多哈凍產談判失敗之後 Oil and markets
It is not often that labour trumps capital. Opec ministers, together handling the taps for a third of the world’s Oil supply, represent the capitalists. Traders had hoped that this group, meeting in Doha over the weekend, might begin to close the spigot. But no agreement to freeze production could be reached, let alone a decision to make cuts. Come Monday, oil fell, and stock markets followed suit.
勞方勝過資方的情況並不多見。石油輸出國組織（Opec，簡稱歐佩克）成員國的石油部長們共同掌控着世界三分之一石油供給的龍頭開關，他們代表資方。交易商們曾希望，上週末在多哈舉行會議的歐佩克石油部長們或許會開始關閉龍頭。然而，該會議沒能達成任何凍結石油產量的協議，更不必說減產決定了。到了週一，油價下跌，股市也隨之下跌。
More effective were the efforts of labour, in the shape of striking state oil workers in Kuwait, Opec’s number five producer. While Opec ministers failed to take a single barrel off the market, a dispute over public sector wages has led to a reported loss of half of Kuwait’s 3m barrels per day of production. Even if the strike does not last long, 1.5m barrels per day is a lot — close to the equivalent of the US Permian region’s shale oil output.
更有效的是勞方的努力，即歐佩克第5大產油國科威特的國有石油工人的罷工。歐佩克部長們一桶原油都未能從市場上拿掉，而據報道，公共部門薪資糾紛導致科威特每天300萬桶的原油產量減半。就算這場罷工不會持續很久，每天150萬桶原油也不是小數目——接近美國二疊紀盆地的頁岩油日產量。
A knee-jerk reaction of equity prices to the outcome of the Doha meeting makes little sense. There is little evidence that oil prices and major stock indices, such as the S&P 500, move together. Share prices soared when oil trod water above $100 per barrel up to mid-2014, and then initially went higher after oil halved.
股價對多哈會議結果的本能反應沒有什麼道理。沒有什麼證據表明油價和標普500(S&P 500)等主要股指步調一致。油價直至2014年年中一直徘徊在每桶100美元以上，其間股價飆升，而油價腰斬後，股價最初還進一步走高。
What does correlate with oil prices (negatively) are credit defaults, 46 so far this year, according to Standard & Poor’s. Compare that with about 70 in all of 2009, when oil had fallen far more in a year. Many of these stem from highly indebted US oil explorers, such as Energy XXI, which is now seeking bankruptcy protection.
真正（負）相關的是油價和信用違約數量。根據標準普爾的數據，今年迄今已出現46起信用違約。相比之下，油價全年跌幅大得多的2009年出現的信用違約大約爲70起。這些違約許多都來自於債臺高築的美國石油出口商，比如目前正尋求破產保護的能源XXI(Energy XXI)。
Banks that have directly lent to the energy companies are also twitchy. Wells Fargo and Bank of America, big lenders to the US energy sector, both upped their energy loan loss provisions in the first quarter. Both have slashed their exposure over the past year; taking more pain should be easier as the sector bet shrinks.
直接爲能源公司提供貸款的銀行也焦慮不安。美國能源業的大債主富國銀行(Wells Fargo)和美國銀行(Bank of America)第一季度都上調了能源貸款損失準備金。兩家銀行過去一年都削減了它們的敞口；隨着押在這個行業上的賭注縮小，承受更大的損失應該會更容易。
Capital will triumph in the end, though. Oil prices, even after this year’s rebound, are still too low for comfort. European explorers depend even more on bank loans than on markets for capital. UK groups like Premier Oil and Tullow Oil will have to work ever harder to keep their lenders happy as the year goes on.
然而，資方最終會勝出。即使是在今年的反彈之後，油價依然低得難以讓市場滿意。歐洲出口商在籌集資金方面依賴銀行甚於市場。第一石油(Premier Oil)、塔洛石油(Tullow Oil)等英國石油公司在今年剩餘時間裏必須更加努力，才能讓它們的債主安心。
