LNG

Halbaras

South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines are also brutally dependent on oil/gas imports from the Gulf. The American narratives about 'haha we fucked over Europe again' miss that the biggest losers are the Gulf States themselves, and then their third key bloc of allies in East Asia. Japan and South Korea have comparatively large SPRs to draw down, but that buys time and doesn't solve the problem if the Strait stays shut. When contracts/hedging expires, all the energy intensive semiconductor manufacturing is going to see brutal price hikes. Taiwan is fucked when it comes to LNG specifically, so TSMC's margins will be squeezed sooner. 'But it will be good for Micron!', Reddit will cry. It won't be good for anyone buying memory, not when all the manufacturers are running at capacity and prices are already exorbitant. If the blockades are still going come autumn the AI boom is in danger from multiple angles - Asian supply chains, the Fed, recession risk endangering AI enterprise spend, and the fact that data centres are bottlenecked by increasingly expensive energy.

caperadium

Brother LNG cannot be transported by rail in any meaningful capacity 

RadagastDaGreen

Okay fine. They're calls. The LNG pulls into Panama, the vessel is turned away and told to lose 40% of their cargo. They will head up to San Diego or Vancouver and use freight.

Leveraged_Lots

Natural gas free in some prices due to oversupply, sure the construction of datacenters and LNG Infrastructure will likely be a substantial tailwind for prices but it still is mostly a byproduct of oil-production. There's a reason natural gas is known as a widow-maker trade, the infrastructure simply isn't built out enough yet to support stable prices. It is undoubtedly a very important fuel for the future and that's why I do have some focused exposure twords it, but I still don't believe it merits the same attention or allocation in one's portfolio, as crude oil.

RoyaleWCheese_OK

Nearly all capital is going in to natural gas , LNG, NGL and purity products. Missed the boat. Oil is way too boom and bust on OPECs whims.

MoreHuman_ThanHuman

too many people are acting like 30% of the world's oil and LNG doesn't flow from the two most active theaters of ww3, qnd that there's no end in sight.

ChairmanMeow1986

So I'm with you on the fact that available cargo's will sell for a premium, because of the inelastic demand (although there is certainly room for significant demand destruction, as well as things like China's ramping up it of coal plants production and limiting commuter traffic in a variety of ways). However what I don't find bullish for shipping conglomerates (and perhaps I'm missing some nuances as I haven't explored this much) is that as far as I can tell most own their own ships. So as you said many tankers will need significant drydock time and repairs before they can be used to generate revenue. That's straight up capital expenditure and time (insurance isn't cover that) to get those assets back to generating revenue. That hardly seems bullish to me. I agree that profit per tanker/cargo ship will increase dramatically, but I think you are absolutely glossing over the fact that they will have *less ships* making *any* profit while needing to spend money overhauling assets for months while they earn nothing. Even if we ignore repair, patience, and the associated costs of the non-revenue generating assets that your 'bullish' thesis posits. I'm still not sure it makes sense. I don't know the numbers, but other main concern about your thesis is something along the lines of if having 100 ships that make 1 million dollars a month gives you the same revenue of 50 ships that make 2 million dollars month. Now that's obviously overly simplistic, as their are associated overhead cost etc, but my overall point is that I just don't think this situation is very bullish for cargo/tanker companies if they have any exposure to Gulf shipping. Your thesis could hold true if you had identified any large shipping firms who specialize in OIL, LNG, or the strategic commodities that are supplied from the straight who had no routes in and out of there. I doubt there's many though.

TomatoSpecialist6879

You've been a bull the past 6 months yet still decided to bet against energy in a time when: 1. Demand completely outpace supply 2. Ongoing oil and LNG shortage that will just get worse as time goes on due to damaged facilities and a strait tug-o-war between US Navy and IRGC Good one OP https://preview.redd.it/2pknarmgua5h1.png?width=612&format=png&auto=webp&s=8238c8f7b13c0e015898c8af0be91519bbe99d43

_hiddenscout

Called this one out back in December. Basically company is shifting to data analytics for LNG/Gas fields which is increasing margins.

Competitive-Ant2876

Don’t get down on ya self, past choices are past choices, a couple bad trade doesn’t make or break you that’s the beauty of the market. Always another opportunity out there just have to find it. It’s all about perspective, and being able to take emotions out of things. Truthfully nobody knows everything, a lot of people just learn as they go and try to not make the same mistake twice. The very first cannabis stock I bought was red white and bloom. They went bankrupt, and I lost 7k. I went back and looked at everything and realized emotion clouded my judgement. The signs were there I just ignored them. I understand filings and financials so for me to ignore them was crazy to me. I will say I’m waiting for a few more percentage points to drop and I’ll buy Cresco. & GTI, and potentially msos calls. I think Cresco will be merged/aquired. Charlie is too connected and Cresco competes in tough states and has good brand power. Trulieve could acquire them. State lay out would fit perfectly and Kim and Charlie spoke about it in the past before the harvest merger. I find it hard to justify msos going crazy because Dan has said numerous times the fund was created because the mso’s where on an otc and he wanted to help with liquidity, well if they uplist then what’s the point of the ETF? What restructuring happens? As far as Tilray goes, idk your reasons but last I check less then half rev came from cannabis, and they acquired brands and then those same brands loss market share. That’s a managerial/operational problem. In my opinion so I’ll never touch them. Blue chips are good, I have some reits that pay monthly. And then traditional blue chips. I don’t think you’ve missed your oil play, depending on what you owned. I think LNG will become massive. And I think we are in arguably one of the most transitional energy & infrastructure phases of my life time. companies like DUK, NEE etc will continue to grow via infrastructure upgrades and rising utility cost due to data centers. They charge to use electricity in the regions while technically having a monopoly for 4-5 years and guaranteed ROI on the build outs/upgrades. And then companies like ormat technologies will be very impactful to traditional oil drilling. Ormat isn’t as known but 67 to 144-148 in less than a year. I think AI is the gold but I think energy/infrastructure/utilities are the shovels. I’d rather be the one selling the shovels. Without the latter AI will stall. You hit load capacity on the grid amongst other things. So these trillion dollar companies or multi billion dollar companies will write a blank check to those infrastructure companies because without them the AI bubble will pop.

