Military Review

In the oil business, they comment on Fedun’s words about the “similarity” of OPEC +’s deal with the Brest Peace

77
In the oil business, they comment on Fedun’s words about the “similarity” of OPEC +’s deal with the Brest Peace

In the oil business sector, they commented on a statement by co-owner of Lukoil Leonid Fedun regarding the OPEC + deal. According to Fedun, which was already reported by Military Review, the deal somehow resembles the signing of the so-called Brest Peace when Russia left the First World War. Then, for the exit, I had to “sacrifice” the state’s territories that were impressive in size.


The newspaper Kommersant today issued an interview with the head of Gazprom Neft Alexander Dyukov. According to Dyukov, he does not agree with Fedun’s opinion regarding the “similarity” of the OPEC + deal with the signing of the Brest Peace Treaty by Russia.

Alexander Dyukov believes that such a deal was "necessary." He called the deal "controlled negotiation of a decline in global production."

Dyukov:

It is definitely better than a decrease in production due to the fact that all oil storage tanks are full.

According to the head of Gazprom Neft, "today the strategy of fighting for market share does not make sense, it is possible in a stable situation."

Speaking of a new deal in an interview "Kommersant", Dyukov noted that "there is nothing derogatory in her."

Recall that, on the basis of the OPEC + agreement, Russia agreed to reduce oil production. It was noted that this will allow the price of oil to rise. However, after the deal was signed, the price of "black gold" can not rise above the mark of 33 dollars, actually freezing at the level of 31,5-32,5 per barrel. In other words, so far the impetus for price increases has not manifested itself.
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins April 14 2020 07: 26 New
    +8
    Well, since this is how the new OPEC + agreement is justified, it means that the bottom has been broken again ...
    1. Aleks2048
      Aleks2048 April 14 2020 07: 42 New
      -2
      If they only
      as if the bottom was broken again

      They’re worse ... They have punched a hole in the budget of the Russian Federation ...
      1. Malyuta
        Malyuta April 14 2020 09: 50 New
        +6
        Quote: Alex2048
        They’re worse ... They have punched a hole in the budget of the Russian Federation ...
        Simultaneously with breaking through the bottom, the Ostankino needle punches "holes" in the heads.
        I asked today on the doctor’s detour
        Why we don’t have a key to the chamber,
        Why is there a hole in my head and budget,
        Why instead of tomorrow, today, yesterday.

        Let the doctor tell us about oil and gas:
        Who sold them to mattresses, what a scoundrel .....
        Who robbed the people of Gazprom and Lukoil.
        There is no answer, but an injection in your ass!
        1. Stas157
          Stas157 April 14 2020 10: 02 New
          +7
          A very short article, the meaning of which the head of Gazprom Neft disagrees with the vice president of Lukoil:

          Alexander Dyukov believes that such a deal was "necessary." He called the deal “driven by a harmonization of declining overall.”

          And I remember after slamming the door Novak trumped differently:

          Exit from the deal will allow Russia from April 1 build up production of 0,3 million barrels. per day. But while these plans have not been discussed with companies, Novak told reporters.

          But Fedun was just categorically against it. Subsequently, all the negative fears of Fedun were fully realized. Oil fell from 60 to 20. The dollar soared to 75. But Russia agreed to a reduction (instead of 0,3 million barrels in March - 2,5 million barrels).

          Dyukov noted that "there is nothing humiliating in her."

