OPEC price fixing?

Richard

Richard

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
9,076
Location
West Coast Resistance
Display Name
Display name:
Ack...city life
OPEC abandoned its traditional role of paring production to prevent oversupply last November as a tide of new oil from the U.S. eroded its share of world markets. The group chose instead to keep pumping, allowing the subsequent price slump to squeeze competitors with higher costs.
Click to expand...

As this is an organization of several countries which import to the USA, how is this not price fixing and would not be in violation of U.S. anti-trust regulation?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...n-opec-close-to-halting-u-s-oil-in-its-tracks
 
Richard said:
As this is an organization of several countries which import to the USA, how is this not price fixing and would not be in violation of U.S. anti-trust regulation?
Click to expand...

Perhaps US law doesn't apply in other countries...
 
Clark1961 said:
Perhaps US law doesn't apply in other countries...
Click to expand...

Which is why I was careful to say, "...import to the USA...".

Does US antitrust laws also apply to imports?

While an organization may operate outside of the US territory (extraterritorial), the SCOTUS has found, based upon "intended effect", such operations do, in fact, fall within the scope of the Sherman Act. Various court decisions reflect this.



The Court held that it is now "well established" that the Sherman Act will apply when the foreign conduct was meant to produce and did in fact produce some substantial effect in the United States.
Click to expand...
​
 
Last edited:
Clark1961 said:
Perhaps US law doesn't apply in other countries...
Click to expand...

That, and the antitrust legislation doesn't apply to governments either. It only applies to companies colluding. Even in the US the government is allowed to price fix.
 
flyingron said:
That, and the antitrust legislation doesn't apply to governments either. It only applies to companies colluding. Even in the US the government is allowed to price fix.
Click to expand...
But isn't it corporate entities which are the conveyors of commodities? Therefore they shall be held under anti trust?


With that in mind, any law or regulation which is not universally enforced shall not present or cause any enforcement against the people of the United States. Agreed?

(I'm trying hard to keep this in HT)
 
Last edited:
Richard said:
Which is why I was careful to say, "...import to the USA...".

Does US antitrust laws also apply to imports?

While an organization may operate outside of the US territory (extraterritorial), the SCOTUS has found, based upon "intended effect", such operations do, in fact, fall within the scope of the Sherman Act. Various court decisions reflect this.
Click to expand...

Great! What do you propose to do? Are you going to tell the Saudis that they are in violation of US law and have to stop? Are you going to tell US refiners to stop buying OPEC oil? The world doesn't work that way even though dreamers wish it would.

On the other hand, if you look at OPEC closely you'll see that other than the embargo there is little cooperation and the volumes produced by each country reflect their actual capacity and not some politically imposed limit. The world oil market is not free from political influence. That said, the volumes of oil purchased on the world market are largely free from short term political influence.

Look at it another way. The Chinese and Indian economies have more influence on the oil market than OPEC. If China is buying oil they are competing with the US and Europe to buy that oil which of course drives the price up. OPEC doesn't have infinite capacity to produce.oil. The OPEC member nations also don't have infinite cash reserves so they have to produce to keep their economies afloat. In other words, OPEC can't just set a price and force the rest of the world to pay. If they could do that, they would. Of course they try to influence the price and put a good face on things but that's about it.
 
You realize the Saudis stone and imprison women for getting raped, right? Do you think they give two ****s about some silly US law?

Richard said:
Which is why I was careful to say, "...import to the USA...".

Does US antitrust laws also apply to imports?

While an organization may operate outside of the US territory (extraterritorial), the SCOTUS has found, based upon "intended effect", such operations do, in fact, fall within the scope of the Sherman Act. Various court decisions reflect this.



​
​
Click to expand...
 
Do you people not think we are them? The money ties run under the borders.
 
If Moses had only turned right instead of left....
 
With Russia establishing a military base in Syria they now are attempting to influence the fray. We need to get off our addiction to oil - the quicker the better.
 
The best remedy for OPEC price fixing is for the US to produce as much oil as possible.
 
PaulS said:
The best remedy for OPEC price fixing is for the US to produce as much oil as possible.
Click to expand...

How do you propose to do that? We're producing all we can at the current price.
 
PaulS said:
The best remedy for OPEC price fixing is for the US to produce as much oil as possible.
Click to expand...

The best remedy for cheap Chinese crap sold at WalMart is for the US to produce as much quality goods as possible.

The best remedy for Japanese cars is for the US to produce as many cars as possible.

The best remedy for illegal immigration is for the US kids to learn how to work.

