Price of fuel

[ColinBarber]

1 hour ago, Dells said:

Sorry I seem to have stepped onto a hornet’s nest but it just seems like profiteering to me if all of a sudden they can drop diesel prices by a few pence.

Dell

Diesel and petrol have different wholesale prices and different demand profiles, hence the prices differences. Diesel has been coming down for months, although that seems to have bottomed out now. 

[steve2006]

19 hours ago, Malc1 said:

Fuel duty is currently levied at a flat rate of 52.95p per litre for both petrol and diesel, while VAT at 20% is then charged on both the product price and the duty. 

I've just lifted this from the RAC website stuff

A ltr of fuel at say £1.50p pump price ........... so taxation is  52.95p in Fuel Duty plus 25p in vat  = about 78p per litre so that means the forecourt cost price incl profit is 72p / ltr  .  now then, how much is the price delivered to Tesco et al so we can determine the pump gross profit

Any thoughts ?

Malc

 

 

The forecourt price is calculated by subtracting the wholesale price from it then adding in the average temperature at the pumps then multiplying by the wind direction upon delivery. 😀

[Bluemarlin]

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

they're running a business in challenging times and at every twist and turn they will inevitably make a profit BUT it's what we, the general public might consider a reasonable profit and NOT created by cartel type arrangements whether unofficial or not ..  so where's the competition element in the retailers thinking ?  it's GONE

In times when the general public are told to tighten their belts, accept higher prices, and run at a loss, I don't think there's any such thing as a reasonable profit. Especially with something like fuel, which not only affects petrol prices, but the price of pretty much everything else in production/delivery/distribution costs. I'm not saying that businesses should run at a loss, but they should share the pain too, and could sustain a period of breaking even in hard times.

The government is supposed to represent the interests of the people and, if oil companies can collectively agree to reduce production to maintain prices/profits, then the government should collectively decide the maximum that people should pay, like they do with gas and electricity.

Generally I'm happy for businesses to make profits, but in exceptional hard times, then the burden should be more evenly distributed between business and the population.

[Malc1]

And if they  don’t see reason then I’m happy to put my £££££ into Lidl and Aldi which don’t sell fuel and we know aren’t taking us for a ride in that way whatever …….. 

damnable fuel prices eh …. And it’s the financially hard pressed that will be suffering the most ….. where’s your collective consciences Supermarkets and Issa Bros ( is it )  ???? 

Malc 

 

[GMB]

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

And if they  don’t see reason then I’m happy to put my £££££ into Lidl and Aldi which don’t sell fuel and we know aren’t taking us for a ride in that way whatever …….. 

damnable fuel prices eh …. And it’s the financially hard pressed that will be suffering the most ….. where’s your collective consciences Supermarkets and Issa Bros ( is it )  ???? 

Malc 

 

For many years I was under the impression that price fixing and cartels were illegal or at least frowned upon, but now it seems like our leaders in parliament see fit to throw us to the dogs and let certain companies fix their high prices, make obscene profits and give virtually no customer service. All the time making vast payouts to their already wealthy patrons.

There really is not a lot that we can do about it apart from trying to get someone  in charge who actually cares about the majority of us who have "normal" or limited means.

With a full service due at approx £750. Insurance at approx £800 ( if not a lot more!! ) and road tax at £700, all to be paid in October, then the IsF is going SORN for the first time. £2250 + or - for winter use of maybe 200 miles is just a step too far.

 

[Linas.P]

On 8/12/2023 at 9:11 AM, ColinBarber said:

Oil prices have been steadily rising over the last month.

Price of crude has nothing to do with price of fuel... $80/barrel was the price back in September 2007 and October 2010... what was the price of petrol then? £0.94 and £1.16. It would be mistake to apply inflation to this, because crude oil is commodity (basically commodities prices does not correlate with inflation and most of the time correlation is inverse). So if the theory of crude oil price being linked to prices of the petrol in the pumps would be true, then the only thing that matter should be price of barrel * USD/GBP rate. But that is not true - so if back in September 2007 barrel of crude was £39 when exchanged to £ and fuel price was £0.94, then in October 2010 it should have been £1.02 and now it should be £1.27.

Quick conclusion - price of petrol is not linked to price of crude, it is only linked to whatever excessive profits oil companies wants to make. I guess it is not surprising then BP made £4 billions of excess profit last quarter and now upgraded predictions by extra £2 billion. "Excess" meaning above the billions of profit they have already predicted to earn. Now where do you think this "excess" profit is coming from? 

So I would not jump to concussion that retailers are making more profit (although they do as well), Asda admitted making £525 millions more than expected...  that is basically by overcharging the customers, but that is not much considering £6 billions on top of already healthy profits that BP made. And I would not blame Asda too much, they are the only ones to admit it, but I am sure everyone does that and Asda fuel is still one of the cheapest. 

