I'll explore your links.

>>19141314
kek. I've only stayed off miners because of these factors. I'm not really sure I like the idea of miners instead of physical if we move into a high stakes high risk scenario where all debt is denoted in USD. there's too much USD denominated debt abroad already, where it can shock our own markets if the debt was defaulted on.

[Anonymous No.19141919]

>>19140060
Interested in feedback on this.

How did two gigantic buyers/sellers completely leave the front month market and there be no difference outside of volume?

USO ended up having to take or arrange for a bunch of deliveries right? Ok, so if they just completely left the market... How the hell did that not drive prices way down?

Who filled in that gap and how the hell are they going to take delivery AT ALL and where was this mystery buyer LAST month?

[Anonymous No.19142064]

>>19138980
that's what I've come to notice about the situation. media is running full damage control on oil right now, including bloomberg, when the reality is the oil sector is fucked.

I guess the question comes down to, can the media and the fed will a market recovery into existence in spite of reality pointing contrary? Or do the laws of supply and demand still apply? Everything I've been experiencing since march is telling me reality no longer matters and price discovery has no logic to it.

[Anonymous No.19142158]

I hear Trump is sending oil to Belarus because he hates tanker investors this much

[Anonymous No.19142181]

I also noticed the buy side activity on TNP, my main tanker hold, and call options expired on the 15th. Looks like contract expiration was not a meme. It all feels like a collaborative effort

[Anonymous No.19142210]

>>19141128
>>19141314

I am not pleased with their recent stock price performance. Even though SALT sold their shares, they should still be trading at $22/share at minimum. I wish I could spend more but I've already averaged in at 18.01/share with 10k spent. They're a really great company but for some reason they've gotten ass raped. The fundamentals are there, especially for STNG. I hope we see some better returns on Monday.

So many people underestimate the value of product tankers.

>>19141202
You've actually provided some really interesting information, the moment I liquidate tankers I'll easily consider metals.

Have you read "The Bitcoin Standard?" The author makes a really good argument for gold as a sound currency, considering that it can only be increased ~1.5% a year, and has been very stable for centuries. However, silver on the other hand, is bashed for being used in industrial processes similar to copper, and it's also a much more common element. Whenever it's in demand, production rates skyrocket, devaluing the commodity.

Are you simply choosing Silver & Gold to hedge your bets? Is there any specific reason you include silver, or are you just casting a wide net?

Again, thanks for your valuable information. I'll be sure to consider it as soon I can free up some capital.

[Anonymous No.19142305]

>>19142064
>Everything I've been experiencing since march is telling me reality no longer matters and price discovery has no logic to it.
I agree with everything you've said but to will a market recovery into existence, someone is getting paid and/or extorted for it. The Cushing supply being under max allowable capacity is due to making tankers float around with deliveries. The government is paying for crude and filling their strategic reserves. Whenever the supply in all other places reaches capacity, because there are few if no incentives to stop production, someone is going to have to pay to take and use the oil somehow, pay for the suppliers to cripple themselves, pay to have a filled up tanker at port, or have "something" catastrophic happen that conveniently solves the problem. Let's pray it's not using it somehow nor something catastrophic.

[Anonymous No.19142356]

>>19142064
I know that fundamentally the "tankies" are correct in terms of oil supply and demand, but we've seen scenarios in the past where someone powerful nullifies the situation completely. However, even if that happens, I'm still confident in the intrinsic value of tankers, as I understand that they're not simply a contango play for futures traders.

>>19141919
>>19140060
Sorry, watching avatar on netflix.

So USO and UCO doesn't actually take deliveries for any product when they buy contracts, they are legally required to sell their contracts and roll them over to the next. It's in(was in) their prospectus. They were forced to allocate a shit ton of capital towards buying May contracts since an influx of robinhood retards thought they were getting into oil.

Also, it did drive the prices way down in May, that's when we saw negative oil.

The "mysterious buyers" were futures traders who took advantage of the contango by buying time charters for tankers, and then selling the oil for a higher price at a later dated futures contract. This is when rates skyrocketted because everyone was scrambling to rent a tanker to store their oil.

I doubt we're going to see another tanker rate spike unless the contango is even worse then last time because no one can accurately predict the outcome of oil. Goldman stated that 50% of the market is betting oil stays below $15 and the other 50% bets it goes above $35 by August.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

[Anonymous No.19142430]

>>19142305
Damn this is some serious critical thinking, I never could've imagined who or what was actually tugging the strings behind the scenes. I always just assumed that someone was being paid, but you're right, at some point physical capacity comes into play and there needs to be something done. Very interesting to see how this all plays out.

