Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Massive hedge fund algorithms may be distorting oil prices behind the scenes. Economist Philip Pilkington argues that large financial institutions can influence AI-driven trading by flooding markets with specific narratives and keywords that automated systems are trained to react to. Those self-reinforcing algorithms can amplify moves, squeeze positions, and... show more

Mario Nawfal

3,673,273 subscribers

88,321 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Финансы

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

The real price of oil may be hiding in plain sight. Economist & Investment Strategist Philip Pilkington argues the physical crack spread tells a very different story from headline crude prices. Refinery margins suggest the market is still behaving as though oil costs roughly $100 to $110 a barrel, even as futures point much lower. In Pilkington's view, physical demand is exposing what financial markets are obscuring. Philip Pilkington

The real price of oil may be hiding in plain sight. Economist & Investment Strategist Philip Pilkington argues the physical crack spread tells a very different story from headline crude prices. Refinery margins suggest the market is still behaving as though oil costs roughly $100 to $110 a barrel, even as futures point much lower. In Pilkington's view, physical demand is exposing what financial markets are obscuring. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

78,365 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Philip Pilkington explains how Donald Trump and the mainstream media are part of the oil market MANIPULATION to keep prices down: ‘A lot of oil market trading is now done by algorithms, not by people. So these are text recognition-based algorithms, not unlike the AI program that you use to look up research. And it’s a it’s a garbage in garbage out situation. If Trump posts enough keywords in his Truth Social, If Bloomberg News is able to recycle these so-called ‘high trust’ media sources, the trading algorithm will respond to those keywords.’ —Philip Pilkington on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Philip Pilkington explains how Donald Trump and the mainstream media are part of the oil market MANIPULATION to keep prices down: ‘A lot of oil market trading is now done by algorithms, not by people. So these are text recognition-based algorithms, not unlike the AI program that you use to look up research. And it’s a it’s a garbage in garbage out situation. If Trump posts enough keywords in his Truth Social, If Bloomberg News is able to recycle these so-called ‘high trust’ media sources, the trading algorithm will respond to those keywords.’ —Philip Pilkington on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Going Underground

17,512 просмотров • 22 дней назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest lie in global energy markets may be starting to fall apart. For months, we've been told the oil market is under control, but economist Philip Pilkington says that's becoming impossible to sustain. His argument isn't simply that oil prices have been manipulated; it's that the entire strategy is beginning to collide with physical reality. Philip believes officials have been able to suppress futures prices through a combination of AI-driven trading, carefully crafted political messaging, and massive short positions entering the market at key moments. The result? A paper market that looks far calmer than the physical energy market underneath it. But futures contracts don't put diesel into trucks, and optimistic headlines don't refill storage tanks. According to Philip, that's where the strategy is starting to unravel. China is returning to global oil markets, refining margins remain unusually high, physical fuel markets are tightening, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve continues to shrink. Every additional disruption puts more pressure on a system that's already running with far less room for error than it had a few months ago. Philip believes the Trump administration had a plan to carry the energy market safely through the midterms. It relied on temporary diplomacy with Iran, lower Chinese demand and continued releases from America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Then Trump tore up the MOU, China started buying more oil again, and the assumptions behind the entire strategy began to fall apart. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸🇮🇷 The biggest lie in global energy markets may be starting to fall apart. For months, we've been told the oil market is under control, but economist Philip Pilkington says that's becoming impossible to sustain. His argument isn't simply that oil prices have been manipulated; it's that the entire strategy is beginning to collide with physical reality. Philip believes officials have been able to suppress futures prices through a combination of AI-driven trading, carefully crafted political messaging, and massive short positions entering the market at key moments. The result? A paper market that looks far calmer than the physical energy market underneath it. But futures contracts don't put diesel into trucks, and optimistic headlines don't refill storage tanks. According to Philip, that's where the strategy is starting to unravel. China is returning to global oil markets, refining margins remain unusually high, physical fuel markets are tightening, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve continues to shrink. Every additional disruption puts more pressure on a system that's already running with far less room for error than it had a few months ago. Philip believes the Trump administration had a plan to carry the energy market safely through the midterms. It relied on temporary diplomacy with Iran, lower Chinese demand and continued releases from America's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Then Trump tore up the MOU, China started buying more oil again, and the assumptions behind the entire strategy began to fall apart. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