          Today, many officials are perfectly doing a good face at a bad game. Nevertheless, the unpleasant fact is that, in quantitative terms, in relation to March, Russia had to reduce production more than anyone else.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 April 14 2020 17: 29 New
            -2
            With Fedun and Co everything is clear. They were going to sell Lukoil shares.
            All years are many already, it is necessary to monetize the years of work and etc., P. ...
            And then he crept unnoticed ... coronavirus.
            Demand for oil fell, the Saudis swept, the markets fell, stocks collapsed ... bully
            So they were against it. In their place, anyone would be against it.
            But from the fact that they are against - nothing has changed in life.
            When the scale of the disaster became clear, then it became clear what a reduction in production for everyone could correct this disaster.
            This is a reduction the other day and agreed. hi
      2. Snail N9
        Snail N9 April 14 2020 10: 25 New
        +6
        Already, how many times the topic of this ill-fated deal was "chewed", more than once here on VO discussed ... Not tired? There are people who are accustomed not to "rely on uncle", who themselves analyze the information received, who know how to count and add "two plus two" to get the result and think it over ..., but there are people who, either out of scarcity of their mind, whether by natural laziness, sometimes due to stereotyped thinking (imposed by ideology), or the habit of obeying (developed at work) and "trusting only superior, official information", they do not want to analyze something, "add up" take away "and so on. They are waiting for how this information will be analyzed, evaluated, and given a solution to the mountains by the sources they are used to" trusting ". Hence the eternal discrepancy in assessments of this or that event.
      3. Dreamboat
        Dreamboat April 14 2020 22: 57 New
        0
        Fedun is a noble whiner. Amid the unfolding global crisis, there is no time for price wars.
        Production and consumption are decreasing, and the demand for oil is logically decreasing. There will be no agreed production decline, the price will go to $ 25 or $ 20 until the guard comes not only to "shale" and offshore production, but also to classic oil production.
    2. Runoway
      Runoway April 14 2020 08: 55 New
      +9
      It’s like every autumn:
      "Little grain is harvested, bad, the price of bread will rise"
      "A lot of grain was harvested, it's bad, there is an oversupply on the market, bread will rise in price"
      On the example of independence from the cost of oil, rising gas prices in the Russian Federation, NOBODY AND NEVER will reduce its revenues in the domestic market, no matter how favorable the situation
    3. o_zotov
      o_zotov April 14 2020 10: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      Well, since this is how the new OPEC + agreement is justified, it means that the bottom has been broken again ...


      Not that word...

    4. antivirus
      antivirus April 14 2020 11: 45 New
      -1
      --- From above or below hollowed and punched?
  2. Thrifty
    Thrifty April 14 2020 07: 28 New
    +6
    Nefig wait now, when the whole world is "in quarantine", the rise in oil prices! The production costs almost all over the planet! It's our hanygs from the "business" on gasoline that raise prices, inflating the rise in prices in stores, and inflation! The absence of healthy competition allows the state to ruthlessly pull out of the population often the last pitiful pennies!
    1. dorz
      dorz April 14 2020 07: 58 New
      +5
      Quote: Thrifty
      Speaking about the new deal in an interview with Kommersant, Dyukov noted that “there is nothing humiliating in it ...

      In terms of numbers, Russia is cutting 2,5 million barrels out of 10 million, i.e. 1/4 of the total reductions of oil exporters spread over 20 countries. The reduction is greater than all Lukoil’s production. sad
      1. alexmach
        alexmach April 14 2020 08: 47 New
        +2
        firstly in my opinion not from 10 but from 11
        And secondly, how much do the Saudis reduce?
        1. kjhg
          kjhg April 14 2020 08: 53 New
          -3
          Quote: alexmach
          firstly in my opinion not from 10 but from 11

          Well, to be absolutely accurate, before the outbreak of the oil war, according to the agreement in force at that time, Russia produced 11,2 million barrels per day, and Saudi Arabia 9,8 million barrels. Now both countries will reduce to 8,5 million barrels. So consider it.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach April 14 2020 08: 56 New
            +7
            In general, my subjective feelings - there is no deafening victory or defeat in this whole situation. There are forced measures. They arranged some strange noise, but thank God we agreed to something.
            What is really bad is the economy’s dependence on oil prices. In fact, the only Russian competitive product .. This is really sad.
            1. kjhg
              kjhg April 14 2020 09: 04 New
              +2
              Quote: alexmach
              in this whole situation there is no deafening victory or defeat. There are forced measures.

