Michael Fitzsimmons - Seeking Alpha 'Michael Fitzsimmons' Tag RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/author/michael-fitzsimmons Recycling U.S. Coins into Silver http://seekingalpha.com/article/169982-recycling-u-s-coins-into-silver?source=feed 169982 Tuesday night I spent commercial time doing my annual piggy bank "roll up."

Yup, I am one of those people who dump their spare change into a large glass piggy bank and once a year pull it out and roll up the coins. As I was rolling up the coins, it dawned on me how non-precious they have become. The pennies are no longer significantly copper, the "nickels" aren't nickel, or the dimes silver. I am sure someone out there knows (and cares) about the exact composition of the coins being minted today, but I don't want to dwell on that. The point is that U.S. coinage is "cheap." It's like they are made in China (wink, wink). Anyhow, I decided it was time to trade in fake money for real money. Ron Paul would be proud of me.

]]> Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:38:28 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Tuesday night I spent commercial time doing my annual piggy bank "roll up."

Yup, I am one of those people who dump their spare change into a large glass piggy bank and once a year pull it out and roll up the coins. As I was rolling up the coins, it dawned on me how non-precious they have become. The pennies are no longer significantly copper, the "nickels" aren't nickel, or the dimes silver. I am sure someone out there knows (and cares) about the exact composition of the coins being minted today, but I don't want to dwell on that. The point is that U.S. coinage is "cheap." It's like they are made in China (wink, wink). Anyhow, I decided it was time to trade in fake money for real money. Ron Paul would be proud of me.


Complete Story »]]> COP CVX GLD SLV XOM Michael Fitzsimmons ConocoPhilips: Time to Embrace Natural Gas Transportation http://seekingalpha.com/article/169914-conocophilips-time-to-embrace-natural-gas-transportation?source=feed 169914
The ConocoPhilips (COP) quarterly earnings conference call was noteworthy for a couple of different reasons. First, the company seems to be taking logical steps to address its debt issues in light of new realities. Although several oil analysts suggested COP would sell off its Lukoil (LUKOF) stake, company executives took any potential Lukoil divestitures off the table:
(Conference call remarks in bold type)

Paul Sankey: Great. And then, if I could just clarify an early question. We are saying that you will not be selling out of any of the Lukoil state? Thanks, I will leave it there. Thank you.

Jim Mulva (CEO): Well, what I said is, we will maintain our strategic relationship with Lukoil.

]]> Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:23:52 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

The ConocoPhilips (COP) quarterly earnings conference call was noteworthy for a couple of different reasons. First, the company seems to be taking logical steps to address its debt issues in light of new realities. Although several oil analysts suggested COP would sell off its Lukoil (LUKOF) stake, company executives took any potential Lukoil divestitures off the table:
(Conference call remarks in bold type)

Paul Sankey: Great. And then, if I could just clarify an early question. We are saying that you will not be selling out of any of the Lukoil state? Thanks, I will leave it there. Thank you.

Jim Mulva (CEO): Well, what I said is, we will maintain our strategic relationship with Lukoil.