387,423 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸 Economist Philip Pilkington says the Treasury intervened directly in the bond market as interest rates approached what he calls a potential crisis point. The problem? The Fed is supposed to control monetary conditions. The Treasury is now effectively stepping into that territory by issuing short-term debt and using the proceeds to buy longer-term bonds. Pilkington's argument is not that the move was illegal. It's that the optics are terrible. If the Treasury has to intervene because rates are spiraling, while simultaneously appearing to challenge the Fed's role, markets can start asking a much bigger question: Who is actually in control of U.S. financial policy? Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸 Economist Philip Pilkington says the Treasury intervened directly in the bond market as interest rates approached what he calls a potential crisis point. The problem? The Fed is supposed to control monetary conditions. The Treasury is now effectively stepping into that territory by issuing short-term debt and using the proceeds to buy longer-term bonds. Pilkington's argument is not that the move was illegal. It's that the optics are terrible. If the Treasury has to intervene because rates are spiraling, while simultaneously appearing to challenge the Fed's role, markets can start asking a much bigger question: Who is actually in control of U.S. financial policy? Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

65,356 просмотров • 19 дней назад

Philip Pilkington EXPOSES how Donald Trump and corporate news outlets MANIPULATED MARKETS via trading algorithms to keep oil prices suppressed: ‘So Trump said that they have full control over the Strait of Hormuz. Now to me and you, that looks like a clownish thing to say. It looks ridiculous. You’d think why would anyone say that? That’s a ridiculous thing to say. Because robots don’t have a sense of humor, they’ll see that and they’ll give that a weight in their trading algorithm. The big one was the oil glut, three or four weeks ago, when there was a partial reopening. There was never really a partial reopening, but the financial headlines all said that there was going to be an oil glut. Now, anyone with a brain would realise that there would be no oil glut. It made absolutely no sense. The point wasn’t even to convince people, the point was to convince algorithms. And if the algorithms see words like ‘oil glut’, ‘we’ve gained full control over the strait’, ‘ceasefire’, ‘peace deal’… The algorithm will put weights on these keywords if they’re from quote unquote trusted news sources, and then they’ll trade accordingly.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇 Philip Pilkington

Philip Pilkington EXPOSES how Donald Trump and corporate news outlets MANIPULATED MARKETS via trading algorithms to keep oil prices suppressed: ‘So Trump said that they have full control over the Strait of Hormuz. Now to me and you, that looks like a clownish thing to say. It looks ridiculous. You’d think why would anyone say that? That’s a ridiculous thing to say. Because robots don’t have a sense of humor, they’ll see that and they’ll give that a weight in their trading algorithm. The big one was the oil glut, three or four weeks ago, when there was a partial reopening. There was never really a partial reopening, but the financial headlines all said that there was going to be an oil glut. Now, anyone with a brain would realise that there would be no oil glut. It made absolutely no sense. The point wasn’t even to convince people, the point was to convince algorithms. And if the algorithms see words like ‘oil glut’, ‘we’ve gained full control over the strait’, ‘ceasefire’, ‘peace deal’… The algorithm will put weights on these keywords if they’re from quote unquote trusted news sources, and then they’ll trade accordingly.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇 Philip Pilkington

