Seeking Alpha

EconMatters

 
View as an RSS Feed
View EconMatters' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    $XOM $CVX both have huge overseas LNG operations, and are dividend-paying blue chips. $CHK is the top domestic natgas producer and shale gas operator. $DVN $ECA and other stocks and ETFs mentioned in this article and my next one are all good candidates for your consideration.
    Thanks for your comment.


    On Aug 27 02:16 PM ffwpg wrote:

    > Thanks for the response. I was in at about 6.40 and got out after
    > a 16k bath. I see no reason that it continues down even tho' the
    > manager of the fund tried pumping it upon BNN. I could easily be
    > down a further 20k. at this point. Got any ideas of when to get back
    > in? I have noted your other plays such as CVX as an alternative.
    >
    Aug 28, 2009. 08:16 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil and Natural Gas: Ratio Explodes in 2009 [View article]
    The ratio tightening discussed in the article is based on my view of the global (and U.S.) economic stagnation scenario (low/no growth) in 2010, and ramp-up from 2011 onwards. Based on this, dollar, natgas, oil, etc. should resume the historical correlation/ratio pattern.
    If you are looking at just 2010 or even 2011 timeline, then no, natgas prices are not going to take off to $6-8/mmbtu. That's why I recommended the investment options for long term investors.
    Thanks for your comment.


    On Aug 28 01:11 AM William M. Wright wrote:

    > Many agree Oil is the logical pull-back price. Market economic forces
    > are working on NG but not Oil. Yes, the dollar weakness is the killer.
    > But they need to raise margin requirements.
    >
    > Margin requirements on oil need to be closer to stocks requirements.
    > Recall when the news blamed one trader using margin responsible for
    > pushing Oil over $72, as the trade was unwound the price of oil declined
    > for weeks? Remember? Now were right back to pushing Oil to $75. Yes,
    > Oils inverse correlation to the dollar is the reason you have to
    > toss out the old ratios. Sure the ratio was smaller in the 90's because
    > the dollar was climbing. Looking at the statistics you can see the
    > ratio changing back in 2003.
    >
    > Now here is food for thought to show you how times change. Look at
    > the price of NG back in 2002-2003. Now look at the price of DVN,
    > APC or APA back then -I know I owned DVN and no one wanted to be
    > these stocks back then but now everyone's looking to buy them on
    > pull backs even though the price of NG has fall all year long and
    > the storage tanks are full.
    Aug 28, 2009. 07:43 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil and Natural Gas: Ratio Explodes in 2009 [View article]
    $APC, $BHI, etc. are not pure natgas plays like $UNG and thus have low or no correlation to natgas prices.
    Unfortunately, most investment vehicles like $UNG are likely to be subject to regulatory overhaul, unless you play directly in the futures market. So I would recommend stay away from natgas ETF's till the dust settles.
    Individual investors may trade futures at IB (Interactive Brokers); however, we all know about the higher capital requirement and risks involved.
    Thanks for your comment, hope to see more often.


    On Aug 28 02:27 AM Ricard wrote:

    > Hmmm...another great article from Ms. Chu about what I'm sure is
    > a popular deep value play.
    >
    > I do have some questions. I'm looking at the APC charts and am comparing
    > it to the Henry Hub. Seems there's no real correlation between the
    > two...same for APA, BHI, KWK, etc...NG shows a slow, steady decline
    > from July of last year onward, but not a single NG play displays
    > the same pattern...except for UNG, which has its own issues.
    >
    > Instead, what you see is exactly what you hear in the media - many
    > people are loading on NG plays, even though NG itself is tanking.
    >
    >
    > Could NG really head lower, and could these speculators be taken
    > for a ride? Is there anything out there that actually reflects spot
    > prices to some degree?
    Aug 28, 2009. 07:30 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil and Natural Gas: Ratio Explodes in 2009 [View article]
    I would play it like this: Short the RBOB contracts and long natgas. why? See my article on the refining sector dated 8/11/09. Thanks for your keen interest in quite a few of my articles.