Complete Story »]]> COP LUKOF OGFGF.PK Michael Fitzsimmons A Crude 10 Year Perspective: The DJIA, Oil and Gold http://seekingalpha.com/article/167156-a-crude-10-year-perspective-the-djia-oil-and-gold?source=feed 167156 Recently the DJIA passed through 10,000 once again. It was definitely more fun on the way up than it was on the way down. Achieving the 10k milestone again was interesting for a number of reasons, not least of which were comparisons based on when the DJIA first crossed 10,000 in March of 1999 ten years ago. That is a long enough time to draw some long term conclusions. Let’s compare the DJIA index, oil and gold indicators then and now:
Ten Year Comparison of the DJIA, Oil, and Gold
Indicator
March 29, 1999
October 14, 2009
Change
DJIA
10,000
10,000
0%
Oil
$16.44
$74
450%
Gold
$280
$1060
379%
Of course I’ll be accused by nay-sayers for cherry picking data, but I cannot think of a more simple chart to bring home what should be obvious to the American people and government: we are in an oil crisis of very, very serious proportions. In fact, as I have stated before, I believe that oil has become the world’s new reserve currency of choice (replacing the U.S. dollar). Oil has even outperformed gold. That is not surprising since cars and trucks cannot run on gold. That is, oil is a more strategic commodity than is gold. This is why we have oil wars and not gold wars.
Although many today think oil is cheap at $75/barrel, and I suppose that is true with respect to the $145/barrel high in 2008, one only has to look at the $16.44 price of a barrel of oil in 1999 to know that the only way oil is cheap today is from a psychological perspective. Five years ago, $75/barrel oil would have been thought an outrageous price. After 2008, we’ve been conditioned to think it’s now cheap. Well, it ain’t.
Let’s look at the U.S. oil import numbers for the last three months (EIA data):
U.S Foreign Oil Import Data (Last 3 months)
Month
Foreign Oil Imports (barrels)
Cost*
% Dependence on
Foreign Oil
July 2009
374,000,000
$24,000,000,000
65%
August 2009
355,000,000
$25,200,000,000
65%
September 2009
357,000,000
$24,700,000,000
63%
*Cost- yes, that is Billions with a “B”. For those interested in a tick-by-tick assessment, this means the U.S. is sending over half a million dollars a minute to foreign countries for oil.
Now I’m an engineer, not an economist. However, my common sense tells me that this is not only an economic problem of disastrous proportions, but also a huge national security issue. I would add that the cost of supporting the pentagon/petroleum relationship (i.e. the military expenditures required to secure oil shipping and future supply) are not even taken into account here. Should we be surprised that a nation that imports 65% of its oil has seen its main investment benchmark (the DJIA) go nowhere over the past decade as oil is up by almost a factor of 5? At one point in 2008, it was up over 700%. We should not be surprised at the resulting economic crisis we are experiencing today. At least I am not. Economic crisis will now be the norm, not the exception. As long as we remain addicted to foreign oil, each subsequent oil shock will happen more quickly and be more economically devastating for the good ole U.S. of A. as Archie Bunker called America.
If we annualize the $24 billion a month the U.S. spent over the last 3 months on oil imports, we come up with $288 billion. Again, I’m not an economist but let’s have some fun with the figures. Let’s say a “decent job” pays $100,000 a year. How many “decent jobs” would $288 billion provide? Answer: 2,880,000. Wow, that’s a lot of jobs man. This is a very simplistic analysis, but in today’s economy, even if that number were off by a factor of 2, that’s still a lot of desperately needed jobs. And if those jobs were created in the U.S., instead of enriching foreign countries (many of whom are very antagonistic toward the U.S.) these salaries would be further recycled through the American economy via consumer spending on cars, trucks, and oh yeah, maybe even houses. So, tangentially, that is even more jobs. But alas, the Bush and Obama administrations and Congress are content to send these dollars overseas. Minute by minute, day after day, month after month, year after year.
Despite the obvious long-term sickness of the DJIA and the U.S. economy as a result of its addiction to foreign oil, the U.S. government and major U.S. based business publications (Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal, Business Week, etc. etc.), both of which should be staffed by many professionally trained economists, continue to ignore the oil crisis. They continue to ignore the solution as well: a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy centered on using American produced natural gas to power its transportation sector. Such an energy policy can be found here.
Instead, American policymakers (and business media) continue to support the dual wrong-headed policies first turbo-charged by George Bush: deficit spending and currency devaluation. Certainly deficits existed prior to George Bush, but his ridiculous tax policy combined with the administration’s loose grip on spending (to put it mildly) doubled the total U.S. deficit in a mere 8 years - a feat not accomplished since Bush senior and Reagan’s last term. And this doesn’t even count the cost of the war in Iraq, because for some reason that is “off ledger”. Of course now Obama is continuing and even expanding the deficit and devaluation policies (“d”-day times 2). Boy do I wish I had my vote back for Ron Paul! In the double-speak so common in America today, it’s very amusing to see such partisan economic hacks as CNBC’s Joe Kernen and Larry Kudlow moan about deficit spending and continue to ask for more tax cuts! Where were these Republican “deficit hawks” when Bush was in office? Well, of course they supported every Bush administration policy for lower tax rates and huge deficit spending while at the same time poo-pooing the need for an energy policy based on anything but “coal and oil”. Apparently alternative energy just isn’t “manly” enough for America. Today, it is readily apparent they have learned nothing even though the policies they supported were not only wrong, but proved disastrous both to the economy and to investors. But wait, isn’t CNBC supposed to be the nation’s leading financial network? Ha. No wonder the rest of the world looks at the U.S. and just scratches their head in wonder. What has happened to this once great nation? When did we stop thinking?
Obama, like Bush, often says “a strong dollar is in the best interest of the United States”. Then he goes off and spends money like a drunken sailor and allows the Fed and Treasury to turn on the printing presses. They have the media convinced this is good for American exports as though devaluing the currency actually has a chance of closing the yawning trade deficit and fixing all of America’s problems. Of course the fallacy is that the biggest component of the trade deficit is imported oil! So, they devalue the dollar, China pegs the yuan to it, and the net effect is that exports go up a little bit, but oil goes up a lot more and is the biggest component of the trade deficit! How can this end in anything but complete disaster for a country that imports 65% of its oil and is competing against China for future oil reserves in an era when worldwide oil supply won’t keep up with worldwide oil demand? It is worth noting that, from a historical perspective, no country has ever devalued their currency as a way to long-term economic success. In fact, just the opposite is true.
So, what should American investors do? Well, as someone said the other day, as long as President Obama and Congress are asleep at the wheel, Americans are in a situation where they would be better off investing in gold than in American companies (and thus we get the first chart above). If you must invest in stocks, invest in oil stocks like Exxon Mobil (XOM), Chevron (CVX), Conoco Philips (COP) and BP. These companies all pay nice dividends (well, Exxon being the exception…grrrrrr). Foreign oil companies may be even more compelling due to the currency issue. In this case, go with Petrobras (PBR) and StatOil (STO). Oil is going to skyrocket sooner rather than later. Oh, and they'll need those big Caterpillars to mine the gold and haul the oil sands and coal, so buy some CAT.
I hate to be a pessimist, but don’t be surprised if 10 years from now the DJIA is still below 10,000. Heck the DJIA itself may even become a non-existent relic of the past. If America doesn’t address the oil crisis head on, it too will become a relic of the past. At least it will not be recognizable to the America we live in today. There was a reason the U.S. was such a power after WWII – we were in large part self-sufficient when it came to oil. Why won’t the U.S. government and media acknowledge this fact and take corrective action? I have my own theories on this, but that’s for another time and another place. Meantime, good luck investing. If the charts above are any indication, you’ll likely need it!