Going Underground

24,356 просмотров • 22 дней назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Philip Pilkington believes the biggest mistake Washington could make is targeting Iran's energy infrastructure. Not because it would fail to inflict damage. But because it could lock the global economy into a crisis that lasts far longer than the war itself. According to Philip, oil markets have remained surprisingly calm because investors still assume escalation can be contained. He argues that assumption disappears the moment energy infrastructure becomes a battlefield. His point is that repairing pipelines, export terminals and refineries takes months, sometimes more than a year. Every strike extends the disruption. Even if the fighting ends quickly, the economic consequences don't. Philip also believes Washington has relied on the ability to repeatedly de-escalate whenever oil prices threatened to spike. If that option disappears, he argues, markets will be forced to confront risks they have largely ignored. His warning goes beyond oil. He believes a prolonged energy shock would hit major importers like Japan first, expose deeper cracks in the global financial system, and eventually put pressure on the U.S. dollar itself. In his view, striking Iran's energy infrastructure wouldn't end the crisis. It would simply make it much harder to stop. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Philip Pilkington believes the biggest mistake Washington could make is targeting Iran's energy infrastructure. Not because it would fail to inflict damage. But because it could lock the global economy into a crisis that lasts far longer than the war itself. According to Philip, oil markets have remained surprisingly calm because investors still assume escalation can be contained. He argues that assumption disappears the moment energy infrastructure becomes a battlefield. His point is that repairing pipelines, export terminals and refineries takes months, sometimes more than a year. Every strike extends the disruption. Even if the fighting ends quickly, the economic consequences don't. Philip also believes Washington has relied on the ability to repeatedly de-escalate whenever oil prices threatened to spike. If that option disappears, he argues, markets will be forced to confront risks they have largely ignored. His warning goes beyond oil. He believes a prolonged energy shock would hit major importers like Japan first, expose deeper cracks in the global financial system, and eventually put pressure on the U.S. dollar itself. In his view, striking Iran's energy infrastructure wouldn't end the crisis. It would simply make it much harder to stop. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

270,753 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump is being protected from the true cost of the Iran war by manipulated markets, and that will make the eventual crash far worse. Hormuz remains disrupted, ships are still being attacked, Bab al-Mandab is under pressure, and there's no end in sight, yet the oil market looks strangely calm. Economist Philip Pilkington says that's the problem. His argument is that the paper oil market is no longer accurately communicating what's happening in the physical economy. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has become extremely effective at keeping markets calm. Headlines about an "oil glut," negotiations and de-escalation feed algorithmic trading systems. Large sell orders appear during thin trading periods, helping trigger momentum algorithms and drive prices lower. Philip even has a name for the mysterious big player he sees repeatedly appearing in these markets: the "Whale of Hormuz." He suspects the intervention is coming from Washington, although he stresses that's his interpretation of the trading patterns rather than something publicly established. And here's the extraordinary part: he thinks Bessent may be too good at his job, because every time the Treasury successfully suppresses the market reaction, Trump gets another signal that everything is fine. Oil hasn't exploded, stocks haven't collapsed, and the economy is still standing, so why end the war? Philip says the financial system that should be screaming at Trump to change course is instead lulling him to sleep. Meanwhile, the actual economic pressure hasn't disappeared; it's simply leaking out somewhere else. Refining margins have blown out, gas is becoming more expensive, food prices are rising, and America's 30-year Treasury yield is pushing toward levels he considers deeply alarming. His fear is that eventually the gap between the paper economy and the physical economy becomes impossible to hide. Iran may understand this better than anyone. Philip believes Tehran's strategy is increasingly becoming: Don't give Trump the deal he wants, keep the economic pressure running, make him pay in the midterms, and if necessary, wait until he's gone in 2029. But Philip thinks the consequences could eventually become much bigger than Trump's presidency, because underneath all of this sits the dollar. China has spent years quietly building the infrastructure for greater international use of the renminbi. Offshore liquidity already exists, trade settlement is expanding, Western institutions have issued Panda bonds, and Chinese borrowing costs can be dramatically lower than equivalent dollar financing. Philip's point is that China doesn't need to overthrow the dollar overnight; it just needs businesses and countries to reach the point where using something else makes more economic sense. And every crisis Washington creates makes that calculation easier. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump is being protected from the true cost of the Iran war by manipulated markets, and that will make the eventual crash far worse. Hormuz remains disrupted, ships are still being attacked, Bab al-Mandab is under pressure, and there's no end in sight, yet the oil market looks strangely calm. Economist Philip Pilkington says that's the problem. His argument is that the paper oil market is no longer accurately communicating what's happening in the physical economy. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has become extremely effective at keeping markets calm. Headlines about an "oil glut," negotiations and de-escalation feed algorithmic trading systems. Large sell orders appear during thin trading periods, helping trigger momentum algorithms and drive prices lower. Philip even has a name for the mysterious big player he sees repeatedly appearing in these markets: the "Whale of Hormuz." He suspects the intervention is coming from Washington, although he stresses that's his interpretation of the trading patterns rather than something publicly established. And here's the extraordinary part: he thinks Bessent may be too good at his job, because every time the Treasury successfully suppresses the market reaction, Trump gets another signal that everything is fine. Oil hasn't exploded, stocks haven't collapsed, and the economy is still standing, so why end the war? Philip says the financial system that should be screaming at Trump to change course is instead lulling him to sleep. Meanwhile, the actual economic pressure hasn't disappeared; it's simply leaking out somewhere else. Refining margins have blown out, gas is becoming more expensive, food prices are rising, and America's 30-year Treasury yield is pushing toward levels he considers deeply alarming. His fear is that eventually the gap between the paper economy and the physical economy becomes impossible to hide. Iran may understand this better than anyone. Philip believes Tehran's strategy is increasingly becoming: Don't give Trump the deal he wants, keep the economic pressure running, make him pay in the midterms, and if necessary, wait until he's gone in 2029. But Philip thinks the consequences could eventually become much bigger than Trump's presidency, because underneath all of this sits the dollar. China has spent years quietly building the infrastructure for greater international use of the renminbi. Offshore liquidity already exists, trade settlement is expanding, Western institutions have issued Panda bonds, and Chinese borrowing costs can be dramatically lower than equivalent dollar financing. Philip's point is that China doesn't need to overthrow the dollar overnight; it just needs businesses and countries to reach the point where using something else makes more economic sense. And every crisis Washington creates makes that calculation easier. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