FrequentUpperDecker

SpaceX uses high grade jet fuel for falcon and LNG for Starship, that won’t change. They are building LNG terminal / port in Brownsville TX

yessiryessirwigga

Is $VG a scam company? Mines in the strait, $LNG up bigly, $VG falling sharply into close

SteamPunkPascal

You shouldn’t be thinking in terms of what will happen. You should be thinking in scenarios and how your portfolio responds to each scenario. Think in terms of sectors. For example, yes there will be shortages of crude due to drawdown of inventories, but the shortages will affect different sectors of the economy in different parts of the world in different ways due to global logistics. Think about what your biotech portfolio needs to do well. For my portfolio, I have specifically focused on the Permian basin and LNG as a response to this crisis. But I acknowledge different outcomes of the war to figure out how much to be in cash versus invest. I always ask the question “if Hormuz opens today what happens” and I weigh that risk against other realistic scenarios to find a range. I also use options defensively. You can have calls on S&P to protect your investment in the case a tweet or news story by Barrak Ravid tanks the oil markets. But if you have conviction, I would do longer term calls on some Permian Basin basin oil stocks, longer term calls on fertilizer like CF and longer term puts on SPY all expiring in Jan 2027 or later.

JimCasy

Fair points on data centers + LNG exports. That will certainly raise the ceiling on it, need to look at timing on the LNG and who/if any gas providers there are for the data centers.

deeptones

I think my thesis was closer to "energy plays that play off the two biggest macro tailwinds that I'm aware of: Oil shock and AI energy demand". I fed it a variety of tickers and specified that if there were better alternatives, to suggest them. BKR was a novel one it found. I get your critique though, and yeah the thesis is split without being dichotomous. Do you prefer FANG to DVN? They both produce oil, natural gas, and LNG to my knowledge? DVN just seems a bit cheaper to me than FANG in terms of forward P/E and such. Or do you posit that its better to drop both and stick to a more focused thesis?

Leveraged_Lots

It's a stock position, despite calling it a "call option on Nat-Gas" I'm in no hurry to see Natty spike to $5-10/bcf. You could definitely be right, in which case Jerry Jones and crew will drill themselves into bankruptcy and a take a relatively minor loss on the overall portfolio. Or gas does meaningfully increase, especially in their neck of the woods due to LNG coming online and datacenter demand (idk about that one but Jerry thinks so), and they spikes into a nice profit.

monster1151

Macro Voices cover that pretty well. Current expectation is for affected countries (mostly Asian countries with notable Resiliency from SK, Japan, and China) are that most reserves will run out by the end of the month to late July. Most affected countries are stretching what they have by maximizing coal, limiting fuel sales, four day work week, closing down school, etc. Economically stronger countries such as SK and Japan have been releasing their strategic petroleum reserves to sustain their country's usage but also had to implement restrictions and work around. The bigger issue isn't simply the reopening from what I've been hearing. Due to the way oil wells operate, shutting them down isn't just turning a tap off. It is more akin to dumping rocks down a well, metaphorically speaking. It'll take few weeks to months to reopen those wells and supposedly there's no guarantee of oil outflow reaching back to the prewar level. Further compounding issues are structural damages done to energy infrastructure. I believe Qatar experiences significant damage to their LNG extraction system and will supposedly take one year or so of time to repair them. Oil infrastructure did receive damage. While less significant, I can't imagine repair taking a short time on those either, especially if each countries don't have all the parts they need to repair the equipment properly. I haven't heard much about the traffic congestion on both sides of the strait other than there are many ships on both sides, but I do know it takes roughly 6-8 weeks for tankers to arrive at their destination, so there will be some delay on that front too. Trump keeps mentioning that the deal is coming soon while IRGC denies it. I think Taco statement triggers algorithm to suppress the price often enough, but I'm not sure how long that can suppress the oil price before reality sets in. Hopefully the market stays relatively calm, but situation is deteriorating further and further away to a point where Trump's statements may not be sufficient enough to recover the price enough to kick the can further down soon. TL:DR Even if strait opened up today, which I highly doubt, there will be some significant lagtime before flow of energy recover to normal level. The world doesn't really have the time to wait for that as issues are compounding a lot right now and return to normal will take way longer than people expect it to be.

lucy5478

Data centers use helium, which is non substitutable, of which 35% of global supply is trapped behind the strait of Hormuz, with the single largest production center hit by strikes and a minimum of 4-5% global supply offline for a minimum of 3-5 years per the Qatari government. I might add that all of the incentives are for the Qataris specifically to downplay the damage to this facility, not inflate it. Furthermore, the semi-conductor foundries need 6N grade ultra pure helium, which requires highly specialized equipment and is known to only be produced at a handful/small subset of helium production facilities, of which Ras Laffan is one of them and probably the biggest! Their helium supplies may not physically be substitutable by the Western world in the event of a prolonged shutdown, even if we chose to deliver 100% of 6N supplies solely to chip foundries and high tech defense industry applications, although there is very little publicly available data on global capacity for this grade of helium (for obvious reasons). The moment TSMC or NVIDIA announce substantial chip foundry production slowdowns or god forbid shutdowns, the whole tech sector goes tumbling down. It’s all built on revenue growth and earnings projections which require the physical production of more chips! Also, if a deal isn’t reached, or the deal leaves Iran in control of Hormuz and insurers remain too wary to cover ship transit, what do we think happens to AI token and software spend by every non-tech company when oil, LNG, helium, and fertilizer/sulfur inputs to the entire economy rise because somewhere between 20-35% of all of those things are gone?I get that they are more insulated than many industries, but those other industries are what pay their bills.

newday6838

Don't do it. I lost so much money betting the strait would stay closed (and it did). Positions were FANG, DVN, COP, LNG, GLNG. Though the strait stayed closed, demand changed too is what I was told but in any case, there's factors here more than the war and the strait being closed. I don't want back in.

