JPM Hikes Crude Price Forecast, Sees $120 WTI By Election Time

Tyler Durden's picture

JPM brings some less than good news for the administration, which unless planning to propose another $500 billion or so gas price offsetting fiscal stimulus (which would bring total US debt to $17 trillion by the end of 2012) may find itself with the bulk of its electorate unable to drive to the voting booths come November. In a just revised crude forecast, JPM commodity analyst Larry Eagles, has hiked both his Crude and Brent expectations across the board, and now sees WTI going from $105 currently to a $120 by the end of the year, $4 higher than his prior forecast. Alas, since in another report from this morning titled "Return of Asset Reflation" JPM finally figures out what we have been saying for months, namely that the stealthy global central bank liquidity tsunami is finally spilling out of equity markets and into everything else, inflation is about to become a substantially topic in pre-election propaganda. As a reminder, when gold was at $1900 last summer, central banks had pumped about $2 trillion less into the markets. We expect the market to grasp this discrepancy shortly.

Here is what has been going on, apparently to everyone's dismay:

And here is JPM with the first of its "reflation" analyses:

The oil market faces the risk of a short-term correction through weakening seasonal demand, falling margins, policy and economic developments. Such a correction, should it occur, is likely to be temporary, with geopolitical issues in Iran, Syria, Sudan/South Sudan, Nigeria and elsewhere creating increased demand for inventory, and providing greater leeway for OPEC to manage a price fall. The supply-side response to higher prices in North America should not be ignored, but as the recent bottlenecks in Cushing, Alberta and the Gulf Coast have shown, when production outpaces the infrastructure needed to move the oil, the market shifts pricing to slow the pace of development.


We remain alert to the potential to grow supply at a much faster rate, but ongoing decline in mature areas, supply risks in key producing countries together with the underperformance of some new frontier areas leave us to feel that it will be a greater risk in 2013/2014 than this year. More importantly, building economic momentum, albeit from a weak base, has the potential to pull oil prices higher for the next 12 to 24 months, and while downside risks remain in Developed and Emerging Markets, recent data strength together with high levels of liquidity being added by Europe and potentially Japan, and easing elsewhere provide upside. The quarterly path of our forecasts embody the timing of these risks, depicting an upward trending market lifting our Brent price forecast for 2012 to $118/bbl and to $125/bbl in 2013. Around this average, we also lift and widen our expectations for the likely price range over the course of 2012 from $100 to $120/bbl to $105 to $135/bbl.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Careless Whisper's picture

How much stock does JP Morgan own in the big oil companies? How much of their bonds does JP Morgan own? I suspect it adds up to alot.

Comay Mierda's picture

this is what i was waiting for.  i was worried the oil price would skyrocket.  but now since they predict it will, it will surely come down.  anyone remember the $2500/oz gold price prediction in 2011?

johnQpublic's picture

gas price will come down as demand is reduced


who needs gas to get to work when you dont have a job?

who needs gas to go visit mom and dad when you are living in their basement?

need i go on?

Don Birnam's picture

Where is the public protestation regarding the high price of gasoline ? Where is the outcry, manifested in any form ? There is none. The American populace is mantled in a heavy cloak of timid resignation, and will accept their plight without clamor. Four, five, ten dollars per gallon -- there will be no mumblings. This is their perceived "lot," and the individual will simply have to accommodate this discomfort by withdrawing spending on some other personal balance sheet item to "redeploy" to the household fuel budget ( read: "Which credit card still has available balance ?" )

As for the "administration" shouldering blame ( be it actual or by default ), they could care less. As the public acquiesces to the new fuel normal, the administration remains, with the complicity of a sight and hearing impaired media, comfortably insulated. Indeed, what better to admonish and browbeat the SUVers among us to migrate to a government-made Volt, than a five-dollar gallon of regular ?

dizzyfingers's picture

"The administration" doesn't control oil. TPTB do.

Jay Gould Esq.'s picture

No, but the implication is that voters have the propensity to "take it out on the administration" via the ballot box. Recall during the Bush Administration years, the hit pieces bursting from the various "unbiased" big media outlets that insisted rising fuel costs were all Bush's fault - when gas was $2.50 per gallon. Now, approaching $5 in some West Coast locales, it isn't even a story.

NumberNone's picture

I'm surprised there are no protest also.  We all know it's caused by speculators and that evil Bush/Cheney cabal in the White House just taking care of all their oil and gas buddies.  Remember, Cheney worked for Halliburton and...ummm, uhhh, ummm...dammit.  

I love Obama!  

dwdollar's picture

Why do you need voters to show up at the election booths when the election is rigged?

