Patrick Boyle

@RyanGoo26555724 Very realistic TTF trades well into the 100s with the trajectory of this war.

If the MS LNG price scenario realizes, $VG will generate an additional $10B in EBITDA in 2026. This massive self-fund raising will thoroughly reshape the financing strategy for its next project.

@RealMattMoney LOL. There is very little spare US LNG capacity to 'easily make up' a 80 mtpa Qatari deficit. The entire US export produces ~110 mtpa.

The United States provides most of the EU's LNG needs. While Qatar provides some, the deficit could easily be made up with US LNG spot imports. $VG $NEXT $LNG

@dbo360x @pulpmx Wow, that's incredible. Had no idea the scale!

Very cool to hear @pulpmx has thru the years, now raised over a million dollars for privateers. That is huge.

@VGDeepDive & TTF will go higher than that. Those are conservative figures based on war ending and a quick Hormuz reopening

Prices like these would be pretty wild. $VG $LNG See the impact by picking a bull market scenario on lngresearch.com

@HFI_Research Market is desperately pricing in a diplomatic miracle that isn't going to happen. Brent will be 110+ by the end of next week as reality sets in.

So we are going past the breaking point in the oil market.

I can't model a scenario where EU injection gets us to 70% storage and that's with assuming this war ends by the end of April. If French nuclear (50 TWh) and coal capacity (only 60 TWh left) run perfect that makes up around 9.5% of EU LNG offset. TTF is violently underpriced here.

A relatively normal 2026 injection year will take European storage to 80% utilization by Nov. 1. Without Qatar #LNG, it'll be difficult but not impossible to achieve. Coal burning & renewable additions in Asia/Europe will play a key role, as will French nuclear. @ColumbiaUEnergy

@GraInformant Especially considering this war isn't ending anytime soon and oil isn't reverting meaningfully. Ethanol margins are going to help establish a new floor and it isn't 4 bucks

Liking corn more and more

@tmarzecmanser Ha. Do you see any world where we have a meaningful injection season? I can't model a scenario where we get to 70% by Dec 1.

We made it! Last day of the gas winter and EU storage is not close to being empty! The market works! What a surprise! 😅 28% full. Down just 6pp YoY. #natgas #LNG #TTF

Oliver — agree on the summer/winter signal. But isn't the curve still dramatically underpricing the restart logistics chain? Even with max injection rates this summer, supply-constrained ceiling without Qatar is ~1,200 GWh/day vs the 2,500-3,000 needed to reach mandate. EU is currently at 28% and still in net withdrawal. I can't come up with a model that gets above 70% by Dec 1. Market is pricing like ceasefire = instant molecules.

Flat price is the distraction... The signal is in the curve! Prompt TTF easing while storage is still being drawn points to comfortable near term supply, mostly LNG driven Watch the summer vs winter spread. If that widens, the market is pricing a refill problem, not a supply one

The European benchmark natural gas price (TTF) is today **lower** than four weeks ago. Yup: Lower. (And yes, TTF prices are still up >75% from pre-war levels, but around the same level as they were in Jan-Feb 2025)

Brian — the critical point I think the market is missing is that ceasefire ≠ molecules. Even if the war stopped tomorrow the restart sequence has little overlap: 1. Ceasefire holds (days to weeks to verify) 2. Damage assessment at Ras Laffan (weeks) 3. Cold train recommissioning — Your own estimate: ~1 month to ramp 12 undamaged trains back to capacity 4. Hormuz minesweeping — Coalition sweep takes weeks at minimum 5. Lloyd's insurance normalization — 60 days incident-free minimum before war risk premiums drop enough for LNG carriers to transit 6. First commercial LNG carrier through Hormuz 7. First cargo reaches European terminal 8. First molecule enters storage That's 3 months minimum from ceasefire to meaningful European injection. We're currently at 28.44% EU storage. Injection season should be ramping up right now. Thoughts?

Quite a few people have recently asked about the impact of the Qatar LNG force majeure on the LNG market. There are no easy or readily apparent answers, as too much is dependent on the outcome of current events. But it is worth noting that a major global oversupply of LNG had been predicted for the late 2020's, with large new production from the US, Qatar, Mozambique, and other areas. The loss of 6.5 - 7 million tonnes per month from Qatar, for however long this lasts, along with the longer loss of the ~14 MTPA from damage to the South Complex trains 4 and 6, along with the delay of the North Field East development, are all conspiring to make that oversupply much less pronounced and longer term before it arrives. Remaining development around the world outside of Qatar remain on track, so there still seems to be abundant long term supply. But near term, LNG has an obvious shortfall, with accompanying price increases (we're currently >$20/MMBTU in Asia) and demand destruction. Three days ago, LNG Journal posted a good article describing many of the things that must be evaluated when considering LNG markets, and quantifying the amounts of LNG affected. It is well worth a read: lngjournal.com/index.php/mark…

@BowTiedFeline @JavierBlas Yeah, logistics are the bottleneck for the 3rd time genius

@patrickB0YLE @JavierBlas “Waha went more negative because LNG demand soared” bro just sign off

While the world panics about the loss of Qatari LNG, your reminder that nat gas prices in the Permian (Waha hub) had been negative for 35 consecutive trading days — and counting. And that Henry Hub is at ~$3 per mBtu (compared to $8-$10 in 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine)

Yes, Permian oil production creates associated gas that contributes to the Waha glut. That's a structural basin issue. But the reason Waha has stayed negative for 35 consecutive days is bc the exit pipelines are saturated by LNG demand running at 100%. Normally, excess Permian gas finds its way to HH and the coast. Now, the pipes are full because terminals are pulling maximum volumes. It's two forces compounding: more gas coming in (oil-driven production) AND less room going out (LNG terminals maxing pipeline capacity). The crisis didn't cause the production. It blocked the relief valve.