266,657 просмотров • 28 дней назад

Macroeconomist Philip Pilkington thinks Trump didn't prevent an oil crisis, he hid it long enough to make it worse. For weeks, we were told the Strait of Hormuz disruption wasn't really affecting global supply, and that the market had plenty of breathing room. Philip says almost all of it was fiction. His argument is that the real stress never disappeared; it was simply hidden in the parts of the market almost nobody was paying attention to: strategic petroleum reserves, Chinese refinery policy, Russian diesel restrictions, and physical oil versus paper oil. Then everything started moving at once. China lifted restrictions on its refiners, Russia tightened diesel exports, and oil prices jumped. That wasn't a new crisis beginning; it was the old one finally breaking through. Philip says the Trump administration became so focused on keeping oil prices low that it distorted the market instead of allowing it to adjust naturally. Policymakers chose to give the market cheap energy today by borrowing stability from tomorrow, and now the bill is starting to arrive. He also made a broader point that goes far beyond oil. Markets can absorb bad news, but what they struggle with is pretending reality has changed when it hasn't. Trump may think he bought the economy more time, but Philip thinks he simply delayed the reckoning. And if he's right, the real energy crisis is still waiting around the corner. Philip Pilkington

Macroeconomist Philip Pilkington thinks Trump didn't prevent an oil crisis, he hid it long enough to make it worse. For weeks, we were told the Strait of Hormuz disruption wasn't really affecting global supply, and that the market had plenty of breathing room. Philip says almost all of it was fiction. His argument is that the real stress never disappeared; it was simply hidden in the parts of the market almost nobody was paying attention to: strategic petroleum reserves, Chinese refinery policy, Russian diesel restrictions, and physical oil versus paper oil. Then everything started moving at once. China lifted restrictions on its refiners, Russia tightened diesel exports, and oil prices jumped. That wasn't a new crisis beginning; it was the old one finally breaking through. Philip says the Trump administration became so focused on keeping oil prices low that it distorted the market instead of allowing it to adjust naturally. Policymakers chose to give the market cheap energy today by borrowing stability from tomorrow, and now the bill is starting to arrive. He also made a broader point that goes far beyond oil. Markets can absorb bad news, but what they struggle with is pretending reality has changed when it hasn't. Trump may think he bought the economy more time, but Philip thinks he simply delayed the reckoning. And if he's right, the real energy crisis is still waiting around the corner. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