None of the above will happen.

We're whores. A nation that is a mere shadow of its once great self.
 
timwinters said:
The best remedy for cheap Chinese crap sold at WalMart is for the US to produce as much quality goods as possible.

The best remedy for Japanese cars is for the US to produce as many cars as possible.

The best remedy for illegal immigration is for the US kids to learn how to work.

None of the above will happen.

We're whores. A nation that is a mere shadow of its once great self.
Click to expand...

Government is in the way, for each one of your examples, I could make that case and government is in the way of producing more oil.
 
timwinters said:
The best remedy for cheap Chinese crap sold at WalMart is for the US to produce as much quality goods as possible.

The best remedy for Japanese cars is for the US to produce as many cars as possible.

The best remedy for illegal immigration is for the US kids to learn how to work.

None of the above will happen.

We're whores. A nation that is a mere shadow of its once great self.
Click to expand...

Painful realities.

---

As for the original topic, well, crude oil is a fungible product, so nothing we can do in the way of "boycotting" the oil production of any particular producer will have any measurable effect on that producer.
 
PaulS said:
All of them, all federal lands. The private wells have saved our bacon over the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, let's set aside the question of which specific Federal lands you want opened up and examine the second statement just a little bit.

"The private wells have saved our bacon over the last 8 years."

Do you know what the economics of the "private wells" were over the past 8 years and what those same wells look like right now in economic terms? Oil companies are always looking for good investments and they are chosing not to drill right now. Why is that? Lack of opportunity or lack of profit?

Now let's get back to the question of which specific Federal lands you want opened. Do any of these lands present attractive drilling opportunities?
 
PaulS said:
Government is in the way, for each one of your examples, I could make that case and government is in the way of producing more oil.
Click to expand...

I'm hardly a flaming liberal, but I don't agree that the Government is particularly at fault for consumers buying cheap crap made in China.

(wanting avoid SZ wrt all the parties at fault for the whole illegal aliens debacle)
 
Clark1961 said:
Hmmm, let's set aside the question of which specific Federal lands you want opened up and examine the second statement just a little bit.

"The private wells have saved our bacon over the last 8 years."

Do you know what the economics of the "private wells" were over the past 8 years and what those same wells look like right now in economic terms? Oil companies are always looking for good investments and they are chosing not to drill right now. Why is that? Lack of opportunity or lack of profit?

Now let's get back to the question of which specific Federal lands you want opened. Do any of these lands present attractive drilling opportunities?
Click to expand...
And could we examine the money owed to the federal government by oil companies for drilling on federal lands that remains unpaid? Or how about drug company's that do not have to negotiate prices with the government, costing taxpayers billions per year!?
 
PaulS said:
The best remedy for OPEC price fixing is for the US to produce as much oil as possible.
Click to expand...

Negative, keep our oil in the ground.

A. Pump THEM dry first, take a 300 year look at it not a 30 year look.

B. Sell them all the rifles, tanks, planes, bullets as they can afford, we get our dollars back, they get hardware that we can defeat easily.

C. Foment and encourage interstate tension in all ME countries, keep them at each others throat(see step B. ).

D. Close the US border to ANY immigration from ME countries due to their horrific human rights policies.
 
Last edited:
PaulS said:
All of them, all federal lands. The private wells have saved our bacon over the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

Just to make sure, you understand that oil is dirt-cheap now, right? Why waste our national resources at a time cheap oil is flooding over here? Wouldn't we be better served to wait until we really need it?
 
docmirror said:
Negative, keep our oil in the ground.

A. Pump THEM dry first, take a 300 year look at it not a 30 year look.

B. Sell them all the rifles, tanks, planes, bullets as they can afford, we get our dollars back, they get hardware that we can defeat easily.

C. Foment and encourage interstate tension in all ME countries, keep them at each others throat(see step B. ).

D. Close the US border to ANY immigration from ME countries due to their horrific human rights policies.
Click to expand...

Hell, I'd vote for you.
 
docmirror said:
Negative, keep our oil in the ground.

A. Pump THEM dry first, take a 300 year look at it not a 30 year look.

B. Sell them all the rifles, tanks, planes, bullets as they can afford, we get our dollars back, they get hardware that we can defeat easily.

C. Foment and encourage interstate tension in all ME countries, keep them at each others throat(see step B. ).

D. Close the US border to ANY immigration from ME countries due to their horrific human rights policies.
Click to expand...

This could be the first time you and I have agreed on anything.

The only thing I'd add is that even a 30-year look would be okay, but some folks don't want to plan beyond 30 days.

