I can't see OPEC letting oil get too cheap or too expensive. Not too cheap to keep the the bank full of money and not too expensive to keep alternative fuels out of the picture.
If big oil is going to bring Jack 2 online the price of a barrel should be more like $95.
Keep in mind that

a) OPEC didn't seem to have any ability to halt oil moving to $78, a point far above which all conventional wisdom over the last three years said was too high. And a point $5 above the $73 listed in this poll and

b) if oil starts moving towards $53 from the current $63, I doubt OPEC could cut production fast enough in the given timeframe to stem the decrease. They would have to frighten the market by threatening huge cuts.

My guess is that the spread of opinions in this poll will be more evenly distributed among the three options. We've already seen $73. We've spent a good part of the year there. I don't think it's much of a stretch. I would have liked to have seen a $30 spread instead of the $20 one. Pick a card, any card.

OK, I did, using the Marseilles tarot and focused on oil price. The card I picked (from majors only) was IIII The Emperor. The simplistic interpretation is (transitory?) wealth and power, a more philosophical one is transcendence of spirit over material. I find it fairly silly to pick a single card, but hey, there you go.

$53 oil, ur pulling my chain, lol, it ain't going there. A $15 spread implies a low of $48-, that is seriously silly and highly unlikely.

I would argue that the most unlikely scenario from a basic logic viewpoint using the actual history of price swings the past 3 years is the range of $53-$73. For two whole months it is going to stay in that band? Yet with 20 people voting so far, 71% have picked it.

Every Thursday, Bloomberg conducts a poll of about 40 to 50 oil analysts, with the question will oil rise, fall, or stay the same. I tracked it fairly closely for about 4 months one time. I found that the majority was right about 33% of the time. In other words, you may as well tack the options to the wall and have a monkey throw a dart at them over its shoulder.

As your poll of experts example shows, predicting oil prices, even over a short period of time, is very hard.

I picked $53 - $73. While I think there is a very good likelihood that it will break past either or both in the next two months, I think it is about 80% likely that it ends up or averages in this range.

For more specific guesswork, I would say the price will say where it is or even drop in the next few weeks, then at some point climb back up to previous highs. Might take more than two months though.

image002

I've marked in red the 12 times since the beginning of 2004 that oil has moved in either direction by $10 or more within 2 months. Some of these moves occured in as little as a month.

The next question is, how many times has it traded in a $20 band for 2 full months?

I'll be the 9th one to pick the $53 option, with the caveat that like SAT I am not particularly fond of the phrasing. I think that the chances of hitting either extreme (combined) are double that of trading in this $20 range. I think the distribution should be 33%-33%-33% instead of the current 10%-60%-30%.

Well, I welcome input on the phrasing of the options...

I wanted to do more than "up" or "down" from today.  That's not very interesting.  So, I had to pick a time horizon and some sort of constraint.  

If you wanted a 33-33-33 distribution, the middle range would have had to have been smaller, not larger, right?

so, perhaps a better way would be, "which is the next price point we hit," or something like that?

Don't get me wrong, I like the poll. Everybody is going to want to do it their way. You're the one that gets to choose. The distribution is changing as we speak. (And I'm certainly not above trying to influence it). $73 has made quite a move in the last hour or two ;)

Yeah, like maybe 5 price ranges instead of 3.

"Yeah, like maybe 5 price ranges instead of 3."

I'd choose between $0 and $infinity.  I'd be guaranteed a gloat for being correct.  Unless of course they have to start paying to have it hauled away.  So I guess I'd have to make it $-infinity to $+infinity for a 100% guarantee.

To me this poll has two different things: there's the "range" and the "which one first."  It would seem better to separate the two, have one that asks about ranges, but still ask which specific amount is likely to be reached first.  Then there's a more nitpicky thing about "remaining in $## - $## range"...is it nullified if it steps out of that range just once?  Or is it valid if it stays in that range 95% of the time?

Re: OPEC didn't seem to have any ability to halt oil moving to $78, a point far above which all conventional wisdom over the last three years said was too high. And a point $5 above the $73 listed in this poll...

Hang on there, Big Guy. OPEC has some control on the pricing low end but none on the high end...

I could have sworn that was what I said.
I interpreted that as you saying -- ah, nevermind! We both agree, they don't have that kind of control over production & pricing. To answer your queries from the other day, I should never post in the morning until I've had at least 1 strong cup of coffee... Yeah, I smoke, just like the Planet Earth.  

best --


"We both agree, they don't have that kind of control over production & pricing."

Well, I am glad you two agree, but allow me to say I sure as helll don't!  :-)

We have spent the last ten plus years being told that OPEC was the "swing producer", the "pivot point" the focus fo the oil world....and now, all of a sudden, they have no power over pricing/production????

That boggles the mind.  And moreso if you accept that the North Sea and Mexico are essentially peaked.  If OPEC were to back production off, what "swing producer" then would step in and make up the production (and remember, I have more faith in non-OPEC production than the peakers do, and am baffled by this logic!)

It gets even more focused, to my view if you you accept any concept of world peak.  Simmons logic goes that as Ghawar goes so goes Saudi, and as Saudi goes, so goes OPEC, and as OPEC goes, so goes the world....this would make the control of price centered not around OPEC, Saudi Arabia, but instead around Ghawar...I think Saudi Arabia has almost ABSOLUTE control over price if they should risk/be willing/desire to use it.  ABSOLUTE.

So what would lead to this wild perception that they don't?  I can find only one thing....the belief, that came only from the Saudi Arabians own lips, that they did not want oil in the $70 dollar a barrel range, but shucky darn, dag gone it, it went there anyway!

What a ruse.  I do not think for ONE SECOND the Saudi's minded oil going into the $70's, or frankly, it would not have gone into the $70's.  I think anything under $100 would have suited them fine.  The demand side was and is the only control valve until new oil comes on, some non-OPEC, and the rest, of course, OPEC and Saudi, which assures them control of price production as it has been since 1970 with that one bothersome little pest, the North Sea.  That has been the only swing producer large enough, and for a time, reliable enough to mess with their monopoly.  But it looks like those days are gone.
Where to now?

Laying aside for now radical changes in consuption of ALL energy by way of advanced technology  (that is coming, but it will take at least 5 to 10 years to really get into the system, at which point it will be BIG beyone belief), for now, natural gas is the competitor.  GTL, CNG, LNG, and LPG, that alphabet soup that is a thorn to crude oil producers, acts a s counterweight in the short term, nothing else.

So what price?  Well, anything above $50 is well above the historical mean, I could see us touching that long enough to lull ourselves to sleep...but not real long.   Then back to mid to high 60's for next summer, and everything else depends on war, weather, and price speculation.  But the tide is turning very, very fast...we have maybe a half decade to whether this idiotic paradigm, before we demonstrate why the world invented applied science and technology, and artful design.  the hackers and the kids are coming, and to them, limits on efficiency are just games to pushed around, and the barriers to be knocked down.  This is gong to be fun, is there anyway us old guys can get back in there and play?  :-)

Roger Conner  known to you as ThatsItImout

The commercials increased their net poistions for another week at a blistering pace. 5 weeks of commercial buying has always but a bottom in oil. We have 3 confirmed weeks so far. I am betting that Wed- through fri also they did the same as pries fell ( COT covers till tuesday). OPEC wont have to cut production we are gonna rally.
I think that is right.  There were numerous articles that implied this soon after oil went over $50.  Like this

http://energybulletin.net/4746.html

"We will find the price level that will slow demand," said Adkins. "It may be $60; it may be $100. I think it's fair to say its going to be in that price band."