This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Most Important Company In Europe
There is a reason why in the past we have referred to Russia simply as Gazpromia. Here is why...
And a little more color on this soon-to-be-critical company... Pages 10-12 are of particular importance...
»
- 33987 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
tony, thank you for this clarification. your idiosyncratic mastery of shakespeare's langauge overwhelms me, i therefore must concede.
ZATO talks a lot of shit but if they want a war in Europe - who would show up? Americans will not. Britain keeps shrinking their military. Germans? Only if Germany was attacked. I think the Poles are the only ones who would fight but only if it would be to defend Poland.
The only people the scum in ZATO can get to fight are mercenaries like Al Qeada, Blackwater, a few from the Balkans, Chenya and Bandara nazis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOOuc-8y7HU
It will be a long cold Winter for Western Europe next year.
The U.S. and E.U. don't seem to care about old folks or the young they would send to war.
The EU/US would be smart not to get directly involved with any Russian conflict; it would be far smarter to keep the Ukrainians in the latest toys on the quiet. Two nuclear powers going toe to toe wouldn't end well.
Russia is draining about $400 billion/year from its enemies to send them stuff that they burn immediately.
This is relentless, inexorable weakening imposed.
Which is the better fuel, US bills or oil? Its less than 2Q of QE.
Russia seems to spend it pretty quickly -- on French aircraft carriers.
Judging by how Obama is handling this situation I think historians will be able to draw at least one comparison between Hitler and Obama.
They both will have created a lot of "shovel ready" jobs.
A cold winter and lots of deaths of the elderly would help reduce the demographic time bomb that the EU has .... perhaps that is the plan?
Whatever China does not buy, Japan and Korea will be happy to purchase.
You don't think Japan will go along with sanctions against Russia?
Only if they can convince Australia to cut energy exports to China in favor of Japan. I would have said "fat chance" of that, but since America managed to get its government intalled in Australia (under Tony Abbott), then hey, maybe it's on the table afterall.
Putin wins yet again.
More than 100% dependency. How's that?
gazprom blah blah
we need to harnish renew bulls then we do not need gazprom.
tony blair should be employed in a money nose object think tanks to think up new ways to generated gas and wind.
wants he has made the device we
base the company in poland so are glorious poles can protect it from the thieving magpie russians.
simples
my ideas no and charge.
harnish away !
Hey, look at the bright side. At least they aren't dependent on "Saudi" oil. /sarc
Belgium? They don't use any gas from Gazprom? Maybe they told the Fed that they wanted paper proof of all of those UST's that they supposedly bought and burn all of those UST for fuel instead?
Belarus? How can it consume more than 100% of it's consumption?
This must be some more high finance stuff that I just don't understand. When you are more than 100% dependent on something you must really be fucked.
The banks are about 1500% dependent of having their loans paid back.
Yeah, I knew that statement would be forthcoming but we are talking about a physical commodity here and not "financial instruments". Or are we not talking physical? I looked at that chart a quite few times before I posted and it does not say futures anywhere. I'm not making any accusations. I just find it odd.
I think you are likely correct if not lowballing a bit.;-)
Probably a combination of domestic double counting and of on-selling being counted as consumption (which is effectively international double counting).
is putin white? he can't be white. all the rest of the white people on earth are stupider than naturally possible. putin must have some asian, perhaps mongolian, in his genes? white people should be grateful to the brown continent for saving their weak gay asses from sure collapse in 2008. white people could learn how to say thank you in mandarin at the very least. you better hope your new masters will be as kind as you were when "discovering" the rest of the world.lol!
Gazprom clients throughout Europe pay different prices for energy delivery and some of this is politically, rather than economically, motivated. Consequently, one of the EU's "yes minister" style plans is to increase Russian gas imports through countries that have favourable contracts with Gazprom, then reroute it back East to less politically strong nations that pay a higher price in an attempt to use Gazprom to undermine....Gazprom. No, I'm not joking: [http://www.theautomaticearth.com/debt-rattle-mar-9-2014-big-oil-and-gas-...]
Europe intends to spend a whole lot of time, money and effort to redevelop pipelines and reverse flows. In response, Gazprom needs only to "renegotiate" contracts to nullify the whole scheme, a simple feat. [To a limited extent, European gas price arbitrage is already occurring which contributes to > 100% energy consumption numbers being cited. These are market forces in action, arbitraging politically motivated (and inefficient) price differences between nations. Gazprom goes along with it so far because it's no big deal but if Europe tries to make it a big deal then Europe finds itself with a fixed (higher) price from Gazprom, a loss for Europe].