Disclosures: the author owns COP, STO, PBR and gold.
]]> Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:44:32 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:
Recently the DJIA passed through 10,000 once again. It was definitely more fun on the way up than it was on the way down. Achieving the 10k milestone again was interesting for a number of reasons, not least of which were comparisons based on when the DJIA first crossed 10,000 in March of 1999 ten years ago. That is a long enough time to draw some long term conclusions. Let’s compare the DJIA index, oil and gold indicators then and now:
Ten Year Comparison of the DJIA, Oil, and Gold
Indicator
March 29, 1999
October 14, 2009
Change
DJIA
10,000
10,000
0%
Oil
$16.44
$74
450%
Gold
$280
$1060
379%
Of course I’ll be accused by nay-sayers for cherry picking data, but I cannot think of a more simple chart to bring home what should be obvious to the American people and government: we are in an oil crisis of very, very serious proportions. In fact, as I have stated before, I believe that oil has become the world’s new reserve currency of choice (replacing the U.S. dollar). Oil has even outperformed gold. That is not surprising since cars and trucks cannot run on gold. That is, oil is a more strategic commodity than is gold. This is why we have oil wars and not gold wars.
Although many today think oil is cheap at $75/barrel, and I suppose that is true with respect to the $145/barrel high in 2008, one only has to look at the $16.44 price of a barrel of oil in 1999 to know that the only way oil is cheap today is from a psychological perspective. Five years ago, $75/barrel oil would have been thought an outrageous price. After 2008, we’ve been conditioned to think it’s now cheap. Well, it ain’t.
Let’s look at the U.S. oil import numbers for the last three months (EIA data):
U.S Foreign Oil Import Data (Last 3 months)
Month
Foreign Oil Imports (barrels)
Cost*
% Dependence on
Foreign Oil
July 2009
374,000,000
$24,000,000,000
65%
August 2009
355,000,000
$25,200,000,000
65%
September 2009
357,000,000
$24,700,000,000
63%
*Cost- yes, that is Billions with a “B”. For those interested in a tick-by-tick assessment, this means the U.S. is sending over half a million dollars a minute to foreign countries for oil.
Now I’m an engineer, not an economist. However, my common sense tells me that this is not only an economic problem of disastrous proportions, but also a huge national security issue. I would add that the cost of supporting the pentagon/petroleum relationship (i.e. the military expenditures required to secure oil shipping and future supply) are not even taken into account here. Should we be surprised that a nation that imports 65% of its oil has seen its main investment benchmark (the DJIA) go nowhere over the past decade as oil is up by almost a factor of 5? At one point in 2008, it was up over 700%. We should not be surprised at the resulting economic crisis we are experiencing today. At least I am not. Economic crisis will now be the norm, not the exception. As long as we remain addicted to foreign oil, each subsequent oil shock will happen more quickly and be more economically devastating for the good ole U.S. of A. as Archie Bunker called America.
If we annualize the $24 billion a month the U.S. spent over the last 3 months on oil imports, we come up with $288 billion. Again, I’m not an economist but let’s have some fun with the figures. Let’s say a “decent job” pays $100,000 a year. How many “decent jobs” would $288 billion provide? Answer: 2,880,000. Wow, that’s a lot of jobs man. This is a very simplistic analysis, but in today’s economy, even if that number were off by a factor of 2, that’s still a lot of desperately needed jobs. And if those jobs were created in the U.S., instead of enriching foreign countries (many of whom are very antagonistic toward the U.S.) these salaries would be further recycled through the American economy via consumer spending on cars, trucks, and oh yeah, maybe even houses. So, tangentially, that is even more jobs. But alas, the Bush and Obama administrations and Congress are content to send these dollars overseas. Minute by minute, day after day, month after month, year after year.
Despite the obvious long-term sickness of the DJIA and the U.S. economy as a result of its addiction to foreign oil, the U.S. government and major U.S. based business publications (Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal, Business Week, etc. etc.), both of which should be staffed by many professionally trained economists, continue to ignore the oil crisis. They continue to ignore the solution as well: a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy centered on using American produced natural gas to power its transportation sector. Such an energy policy can be found here.
Instead, American policymakers (and business media) continue to support the dual wrong-headed policies first turbo-charged by George Bush: deficit spending and currency devaluation. Certainly deficits existed prior to George Bush, but his ridiculous tax policy combined with the administration’s loose grip on spending (to put it mildly) doubled the total U.S. deficit in a mere 8 years - a feat not accomplished since Bush senior and Reagan’s last term. And this doesn’t even count the cost of the war in Iraq, because for some reason that is “off ledger”. Of course now Obama is continuing and even expanding the deficit and devaluation policies (“d”-day times 2). Boy do I wish I had my vote back for Ron Paul! In the double-speak so common in America today, it’s very amusing to see such partisan economic hacks as CNBC’s Joe Kernen and Larry Kudlow moan about deficit spending and continue to ask for more tax cuts! Where were these Republican “deficit hawks” when Bush was in office? Well, of course they supported every Bush administration policy for lower tax rates and huge deficit spending while at the same time poo-pooing the need for an energy policy based on anything but “coal and oil”. Apparently alternative energy just isn’t “manly” enough for America. Today, it is readily apparent they have learned nothing even though the policies they supported were not only wrong, but proved disastrous both to the economy and to investors. But wait, isn’t CNBC supposed to be the nation’s leading financial network? Ha. No wonder the rest of the world looks at the U.S. and just scratches their head in wonder. What has happened to this once great nation? When did we stop thinking?
Obama, like Bush, often says “a strong dollar is in the best interest of the United States”. Then he goes off and spends money like a drunken sailor and allows the Fed and Treasury to turn on the printing presses. They have the media convinced this is good for American exports as though devaluing the currency actually has a chance of closing the yawning trade deficit and fixing all of America’s problems. Of course the fallacy is that the biggest component of the trade deficit is imported oil! So, they devalue the dollar, China pegs the yuan to it, and the net effect is that exports go up a little bit, but oil goes up a lot more and is the biggest component of the trade deficit! How can this end in anything but complete disaster for a country that imports 65% of its oil and is competing against China for future oil reserves in an era when worldwide oil supply won’t keep up with worldwide oil demand? It is worth noting that, from a historical perspective, no country has ever devalued their currency as a way to long-term economic success. In fact, just the opposite is true.
So, what should American investors do? Well, as someone said the other day, as long as President Obama and Congress are asleep at the wheel, Americans are in a situation where they would be better off investing in gold than in American companies (and thus we get the first chart above). If you must invest in stocks, invest in oil stocks like Exxon Mobil (XOM), Chevron (CVX), Conoco Philips (COP) and BP. These companies all pay nice dividends (well, Exxon being the exception…grrrrrr). Foreign oil companies may be even more compelling due to the currency issue. In this case, go with Petrobras (PBR) and StatOil (STO). Oil is going to skyrocket sooner rather than later. Oh, and they'll need those big Caterpillars to mine the gold and haul the oil sands and coal, so buy some CAT.
I hate to be a pessimist, but don’t be surprised if 10 years from now the DJIA is still below 10,000. Heck the DJIA itself may even become a non-existent relic of the past. If America doesn’t address the oil crisis head on, it too will become a relic of the past. At least it will not be recognizable to the America we live in today. There was a reason the U.S. was such a power after WWII – we were in large part self-sufficient when it came to oil. Why won’t the U.S. government and media acknowledge this fact and take corrective action? I have my own theories on this, but that’s for another time and another place. Meantime, good luck investing. If the charts above are any indication, you’ll likely need it!

Disclosures: the author owns COP, STO, PBR and gold.

Complete Story »]]> BP CAT COP CVX DIA GLD IAU OIL PBR STO USO XOM Michael Fitzsimmons The End of the Oil Age? Not Quite http://seekingalpha.com/article/166178-the-end-of-the-oil-age-not-quite?source=feed 166178 Kopin Tan recently wrote an article in Barron’s entitled “Get Ready for the Oil Age to End”. The article cites Paul Sankey’s opinion that electric and hybrid vehicles are game changers and the decline in U.S. gasoline demand as backing up the title’s claim. Further, the article states that competition from natural gas will also crimp oil demand. The overall tone of the article suggests that mankind is moving away from oil, and therefore the age of oil will be over sooner rather than later.

Poppycock!

]]> Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:30:07 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Kopin Tan recently wrote an article in Barron’s entitled “Get Ready for the Oil Age to End”. The article cites Paul Sankey’s opinion that electric and hybrid vehicles are game changers and the decline in U.S. gasoline demand as backing up the title’s claim. Further, the article states that competition from natural gas will also crimp oil demand. The overall tone of the article suggests that mankind is moving away from oil, and therefore the age of oil will be over sooner rather than later.

Poppycock!


Complete Story »]]> BP CLNE COP CVX OXY PBR STO XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Why Exxon Should Significantly Increase its Dividend http://seekingalpha.com/article/165726-why-exxon-should-significantly-increase-its-dividend?source=feed 165726 The following chart displays the ticker symbol, price, yearly dividend, and current yield for a few of the world’s largest oil and gas companies. The data is presented is as of the close on October 8, 2009. Dividend yields were obtained or calculated from online financial service data and/or individual oil company websites. I apologize in advance for any errors.

The companies are sorted from highest to lowest dividend yield.

