@anasalhajji Thank you for this interesting video, but your argument that reduced internal OPEC winter demand will offset the production cut (leaving exports basically unaffected) ... will be invalid by next summer as internal OPEC demand rises again, no?
@dampedspring Maybe it's just reflecting the recent 10% jump in oil? That's a boost to CPI and GDP. At the same time Core CPI Nowcast didn't move at all ...
@TigerTrader41 That Bloomberg headline was a bit catchy, emphasis in the quote from Bob McNally should be on "but not yet" ... he doesn't expect a run above $100 this year, but at some point later, he sees Brent at $75 in 2H22 with a lot of supply coming from Saudi, UAE, US.
@garyblack00 You're wrong on Daly: "Mary Daly on Friday weighed into the debate at the Fed on when to begin shrinking its massive balance sheet, saying she could see doing so soon after the Fed has raised rates once or twice." https://t.co/IrB4D4Gkh2
@UndervaluedOnG Beautiful, great analysis! Agree that stock level is main driver of price. Would love to see the same plot using a measure of stock adjusted for demand, which has obviously increased over the years. E.g. NTPS / daily demand at date of report. What do you think? :-)
@MacroAlf I don't trade this stuff, so wondering ... is there an arbitrage opportunity between these two? If yes, then Fed manipulating the one could be enought to get the other in line?
@WarrenPies Problem with this argument: front typically sells off harder than back, eventually flips from backwardation to contango ... while selloff possibly still continues. So that 18.7% doesn't mean selloff stopped there, just flipped to contango?
@crudegusher Well ... in the 12 months through 03/2020 it was 214.13 million tons, so the projection of 215.24 is just a "back to normal" (pre-covid), not huge growth
@garyblack00 Cool, thanks for checking! Judging from this small dataset, 7 new adds pretty uniformly distributed over 5 weekdays, with 1-2 add on each weekday, there appears to be no statistically significant difference between weekdays.
@Schuldensuehner Quote from BLS report for April:
'If the workers who were recorded as employed but absent from work due to "other reasons" [...] had been classified as unemployed on temporary layoff, the overall unemployment rate would have been almost 5 percentage points higher than reported'
@Schuldensuehner This "error" is not new, was also present in April data. The unemployment rate for April would have been even 5 percent higher than reported. See April report: https://t.co/wA0JA7lal0