Iranian Sanctions - What Are The Facts?

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

https://sputniknews.com/business/201809251068325352-indian-refiners-not-dependent-iranian-crude/

older news but may still hold true for them

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

https://sputniknews.com/business/201809151068064076-india-readying-terminate-iran-oil-sanctions/

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

https://www.reuters.com/article/iran-nuclear-india/indian-oil-to-turn-to-traditional-suppliers-to-meet-iran-oil-shortfall-idUSL3N1ST43L

 

The Indian refiners have stated in the past that they can and will replace Iranian barrels if push comes to shove

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

They have plan A-D for Iranian sanction related crude supply issues

https://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/india-has-plan-d-to-deal-with-trump-s-sanctions-on-iran-oil-supply/story-Lh07ZoboZQg8TLHlIAvzRJ.html

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

I had a feeling deep in my gut that I was being drawn in to rising prices.  There was simply too much information telling me that prices would rise.  They may still, but it's looking more and more like the uncertainties are disappearing.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

It's from CNBC and Goldman Sachs, but for what it's worth:

Goldman Sachs on oil prices: 'We don't have a problem today, but we potentially have one tomorrow'

• Still, September numbers revealed that OPEC Plus production grew 32,000 bpd faster than the decline in Iran, leading some analysts to dismiss predictions of crude cracking $100 a barrel.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

1 minute ago, Dan Warnick said:

I had a feeling deep in my gut that I was being drawn in to rising prices.  There was simply too much information telling me that prices would rise.  They may still, but it's looking more and more like the uncertainties are disappearing.

We wont really know the full effect till Nov, enjoy making some $$$$ on trades till then , it is a great time to ramp up physical barrels trades too upto the run up

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Just now, Dan Warnick said:

It's from CNBC and Goldman Sachs, but for what it's worth:

Goldman Sachs on oil prices: 'We don't have a problem today, but we potentially have one tomorrow'

• Still, September numbers revealed that OPEC Plus production grew 32,000 bpd faster than the decline in Iran, leading some analysts to dismiss predictions of crude cracking $100 a barrel.

My personal opinion is that even if Iranian barrels exports drops down to zero, between Saudi Arabia, UAE maybe Q8, Russia and the US, there will be enough barrels to go around to cover the shortfall.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

1 minute ago, Dan Warnick said:

It's from CNBC and Goldman Sachs, but for what it's worth:

Goldman Sachs on oil prices: 'We don't have a problem today, but we potentially have one tomorrow'

• Still, September numbers revealed that OPEC Plus production grew 32,000 bpd faster than the decline in Iran, leading some analysts to dismiss predictions of crude cracking $100 a barrel.

I saw a news blurb not too long ago, last night, coming out of WAF that there  maybe "many"? unsold cargoes of WAF crude, if that is true even if 5 or 10 cargoes of a million bbls each that would def. put a slight dent in the Brent pricing

Trying to find the link to it to see the details or how valid that piece of info is

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 minute ago, ceo_energemsier said:

I saw a news blurb not too long ago, last night, coming out of WAF that there  maybe "many"? unsold cargoes of WAF crude, if that is true even if 5 or 10 cargoes of a million bbls each that would def. put a slight dent in the Brent pricing

Trying to find the link to it to see the details or how valid that piece of info is

WAF?

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

2 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

WAF?

Sorry should have clarified West Africa

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Good night all. Enough for one day.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

6 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

WAF?

Here it is, wow 25 cargoes--- India and China should jump on it, it creates a very good opportunity for physical trades to grab these cargoes now.

________________________________

https://af.reuters.com/article/angolaNews/idAFL8N1WQ4YH

NIGERIA

* Nigerian cargoes have been slow to sell over the past few weeks, but this did not deter sellers from raising their offer prices for both Qua Iboe and Bonny Light.

* Both were offered around $1.70 a barrel above dated Brent, compared with recent indications closer to $1.55, but found no buyers.

 

* There are around 25 cargoes left for sale from the October and November programmes, marking very little change over the last week.

[Epic + 390]

On 10/10/2018 at 5:24 AM, NAPHTA said:

So, anyone here who can tell if there is any country in the world that actually used nuclear weapon in a war situation?

