Analys
Extremely tight platinum and palladium markets

The South African platinum mining industry has been affected by strikes for more than ten weeks now. Because stocks are dwindling, the mining companies concerned are finding it increasingly difficult to fulfil their contractual delivery obligations. The situation as regards palladium is dominated by concerns about how Russia might react if the West were to impose further-reaching sanctions on the country. At the same time, demand on both markets is robust, driven by the automotive industry. The situation appears to be tightening noticeably, which in our opinion suggests that platinum and palladium prices will rise.
Platinum came under pressure from the weak gold price in March and declined noticeably as a result. For a time it dropped below the $1,400 per troy ounce mark to a six-week low. Palladium fared somewhat better and trended sideways while fluctuating significantly. For the first time since August 2011, it actually exceeded the $800 per troy ounce mark for a while, though it was unable to maintain this level (Chart 1). We believe that both precious metal prices are too low from a fundamental viewpoint given the risks to supply. In this Commodity Spotlight we will be assessing the supply situation in South Africa, the world’s biggest platinum producer and the world’s number two palladium producer, as well as taking a look at Russia, the biggest supplier of palladium.
According to figures from Johnson Matthey, South Africa produced 4.12 million ounces of platinum and 2.35 million ounces of palladium last year, thus accounting for 72% of global platinum mining production and 37% of global palladium mining production (Chart 2). Palladium is generally mined together with platinum. However, a strike has been underway in the South African platinum mining industry since 23 January. The radical AMCU (Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union) called its members out on strike to lend emphasis to its calls for wage hikes. The union, which was established in 1998 and formally registered in 2001, represents the majority of workers in the platinum mining industry and has meanwhile overtaken the more moderate union NUM (National Union of Mineworkers) in terms of membership. The world’s three biggest platinum producers are affected: Anglo American Platinum, Impala Platinum and Lonmin, 87% of whose workers are union members. Accounting for 66% of these, the AMCU predominates (Chart 3). Over 70,000 workers went out on strike when called upon to do so. The strike is the biggest to hit the South African mining sector since the Apartheid regime ended in 1994. 350,000 workers took to the streets in 1987 to protest for better working conditions, though this strike was brought to an end after around three weeks and cost the mining companies around ZAR 250 million at the time, according to the NUM.
Union and companies still far apart
The AMCU is calling for producers to increase wages significantly, its core demand being that entry-level salaries be doubled to ZAR 12,500 per month. Originally, the AMCU urged the mining companies to meet its demands immediately, though it has meanwhile shown itself willing to “make some concessions”. AMCU has “eased” its core demand in two stages, with the result that it now wishes to see wages doubled within four years. For their part, the companies have offered staggered wage increases over the course of three years – 9% in the first year, 8% in the second and 7.5% in the third. In February, the rate of inflation in South Africa was 5.9%. In other words, the two parties still maintain positions that are very far apart. To date, the state mediator engaged to help (CCMA – Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration) has failed to bring the two parties any closer together. In fact, talks were actually suspended for a time because the mediator saw no possibility of agreement.
Politicians exercise restraint ahead of elections
So far, politicians have chosen not to intervene in the strike, clearly because of the upcoming elections in South Africa. Parliamentary elections will be held on 7 May, with presidential elections to follow in the second half of the year. The mine workers make up a major group of voters which neither the governing party ANC (African National Congress) nor the opposition parties wish to alienate. Polls indicate that the ANC is likely to win the elections, though it remains to be seen whether this will subsequently result in the necessary reforms being implemented which would also steer the mining industry into calmer waters. Recently, the South African finance minister played down the strike’s negative impact on the local economy, claiming that the current strike is causing less damage than the industrial actions taken two years ago. In 2012, a series of strikes cost gold and platinum producers more than ZAR 16 billion.
High revenue losses for companies and lost earnings for workers
By their own account, the mining companies concerned are losing 9,900 ounces of platinum production every day – 4,000 ounces at Anglo American Platinum, 2,800 ounces at Impala Platinum and 3,100 ounces at Lonmin. Assuming that work generally continues in the mines seven days a week, the producers have thus lost nearly 700,000 ounces of production since the beginning of the strike. The companies claim that they have lost revenues totalling over ZAR 11 billion as a result. So far, workers who are not being paid while they are out on strike have lost earnings of around ZAR 5 billion.