Leveraged_Lots

All true but like I wrote in the post, it's just a call option on Nat-Gas, it has nothing to do with Hormuz in the short-term, long-term however, I think the world will see increasing demand for US LNG, the infrastructure is already being built and I think construction will only increase. CRK will be a long term winner of the increasing LNG capacity.

letmegetviral

LNG long

Leveraged_Lots

Kosmos Energy is up damn-near 200%, African crude and LNG beats green garbage any day.

RoyaleWCheese_OK

Tiny in the scheme of things. Rail? Meh… LNG and gas pipelines are where it’s at.

Neither_End8403

I am a generalist with no financial expertise at all. But I can't "Think of the market then." without thinking of what the global economic situation will be then. I do my own research, by which I mean I subscribe to and read papers of record as well as Bloomberg and *The Economist.* I also prompt Claude and GPT for situational analysis, a recent generation that clearly states my concern is below. I would be glad to hear your counterarguments: Note: humans and AI can make mistakes. # Reappraisal The risk level is now **higher than my earlier base case**, but more unevenly distributed. Markets are currently pricing some probability of a deal: Brent fell to about **$92/bbl** on May 29 on ceasefire hopes. But the physical situation remains much worse than the headline price suggests: the Strait is still far below normal traffic, U.S. blockade enforcement continues, and Reuters reports that even if a deal is reached, ADNOC expects at least **four months** to restore flows to 80% of pre-conflict levels. So the core revision is: > # Military situation The military picture looks like **unstable coercive pause**, not de-escalation. There are negotiations, but the facts on the water still indicate conflict. Reuters reported that U.S. Central Command disabled a vessel trying to reach an Iranian port, after more than 20 warnings, and said the U.S. has redirected at least **115 ships** since the blockade began. The same report notes that the conflict has pushed up energy prices because Iran has mostly closed the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, the oil market has become highly sensitive to deal rumors. Reuters reported that a few supertankers were crossing Hormuz after waiting more than two months, but also that traffic remains far below the roughly **130 ships per day** before the war. That is not normalization; it is a controlled trickle. Military implication: **the war has entered the bargaining-over-chokepoint phase.** That is economically dangerous because a ceasefire announcement may reduce oil prices before actual flow restoration occurs. # Economic situation # 1. Energy shock: still severe, but temporarily repriced lower The IEA described the March disruption as the largest supply disruption in global oil-market history, with flows through Hormuz falling from about **20 mb/d** to a trickle, Gulf production curtailments of at least **10 mb/d**, and emergency stock releases being only a stop-gap if shipping does not resume quickly. The current Brent price near the low $90s reflects deal expectation, not restored supply. Reuters also reports that Citi sees Brent at **$120** if disruption persists, and Wood Mackenzie sees a possible approach toward **$200** if Hormuz stays largely shut until year-end. So: **near-term market risk is slightly lower; physical supply risk remains very high.** # 2. Fertilizer/food shock: risk has worsened This is where my reappraisal moves upward most. World Bank data now show urea prices above **$850/metric ton** in April, up **80% since February**, with Middle Eastern disruptions, Qatar production suspensions, Iran ammonia stoppages, and reduced Indian output from lower LNG supplies. The World Bank projects urea prices up nearly **60% in 2026**, with risks tilted upward if Hormuz disruption persists beyond Q3. The FAO warning is also important: a prolonged Hormuz crisis could become a global agrifood catastrophe by disrupting fertilizer and energy exports, raising food prices, and reducing crop yields, especially in poorer countries with fixed planting calendars. This makes the risk more stagflationary than before. Fertilizer is a delayed inflation channel. Even if oil stabilizes, the food-cost effect can arrive later. # 3. Industrial input shock: now clearly spreading beyond oil Aluminum has become a major secondary channel. Reuters reports that Gulf aluminum production has fallen sharply, that the Gulf accounts for more than a fifth of non-Chinese production, and that physical buyers are paying up even where exchange prices look relatively calm. Reuters also reports that U.S. solar installation costs are rising because aluminum racking systems are more expensive; LME aluminum is up about **15%** since late February and COMEX aluminum futures more than **30%**. That matters because the shock is hitting precisely the investment categories that were supposed to support growth: data centers, grid buildout, solar, electrification, and industrial replacement. # 4. Corporate damage is now visible Reuters’ corporate survey found at least **$25 billion** in costs already reported by global companies, with at least **279 companies** citing the war as a trigger for defensive actions: price increases, production cuts, furloughs, dividend/buyback suspensions, fuel surcharges, and emergency assistance requests. That is no longer only a commodity-market story. It is moving into margins, capex, employment decisions, and consumer prices. # 5. Financial risk: still contained, but asymmetrically dangerous The IMF says global growth is projected at **3.1% in 2026** only under the assumption that the conflict remains limited in duration and scope. It also warns that rising commodity prices, firmer inflation expectations, tighter financial conditions, high public debt, and eroded policy buffers create downside risk. The IMF’s financial-stability report says markets have functioned orderly so far, but risks are asymmetric: longer conflict could tighten financial conditions abruptly, while stretched equity valuations, AI concentration, sovereign rollover risk, nonbank leverage, and private-credit borrower stress could amplify the shock. This is the depression/stagflation hinge. The real economy is already impaired. The next question is whether the financial system starts repricing risk violently.

BuyTheFuckingDipss

Ladies LNG and Oil is flowing again!!! Drill Baby Drill!!!

Boring-Test5522

Natural gas & LNG are the game to play

BuyTheFuckingDipss

Looks like 15 were LNG and 25 were oil tankers. The remaining ones we listed as “others”

hodd01

we have so much extra natural gas in the US that the permain basin pays people to take it, or they pay to burn it via a flare. Until LNG expansion does a 5x natural gas is going to be the backbone of AI energy consumption.

Boring-Test5522

LNG and WMB my regards

danisanub

BRUN: like NBIS and Coreweave, but they have customers prepay to finance expansion. Very high EBITDA margins. SLS: promising data for AML vaccine. It either goes to $20-40 or to near $0 AMRQF: hold the most mineral exploration rights in Greenland. Gold mine is producing and scaling up, better yields than expected. Found germanium and gallium (rare earths) on some of their sites. Talk of Danish and US buying equity stakes. Uplisting on LSE soon. TMC: riskiest play and smallest position, underwater sea floor mining. Bought calls for this. ABXXF: Singapore based commodities exchange to challenge COMEX with better technology. Gold exchange is doing well and silver just opened. Going into LNG soon. Great leadership. Confident on this one. KRKNF: underwater drones and sensor tech. I think we see underwater drones become a second wave since the adoption of aerial drones. Not financial advice, these are my personal investments. Do your own research.

