Ax

Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note

Those 3 sentences are a fantastic introduction. Now you have laid down the crude, basic idea - that is your thesis. And it captures the reader in a blink of an eye.

Now all an uneducated reader as myself needs is the answer to:

"The question is how much, and I say that because of the mechanics of the paper markets, not much at all."

I don't know what are the mechanics of the paper markets, and I don't know where the "not much at all" comes from... so that is what a reader in the land of the darkness needs an answer to.

Now you get the 297 sentences and explain.

I mean, I don't need an explanation here, since I never invest in commodity markets due to the crazy speculative gambling casino that it has become. But that is how an article should be written in my opinion. At least in a non scientific journal as seeking alpha.

I'm pretty sure you would get better reviews from the investors community.

I wish you all the best.

Regards.

Ax

Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note

Fred,

you can be a brilliant economist and a wonderful teacher. I am not saying you are not, because I have never read any of your works and I never attended your lectures. But this article could have been shorter and have more content. That's all.

Have a nice day.

Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note

Fred Banks:

Try to do this task: Try to read your article every day for a period of 10 days... and ask yourself this question: "What are the things I could have left out, and still would deliver the main points to the reader?"

I mean in this article you have a sentence that begins with: "Needles to say..." If it is needless leave it out!

What is the purpose of this paragraph:
"One of my favorite daydreams features me standing in front of a blackboard somewhere, discussing e.g. speculation and the oil market, and suddenly hearing a sturdy, confident voice from some corner of the room informing me that I don’t know what I am talking about. It has been so many years since something of that nature happened, that should it take place in the near future, I probably would find myself immediately reaching for a double dose of aspirin or smelling salts, or asking if there was a doctor in the house who could check my hearing. The problem – as the late president Lyndon Johnson once pointed out – is that very few individuals possess an extensive knowledge of financial or financial-like markets, although in my teaching in half a dozen countries, I have never had the slightest problem explaining to first year students how speculation works in commodity markets."

Is there any value added here about oil speculation? You could have said it in one sentence, if you wanted - the problem is the lack of knowledge of financial markets. Why you couldn't do that? The paragraph is aimless in regard of the topic you are writing about, but is it absolutely NECESSARY to show the true nature of your self.

What it shows is your need for confrontation as you put it: it is your favorite daydream!

I suggest you try some creative writing where you will be able to express your true emotions. You will also get some tips about being articulate. Otherwise your readers will need aspirin in massive dozes and they will not be daydreaming about that.

As for your footballer story let me tell you one. Heidegger was laughed at and considered a clown by his critics. And yet, today everyone knows who Heidegger is, and no one knows the names of his critics.

There's a story you can tell to yourself after critics will tear you apart. Because if no one will tear you apart, then you really haven't written anything important at all.

But you like your article. So you will not improve your apparent lack of writing skills. You are just perfect.

A Chinese architect once said to me: "My aim is to work 6 hours and a half if my competitors work 6 hours. And if my competitors make 6 mistakes, my aim is to make only 5 of them."

So, yeah this is a crappy article. It could have been shorter by 2/3.

Speculation and the Price of Oil: An Unfriendly Note

I suggest you publish your articles (papers) here, instead of this crappy article which consists of cheap advertisements for your already published works. We need data, charts and the rationale that is derived from that data... This is not an ad campaign.

Oil: Demand Destruction Overdone?

Nobody wants to hear about fossil fuel anymore. People just don't wanna hear about being kidnapped by the Arabs and paying them their mansions in the deserts.

What the oil markets showed is that there is no real benefit of having this sort of energy if the price of it can sky rocket at any explosion of a pipeline in some Mumbojumboland in the middle of nothing.

There is a radical shift in the way people think. Maybe it's not the Americans, but the technology societies of the future are doing something about the problem right now.

So you can put your charts from the past as much as you like... the money is pouring in alternative energy and all the oil rich countries know this century policies are coming to a brutal end.

Demand destruction? Wait and see. No one wants to hear about oil anymore except for the ones who made billions. Oil is out of fashion... and anyone who thinks about buying a SUV is now regarded as an idiot, a mere egotistical moron who should be shoot. That's what people in Europe think. So demand destruction? Of course... not only destruction, but complete elimination of this old, expensive, geopolitically dangerous addiction altogether.

This is going to be an alternative energy century. More expensive than a 100 USD for a barrel of oil, but sustainable and clean.