              This is not the case. The fact is that under the new agreement that the CA proposed to us on 06.03.20/1,5/1,2, Russia was supposed to reduce 1,5 million, and the CA - 45 million. Undertaking this agreement with the current one, Russia completely lost 10 million barrels of oil production to the Saudis. At the current cost of oil, this is a loss of more than $ 13 million per day. This is not counting the March losses and losses in early April, when the price of our oil filed up to XNUMX - XNUMX dollars per barrel. In and calculate how much has already been lost and still lose.
              1. alexmach
                alexmach April 14 2020 09: 20 New
                +2
                This is not the case. The fact is that under the new agreement proposed to us by SA 06.03.20, Russia was supposed to reduce 1,5 million

                I think not so. There I think 1,5 million was the total reduction in all OPEC + production and not only in Russia. Of this volume, Russia received only a third. And this is clearly not enough given the drop in demand.
                And no one will be able to maintain financial stability in a situation of such a widespread decline.
            2. orionvitt
              orionvitt April 14 2020 09: 23 New
              0
              Quote: alexmach
              in this whole situation there is no deafening victory or defeat

              To be precise. then everyone lost. But first of all, most of all the Saudis, then the states, and after them, Russia. The Saudis, out of their stupidity, thought they were smarter than the "Odessa rabbi" and tried to throw not only Russia, but the states. But this is not forgiven there. So, against the general background of the global decline, everything is not so bad.
            3. Lelek
              Lelek April 14 2020 17: 33 New
              +1
              Quote: alexmach
              They arranged some strange noise, but thank God we agreed to something.

              hi
              We agreed to agree, but cunningly ** the Saudis, contrary to the agreements, continue to dump.
        2. Paranoid50
          Paranoid50 April 14 2020 10: 20 New
          +2
          Quote: alexmach
          secondly, how much do the Saudis reduce?

          In addition, as agreed at the OPEC + meeting, the Saudis, Kuwait and the UAE voluntarily agreed to further reduce supplies by another 2 million barrels per day. Everything is available, better from the source than from the local inhabitants - these will tell this ... fellow wassat hi
        3. dorz
          dorz April 14 2020 13: 03 New
          0
          Quote: alexmach
          firstly in my opinion not from 10 but from 11
          And secondly, how much do the Saudis reduce?

          According to the latest information, the volume of oil reduction will be about 20 million barrels per day. This will happen due to a reduction of 12 million barrels per day by OPEC + members and 7 million barrels per day will reduce the G20 countries. No country-specific statistics yet.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach April 14 2020 14: 22 New
            -1
            Very interesting, but nothing old G20 are included in the same custody +? how correctly summarize these 2 digits?
    2. yfast
      yfast April 14 2020 09: 00 New
      -1
      What can be a healthy competition with the state?
    3. Andrey Sukharev
      Andrey Sukharev April 14 2020 09: 39 New
      +3
      It's our hanygs from the "business" on gasoline that raise prices, inflating the rise in prices in stores, and inflation!

      What "khanygi" ??? What are you, kid, or what? Fuel prices are regulated by the government through excise taxes. In the price of a liter, the lion's share of the state excise tax, the traders themselves do not have much there.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter April 14 2020 07: 29 New
    0
    Amid a catastrophic drop in demand, ANY agreement is better than complete chaos ...
    1. Piramidon
      Piramidon April 14 2020 08: 18 New
      -1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Amid a catastrophic drop in demand, ANY agreement is better than complete chaos ...

      But again, they underestimated something, under-forecasted it.
      However, after the signing of the deal, the price of "black gold" cannot rise above the $ 33 mark, actually frozen at the level of 31,5-32,5 per barrel. In other words, so far the impulse for price growth has not shown itself in any way.
      1. Nyrobsky
        Nyrobsky April 14 2020 08: 42 New
        +6
        Quote: Piramidon
        But again, they underestimated something, under-forecasted it.
        However, after the signing of the deal, the price of "black gold" cannot rise above the $ 33 mark, actually frozen at the level of 31,5-32,5 per barrel. In other words, so far the impulse for price growth has not shown itself in any way.