]]> Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:33:13 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

The following chart displays the ticker symbol, price, yearly dividend, and current yield for a few of the world’s largest oil and gas companies. The data is presented is as of the close on October 8, 2009. Dividend yields were obtained or calculated from online financial service data and/or individual oil company websites. I apologize in advance for any errors.

The companies are sorted from highest to lowest dividend yield.


Complete Story »]]> CHK CLNE COP PBR STO XOM Michael Fitzsimmons The U.S. Dollar and Oil: Is an Endgame Near? http://seekingalpha.com/article/165251-the-u-s-dollar-and-oil-is-an-endgame-near?source=feed 165251 I'll keep this short. As I have been writing for the past year, those American policymakers (and I include here both Bush, Paulsen, Obama, Geitner and Bernanke) who think the solution to foreign oil addiction is financial tom-foolery are locked into a failed strategy and need to read this article by Robert Fisk in the Independent.

Please read my previous instablog post, "The Big Picture", (which SA decided not to publish for whatever reason, but which predicted Tuesday's market action) for more on this issue. Not only are Americans addicted to foreign oil, but we'll soon have a currency with which is so weak we won't even be able to purchase oil (at any price). Meanwhile, we sit on an abundance of natural gas and have readily available proven natural gas vehicle technology. As Boone Pickens said on CNBC yesterday morning, this country must be stupid.

]]> Wed, 07 Oct 2009 06:06:00 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

I'll keep this short. As I have been writing for the past year, those American policymakers (and I include here both Bush, Paulsen, Obama, Geitner and Bernanke) who think the solution to foreign oil addiction is financial tom-foolery are locked into a failed strategy and need to read this article by Robert Fisk in the Independent.

Please read my previous instablog post, "The Big Picture", (which SA decided not to publish for whatever reason, but which predicted Tuesday's market action) for more on this issue. Not only are Americans addicted to foreign oil, but we'll soon have a currency with which is so weak we won't even be able to purchase oil (at any price). Meanwhile, we sit on an abundance of natural gas and have readily available proven natural gas vehicle technology. As Boone Pickens said on CNBC yesterday morning, this country must be stupid.


Complete Story »]]> GLD OIL UDN USO UUP Michael Fitzsimmons Why Is Congress Agnostic About Natural Gas? http://seekingalpha.com/article/160548-why-is-congress-agnostic-about-natural-gas?source=feed 160548 Nothing is a better testament to Congressional dysfunction than this recent article in the New York Times about the "progress" of the natural gas bill working its way through Congress. In the article, Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy (CHK), aptly sums up the situation. "Never in my life have I been confronted with something so obviously easy and good to do and have such Congressional apathy."

Does anyone really believe that it is both physically and economically possible to drill a hole in the ground and pump millions of tons of CO2 into the hole? Even if this were true (it is not), why not start with a fuel (natural gas) that emits 50% less CO2 than coal in the first place? Meanwhile, solely focusing on CO2 emissions ignores the even bigger problem of toxic metal particulate remnants from burning coal. But I guess when you build a big enough store of those pollutants, you just allow most of it to run into the Tennessee River and then dig a big hole in Cumberland County, TN to bury the rest.

]]> Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:33:20 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Nothing is a better testament to Congressional dysfunction than this recent article in the New York Times about the "progress" of the natural gas bill working its way through Congress. In the article, Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy (CHK), aptly sums up the situation. "Never in my life have I been confronted with something so obviously easy and good to do and have such Congressional apathy."

Does anyone really believe that it is both physically and economically possible to drill a hole in the ground and pump millions of tons of CO2 into the hole? Even if this were true (it is not), why not start with a fuel (natural gas) that emits 50% less CO2 than coal in the first place? Meanwhile, solely focusing on CO2 emissions ignores the even bigger problem of toxic metal particulate remnants from burning coal. But I guess when you build a big enough store of those pollutants, you just allow most of it to run into the Tennessee River and then dig a big hole in Cumberland County, TN to bury the rest.


Complete Story »]]> BP COP CVX PBR STO UNG XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Energy Secretary Chu Wimps Out Again http://seekingalpha.com/article/158800-energy-secretary-chu-wimps-out-again?source=feed 158800 Most of my followers are very familiar with my opinion of Energy Secretary Stephen Chu: he should resign his office. Why? Because Chu doesn’t understand that America’s biggest energy and economic problem is our addiction to foreign oil imports and the resulting daily drain of U.S. wealth away from our shores. Any U.S. Energy Secretary who is “agnostic” about the only domestic fuel (natural gas) that can be scaled up to solve these problems should be fired. Top that off with Chu’s agreement that “clean coal” is actually possible and, you have an Energy Secretary who has certainly risen to the level of incompetence.

Why bring this up now? Yesterday Secretary Chu and the U.S. Department of Energy announced $300 million in “Clean Cities Grants to Support Clean Fuels, Vehicles, and Infrastructure Development.” Here’s the announcement on the DOE website. This link shows a map of the U.S. and how the awards will be distributed across the country.

]]> Fri, 28 Aug 2009 04:24:45 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Most of my followers are very familiar with my opinion of Energy Secretary Stephen Chu: he should resign his office. Why? Because Chu doesn’t understand that America’s biggest energy and economic problem is our addiction to foreign oil imports and the resulting daily drain of U.S. wealth away from our shores. Any U.S. Energy Secretary who is “agnostic” about the only domestic fuel (natural gas) that can be scaled up to solve these problems should be fired. Top that off with Chu’s agreement that “clean coal” is actually possible and, you have an Energy Secretary who has certainly risen to the level of incompetence.

Why bring this up now? Yesterday Secretary Chu and the U.S. Department of Energy announced $300 million in “Clean Cities Grants to Support Clean Fuels, Vehicles, and Infrastructure Development.” Here’s the announcement on the DOE website. This link shows a map of the U.S. and how the awards will be distributed across the country.


Complete Story »]]> CLNE FSYS WPRT Michael Fitzsimmons China Repeats U.S. Energy Policy Mistakes http://seekingalpha.com/article/157190-china-repeats-u-s-energy-policy-mistakes?source=feed 157190 When Y.E. Yang beat Tiger Woods in a head-to-head battle to win the 91st PGA Golf Tournament last Sunday, it was the first major golf tournament won by an Asian. As golf pundits began to talk about the celebrations that will take place in Yang’s home country of Korea, I began to think about just how many golfers the Asian countries would field in 10 years simply as a result of Yang beating Woods. As someone obsessed with energy issues, I then started thinking about how many Asians may be driving a car to golf courses.

In June of this year China’s auto sales increased by 36.5% over the prior year to 1.14 million units. In the first half of 2009, total auto sales rose 17.7 from a year earlier to 6.1 million units. At this rate, China will overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest auto market this year.