Company stocks dwindling
Although production has been at a standstill since the beginning of the strike, the companies have been able at least partly to fulfil their delivery obligations by drawing on stocks. By their own account, the producers had piled up considerable stocks in the run-up to the strike, which industrial sources estimated would last two months. The situation is not the same in all the companies, however. Anglo American Platinum had for example announced at the end of March that it had used up half of its 430,000 ounces of stocks up to that point, saying that material would be bought on the market if stocks ran out. By contrast, Impala Platinum had already declared “force majeure” in early March and has no longer been able to guarantee deliveries since the beginning of April. Impala is likewise considering buying in material on the market in order to meet its contractual obligations. Lonmin had also downwardly revised its sales forecasts for this year at an early stage.
Negative long-term impact cannot be excluded
Even if the strike can be brought to an end, it will take weeks if not months before platinum production achieves its pre-strike levels again. After all, the damage in shafts and galleries resulting from the lack of use first has to be identified and, most importantly of all, safety has to be restored. In some cases the companies are already talking about irreparable damage and are considering shutting down individual shafts entirely. There are also likely to be some redundancies because the companies claim that they will otherwise no longer be able to operate at a profit. This could spark renewed protests and set in motion a vicious circle which would harm the entire country.
Concers about supply outages in Russia
As far as palladium is concerned, we need to take a look at Russia. According to data from Johnson Matthey, Russia accounted for 42% of worldwide palladium supply in 2013 (primary production and reserve sales together totalling 2.7 million ounces) and for 14% of global platinum production (780,000 ounces), making the country the largest producer of palladium and the second-largest producer of platinum. The situation here is dominated by concerns about the extent to which possible sanctions imposed by the West on Russia could hit this sector and how Russia might react to further-reaching sanctions against its economy. That said, there are no signs so far that deliveries from Russia are at risk. According to the UK’s Financial Times, however, Norilsk Nickel, the world’s largest palladium producer, is currently negotiating longterm palladium and platinum supply contracts with Chinese and Japanese buyers. Although this might not mean anything, it could perhaps be viewed as a not particularly subtle hint to the West.
Robust demand from the automotive industry
Driven by the automotive industry, demand for both platinum and palladium is robust. March saw the seasonally adjusted annualized vehicle sales rate in the US rise to 16.33 million units, the highest figure since May 2007. At 3.16 million units, car sales in China in January and February combined were a good 11% up on the same period last year. It would therefore seem that the 2014 target of an increase in sales of up to 10%, set by the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, is achievable. The European auto industry may also have bottomed out, for car sales in February increased year-on-year for the sixth consecutive month (Chart 4).
New palladium ETF on the market
When it comes to investment demand, market participants evidently switched their allegiance from palladium to platinum in the first quarter. While the palladium ETFs tracked by Bloomberg recorded outflows of 51,900 ounces, the platinum ETFs saw inflows of 53,600 ounces. That said, the trend could soon be reversed in the case of palladium (Chart 5), for South African investment bank Absa Capital launched its long-awaited palladium ETF at the end of March. The ETF is listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange and solely sourced with palladium from South Africa. If the palladium ETF follows the same course as Absa Capital’s platinum ETF, which was launched at the end of April 2013, a great deal of supply could be stripped from the market. Within just four months of its launch, the platinum ETF became the world’s biggest platinum ETF and at the end of March had a market share of 37% with over 952,000 ounces. Holdings in all platinum ETFs combined are equivalent to more than five months of global mining production, while holdings in palladium ETFs equate to nearly four months of global production.
Higher prices expected during the course of the year
In our opinion, risks to supply in conjunction with robust demand point to higher platinum and palladium prices. According to data from Johnson Matthey, the supply-demand situation was already tight on both markets last year, the global platinum market showing a supply deficit of 605,000 ounces in 2013 and demand outstripping supply on the global palladium market by 740,000 ounces. Assuming the supply problems are not resolved in the near future and demand remains robust, the situation on both markets will doubtless tighten further. By year’s end we continue to envisage a platinum price of $1,600 per troy ounce, while palladium is likely to be trading at $825 per troy ounce.
Analys
Brent crude is now trading below its nominal 2018-19 average in EUR/barrel terms