        So why should the price of oil rise if a stockpile of storage facilities has already been created and the economy collapsed everywhere? With the withdrawal of stocks and the restoration of industry, growth will begin. In the meantime ... request
        1. WIKI
          WIKI April 14 2020 11: 32 New
          +1
          Quote: Nyrobsky
          So why rise in the price of oil,

          Really. The war continues. The Saudis have raised the price for the United States. But the volumes of supplies there are small. And where there is a large volume, the price is reduced. Saudi Aramco, the state oil company of Saudi Arabia, has released data on its oil prices for May 2020.

          According to Reuters, prices for Asia in May 2020 were reduced by $ 2,95 - $ 5,5 per barrel. At the same time, the price of oil supplies to the United States increased by $ 2,50 - $ 4,2 per barrel. The cost of delivering Saudi oil to Europe has remained the same.
          http://pozitciya.com.ua/79185-reuters-saudovskaya-araviya-vozobnovila-neftyanuyu-voynu-protiv-rf.html?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fyandex.ru%2Fnews
      2. alexmach
        alexmach April 14 2020 08: 51 New
        0
        What was underpredicted? The forecast then clearly says by the end of the year by forty. Is it already the end of the year?
        And the expectations from the cut off oil have been won back even before the deal, rising from 20 to 30.
      3. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter April 14 2020 09: 35 New
        -2
        Quote: Piramidon
        But again, they underestimated something, under-forecasted

        All stupid, you ... They would have asked us, we would have resolved everything right away - these to those, those to here ... It’s a pity, we need to get ready for work, the courtyard of revenge, otherwise ... laughing
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon April 14 2020 10: 04 New
          -1
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          If only we would be asked, we would have settled everything right there

          Well, we don’t climb where we don’t understand anything. And if you undertook to steer, then the steering wheels so as not to bump into poles and trees.
    2. o_zotov
      o_zotov April 14 2020 10: 34 New
      -3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Amid a catastrophic drop in demand, ANY agreement is better than complete chaos ...


      But Putin confidently won the oil war. Why was it necessary at the last moment to retreat and merge the already ready victory over the Saudis and the USA?



      1. iouris
        iouris April 14 2020 11: 05 New
        0
        Quote: o_zotov
        Why was it necessary at the last moment to retreat and merge the already ready victory over the Saudis and the USA?

        This is not a victory or a defeat. This is a tactical question. Neither KSA, nor, especially, the USA will be defeated. Another thing bothers me ... Well, you understand.
      2. Semen Sychev
        Semen Sychev April 14 2020 12: 59 New
        +1
        Oleg, you are absolutely right, but it seems to me that some individuals behind HIS back managed to push through this agreement. Nothing, sort it out. Our president won against such cunning figures.
        1. o_zotov
          o_zotov April 14 2020 14: 01 New
          -2
          Quote: Semyon Sychev
          Oleg, you are absolutely right, but it seems to me that some individuals behind HIS back managed to push through this agreement. Nothing, sort it out. Our president won against such cunning figures.


          He is now hiding in a bunker, perhaps adherents of the Kremlin’s liberal tower took advantage of the situation and temporarily limited the President’s communications and information. Perhaps he does not yet have all the information ...
  4. syndicalist
    syndicalist April 14 2020 07: 32 New
    +4
    Dyukov believes that such a deal was "necessary." He called the deal “driven by harmonization of declining overall

    And when a month ago they threw show-offs and slammed their guardianship doors, was this not obvious?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 14 2020 07: 54 New
      +5
      Quote: syndicalist
      And when a month ago they threw show-offs and slammed their guardianship doors, was this not obvious?

      Well, you from the very beginning knew that it was necessary to fulfill the American demands transmitted by the Saudis without any argument, right?
      You should bring order to the Government. After all, external management from Washington is good, isn't it?
    2. D16
      D16 April 14 2020 07: 57 New
      +4
      And when a month ago they threw show-offs and slammed their guardianship doors, was this not obvious?