You are right: no reasonable country would actually use nukes in a war.  I originally thought Iran wanted nukes so that they could destroy Israel, or something like that.  However, I could never quite fully reconcile that single-minded focus with a "leader" of any country...  I mean, to become a leader of an entire people, one must have some semblance of wisdom and/or sensibility; yet, this is not the case if your sole purpose in life is to utterly destroy another. 

However, I recently discovered an alternate reasoning behind why Iran wants nukes, and it makes a lot more sense.  It goes like this...

It is quite possible that there are rich and powerful groups in this world who want to help themselves at everyone else's expense.  In order to best do this, they need to control everyone.  The easiest way to control people is to control their source of information.  This is most effectively done with money by creating huge news media conglomerates.  What is also necessary is to bribe or blackmail politicians in order to have them manipulate the government-run education system in the direction they want it to go (rather than helping citizens to lift themselves us, you cut everyone down to size with a stupidly inefficient no-child-left-behind act, or something similar).  However, with the advent of the internet, control over information (for them) is in danger of being lost.  Therefore, they must ensure that plan-B is ready in order to keep control.  Plan-b can be found written in stone here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

Read rule #1. 

 

How to best accomplish rule #1 (plan-b) should control over information be lost: 

Through blackmail, subterfuge, and murder, the people in power are able to 'turn' agents from various nations into double agents, or rogue agents.  They can then use these agents to help place puppets in charge of rogue nations in exchange for various things.  Once in power, they use the rogue nations to develop nuclear programs so as to give the people in power access to rogue nukes.  Then when the time is necessary, they can kick off plan-b...reducing the population of the world below half of a billion (a controllable number).    

Iran and Iraq used to be bitter enemies...  That was taken care of by US forces...in exchange for what?  Iran used to have debilitating sanctions placed against them, but those were removed by a US president...in exchange for what?  That US president's #1 adviser was born in which country?  Coincidence?  Which US Secretary of State had as her #1 adviser someone with direct ties to the terrorist organisation the Muslim Brotherhood?  Which influential politician was on very good terms with the head of ISIS?  (I'll give you a hint in the attached pic).  There is a reason that big politicians set up non-profit foundations which allow unrestricted giving of "donations"...  Guess why?  

Now, I am not trying to say that Iran is a puppet of the US; on the contrary, what I am suggesting is that it is not completely illogical that certain politicians of the US have received "donations" to their "foundations" in exchange for distributing favors to groups of very wealthy individuals who have very specific agendas that may or may not be understood by those politicians.  Does anyone think it is unusual that the Clinton Foundation had to lay off so many employees back in early 2017.  I wonder why that would be?  And do you really think that someone mistakenly pressed the "wrong button" on January 13th, 2017?  Of all the times emergency alerts have gone out, how many times has a "button" been mistakenly pressed within the system since the beginning of emergency alerts?  There are multiple levels of fail-safes to prevent "accidental" button pressing.  Why do you think they would want to start a war on January 13th?  What was about to occur exactly 7 days later?  And 7 days later, when he took over, what has since been his policy concerning Iran?

...take it for what you will.  

 

[Rodent + 1,424]

4 minutes ago, Epic said:

... to become a leader of an entire people, one must have some semblance of wisdom and/or sensibility

Say what, now???

[NAPHTA + 33]

38 minutes ago, Epic said:

You are right: no reasonable country would actually use nukes in a war. 

....

Jisses! What an epic, detailed answer to my humble question! I miss Dr Strangelove! Thank you for the text and the photo with smiling people. But you know, another honoured member has already filled the gap: Switzerland actually did it.  Imagine that! and then they tell you goodnight stories about William Tell and the rest of it.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 hours ago, J S said:

Basic question to all the Trump lovers out there.  When is the last time Trump ever had an active automobile drivers license?  When is the last time Trump ever drove a car?  When is the last time Trump ever filled up a car with gas?  I am betting the answer to all these questions is more than 30 years ago.

And Hillary?

[NAPHTA + 33]

Who's she? A Swiss? 

But seriously, these political issues are sometimes so inhuman and there are so many words there flying in all directions. Read a good romantic book instead! That's what I do, when oil prices fall.

Here it is: 

Hiroshima My Love by Duras. Really good, it's about the intense encounter between a man and a woman in Hiroshima.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 minutes ago, NAPHTA said:

Who's she? A Swiss? 

