News In The Usa Is Argentina Might Default Again

[ajoknoblauch]

I fear you and your comments are vapid, vacuous and a waste of time, for obvious reasons. Good day.

Don't leave without checking your blood pressure.

 

[John.St]

Don't leave without checking your blood pressure.

Guess the IQ of a person, who spends time commenting on comments, which are 'vapid, vacuous and a waste of time', and who writes to ajoknoblauch that he is living in fear of him "I fear you".

 

[Reneige]

That's a lovely theory, but unfortunately has nothing to do with the facts. Argentina closed 2013 with a USD 9b trade surplus, and is one of the world's leading commodity exporters: number 1 in soy, 2nd in corn...

If you want to look at an area for improvement, it would be in exports of finished products (maybe what you were referring to?), but its finished goods exports have increased steadily over the last decade, even though there is a deficit in that item.

Insofar as energy goes, the nationalisation of YPF was a huge step forward in that regard, since Repsol was vastly underinvesting (in default of its contractual obligations, thus the nationalisation).

You are right, I was erroneously referring to a trade deficit when I should have been referring to the gaping current account deficit. Argentina does export slightly more than it imports, however the positive balance is mostly due to the fact that the government has made almost impossible to import goods. That still hasn't prevented a 1.5 billion current account deficit in the most data I can find.

As for your hypothesis about repsol, I'll direct you to paragraphs 3 and 4 of this post (I don't have the patience to rewrite it) : http://baexpats.org/...post__p__240819

I still don't see any developments in infrastructure two years on from the nationalisation of Repsol.

 

[EdRooney]

They then find themselves 2 years later with no energy infrastructure, no means to develop it domestically, no dollars to hire an external firm to do it

Dude, you seem like a smart enough person, but do you do any research before you post these things?

http://www.reuters.c...E96F18X20130717

 

[John.St]

That's a lovely theory, but unfortunately has nothing to do with the facts. Argentina closed 2013 with a USD 9b trade surplus, and is one of the world's leading commodity exporters: number 1 in soy, 2nd in corn...

If you want to look at an area for improvement, it would be in exports of finished products (maybe what you were referring to?), but its finished goods exports have increased steadily over the last decade, even though there is a deficit in that item.

Insofar as energy goes, the nationalisation of YPF was a huge step forward in that regard, since Repsol was vastly underinvesting (in default of its contractual obligations, thus the nationalisation).

To be a leading commodity exporter is extremely dangerous, I refer you to the history of Brasil and coffee, the history of Chile and copper, etc., etc.

Another problem with Argentina's export is this:

2013 INDEC: Trade surplus fell by 27% during 2013 [1]

2006: 12.39 billion USD [3]
2007: 11.27 billion USD [3]
2008: 12.60 billion USD [3]
2009: 16.89 billion USD [2][3]
2010: 11.60 billion USD [4][5] - early in the year it was estimated to 14 billion USD [3]
2012: 12.42 billion USD [6]
2013: 9.24 billion USD [1]

Not exactly the most encouraging development in trade surplus, as the 2013 surplus is the lowest in 7 contiguous years of Argentina international trade.

[1] http://www.buenosair...-27-during-2013
[2] http://www.reuters.c...311898720100223
[3] http://www.ambito.co...a.asp?id=524123
[4] http://online.wsj.co...123-710286.html
[5] http://www.indec.gov..._ext_anu_10.pdf p. 25
[6] http://www.reuters.c...N0ASERW20130123

 

[John.St]

Dude, you seem like a smart enough person, but do you do any research before you post these things?

http://www.reuters.c...E96F18X20130717

Links to "Chevron, Argentina's YPF sign $1.24 billion Vaca Muerta shale deal"

Sure, mucho dinero.
Based on experience with shale oil cracking elsewhere, how much is needed to produce?
(hint: not less than 3 and probably up to 10 bio USD)

 

[EdRooney]

I have no idea what your USD 10b figure refers to, could you please be more specific? Is that a price per well, per square km of well surface...

And just a quick post-script: I have said several times here that I am against fracking, against the Chevron deal as is... but that's not the question here.

 

[John.St]

I have no idea what your USD 10b figure refers to, could you please be more specific? Is that a price per well, per square km of well surface...

Getting started. First barrel produced.

 

[EdRooney]

Sorry I still don't get where you get that figure. For example there are roughly 450,000 fracking wells in the US. You mean $4.5 trillion was needed to get them started? Maybe if you could show your source on this it would help.

 

[John.St]

Sorry I still don't get where you get that figure. For example there are roughly 450,000 fracking wells in the US. You mean $4.5 trillion was needed to get them started? Maybe if you could show your source on this it would help.

Why do you misinterpret the capital cost to be per well? why not per barrel or cubic inch?

Try per site.

According to the United States Department of Energy, it is estimated that the capital costs are $3–10 billion at 2005 prices.
http://fossil.energy...Fact_Sheet1.pdf

The file (2 pages) seems to have disappeared since I read it.