An interview with Marin Katusa, Casey Research

In the past three years, Marin Katusa, senior energy analyst at Casey Research, has become one of the most respected and listened-to authorities in the investment advisory business. He spends the bulk of his time on airplanes and in far-off places studying the future of energy… and the best ways to make money from it.

Brian Hunt, editor in chief of Stansberry’s free online investment digest, The Daily Crux, interviewed Marin to get his take on where oil prices are headed for the long-term… the regions where investors and traders should focus their dollars… and some of his favorite energy companies with massive upside.

The Daily Crux: Marin… we noticed you guys at Casey Research are bullish on energy. Can you explain to us why?

Marin Katusa: Well, as we’ve mentioned in our Casey Energy letters, we’re short-term bears but long-term bulls.

I think there’s a very good chance oil will be knocked back down along with other markets in the short term, but I’d consider that a rare opportunity to buy the best companies at a steep discount. Long term, I’m very bullish on oil because I think the supply of cheap oil is running out.

The days of cheap and easy oil are over. Oil is getting harder and harder to extract because most of the easy-to-find deposits have already been found and extracted.

The best remaining deposits are deep underwater like in the Gulf of Mexico or offshore of Brazil, in state-controlled or politically unstable areas like Iran and Venezuela, or experiencing dramatically falling production like Mexico. There are also huge oil-sands deposits in Canada, but these are more expensive to extract – anywhere from $35-$40 per barrel for existing production, up to $65 or more for new production.

The simple fact is oil prices will eventually rise due to the increased costs involved in meeting existing demand.

On top of that, you’ve got developing countries beginning to significantly increase their own demand. Right now, you’ve got just 30 or so of the world’s most developed countries, known as the OECD, that consume about half of all the oil produced.

As emerging countries like China and India begin to increase their standard of living, they’ll start using a lot more oil. As you guys know, oil consumption per capita is tied very closely to GDP per capita of the country. So this means these emerging countries could be using multiples of the oil that they use now.

Today, China uses just under six barrels of oil per day for every thousand people. In India, it’s about two and a half barrels for every thousand. In the U.S., it’s just under 70 barrels for every thousand. Even if you figure just a 20% increase in China and India per person – those are huge, huge numbers. China alone has over a billion people. This is going to add tremendous upward pressure on prices.

And of course, I’m sure your readers are aware of the long-term threats to the U.S. dollar. Dollar depreciation will only make the problems I just mentioned that much worse.

That said, in the short term, I think oil is very vulnerable to pullbacks in the general stock market. So we’ve been telling our subscribers to be very cautious. In fact, a year ago, I decided to use $40 oil as the basis for all of our analyses for our newsletter. If a company we were looking at wouldn’t be profitable at $40 oil, then we wouldn’t go any further. The logic behind $40 was to provide a real margin of safety should we get the correction in oil I’m expecting.

But it also pushed me to look a lot deeper and be more selective, and it’s really paid off in our results – over 90% of my recommendations over the last year have delivered significant profits for our subscribers.

The funny thing is that by not using $70 or $80 oil, I started getting hate mail from people, saying, “Don’t you know oil’s at $73 and you’re using $40?” It was hilarious, but that’s exactly my point. If a company cannot be profitable at $40 per barrel of oil, it will underperform its peers even when oil is higher. When I use $40 oil and I like the financials – it’s gold.

A good example of this is what we did with Nexen. When I first wrote it up, it was trading at C$23 per share. After doing my analysis, I thought its intrinsic value was less. I said, “Buy under C$16 per share.” Of course, I got people writing in saying I was out of my mind for setting the buy price so low. Just over a month later, it was trading down below C$16 per share, and my subscribers ended up making about 50% within four months on a low-risk company.

So by using $40 oil, I get my true value, rather than the market value. There’s a difference between intrinsic value and the market value, and I go with intrinsic value. I don’t care what people are paying in the market right now. You might not get it today, you might not get it next week. You have to be patient. It’s what I call “stink bid investing.”

Crux: What else do you look for?

Katusa: Another factor I like to look at is what I call game changers. An example of a game changer is what has recently happened to the natural gas sector in the United States. Companies were victims of their own success, because they were so successful in using new technologies to retrieve gas from the shales, they drove the natural gas price down.

Using advanced technologies to discover big offshore deposits is an example of a game changer in oil. But what you’re going to see is a lot of the big finds are going to be drilled by the major oil companies – what I call the super majors – because it’s just so expensive to drill these targets.

Crux: Nobody else has the money.