Gazprom's ability to nullify any arbitrage games will not stop the redevelopment of pipeline infrastructure because European top-brass are actually stupid enough to believe American top-brass that Europe will be able to obtain high-cost (due to inclusion of non-traditionally sourced energy) LNG, transported overseas through supply lines that don't even exist yet at a price that is somehow, miraculously, going to be cheaper than the traditional gas that Gazprom can already provide overland through existing infrastructure (assuming peaceful relations with Russia). European leadership has apparently been suckered into the US-fracking-bonanza myth and thinks that a bird in the bush is worth more than two birds in the hands, a failure of geopolitics 101.
"Peaceful relations" are the key here; I hope it would be obvious to all by now that the USA has no intention of retaining peaceful relations with Russia (and China), in the longer (and apparently shorter term), because a strong East is incompatible with the Brzezinski doctrine of US global hegemony [http://www.voltairenet.org/article30038.html]. (And in case you didn't already know, the Polish really, really, don't trust Russians. Just ask an old Pole who was worse in (and after) WWII, the Russians or the Germans? Many Poles would rather have an economic collapse or a war than have to be under the boot of Russia again, Brzezinski is no exception).
The coming hostility with Russia will lead to higher energy prices for Europe and this is the real reason that Europe is exploring alternative supply options. What is so disturbing about this is that European leadership seems resigned to this course of action rather than trying to deal peacefully with a stronger East and talk Washington down.
Are citizens of Europe paying attention to this? The hawks are asking you to throw relatively stable energy supplies from Russia under a bus in exchange for the fantasy of cheap energy sourced from US, Australia, Africa and elsewhere, via supply lines that don't even exist yet. In other words, the hawks are asking you to willingly embrace an energy crisis. You ready for that?
Given the remaining vulnerability of European banks and the underlying weakness of European economies, do European governments really believe that going along with an impatient USA then embracing an energy shock is a wise idea? Perhaps European politicians need to be reminded that economies run on energy, not money, and that an energy crisis guarantees a banking crisis. Maybe that will get their attention, seeing as the health of the banking sector seems to be their primary concern.
Europeans have fair reasons to not trust Putin, meaning that his EEU [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Union] is perceived as threatening to Western powers, but embracing economic collapse (due to an energy crisis caused by cutting back on Russian energy consumption) in an attempt to induce an economic collapse in Russia, hence stalling the EEU, is cutting off a nose to spite a face. It is MAD via economic means without the M or the A given that Russia can just shrug its shoulders and reroute supply (over a few years) to Asia. It's just D for Deranged, Dumb and Disturbing.
Furthermore, a consequently weakened Europe would just make it even more of a target for alleged Russian ambitions. Cooler heads need to prevail here and that means letting Putin have his way with Ukraine joining the EEU (but not Russia) in exchange for reliable energy supplies to the EU. Losing Crimea (and possibly other Russian dominated oblasts) was entirely a consequence of US meddling and never needed to happen, not that it's really any big deal that it did anyway.
It's time for the USA to face up to the fact that it no longer has the economic foundation to support the position of sole world superpower, and that the world can do just fine with a power-sharing agreement rather than a dictator.
[I just had a disurbing thought that perhaps the hawks would like to return America to a position whereby it can rightfully hold the title of sole superpower, as it did in the aftermath of WWII, not by suddenly strengthening through economic progress, but by weakening the rest by inducing them to war. That's almost too disturbing to entertain but I can see how it may appeal to a psychopathic mind].
Great sourcing, ZH. The panda-bear marketing slide on slide 11 of the preso makes it quite clear who the audience is.
Why anyone rates this article below a 5-star article is beyond me. The writing on the petrodollar wall couldn't be clearer:
Aaaaaand it's gone.
what this article hides in plain view is the following fact:
in other words, germany can basically handle a supply cut from gazprom and/or russia, quite simply by turning on those nuclear reactors again.
i'm not so sure if my fellow russian oligarchs and putin did the math on this one...
unless russia-china announce a big ng pipeline development and ng supply contract worth 770 billion rubles [first negotiation failed, b/c china wants a cheaper ng price than gazprom's european market], whereby china advances the necessary tranches to make up for the lost revenues from european ng consumers, i see a very difficult road ahead for them.
all eyes on putin's meeting to china in may.
whether they admit it or not, the west loves russia what it did in world war ii, by putting an end to nazism and saving lots of people from the concentration camps.
well done ZH, this is cutting edge. Right where is matters. Good article.
This should be a lesson to Barry to not export and to protect our supply so that we remain independent.
How about getting the f-ing gov't out of the way and developing these resources?
The $$$ gererated would be turned over and over and over in our economy for goods and services.
Probably not.