]]> Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:25:41 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

When Y.E. Yang beat Tiger Woods in a head-to-head battle to win the 91st PGA Golf Tournament last Sunday, it was the first major golf tournament won by an Asian. As golf pundits began to talk about the celebrations that will take place in Yang’s home country of Korea, I began to think about just how many golfers the Asian countries would field in 10 years simply as a result of Yang beating Woods. As someone obsessed with energy issues, I then started thinking about how many Asians may be driving a car to golf courses.

In June of this year China’s auto sales increased by 36.5% over the prior year to 1.14 million units. In the first half of 2009, total auto sales rose 17.7 from a year earlier to 6.1 million units. At this rate, China will overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest auto market this year.


Complete Story »]]> COP CVX FSYS FXI PBR TOT WPRT XLE Michael Fitzsimmons How Natural Gas Can Save the U.S. Economy http://seekingalpha.com/article/155434-how-natural-gas-can-save-the-u-s-economy?source=feed 155434 US produced natural gas can literally save the US economy and usher in an era of economic prosperity reminiscent of the country’s glory days of the now seemingly distant past. This means it can also rescue the US equity markets. The other side of the coin is bleak: continuing US addiction to foreign oil in an era when worldwide oil supply won’t keep pace with worldwide oil demand is a recipe for economic disaster. In addition, the end of US economic prosperity due to its oil dependency will quite likely mean the end of democracy in the US. History is filled with examples of the ties between economic and political well-being.

A country with 5% of the world’s population that uses 25% of the world’s oil and imports anywhere from 60-70% of that oil is in a very precarious situation. Unfortunately, 2008’s $145/barrel oil and $4.50/gallon gasoline has not significantly affected US energy policy, the US media, or the US electorate. Even the financial turmoil suffered by the entire country, the US equity markets, and specifically US automakers haven’t fostered the kind of realistic energy policy debate the country so desperately needs. The US is going bankrupt trying to solve a commodity problem (oil) with financial tomfoolery. The cost of fighting foreign oil wars in a continuation of the pentagon/petroleum relationship that has dominated US foreign policy for decades has not shown a positive return on investment and has caused the US to top a 2008 world survey on a list of “most feared nations”.

]]> Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:53:24 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

US produced natural gas can literally save the US economy and usher in an era of economic prosperity reminiscent of the country’s glory days of the now seemingly distant past. This means it can also rescue the US equity markets. The other side of the coin is bleak: continuing US addiction to foreign oil in an era when worldwide oil supply won’t keep pace with worldwide oil demand is a recipe for economic disaster. In addition, the end of US economic prosperity due to its oil dependency will quite likely mean the end of democracy in the US. History is filled with examples of the ties between economic and political well-being.

A country with 5% of the world’s population that uses 25% of the world’s oil and imports anywhere from 60-70% of that oil is in a very precarious situation. Unfortunately, 2008’s $145/barrel oil and $4.50/gallon gasoline has not significantly affected US energy policy, the US media, or the US electorate. Even the financial turmoil suffered by the entire country, the US equity markets, and specifically US automakers haven’t fostered the kind of realistic energy policy debate the country so desperately needs. The US is going bankrupt trying to solve a commodity problem (oil) with financial tomfoolery. The cost of fighting foreign oil wars in a continuation of the pentagon/petroleum relationship that has dominated US foreign policy for decades has not shown a positive return on investment and has caused the US to top a 2008 world survey on a list of “most feared nations”.


Complete Story »]]> BP CHK COP CVX PBR STO XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Oil Is Still the Key to U.S. Economic Future http://seekingalpha.com/article/153353-oil-is-still-the-key-to-u-s-economic-future?source=feed 153353 Recently there has been a plethora of articles in the financial press, including SeekingAlpha, intimating the weakness of large integrated oil companies based on the last couple quarterly earnings reports. Most of the authors of such articles have a very short memory and obviously need a reality check. I'm happy to oblige.

Naturally companies like ExxonMobil (XOM), British Petroleum (BP), ConocoPhilips (COP), and Chevron (CVX) reported lower earnings. After all, oil had dropped from $145/barrel to around $40/barrel and the price of natural gas has plummeted. Did anyone not expect earnings to be significantly lower? However, the question is not what earnings are today, but what will the oil company earnings be in future quarters next year and the year after?

]]> Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:58:46 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Recently there has been a plethora of articles in the financial press, including SeekingAlpha, intimating the weakness of large integrated oil companies based on the last couple quarterly earnings reports. Most of the authors of such articles have a very short memory and obviously need a reality check. I'm happy to oblige.

Naturally companies like ExxonMobil (XOM), British Petroleum (BP), ConocoPhilips (COP), and Chevron (CVX) reported lower earnings. After all, oil had dropped from $145/barrel to around $40/barrel and the price of natural gas has plummeted. Did anyone not expect earnings to be significantly lower? However, the question is not what earnings are today, but what will the oil company earnings be in future quarters next year and the year after?


Complete Story »]]> BP COP CVX FSYS PBR RIG SLB STO WPRT XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Westport Innovations: A Growing Natural Gas Engine Business http://seekingalpha.com/article/144145-westport-innovations-a-growing-natural-gas-engine-business?source=feed 144145 Westport Innovations (WPRT) is based in Vancouver, BC and makes heavy duty CNG and LNG engines. The company has dedicated itself to lead the international commercial engine industry in the shift from dirty and expensive oil-based engines to those running on cleaner and cheaper gaseous fuels. Its technologies allow diesel engines to operate on natural gas, propane, and hydrogen. Its engines meet or exceed EPA, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and EURO emissions standards.

In fiscal year 2009, Westport shipped 4,038 units compared to 2,720 in FY 2008. FY 2009 revenues grew to $121.8 million from $71.5 million in 2008, an increase of 70%. Westport indicated the increase is mainly attributed to increased sales of the Cummins Westport (CWI) ISL-G engine in North America as a result of increased demand for natural gas solutions in the transit and refuse markets.

]]> Fri, 19 Jun 2009 04:04:04 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Westport Innovations (WPRT) is based in Vancouver, BC and makes heavy duty CNG and LNG engines. The company has dedicated itself to lead the international commercial engine industry in the shift from dirty and expensive oil-based engines to those running on cleaner and cheaper gaseous fuels. Its technologies allow diesel engines to operate on natural gas, propane, and hydrogen. Its engines meet or exceed EPA, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and EURO emissions standards.

In fiscal year 2009, Westport shipped 4,038 units compared to 2,720 in FY 2008. FY 2009 revenues grew to $121.8 million from $71.5 million in 2008, an increase of 70%. Westport indicated the increase is mainly attributed to increased sales of the Cummins Westport (CWI) ISL-G engine in North America as a result of increased demand for natural gas solutions in the transit and refuse markets.