Katusa: That’s right. So the only frontiers left for conventional oil production that can be extracted easily and cheaply, like I mentioned before, are in politically unstable countries like Iran, Iraq, Libya.

These countries are fully aware of the potential of their resources locked within their borders. They’re increasing the royalties they charge, including the gradual increase in the use of service fee contracts.

We spent a whole issue talking about this in our Casey Energy Report, in the October issue. In countries where the governments hold the ownership of the oil – such as south central Iraq, Kuwait, even potentially Mexico – these are places that you want to watch out for, because they are constitutionally barred from giving foreign oil companies ownership of the oil in the ground. They’re not as positive as people think they are.

A reliable and friendly oil source to the United States, such as the Alberta oil sands, is not cheap to produce. The oil sands require at least $35-$40 per barrel at the very minimum to extract, compared to less than $5 per barrel in places like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Kuwait.

Proven reserves in politically stable parts of the world unfortunately will cost the U.S. consumer a lot more money per barrel. We spent a lot of time in our latest issue of Casey’s Energy Opportunities looking at all of the national oil companies. Of those, you’ve really only got three you can possibly invest in, if you dare.

Crux: How about your take on the likelihood of big takeovers and buyouts? Do you see oil-hungry nations like China coming in to buy up a lot of reserves?

Katusa: Absolutely, but it’s not just going to be the Chinese, it’s also going to be big oil companies who want to replace their production with proven reserves in the ground.

An advantage the Chinese companies will have over the Western oil companies is the Chinese ability to leverage their political and economic muscle in places such as Africa, Venezuela, and Bolivia.

These countries potentially hold world-class oil deposits, but it’s much riskier for a Western company to explore these regions than the powerful Chinese oil companies.

Crux: China is already in a bidding war with ExxonMobil for African oil…

Katusa: Right. What our angle is, if you’re looking to invest in Africa, you’re looking for elephant-size deposits – what they call “world class deposits.”

The company needs to go in with a crew able to maneuver in politically unstable parts of the world. We had a big and fast win on a company called Tanganyika Oil, using just that concept. They went in, they built up production, then sold the company to the Chinese.

We’re doing it again right now on a company called Africa Oil – ticker symbol is AOI on the Toronto Venture Exchange – that’s partnering with the Chinese.

The man behind AOI is the same person behind Tanganyika Oil, Lukas Lundin.

Lukas Lundin, like his father before him, has a long record of going into politically unstable parts of the world and succeeding in developing world-class deposits and selling them at huge gains for the investors. So you’re going to see a lot of this type of partnering going on where the Chinese want the North American expertise, and in return, the Chinese add value by political clout and financial clout, helping to pay the costs of development.

We wrote up Africa Oil as a buy under C$1, and when it popped up to about C$1.50, we told our subscribers to take a Casey Free Ride [a profit-taking strategy] when the stock was trading above C$1.30, and it subsequently went as high as C$1.70. Currently we have AOI as a buy under C$1, and it’s trading at C$0.87, which we view as a very cheap cost for this stock.

Crux: Are there any other countries you’re interested in right now? Are you interested in Iraq?

Katusa: In northern Iraq in the Kurdistan region, there are some good onshore blocks with decent royalty rates.

A company called ShaMaran (ticker symbol is SNM on the Venture Exchange) we think has huge potential. It’s totally cashed up. I wrote it up as a buy under C$0.20 and put two buy signals on it. It’s trading at C$0.57 now. It went as high as C$0.80.

And they’ve got about C$0.25 in cash per share. This was a company that was trading less than cash – they had more cash than the market cap. Our shareholders bought millions of shares, because we were the only ones writing it up. And it had zero interest – there was nothing going on with it. And they’re now in northern Iraq in the area of Kurdistan, which has huge, huge potential.

I’ve also been looking at Colombia. I think that’s a country that people have to pay attention to. In the last month, a lot of the smart money, the big, big players in Vancouver – Frank Giustra and Sam Magid – have been putting huge money, their own personal money, into a bunch of oil plays in Colombia. I would recommend your readers take a look at some Colombia plays. One that I really like is Petroamerica, symbol PTA on the Venture Exchange.

Crux: Great. Any parting thoughts?

Katusa: I think what you have to emphasize to people is to buy at a discount to intrinsic value when it’s unpopular, and sell at market value when it’s popular.

That’s not just being a contrarian. A contrarian is just buying something that’s unpopular. Buy something unpopular that has a great discount to its intrinsic value, and when you sell, sell when it’s popular and trading at the market value, not at its intrinsic value. So those are the two rules that I have.

Crux: Thanks for your time.

Katusa: My pleasure.

