aet

"Silver Standard Resources (NASDAQ: SSRI) has set a new standard for silver resources; simply put, its boasts the largest published in-ground silver resource of any publicly-traded silver company," says mining stock specialist Brien Lundin.

In The Gold Newsetter he adds, "We were fortunate over the years that the great idea behind this company was combined with a great management team, as CEO Bob Quartermain is among the best in the business."

"Silver Standard has 1.127 billion ounces in measured and indicated resources, plus another 195 million ounces in proven and probable reserves, and another 456 million ounces in inferred resources.

"Its resources come from a portfolio of properties spanning the globe from Argentina, Peru, and Mexico, to Canada, Chile, the US and Australia. Now the companyis making the transition to production with aggressive development programs on five core properties.

It's bad enough that Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) killed its C2 brand a few years ago -- I still have one memorial (empty) can I keep in my china cabinet for posterity. Now Coke Zero, the soft-drink behemoth's alternative for those of us that don't quite dig the Diet Coke taste, poses a "danger to health" in South America? What the what?

Yesterday, the Venezuelan government ordered Coca-Cola to pull the Coke Zero brand from the country's shelves, claiming unspecified health risks. The nation's health minister simply said that the zero-calorie fizzy drink "should be withdrawn from circulation to preserve the health of Venezuelans."

Very often you can get a sense of the way a market is reacting by what is not happening. OPEC is meeting next Sunday to review their strategy in light of the current financial crisis. There is an indication that OPEC may not cut production this time around. Why is this?

Here are several reasons why we may see things stay as they are. First and foremost is that OPEC members "talk the talk" but they all do not "walk the walk." For example, Saudi Arabia has cut production by 16% since September but Iran cut its production only 4.3% and Venezuela cut its production by 8.3%. So as usual OPEC has difficulty holding each of its members to an agreed upon reduction.

What goes around comes around... and Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan "socialist" president who keeps promoting perpetual referendums to stay in power, has turned his recent attention back to those capitalist dogs he despises so much to bail him out of a tight jam.

After nationalizing agriculture, mining, power and building materials companies over the past few years, which pushed capital flight, Venezuela was reliant on oil for about 93 percent of its export revenue in 2008, up from 69 percent in 1998 when Mr. Chávez was first elected, according to a story in the NY Times.

While the socialist (authoritarian) in him is unhappy as oil is now trading around $35 a barrel today, dealing a severe blow to his misguided notions of economics, the pragmatic side of the former military man is biting his tongue and reaching out to all the major international oil companies he chased off only a short while ago. He is asking them to return and invest to expand exploration, maintain and modernize current facilities and improve over all productivity.

The question is: On what basis would a foreign enterprise dedicate its financial and technical resources to an agreement with a partner that has already ignored previous agreements?

Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) and CEMEX S. A. B. (NYSE: CX) are currently in litigation with the Chavez government. The Chinese and their nationally integrated oil companies have not done well either and remain apprehensive.

How can any deal get done? If it was being done on a smaller scale, you might use third party escrow accounts and ask for money to be set aside in advance, but Venezuela is cash strapped and would find this difficult to do.

One metaphor begets another, so from "what goes around comes around" I end with: Mr. Chavez, we would be happy to come back, but first we will have to see "cash on the barrel-head!"

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture & planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money. DISCLOSURE: I own shares of CX but not XOM .

Oil moved above $46 yesterday. According to The New York Times, "One year after crude oil eclipsed $100 a barrel for the first time, the new year's trading began Friday with prices roughly half their year-earlier levels, and some believe oil could be headed even lower."

It is hard to make a bull case for oil, but not as hard as some imagine.

The stock market yesterday signaled that investors think that the economy is making a bottom and that perhaps the second half of the year will actually bring a recovery. If oil traders buy into that, they will begin to trade futures up. It is a fair assumption that an improving economy will require more crude.

Another, more obvious, reason is that OPEC will cut supply until prices go up. Some oil producers, both inside and outside OPEC, need the money from crude sales to keep their economies from sharp contraction. Russia and Venezuela are high on that list.

People watching the news think the war in Gaza will push prices up by interrupting demand. This is only true if Iran becomes involved and its territory is attacked. That is a long shot.

The large exporter that is very likely to see political turmoil that will cut its production is Nigeria, which is almost never mentioned in the debate over oil prices. Rebels cut supplies there several times last year. Only last week, a well-know militant was arrested by the government. That act could certainly lead to growing rebel activity to hurt the government. Hitting pipelines is not terribly hard. Defending thousands of miles of them is impossible.

The price of oil? Watch Nigeria.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 24/7 Wall St.

OPEC may end up offering the U.S. a larger bailout that the federal government. Data on what Americans spend on gas show that because of the fall in prices at the pump, U.S. drivers are saving $1 billion a day.

According to The Detroit Free Press, "Americans are paying $1 billion less per day for gasoline now compared with mid-July, when the national average price was more than $4 per gallon."