Maybe the government starts paying for tankers?

[Anonymous No.19142645]

>>19142210
I mean, my average for STNG's 200 shares is 17.5. I really don't need a high bounce for that particular investment to go profitable, so I am sort of glad it was kept down for now. But I most assuredly agree it should be WAY higher. I hope returns go well too, in truth out of all tankers for whatever reason the algos trade that correlatively inverse with Crude the hardest. Which is hilarious since it theoretically should be one of the least correlative. But, gave a good buying opportunity due to it and if oil goes down...as we all think it will, will also give it a nice bump.

>>19142181
Nice. I should look up the other tankers to see how their options day went.

>>19142430
If the government pays for tankers then our tanker stocks are flying right past the moon and into the fucking sun. Companies are making 1000%+ profit already, and NOW you are telling me they are going to get government funds on top of it? I know this is a fantasy scenario, but my SCO could fucking go to 0 for all I care if that would be its cause because that would make us rich as sin. It would be impossible to be any more bullish than the US government paying your tankers to store oil, and probably at even BETTER rates.

[Anonymous No.19142687]

Was I stupid to buy SCO?

[Anonymous No.19142994]

>>19142430
Assuming you're not shitting with me...
>at some point physical capacity comes into play
This is the whole play for me and many others.
>1. demand destruction & insufficient supply cuts due to competitive forces
>2. supply glut - capacity is reached & no one can take oil without paying - tankers become a "storage of last resort" per se. Tankers are in the $$$$$.
we are here
>3. due to the cost of storage and limited storage, oil prices are suppressed until levels return to normal
>4. credit situation for USA (and shale) is fucked bad. Low oil prices will wreck US shale production, many bankruptcies actually start reigning in supply.
>5. government can bail shale & tax the hell out of imports, but the price of oil will remain low globally due to lasting supply glut and slow demand growth.
>6. Due to bankruptcies & shuttered operations, US returns to importer status as demand returns.
>7. tankers see long term use until global oil prices return to the break even point long enough for US shale to re-establish itself.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

>Maybe the government starts paying for tankers?
the government only really has a few options.
>stall (current action)
>start using oil like crazy
>destroy suppliers

[Anonymous No.19143038]

>>19142687
No. The oil market is snorting hopium like nobodies business, unless the well shut ins were fucking catastrophic and we all missed the memo. The only reason I know that this whole price rally is bullshit is because the refineries haven't picked up at ALL. In fact, they've decreased utilization. Oil on storage is also at an all time high. I think we're about to see some crazy shit go down on Monday, we've reached backwardation at the front month contracts even though we just went negative due to storage concerns a month before.

If it smells like bullshit, looks like bullshit, sounds like bullshit... It's probably _______.

>If we don't see a huge drop on Monday: SELL.

Also, if oil contango doesn't happen, tanker gang is partially fucked.

>>19142645
LOL that would be fucking nuts. Honestly, nothing is outside the realm of possibilities with our president, he never ceases to amaze me.

>"Super Duper Missle"

[Anonymous No.19143105]

>>19142210

Haven't read it, will add to my reading list. My case for silver simplified is something like this:

>Silver always moves with gold upwards, but just with a delay. (Could be due to silver's industrial use, so it needs the economy to pick up before it makes it's move. ie needs to hit the timing of PM cycle and industrial cycle; not sure if I agree but reasonable) When you see gold move, it's your cue to buy silver

>Silver is far less rare than gold but far rarer than current G/S ratio suggests, 1:120 (1:8 ratio in the ground I believe; Very few silver only miners exist as most end up converting to a gold mining company due to lack of major silver deposits)

>Silver has always been money next to gold in all our history. Think Roman times, medieval times, modern times, even in video games; will continue to be.

>Solar demand and EV demand is on the up and up, overall electrification of society is bullish for silver demand as it's the second best conductor next to gold; gold not feasible due to high price

>I'm choosing both as silver tends to move higher than gold, but recognise it's still inherently more risky

>"silver is poor man's gold," when they hype for Gold happens, majority of people will be priced out so they settle for next best thing. People use that phrase derogatorily to silverbugs, not realising everybody's poor and it's their only option to get into PM

[Anonymous No.19143133]

>>19143038
I'm going to be so depressed if tankers just crab all week after this whole saga

[Anonymous No.19143152]

>>19142994
That's pretty much how I view this situation playing out. What's confusing is that the oil market is currently pricing in storage capacity as ((((((sufficiently))))) handling the supply glut.