As mentioned above, Marin’s track record for profiting in resources like crude oil, natural gas, and uranium is unmatched in the industry.

If you’re interested in reading a monthly analysis on the trends and stocks Marin likes, you can get on board as a Casey Energy Opportunities subscriber for only $39 per year. It’s an incredible deal and completely risk-free, with our 3-month, 100% money-back guarantee. You can learn more about a subscription here.

In essence, the Air Force is offering a pilot site for a coal-to-liquid (CTL) project at a base in Montana. This will be the first of many such CTL facilities around the nation. The idea is that funding will come from the private sector, not the Air Force or any other government source.

The Air Force will sweeten the pot, however, by guaranteeing that it will purchase the fuel that comes out of the CTL plants. Eventually, much of the Air Force fleet will fly on a mixture of CTL fuel and traditional petroleum-based fuel. For the past two years or so, the Air Force has been qualifying its planes to fly on synthetic fuels. Just recently, a B-1B “Lancer” bomber went supersonic over New Mexico on a mix of synthetic fuel. So synthetic fuels work.

The Wagon Train Is Forming Up

Some of the synthetic fuels information has made it into various trade press publications. But the major media have pretty much ignored the synthetic fuels development. Even on Wall Street, this program is under the radar screens. I guess the people on Wall Street are too busy counting up their losses from subprime mortgages. But the wagon train is forming up on the trail to synthetic fuels. Things are going to start happening, and soon.

********The Opportunity of a Lifetime********

Why I Will Pay You $6,503 to Cancel Your Agora Financial Subscription Right Now

There’s more than $6 grand staring right at you. All you have to do is decide whether you want it or not.

But don’t worry if you decide – this won’t be the last time Agora Financial will line your pockets with dough…

Read on to cash your $6,503 check…

*************************************

The idea is to jump-start a large U.S. military-industrial CTL program that will eventually serve the rest of the economy. The CTL projects will cost over $5 billion each, based on preliminary estimates. In other words, each CTL refinery will cost about as much as an aircraft carrier, and use about as much steel and equipment.

This ambitious CTL project will have major implications for the future of the coal-mining industry, as well as many companies in the engineering, construction and capital equipment sectors.

Future Liquid Fuel Supplies — We’re Running Out of Time

CTL will surely generate controversy. I cannot begin to describe the visceral opposition to CTL projects from the usual suspects. The NIMBYs, the environmental lobbyists the “global warming” activists and many others will all fight against CTL with tooth and nail. You will hear glib arguments about how “If we just do this or that” (windmills, biofuels, conservation, etc.) we can avoid the need to build any CTL plants. As a nation, we should “do this or that” in any event. Really, we need to do everything. But we will also have to build the CTL plants. The opposition to CTL reflects how deeply the “Just say no” approach is hard-wired into our modern culture.

The U.S. could get away with avoiding major capital investments in energy projects when the dollar was strong and oil was cheap. (How else did we wind up importing two-thirds of our daily oil?) If the U.S. needed oil, we just waved dollars and the tankers showed up at the piers. But no more.

It is crystal clear that the U.S. no longer has long-term assured access to liquid fuels. I hope you got the memo. This reality is rapidly transforming into a supreme matter of national security. A U.S. CTL industry cannot come about too fast, in my view. The nation is not “running out of oil,” technically speaking. But not enough oil can cause just as much havoc as running out. And the national “adult supervision” sure knows that the U.S. is running out of time. Let’s look at the present and forecast the future.

Oil Output and Supply

First, let’s discuss the U.S. oil supply going forward. The U.S. presently consumes about 21 million barrels of oil per day. This is a mix of domestic output (much coming in small quantities from several hundred thousand old stripper wells) and imports.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. DOE, in January 2008, U.S. crude oil output was just over five million barrels per day, plus additional natural gas liquids. The balance of oil consumption comes from imports. (Also, the U.S. supply of transportation fuel is supplemented about 3-4% with ethanol that comes from distilling about half the U.S. corn crop. That is why your grocery bill is skyrocketing.)

*************************************

A Collaborator Countdown: The Four Horseman of the Oil Apocalypse

Find out who these four are and how knowing that will line your pockets with cash, while oil is set to shoot over $150 per barrel.

It’s all right here…

*************************************

But domestic volumes of oil output are depleting and declining inexorably. From the North Slope of Alaska to the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. output is just plain falling. There is very little good news, and even the good news is oft-times not so good.

New discoveries and new wells just cannot keep up with depletion of older oil fields. By 2025, U.S. daily oil output will be a fraction of its current level (probably down to about 2-3 million barrels per day), even with an aggressive program of drilling offshore and in Alaska — which is not happening, in any case.

