Oil War: Russia and the CA lose, and the winner reaps the benefits

15 May 2020 13

Today, it has become fashionable in the domestic media to argue that Russia nevertheless defeated Saudi Arabia in the "oil war". Bad supposedly testify to this economic news from the kingdom. Let’s not be like a joke character who is ready to poke one eye out with the condition that the neighbor will lose both.

In this trade war, which brought down world energy prices, if there is a winner, then he is “not the one”.

Let's go back to the events of two months ago. In early March, Moscow was required to introduce oil production quotas in the amount of 0,5 million barrels per day. At the suggestion of the head of Rosneft, we slammed the door in the Austrian capital, refusing to extend the OPEC + deal. Igor Sechin, who, as it turned out, still confuses barrels and tons, began to wait for the producers of American shale oil to go bankrupt. The end of the “six-week war”, which was then launched by Saudi Arabia, is well known: quotes collapsed, export earnings from all manufacturers plummeted, and the coronavirus pandemic worsened the situation. After a month and a half, Russia was forced to commit itself to quotas for oil production in the amount of 5 times more than originally required.

In general, they outplayed everyone. Now, some domestic publications are paying attention to the economic problems of the Saudis as proof of our “overpower”.

Indeed, Riyadh's affairs are now not in the best of circumstances. Revenues from hydrocarbon exports fell by a quarter. VAT increased from 5% to 15%. (By the way, in Russia it has already been increased from 18% to 20%.) Additional payments to the military and civil servants of the Kingdom have been canceled. Saudi Arabia was forced to suspend the implementation of the Vision 2030 program, which was supposed to remove the country from the oil and gas needle. The budget of Saudi Arabia is 90% dependent on the export of raw materials, and we must pay tribute to the monarchy that it at least tried to get rid of the destructive dependence on mono goods. Does this mean that the Saudis were defeated in the "oil war"?

Of course, yes: they lost, and we, and all the major producers of raw materials. There is probably only one winner - this is the United States. Washington did not allow itself to burden itself with any production quotas under the new OPEC + deal. A certain decrease occurred for purely economic reasons, but it can be increased again at any time. Now Americans need high prices that are comfortable for their manufacturers, and what do we see?

Saudi Aramco said that in addition to those 2,5 million barrels per day, it will take on additional restrictions of another 1 million barrels from June. Why would such "altruism" be asked. The motives of Riyadh can be assumed, judging by the statement of the White House spokesman, Judd Deere:

The leaders of the two states agreed that stability in world energy markets is very important, and reaffirmed the strong cooperation of the United States and Saudi Arabia in the field of defense.

Apparently, President Trump threatened Saudi Arabia to withdraw American troops, leaving the Kingdom alone with Iran and other unfriendly neighbors in the Middle East. For a start, they started with the Patriot air defense system, which had previously been deployed to cover the oil infrastructure from UAV attacks and Iranian proxy cruise missiles from Yemen. The head of the White House with surprising directness told the general public his conversation with the monarch:

We defend Saudi Arabia. They are rich. And I love the king, King Salman. But I said: “King, we protect you, and you cannot stay there even for two weeks without us. Therefore, you must pay for our military. ”

It must be assumed that the reduction in oil production has become a payment for "protection". The bottom line is that the Saudis are exactly the same losers in the "oil war" as we are, and the real winner is well known to everyone. This is, like last time, the United States of America.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

kriten

+6

15 May 2020 12: 01

The author does not understand the situation .... Now, however, there are almost no others.
1. Marzhecki
  
  -2
  
  15 May 2020 12: 15
  
  Well, zero arguments, one rudeness.
  I love the comments of the "network experts": point to anyone, either a Doctor of Economics, or a military analyst.
  1. Alexei Ushakov
    
    +4
    
    15 May 2020 14: 08
    
    And who are you? Is it a network expert? In all areas? ))) Do not you yourself write about airplanes, the economy, oil, the Navy? So who are you ??) Mnogostanochnik?) How is your article doing, that Nord Stream 2 will never be completed?) (Expert) Everything that you write is the "Yellow Press".
    1. Observer2014
      
      0
      
      15 May 2020 23: 15
      
      Quote: Alexey Ushakov
      ... one winner is the United States. Washington did not allow itself to be burdened with any production quotas under the new OPEC + deal. A certain decrease occurred for purely economic reasons, but it can be increased again at any time. Now Americans need high prices that are comfortable for their manufacturers, and what do we see?
      