But seriously, these political issues are sometimes so inhuman and there are so many words there flying in all directions. Read a good romantic book instead! That's what I do, when oil prices fall.

Here it is: 

Hiroshima My Love by Duras. Really good, it's about the intense encounter between a man and a woman in Hiroshima.

Hillary Hiroshima, nee Clinton, nee Rodham?  Probably a ghost writer.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Dan Warnick

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

30 minutes ago, J S said:

That said  maybe you would find Hillary more attractive if you thought of her in black latex with a whip...  I am sure that was what the majority of Americans did when they voted for her.

I am feeling itchy again to make more money on oil.  My question is why would anyone else be on this website but stock and oil traders?   Someone enlighten me.   When I am not trying to make money on this stuff, I don't really care about it.

That's just rude.  I mean, I know you didn't know I had just had dinner, but man...the mental image!  Remember a time when a simple "Good grief, Charlie Brown" was a good enough comeback?  Think of the line about "I'm going to say 2 words, and when I say them I don't want you to think about the item.  Ok: Purple Bananas."  Hard to get out of your head once it's put there.  Thanks for the Hillary image.  Good grief.

I'm here to trade oil, too, but the various forum topics on here are interesting in between.  For the most part the participants are interesting and there are a great many different perspectives, formed by life experiences and origins.  I think it's great, for the most part.  We do need more discussions on the price of oil though. 

I had even thought about starting one today with a title like "What Do You Think the Price of WTI and Brent Will Rise or Fall to Today?" and asking commenters to keep the comments only about the prices of the present trading day, and to add their reason(s) for their predictions (news article, charts, gut feeling, whatever).

[Tesla3D 0]

I think it was India Times*  India announced it would continue buying oil directly from Iran. There is strong indication from this they will not use the PetroDollar. Today, India's August public Gold Imports show over a 50% increase over previous month. Over a 100% increase over Jan 2018. In other words, it has been on a huge uptrend. China recently devalued its currency. The Treasury is considering  labeling China as a "currency manipulator". Other economic studies indicate that China and Russia have been accumulating massive amounts of physical gold. They have conducted regional meetings to establish a SDR (Special Drawing Rights) with the IMF. The "Euro-Dollar" was a SDR for years, it is a historical concept. It appears China's currency was "pegged" to the USD for decades. There is speculation it is now De-pegged from the USD. That external traders have a counterparty to settle in gold or other options.  

Another older related story: The day of he announcement for Iran Sanctions, the China high-speed rail (co-designed with Russia) opened service from Iran to the largest shipping port in China. Oil can arrive in China by land 2.3 weeks faster than any maritime service. The new China rail technology is worth looking into. For the past many centuries, sea power determined trade routes and currencies. This is changing as Eruo-Asia high-speed high-tech rail or Silk Road is emerging. One might possibly guess that China is not going to pay Russia or Iran in PetroDollars for the pipeline or rail delivery. 

I am not making any predictions, at least in the future, as to how this could change oil or the Petrodollar we have become accustomed to expect for world trade. I will leave that to others.

* On paid subscriptions that provided links, I have long since lost the links. Sorry I don't have time to lookup and post links. But, I did open the links and read the stories when they appeared..

[HYDROGEN SOCIETY 0]

Hi!

[Goose Creek Farm,LLC + 7]

President Obama did not sign a Treaty with Iran because it would not  be approved by the US Senate that was controlled by  the Democrats . So he by passed the Senate and  made it  an agreement that was subject to  the next President ( Trump ) withdrawing from it .

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

15 hours ago, HYDROGEN SOCIETY said:

Hi!

Hi, Hydro.  Sorry it's taken this long for someone to acknowledge your hello.  There is actually an introduce yourself thread around here somewhere.  I'll let @CMOP  or @Rodent guide you in.  Welcome!

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

46 minutes ago, Goose Creek Farm,LLC said:

President Obama did not sign a Treaty with Iran because it would not  be approved by the US Senate that was controlled by  the Democrats . So he by passed the Senate and  made it  an agreement that was subject to  the next President ( Trump ) withdrawing from it .

Hi Goose,

Do you have some article or other that confirms your details.  I wasn't aware of those, but would sure like to see them.