314,155 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Oil is back near $95. Japanese bond yields are surging. U.S. 30-year yields are back around levels last seen before the 2008 financial crisis. And Philip Pilkington thinks we're watching the early stages of something much bigger. His argument is that the pressure has moved beyond individual geopolitical shocks and become structural. Treasury is trying to suppress long-term borrowing costs. The Fed is signalling tighter policy. Japan is struggling to defend the yen. Meanwhile, the Iran war is pushing energy prices higher and adding another inflationary shock. Pilkington says Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is effectively trapped between the bond market and the Federal Reserve, while Trump's own policies are making the inflation problem harder to contain. And he thinks the usual tricks are running out. Bessent is now publicly pressuring Japan to raise rates and unwind the carry trade, which Pilkington calls an “admission of defeat” for Treasury's attempts to stabilize the situation itself. His warning is extreme: If current trends continue, he fears a serious financial crisis within 3 to 6 months, potentially the worst episode of financial instability the U.S. has faced since the Great Depression. And Washington is escalating against Iran right in the middle of it. Pilkington's concern isn't simply that the war could cause the crisis, but that the financial system may already be entering one, and the war is pouring oil on it. Philip Pilkington

🇮🇷🇺🇸 Oil is back near $95. Japanese bond yields are surging. U.S. 30-year yields are back around levels last seen before the 2008 financial crisis. And Philip Pilkington thinks we're watching the early stages of something much bigger. His argument is that the pressure has moved beyond individual geopolitical shocks and become structural. Treasury is trying to suppress long-term borrowing costs. The Fed is signalling tighter policy. Japan is struggling to defend the yen. Meanwhile, the Iran war is pushing energy prices higher and adding another inflationary shock. Pilkington says Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is effectively trapped between the bond market and the Federal Reserve, while Trump's own policies are making the inflation problem harder to contain. And he thinks the usual tricks are running out. Bessent is now publicly pressuring Japan to raise rates and unwind the carry trade, which Pilkington calls an “admission of defeat” for Treasury's attempts to stabilize the situation itself. His warning is extreme: If current trends continue, he fears a serious financial crisis within 3 to 6 months, potentially the worst episode of financial instability the U.S. has faced since the Great Depression. And Washington is escalating against Iran right in the middle of it. Pilkington's concern isn't simply that the war could cause the crisis, but that the financial system may already be entering one, and the war is pouring oil on it. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

322,082 просмотров • 7 дней назад

🇮🇷 The Iranian rial is approaching 2 million to the dollar, and the financial system holding this war together is cracking in ways that have nothing to do with Iran. Economist Philip Pilkington joins me to break down what is actually happening beneath the headlines: Primary sanctions on Iran are already maxed out, having been at effective maximum pressure since 2012, which is why the real question is secondary sanctions and whether Trump will actually impose them on China. If he does, China will not comply, because folding on Iran would destroy their entire credibility as an alternative to the American-led order. And the economic blowback on the U.S. would be SEVERE: rare earths cut off, the AI bubble popped, treasury markets further destabilized... The rial at 2 million to the dollar is a SYMPTOM. The 'disease' is a global financial system under simultaneous pressure from war, sanctions, currency crises, and a U.S. bond market nobody fully controls anymore. Pleasure as always, Philip Pilkington

🇮🇷 The Iranian rial is approaching 2 million to the dollar, and the financial system holding this war together is cracking in ways that have nothing to do with Iran. Economist Philip Pilkington joins me to break down what is actually happening beneath the headlines: Primary sanctions on Iran are already maxed out, having been at effective maximum pressure since 2012, which is why the real question is secondary sanctions and whether Trump will actually impose them on China. If he does, China will not comply, because folding on Iran would destroy their entire credibility as an alternative to the American-led order. And the economic blowback on the U.S. would be SEVERE: rare earths cut off, the AI bubble popped, treasury markets further destabilized... The rial at 2 million to the dollar is a SYMPTOM. The 'disease' is a global financial system under simultaneous pressure from war, sanctions, currency crises, and a U.S. bond market nobody fully controls anymore. Pleasure as always, Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