@patrickB0YLE @JavierBlas Are you suggesting Oil production in permian has gone into overdrive pushing associated gas prices down? That doesn't have anything to do woth higher LNG pull

They're connected through LNG export terminals. The war knocked out Qatar, so every buyer on earth is bidding for US cargoes. Terminals went from 85% to 100% utilization. The pipelines from Permian to the coast are now completely full. More gas is being produced than the pipes can carry out. Gas with nowhere to go = negative local prices. The crisis didn't create the surplus — it maxed out the exit routes that would normally relieve it.

@patrickB0YLE @JavierBlas I guess the part I am confused by is this part: “Waha is negative BECAUSE of the crisis, not despite it.” In my rudimentary understanding, the two things are unrelated, no?

@efb_1 @JavierBlas Think of it as a highway. Negative Waha doesn't mean too much gas in the world. It means a traffic jam between where it's produced and where the world desperately needs it.

@patrickB0YLE @JavierBlas I don’t understand your argument. (I am not an expert, that is probably why.) I don’t see how having so much associated gas in the Permian that prices are negative is related to what is happening in the Persian Gulf. Can you expand on the cause and effect?

Waha was negative before the crisis because Permian pipeline takeaway capacity was already constrained relative to production. But the crisis made it MORE negative and made it STAY negative because LNG export terminals went from running at 85-90% utilization to 100%. The marginal molecule that might have relieved Waha basis by flowing to the Gulf Coast is now being liquefied and shipped at $50/MMBtu instead.

@patrickB0YLE @JavierBlas Holy slop Waha was negative before the crisis Which literally means it’s negative *despite* the crisis

The market is still pricing this like a standard cyclical squeeze, but the physical math points structurally to €80+ TTF. Here is the exact convergence the consensus models are missing: 1. The JKM Floor: With 17% of Qatari LNG permanently offline, Asia is short its baseload for the summer cooling season. JKM is already testing $20/MMBtu. TTF must maintain a massive structural premium above that just to divert US spot cargoes away from Tokyo. 2. The Demand Destruction Mandate: Europe is starting the injection season at catastrophic lows. To hit the revised 80% EU storage mandate by winter, they must inject an unprecedented 3.3 TWh/day. You cannot achieve that volume in a globally short market with 'margin compression' pricing. TTF has to clear high enough (€80 to €120+) to physically force European heavy industry (chemicals, fertilizers) to shut down and surrender their gas to the storage tanks. €60 doesn't close factories

I think meaningfully higher US LNG exports have something to do with the more muted response. And unlike in 2022, the market still believes the Qatar outage is temporary rather than structural.

@agtradertalk so YOU were the S NX buyer

Margin clerk sends email...then immediately calls Me checks markets...uh..

@GrainsGorilla Only a moron would think China is going to buy US beans at the highs during South American harvest but here we are.

So everyone in the world thinks China will buy old crop US beans. I have one question for them. How do you fix the ocean freight problem today? Asia can’t buy bunkers. So they can say all they want this weekend on how they will buy more US ag goods but it sure as hell isn’t going to be OLD CROP because it can’t get there. Thats a known fact.

@tlw109 @elitomac He was 21st in qualifying and 44 was the start lap. By mid race he and the others are 4-5 seconds off the leaders pace. Look at average lap time vs the leaders... it is ~4 seconds slower in each main. We need less of those guys on the track ASAP

@patrickB0YLE @elitomac Friese's qualifying time was 2 seconds off of the #1 time and his best time in main 3 was just under 3 seconds off. He still would have been out there based on your requirements. The best time in main 3 was 44.530 and the worst was 49.282. All under 5 seconds.

People saying we wouldn’t deal with lappers with if we were all on stock bikes. It’s quite the opposite of the truth. The 450 class is actually easier to be competitive in its current state compared to the 250 class. Want to be competitive throughout a whole season with a do it your self effort on a 250, going against teams with endless R&D squeezing maximum power out of the small displacement. Good luck. On top of keeping engines and race bikes in safe hourly rotation. There’s not a whole lot of light at the end of that tunnel without a blank check. IMO 450 class needs to be non production based, with the baddest works bikes on planet earth. The beautiful thing about Supercross and Motocross is that skill and hard work will always prevail. And yes that would still shine with works bikes. Or maybe we just keep everything the way it is, because our sport is pretty sweet. 😉