Boring-Test5522

LNG & energy infra. They pay high dividend, stocks dont swing up and down 20% per day. AI needs them too.

Opposite_Day_9771

How is this possible with LNG, oil, and other chemicals in short supply? Gulf facilities destroyed or damaged. Majority of the chips, wires, fans, and other equipment are in East Asia. They're rationing and working from home. 100% sold for the year doesn't mean money in the bank. You still have to deliver the goods. 50% data centers on hold or cancel. There's not enough energy.

cinnamon-toast-fox

Look at the SPCX disclosures in their S-1 about the xAI contract with anthropic. look at revenue per GPU hour and compare that to IREN’s deals with MSFT and NVDA. you will see the xAI contract generates 2x the revenue per GPU since they are directly contracted with the AI end user (in this case anthropic but could be any AI lab) instead of contracting with a hyperscaler who essentially acts as a middle man renting out the GPUs. that is what iren is going for in its next contracts that could be anncd before the GPUs power up in 2H…and could lead them to raise the ARR guides. also they gave NVDA a crapload of equity and big incentive to keep IREN at the front of the line / largest allocations for new chips. IREN building a wall of cash flow similar to how Cheniere LNG was built. happy hunting

EpiphyticOrchid8927

Leapords eating trumps face Canada and Germany are announcing an LNG supply deal tomorrow with gas sourced from the proposed Ksi Lisims export terminal on BC's north coast

Fancy_Rice_2799

Who gives a shit about LNG in summer?

taffy_laffy

>QatarEnergy said it would extend the force majeure on its exports of liquefied natural gas until the middle of August, >Originally, the force majeure was set to run until early July. The declaration followed Iranian strikes on Qatar’s LNG hub that caused extensive damage. >The shutdown affects LNG output as well as downstream products including urea, polymers, methanol and aluminum. Its over.

Th1rt13n

Ships sail each day now. Even LNG tankers What are you on about?!

BuyTheFuckingDipss

33 ships in last 24 hours, dig deep and you will see a number of LNG and oil tankers

BuyTheFuckingDipss

LNG and OIL movements is steadily increasing thru the so called “Strait of America”

Orkapork

Unsure but largely it doesn't matter until there are daily oil and LNG tankers floating in AND out. I don't think the USA is ready to permanently allow Iran to toll the straight yet so I don't think a deal is here. I'd suspect to see the USA agree around late July personally.

NVDA_Gaped_Me

Good point, and that works for the VLCCs, not sure what the calc would be for cargo containers or LNG ships. If you know, even a rough approximation, let's update the calculation.

Wild-Astronomer1200

I’m holding 15.5 K shares that I have accumulated through both major dips so I am up right now I think around $85,000 I can definitely see this stock going 2X within the next 6 to 12 months Q2 earnings are going to be the big turning point when all the spot cargoes being sold it massive profit get released They have massive additions coming online later this year that are going to drastically increase. They’re already massive LNG output. I’m in it for the long haul doubtful I ever sell any shares I can see the stock getting to $30-$40 per share in the next two or three years if not sooner Happily the 5 to 10 year outlook is going to be massive. Huge dividends should kick in right around that timeframe if not sooner.

RadFriday

LNG processing is critical for helium production, which semiconductors rely on heavily for an inert gas

koshgeo

My guess is the price is buffered by the expectation of a sudden release of an enormous amount of pent-up supply at some point, even with the time lag between the release and actual delivery. Nobody wants to be paying $150/barrel when it could be $80/barrel post-deal in a week. They are anticipating the fall, and that's rounding off the peak. The thing is, you're right about the principles. If deliveries start not being met due to the real practicalities rather than speculation, and countries get desperate because of low stock of oil and LNG, there's going to be a bidding war on whatever is left at some point. The problem is we don't really know for sure when that is or how quickly the market will notice something has changed and respond to it. Everyone is hoping things will be resolved before we hit that second crisis, and it's 12 weeks and counting.

Only_Year_2466

I think VG is languishing lately entirely because of an expected imminent “peace” deal which should be just around the corner, running on 6 weeks. People are first waiting to see where the JKM forward curve settles in the days following peace whenever that is. On the one hand, we were staring at a huge surplus of LNG heading into 2026, and now we have a double whammy with both considerable damage at Ras Laffan affecting 20% of Qatar’s total LNG production and up to 7% of global supply. This damage may take as much as 3 years to replace… while at the same time, we keep eating into our inventory stocks globally the longer it takes… which means the price of JKM as an example should by all means remain wide, probably not as wide as it is currently, but wider than the $10-$11/btu it was at pre-war. But until that forward price curve settles down to a level that reflects the new world for the next 3 years where we are both rebuilding offline capacity while also re-building above ground stock… it’s hard to really assign any long term EBItDA projection to VG in the immediate term. I keep waiting for the hopeful peace deal, immediate drop in JKM, and hopeful selloff in VG on that day(s) following with which to build my position 