      Therefore, they slammed that the overstock of oil storage facilities of consumers was obvious. Everybody should reduce production in an orderly way, not just OPEC and us. The fact that the Saudis sent tankers with discount oil to the sea does not mean that they sold it. If there is nowhere to unload it, no one will take it even for free. That is OK. The market will do better. Tanker deliveries, or a labor pipeline with long-term contracts.
      1. Mikhail m
        Mikhail m April 14 2020 08: 25 New
        +7
        Quote: D16
        The market will do better. Tanker deliveries, or a labor pipeline with long-term contracts.

        Better export of products of deep processing of raw materials. And so, through the pipe, we send our missed profit and jobs. So a typo labor line very much in the subject.
        1. D16
          D16 April 14 2020 13: 15 New
          +1
          Who argues. It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick. laughing We export a lot of oil products, but if the country has its own refineries, then it will buy oil to load capacity. With us, or somewhere else. Try to declare to Lukashenko that now we sell only oil products, and let him close his new plants laughing . We just lose the customer.
          1. Mikhail m
            Mikhail m April 14 2020 19: 04 New
            0
            And we are not able to sell oil products to Lukashenko’s customers, bypassing his refinery, processing raw materials on our own? And not only Lukashenko. And to everyone who buys our raw materials. This applies not only to oil. Profit from any products of high processing is much higher than from the sale of raw materials. Conclusion: Russia is a raw material colony under external control, which simply does not give the opportunity to develop industry.
            1. D16
              D16 April 14 2020 19: 50 New
              0
              Conclusion: Russia is a raw material colony under external control, which simply does not give the opportunity to develop industry.

              In 2018, Russia sold 260,2 million tons of oil worth $ 129,05 billion. Petroleum products 150,05 million tons in the amount of $ 78.11 billion. So at the expense of the colony you got excited.
              But the joke is that if you divide the money into tons, the difference between a ton of oil and a ton of average petroleum products is about 30 bucks per ton, so not everything with refining is so cloudless.
              And we are not able to sell oil products to Lukashenko’s customers, bypassing his refinery, processing raw materials on our own?

              Is it like that? wassat Lukashenko sits on the infrastructure through which the Soviet Union sent NP products to Europe. Do you propose to stir up the Nord Stream 3,4,5 for gasoline, diesel and fuel oil? laughing Or delivery to Ust-Luga, transshipment to a tanker, unloading at a European port and delivery to a specific consumer. Do you think it will be cheaper than in European refineries? Anyway, after such a scam from the Slavic brothers, you can expect anything. And deservedly.
      2. syndicalist
        syndicalist April 14 2020 08: 43 New
        -6
        Quote: D16
        Therefore, they slammed that the overstock of oil storage facilities of consumers was obvious. Everybody should reduce production in an orderly way, not just OPEC and us.


        Ah, got it! It finally came. It was a secret plan. Mnogohodovochka. We deliberately brought prices down to then reduce production not by 0.3 million barrels, but by 2 with a tail.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. D16
            D16 April 14 2020 13: 29 New
            -2
            Come on. We are the number one oil supplier for the USA. Why should Russia intrigue against the shale, if they cannot do without the Urals? Lowering the ruble makes life easier for exporters and oil industry workers. Import rises and declines. Domestic prices grew at grocery stores more likely due to alarmists who rushed to buy food. So I don’t see a special tragedy in what happened.
            1. Stirbjorn
              Stirbjorn April 14 2020 15: 25 New
              0
              Quote: D16
              Lowering the ruble makes life easier for exporters and oil industry workers. Import rises and declines.
              These tales were appropriate in 2014. Nothing is being reduced, the same eggs are a side view, update your manuals. Zadolbali with their profitable lowering of the ruble, they’re holding people by the herd fool
              1. D16
                D16 April 14 2020 17: 31 New
                0
                China periodically lowered the yuan against the dollar, the Americans were very offended by this. Probably China was not profitable. laughing If this is not personally beneficial for you, then it is most likely beneficial for the state. This is an axiom to which it’s time to get used to or to kill your forehead against the wall. laughing
        2. D16
          D16 April 14 2020 13: 05 New
          0
          It was a secret plan. Mnogohodovochka. We deliberately brought prices down to then reduce production not by 0.3 million barrels, but by 2 with a tail.

