Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Time horizon matters here. Over the near term most would expect higher crude prices, after the heavy oil from seized VZ tankers has been dumped onto the market. While the threat of a dump will be held over Canadian suppliers, resolution would most likely be a temporary diversion of Canadian supply into inventory, to force the dump. The US doesn't have the heavy oil inventory, and once that seized VZ heavy has gone ... good for Canada over the near term. 

 

Today, the mystery is how the rest of the world treats this head of state extradition, that is an act of war. Can Putin now execute a similar head of state extradition/assassination on the Ukrainian Zelensky? Can Xi Jingping now execute a similar head of state extradition/assassination on the Taiwanese Lai Ching-te? Can Netayahu now execute a similar head of state extradition/assassination on the Iranian Khamenei? Can the world now execute a similar head of state extradition/assassination of Putin or Trump? Any one of these, will raise volatility in a big way. 

 

Most would now expect a coup, and opposition sabotage of export facilities that makes VZ impossible to govern. The reality is that it will take years vs months to sustainably raise heavy oil exports, and given the ongoing uncertainty ... whatever is sold will go at a discount to spot. Again, good for Canada over the near term. 

 

If you already have o/g, good for you 😁, but if WTI goes much above USD 61-62 .... it might be wise to sell down and buy back later. If you're looking to get into o/g, come back later once answers are apparent.  

 

Long term nothing really changes other than the safe supply premium getting a little larger.

 

SD 

Edited by SharperDingaan
Posted
1 hour ago, shhughes1116 said:

+1

 

If Venezuelan crude comes back to the market in significant quantities, it would end up in Padd 3 and likely displace Canadian crude.  The current direction of pipelines would make it hard for Venezuelan crude to be refined in other geographic areas, so padd 2 and padd 4 would continue to be the primary destination for Canadian crude.  
 

All of this probably leads to small drop in WTI, and a more considerable widening of the WTI-WCS differential - negative for Canadian oil producers and especially the oil sands producers.  

 

I completely agree Venezuela could back out all the Canadian heavy out of PADD 3. But that's only 432 kbbl/d (last 6 months as  per EIA), already down from over 600k bbl/d a few years ago, even with significant Canadian production growth in that time. Exports to PADD 5 and Asia (both via TMX) have picked up the slack, while PADD 2 has remained the big destination (~2.9MMbbl/d)

 

PADD 2 refiners are a captive customer - that's why they made so much noise about a tarriff on Canadian energy. They/their customers would have had to pay it. As you note their really isn't a way for Venezuelan barrels to go from the Gulf Coast up to PADD 2.

 

As long as Canada has a home for marginal barrels past PADD 2 demand WCS spreads will remain reasonable. So if Venezuelan heavy backs Canada out of PADD 3 the producers need to find a new home for about 420 kbbl/d. There's about 120k bbl/d spare capacity on TMX so some could go to Asia. TMX could be optimized to add that capacity (more pumping stations), but it'll depend on political will in Canada.

Posted
On 11/10/2025 at 9:56 AM, Dalal.Holdings said:

https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/11/07/trump-maduro-venezuela-democracy-intervention/

 

https://www.latintimes.com/maduro-reportedly-open-leaving-venezuela-exchange-amnesty-comfortable-exile-report-591357

 

 

If the U.S. achieves a smooth regime change in Venezuela (the rightful ruler/Nobel Peace Price winner would take over), what does that mean for oil supply in the medium term? My guess is probably more downward pressure on oil prices...

 

Chevron would probably be back in a heartbeat...

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/chevron-terminates-contracts-will-keep-staff-venezuela-sources-say-2025-05-28/

 

In fact, I think this prospect is probably a key reason Venezuela is drawing so much attention from Trump...

 

8yuyf-scaled.thumb.jpg.15851a82b15a5323a4eab51b888bbbb4.jpg

image.png.15b693d981068daf747dfcc29d0cf56f.png

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, willypoo said:

Any views on how this might affect condensate?

 

Not our wheelhouse, but I would expect outcome will depend heavily upon whether TMX/rail is used to divert product from PADD 3. Higher throughput requiring more diluent, raising the demand for condensate, etc. Offset against rising LNG exports going through Kitimat, and a higher supply of associated condensate from wet wells.