331,183 просмотров • 16 дней назад

In most places in the US, you can't trade onion futures. This is because of the the Onion Futures Act of 1958, a U.S. federal law that permanently bans futures trading in onions. As a result, onions are the only commodity explicitly prohibited from futures markets in the United States. The Act came about after an episode in the early 1950s, when onions were actively traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Two men named Vincent Kosuga and Sam Seigel bought up enormous quantities of physical onions, and gained control over storage and distribution. By dominating the available supply, they were able to push prices higher while simultaneously taking large short positions in onion futures, which was a bet that prices would eventually fall. Once their short positions were in place, Kosuga and Seigal released massive amounts of onions back into the market, flooding supply and causing prices to collapse. Accounts from the period describe warehouses overflowing with onions, spoilage accelerating, and farmers unable to sell their crops for prices that even covered transportation costs. The collapse was so severe that some farmers reportedly burned or dumped onions rather than bring them to market.

In most places in the US, you can't trade onion futures. This is because of the the Onion Futures Act of 1958, a U.S. federal law that permanently bans futures trading in onions. As a result, onions are the only commodity explicitly prohibited from futures markets in the United States. The Act came about after an episode in the early 1950s, when onions were actively traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Two men named Vincent Kosuga and Sam Seigel bought up enormous quantities of physical onions, and gained control over storage and distribution. By dominating the available supply, they were able to push prices higher while simultaneously taking large short positions in onion futures, which was a bet that prices would eventually fall. Once their short positions were in place, Kosuga and Seigal released massive amounts of onions back into the market, flooding supply and causing prices to collapse. Accounts from the period describe warehouses overflowing with onions, spoilage accelerating, and farmers unable to sell their crops for prices that even covered transportation costs. The collapse was so severe that some farmers reportedly burned or dumped onions rather than bring them to market.

TBPN

79,256 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇪🇺🇳🇴 The world's safest asset is being quietly abandoned, and the timing could not be worse... Economist Philip Pilkington joins me to connect dots most commentators are missing: Norway just dumped $80 BILLION in U.S. Treasuries, and this is not one country quietly rebalancing. Norway's sovereign wealth fund does not move without government backing, which does not move without EU and ECB alignment, making this a coordinated signal from the European financial establishment. Treasury bonds have delivered the worst 10-year returns in 100 years. The next country to watch is Britain, the second largest holder, heading into a fiscal crisis, and now with a fresh geopolitical grievance over the Falklands. The Netherlands is repatriating its gold. Multiple central banks are quietly reducing exposure. The exorbitant privilege that made U.S. debt the world's default safe asset is eroding in real time. "I'm more bearish than ever" Philip rarely says that. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸🇪🇺🇳🇴 The world's safest asset is being quietly abandoned, and the timing could not be worse... Economist Philip Pilkington joins me to connect dots most commentators are missing: Norway just dumped $80 BILLION in U.S. Treasuries, and this is not one country quietly rebalancing. Norway's sovereign wealth fund does not move without government backing, which does not move without EU and ECB alignment, making this a coordinated signal from the European financial establishment. Treasury bonds have delivered the worst 10-year returns in 100 years. The next country to watch is Britain, the second largest holder, heading into a fiscal crisis, and now with a fresh geopolitical grievance over the Falklands. The Netherlands is repatriating its gold. Multiple central banks are quietly reducing exposure. The exorbitant privilege that made U.S. debt the world's default safe asset is eroding in real time. "I'm more bearish than ever" Philip rarely says that. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