ChairmanMeow1986

I didn't see the DTE and thought it was July on first read, what in the WSB lol. First this is a Options on futures, not futures and it's a spread not a naked sell and not two bought puts, so at worst they are out the premium payed. Unless there's something I'm not understanding, it's a 90/91Spread. Which means they did something like buy 91 out and sell a 90 to profit quick directional price movement or if it actually moves to 90$ or below profit 1$ per barrel of x100 x# of spreads. OP's 134 million of barrels thing is confusion as far as I can tell. \--- Beyond that though, most futures contracts never end with someone physically taking barrels of oil. The vast majority are closed, rolled, or cash-settled before delivery. The people trading July Brent contracts are often airlines, refiners, producers, hedge funds, banks, and speculators managing exposure rather than lining up tanker trucks. "If they left the Middle East today they would not get somewhere until about mid-August.” Brent doesn't work like that, it's a broader basket of crude streams. Cargoes come from multiple regions and can be redirected. Physical markets also draw from, inventories already in storage, floating storage, strategic reserves, existing cargoes already in transit, alternative suppliers. So it very much is just about the cost of a barrel of oil *at that time*, not really to do with where *new* oil from the gulf region is in it's physical out flow. China has repeatedly done this, more with LNG than crude oil itself. They basically re-sold long-term contracts for shipments in the future, basically redirecting those cargoes to buyers that need them more in the pacific. Basically reshuffling flows and perhaps export flows. It doesn't seem to be much yet directly, but China did recently resume permitting refined oil exports, which had been severely restricted early in the crisis. This gradual release of aviation fuel, diesel, and gasoline is actively helping to stabilize supply constraints across Asian economies. There massive petroleum hoard, like the global strategic reserve that got tapped early into the war, there are other sources of oil on the market that could come into play if the flow of oil out of the Gulf could normalize. Even at reduced volume would probably be fine as long as it was consistent. TLDR: The point of being that the physical price of Brent for July is not just based on new outflow of oil specifically from Hormuz, it's a based on all oil outflow, anticipated supply, demand at what prices, reserves, etc. More so it

Competitive-Water944

I got shares and June calls. Plan on rolling those out to August if needed. I like the underlying fundamentals of the company. Will continue adding shares on large pullbacks but probably done averaging down on calls for now. I feel like I’m missing something though because it appears too good to be true and LNG is not within my circle of competence if I’m being honest

Antilokhos

I feel like the value here is NEXT, not VG. Not that VG is bad, but NEXT has more time to production so there's more profit possible as a long term hold. That said, all LNG stocks have popped off due to the current administration shutting down Hormuz. I wouldn't buy anything right now, but I do have a bunch of NEXT I scored in the $4s

oberwolfach

Venture Global is heavily loaded with debt and there is likely to be a global LNG glut once the current Middle East situation settles down and the Qatar LNG expansion that has been in the works since 2019 comes online. Growth isn’t everything; compare with the shale producers from the early 2010s that incinerated hundreds of billions of dollars growing into a market glut.

tachyonvelocity

No, that's incorrect. There has been little actual damage to oil facilities, the major damage has been to LNG, which takes more than a year to get back, because LNG liquefaction requires specialized facilities. Qatar LNG said \~20% of LNG requires 2 years of repair. Oil production is very simple and not even concentrated so Iran can't damage much of it in the first place. Iran could hit pipelines, but they're easy to repair and Iran hasn't actually done so.

Mguidr1

Very accurate post. Let me add to this from the perspective of an investor in VG and someone who lives in the area and works at a local refinery. I currently own 4800 shares of VG at an average of $8.60 a share. Let me explain why I intend to buy more shares when the share value dips. The construction of the CP2 project that is currently underway is massive and ahead of schedule. They are already moving trains in and are on pace to start production in June of 2027. There are around 4000 contractors working to make this happen. Where I work we have seen a workforce reduction due to hiring from Venture global. These are our best people and I’d be there right along with them if I wasn’t retiring this year. I have also worked with people on the venture global team in the past and can attest to their competence and work ethic. Let’s talk about the pipeline from Sourlake Tx. This is never discussed but is very relevant. I pass this pipeline every week in several places along its route from Texas because I have a house in Texas. This project alone is massive and will have several junctions and will also become a money maker. They are making good progress as well. VG is already expanding CP2 by 4 additional trains from the original plans. They are building ships to transport their LNG to markets as well. Right behind CP2 is CP3. There are few investment opportunities as good as VG and I’m in it for the long term. It is a steal at current value and should be at least $20 per share at current levels.

TreGet234

Time go heavy long on LNG?

JafarFromAfar2

China has officially started buying US LNG again (hadn’t done so since Feb 2025) and people seriously think 🥭 wants the Strait to open https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/four-us-lng-vessels-sailing-china-after-trump-xi-summit-2026-05-19/

Longjumping-Bonus723

🚨 Two Chinese VLCCs carrying 4 mb of Iraqi oil have crossed the Strait of Hormuz and are now heading straight for the US blockade. If they’re allowed to pass, it means Trump and Xi have quietly agreed to let it happen. Meanwhile, 4 LNG carriers are on their way to China to deliver US LNG ... so they have a deal!

Own-Cauliflower-6992

> LNG. It’s not DIRECTLY bought by Germany, but there’s some Houdini shit where things are offloaded into Europe from Russia where they end up in an intercontinental market where it’s then bought by Germany. Biden put a price cap on the oil + LNG Russia was able to sell. India said that was stupid and simply bought discounted oil + lng from Russia and then resold it in the open market. Everyone paid India more for oil they were already buying anyway so they could look politically correct.

xViscount

Yes. Even Germany. 1. Oil. There’s not an embargo on a certain pipeline that I can’t spell. 2. LNG. It’s not DIRECTLY bought by Germany, but there’s some Houdini shit where things are offloaded into Europe from Russia where they end up in an intercontinental market where it’s then bought by Germany. I’m not criticizing Germany. They should buy Russian energy. If choosing for their people to freeze and run low on energy, buying Russian energy is the correct decision.

xViscount

Or…because Europe still bought Russian oil and LNG. Just at discounted prices.

AgentBlackwell

Im boring, and Canadian, but power.... everything power, whether thats [power.to](http://power.to) the financial holding company, capital power (CPX.TO) the power generation company, Hydro one (H.TO) for power supply, and fringe players like PEY.TO for LNG into power. I could be wrong but I think its all about power.

dimdada

Wow, I sold LNG @ $40 after for 3 years. Once I did it 🚀 and then announced dividends. I believed in the stock but didn’t want to wait. That’s one I regret letting go. But I made a nice amount as my cost basis was below $10

WillowgirlIII

You bet! I had a bunch of LNG when it was like $19 a share.

External-Plastic-154

China has already overtaken South Korea industrially in most sectors, and with only semiconductors and LNG carriers still holding a technological edge, if semiconductors collapse, Korea would effectively become subordinate to China. Chinese capital has already penetrated South Korea on a massive scale.