    On Aug 27 04:57 PM ETFdesk.com wrote:

    > I am playing this headline with (USO DBO USL UNG FCG) Ok so if you
    > buy the argument that Oil : Nat gas ratio should fall from 25 to
    > 1 back to 15 to 1 or lower, why not short Oil, Long Gas? How would
    > you play it>?
    >
    > track this over time...
    > tinyurl.com/ljrwkk
    Aug 27, 2009. 11:20 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil and Natural Gas: Ratio Explodes in 2009 [View article]
    In my 7/13/09 article, I noted that I expect stagnation through 2010, as the economy slowly recovers, which would not have justified a $72/bbl oil price tag barring any hurricanes, geopolitical crisis, and 'excessive' speculations.
    NatGas might move up from the current low's contributing to the ratio tightening, but to a much lesser extent than the movement from the crude oil side.
    I beieve the ratio should move back to the historical range of 8 to 12 by the end of next year.

    On Aug 27 06:42 PM dano123 wrote:

    > "We should expect the ratio to narrow with most of the tightening
    > likely coming from the retracement of oil prices to the downside.
    > While it is difficult to expect a 10 to 1 ratio, some tightening
    > towards 15 to 1 level could be in the cards by next year, depending
    > on the pace of the global economic recovery. "
    >
    >
    > You say the ratio will tighten due to falling oil as the economy
    > recovers. So oil goes down when economies recover? Hmmm.....learn
    > something new everyday.
    Aug 27, 2009. 11:13 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    If you already own $GAS, then I would recommend hold long instead of selling at a loss now. North America natgas price should bottom out soon, but in my opinion, the climb back to $6-$8/mmbtu is not likely in the cards for 2010.
    Below is a copy/paste a previous discussion thread on $GAS & $UNG for you reference.

    "As for Claymore Natural Gas Commodity Fund, it has been designed to track the performance of the benchmark NGX Canadian Natural Gas Index. The fund will likely be subject to the similiar regulatory issues and market risks just like $UNG and other commodities ETFs.
    Thanks for your comment.

    On Aug 17 03:13 PM adamnb wrote:

    > One etf alternative to UNG is Claymore Natural Gas Commodity Fund > (seekingalpha.com/symb... that trades on the Toronto Exchange, > trading at about 5 (Canadian)"

    On Aug 26 11:05 AM ffwpg wrote:

    > Is GAS.TO (claymore etf) safe long? Talking head on BNN suggested
    > his firm bought at beginning of summer ( over $6 ). Now barely over
    > $4. How low does it go...out the bottom? I get the feeling folks
    > are being hosed.
    Aug 26, 2009. 01:32 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Prepare Yourself for the Inflation Invasion [View article]
    Just take a look at the stock and commodities markets, whose performance has diverged from and contradited to almost all economic indicators.

    Yes, investment banks are not lending, because they are pushing money into hard assets and quities with superior returns vs. lending to consumers and businesses. Noticed that $GS let its macro bulls out? www.bloomberg.com/apps...

    Also, the QE is not limited to the U.S. Just like the current recession is the most globally synchorinized in history, so are the global central banks QE's. Imagine the amount of money pumped into the system globally when we finally come out of this recession. If that does not spell inflation, then I don't know what does.
    Thanks for your comment.


    On Aug 25 08:36 AM Marli wrote:

    > I pose a question.
    >
    > Capacity underutilization is at a historical high, the velocity of
    > money has fallen off a cliff and the traditional money multiplier
    > mechanism is temporarily impaired because of banks either parking
    > their excess capital back with the Fed to earn 0.25%, using Fed money
    > to bid in treasury auctions, or to patch the gaping holes in their
    > balance sheets.
    >
    > Banks are reluctant to lend and are holding on to the low-cost capital
    > provided by the Fed to brace themselves for the impending wave of
    > Alt-A, optionARM and prime real estate losses.
    >
    > If the historical correlation between monetary profligacy and inflation
    > has been compromised by the above, then how exactly will monetary-based
    > inflation manifest itself within the next few years?
    Aug 25, 2009. 07:35 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prepare Yourself for the Inflation Invasion [View article]
    That's why I said "most analysts" instead of "all analysts". I also noted staflation and reflation in the article, in addition to hyperinflation and stagnation.
    Thanks for your comment.


    On Aug 24 07:43 AM Living4Dividends wrote:

    > "Most analysts are of two minds about inflation: One group tends
    > to argue that the Fed's printing of new money would lead to explosive
    > inflation or even "hyperinflation.” The other group argues that there
    > is too much "slack" in the economy for prices to rise, i.e., a stagnation
    > scenario, due to high unemployment, falling wages, plunging home
    > values, and damaged 401ks. So far, the latter view seems to have
    > held up better."
    >
    > You write that the only two choices are Hyperinflation or Stagnation.
    > It's not that simplistic: There are many other options.
    Aug 24, 2009. 09:16 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    I'm saying if you already bought $UNG at below $45, then hold long, instead of selling at a loss now.

