SSALarry

Don't Believe Long-Term Oil Forecasts

I enjoyed this article as I found it fairly balanced. What we know today is not what we will know five years from now, therefore, prediction that go out beyond five years are highly suspect. I rmember a hugely succesful oil trader being interviewed on TV about four years ago saying he didn't think oil would hit $100.00.

However, I do take issue with a couple of tyhe comments that were made.

1 - "Distillate fuel move our goods and services. This is down 14.8% from last year. Even with this news they want to trade up prices for Greed.
A story from Fadel Gheits about oil prices.

Fadel Gheits is the one guy that CNBC won't bring on."

Actually I have seen Mr. Gheits on CNBC a number of times.

2 - the U.S. continues to spend huge sums of money to obtain oil: witness the war in iraq and afghanistan (which is not about the taliban, but about getting caspian sea energy treasures to market without going through russia or iran).

Sorry, although I agree with Mr Fitzsimmons more times than not, I just do not believe we are in Afghanistan for the reason stated. It is highly cynical to think energy is the reason we are there.

Recycling U.S. Coins into Silver

sdavid0419 - No way "green energy" will replace oil and gas, can't be done. How do I know this? I manage an 800,000 sq. ft building in Chicago, in the last five years we have installed 100kW photo-voltaic array, solar hot water unit and just completed installing four urban wind turbines. All of this equipment has reduced the electricity used in this building by 1% a day. I will never get my money back on the photo-voltaic array, it will be a long time for the wind turbines and fairly short on the solar hot water.

Even if we get solar and wind to account for 10% percent of the energy used, that will be in an environment where energy demand is growing world wide. So the net effect is no real reduction in fossil fuel demand.

Now don't get me worng, I am not saying we shouldn't invest in renewables, we should, however, we have to realize it will not make a sigificant reduction in the demand for fossil fuel .

More Heads on the CNBC Chopping Block as Financial Media Landscape Shifts

All these women that look alike? Becky Quick, small petite blonde, Melissa Lee, petite Asian, Michelle Carusso Cabrera, well endowed part Hispanic, Erin Burnett tall slim brunette, Sue Herrera, middle aged blonde, Maria Bartiromo, attractive brunette, Melissa Francis, blonde. So how do all these women look alike?

More Heads on the CNBC Chopping Block as Financial Media Landscape Shifts

I agree with davidbdc, comparing CNBC ratings from this quarter to the same period last year, simply is not a fair comparison. The financial market news last fall, was the lead story almost every night on all news channels, which would lead people to turn into the leading business channel. The news was very compelling and CNBC's coverage was exemplary. Anyone recall Charlie Gasparino getting cell phone calls while on air informing him Merrill Lynch was going down, CIti was on the verge, some CEO was being forced out. I was glued to CNBC every night. Current market conditions simply aren't as compelling, thus fewer viewers. I would be curious to know the current rating vs. say the spring of 2008. I would also be curious to know if Fox Business has any ratings yet, and what how Bloomberg is fairing.

Niall Ferguson: Dollar Is Doomed, U.S. Empire Is Finished

Yawn, just another guy talking his book.

The more everyone screams gold is going higher, $1,500, $2,000 even $5,000, the more I think we are at the top.

Fight Club: Zero Hedge, Matt Taibbi Knock Out Goldman, CNBC

First, I never said, you said every blog site is objective and unbiased, I said "I also find the idea that various blog sites provide fair and accurate information without any biases all in the name of the First Amendment laughable". Various being the key word. Every blog site I have visited, has some bias, liberal, conservative, free market, socialist, etc. Zero hedge has an obvious bias against CNBC.

Second - The CNBC Investigates specials are, for the most part, run at the 10 p.m. eastern time slot. CNBC has had difficulty finding programing for that hour. Various talk shows, financial help shows have failed to garner ratings. Therefore, they have produced some specials that have delivered some good ratings. Everyone mentions the high-end prostitution and marijuana specials, but they don't mention the McDonalds, American Airlines and House of Cards specials, all of which were quite good and all of which received solid reviews. Like any network they need to deliver ratings to stay in existence.