Anymousie

Regarding that $10B debt, what’s your stress test on VG’s debt if the Strait reopens faster than expected? I ask because your case assumes the Strait stays closed long enough for spot prices to stay elevated, storage levels to force buying, and the market to re-rate VG upward. But if a deal gets done in the next 30-60 days and Gulf LNG comes back online, spot prices normalize, VG’s Q2 earnings disappoint relative to the elevated guidance, AND they’re sitting on $10B more debt than their closest comp.

Mental-At-ThirtyFive

The hurt is real. The people that are visibly hurt are the ones in South and SE Asia in countries that do not have LNG supplies. The supply disruption has already led to factory closures and unemployment. I don't know about people in Iran or UAE or whats on ground in Bahrain or Kuwait

fastowl76

Some interesting picks many of which i can agree on. Some thoughts however. I like CRK at a lower price point. Keep in mind that that it is a natural gas play, not an oil play. A Haynseville driller so is well situated for expanding LNG exports as well as eastern US power generation. That being said, incremental LNG is slow to come online, the next increase, Golden Pass trains are in the midst of completion over the next 9 months. But in a 110 bcfd market in the US the incremental demand at the next 2 GP trains is only about 1.5 bcfd. Generally speaking the LNG terminals run near capacity and the rest of the North American gas market is a closed system subject to weather and power demand. Prices do not generally move with crude. Worse if crude drilling picks up, the nat gas supply will increase faster than demand does. Long term nat gas demand is growing but the next 12 months? Not that significant. Just an example of some items on your list.

Humble-Witness6933

used Chatslide for my VG notes. setup was kinda clunky but made a 12-slide deck in 4 min. about your LNG thesis, what's your exit plan?

rair21

VLO, PBF, MPC for refiners. VG, LNG for nat gas. VG just posted great earnings and is going to be a HUGE gas producer in 2027.

Jeff__Skilling

No, it basically trades like a bond. That's how most of these LNG liquidification companies trade -- like +80% of their supply and offtake are all at fixed volumes and prices (which OP mentions) and those projects are all (generally) underwritten with fixed rate bonds. We know what all the cash flows look like -- both in and out -- save for their spot exposure (or any open liquification capacity), so their shares are going to trade like a bond since the same cash flow / risk fundamentals apply.

blacksiddis

I work in gas/LNG. The industry consensus has and still is that supply will outpace demand. SoH just delays the glut.

mithyyyy

i like your thesis overall but i do think you're underestimating the willingness of some parties to enter within the LNG trade, nor how much expansion has been built on the infrastructure front. coastal gaslink is probably my main example when it comes to this. LNG production with canada was massively hampered in the past because of the federal government and a lot of first nations protests, but (after paying out the tribes and a shift in government), CGL is more-or-less operational. the whole point of the project was to pump LNG into asia and canadian LNG has the benefits of avoiding all bottlenecks like hormuz or suez that most other LNG producers suffer from, making CAD LNG much cheaper to ship ($0.96 mmbtu vs $2.22 mmbtu for gulf, where VG operates). there's a shit ton of progress being made here and this hormuz shabang is shooting roids into it. obviously in the near term, canada isn't going to be pumping at usual american levels, but i think it's unfair to say that the infrastructure isn't completely there, nor that it's too unfavourable now to enter.

Illustrious-Aside522

Did not see any mentions about the red flags, so I asked AI: VG is **not a low-risk LNG infrastructure stock**. It is more of a leveraged LNG growth vehicle. The bull case is clear: massive LNG demand, U.S. export advantage, big production ramp, strong 2026 EBITDA, and geopolitical upside. But the red flags are also very clear: **Debt is high, legal risk is material, future capex is massive, LNG spreads are volatile, and project execution must go almost perfectly.**

curveball21

I like your enthusiasm, but I would cauton that transport is a real problem wth your thesis. You can't just build new LNG tankers overnight and all the current ones are booked for a while.

JafarFromAfar2

It’s the same concept as oil companies wanting the long term price for crude to be $70ish. Too low and your margins crater, too high and demand wanes + inflation persists. Everyone in the LNG industry wants to make sure that there’s consistently enough demand before they invest in costly infrastructure. If an entity like Cheniere went overboard and added 100 MPTA of production capacity, they would not be able to find enough demand for their new supply. Their profit margins would crater and they would lose billions of dollars while waiting for demand to catch back up. So all these teams of people that are working on proposals and planning new projects have to be 100% sure that their efforts will bear fruit. They need to account for competitors’ projects that will finish before theirs do, and they need to confidently project that there will be enough demand to satisfy their additional supply (which you can’t accurately do far into the future). Additionally, most shareholders of conglomerates like XOM or SHEL would much rather have profits immediately returned in the form of dividends or buybacks.

RudeNewYorker

For a company in the energy sector, that already has a hand in LNG, that already invested in construction on the 5 year to profit timeline, why wouldn’t they do it again? Especially as demand is predicted to be higher than supply. Ok say you have a crew of people that are building out the construction project. Instead of hire then fire a crew every time you have a project, you set up projects so as one finishes, they simply move to the next one. That’s how construction companies and large players manage these construction teams. So one could assume one of the following will happen. 1. The crews that finish jobs currently under construction are then moved to new jobs over the next 5 years. 2. Crews that finish jobs currently under construction are let go and no one develops any new projects in LNG even though there’s a projected increase in demand and dwindling supply. Which is more likely? Personally I think that there are teams of people working on proposals and planning new projects because that’s their whole job function at these companies. I think that LNG having a very steady (if not projected increased) supply curve over the next five years indicates that many companies are projecting that they’re very interested in investing in construction and taking a profit in 5 years (which btw is not very long at all in terms of enterprise, especially those in energy, a nuclear power plant takes 6-8 years, plus polo at all the projected construction, they’re obviously investing in these construction projects with the same 5 year timeline, one could say at an even higher rate than before). We can look at it another way. In this graph you have demand growth projected in blue. Why don’t we project supply growth by protecting a straight line from 5 years ago, to 5 years from now, and continue that pattern for another 5 years. You’ll see that the projected supply hits right in the middle of projected demand. When you don’t have future projections for supply, you can’t just say ok it’s going to be 0 for as long as I have projected data for demand. You should project continued growth at the current curve. All you’ve found here is that supply data ends in 5 years, because construction projects take 5 years. You’ve chased and caught your own tail.