Complete Story »]]> CMI WPRT Michael Fitzsimmons Stay Away from U.S. Treasuries - Invest in Energy Stocks http://seekingalpha.com/article/143062-stay-away-from-u-s-treasuries-invest-in-energy-stocks?source=feed 143062 Recently there have been a plethora of articles delving into all the complexities of the US bond market. For this reason, I am going to keep this article short and simple.

US deficit spending ensures future Treasury bond issuance in the weeks, months, and years ahead as far as the eye can see (and then some). The US will depend on foreigners to purchase the debt. However, foreigners are becoming fully aware that the US economy is built on a foundation dependent on a commodity (oil) which will become increasingly expensive and which the US not only uses 25% of the world's output, but imports 65% of it. At current prices, the US is spending $840,000,000 a day for foreign petroleum imports. This works out to $306,600,000,000 a year. That's a lot of zeros isn't it? Double that number when oil goes back to $140/barrel.

]]> Sun, 14 Jun 2009 13:27:26 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Recently there have been a plethora of articles delving into all the complexities of the US bond market. For this reason, I am going to keep this article short and simple.

US deficit spending ensures future Treasury bond issuance in the weeks, months, and years ahead as far as the eye can see (and then some). The US will depend on foreigners to purchase the debt. However, foreigners are becoming fully aware that the US economy is built on a foundation dependent on a commodity (oil) which will become increasingly expensive and which the US not only uses 25% of the world's output, but imports 65% of it. At current prices, the US is spending $840,000,000 a day for foreign petroleum imports. This works out to $306,600,000,000 a year. That's a lot of zeros isn't it? Double that number when oil goes back to $140/barrel.


Complete Story »]]> BP COP CVX PBR RIG STO TBT XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Fuel Systems Solutions Conceptualizes a Better Energy Policy http://seekingalpha.com/article/142583-fuel-systems-solutions-conceptualizes-a-better-energy-policy?source=feed 142583 A "Cash for Clunkers" bill is working its way through Congress. The basic points of the bill are:

  • Rationale: stimulate new vehicle sales to help employment and the US government investments in GM (GMGMQ.PK) and Chrysler.
  • Buyers can get a federal voucher for up to $4,500 by trading in their vehicle for one getting better gas mileage.
  • Estimates predict 1 million cars could be traded in. That means the total price tag could be $4 billion dollars. This money will come from the Department of Energy funding in the already enacted in the $787 billion economic stimulus package.
  • To qualify, you must trade in any car that has been registered for at least 1 year and gets a federal combined fuel rating of 18 mpg or less.
  • The new car ($45k or less) must be rated at least 4 mpg better than the old to get you a $3,500 voucher. 10 mpg better wil get you the full $4,500.
  • For trucks or SUV's, you only need to get 2 mpg better for $3,500 or 5 mpg better for $4,500.

The bill is currently in House committee and is supported by Obama. Senators from both parties are preparing to co-sponsor similar legislation.

]]> Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:14:59 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

A "Cash for Clunkers" bill is working its way through Congress. The basic points of the bill are:

  • Rationale: stimulate new vehicle sales to help employment and the US government investments in GM (GMGMQ.PK) and Chrysler.
  • Buyers can get a federal voucher for up to $4,500 by trading in their vehicle for one getting better gas mileage.
  • Estimates predict 1 million cars could be traded in. That means the total price tag could be $4 billion dollars. This money will come from the Department of Energy funding in the already enacted in the $787 billion economic stimulus package.
  • To qualify, you must trade in any car that has been registered for at least 1 year and gets a federal combined fuel rating of 18 mpg or less.
  • The new car ($45k or less) must be rated at least 4 mpg better than the old to get you a $3,500 voucher. 10 mpg better wil get you the full $4,500.
  • For trucks or SUV's, you only need to get 2 mpg better for $3,500 or 5 mpg better for $4,500.

The bill is currently in House committee and is supported by Obama. Senators from both parties are preparing to co-sponsor similar legislation.


Complete Story »]]> FSYS GMGMQ.PK Michael Fitzsimmons Petrobras Ready to Benefit from Next Oil Price Spike http://seekingalpha.com/article/142279-petrobras-ready-to-benefit-from-next-oil-price-spike?source=feed 142279 The Tupi people are a group of indigenous people native to the Amazon rainforest of Brazil. Although their history is in some respect reminiscent of the American Indian, Tupi culture and language are still very prevalent in Brazilian culture today. It is in their honor that one of the world’s largest oil fields discovered in the past 25 years off the coast of Brazil was named.

]]> Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:00:07 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

The Tupi people are a group of indigenous people native to the Amazon rainforest of Brazil. Although their history is in some respect reminiscent of the American Indian, Tupi culture and language are still very prevalent in Brazilian culture today. It is in their honor that one of the world’s largest oil fields discovered in the past 25 years off the coast of Brazil was named.


Complete Story »]]> PBR Michael Fitzsimmons Current Market Strategy? Invest in Resource-Rich Countries http://seekingalpha.com/article/141552-current-market-strategy-invest-in-resource-rich-countries?source=feed 141552 The US Treasury, Federal Reserve and Congress are attempting to re-inflate the US economy by working in concert to pump massive amounts of US dollar liquidity into the system. Although their policies have been successful in averting a complete financial meltdown, and stability has returned to US equity markets, the questions still remain: can US policymakers solve a commodity problem (oil) with financial policies? Can the US ever again attain financial solvency and economic security without first solving their addiction to foreign oil by adopting a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy? If you’re an American investor and believe the answers to these questions are “No”, how should you position your investment portfolio to protect your assets and prosper in a future when America’s star is likely to dim?