Also by 2025, U.S. imports will almost certainly decline. The oil will not be available to buy and import from world markets. Not everyone agrees with this. In one fanciful projection from 2005, the U.S. DOE forecast that “Total U.S. gross petroleum imports are projected to increase in the reference case from 12.3 million barrels per day in 2003 to 20.2 million in 2025.” Maybe in somebody’s dreams, but my view is that this is one projection that will never come true.

This weekend saw the official start of the North Atlantic hurricane season… a vitally important factor to the oil price in the coming months.

And, as everyone knows, predicting the weather can be a losers’ game.

Back in 2005, Hurricane Rita had a disastrous effect on oil production in the Gulf of Mexico.

At one point just after the landfall of the storm, 93% of Gulf platforms were evacuated. As much as 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil (100% of normal output) and 8.8 billion cubic feet (bcf) per day of natural gas (88% of normal output) were shut in.

The cumulative impacts of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were massive. The total disruption was estimated at 109 million barrels bbls of crude oil (about 20% of annual Gulf production) and 561 bcf of natural gas (15.3% of annual production).

According to the US Energy Information Administration, the US Gulf Coast is the source of about 40% of the gasoline produced in the US and the starting point for most major gasoline pipelines.

With supply constraints dominating the industry, a repeat of 2005 would send the oil price into the stratosphere. Indeed, if we have a repeat of the 2005 season this year, Goldman Sachs prediction of $200 oil may actually be met.

However, as I said earlier, predicting the weather is a losers’ game… and even the forecasters themselves appear to accept this.

Past performance is not a guide…

In fact, long-range hurricane forecasts are so unreliable that many forecaster issue disclaimers with their work, similar to the warnings you see on financial products.

Famous forecaster William Gray has always issued disclaimers with his forecasts. An expel goes like this: “[the forecast] can only predict about 50% of the total variability in Atlantic seasonal hurricane activity.”

North Carolina’s state forecaster Lian Xie added the following to his 2008 forecast – in bold: “Results presented herein are for scientific information exchange only… Users are at their own risk for using the forecasts in any decision making.”

The season has started bang on time this year. Already one named Tropical Storm has formed: Arthur. The storm weakened to a tropical depression on Sunday, after soaking the Yucatan Peninsula, but still threatened to cause dangerous flooding and mudslides in Mexico, Belize and Guatemala.

Last year the forecasters got it wrong. They were predicting a more-active-than-normal season which failed to materialise. This year, who knows, but it is of interest to see what these meteorologists are saying.

The forecast from the US government’s Climate Prediction Center says it’s likely that 2008 will be an active year for hurricanes in the Atlantic basin. It has indicated a 65% probability that we’ll see an above-average storm season… a 25% chance it will be average… and just a 10% chance that it will be below average. So, we are looking at 12 -16 named storms, with 6 – 9 hurricanes and 2 – 5 major hurricanes. (A major hurricane is a Category 3, 4 or 5 on the Saffir-Simpson Scale).

On average, there are 11 named storms, with 6 of them becoming hurricanes.

The experts are predicting an above-average season, but we should take that fact with a pinch of salt. What we need to remember is that every year between 1 June and 30 November a new risk factor moves into the oil market… it is impossible to predict and impossible to quantify… but it’s yet another bull fact for the oil price.

At Smart Commodities we’ve got two great oil plays specifically targeted to earn you profits in this bull market. More than that… it doesn’t matter if the oil price goes up or down… these plays are set to make you money either way.

Find out about these and all my other recommendations right now…

Regards,

Garry White
Editor
Smart Commodities UK

Source: Hurricane Season Hits USA, Prepare For The Resulting UK Petrol Panic Now

Q: Do you think we should drill Florida’s oil to ease our addiction to Middle Eastern oil? – A.H.

A: While Alaska gets all the press (see below), we know there is oil under Florida.

Drillers found oil in my home state in 1943. The Sunniland trend in South Florida has produced about 110 million barrels so far. And the Big Cypress National Preserve produces about 730,000 barrels of oil per year.

That’s not the only park hiding oil reserves.

If you’ve visited the Everglades National Park at Shark River, you drove down the old drill road. I’ve seen the logs from those wells. There’s plenty of oil, it was just too sour to make any money in those days. These days, with oil above $107, it’s a different story…

I firmly believe oil is vital to our quality of life. I also believe oil will change the way millions of people in China and India live. So we’re going to compete with more players for the oil supply soon. ———- Advertisement —————–
BANNED ON WALL STREET

Dr. George Huang – a PhD trader and former VC – has uncovered a small subsection of the financial markets offering tremendous returns – and which Wall Street CANNOT touch.