That makes OPEC and other oil-producing countries better friends to the consumer than the federal government is. The new administration is planning to spend about $700 billion over two years to try to increase jobs and stimulate the U.S. economy. The savings on gas over two years, assuming that prices stay where they are, is almost $730 billion.

The gasoline savings do not take into account what American businesses like airlines and petrochemical companies lay out for oil-related products. Trucks that run on diesel also cost much less to operate.

On the back of an envelope, the benefit of cheaper oil is well over $1 trillion over a 24-month period. Perhaps America should have sent Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela a Christmas card.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

What is already known is that OPEC will almost certainly cut production at its December meeting. It has several members with faltering economies, particularly Venezuela and Iran. Even countries like Saudi Arabia would like to begin to see the profits that $70 oil were bringing in.

Rumors are that a production cut could hit two million barrels a day. With demand falling in large economies like the US and China, will that be enough? No one knows, but it is a good bet that if this reduction does not do the trick, there will be another one.

Oil may be pushed down by a second important factor. With prices low, the investment in drilling is dropping sharply, which means that, in the near future, supply will take another hit. According to The Wall Street Journal, "As oil and gas prices fall, drilling activity in the U.S. is slowing more than expected, battering shares of drilling companies, hurting economies in energy-producing states and sowing the seeds for supply shortages when the economy recovers."

It would probably be safe to guess that what it happening in the US is also working its way through drilling operations in other large countries. Oil consumers would have to be especially concerned if this is happening in non-OPEC states like Russia, Mexico and Canada where low oil prices are combining with a deep recession to cut capital expenditures on oil exploration.

The price of oil is going up, and if drilling continues to slow, it may stay up for a long time.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Will crude go up or down before the end of the year? Since it has dropped from $147 in the summer to just above $40 recently and demand is falling, betting on down makes sense.

Americans are using less gas. There is probably little reason to think that will change. Oil imports by China, a huge consumer, dropped in November to their lowest point this year, according to Xinhua news agency.

But, the drop in consumption is a collateral effect of the recession. It is, by some measures, an "accident."

What is not an accident is the need for oil producers to get prices up. Economies including Russia, Venezuela, and Iran count on crude for a great deal of their income and their ability to keep balanced national budgets. Russia, which is not a member of OPEC, will probably work with the cartel to cut production and raise prices.

The market laughed at OPEC cuts in September and oil continued to fall. But members of the cartel are desperate now and will probably take a much different view of what they need to do at their December meeting. Getting oil prices back toward $60 or $70 will be hard, but it is entirely possible.

OPEC ministers have been discussing a production cut of two million barrels a day. It their economic advisers say that is not enough to get prices up sharply, the figure could rise to three million or more.

Prices are going up. OPEC and Russia control too much crude. They can cut supply until the cows come home.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

U.S. consumers have another reason to worry about gas prices. Two of the largest oil-producing nations in the world are forming a military alliance, and neither nation likes the U.S.

According to The Wall Street Journal, "Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez signed new energy agreements with Russia on Friday, shortly after obtaining a $1 billion loan to buy more Russian arms."

Chavez has kicked a number of U.S. and EU oil companies out of his country as he has nationalized the industry. It would not be beyond imagination that Russia and the South American nation would use a combination of oil and guns to try to weaken U.S. influence in its own hemisphere and force America into more military spending to patrol the regions to its south.

Chavez has already begun spreading money around to his neighbors in the hope of being viewed favorably. Having a stronger military presence should help him make the case that he can keep the U.S. from using its power to push him out of his role as the most powerful political figure north of Brazil and south of Mexico.

In the margins of Barron's this week there was a smallish note about the government of Venezuela nationalizing Cemex's (NYSE: CX) operations in that country. For some reason the government of Hugo Chavez thinks that stealing all of the private companies in 'his' country will lead to greater prosperity for 'his' people.

While it is a long journey from Venezuela to Zimbabwe, with its exponential inflation rate and a near-total economic breakdown, every journey begins with a first step. Mr. Chavez will move much closer to this inevitable outcome if he continues on his chosen path.

Motley Fool has a good write-up on the subject in which they detail the sour relations between Chavez and foreign businesses. Chavez recently offered to re-open negotiations with Cemex, but since he has already decided to take the company, that offer is suspect -- you can't negotiate with a gun pointing at you. To date, Chavez has nationalized the telecommunications industry, electricity, and oil. How many steps down the road is that? Why would anyone want to invest in Venezuela?

Economists think they have most of the data they need to forecast the price of oil: The dollar is rising; consumption in the US is falling; production out of OPEC is steady; the drop in crude has driven many speculators out of the game; unrest is receding in Nigeria and Venezuela; huge deposits have been found off Brazil; the hurricane season in the Gulf of Mexico has not disrupted production.

War is harder to predict, but there it is in Georgia. Russia seems intent on destroying the military of its small neighbor state. The U.S. is pushing to keep Russia from escalating the conflict, which is driving extreme tension between Russia and NATO. Russia is an important supplier of crude, and it could decide to use that as leverage to keep the West out of the dust up.