The author has written many articles suggesting Americans invest in energy and gold to protect themselves against US dollar depreciation and the inflation resulting from decades of unwise US energy, financial, and fiscal policies. Just as important is what not to invest in: broad and “diverse” investments like the S&P500 and bonds (with few exceptions) for example. But today I will look outside the US to suggest another investment theme: natural resource rich countries.
Scanning the globe, there are several countries that will benefit from a recovering world economy and the growth taking place in countries like China and India. These resource rich countries are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Resource Rich Countries
County
Natural Resources
ETF
YTD Return
Australia
Coal seam gas, iron ore, copper, gold, uranium, zinc, silver, coal
EWA
20.6%
Brazil
Oil, iron ore, nickel, gold, uranium, platinum, manganese, timber
EWZ
60.3%
Canada
Bitumen, Iron ore, nickel, zinc, copper, gold, molybdenum, potash, silver, timber
EWC
32.5%
Russia
Oil, natural gas, coal, precious metals, timber
RSX
82.9%
Each of these countries will provide the growing economies of China and India with raw materials to fuel that growth. Energy is again a major theme with each of these picks, so I am not straying too far from my usual peak oil preaching.
These investments will also benefit investors if the US dollar continues to weaken.
Many US investors are wary of the political risks associated with some of these countries. However, as I explained to a friend just the other night, they seem to neglect the political risks of investing in the US! For example – the talking heads on CNBC love to call President Lula of Brazil a “socialist” or “leftist”. Yes, Lula worked his way up from shoe-shine boy to lathe operator to union organizer. But Lula cares about the middle class in Brazil and works tirelessly for economic fairness and to strengthen the middle class.
Contrast that with the US where hard-earned middle class taxpayer money is stolen and given as bonuses to already wealthy executives of insurance, banking, and financial services firms. How does Brazil's efforts to strengthen the middle class compare to the US where policies continue to enrich the already wealthy and there is an effective war on the middle class? Which is the greater risk? By the way, note that Brazil solved their energy crisis of the past and now is an exporter of oil. Meanwhile, the US is going bankrupt fighting oil wars halfway across the world. Sometimes it's hard for Americans to take a true risk assessment of American economic and foreign policies.
Take Canada for example. Again, the talking heads on CNBC call Canada’s health care system “socialism” (or Joe Kernen’s now favorite term “Eurocare”). Yet Canada at least has a functioning health care system that is not bankrupting the country in order to make a small minority (doctors) super-rich (in America, simply “rich” isn’t good enough). Also, note that Canada’s banks and budgets are run much more conservatively than America's and are therefore in much better shape than those in the US. So again, which is the greater risk? Again, please note that Canada exports oil and natural gas to the US.
Russia is vying with Saudi Arabia to be the largest oil producer in the world. On the other hand, the US is the world’s largest importer of oil and every day imports more oil than either Russia or Saudi Arabia can pump out of the ground in a single day. Yet, US policymakers refuse to make use of America’s abundant, clean, and cheap natural gas reserves for use in the transportation to reduce foreign oil imports. So, again, which is the greater risk, Russia or the US? The point is, arguments can be made on both sides of this question. Americans must be careful to view foreign investment risks by taking a critical look at US policy risks as well.
Funny how the CNBC commentators always make fun of the countries we import oil from. Am I the only one that ever notices that? I always remember an interview I saw with a Brazilian man on the street in Rio de Janeiro. When asked what he thought about the huge oil discoveries off the coast of his country, he replied, “I wish they hadn’t found it - now America will probably invade us!” How classic is that?
All that said, I would agree that of the four country ETFs listed, the Russian and Brazilian ETF’s may well be the riskier investments. Of course that is probably also why the YTD returns of those two countries are more than double Canada and Australia. It’s all risk/reward.
All four ETFs shown are obviously miles ahead of US equity markets YTD. Speaking of YTD returns, I can already anticipate the comments coming in - “hey Fitzman, nice call, why not wait until your investment picks are up 100% YTD and then recommend them?” All I can say to that is - good point! However, despite the impressive YTD returns, these ETFs fell so far last year they would all still have to near double (and then some) to reach the heights attained in 2007/2008. In other words, I think there is plenty of time to jump in. That said, you may want to wait for a pullback in the oil and gold markets after the recent nice rallies. This pullback could be imminent and might well create a better buying opportunity than today. Also, be sure to check out the top-10 holdings in each ETF and make sure you are comfortable with them. I was surprised to see such a large group of communication companies in the RSX ETF, but they have done really well this year.
So, add these ETFs to your “watch list” and wait for a better entry point. Long term, oil is going much higher than $145/barrel and gold much higher than $1000/oz. Each of these ETF’s should prosper in such an environment. On top of that, a falling US dollar will simply provide an added kicker. Good luck to you.
Disclosure: The author does not own the ETFs discussed in this article. Yet.
]]> Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:48:36 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

The US Treasury, Federal Reserve and Congress are attempting to re-inflate the US economy by working in concert to pump massive amounts of US dollar liquidity into the system. Although their policies have been successful in averting a complete financial meltdown, and stability has returned to US equity markets, the questions still remain: can US policymakers solve a commodity problem (oil) with financial policies? Can the US ever again attain financial solvency and economic security without first solving their addiction to foreign oil by adopting a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy? If you’re an American investor and believe the answers to these questions are “No”, how should you position your investment portfolio to protect your assets and prosper in a future when America’s star is likely to dim?

The author has written many articles suggesting Americans invest in energy and gold to protect themselves against US dollar depreciation and the inflation resulting from decades of unwise US energy, financial, and fiscal policies. Just as important is what not to invest in: broad and “diverse” investments like the S&P500 and bonds (with few exceptions) for example. But today I will look outside the US to suggest another investment theme: natural resource rich countries.
Scanning the globe, there are several countries that will benefit from a recovering world economy and the growth taking place in countries like China and India. These resource rich countries are listed in Table 1.
Table 1: Resource Rich Countries
County
Natural Resources
ETF
YTD Return
Australia
Coal seam gas, iron ore, copper, gold, uranium, zinc, silver, coal
EWA
20.6%
Brazil
Oil, iron ore, nickel, gold, uranium, platinum, manganese, timber
EWZ
60.3%
Canada
Bitumen, Iron ore, nickel, zinc, copper, gold, molybdenum, potash, silver, timber
EWC
32.5%
Russia
Oil, natural gas, coal, precious metals, timber
RSX
82.9%
Each of these countries will provide the growing economies of China and India with raw materials to fuel that growth. Energy is again a major theme with each of these picks, so I am not straying too far from my usual peak oil preaching.
These investments will also benefit investors if the US dollar continues to weaken.
Many US investors are wary of the political risks associated with some of these countries. However, as I explained to a friend just the other night, they seem to neglect the political risks of investing in the US! For example – the talking heads on CNBC love to call President Lula of Brazil a “socialist” or “leftist”. Yes, Lula worked his way up from shoe-shine boy to lathe operator to union organizer. But Lula cares about the middle class in Brazil and works tirelessly for economic fairness and to strengthen the middle class.
Contrast that with the US where hard-earned middle class taxpayer money is stolen and given as bonuses to already wealthy executives of insurance, banking, and financial services firms. How does Brazil's efforts to strengthen the middle class compare to the US where policies continue to enrich the already wealthy and there is an effective war on the middle class? Which is the greater risk? By the way, note that Brazil solved their energy crisis of the past and now is an exporter of oil. Meanwhile, the US is going bankrupt fighting oil wars halfway across the world. Sometimes it's hard for Americans to take a true risk assessment of American economic and foreign policies.
Take Canada for example. Again, the talking heads on CNBC call Canada’s health care system “socialism” (or Joe Kernen’s now favorite term “Eurocare”). Yet Canada at least has a functioning health care system that is not bankrupting the country in order to make a small minority (doctors) super-rich (in America, simply “rich” isn’t good enough). Also, note that Canada’s banks and budgets are run much more conservatively than America's and are therefore in much better shape than those in the US. So again, which is the greater risk? Again, please note that Canada exports oil and natural gas to the US.
Russia is vying with Saudi Arabia to be the largest oil producer in the world. On the other hand, the US is the world’s largest importer of oil and every day imports more oil than either Russia or Saudi Arabia can pump out of the ground in a single day. Yet, US policymakers refuse to make use of America’s abundant, clean, and cheap natural gas reserves for use in the transportation to reduce foreign oil imports. So, again, which is the greater risk, Russia or the US? The point is, arguments can be made on both sides of this question. Americans must be careful to view foreign investment risks by taking a critical look at US policy risks as well.
Funny how the CNBC commentators always make fun of the countries we import oil from. Am I the only one that ever notices that? I always remember an interview I saw with a Brazilian man on the street in Rio de Janeiro. When asked what he thought about the huge oil discoveries off the coast of his country, he replied, “I wish they hadn’t found it - now America will probably invade us!” How classic is that?
All that said, I would agree that of the four country ETFs listed, the Russian and Brazilian ETF’s may well be the riskier investments. Of course that is probably also why the YTD returns of those two countries are more than double Canada and Australia. It’s all risk/reward.
All four ETFs shown are obviously miles ahead of US equity markets YTD. Speaking of YTD returns, I can already anticipate the comments coming in - “hey Fitzman, nice call, why not wait until your investment picks are up 100% YTD and then recommend them?” All I can say to that is - good point! However, despite the impressive YTD returns, these ETFs fell so far last year they would all still have to near double (and then some) to reach the heights attained in 2007/2008. In other words, I think there is plenty of time to jump in. That said, you may want to wait for a pullback in the oil and gold markets after the recent nice rallies. This pullback could be imminent and might well create a better buying opportunity than today. Also, be sure to check out the top-10 holdings in each ETF and make sure you are comfortable with them. I was surprised to see such a large group of communication companies in the RSX ETF, but they have done really well this year.
So, add these ETFs to your “watch list” and wait for a better entry point. Long term, oil is going much higher than $145/barrel and gold much higher than $1000/oz. Each of these ETF’s should prosper in such an environment. On top of that, a falling US dollar will simply provide an added kicker. Good luck to you.
Disclosure: The author does not own the ETFs discussed in this article. Yet.

