|
Home l Broadcast l WrapUp l Storm Watch l Editorial Archives l About Us l Contact Us |
|
Such is the case with the recent plunge in the price paid for gasoline by formerly dour consumers leading up to an election where the party in power is clearly having difficulty wooing the electorate. It just so happens that the newly appointed Treasury Secretary used to run the investment bank that controls the world's most important commodity index, which seven weeks ago cut the weighting of unleaded gasoline by nearly 75 percent, causing all commodity investments based on this index to sell their unleaded gasoline futures. For the same number of buyers, a glut of sellers means lower prices, and voila! Prices at the pump drop precipitously, consumer confidence rebounds, and the electorate develops a new spring in their step. Or at least, that's what some would have you believe. A recent poll revealed that 42 percent of the respondents thought the White House had somehow manipulated the price of gasoline so that it would decrease before this fall's elections. They were only slightly outnumbered by the 53 percent who believed there to be no trickery involved. Still, there are a few too many events that have lined up so precisely over the last few months that it's hard not to take notice. A recent New York Times story observed the changes made to the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index back on August 9th, particularly its fortuitous timing. Heather Timmons writes: Wholesale prices for New York Harbor unleaded gasoline, the major gasoline contract traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange, dropped 18 cents a gallon on Aug. 10, to $1.9889 a gallon, a decline of more than 8 percent, and they have dropped further since then. In New York on Friday, gasoline futures for October delivery rose 4.81 cents, or 3.2 percent, to $1.5492 a gallon. Prices have fallen 9.4 percent this year.Not surprisingly, Goldman Sachs had no comment on the recent change. Having looked at this commodity index some time ago as part of the work done for the Iacono Research website, the weightings from late June were already available in spreadsheet form. A comparison between the composition from a few months ago to the most recent data available at the GSCI page of Goldman's website shows the following changes.
The
Times article states that the adjustment prompted the sell-off of some
$6 billion in unleaded gasoline futures contracts, some of these being
replaced by Reformulated Gasoline Blendstock for Oxygen Blending ("RBOB")
futures and, as shown in the chart above, the rest being distributed to
other commodities. Note that there was a hefty decline in the natural
gas weighting as well.
So,
indulging some conspiratorial inklings just a bit further, a reasonable
question to ask is whether there might be a relationship between falling
gasoline prices and other energy prices. Were plunging gasoline prices
just part of a broad energy price decline or did it serve as a catalyst?
With
the exception of a brief exchange with always-volatile natural gas
shortly after August 9th, other energy prices appear to have been led
down by the falling price of unleaded gasoline. It looks like a
contagion in the graphic above, spread by unleaded gasoline and picked
up by other energy commodities that were unable to fight off its
effects.
CONTACT
INFORMATION Tim Iacono is the founder of Iacono Research which provides market commentary and investment advisory services specializing in macroeconomic analysis and commodity based investing. He also writes the popular blog The Mess That Greenspan Made. The opinions of FSU contributors do not necessarily reflect those of Financial Sense. |
|
Home l Broadcast l WrapUp l Storm Watch l Editorial Archives l About Us l Contact Us |
Copyright ©
James J. Puplava Financial Sense™ is a Registered Trademark
P. O. Box 503147 San Diego, CA 92150-3147 USA 858.487.3939