Existing users please login

 

Home / Markets / Industries / Energy

Oil Falls Below $56 on Demand Concerns

 
Christine Giardina
Associated Press
     

    The oil market fluctuated Monday morning as traders weighed recession concerns, but by midafternoon had fallen $1.97 to $55.07 a barrel.

    Japan announced Monday that its economy slipped into recession for the first time since 2001. This indicated a possible drop in demand, heightening traders’ expectations that OPEC might have to slash production further in order to stabilize the oil market.

    “The question is how long and deep the recession would be,” said Fadel Gheit, Managing Director and senior analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. “If people saw that we had a shallower or shorter than expected recession, that will always put oil prices up and influence OPEC’s decision to cut output.”

    OPEC already announced a production cut last month, in which quotas were cut by 1.5 million barrels a day.

    Tom Hartmann, a commodity analyst at Altavest Worldwide Trading Inc, believes that a more “meaningful cut” is necessary. OPEC’s "last emergency cut did not even come close to meeting the estimate for the drop in demand.”

    OPEC President Chakib Khelil suggested Sunday that the group will not cut production at its December 17 meeting, further influencing crude oil prices.

    Khelil said that Iran’s request for more cuts is “a wish,” according to an Associated Press report.

    Crude oil is currently hovering around being virtually unchanged, trading at $56.85, after deviating between selling higher and lower throughout Monday morning.

    Oil prices have plunged nearly 62% since its mid-July peak at almost $150 a barrel.

    Hartmann identifies production cuts as a long-term factor on prices, while pointing to the weaker dollar as the force driving Monday’s market.

    “I think the weaker dollar is sparking a little bit of support in the commodity market today. Typically when we have seen strength in the dollar, oil was down.”

    Analysts have also attributed the volatility in the market to a number of other factors.

    Some industry participants believe that demand is seasonal, explaining that winter is a considerably low-demand time of year. “If it was summer, we might see a rebound in demand due to summer driving,” Hartmann said.

    Jim Ritterbusch, president of Ritterbusch & Associates, attributes the early-morning strength to the higher-than-expected industrial production numbers released this morning.

    The U.S. Navy announced Monday that pirates have hijacked an enormous crude oil tanker with 25 crew members off the Kenyan coast.

    “What we could see is some short-term disruption in supply,” Hartmann said. “We might look at some alternative shipping routes for oil and for other commodities. There probably won’t be a long-term effect, but it could back things up in the short term.”

    In other energy markets, wholesale gas was two cents lower at $1.22 a gallon, and natural gas was 16 cents higher at $6.47. Heating oil was practically unchanged.

    Gold was up $1.80, trading at $744.20.

     

    Fox Business Video


     

    FOX Translator

    Detach

    No data currently available.

    No data currently available.

    No-Load Funds

    Some mutual funds want you to pay for the privilege of them (or your investment adviser) taking your money to invest. It's called a load, and it works like a cover charge to get into a nightclub. Luckily, there are such things as no-load funds. As the name implies, shares of these funds are sold without a fee paid to a broker or investment advisor.

    The entire amount you invest in no-load funds goes to work for your returns. On the other hand, with load funds, right off the bat you're charged commission (not to mention other fees incurred over the life of the investment). Let's say, for example, you invest $25,000 into a load fund that charges a 5% commission. This costs you $1,250 off the top, bringing your actual investment down to only $23,750.

    The often-cited horse race analogy argues against investing in load funds. Here's the logic behind it: Would you place a bet on a horse that had to start a race 200 yards behind the others? Well, maybe you would if you got a tip from a sketchy, trench coat-clad man in a dark alley. However, under most circumstances, it's not smart to put your money on that handicapped horse.

    But some argue that at times that man in the trench coat (aka your broker) knows more about the horses than you do, and has a better shot at picking a winner. Also, sometimes these fees are unavoidable because some funds are available only through investment advisers.

    Cost-benefit analysis can help determine when a load fund is worth it (in other words, when it will score you a load) and when it is better to "do it yourself" and avoid the fees. Load-fund fees range depending on share class and can cover a variety of costs, such as paper work and fund management.