Third - As a long time market investor I feel I get great information from CNBC. I pay no attention to the various market prognosticators that appear during the day to name drop a stock they like. I do pay attention to the market sentiment, economic news, political issues that may alter markets, and analysis of various sectors (energy, tech, health care, etc.). When a major economic number is released before the markets open, CNBC will have various well known market participants, like a Bill Gross, offering analysis. Where else am I going to find that immediate feedback.

Fourth - Barry Ritholtz answers this better than I can, but I think he is spot on. www.ritholtz.com/blog/.../

Fifth - I don't know, perhaps you should ask them, my guess would be it would be hard to actually concentrate on your work, hold conversations with fellow workers while having CNBC blaring their conversations in the back ground.





Thanks, Larry. First, I never said every blog or internet source is objective and unbiased. That's would obviously be ridiculous.

Second, you failed to address the issue that CNBC has spent an increasing amount of time on WWE and Tabloid style rhetoric.

Third, you did not explain how CNBC provides excellent coverage of the markets and helped investors avoid the downturn.

Fourth, you did not address CNBC's 28%, yes 28%, loss of viewership (I think Larry Kudlow is down 40-something percent).

Fifth, if CNBC is so great, I ask one simple question: why do 99% of all the shops on Wall St. keep it on mute?

Fight Club: Zero Hedge, Matt Taibbi Knock Out Goldman, CNBC

Pretty funny article, I am sure the CNBC big wigs sit around during the day worrying about Zero Hedge and/or Minyanville, which 99 out of 100 people on the street have never heard of. In addition, if you are going to score a fight you are supposed to be unbiased, I don't believe that is the case here.

As for reporting the news. If you caught the health care special on Squawk Box last Thursday you learned quite a bit. Politicians from both parties, former HHS Secretaries, drug company CEO's, health care officials, etc. all discussing the future of health care. It was fascinating stuff, but no one likes to talk about that, they prefer to focus on some reporter they don't like and bash the whole station.

Lastly, I also find the idea that various blog sites provide fair and accurate information without any biases all in the name of the First Amendment laughable.

Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, Charlie Gasparino Bash Finance Blogs

Most (not all) financial blog sites are crap, made up of day traders ripping a stock they just shorted or touting a stock they just went long. In addition, you get the daily bashing of one political party or another, not to mention the occassional wacky conspiracy theory.

Let's be honest, CNBC needs ratings to generate revenue, to get ratings they need to appeal to as broad an audience as they can. Since they cover markets and business news this is difficult. Adding some humor (10 second clip of horn blowing seals) is not a bad thing, if after that you get an interview with a Warren Buffett, followed by breaking news of some merger.

I find CNBC to be informative and entertaining, it is not perfect, and not every on-air personallity appeals to me, but not everyone I work with appeals to me either. So Gasparino and Caruso-Cabrera made negative comments about finacial blog sites, that is their opinion, the author of this article didn't like it, that is his opinion, so lets move on..

The Crude Oil Collapse Is Coming

Although I do not agree on every point, this is an excellent article. I do agree we are awash in oil, with every available tanker and storage facility holding oil hoping for a future price spike. That said, I don't think the world economy will have to heat up too much for some of the spare capacity to start to dwindle and prices rise as traders look to the potential future supply imbalance.

With so much liquidity being made available as soon as the velocity of money starts to increase I believe things will heat up in a hurry and it appears the Fed and Treasury are intent on making this happen. That said, I do agree the Federal Government cannot spend us out of a recession. In addition, the possibility of health care taxes and cap-and-trade are sure to only add to businesses and consumers keeping their wallets shut. So it appears we have a battle between the Fed/Treasury who want to push liquidity in hopes lending and spending increase, versus, the President and a Democratic Congress looking to increase businesses and individuals tax burden.

I give the author credit for going on record, and look forward to seeing how his forecast works out.

China Pays Too Much for Oil in Iraq at $16 a Barrel

I agree with general thesis the writer presents. As China goes around the world locking up oil and other commodities for their future use, our administration seems bent on tying the hands of our oil companies and over regulating the rest of industry. The idea that green energy will be our savior is laughable, it just isn't possible.