Miss Expectations's picture

Has anyone ever suggested that each voter get a receipt from these new fangled voting machines?

dwdollar's picture

Voting has been a farce for a long, long time now. The electronic voting machines just make the corruption more efficient.

johnQpublic's picture

that was actually the premise of one voting machine design

company bankrupt...never sold a single machine

there is a youtube vid about it years back

Normalcy Bias's picture

...Because, providing voters with an 'illusion of choice' helps to keep them docile...

samsara's picture

Consumption is dropping off a cliff for all energy types.

Crude it going to new average highs

I love the smell of Peak Oil in the morning.   Smells like Collapse

aerojet's picture

How does the drop in consumption and the spike in price caused by excess liquidity in commodities markets have anything to do with peak oil?  Or does every Internet-based armchair collapse aficionado automatically post something about peak oil whenever any blog posting about oil prices on the rise emerges? 

Also, how can we have problems due to peak oil if demand has fallen to 2001 levels?  We were able to meet 2008 demand levels, but not 2001 demand levels (which are lower)?  Peak demand is not the same as peak extraction.

In general, less energy use is a good thing unless you are involved in the energy business or happen to care what GDP numbers look like.  The problem with the energy business is that any cutbacks in consumption are a problem for growth--executives want more profit each year so they can give themselves raises and meet stock holders' demands and that cannot happen if consumers of their services cut back either through energy conservation or outright lack of demand.  But wasting resources in the name of growth is utter stupidity.

As far as $120/bbl oil goes, it's a non-issue.  Yes it is painful when buying gasoline or food, but it also forces those who waste resources to reconsider their behavior.  Look for a lot of Americans to stop mindlessly consuming literally everything.  We import a lot of stupid crap from China and that needs to end because it is massive waste--Soviet-level resource misallocation, just not centrally planned.  Americans of lower socioeconomic status need to stop buying goods in search of social status, and that includes large SUVs and trucks that actual transportation needs do not dictate.  I'm going out on a limb and am going to suggest that culturally, this shift will eventually have a silver lining in that people are going to have to come back around to finding status through meaningful pursuits and not mindless consumption.  It may also lead to a political re-awakening so that we stop electing morons (if elections still make any difference at all).




samsara's picture

this shift will eventually have a silver lining in that people are going to have to come back around to finding status through meaningful pursuits and not mindless consumption.


Yes,  and it will happen with a lot less people I believe.

Caviar Emptor's picture

lol. i love your near-term analysis. never do now what you can put off until tomorrow


I'm going out on a limb and am going to suggest that culturally, this shift will eventually have a silver lining in that people are going to have to come back around to finding status through meaningful pursuits and not mindless consumption.


Whoa, there. That's as anti-American as it ever gets. 

CrashisOptimistic's picture

You try to be serious minded, but you don't mention anything about geology at all, and how can you discuss oil if you don't discuss geology?

How can you think in terms of waste, or social behavior or economics when geology is the decisive issue in the matter?

Matt's picture

While these stats only show to 2009, clearly demand is higher than in 2001. Do you mean in America only? Actually, by 2009 America was using less than in 2001. Do you understand WORLD oil supply and demand?

While Americans are consuming less, developing economies are consuming more (but still far less per capita than America). Here's some numbers to look at:




Do you really think oil consumption would not be much higher if oil was ~$25 per barrel as in 2001, compared to ~$100 now? Or do you think that 100 percent of the price increase is purely due to "excess liquidity"?

Yes, American demand has shrunk alot, but the prices are much higher and the rest of the world is growing in demand, limited only by the incredible prices - quadruple in 10 years, thats a 14 percent YoY increase on average.

LawsofPhysics's picture

"Consumption is dropping off a cliff for all energy types."

Not in the BRICs.  America and the dollar grow less relevant by the day.  

Death and Gravity's picture

Thats a conservative estimate, no pun intended.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

America to take a perminent "staycation".  Sounds fun!

Matt's picture

Now if only the US Military would take a good long Staycation!

CrashisOptimistic's picture

You need to recalibrate your attitudes.

The US has 4% of the world's population and burns 22% of the world's daily oil consumption.

If the US were to try (or be forced) to cut that 22 number to 4, America would disintegrate.  This 4:22 ratio is not waste.  It's what it takes to grow food in Iowa and ship it to NYC.  It's what it takes to have a population that doesn't live strictly in cities.

America is spread out.  Lifestyle requires oil.  Russia is in the process of spreading out and so is Saudi Arabia.  People don't naturally WANT to live in 20 story apartment buildings.  Some, many, would like to have a backyard in the suburbs for their kids to play in.  Russia is headed in that direction.  They always were, with their country dachas.  An advanced lifestyle has ALWAYS translated to a house in the country, even if you were not American.

Only the US military can protect that 4:22 ratio and the US lifestyle it has defined.  Only the US military will be able to prevent the US from looking like Lagos, Nigeria or the favelas of Rio.