There is some speculation that the Russian government would like to cripple other countries that share it borders to build a geographic "buffer" to its south. NATO may be forced to step in because some of these countries are close to its members' territories.

War is hard to predict and the oil market does not like the unpredictable. Oil prices are about to rise and could get much higher.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 24/7 Wall St.

"Closed-end funds are a terrific way to gain diversified exposure to high-yielding foreign stocks," says global expert Nick Lanyi.

In his High-Yield International, he explains, "My latest closed-end fund pick, First Trust/Aberdeen Emerging Opportunity Fund (NYSE: FEO), gets income any which way it can from the world's fastest-growing economies." Here's his review.

"For U.S. investors looking to broaden their horizons, closed-end funds offer an easy way to gain exposure to a diverse mix of foreign stocks without venturing beyond U.S.-based stock exchanges.

"Not only that, they often provide access to stocks that don't trade in the U.S. -- including companies that only institutional investors (such as a fund manager) can buy.

"But these funds offer a bonus that mutual funds don't: in some cases you can purchase them at a discount to their net asset value (NAV) -- the underlying value of the fund's portfolio.

"That's because closed-end funds trade on the major stock exchanges, just like stocks. Their prices are determined by investor sentiment and supply and demand, in addition to the value of the investments they hold.

"Led by Brett Diment, the management team at Aberdeen Asset Management -- which specializes in emerging markets -- has assembled a portfolio that exposes investors to some of the fastest-growing economies in the world: Brazil, Mexico, China, India, Turkey, Argentina and Venezuela are among the fund's top holdings.

Now and then, a media outlet or analyst will talk about $200 crude. Most analysis shows oil peaking at $160 or so and dropping back over the next few months. The commodity may never trade at $60 again, but most of its rise may be over.

Unfortunately, the picture of the energy world seems to be changing. According to The Wall Street Journal, "Oil's historic ascent from $100 to nearly $150 a barrel in just six months is lending weight to a far grimmer prediction: Crude could reach $200 a barrel by the end of the year." The paper adds that this could mean gas would rise to $6 a gallon.

Oil may actually go higher especially if demand in China and India continues to rise and oil producing countries, including Venezuela and Nigeria, stay politically unstable.

What is truly frightening is what $200 oil would do to the U.S. economy. It would almost certainly send companies in the automotive and airline sectors into Chapter 11. Some consumers could see the cost of gas and heating their homes become as high as 20% to 25% of their total cost of living. That would destroy current retail spending habits.

But the economic effect would be more widespread than the airline and car sectors. Every industry that has to ship large amounts of its products, from newspapers to food processors, would be faced with nearly unimaginable additions to their costs of doing business.

All of that would send the US economy into a long and very deep recession. If nothing is done about oil prices soon, the odds of tremendous trouble go way, way up.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

It is reasonable to believe that as the cost of crude rises, demand will fall. It is in the Economics 101 textbooks. It has to to be true.

Not so, says The International Energy Agency. According to The New York Times, the think tank says "the small decline in oil demand in the industrialized countries will be more than offset by an estimated increase in demand of 3.7 percent a year from 2008 to 2013 in developing countries, particularly in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America."

The argument has the benefit of making sense. Asia, especially China, cannot keep up its GDP growth without gas to drive its transportation industry. It has cut the amount it provides to underwrite the price of diesel and gas, but it has not eliminated the practice. Driving a car or truck on the mainland is still cheap.

In the Middle East and Latin America, many of the countries are net exporters of crude. Brazil recently claimed that it found one of the largest oil deposits ever discovered. The field are just off its coast in the ocean. Many of the nations with excess oil will keep some of that at home to build their own infrastructures.

Oil prices are staying high whether the US can afford that or not.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

Growth is slowing in all regions of the world, and inflation is rising, but the International Monetary Fund's No. 2 person in charge says a repeat of the 1970s stagflation period isn't likely.

IMF First Deputy Managing Director John Lipsky said the "inflation speed-up must be taken seriously as it creates potentially significant challenges to economic stability," Bloomberg News reported Thursday. However, Lipsky added that a return to 1970s-style stagflation isn't likely, but it cannot be totally ruled out.

Oil, commodity-rooted inflation

Further, Lipsky underscored that the current inflation rise is being driven by a fundamental increase in demand for commodities, primarily oil, and to a lesser extent by supply constraints around the world, Thomson Financial reported Thursday via Forbes.com. Hence, the recent price increases are likely to prove finite, Lipsky added, unless these items keep rising more rapidly than other items.

Economist David H. Wang told BloggingStocks Thursday he agreed with Lipsky's categorization of the most-recent rise in inflation but added that government subsidies may prevent a pullback in commodity prices, especially oil. Classic economic theory holds that as the price of a good rises, people will use less of it. However, governments in China, Venezuela and the Middle East, among other nations, subsidize gasoline/fuel, lowering its cost, which discourages conservation, Wang said. The United States does not subsidize motor fuel at the federal level, but individual states do subsidize heating oil/natural gas for low-income citizens.