Complete Story »]]> EWA EWC EWZ RSX Michael Fitzsimmons My Thoughts on Oil http://seekingalpha.com/article/140753-my-thoughts-on-oil?source=feed 140753 Here we go again. Let’s take a look at the oil chart (created with SuperCharts by Omega Research):

click to enlarge

]]> Tue, 02 Jun 2009 03:24:03 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

Here we go again. Let’s take a look at the oil chart (created with SuperCharts by Omega Research):

click to enlarge


Complete Story »]]> BP BRK.A COP CVX OIL PBR USO XOM Michael Fitzsimmons Book Review: 'Game Over' by Stephen Leeb http://seekingalpha.com/article/139502-book-review-game-over-by-stephen-leeb?source=feed 139502 I first read Stephen Leeb’s book The Oil Factor back in 2004. I read it again in 2008 and it reads more a history book now as Leeb’s projections for oil prices, precious metals, and investing in general were all spot-on. His latest book Game Over continues the main thesis unveiled in The Oil Factor: the world is beginning to run out of the essential raw materials such as oil, silver, titanium, iron ore and steel which are needed to support economic growth. Energy remains the key, and Leeb continues to pound the table in support of comprehensive and strategic energy policies for the US and the world.

Leeb is obviously a believer in peak oil and now proposes the concept of Absolute Peak Oil. He defines this as the point in which we’d have to invest more than a barrel’s worth of energy to pump, refine, and truck a barrel’s worth of it to the local gas station. He believes this point in time is very near and therefore suggests a massive investment in alternative energy. This is particularly important for the US, considering its 65% dependence on foreign oil.

]]> Tue, 26 May 2009 05:35:53 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

I first read Stephen Leeb’s book The Oil Factor back in 2004. I read it again in 2008 and it reads more a history book now as Leeb’s projections for oil prices, precious metals, and investing in general were all spot-on. His latest book Game Over continues the main thesis unveiled in The Oil Factor: the world is beginning to run out of the essential raw materials such as oil, silver, titanium, iron ore and steel which are needed to support economic growth. Energy remains the key, and Leeb continues to pound the table in support of comprehensive and strategic energy policies for the US and the world.

Leeb is obviously a believer in peak oil and now proposes the concept of Absolute Peak Oil. He defines this as the point in which we’d have to invest more than a barrel’s worth of energy to pump, refine, and truck a barrel’s worth of it to the local gas station. He believes this point in time is very near and therefore suggests a massive investment in alternative energy. This is particularly important for the US, considering its 65% dependence on foreign oil.


Complete Story »]]> USO Michael Fitzsimmons StatOil: Attractive Investment with a Big Dividend http://seekingalpha.com/article/139389-statoil-attractive-investment-with-a-big-dividend?source=feed 139389 StatOil’s (STO) annual meeting was held on May 19, 2009 and announced its dividend as NOK7.25 of which NOK2.85 was a special dividend. The dividend applies to shareholders of record on May 19, 2009 and the expected payment date is June 3, 2009. StatOil pays a dividend once per year and its dividend policy is stated as follows:

It is Statoil’s intention to return to its shareholders, through cash dividends and share repurchases, an amount in the range of 45-50 per cent of consolidated net income as determined in accordance with IFRS.

]]> Mon, 25 May 2009 03:08:50 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

StatOil’s (STO) annual meeting was held on May 19, 2009 and announced its dividend as NOK7.25 of which NOK2.85 was a special dividend. The dividend applies to shareholders of record on May 19, 2009 and the expected payment date is June 3, 2009. StatOil pays a dividend once per year and its dividend policy is stated as follows:

It is Statoil’s intention to return to its shareholders, through cash dividends and share repurchases, an amount in the range of 45-50 per cent of consolidated net income as determined in accordance with IFRS.


Complete Story »]]> STO Michael Fitzsimmons What U.S. Needs Is Long-Term Comprehensive Energy Policy http://seekingalpha.com/article/139075-what-u-s-needs-is-long-term-comprehensive-energy-policy?source=feed 139075 President Obama recently touted plans for higher car and truck fuel-efficiency standards. Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg.

He said:

]]> Fri, 22 May 2009 05:06:33 -0400 Michael Fitzsimmons Michael Fitzsimmons submits:

President Obama recently touted plans for higher car and truck fuel-efficiency standards. Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg.

He said:


Complete Story »]]> BP COP CVX PBR RIG SLB XOM Michael Fitzsimmons