Matt's picture

Not sure if serious?

In case you are not being sarcastic, you really don't think that America could operate on half its current oil consumption? Or even a quarter?

Sure if the change happened overnight, there would be collapse. If the change happens slowly over a decade or two, it should work out. It is the rate of change that causes the chaos and mass die-offs when countries go through major changes.

AC_Doctor's picture

$120 x 2 = $240+ when the US goes into Iran in late July or August.  The Brown Clown is betting a war will take the publics eye off his horrendous handling of our faltering economy.  The black gold will bite him in his brown ass.

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Dude's pretty white for a brown guy.

AC_Doctor's picture

LOL!  It must  be hard staying white with all the rounds of golf and vacations the Clown puts in.  He wears the 100+ sunblock like the ex-great Micheal Jackson to keep him from getting too dark!

machineh's picture

C'mon, $8/gallon gas is a small sacrifice to defend 'the middle east's only democracy.' /sarc

thunderchief's picture

Pumpers and Dumpers..

Just like Silver last year.


Snakeeyes's picture

It isn't bad news for the Administration. Almost 50% of Americans don't pay Federal taxes. 70% receive some sort of Federal assistance (whether direct or indirect). We are on the debt train to hell, but 50% of Americans will vote to keep their handouts and demonize oil companies.

Obama and the media will successfully blame Republicans for high gas prices. Seriously. And our scum media won't challenge him.

kralizec's picture

Mmm...Texas Tea!

YesWeKahn's picture

When Bernanke's lips are talking "inflation", it always comes out as "QEn is justified". This junk needs to be in a trash can.

adr's picture

It is just hysterical when the supply side numbers and real demand metrics are completely eclipsed by the rumors or geopolitical instability which so far haven't shown to actually afect the supply of crude at all.

Actual demand falling for over a year and production outpacing the need for supply is temporary, but a Nigerian oil worker strike is a permanent fixture for increasing the price of crude.

It's all bullshit. Every last bit of it.

When you have refineries closing and the USA exporting more refined fuels than it uses, you can't make a bullish case for higher oil prices. You can make a bullshit speculative case based on rumors of things that haven't and may not happen.

Sadly bullshit trumps reality every time in the "market".

aerojet's picture

Clearly, it is not a demand-driven market any longer.  If it ever was...

CrashisOptimistic's picture

Here is the decisive matter.  

We don't know what supply is.  There are 3 tracking agencies, EIA, IEA and JODI.  THEY DON'T AGREE, and they don't agree to a very large extent.

People ask . . . what is oil consumption and what is oil production and they go surfing around for the data and find that the numbers don't look bad and say why is price up?  But the numbers they find are not gospel.  Governments are often the source of them.

There were rumors recently that Lukoil, one of Russia's big oil companies, had provided their company's oil production to their government, who added it to Rosneft and their other companies and published "Russian oil production".   But Lukoil has holdings in Africa.  They didn't seperate them out and Russia just reported the raw number.

There is a LOT of bogus info in the world of oil.

cjbosk's picture

Welcome GOP Bitchez, out with Obummer, once and for all!


I hope WTI hits 150, that will in fact seal the Teleprompter's fate.

Caviar Emptor's picture

I'll propose it again: fracking one well at a time is just too slow and labor-intensive to meet our national needs. 

We need a plan.

We need an executive order to carpet bomb all shale structures from sea to shining sea and slurrp up all the crude from out of the bomb craters. 

There, fixed it. 

Caviar Emptor's picture

And expand mountain top removal for coal mining, strip hydraulic uranium mining, clear-cutting all forests and daming up all streams and rivers. 

Caviar Emptor's picture

And abolish all off-shore drilling regulations to prevent spills. 

We're over this whole beach vacation thing anyway. 

johnQpublic's picture

de-regulate nuclear power while yer at it

if it makes power, bedamn the consequences

Caviar Emptor's picture

Absolutely. Fear of nuclear is the biggest crock. We need nuke plants that are big. Really big. 

Cast Iron Skillet's picture

don't need vacation when you're working 7 days/week to make ends meet ...

Caviar Emptor's picture

You mean working 7days/week in the nuclear power stations and coal mines. I agree. That's my view of utopia. 

Cast Iron Skillet's picture

well, we have those great big bunker buster bombs ... maybe we could get the military to pretend that the shale is like a big bunker that is holding back the oil of our heritage, let pilgrims sing, and bomb it. They could even drop the big bombs out of a b2, if that's fun for 'em. That way, they could shoot off all their bombs without even attacking a 3rd world country.

kito's picture

I call bullshit...if jpm is calling for 120, they have plans for 70.......

aerojet's picture

Ha, that's kind of how I parse these things, too.  If JPM or GS produces a report, it is best to expect the exact opposite to happen.