Also, the U.S. government has a fourth option: Use a bunch of their land to store oil. Even though it would be a borderline scandal due to EPA regulations, they're the government and can pretty much bypass all rules so long as the oil moves away eventually. If the FED is already renting out space to Oil Supermajors, they can just use it themselves as a "storage bailout" to keep those wells pumpin'.

This is the scenario I'm most fearful of.

>https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/US-To-Rent-Out-Federal-Storage-Space-To-Oil-Industry.html

[Anonymous No.19143206]

>>19143133
I've got good news, tanker prices are either going to go way up or way down. I don't think there is going to be an in between unless some backwards ass fuckery is used to resolve the oil situation

[Anonymous No.19143220]

>>19143206
>way down
I'll hang myself if all of this was for nothing

[Anonymous No.19143305]

>>19143152
they were talking about filling up strategic reserves to the top since early march. unlikely that they have any significant empty space left to affect the market at this point
though id be surprised at nothing at this point

[Anonymous No.19143372]

>>19143038
If contango doesn't happen, some of the richest men on earth who is buying this shit is fucked, just think about the astronomical cost it would be to buy oil currently at 30 dollars a barrel with the market as fucked up as it currently is. Trump is crazy, but it is true, he might want to "hire some super duper tankers" and we make a killing on it. Now THAT would be the Big Port!

>>19143206
>way down
There is where I gotta disagree with you there. Maybe spot rates, but I got 2 scenarios to play out for you. Assuming demand returns and production remains low, production will rapidly spike and create another contango after backwardation within 6 months...and can be an even bigger contango if lockdown v2 happens. Option 2, Fed rents out land, demand doesn't pick up, and oil companies go "SCORE!" and up production due to less fears of storage issues....in which case price is kept reasonably low, AND we may create an even bigger oil crisis the liked we never seen.

Tankers for "within the year" playing....I can only see a win. Also based Hisoka posting.

[Anonymous No.19143444]

>>19143305
Oh the SPR is definitely not fit to handle any more oil. I'm just suggesting that they'll use whatever space that isn't occupied to store oil.

>>19143220
No matter the outcome, share prices will eventually recover. I am very convinced of this, even before corona the tanker market was being set up for a huge boom. That's just being delayed because the spread on bunker fuel has tightened and companies aren't installing scrubbers until it's economically necessary, therefore delaying the scrapping of old ships.

>>19143372
Oh I'm absolutely positive spot rates and share prices get fucked on Monday if there is no contango. We'll recover in a year or two due to other factors, but I don't see production spiking like you said for this reason and a couple others:

>"Approximately 1.5 mm b/d will be shut in from so-called “stripper wells” in the United States. These wells are extremely old and nearing the end of their productive lives. In most cases they produce less than 5 b/d each yet make up nearly 20% of total US production in aggregate. Since their production rates are so low and their water production is high, the stripper wells incur operating costs in excess of the oil price and have started being shut in already. While it is more challenging to get data on international stripper wells, we estimate another 1.5 mm b/d will be shut in from this group as well."

(1/2)

[Anonymous No.19143511]

>>19143220
depending on what you own there’s probably only going to be another 25% drop at most

[Anonymous No.19143528]

>>19143152
right, which would be stalling.
They're going to need to prop up prices or buy from the companies at a premium for about a full year. Let's be fair, because demand will pick back up, but will be somewhat slow. I'm going to guess that the total cost (not price) of the recovery over three years will look like this quarter for a full year. I'm a finance guy, not an oil guy, so again, someone please correct me if I'm off. A year's worth of supply glut that we are taking on so that US crude producers can stay solvent is going to be very expensive. I have a strong feeling that the strategic reserve alone can't handle it. TANKER. CHADS. RISE. THE. FUCK. UP.

[Anonymous No.19143532]

LONG TANKERS

https://twitter.com/calvinfroedge/status/1261845757004578816

[Anonymous No.19143546]

>>19143444
(2/2)

So again, not considering the stripper wells, after a lot of these wells close down it requires a lot of capital to start them back up. Even if U.S. Shale wanted to kick production into overdrive it costs way too much time and money. The profit margins are going to be super tight with all the excess crude. Have we forgotten that almost all of these shale companies are saddled with huge amounts of debt? It's a huge risk to take on with the uncertainty in the oil market. Unless they go full retard, I don't see them spiking production again and creating another contango. I do see the companies with strong balance sheets starting back up again, but it won't be enough to create another insane contango.

Option 1: The only way I see your situation playing out is if we have another lockdown, but Trump is already pissed off at the libs for not letting him reopen the economy. I'm not sure he's going to let us shut down again after the economic devastation from the first one.