327,456 просмотров • 2 дней назад

🇺🇸 Philip Pilkington says the biggest consequence of the Iran war may have nothing to do with missiles. It could be the beginning of the end for the U.S. dollar. His argument starts with an uncomfortable fact. Everyone is watching the Strait of Hormuz. Almost nobody is watching Japan. Japan is the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries, but its financial system is under enormous strain. Pilkington says Washington has already taken extraordinary steps to stop the crisis spreading, effectively creating an international version of quantitative easing to keep the dollar system stable. He thinks that's the real story. "The pressure is building." Even if the missiles stop tomorrow, he argues the economic damage won't. The Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted, energy markets remain distorted, and inflationary pressure is beginning to ripple through some of America's closest allies, starting with Japan and South Korea. Then comes the prediction. Pilkington believes the Iran crisis has accelerated a shift that was already underway: the gradual erosion of dollar dominance. He points to growing discussion of a new Bretton Woods-style monetary system, the expansion of renminbi financing, and signs that financial institutions are beginning to prepare for a world where the dollar is no longer the unquestioned centre of global finance. His warning is stark. "If we sat down here and did this interview in 10 years' time... we'll be living in a different world." For Pilkington, the Iran war is far from being just another Middle East conflict. The event that may force the world to confront the slow collapse of the post-1945 financial order. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸 Philip Pilkington says the biggest consequence of the Iran war may have nothing to do with missiles. It could be the beginning of the end for the U.S. dollar. His argument starts with an uncomfortable fact. Everyone is watching the Strait of Hormuz. Almost nobody is watching Japan. Japan is the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries, but its financial system is under enormous strain. Pilkington says Washington has already taken extraordinary steps to stop the crisis spreading, effectively creating an international version of quantitative easing to keep the dollar system stable. He thinks that's the real story. "The pressure is building." Even if the missiles stop tomorrow, he argues the economic damage won't. The Strait of Hormuz remains disrupted, energy markets remain distorted, and inflationary pressure is beginning to ripple through some of America's closest allies, starting with Japan and South Korea. Then comes the prediction. Pilkington believes the Iran crisis has accelerated a shift that was already underway: the gradual erosion of dollar dominance. He points to growing discussion of a new Bretton Woods-style monetary system, the expansion of renminbi financing, and signs that financial institutions are beginning to prepare for a world where the dollar is no longer the unquestioned centre of global finance. His warning is stark. "If we sat down here and did this interview in 10 years' time... we'll be living in a different world." For Pilkington, the Iran war is far from being just another Middle East conflict. The event that may force the world to confront the slow collapse of the post-1945 financial order. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

273,290 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🇺🇸 🇮🇷 A theory of how Trump got played back into the war, step by step, and it fits the timeline disturbingly well. Economist Philip Pilkington gamed out a scenario live: if someone wanted Trump back in a war he'd clearly grown sick of, how would they do it? His answer runs like a playbook. Pick one limited objective that sounds unimpeachable, "we can't let them control the strait," and hammer it until it sticks. Bring the president a can-do option: run ships through the Omani corridor. Then execute it while Iran is burying its religious leader. When the inevitable strikes on those ships come, walk into the Oval and say, you can't deal with these people: "And then I'd have manipulated the president into another round of the war. So that's a possibility." Pilkington stresses it's a hypothesis. But he notes the manipulation may run deeper than oil prices, covering this whole process. His only advice for what comes next: keep your car full, and buy a bicycle. Philip Pilkington

🇺🇸 🇮🇷 A theory of how Trump got played back into the war, step by step, and it fits the timeline disturbingly well. Economist Philip Pilkington gamed out a scenario live: if someone wanted Trump back in a war he'd clearly grown sick of, how would they do it? His answer runs like a playbook. Pick one limited objective that sounds unimpeachable, "we can't let them control the strait," and hammer it until it sticks. Bring the president a can-do option: run ships through the Omani corridor. Then execute it while Iran is burying its religious leader. When the inevitable strikes on those ships come, walk into the Oval and say, you can't deal with these people: "And then I'd have manipulated the president into another round of the war. So that's a possibility." Pilkington stresses it's a hypothesis. But he notes the manipulation may run deeper than oil prices, covering this whole process. His only advice for what comes next: keep your car full, and buy a bicycle. Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

