by Pops » Wed 11 Jan 2012, 18:47:59
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he outcome would be a financial ‘lease’ of oil by BP to GSCI investors and the monetisation of part of BP’s oil inventory. Such agreements in relation to bilateral physical oil transactions are typically concluded privately, and are invisible to the organised markets. However, any risk management contracts which an intermediary such as Goldman Sachs may enter into as a counter-party to both a fund and a producer are visible on the futures exchanges.
Due to the invisibility of the change of ownership of inventory ‘information asymmetry’ is created where some market participants are in possession of key market information which others do not have. This ownership by investors of inventory in the custody of a producer has been termed ‘Dark Inventory’
So basically he's saying BP rents out an amount of oil that's still in the ground to someone - monetizes their reserves - and buys back the oil at some future date when it is actually out of the ground in a pipe somewhere. This is a private transaction that creates "dark Inventory" as opposed to a futures contract that all can see.
From comments by the OP
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat will happen is that market players sell BFOE/Brent forward physical contracts, and OilCo buys them.
The market players sold because they believed the price will fall, in the expectation that they can buy back similar contracts cheaper in this 'over the counter' market and make a profit.
The problem is that OilCo already owns some or all of the inventory/rights to production available, and this means that the hapless seller finds himself 'squeezed'. He therefore has to buy the spot oil necessary to fulfil his forward sale contract from the only seller - ie Oilco.
And the spot price 'pops' upwards (and is distorted) as a result.
When we argue about speculation I always take the position that producers are really the only ones in a position to manipulate the market by leaving oil in the ground. With the OP's scenario the producers don't even need to forego the cash flow.
Beyond that, I can't follow him as to why he thinks this is coming to a head right now, my brain is too puny.