Option 2: This will most likely not happen either. We must factor in that the sole reason this contango occurred was Saudi Arabian and Russian overproduction and beerflu demand cuts. Even if U.S. kicks it back into overdrive, we probably won't hit tank tops since fuel will be consumed at a higher rate then it was in March and Saudi-Russia has chilled the fuck out.

Probably left out a lot of details but I can elaborate more, just tired. Also, this isn't a bear tanker thesis, I'm just 99% sure that oil is about to get raped on Monday.

[Anonymous No.19143654]

>>19143528
You call it stalling, they call it a solution. These guys have QE up the ass. I don't think they're afraid to spend a couple billion to bailout the oil supermajors and small shale trump has been working so hard on for the past 4 years.

Then again, if they have QE up the ass, their first solution after filling up the reserve would be tankers, since it's once of the easiest and simplest fixes....

Holy shit, will the U.S. government start contracting out tankers? I honestly am considering this as a possibility now, thank you for opening my eyes anon.

>>19143532
Damn that's BIG. 2021 tanker bros will be ascending into heaven.

[Anonymous No.19143691]

>>19143532
Alright this has convinced me not to just cut my losses if things go poorly. Maybe I'll just unload my DHT.

[Anonymous No.19143715]

>>19143654
>will the U.S. government start contracting out tankers?
they'll probably only be able to do that by force. And if this happens, there might end up being a bidding war. top fucking kek. You're coming to these conclusions yourself, I hadn't considered a bidding war for tankers by governments and firms at all. That would just blow my fucking mind. I more fully anticipate them giving out subsidy like they do for farmers almost indefinitely.

[Anonymous No.19143734]

>>19143691

That's my plan. That number accounts for 25% of floating storage supply guaranteed to be cut

[Anonymous No.19143782]

>>19143444
>>19143546
Well...about lockdowns, we got to watch China and Brazil. China may enter another lockdown. Brazil took 0 precautions and locking down...and their cases are skyrocketing still exponentially showing "herd immunity" might be catastrophic if the rate continues. Sweden was never a good example because they in fact did shut down businesses where a lot of people gathered, the average home has 1-2 people only, and in general they have a culture of social distancing. If this respreads and results look poor from China and Brazil, fuck locking down, if Trump doesn't do it people will do it on their own and governors out of sheer fear as our own cases skyrocket past previous peak.

But anyways, I didn't know about Shale being THAT poorly off. Well shit. Well, assuming no lockdown or pseudo-lockdown v2 you are probably right....but oil prices will probably remain at like 30 or something, there is just no way in hell that is going up. And if it does go obscenely to 60....production overdrive I would bet just because companies are greedy, economics and your logic be damned, that is a lot of money when they desperately need it. Thus making backwardation which may make another contango.

But if lockdown happens...yea, game over, no need to explain. I am personally very distrustful of the saudis and russians and don't think they are truly cutting as much as expected nor will keep it cut as long as needed. The underlying reasons for a price war never went away, they just went "we will play nice now." I can fully see them price warring all over again.

Honestly I am somewhat shooting the shit, not making concrete arguments here or anything. I am not saying this is truth or whatever, just my own opinions and speculation prior to actually seeing numbers for anything for the future. Your reasoning is more solid than my blanket pessimism + greed thesis.

Either way 99% sure as well oil is gonna die this week as well.

>>19143532
COLD DEAD HANDS

[Anonymous No.19143861]

>>19143654
>You call it stalling, they call it a solution
Top fucking kek. But if they did contract them, we will basically have eternal bragging rights on /biz/ forever when these things shoot up beyond any previous conception imaginable.

>>19143715
>Governments having a bidding war with firms for renting out tankers for oil storage
lmfao, made my day imagining that. Imagine if insiders knew this was in Trump's plan already so have been pushing the price down on purpose so they can buy millions of shares when this starts and this was their big plan. I doubt it would ever happen, highly doubt. But if it did we would see FOMO like you would never believe and half of us would become millionaires.

[Anonymous No.19143886]

>>19143532
So this means wait until 2021? For eurn, dht, and fro I planned on long but it sounds like to hold onto all of them unless something moons this year?

[Anonymous No.19143933]

>>19143715
Still kind of retarded that the burden falls on the taxpayer for an oil supergiant that couldn't keep its dick in its pants. It would blow my fucking mind if congress passed subsidies for oil storage, but it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility. This whole situation is so fundamentally and utterly fucked I don't know how tankers don't win.