In concussion - petrol price is as it is because everyone is profiteering from "fake shortage", the price of crude is just excuse... 

[dutchie01]

 Fuelprices are the result of supply and demand nothing else. Crude oil pricing is the result of supply and demand. If supply outstrips demand prices fall, if not they rise. Now, if you are so massively big important huge powerful and have the means to influence supply you can control the price. As these products are traded on the worldmarkets it could potentially maybe be interesting to speak to your international competitors and agree a certain productionlevel that is low enough to push worldprices up or at least prevent them from falling. All participants will make more money this way. As we are talking about oil and it sounds like a cartel agreement lets call it something like an oil cartel. Or better lets give it an official name something like Organisation of the Petrol Exporting Countries. In short is sounds even better OPEC! The members are not companies but governments so they are basically above the law. A normal cartel is illegal some sort of matchfixing but in this case who will arrest who? This leads to the next topic of how multinationals like Shell BP or Unilever influence government policies ot the other way around but lets leave that for another time.

Most of the profit of fuel goes to the state in form of taxation. So, would it not be a decent thing to reduce taxes even if momentarily?

[Malc1]

Then of course the known reality that Brazil holds the majority of the world potential oil yet to be extracted, from its ownership of the seas within its jurisdictions …… the Brazil Govt is possibly merely awaiting the pricing algorithm to get correct to then flood the world with all that black stuff ….. and keep the price sensibly high enough 

Democratic Brazil just might improve its nations financials and obliterate a few other countries in the process ….. now then, which Oil-igarks / Companies might it use to do this dirty deed …… Exxon. Bp. Shell ……. then maybe link into the Falklands HUMUNGOUS oil reserves too ….. oh, they’re British and would be OURS to reduce OUR dependency on OPEC+ or whatever and fill our Govts coffers with spondoolies £££    😂👍

Then we could enjoy almost zero cost( ex tax ) fuel at the pumps …….. hahahaha that will NEVER come about 

Heaven knows when any Govt will allow us to economically run our cars ……. Probably never 👎 ….. whatever the fuel ! 

Cest  le vie

Malc 

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, dutchie01 said:

 Fuelprices are the result of supply and demand nothing else. Crude oil pricing is the result of supply and demand. If supply outstrips demand prices fall, if not they rise. Now, if you are so massively big important huge powerful and have the means to influence supply you can control the price. As these products are traded on the worldmarkets it could potentially maybe be interesting to speak to your international competitors and agree a certain productionlevel that is low enough to push worldprices up or at least prevent them from falling. All participants will make more money this way. As we are talking about oil and it sounds like a cartel agreement lets call it something like an oil cartel. Or better lets give it an official name something like Organisation of the Petrol Exporting Countries. In short is sounds even better OPEC! The members are not companies but governments so they are basically above the law. A normal cartel is illegal some sort of matchfixing but in this case who will arrest who? This leads to the next topic of how multinationals like Shell BP or Unilever influence government policies ot the other way around but lets leave that for another time.

Most of the profit of fuel goes to the state in form of taxation. So, would it not be a decent thing to reduce taxes even if momentarily?

Cartels certainly have big impact... but they only impact the price of crude oil. Yet as I have said ~$80 a barrel isn't actually historically high price, yet prices in the pumps are historically high. In short - blaming OPEC is common excuse given by other parties profiteering in the supply chain. I do hate OPEC, especially the so called "OPEC+" with ruzzia, because now they further their geopolitical goals by cutting the production when it suits their goals and artificially increasing prices, and probably generally due to principle of free market, in other hand I do appreciate that middle east is pretty much desert, so it does make sense for them to get "fair price" for their natural resources, because when they run out they will be back to breeding camels in the desert. So apart of using it to literally finance the war, I can see the point of OPEC protecting the interest of people of oil producing countries (or their rulers more likely).

As I have already said - the cost of crude oil does not correlate to price at the pump, so OPEC to be honest is not to blame. Sure when crude prices goes-up out pump price goes up, but that is more of retailers and refiners profiteering and just using it as excuse. Have you noticed how every time when crude price goes-up the prices at the stations goes-up overnight, sometimes even during the day, yet the prices of crude drops they always say "we have to sell off old stock first", yet it seems they never have "old cheap stock", only "old expensive stock". Does anyone remember when in beginning of certain virus barrel prices was negative? So that literally means refineries were paid to take crude oil. Somehow I don't remember retailers paying money for people to fill-up their tanks... I know that would be ridiculous, but it was completely reasonable to expect solid 20-30p drops to prices like 99p, yet that never happened. 

So why our oil is expensive then?

