Our NPD price for the period 29-4-26 to 5-5-26 is down another 22 cents. Diesel is $2.56 per litre incl gst

wellygary:

 

johno1234:

 

Singapore trade agreement strengthens NZ fuel security, in return strengthens Singapore food security:

 

https://archive.is/fV4eb

 

 

Its all pretty "Hand wavy" though.. especially on our side...

 

"According to a senior official, it is possibly unique in the world: two countries voluntarily waiving their rights to impose export restrictions on each other in a crisis."

 

 I don't believe the NZ has ever imposed export controls on food exports at any time in its history,

 

We shame people to not export to Russia, but food is pretty much exempted under most UN sanctions, (Although Lobster, Truffles and Wine get banned as "Luxuries")  but the bulk of what we sell can go anywhere...

 

I think we'd  likely be pretty far down the "mad max" petrol wars road before we looked at banning exports of butter and beef...  Where would  all the production go?? we certainly can't consume it all here...

 

The significance to this thread topic is fuel security so let's leave the food part aside shall we? It is not "hand wavy". Singapore has agreed that it will not restrict supply of fuel to New Zealand, and specifically "in the case of a crisis". "Crisis" is the whole point of this addition to the trade agreement. It means that Singapore can restrict fuel supply to other nations but not us. It's very fortunate given the current Hormuz situation that we have this in place. 

Credit where it is due.

Oil is the most commercial fluid product of any of the commodities.
There is restriction, then there is market price, as long as you outbid others?

Singapore's refining volume compared with its own domestic use, restriction is probably unlikely anyway?
Is it restriction if Singapore can't source the oil to refine in a world calamity, that's 'force majeure'.

I'm not sure we actually got anything.

ezbee:

 

Oil is the most commercial fluid product of any of the commodities.
There is restriction, then there is market price, as long as you outbid others?

 

Singapore's refining volume compared with its own domestic use, restriction is probably unlikely anyway?
Is it restriction if Singapore can't source the oil to refine in a world calamity, that's 'force majeure'.

 

I'm not sure we actually got anything.

 

If they get down to their last barrel then yes, they can do that. What they cannot do is say no to NZ while still supplying anyone else. 

So we did, actually, get something. And it is significant.

johno1234:

 

The significance to this thread topic is fuel security so let's leave the food part aside shall we? It is not "hand wavy". Singapore has agreed that it will not restrict supply of fuel to New Zealand, and specifically "in the case of a crisis". "Crisis" is the whole point of this addition to the trade agreement. It means that Singapore can restrict fuel supply to other nations but not us. It's very fortunate given the current Hormuz situation that we have this in place. 

 

Credit where it is due.

 

The full text has never been released, so it appears to be hand wavy to suggest that there is no provision for "Force Majuere" or "Exceptional circumstances" or "National emergency" or any other type of clause that normal appears in a trade agreement. In other words, it is not cast iron and can be put to one side as required.

fastbike:

 

johno1234:

 

The significance to this thread topic is fuel security so let's leave the food part aside shall we? It is not "hand wavy". Singapore has agreed that it will not restrict supply of fuel to New Zealand, and specifically "in the case of a crisis". "Crisis" is the whole point of this addition to the trade agreement. It means that Singapore can restrict fuel supply to other nations but not us. It's very fortunate given the current Hormuz situation that we have this in place. 

 

Credit where it is due.

 

 

The full text has never been released, so it appears to be hand wavy to suggest that there is no provision for "Force Majuere" or "Exceptional circumstances" or "National emergency" or any other type of clause that normal appears in a trade agreement. In other words, it is not cast iron and can be put to one side as required.

 

It's as close as we're likely to get. Much better than mere commercial terms.

fastbike:

 

johno1234:

 

The significance to this thread topic is fuel security so let's leave the food part aside shall we? It is not "hand wavy". Singapore has agreed that it will not restrict supply of fuel to New Zealand, and specifically "in the case of a crisis". "Crisis" is the whole point of this addition to the trade agreement. It means that Singapore can restrict fuel supply to other nations but not us. It's very fortunate given the current Hormuz situation that we have this in place. 

 

Credit where it is due.

 

 

The full text has never been released, so it appears to be hand wavy to suggest that there is no provision for "Force Majuere" or "Exceptional circumstances" or "National emergency" or any other type of clause that normal appears in a trade agreement. In other words, it is not cast iron and can be put to one side as required.