 

SD

Edited by SharperDingaan
Posted

Still laughing at the energy bros who thought this guy would be good for their oil stonks

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/energy/us-will-look-tap-venezuelan-oil-reserves-trump-says-rcna252054

 

Quote

“We’ll be selling large amounts of oil to other countries,” Trump said when he was asked how controlling Venezuela’s energy supply could impact relations with China, Russia and Iran. “We’re in the oil business. We’re going to sell it to them.”

 

Posted

 

This is pretty funny. A lot of VZ's oil reserves are probably made up by Chavez-Maduro regime. Ironically, the made up reserves probably at least partially contributed to U.S. capturing Maduro ...

 

 

G96If7CXYAAPlQf.jpeg

Posted

Makes me scratch my head why Buffett is still adding to CVX and OXY in Q1&2. I took a look at CVX/XOM and it’s hard to get excited about them without higher oil which looks improbable. I was listening to a podcast and the guy was going big into oil stocks partly because they are hated but as a political hedge. I don’t know it just seems like oil has too much working against it. 

Posted
5 minutes ago, coffeecaninvestor said:

 I was listening to a podcast and the guy was going big into oil stocks partly because they are hated but as a political hedge. I don’t know it just seems like oil has too much working against it. 

 

The podcaster is right. The reality is that while a great many can quote WEBs 'buy when there is blood in the streets', very few can actually do it. Should Iran collapse tomorrow, its oil will still flow ... but at world price, vs sanctioned price, and to mostly the same buyers.

 

SD

Posted
5 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

 

The podcaster is right. The reality is that while a great many can quote WEBs 'buy when there is blood in the streets', very few can actually do it. Should Iran collapse tomorrow, its oil will still flow ... but at world price, vs sanctioned price, and to mostly the same buyers.

 

SD

WEB does not buy either when there is blood on the streets. Maybe he never sees enough blood, he needs to be a massacre and those are rare.

Posted

But is there blood in the streets in terms of valuation? $XOM’s trading north of half a trillion dollars.

 

Oil is down at $60 and XOM’s market cap is higher than when oil was >$100.

Posted
9 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

 

The podcaster is right. The reality is that while a great many can quote WEBs 'buy when there is blood in the streets', very few can actually do it. Should Iran collapse tomorrow, its oil will still flow ... but at world price, vs sanctioned price, and to mostly the same buyers.

 

SD

9 hours ago, coffeecaninvestor said:

Makes me scratch my head why Buffett is still adding to CVX and OXY in Q1&2. I took a look at CVX/XOM and it’s hard to get excited about them without higher oil which looks improbable. I was listening to a podcast and the guy was going big into oil stocks partly because they are hated but as a political hedge. I don’t know it just seems like oil has too much working against it. 

 

WEB has bought when there was blood in the streets: when OXY was in trouble, he got a sweet preferred stock deal that he continues to reap from to this day. When Oxy needed liquidity again, he got OxyChem at a steal.

 

Stop pretending Buffett is merely buying OXY common stock like the retail investors. Warren has made off much better than OXY common shareholders

 

Posted

The crazy thing about oil is that if you buy merely when there is "blood in the streets", you could still be in for a decade more of bleeding. The commodity has historically had multi-decade periods where the returns were horrible. 

 

And the other thing is -- I would not call today "blood in the streets". Has any even independent/small oil company gone bankrupt? Hell, even SOC is limping along able to do an equity raise recently. Where exactly is this "blood in the streets" that @SharperDingaan is talking about? I have yet to see real pain in the sector

Posted
26 minutes ago, Stuart D said:

But is there blood in the streets in terms of valuation? $XOM’s trading north of half a trillion dollars.

 

Oil is down at $60 and XOM’s market cap is higher than when oil was >$100.

 

Exactly. No "blood in the streets" to be found.

Posted

Don't do the research .... deserve what you get 😇. Within the WCSB, there have been quite a few transactions that say otherwise; the Strathcona Energy acquisition MEG being a more recent example. Acquisitions by people who actually run o/g companies, not tourists merely holding paper and hoping a quick flip.   

 

SD

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...