I would say primarily 2 reasons:

- weakened UK economy and £, this is due to some stupid decision by our government and "people". As crude is traded in $, the $80/barrel now costs £63, whereas in 2007 it was just £39.

- profiteering in the supply chain, big multinationals and retailers simply feeling like they can charge whatever they like, because of overall hostility towards motorists.  In the past they would get pressure from the government to be reasonable, whereas now stupid fuel prices almost supports the policy by just being stupid. We can even quantify the margin here ~20% or 25p, we know part of this is 3% increase in retailers margin from 3% to 6% and another 17% is refining, and BP already had healthy margin of ~15%.

- and even thought I said 2 reasons... there is kind of third reason - excessive taxation! Even if petrol would be free we would still pay 65p for it at the pump. It is kind of hard to blame retailers for profiteering when everything combined they don't earn even half of what government takes. Essentially government telling oil industry to stop excessive profiteering is most hypocrite thing ever. And especially now as we looking in a way to reduce inflation cut of fuel duties would be win-win, not only it would stimulate the economy, but as well it would literally reduce the inflation itself when the cost of many goods could be as much as 30% in transportation alone. But forget it... since when reducing the attacks on motorists was the policy of the government (even thought current PM toying with pro-motoring populism idea).

[GMB]

10 hours ago, Malc1 said:

Then of course the known reality that Brazil holds the majority of the world potential oil yet to be extracted, from its ownership of the seas within its jurisdictions …… the Brazil Govt is possibly merely awaiting the pricing algorithm to get correct to then flood the world with all that black stuff ….. and keep the price sensibly high enough 

Democratic Brazil just might improve its nations financials and obliterate a few other countries in the process ….. now then, which Oil-igarks / Companies might it use to do this dirty deed …… Exxon. Bp. Shell ……. then maybe link into the Falklands HUMUNGOUS oil reserves too ….. oh, they’re British and would be OURS to reduce OUR dependency on OPEC+ or whatever and fill our Govts coffers with spondoolies £££    😂👍

Then we could enjoy almost zero cost( ex tax ) fuel at the pumps …….. hahahaha that will NEVER come about 

Heaven knows when any Govt will allow us to economically run our cars ……. Probably never 👎 ….. whatever the fuel ! 

Cest  le vie

Malc 

Hi Malc Sorry to be a pain but Life in French is feminine - C'est la vie. Maybe that is why life can sometimes be difficult?

Another funny French one - If a woman gives evidence in court she is female but if she is a witness she becomes male!

 I.e. le témoin.  Cars and vans are females but trucks are male.........  Don't ask  😇

[Spacewagon52]

2 hours ago, GMB said:

Hi Malc Sorry to be a pain but Life in French is feminine - C'est la vie. Maybe that is why life can sometimes be difficult?

Another funny French one - If a woman gives evidence in court she is female but if she is a witness she becomes male!

 I.e. le témoin.  Cars and vans are females but trucks are male.........  Don't ask  😇

France is a wonderful country ............ just a shame the French live there! We should not have given it back!

[GMB]

1 hour ago, Spacewagon52 said:

France is a wonderful country ............ just a shame the French live there! We should not have given it back!

Absolutely agree David.

We lived there for 18 years and it is a beautiful uncrowded country. Our idea was to send all the French to live in the UK and vice versa.

[dutchie01]

Would that mean the British Cuisine in France ??? 

[Spacewagon52]

32 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

Would that mean the British Cuisine in France ??? 

No, we can pinch their wonderful recipies!

[Malc1]

so what's the price of fuel in France these days ?

Malc

[Cotswold Pete]

6 hours ago, GMB said:

  Cars and vans are females but trucks are male.........  Don't ask  😇

I was once told many years ago by a native french speaker that female gender is used when it is an item that you put things in (la voiture, la batteux, la verre), where as masculine was when you put things on or the thing that you put in (whatever the female item you are going to insert it into), (le camion, le metro), Why it is le temoin, who knows, but maybe in years gone by women would not be considered to be fit to give evidence so it would have been a bloke.

[GMB]

11 minutes ago, Cotswold Pete said:

I was once told many years ago by a native french speaker that female gender is used when it is an item that you put things in (la voiture, la batteux, la verre), where as masculine was when you put things on or the thing that you put in (whatever the female item you are going to insert it into), (le camion, le metro), Why it is le temoin, who knows, but maybe in years gone by women would not be considered to be fit to give evidence so it would have been a bloke.

Now then Pete let's not try to understand the French Psyche, that's a losing wicket!😵‍💫

True story - sign in a café in Montpellier:

Café - 1.70

Un café SVP - 1.50

Bonjour Monsieur un café SVP -1.30

 

BTW SVP is s'il vous plait,    or  (if) you please      for all our anglophile mates.