advertisement
If you're frustrated over the high cost of gasoline at the pump, don't trade in your Hummer for a Vespa just yet: A leading energy analyst is telling clients these days to prepare for crude oil to retreat back below $65 per barrel over the next three years.
How could it happen? He says conservation, new drilling, efficient new vehicles, alternative energy sources, a rising dollar and a global recession will combine to blast prices back to the Stone Age -- or at least to last year's levels.
"The match has struck, the fuse has been lit, and four or five years from now OPEC producers are going to be drinking their own oil and choking on it," says Tony Kolton, the founder and president of Logical Information Machines, a provider of research to most of the world's major energy-trading companies for two decades.
Plenty of smart analysts disagree with this point of view, figuring that emerging-market demand will pump up fossil-fuel prices and that Americans will blithely forget all about conservation if gasoline prices trend lower. But since Kolton's view is deeply out of consensus and at least minimally plausible, it does deserve our attention.
Speculators unmasked
Kolton, a specialist in the history, composition and psychology of the energy market, believes that speculators were without question behind the run-up of prices to $147 per barrel in July and that government threats to expose and punish their behavior spooked them out of their positions in a hurry.He says his data on open interest of noncommercial positions in crude trading, as well as conversations with professional traders at big oil companies, clearly show that speculators, and not rising demand from Asia, pushed the market to extremes.
In contrast to people who say the oil market is too big to be pushed around by hedge funds, Kolton counters that in fact it is much smaller than the bond, currency or equity markets. The oil market "can be easily manipulated," he says.The reason for the misconception is that while the market is large in dollar terms, most of the oil companies' hedging positions are pointed the same direction and set for months at a time. So marginal new positions that point the opposite way can have an outsize impact, much like a 5-foot rudder can change the direction of a 500-foot ship.
"I would ask all the fundamental guys why oil was $147 a month ago and $114 today," Kolton says. "Their opinion that crude moves purely on real demand is BS. When the fast money comes out, there's a giant sucking sound."
The swift exit of the fast-money crowd has pushed oil back down to its March level, around $110. Kolton's research on seasonality and demand suggests oil prices will rebound back to the $125 area and then resume their crash. The $100 level will be hard to crack, but he expects energy bears to prevail over bulls within six months and launch crude on a journey below $65."You had a perfect storm of pre-Olympics demand in China, a plunging dollar, speculation, cold weather and fear of supply disruptions in Nigeria and Iran pushing it up, and now they've all swung around on a dime," Kolton says, observing that recession and conservation are gutting demand, Iran is at the negotiating table, the dollar is soaring against the euro in reaction to the worsening European economy, and the summer has proved milder than normal, sapping the use of air conditioning nationwide.
"People who don't trade the futures markets don't realize that this is typical for commodities, which always trade on emotion. Look at silver in the late 1970s, which went from $4 to $50 and back to $4 in two years," Kolton says.
Diminished demand
What about all that talk of how supply is running out? Well, it's funny: The spike to $147 seems to have really got people thinking about scarcity, and they've started making plans that could be very long-lasting.It's sort of like the day a person realizes it's time to stop smoking -- a light-bulb moment of alertness to a long-simmering crisis. Oil bears now think the $147 level was a slap in the face that made major corporate users consider changing their behavior in persistent and fundamental ways.
Rate this Article





A view from the Fed