If you've been reading the latest news stories on how "the growing Libyan conflict is affecting crude oil prices," you're probably scratching your head in confusion.
The reason being: The stories don't match up. Here, the following August 23 news feed captures the conflicting messages coming out of the popular news channels:
- August 23, 10:18 AM: Ongoing discord clouds the future outlook of Libya's oil output: "Oil Prices Wobble As Fresh Fighting Erupts In Tripoli. The state of the country's oil infrastructure remains unknown."
- August 23, 11:45 AM: Ongoing discord pushes oil prices up: "Oil Up On Libyan Strife... Supporting Brent crude prices was the continued fighting in Libya."
- August 23, 12:30 PM: No more discord. Oil prices turn down: "Big Investment Banks Began To Lower Their Oil Prices Forecasts On Improving Prospects For A Return Of Libyan Crude Oil Supplies."
This only shows you how pinning trend changes on events -- especially one as complex and changeable as the Libyan conflict -- makes it impossible to anticipate said market's near-term moves.
That's where Elliott wave analysis stands apart from "fundamental" analysis. Elliotticians approach a market from a purely objective standpoint, identifying the Elliott wave structure underway in prices-- instead of guessing on the outcome of the news' "impact."
Here, EWI's
Energy Specialty Service is the premier resource for near-term and intraday forecasts for crude oil. In fact, on August 22 -- the very day that Libyan rebels infiltrated the capitol city of Tripoli --
Energy Specialty Service editor Steven Craig sent me an email in which he removed the supposed "wild card" of Libya and focused entirely on the Elliott wave set-up underway.
In Steve's own words:
"The petroleum complex as a whole [offers the most favorable opportunity] right now. If I had to choose one market, it would be Brent... regardless of whether Libyan production comes back on line or not."