          Prices have crushed and continue to crush the Saudis, announcing a discount for Southeast Asia. They have nowhere to go. Our customers both sat and sit on our oil, for example, China received both and receives our oil through the pipe. The contract is long-term. Previously, the price was below the market, now higher. Mining will decline itself, and much more so for everyone. The only question is who has higher profitability and government support.
      3. den3080
        den3080 April 14 2020 08: 52 New
        +3
        Quote: D16
        And when a month ago they threw show-offs and slammed their guardianship doors, was this not obvious?

        Therefore, they slammed that the overstock of oil storage facilities of consumers was obvious. Everybody should reduce production in an orderly way, not just OPEC and us. The fact that the Saudis sent tankers with discount oil to the sea does not mean that they sold it. If there is nowhere to unload it, no one will take it even for free. That is OK. The market will do better. Tanker deliveries, or a labor pipeline with long-term contracts.

        Again the “invisible hand of the market" ...
        Trump imposed duties on Chinese goods, imposed sanctions against 5G, taking Vice President Huawei as a hostage.
        Political! leaders of oil-producing countries agree to reduce oil production so that prices do not fall.
        Throughout Europe (western), agriculture has been directly subsidized by states for a long time.
        And fools like Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia are told that their products are uncompetitive compared to Western European because ... and the usual set for suckers ... your standards are not the same, the packaging is not bad, and the prices ... are higher, but therefore, here is a quota of 10 trucks per year - be happy.
        One must be blind and deaf in order to say "the market will resolve what is better."
        Timurovets, that is, Gaidarovets, you are ours.

        Oil fell by 60%, but at gas stations in Finland, for example, only by 15-17%. And this is not bad.
        But in Russia banned! import (import) of petroleum products. They may be too cheap for the Russian "national" economy, apparently. That is, there will be no reduction in gas prices in Russia.
        Well, the invisible hand of the market, what can I say.
        1. IL-18
          IL-18 April 14 2020 09: 06 New
          +1
          Quote: den3080
          That is, there will be no reduction in gas prices in Russia.

          The states also put a barrier of cheap oil and products from it. Well yes! There it is a necessity, but we have robbery.
          1. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn April 14 2020 11: 47 New
            +1
            Quote: IL-18

            The states also put a barrier of cheap oil and products from it. Well yes! There it is a necessity, but we have robbery.
            In the US, the dollar does not fall in the wake of oil. The lower the price, the cheaper the gasoline. And there is enough of its own oil, it’s been exported for a year and a half
          2. Semen Sychev
            Semen Sychev April 14 2020 13: 09 New
            0
            Quote: IL-18
            The states also put a barrier of cheap oil and products from it.

            Well, this is how to look.
        2. D16
          D16 April 14 2020 14: 14 New
          -1
          Oil fell by 60%, but at gas stations in Finland, for example, only by 15-17%. And this is not bad.
          But in Russia banned! import (import) of petroleum products. They may be too cheap for the Russian "national" economy, apparently. That is, there will be no reduction in gas prices in Russia.
          Well, the invisible hand of the market, what can I say.

          Are you refueling in Finland? If gasoline, then it is worth considering that in its price, in addition to the price of oil, many components are included, of which oil is not the most important. Therefore, at such surges, the exchange of oil prices, the prices for diesel and gasoline are relatively stable. Whatever this gasoline is imported, at the gas station you buy it along with the mark-ups and taxes laid down in it. So it would be more expensive. But they do not buy it in order to ensure maximum sales to their refineries and non-oil companies. Is it really difficult to understand basic things? lol
  5. rotkiv04
    rotkiv04 April 14 2020 07: 33 New
    +3
    d'Effective managers and thieving oligarchs began to spit at each other, they used to steal from profit, and now they will have to pay a loss
  6. GTYCBJYTH2021
    GTYCBJYTH2021 April 14 2020 07: 50 New
    -4
    Quote: Alex2048
    If they only
    as if the bottom was broken again

    They’re worse ... They have punched a hole in the budget of the Russian Federation ...