According to Dr. Huang’s 8-year back-testing study, this small group of 69 companies outperformed the NASDAQ 6-to-1 over an 18 month period.

For more information, click here.
———————————————-

However, the amount of oil under Florida is ridiculously small. The U.S. Geologic Survey reports around 370 million barrels of oil potential in Florida. That’s enough oil to supply our needs for about 30 minutes or so. There’s probably more oil under the continental shelf of the Gulf of Mexico, off Florida’s coast. That oil could reduce our imports… by a fraction of a percent.

On the other hand, Florida exploits it tourism industry quite well. Florida has no state income tax. It generates revenues from sales and hotel taxes. And as one St. Petersburg Times columnist declared, “Florida and its beach-dependent tourist industry welcome nearby drilling – and the potential pollution of oil spills – about as much as an anthrax attack.”

A horizon full of oilrigs and potential spills just wouldn’t sit well with beachgoers and fishermen.

So from a “best use” standpoint, I think Florida’s tourism wins the argument. While we’d use up Florida’s oil rather quickly, the state can mine its sunshine and sandy shores indefinitely.

Q: I’ve heard we have enough oil in Alaska to fill our needs. In all your research, do you find that to be true or not? – E.A.

A: Alaska holds a lot more oil than Florida…

The U.S. Geological Survey’s best estimate is about 20 billion barrels in place between the National Petroleum Reserve and the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve. Of course, only about half of that could be recovered with current technology… But let’s be optimists and say we could recover 12 billion barrels.

Bizarre Economics: Why High Oil Prices Have Reduced Supply

The U.S. imports about 10 million barrels of oil per day. That means, every year, we need 3.6 billion barrels of oil. If we could pump it as we wanted, Alaska’s oil would only cover our imports for three or four years before it was exhausted.

I’m happy leaving that oil up there for a real energy crunch.

On the other hand, the U.S. sits next to an absolutely enormous oil supply… it’s in an area most investors haven’t yet heard about. You can read the full story here. 

Good investing,

Matt

P.S. A couple months ago, I received a question along these same lines about the billions of barrels of oil shale that sit in Utah and Colorado. Check our archives for my answer.

P.P.S. If you’d like to submit a question to the Commodity
Q&A, send us an e-mail. Please remember, I can’t give individualized investment advice.

According to the most recent figures from the U.S. DOE, in January 2008, U.S. crude oil output was just over 5 million barrels per day, plus additional natural gas liquids. The balance of oil consumption comes from imports. (Also, the U.S. supply of transportation fuel is supplemented about 3-4% with ethanol that comes from distilling about half the U.S. corn crop. That is why your grocery bill is skyrocketing.)

But domestic volumes of oil output are depleting and declining inexorably. From the North Slope of Alaska to the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. output is just plain falling. There is very little good news, and even the good news is oft-times not so good.

New discoveries and new wells just cannot keep up with depletion of older oil fields. By 2025, U.S. daily oil output will be a fraction of its current level (probably down to about 2-3 million barrels per day), even with an aggressive program of drilling offshore and in Alaska — which is not happening, in any case.

Also by 2025, U.S. imports will almost certainly decline. The oil will not be available to buy and import from world markets. Not everyone agrees with this. In one fanciful projection from 2005, the U.S. DOE forecast that “Total U.S. gross petroleum imports are projected to increase in the reference case from 12.3 million barrels per day in 2003 to 20.2 million in 2025.” Maybe in somebody’s dreams, but my view is that this is one projection that will never come true.

Really, by 2025, the rest of the oil-producing world will simply lack the product to export. This will be due to reasons of depletion on a global scale, and fast-growing internal demand in oil-producing nations. Gasoline consumption in places as diverse as Russia, Iran, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia is just soaring, so there is less net oil available for export.

And oil output everywhere is flat or declining. (Just last month, Russia announced a plateau in oil output.) And closer to home, Mexico’s Cantarell field is simply crashing at an annual depletion rate of 8% or more.

So what will happen in 2025? Will the U.S. pump its own oil? No, it’s not there. Will the U.S. continue to import large volumes? No, it won’t be available. The bottom line is that conventional oil sources for the U.S. — domestic output and imports — are simply drying up.

Until next time,

Byron King

Note: Byron King is a frequent contributor to the free e-letter Whiskey & Gunpowder. To receive daily insights into energy, oil, commodities and other natural resources sign up here!