      So let him write! Did he step on your tail ?! Or are you able to print articles in such quantities? Take and comment on the article. Or there’s not enough mind for the article, so let’s try to comment on the commentator or author of the article. What, such a wimp. Gathering a bad crowd under ya sauce is one thing. But the material of the article is. So butt with the material of the article. Commenting out.
      
      this is the "Yellow Press".
      
      And what, not the yellow press? AND!? Well, object to me. Name it specifically. What is now not called the "Yellow Press". Name the newspapers. TV shows, authors on the net. Forward. Come on. First ...
  2. Nick
    
    +3
    
    15 May 2020 19: 36
    
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    Well, zero arguments, one rudeness.
    
    Your articles also have zero arguments, analytics zero. Solid fiction. You are not even given to understand that production volumes reduce EVERYTHING for economic reasons. There is only one reason for all, a drop in oil consumption. There are no other reasons. Demand for the Russian Urals remains, which is confirmed by the prices for it, which are equal to the more expensive Brent. But the Saudis had to reduce production beyond the limits, simply because their oil does not find demand. Demand for American oil also fell and shale producers reduced their production. Russia is the only one of all large oil producers who maintains production volumes and has no problems with oil sales. The other two customers are in a huge minus and are already fighting for markets among themselves.
    Good analytics here:
2. The comment was deleted.
123

+6

15 May 2020 13: 31

In early March, Moscow was required to introduce oil production quotas in the amount of 0,5 million barrels per day.

This is not entirely true, quotas were set by earlier agreements, Moscow did not agree with OPEC's decision to further reduce production. Actually, why did she have to do this? Russia is not a member of OPEC, what they decided there is their business.

At the suggestion of the head of Rosneft, we loudly slammed the door in the Austrian capital, refusing to extend the OPEC + deal.

First, "at the suggestion of the head of Rosneft," this is the speculation of journalists, a primitive view of events, Sechin is far from the entire Russian oil industry. Secondly, they refused not to extend the deal, but to further reduce production. Russia did not refuse to follow the terms of the deal on the old terms. They are not the same thing.

Igor Sechin, who, as it turned out, still confuses barrels and tons, began to wait for the producers of American shale oil to go bankrupt.

It is very funny to read such expressions performed by a person who has a vague idea of observing the established quotas and reducing them with a new agreement, who does not understand the difference between extending the terms of a transaction and setting new restrictions.

The end of the “six-week war”, which was then launched by Saudi Arabia, is well known: quotes collapsed, export earnings from all manufacturers plummeted, and the coronavirus pandemic exacerbated the situation. After a month and a half, Russia was forced to commit itself to quotas for oil production in the amount of 5 times more than originally required.

Yes, indeed, Russia has reduced production, but as you know, it’s not the only one; the United States and other countries that previously categorically refused to do so went for a reduction.
As for the coronavirus, I hope the author is not trying to blame Sechin for the pandemic? Again, which of this paragraph can we conclude? Agree to all the demands of the Saudi princes, because they behave like hysterical princesses and act like a monkey with a grenade, in the end everything will be worse? So what?

Of course, yes: they lost, and we, and all the major producers of raw materials. There is probably only one winner - this is the United States.

Thank you for having fun.

Washington did not allow itself to burden itself with any production quotas under the new OPEC + deal. A certain decrease occurred for purely economic reasons, but it can be increased again at any time.

Why don't they boost production right now? You might think that Russia imposed restrictions on 300 years. As far as I know, no one signed the agreement at all, an oral "gentleman's" agreement in the "online conference" mode.

Now Americans need high prices that are comfortable for their manufacturers, and what do we see?
Saudi Aramco said that in addition to those 2,5 million barrels per day, it will take on additional restrictions of another 1 million barrels from June.

The Saudis simply cannot sell their oil, no one needs it. And what, as a result, the US got a "comfortable" price?

It must be assumed that the reduction in oil production has become a payment for "protection". The bottom line is that Saudis are exactly the same losers in the "oil war", as we areand the real winner is well known to everyone. This is, like last time, the United States of America.