    And what about the budget, if you don’t have a state employee, I’ll have a pension ... and to my comrades, combat and non-combat ...... He said, ostensibly, the Supreme Pogonnikov not to infringe .....
    1. Zlat070
      Zlat070 April 14 2020 08: 00 New
      +2
      Well, with us, every couch strategist knows what is best for the budget!
  7. Avior
    Avior April 14 2020 08: 00 New
    0
    . Alexander Dyukov believes that such a deal was "necessary."

    Yes, this is already obvious to everyone.
    It is strange only that managers with large salaries understood this only after it became obvious to everyone
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 April 14 2020 09: 16 New
      +1
      Just a decrease in production without pathos to our (and not ours, too) type of top managers looks like a threat, the Supreme Authority can see that nothing changes without them, or vice versa, the movement has begun. So, when the inevitable happens with the fervor of negotiations and agreements with abroad, then they will immediately report on the "great" works, supposedly their own.
  8. Keeping
    Keeping April 14 2020 08: 06 New
    -6
    A hybrid war is going on against us, respectively, and we need ambiguous steps.
    Here is an agreement with OPEC just from this category.
    We were expected to decrease production by 0,3 million per day, and after hybrid maneuvers, we agreed to a decrease to 2,5 ...
    Well, after all, no one expected this from us and was not ready for such a thing - a hybrid act ...
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir April 14 2020 10: 05 New
      +1
      by 0,3 million a day, and after hybrid maneuvers, we agreed to a decrease to 2,5.
      At first they wanted to cut off a finger, but then decided that a hand on the shoulder, this is a victory.
  9. askort154
    askort154 April 14 2020 08: 16 New
    +2
    It is difficult to understand these games from the "couch". But one thing is logical to me.
    Trump, after signing, crucifies every day in his thanks to Russia and the SA for their "excellent" decision. Personally, I thanked Putin on the phone. As Stalin said, if the West praises us, it means that we are doing something wrong.
    1. Avior
      Avior April 14 2020 08: 18 New
      -2
      For the States, it is "excellent"
  10. Andrei Nikolaevich
    Andrei Nikolaevich April 14 2020 08: 23 New
    -3
    How much does it cost to trust these expErds?
  11. Mentat
    Mentat April 14 2020 08: 34 New
    -3
    Recall that, on the basis of the OPEC + agreement, Russia agreed to reduce oil production. It was noted that this would allow the price of oil to rise.

    Such serious experts have never been noted. From the very beginning it was reported that this agreement was not “Brest Peace” and other nonsense, but a working, “short” agreement for several months. Months. Then further negotiations and adjustments will be needed.

    "The bottom has broken."
    The bottom here is pierced by pseudo-communists, a liberd and paid bots, frantically rubbing their sweaty palms in the ecstasy of "reeling of the regime." It is impossible to take such screams and antics seriously.

    Returning to the substantive aspect, this agreement reached an unprecedented earlier: the United States, in spite of its antitrust laws with which they covered themselves, assumed obligations, including for Mexico. Oil producing states that are not members of OPEC + have also committed themselves. This is a significant achievement both in the economic and in the geostrategic sense.

    Is it possible to say that Russia won a certain war? No. However, in essence, it conducted the “peace enforcement operation” of both the Saudis and the United States, and, in essence, of the entire world of oil production. Without indemnities, without high-profile gains, the result was a compromise that partially suits everyone, but the very possibility of such operations already says a lot.
  12. Maks1995
    Maks1995 April 14 2020 09: 07 New
    0
    Ah, bullshit, all these expressions. The person is saved and regretted that they were not allowed to the cake.
  13. Roman123567
    Roman123567 April 14 2020 09: 14 New
    -1
    Dyukov believes that such a deal was "necessary."
    So Fedun said the same thing about the Brest Peace ..
    What was necessary to chop off his leg in order to save his head from gangrene ..