SCCutler said:
Hell, I'd vote for you.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough, I might too.
 
Richard said:
But isn't it corporate entities which are the conveyors of commodities? Therefore they shall be held under anti trust?


With that in mind, any law or regulation which is not universally enforced shall not present or cause any enforcement against the people of the United States. Agreed?

(I'm trying hard to keep this in HT)
Click to expand...

In a very simplified form: The people who are importing are not the ones who did the price setting. The various countries in OPEC get together and set a price. Company X buys their oil and then uses it, imports it to the US or perhaps resells it to someone else who uses it, imports it or resells it.
 
steingar said:
My biggest hope is fusion energy, so we don't have to depend on the Arabs.
Click to expand...

I wasn't going to go there, but had the same thought. 50 years from now crude will be found only in the anals of history.
 
timwinters said:
The best remedy for illegal immigration is for the US kids to learn how to work.
Click to expand...

Disagree on this one. Companies want illegal immigrants...including illegal high tech immigrants...because they can pay them dirt cheap, sometimes less than a legal wage.
 
A while back, I think it was Bush, we increased our storage supply of oil to protect against this very thing. I don't know what the threshold is, but at some price point/% increase the US government would release some of that to market to control pricing. So, we can play that game, too.
 
bflynn said:
In a very simplified form: The people who are importing are not the ones who did the price setting. The various countries in OPEC get together and set a price. Company X buys their oil and then uses it, imports it to the US or perhaps resells it to someone else who uses it, imports it or resells it.
Click to expand...

Close. The purchase price is negotiated on an open market. What OPEC does is "agree" on production quotas for it's member nations. Those quotas are really just answers to the question of "How much can you produce and sell this quarter?" The member nations then just do as they please with respect to the quotas - the Saudis don't care one whit about their quota. Of course politics comes in to it when some of the member nations get ****ed at each other or one or more of the oil importing nations ****es off one or more of the OPEC member nations.
 
docmirror said:
All you need to add is some change and you'll really have -- well, nothing.
Click to expand...

Can't disagree, although a cadre of internet rich guys have started making fusion investments with fresh approaches. And Lockheed Martin announced very publicly that they're working on it.

That, and we've already achieved break-even fusion. What we need is inexpensive get-ahead fusion, which I hope can be attained with today's technology. Only with that will we avoid Peak Oil.
 
steingar said:
Can't disagree, although a cadre of internet rich guys have started making fusion investments with fresh approaches. And Lockheed Martin announced very publicly that they're working on it.

That, and we've already achieved break-even fusion. What we need is inexpensive get-ahead fusion, which I hope can be attained with today's technology. Only with that will we avoid Peak Oil.
Click to expand...

Please, just stop now. I'm not going to post all the faults of fusion. It's just not worth the time.

And no - we have not achieved anything remotely close to break-even fusion reaction. Not - even - close. For people with simple calorimitry counters, the best case right now is about 200,000:1. Sadly, fusion doesn't lend itself to simple calorimitry so the real number is way higher.

This is my last post on fusion, say anything you want, but know this, I used to work on those reactors, and there's a reason the fedguv is paying for everything(even LMs process).
 
docmirror said:
Please, just stop now. I'm not going to post all the faults of fusion. It's just not worth the time.
Click to expand...

I am certain you can fill rather long book with failures related to fusion power. I don't see any downsides at all with fusion power generation in theory. I understand the practical aspects leave something to be desired.

docmirror said:
And no - we have not achieved anything remotely close to break-even fusion reaction. Not - even - close. For people with simple calorimitry counters, the best case right now is about 200,000:1. Sadly, fusion doesn't lend itself to simple calorimitry so the real number is way higher.
Click to expand...

Break-even fusion was been reported by ITER last year in the journal Nature.

docmirror said:
This is my last post on fusion, say anything you want, but know this, I used to work on those reactors, and there's a reason the fedguv is paying for everything(even LMs process).
Click to expand...

I sincerely hope not, all my observations are second hand at best and I am very interested in your outlook. And like I said, there is now quite a bit of private money going into the research.
 
steingar said:
I am certain you can fill rather long book with failures related to fusion power. I don't see any downsides at all with fusion power generation in theory. I understand the practical aspects leave something to be desired.
Click to expand...

An enormous source of fusion power is already available - we just don't know how to harness it yet. :wink2:

And the nimby crowd wouldn't want it right next door.

(actually, I wonder if people would hear "fusion power plant" and be afraid of it automatically)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top