The administration likes to say they are going to create green jobs, but as they are doing that, they seem intent on destroying the oil gas jobs already out there. I am all for development of green/renewable energies, but we will need oil and gas for a long time and I wish the folks in power would realize that.

Sinopec (SNP) agrees to buy Swiss explorer Addax Petroleum (ADXTF.PK) for $7.3B in cash, gaining access to oil reserves in Iraq's Kurdish region and Africa.

While the Chinese run around locking up oil reserves all over the world, the Obama administration seens intent on handcuffing the American oil and gas companies. I have nothing against developing green technologies, but we are going to need oil and gas for a very long time, wind, solar, geothermal, etc, will never completly replace oil. Seems to me we should be turning the exploration companies loose, not holding them back.

Cap-and-Trade Datapoint of the Day

.Europe's experience with Cap-and-Trade has been anything, but smooth. After implementation, CO2 emissions actually went up, and companies profited by selling their excess credits. In addition, accusation of cheating were made against several countries. Emissions did fall last year as Mad Hedge points out, but their is no proof that it is attributed to cap-and-trade, it is more likely attributed to a recessionary economy.

Mr. Simon mentions pseudoscientific scaremongering, but I would contend that his statement that the public would enjoy economic gains through investments in green energy and that we would "massively" reduce oil imports as pseudoscientific pie in the sky dreaming.

What is more likely to result, is companies who use energy will hire Wall Street brokers to trade their carbon accounts and make money for them. So Wall Street firms will make money, the Government will have another monitoring bureaucracy supported by the taxpayers, and we will still need and use fossil fuels

Stay Away from U.S. Treasuries - Invest in Energy Stocks

Although I don't think things are quite so desperate as the author does, I do agree it is in the countries best interest to develop a more comprehensive energy policy. As I have stated before we need to select the "all of the above" choice, and invest in all forms of energy, renewables, nuclear, and yes, more domestic drilling for oil and gas. Increased conservation is also an important element, although we cannot expect people to go back to the stone age.

I also try to look on the bright side, vehicles are more efficient and run cleaner than they use to. Citizens conserve more than they use to. Corporations are investing in new technologies to reduce energy use. We are making progress, maybe not as fast as would like, but progress none the less.

I do agree that "Cash for Clunkers" is a dumb idea, if for no other reason than the Government needs to stop spending money.

Michael - You and I traded a few posts previously discussing one of your articles, at that time you suggested I read Steven Leeb's book Game Over, just wanted you to know I am currently reading it. just wondering if you have ever read Gusher of Lies by Robert Bryce.

Lawmakers vote today on a 'cash-for-clunkers' bill that would let consumers collect up to $4,500 when they trade-up to new, more fuel-efficient cars. Automakers, unsurprisingly, are in favor of the measure because it will push consumers to showrooms.

The Government has got to stop spending. As much as I would like $4,500 for my 10 year old van, I think the policy is wrong. The more the Government attempts to manipulate behavior and markets, the worse things get.

My Thoughts on Oil

An excellent article and I agree on all points. We have had two energy bills in the last five years, which were nothing more than payoffs to lobbyists and campaign donors. Ethanol is a terrible idea that saves almost no energy, and costs the taxpayers a lot in subsidies.

I have nothing against clean coal as I believe we should be moving forward on all energy fronts, but electric cars and an infrastructure to support it are years away. Natural gas for transportation seems to me, to be a quicker and easier solution.

I would caution on one point, it is popular to say we import oil from countries that don't like us. However, we import the majority of our crude oil from Canada and Mexico, which I would consider allies.. Venezuela and Saudia Arabia also supply a large amount of crude, however, we get very little from Russia and even less (maybe nothing, I'm not sure) from Iran. So I think it is a bit too simplistic to say all our money is going to countries that hate us and our choice is to use the bad guys oil or use our own energy.

However, that is a small point, I enjoyed reading the article as I do all the authors posts, and agree with his overall sentiment.