>>19143782
Honestly, to your point, I am willing to forfeit my scenario in case of greedy corporations being extremely naive and over-pumping again. It's happened before, and will no doubt happen again. When oil reaches $40/bbl and shale decides it's time to send production levels back to normal, and manages to do so without incurring debt, well then fuck me I guess you're right. I just hope (or maybe I don't hope?) that they have learned something from this and don't act like retards again.

Also, I believe the Saudi and Russians are cutting, but the key statistic is the exports. If domestic consumption is below normal levels in 2019, they're obviously going to be exporting more, which effectively nullifies a portion their production cuts.

And if lockdown 2 happens, it's absolutely game over.

>From calvin, "Production cuts and export cuts are two different things.

Here are 5 of the major OPEC producers. Though production cuts in May were 4.8M bpd, export cuts were only 2.45M bpd.

Tanker demand and storage capacity are a function of exports, not just production."

I hate to agree to your shitty pessimism being the cause of oil overproduction, but with our society it's not far out of reach. *dissapointment*

[Anonymous No.19144035]

>>19143782
>if Trump doesn't do it people will do it on their own and governors out of sheer fear as our own cases skyrocket past previous peak
we have a generational gridlock if this is the case. Governors will actually go along with the plans to open if they have (likely they all do) strained budgets due to unwise spending, inefficient management, and pensioners. They absolutely need tax revenues. They cannot, absolutely cannot stay solvent otherwise. They are already getting loans from the FED, and if young people actually fear the virus, they will be unwilling to work and unwilling to spend. It's an absolute nightmare scenario for the government and the people. We're lucky to have a good amount of glut in the US and a fuckton of food.

>I didn't know about Shale being THAT poorly off.
Break even is somewhere between $25 - $40? I would assume most us businesses are over-leveraged and have large debt obligations that cant be served with such low margins.

>but oil prices will probably remain at like 30 or something, there is just no way in hell that is going up
>>19143933
>This whole situation is so fundamentally and utterly fucked I don't know how tankers don't win.
realistic US options or convenient events that fuck tankers include: destroyed suppliers and/or destroyed supplies elsewhere. the venezuela and china hot war idea would shake up my certainty in this play. I would look for an exit so my positions are much smaller.

>>19143861
Shanty threads for fucking months.

[Anonymous No.19144109]

>>19140574
>PureGoldMining, LibertyGold, Goldmining, equinox Gold;
just lurking. buying all of these stocks. can't be arsed becoming a goldbug pro. looks legit this info. thanks anon

[Anonymous No.19144222]

>>19134543
Nigger, the US inventory dropped -750,000 two weeks ago. We will have more data from last week and it will be even more. Check the EIA data
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/supply/weekly/
>>19135186
it's not gonna go negative two months in a row, now the faggots know what futures are
I'm not kidding, my uncle works at goldman and says many of the people trading are absolute tards. There were people (not specifically at Goldman) getting calls saying where they wanted oil delivered from offices in new york, who didn't even know a futures contract meant you actually get oil delievered to you. They obviously didnt want it so they paid people to take their contracts. Kek.
>>19138388
yep they are tards
>>19143546
I hope they were smart with the shut ins and didn't shut the strippers that aren't worth turning back on. Shale guys have natural decline curve working to their advantage in this situation.

[Anonymous No.19144689]

https://twitter.com/calvinfroedge/status/1261874317920526341/photo/1

COLD

[Anonymous No.19144923]

I sold DHT on Friday to avoid the 30% dividend withholding tax for non-us residents.
When it drops by 35 cents, I can buy back and be in a winning position since I would have only received 70% of those dividends.

[Anonymous No.19145308]

>>19144923
Assuming it actually drops by that amount, spaz.

[Anonymous No.19145344]

>>19145308
DHT is opening under 6

[Anonymous No.19145940]

>>19145344
probably

[Anonymous No.19146398]

I can't sleep anons, I can only think about STNG

[Anonymous No.19146581]

>>19146398
That's a man

[Anonymous No.19146616]

>>19146398
Asian ppl look like aliens

[Anonymous No.19146710]

>>19140574
Good info anon. Might get a position. See ya in 6 months

[Anonymous No.19146734]

Am I retarded to hodl SCO, /tsg/?

[Anonymous No.19146879]

>>19145344
monday could be the one two punch that quite possibly could send the share price of DHT to under 5 dollars. ex div date combined with bad news on a new contango could be devastating for DHT shareholders.

[Anonymous No.19147893]

>>19142181
If you're still around anon, i'd like to hear more about TNP - why did you opt for them as your main?

[Anonymous No.19148042]

What does this mean?