Ellen_1234

True, my very regarded ai agents summary: Strait reopens, spot prices crash, VG’s 30% spot exposure gets wrecked. Also: $10B debt, PE 12 for a reason (cap-ex heavy), and if global LNG supply catches up (150M+ new capacity by 2030), their growth story fizzles. Plus, your $17.5 calls expire worthless if the market stays irrational longer than you can stay solvent. TL;DR: High risk, high reward—don’t YOLO your rent money.

Faedro

From AI: "This reads *heavily* AI-assisted, but not fully AI-generated. My estimate: roughly **70–90% AI-written**, then edited by a human who knows trading culture and added some original riffs/jokes." "**Token-padding behavior** Huge portions restate the same point in slightly different wording: > The post could be half as long without losing meaning." **"Suspiciously broad domain fluency** It smoothly jumps between: * geopolitics * LNG logistics * shipping economics * energy infrastructure * investor relations * valuation metrics * macro policy * commodity spreads without the normal “depth variance” humans usually show." Yep yep. You wrote it. Got it.

RudeNewYorker

Ok question. You say that demand will outpace supply in the coming years, about 10 according the graph. But there are planned expansions currently being built to increase supply, just none planned for 10 years or as of today. What makes you think that there won’t be future construction projects to expand the supply, especially as demand increases? Have we constructed all the LNG refineries that we can? Will LNG dry up? Or will construction projects finish over the next 10 years, and then new projects begin, thus increasing the supply?

MountainTwo3845

The US sells LNG at less than half of the rest of the world when you consider boe equivalent. If prices continue to go up their margins fly up.

JafarFromAfar2

I’m pretty sure they also announced 4 additional liquefaction trains for their CP2 bolt-on expansion in the ER (additional meaning on top of their existing expansion plans), which shows how much future demand they are anticipating. Even if competitors like Cheniere decide to start expanding their capacity more, VG has such a huge head start that it really doesn’t matter. It’s by far the best way to get exposure to LNG.

Th1rt13n

Yeah it’s a great CO and great stock No, LNG demand won’t be that high. Hell it only fell now And the US are expanding export capacity: VG, Cheniere, golden Pass and many others A lot of competitors in US alone

Intrepid-Distance-54

I work for venture, by 2030 we will pass cheniere in LNG exports

Dick_Wiener

Isn’t the problem the lack of LNG transport ships? Also that they lose like 50% of the cargo in transit?

A55BAG

European semis are quite expensive and so many companies are suffering from energy prices. My last stock was Technip Energies for hopes of more LNG projects in the future.

AspenSki1988

VG beat earnings. One of the more obvious plays along with NEXT. Buy and hold American LNG, thank me later.

KillerJackRabbits

This guy actually knows what’s up, AI stocks are booming, but people are forgetting it takes energy to run the tech. Energy stocks are being slept on huge right now, especially stocks around LNG. Solar stocks they’re good too if you plan to sit on them for 20 years. But anyways, LNG will be the bridge fuel.

thewimsey

We don't use oil for electricity generation in the US. We do use natural gas, which we get from our own fields. But not LNG; that's what we export.

Rubricity

Which is problematic, not the end state but the process. It is known that MU is currently overvalued in the sense that it builds on a short-term shortage of HBM, and so does Samsung and SK Hynix; however, no one can argue whether this is not a structural change in demand, like the fiber cable in the 1990s. So they have a good argument, not essentially a bad one, but here is the problem: the runway could be significantly longer. The oil industry price transfer is significantly cushioned by the modern supply chain rerouting and countries currently refraining from buying by prioritizing existing storage and IEA releases (note the IEA release number is significantly lower but still remains a cushion) meanwhile LNG source for the main semiconductor players are significantly cushioned as both Taiwan and Korea has so far been able to absorb the cost. Meanwhile, you mentioned a hike, but will Warsh deliver a hike? He could walk into the room and deliver a cut or just hold, as he has steady track of political motivated record that stood firmly with the Republican views. From history and an economic sense, clearly the stock market is irrational and overly concentrated, but not 100 percent decoupled from reality — the final euphoria stage usually involves indiscriminate growth in stocks across all sectors.

Halbaras

Korean and Taiwanese chipmakers are in for a lot of trouble if the Strait stays shut for another couple of quarters, and pain even if it opens now. They rely heavily on LNG, oil and helium from the Gulf. It might be good for Micron temporarily but it's going to be a hit to the likes of NVIDIA when the costs eventually get passed on, and a blow to the wider ecosystem. But if that happens tech will have bigger issues to worry about - their enterprise customers cutting AI spending, the Fed potentially hiking rates and an energy crunch happening just when the data centre rollout was relying on fossil fuels.

Opposite_Day_9771

1.       It’s a bubble because people ignore reality of physical shortages to oil, helium, LNG, and other resources that affect manufacturing. Chip supply chain being stretched and running on inventory. How long before there’s no more inventory? Infrastructures have been destroyed. A peace deal doesn’t fix broken equipment. It takes time and investment. Also, it’s obvious various actors do not want peace and will sabotage it. 2.       I’m winning with my investments. My portfolio keeps going up but I’m also hedging. This is like financial bubble with no doc loans or the dot com bubble. Markets can be irrational. 3.       Covid caused a global recession. The fix was money printing to cause inflation. Can we do that again? Can we have asset bubbles and make middle class and poor people pay more? In the US, the top 10% own 93% of the equities. I’m sure the bottom 90% would want more inflation /s. 4.       This time is different since it’s structural. There’s no more Petro dollar recycling. Iran is the new gatekeeper of Middle East oil. The US stock market is 92% based on intellectual property or intangible assets. With AI, copying is easy which makes the value of these companies super inflated. Software companies are getting killed. 5.       There are lots of posts that do not go into details or misleading at best. Also, up to 75% of trades are bots. They read headlines and execute immediately. I wouldn’t be surprised if people are manipulating the algorithms with bogus stories. Just look at the trends and invest accordingly. If no new information arises but your positions go down, just invest more.   

floridabeach9

farmers in the USA will be fine. LNG is not as globally priced as oil is because its way harder to ship, and the USA creates way too much LNG. i’m kinda tired of people mentioning fertilizer because its crazy cheap.