    According to the head of Gazprom Neft, “today strategies to fight for market share does not make senseIt’s possible in a stable situation. ”

    A month ago, someone Sechin told us all about the importance of preserving their markets and preventing Americans from taking this share ..
    Actually, it is precisely with this that the previous split with OPEC is justified, as a result of which the price collapsed ..
    1. Peter is not the first
      Peter is not the first April 14 2020 09: 33 New
      -3
      Taking into account the rest of the negative that we received after slamming the doors, it just happened and the United States did not take up its oil, which was released after the OPEC + countries declined, and also reduced their oil production.
      1. Roman123567
        Roman123567 April 14 2020 10: 15 New
        -1
        The United States did not take up its oil, which was released after the OPEC + countries declined, and also reduced their oil production.


        Well, if you think so, then the degree of "victory" could have been increased even further ..

        We could have re-signed nothing on the weekend with OPEC, and then even fewer "would not be released" .. And then the United States would have further reduced its production ..
        So why did we stop halfway, and did not "kill" the United States to the end ?? Or was this path initially not correct, and did not bring us personally any profit ??

        PS .. And all this should be considered against the background of the fact that the United States reduced production only by economic feasibility, and not by obligations .. and as soon as the price rises (namely, for the sake of raising prices and all these reductions are started), production will again increase again. .
  14. Operator
    Operator April 14 2020 09: 22 New
    -3
    Bzdun offers to give up.
  15. IL-18
    IL-18 April 14 2020 09: 27 New
    0
    Brest Peace, Pearl Harbor, Tsushima, the defeat of light cavalry near Balaclava ... What difference does it make! One FIG soon oil will have nowhere to drain. That with the contract, that without - it will be necessary to reduce production. And it’s good if you don’t stop at all for a while.
  16. Gardamir
    Gardamir April 14 2020 10: 02 New
    0
    But Fedun well done! First, Trotsky went to negotiate with the Germans. The conditions of the negotiations were sparing, but Trotsky sent the Germans and slammed the door. Germany went on the offensive and had to agree to more humiliating conditions.
    Isn’t it right now?
  17. Whowhy
    Whowhy April 14 2020 10: 27 New
    +1
    Can it already be engaged in the development of industry for deep oil refining? winked
  18. sanik2020
    sanik2020 April 14 2020 10: 49 New
    -1
    All pro-Kremlin media shout, Putin’s victory is Putin’s victory, and unless victory is forced, in my opinion victory is well-deserved.
  19. iouris
    iouris April 14 2020 10: 58 New
    0
    Fedun hardly understands what he is talking about. "Peace of Brest" was the right decision. By the way, I recommend watching the film "The Sixth (6) July". Almost documentary. Many young people will have fun and answers to the burning questions of history.
    1. Roman123567
      Roman123567 April 14 2020 11: 32 New
      -1
      So the day before yesterday's deal is "the right decision" .. Everyone acknowledges and emphasizes this, including Fedun ..
      The question is what led to this "correct" decision.
      I already wrote - when gangrene is on the legs - it is right to cut off the leg .. But who is this alignment "victory" .. against the background of the fact that a month ago you were running on both legs ..
      1. iouris
        iouris April 14 2020 11: 59 New
        +1
        If you cut off both legs, then the well-known status body will reach right to the ground.
    2. Avior
      Avior April 14 2020 11: 40 New
      +1
      so he approves this decision as correct
  20. Semen Sychev
    Semen Sychev April 14 2020 12: 44 New
    0
    Dyukov noted that "there is nothing humiliating in her"

    They proposed to drop 0,5 million barrels per day - now it is necessary to reduce 2,3 million barrels per day. Even Peskov said it was a bargain. Good economists are sitting there, it’s not for nothing that Vladimir Vladimirovich scolds them at meetings