Brent crude gained a meager 0.65% yesterday with a close of USD 66.55/b. That was not much given that US equity markets rallied 2% yesterday with Nasdaq now is almost back to its pre ”Liberation Day” level. Brent crude is trading unchanged this morning with little impulse to do anything it seems.

Equity markets have gotten a boost along with easing US tariff rhetoric. The Brent crude oil price has however not gotten the same rebound and is today still trading USD 8.5/b lower than its USD 75/b level from 2 April.
Two factors at hand here: Expectations of softer growth and more oil from OPEC+. One is that global growth in 2025 will still take a hit with softer growth and thus softer oil demand growth due to the US tariff-turmoil. Even if rhetoric has eased. The second is that OPEC+ has upped its production plans with a softer market as a result going forward. The latter message to the market happened almost at the same time as the ”Liberation Day” on 2 April.
Spot market still as tight as it was on 2 April. Still, the front-end market is more or less equally tight today as it was on 2 April. The average Brent, WTI and Dubai 1-3mth time-spread is USD 1.4/b today versus USD 1.5/b on 2. April.
The market setup/pricing is thus that the market is still tight, but that surplus will come. Either because global growth will slow due to US Tariff-turmoil or because OPEC+ will add more barrels.
Will OPEC+ resolve its internal quarrels? Worth remembering on the latter is that the latest more aggressive OPEC+ production growth plan is due to internal quarrels over quota breaches by Iraq and Kazakhstan. OPEC+ could potentially ease those growth plans just as quickly if the internal quarrel is resolved.
Brent crude in EUR/barrel is now trading at the nominal level from 2018-2019. That is nominal! Not taking account of any kind of inflation which cumulatively is up 20-30% since primo 2018. The average, nominal Brent crude oil price in 2018-2019 was EUR 59.1/b. The front-month Brent crude oil price is now EUR 58.4/b. And Brent forward 36mth is only EUR 55.5/b and in real terms one could subtract some 5-10% for the next three years from that nominal forward price. Quite sweet for consumers!
Brent has rebounded along with equities (here US Russel 2000 index in orange), but the rebound in oil has become more hesitant the latest days. Brent still trading USD 8.5/b below its pre ”Liberation Day” of USD 75/b
Brent crude forward curves. Today versus 2 April (’Liberation Day’). Still a tight current market but now with expectation that surplus is coming.
The Brent crude oil price versus the average Brent, WTI and Dubai 1-3mth time-spread. The latter is today on par with where it was on 2 April while the Brent 1mth price is down USD 8.5/b.
Brent crude in EUR/b is down to its 2018-2019 nominal price level. Not bad for euro-based oil consumers!!
Yearly averages for Brent crude in EUR/barrel. The Brent 1mth in EUR/barrel is today trading below its nominal average from 2018-2019 of EUR 59.1/b. And 36mth forward Brent is trading at only EUR 55.5/b. And that is nominally both ways. Add in some 20-30% inflation since primo 2018 and 5-10% additional inflation next three years. Think real terms!
Analys
OPEC+ tensions resurface: Brent slides to $66.6

Brent crude prices have lost the positive momentum seen from Monday evening through midday yesterday. The price initially bottomed out at USD 65.7 per barrel on Monday afternoon, before climbing steadily by USD 3 to USD 68.7 on Wednesday morning. However, that upward momentum quickly reversed course. Brent tumbled nearly USD 3.4, hitting a weekly low of USD 65.3 per barrel before recovering some losses. As of this morning, it trades at USD 66.6 – a reflection of continued and substantial volatility.