RiffsThatKill

It takes time, its not an instant impact aside from perception impacts on prices, but we also have AI and chip or tech companies keeping things afloat (whether floating on a bubble or not is still to be seen). Youre already seeing some of it with Spirit going under. Once more serious impacts to fertilizer, helium and other LNG start to accrue there will be more fallout unless something creative is done. Even if the war ended today, some of this might still happen down the road. Delayed fuse, basically.

thenuttyhazlenut

|Ticker|Company|Allocation| |:-|:-|:-| |ACGL|Arch Capital|18.25%| |SGOV|0-3 Month Treasury Bond|12.00%| |CROX|Crocs|11.00%| |ADBE|Adobe|11.00%| |DR|Medical Facilities|11.00%| |QFIN|Qfin Holdings|9.00%| |LNG|Cheniere Energy|7.00%| |JD|JD .Com|6.00%| |THX|Thor Explorations|5.00%| |FMCC|Federal Home Loan Mortgage|4.25%| |QQQ put|Puts|3.00%| |MELI|Mercado Libre|2.50%|

willscuba4food

Ah, then it'll skyrocket in price I imagine since other industries use LNG and marine diesel

SomePolack

Looks like they use marine diesel or LNG so it doesn’t sound the same 

InquisitorCOC

End last year, I mentioned $FNMA as one of my best ideas for 2026 It has not panned out so far, but I did average down to $4.5 range and now I'm up big overall. It's still among my best ideas -------- $BPTRX has 33% of its asset in SpaceX valued at $830 billion (latest funding round). If SpaceX can indeed trade at $2 trillion on its IPO day, as most prediction markets are implying, the gain will be very substantial SpaceX's latest deal with Anthropic can generate $5 billion annually at current GPU rental prices. xAI's investment in its Colossus 1 cluster was ~$7 billion, so this kind of ROI is several times better than pre AI cloud computing -------- I see Energy ($XLE, $MLPX, $FSLR, $LNG) as a hedge in the current environment. This sector is now down since the start of the war, as if the market has already priced in Iran's surrender. I personally don't think it will be that easy. Plus, the AI buildout needs a lot more energy in the years ahead

Rock_or_Rol

The euphoria amidst insane macro risks and pressure into pure speculation at the cost of a failing economy is beyond troubling I’m going to sound like a boomer, but we should be investing in Alaska to US pipelines, LNG liquefaction, refineries, dark manufacturing, scalable housing, LiDAR integrated cloud networks for automated driving.. stuff like that.. not data centers of semis that capex was gouged on and will burn out in a few years or be replaced by more efficient inference compression with a limited victor list LLMs need a NOMINAL improvement to reclaim exponential potential.. as it is, it’s a marginal productivity factor with decelerating growth. It needs to be able to achieve novel thought or self complete a self training loop. I seriously wouldn’t be surprised if 🥭 and Bessent panicked late March and overcorrected with trying to save the market amidst dwindling sentiments.. hyped up mythos with glass wing, earnings manipulation, insider trading to catch the market and implemented shaky SEC stuff like (this)[https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/other/2026/34-105108.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/other/2026/34-105108.pdf). Obviously all speculation, but they were sweating for a few weeks there. JS

Main_War9026

LNG

Rock_or_Rol

I like IMSR for the SMR thing Earnings next week I think they’ll have updated guidance on. Low enrichment HALEU fuel helps supply chain. They’re on the DOE pilot project and are breaking ground soon. Still haven’t been bought up like OKLO and they have a small float. They were awarded a project with RIOT earlier this week. Westinghouse deals I said it after 🥭’s SOTU, but I guarantee you he will subsidize them by the time his term is over. Billionaires seem to all have their own SMR company.. bezos, gates and I’m sure there are others NEXT for US based LNG liquefaction if the UAE/bahrain receive more missiles. It’s the only one in the states and TBH, the US should abso-fucking-lutely subsidize it to expedite its timeline for massive export revenue amidst the Iran and Russia/ukraine conflicts, I doubt they will though. It would make a killing. More of a boomer stock but it has some volatility if you’re interested in more of the investment side of things I think rare earths may be the play again going into China trade talks too… after we’ve been sanctioning them and fucking with their oil? There *has* to be some friction coming up unless we completely capitulate on Iran

Street-Badger

Appreciate how LNG can be off 11% in a week where tankers are getting lit up by Uncle Sam.

Mother-Grapefruit-45

20,000 seafarers stranded on 2,000 vessels around Hormuz. The supply chain isnt just delayed. The people who move it are stuck. Everyone tracks the barrels. Nobody tracks the crew. The IMO says 20,000 seafarers are stranded on roughly 2,000 vessels in and around the Strait of Hormuz. Some have been there since the strait closed in early March. Supplies are running low on multiple ships. Project Freedom launched yesterday to escort vessels through but only 2 US-flagged ships actually transited. Commercial operators arent sending their crews into a strait where Iran just fired 15 missiles at the UAE overnight and the US sunk 7 Iranian boats in response. The commodity angle here isnt just the oil that isnt moving. Its the people who move ALL commodities through that waterway who cant leave. LNG carriers, petrochemical tankers, container ships, bulk carriers. The longer they sit the more crews rotate out or dont, the more maintenance gets deferred, the more insurance costs spike. When the strait reopens you dont just flip a switch. You need 2,000 vessels and their crews ready to move simultaneously. Thats a logistics bottleneck on top of the supply bottleneck. Brent, Some analysts now modeling 200. The human cost of moving from 100 to 200 isnt just the price at the pump. Its the 20,000 people sitting in ships they cant leave.

SonofAngus

True, like the discovery oil and LNG facilities in the gulf are far more fucked than we now know. But withstanding that I think we continue the metals bull run.