    However, if you don't already own $UNG, but are looking to get in on natgas now, then I would advise to stay away from $UNG due to the various regulatory and market risks as outlined in my article. Instead, I would take a look at the E&Ps listed in the article.

    For seasoned traders looking to play with the price momentum, I would say short $UNG.

    Hope this helps clarify. hank you for your comment.


    On Aug 22 01:05 PM SouthboroughMAGuy wrote:

    > It sounds like you are saying if you bought under 45, then hold.
    > But in general you're saying don't buy UNG, and in fact, short it.
    > How does that all add up if the price is currently under 12?
    >
    > Or are you saying, short UNG for some tight time frame - next 3 months,
    > but 2-3 years out you expect it to go up?
    >
    > What am I missing?
    Aug 22, 2009. 07:01 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    I replied on $GAZ to the wrong thread.
    As for Claymore Natural Gas Commodity Fund, it has been designed to track the performance of the benchmark NGX Canadian Natural Gas Index. The fund will likely be subject to the similiar regulatory issues and market risks just like $UNG and other commodities ETFs.
    Thanks for your comment.

    On Aug 17 03:13 PM adamnb wrote:

    > One etf alternative to UNG is Claymore Natural Gas Commodity Fund
    > (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) that trades on the Toronto Exchange,
    > trading at about 5 (Canadian).
    Aug 22, 2009. 11:01 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    Here is the latest on $GAZ: Barclays suspends iPath nat-gas ETN issuance $GAZ tinyurl.com/m4ps6u
    Thanks for your comment

    On Aug 17 12:28 PM Castrese Tipaldi wrote:

    > Speaking of tracking NatGas, why nobody ever notices GAZ?
    >
    > I guess it's just too cool bidding up the price of an ETF like UNG
    > to double digit premium to its NAV, a total non-sense!
    >
    > An ETF structured like UNG is just a gigantic wealth transfer from
    > retail investors (other than aggressive traders) to the Wall Street
    > finest.
    >
    > Just think about the constant roll over: all other futures traders
    > know what it has to do and when it must do it.
    > Amazing!
    >
    > Long GAZ, short UNG!
    Aug 22, 2009. 09:07 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    Here is the latest on $GAZ: Barclays suspends iPath nat-gas ETN issuance $GAZ tinyurl.com/m4ps6u
    Thanks for your comment.

    On Aug 17 03:13 PM adamnb wrote:

    > One etf alternative to UNG is Claymore Natural Gas Commodity Fund
    > (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) that trades on the Toronto Exchange,
    > trading at about 5 (Canadian).
    Aug 22, 2009. 09:01 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    This is the latest on $UNG net asset value that might help: WSJ: $UNG now trading at $12.8% premium snipr.com/qkzwq
    I still recommend short $UNG.

    On Aug 22 06:04 AM H. T. Love wrote:

    > Thought it might be useful to know that UNG is taking steps that
    > could affect an assumpton of premium over NAV.
    >
    > On Aug 21 07:08 PM H. T. Love wrote:
    Aug 22, 2009. 08:47 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    As noted in my article, I recommend oil-weighted E&P companies shares like $APA, $XTO as hedge for current $UNG holdings or as new investments in both the oil and natgas.
    I like the ETF $XOP as well.
    If you'd prefer natgas-weighted producers, $CHK, $APC, $DVN are all very solid and well-managed E&Ps worthy of a look.

    On Aug 21 07:41 PM Ricard wrote:

    > Very interesting article and comment stream. I'm long term bullish
    > on natural gas, but am not familiar (at all) with this sector. Seems
    > this ETF is not the way to go. Anyone have a list of stocks to recommend
    > for this play?
    >
    > Thanks.
    Aug 21, 2009. 09:19 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas ETF Suspends New Shares: Are There Alternatives? [View article]
    I would recommend holding $UNG @ $13 long.
    If you click and enlarge the graph of the article, you will see I recommended hold if bought below $45.
    Thanks for your comment.

    On Aug 21 05:33 PM oldtenor wrote:

    > Thanks for the article & comments.
    > Unfortunately, I bought UNG several weeks ago at $13.00.
    > Should I sell to take a loss ?
    > Thanks for advice.
    Aug 21, 2009. 09:09 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
185 Comments
482 Likes