Market fundamentals have largely remained in the background, with tariff rhetoric still dominating headlines. However, yesterday’s drop was clearly driven by the supply side of the equation, after reports emerged that several OPEC+ members are pushing for an accelerated oil output increase in June.
The timing of this move – amid global trade uncertainty and softening demand – may seem counterintuitive. But internal rifts within OPEC+ appear to be taking precedence. In May, Saudi Arabia already surprised the market with an output hike aimed at disciplining quota violators. That move failed to restrict Kazakhstan, the group’s largest overproducer, and has now triggered discussions of yet another sizeable production boost in June.
A later statement from Kazakhstan’s energy ministry, pledging renewed compliance, may have helped lift crude prices slightly this morning.
The next OPEC+ meeting is set for May 5, with the proposed June output hike expected to top the agenda. The group will likely choose between a scheduled, incremental increase of 138,000 barrels per day, or a more aggressive jump of 411,000 barrels per day – equivalent to ish three months’ worth of increases rolled into one. The latter scenario would put downward pressure on oil prices and highlight deepening tensions within OPEC+, while also exacerbating concerns in a market already clouded by weak demand expectations.
Although the final decision on volumes remains unclear, OPEC+ has demonstrated it still has pricing power, and that it can pull prices lower quickly if it chooses to do so.
________
US DOE DATA
U.S. refinery activity picked up in the week ending April 18, with crude inputs rising by 326,000 barrels per day to a total of 15.9 million. Utilization rates also climbed to 88.1%. Gasoline output strengthened to 10.1 million barrels per day, while distillate fuel production edged lower to 4.6 million.
Crude imports declined by 412,000 barrels per day to 5.6 million last week. Over the past month, import volumes have averaged 6.1 million barrels per day – down 6.8% compared to the same period a year ago. Gasoline and distillate imports came in at 858,000 and 97,000 barrels per day, respectively.
Inventories were mixed. Crude oil inventories (excl. SPR) rose slightly by 0.2 million barrels to 443.1 million, still 5% below the five-year average. Gasoline inventories posted a sharp draw of 4.5 million barrels and are now 3% under seasonal norms. Diesel inventories dropped by 2.4 million barrels, leaving levels 13% below the five-year average. Propane inventories rose by 2.3 million but remained 7% under typical levels. Total commercial petroleum inventories saw a net decline of 0.7 million barrels on the week.
Product demand was generally stable. Total products supplied averaged 19.9 million barrels per day over the last four weeks, up 0.4% year-on-year. Gasoline demand slipped by 0.4%, while distillates and jet fuel rose sharply, by 12.8% and 13.8%, respectively.


Analys
Nam, nam, nam. Give me more 36mth forward Brent crude in EUR/barrel

Brent carried higher by relief rally across markets as Trump backs away from sacking Powel. Brent crude rose 1.8% ydy to USD 67.44/b with an intraday high of USD 68.04/b. The gain was driven by a relief rally across markets as it became clear that Trump would not try to force out Powel from his role as chair of the US Fed. US equities rallied more than 2.5% as a result and pulled oil along upwards in relief. The gains continue this morning both in equities and oil with the latter up 1.2% to USD 68.25/b.

Forward oil in euro looks very appealing for consumers. Even after recent oil price gains. A weaker USD and a lower oil price at the same time recently has strongly lifted the appeal for oil purchases by non-US denominated oil consumers. The euro has rallied against the USD. On Monday Brent closed at EUR 57.57/b while the 3yr forward Brent price closed at a nominal EUR 53.95/b when the forward fx rate is applied. But this is nominal three years forward basis. If we also assume that Eurozone inflation will average 2% pa. for the next three years, then the real forward euro price for oil is even lower. The price for Brent crude today is EUR 60.1/b for the front-month while the 36mth contract is EUR 55.1/b when the forward eurusd rate of 1.2 is applied. If we also assume a 2% annual inflation for three years then the real forward price is only EUR 51.9/b. Compare this to the average nominal price of Brent crude from 2015 to 2019, the shale oil boom-years, when Brent crude only averaged USD 58.5/b and EUR 51.3/b. This period was the tragic oil-years when US shale oil companies were chasing volumes rather than profits with many of them going bankrupt as a result. Even after the recent rally in Brent crude oil prices, the forward 36mth price in EUR is still relatively cheap in historical terms and especially so when the 36mth real forward price is taken into account.
The 36mth real forward price for Brent crude in EUR/b is almost down to the ”valley of death” period from 2015 to 2019 when Brent crude nominally averaged USD 58.5/b and EUR 51.3/b. That was the period when US shale oil producers aimed for volume over profits which led many of them to bankruptcy.

-
Nyheter4 veckor sedan
Danska Seaborg Technologies siktar på serieproduktion av smältsaltsreaktorer till mitten av 2030-talet
-
Nyheter3 veckor sedan
Oljepriserna slaktas på samtidiga negativa faktorer
-
Nyheter4 veckor sedan
Guld kostar över 3100 USD per uns och 1 miljoner kronor per kilo
-
Analys4 veckor sedan
Tariffs deepen economic concerns – significantly weighing on crude oil prices
-
Nyheter3 veckor sedan
Två samtal om det aktuella läget på råvarumarknaden
-
Analys3 veckor sedan
Lowest since Dec 2021. Kazakhstan likely reason for OPEC+ surprise hike in May
-
Analys3 veckor sedan
Quadruple whammy! Brent crude down $13 in four days
-
Analys4 veckor sedan
Brent on a rollercoaster between bullish sanctions and bearish tariffs. Tariffs and demand side fears in focus today