 

Well I guess you can believe or not believe. If MFAT says unambiguously that food/fuel trade won't be restricted I have no reason to think they are lying about it.

DW Rev: How to ditch an energy crisis?

Now this is interesting, I wonder how much excess profits NZ retailers have been making due to this "crises"?

"BP first-quarter profit more than doubled year-on-year to $3.2 billion - its highest since 2023 - the British oil major reported on ‌Tuesday, beating expectations by 20% after the Iran war boosted its oil trading results.

JPNZ:

 

Now this is interesting, I wonder how much excess profits NZ retailers have been making due to this "crises"?

 

"BP first-quarter profit more than doubled year-on-year to $3.2 billion - its highest since 2023 - the British oil major reported on ‌Tuesday, beating expectations by 20% after the Iran war boosted its oil trading results.

 

The spike in oil prices triggered by the war has helped European majors reap billions of dollars from the energy supply crunch."

I don't expect the retailers make massive profits off fuel. They generally run razor thin margins on fuel - the fuel is there to get you into the shop to buy a $0.50 AliExpress USB-C cable for $45.

JPNZ:

 

Now this is interesting, I wonder how much excess profits NZ retailers have been making due to this "crises"?

 

"BP first-quarter profit more than doubled year-on-year to $3.2 billion - its highest since 2023 - the British oil major reported on ‌Tuesday, beating expectations by 20% after the Iran war boosted its oil trading results.

 

The spike in oil prices triggered by the war has helped European majors reap billions of dollars from the energy supply crunch."

But BP isn't making these super normal profits because its a retailer. 

Its making them because  a vertically integrated oil major, that has the ability to supply product in a constrained market...

It has a huge number of oil and gas wells around the world that 6 months ago were selling their output for $70USD, they're now selling it for `~$100 USD, its pretty hard not to make more money when your sale price goes through the roof,  but your inputs are "relatively" the same...

SaltyNZ:

 

I don't expect the retailers make massive profits off fuel. They generally run razor thin margins on fuel - the fuel is there to get you into the shop to buy a $0.50 AliExpress USB-C cable for $45.

 

The increasing number of fuel sites that has no retail function at all (NPD, Up-N-Go, many Gull sites, etc) makes me question that. If that was true Z would not have established their new fuel-only brand and Gull wouldn't be converting their retail sites to fuel-only sites.

Not disagreeing that the retail functions can be a good money-spinner at some locations however. BP's well placed roadside service stations with food/retail partners along major state highways are examples of this done well e.g. Dairy Flat, Drury, Bombay, etc.

SaltyNZ:

 

I don't expect the retailers make massive profits off fuel. They generally run razor thin margins on fuel - the fuel is there to get you into the shop to buy a $0.50 AliExpress USB-C cable for $45.

 

Its just a dairy with a captive audience of fuel customers. With app payments and pay at pump there is no reason to go inside unless you have some cash to get rid of, so not sure how sustainable the model is with more and more people not having cash and being ok using an app to pay.

KiwiSurfer:

 

SaltyNZ:

 

I don't expect the retailers make massive profits off fuel. They generally run razor thin margins on fuel - the fuel is there to get you into the shop to buy a $0.50 AliExpress USB-C cable for $45.

 

 

The increasing number of fuel sites that has no retail function at all (NPD, Up-N-Go, many Gull sites, etc) makes me question that. If that was true Z would not have established their new fuel-only brand and Gull wouldn't be converting their retail sites to fuel-only sites.

 

Not disagreeing that the retail functions can be a good money-spinner at some locations however. BP's well placed roadside service stations with food/retail partners along major state highways are examples of this done well e.g. Dairy Flat, Drury, Bombay, etc.

 

It's an odd dichotomy that we see flourishing both U-Go style no staff/no retail operations and the full servo types that are almost a full grocery store with food, coffee, usb chargers, ATMs and everything in between. 

But then again, there are yuge fuel price differences. U-Go have very cheap fuel, the full BP servo has expensive fuel. Seems like there's a market for both.

Also remember that as long as company fuel cards are a thing, there are people that will not give a crap what the pump price is and will still go to the one that can make them a passable coffee and sell them a mediocre pie.