Juggling workshop, bravo, to tell about the "family quarrel" of the Saudis and the Americans and to drag Russia here somehow sideways. This kind of "analytics" is like trying to drown out the ambergris from your pants with deodorant.
I completely agree with the assessment kriten (Vladimir)
I wanted to ask, you accidentally did not trade dates, but changed your mind, your ceiling - measure seeds at the transition with glasses. Diplomas, by chance, not from there?
Sergey Latyshev

-4

15 May 2020 13: 56

And, again, a fad appeared in the brains - an evil USA or not an evil USA.

But in fact, even before the exam they taught at school, and common sense says one thing:
The winners are consumers. Europe, China, India, Asian and American tigers, USA.
Losers are manufacturers. All.
In the past, after 14 years, a drop in prices, they wrote - Europe added + 3% of production simply due to cheaper fuel and transportation. Now - a number of countries bought on the decline of oil / gas, how much could .....

And all the Russian Federation, CA, USA - this is already particular, they have been sucking them for 2 months, and they will still have completely different conclusions from different experts ...
Oyo Sarkazmi

+4

15 May 2020 16: 04

USA with 30 million unemployed at once - winners !!! Everyone will be sent to Syria in wheelbarrows to export oil through Jordan and Israel ...
The USA is the biggest loser. In a month (or two, how to count), production from 13 million bar fell to 7,5. And after correcting the situation, the pump will not immediately turn on. Why did you say that you can’t stop the wells, you have to burn oil? And the water! Water is pumped along with oil, a certain percentage that seeps out. It is impossible without this. Stop pumping - water will replace oil. When hydraulic fracturing or displacement is carried out - there you generally need to balance a liter per pint. Neither pumping nor pumping can be stopped.
faterdom

+3

15 May 2020 20: 35

The author undertook a difficult task: to appoint winners. About December 41, he would have taken to hand out laurels - Germany or Japan, the United States or the USSR. It was at that time that at that time only Germany was sure of her victory.
But it was an erroneous assurance, as a result, her leader managed to drink poison.
Author?
Astronaut

+5

16 May 2020 20: 10

Yeah, the US "won" half of the shale companies in the pre-bankruptcy state.

Washington has not allowed to burden itself with any quotas for production in the framework of a new transaction OPEC +

Of course he didn’t allow it, his production is falling without quotas ...
1. Natan bruk
  
  -3
  
  17 May 2020 01: 02
  
  Aha. Only there all these companies are hedged. But the main thing is that even if there is no shale oil / gas at all, nothing terrible will happen to the American economy. It is not built on oil and gas, unlike the modern Russian one and its share in the US budget is minimal. The fact that the US is nothing more than a nuisance is a disaster for Russia.
Ruslan Ruslan

+1

16 May 2020 23: 00

Mr. Marzhetsky!
Let me disagree with you. It doesn’t matter for what reasons the US has reduced oil production, the main reason for this is Russia's actions. But the United States did not plan to reduce its production in the OPEC + transaction at all, but the fact remains that production decreased by about 1 million barrels per day. And while quotes are starting to rise, the situation is already awful for the shale industry, more than 150 wells have closed, a large number of companies have already gone bankrupt, including large ones, such as Chesapeake Energy, which has accumulated $ 2 billion in debt. The other day, the largest NOT a shale company California Resources, which has already lost 75% of its value and has debts of $ 5 billion. And this is only the beginning.
And here is what they write about this situation in the American Forbes, recognizing that Russia at this stage won both the USA and the KSA in the oil war.

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/zakonodatel/v-forbes-poiasnili-prichiny-nesgibaemosti-rossiiskogo-gazproma-vo-vremia-mirovogo-krizisa-5ebdd567f1689869c21cdb7c

What will happen next is another stage in history and the next page of the ongoing economic war launched by the United States against Russia.
1. Ruslan Ruslan
  
  +3
  
  16 May 2020 23: 16
  
  I apologize, I was a little mistaken. Whiting Petroleum already went bankrupt in April, with a debt of $ 2 billion, and Chesapeake Energy expects bankruptcy by July.
  
  And another alarming trend for US oil and gas companies: companies are reducing not only production, but also investment. So, Diamondback Energy Inc., Callon Petroleum Co. and Cimarex Energy Co., active in the Permian Basin shale field, have warned investors that they do not intend to increase investment next year.