51,168 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Philip Pilkington’s read on this week comes down to one thing: control. More specifically, who is starting to lose it. He points to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s intervention in the bond market, where Treasury sold short-term bills to help fund purchases of longer-term bonds. It was an unusual move that effectively stepped into territory normally handled by the Fed. It lasted less than a day before yields climbed again. For Pilkington, the bigger issue is what the move says about the system: Treasury appeared willing to fight its own central bank in the middle of a crisis, suggesting the coordination between Washington’s institutions is starting to break down. He sees something similar in the yen intervention. Washington shorted the euro to support the yen, which Pilkington sees as a departure from the usual rules of currency diplomacy. He interprets the ECB’s warning about a possible AI bubble as a response rather than a neutral observation. His argument is that European pension funds could take that as a signal to start quietly reducing their exposure to U.S. equities. His strongest analogy is the doorknob. You never think about how it works until suddenly it doesn’t. Pilkington argues that the same is true of things like the U.S. military’s reputation, the dollar’s perceived safety and the Fed’s authority over markets. Much of that power depends on confidence and expectations. His view is that Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz has put several of those assumptions under pressure at the same time. He is also skeptical of the Axios report suggesting oil shipping through Oman has returned close to pre-war levels. He points instead to diesel crack spreads above $100 and reports from contacts receiving genuine requests for physical fuel. His China argument also runs against the obvious assumption. Beijing no longer needs to protect the U.S. economy in the way it once did, because years of shifting exports toward the Global South have reduced its dependence on American demand. If Washington responds with secondary sanctions, Pilkington expects China to retaliate by restricting rare earth exports. In his view, that could hit the AI industry very quickly rather than gradually. The system won't collapse on a particular day. He is arguing that several pressures are building at once, and that systems can look stable right up until the moment they aren’t. Thank you Philip Pilkington for the insight!

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Philip Pilkington’s read on this week comes down to one thing: control. More specifically, who is starting to lose it. He points to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s intervention in the bond market, where Treasury sold short-term bills to help fund purchases of longer-term bonds. It was an unusual move that effectively stepped into territory normally handled by the Fed. It lasted less than a day before yields climbed again. For Pilkington, the bigger issue is what the move says about the system: Treasury appeared willing to fight its own central bank in the middle of a crisis, suggesting the coordination between Washington’s institutions is starting to break down. He sees something similar in the yen intervention. Washington shorted the euro to support the yen, which Pilkington sees as a departure from the usual rules of currency diplomacy. He interprets the ECB’s warning about a possible AI bubble as a response rather than a neutral observation. His argument is that European pension funds could take that as a signal to start quietly reducing their exposure to U.S. equities. His strongest analogy is the doorknob. You never think about how it works until suddenly it doesn’t. Pilkington argues that the same is true of things like the U.S. military’s reputation, the dollar’s perceived safety and the Fed’s authority over markets. Much of that power depends on confidence and expectations. His view is that Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz has put several of those assumptions under pressure at the same time. He is also skeptical of the Axios report suggesting oil shipping through Oman has returned close to pre-war levels. He points instead to diesel crack spreads above $100 and reports from contacts receiving genuine requests for physical fuel. His China argument also runs against the obvious assumption. Beijing no longer needs to protect the U.S. economy in the way it once did, because years of shifting exports toward the Global South have reduced its dependence on American demand. If Washington responds with secondary sanctions, Pilkington expects China to retaliate by restricting rare earth exports. In his view, that could hit the AI industry very quickly rather than gradually. The system won't collapse on a particular day. He is arguing that several pressures are building at once, and that systems can look stable right up until the moment they aren’t. Thank you Philip Pilkington for the insight!

Mario Nawfal

300,346 просмотров • 19 дней назад

The oil market is being manipulated to hide a CRISIS that's already here, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will hit critical levels BEFORE the midterms... Economist Philip Pilkington returns with his most alarming assessment yet: If Hormuz, the Bab el-Mandeb, and the Gulf pipelines are all disrupted simultaneously, that is roughly 20-22% of world oil supply offline... His comparison for what that looks like? COVID. "You'd have to shut down about a fifth of global economic activity, fuel rationing, QR codes for diesel, military doing school runs, it's the same as the lockdowns without the masks." China just ended its 60-day oil purchasing pause and is moving back toward 12 million barrels a day, which he believes was always the deadline after which Beijing would return to the market regardless of any deal. The crack spread on diesel is already significantly higher than the diesel price itself, meaning the actual cost of fuel delivery is far above what futures markets show. Whoever is suppressing the paper oil price is prolonging the war by giving Trump a false picture of the energy situation. On negotiations: "It's become completely controversial now to even talk about diplomacy in Iran, and I think the Americans have pretty much reached the point where they may actually not be able to negotiate." On where this ends: "My underlying assumption is anything that can be hit will eventually be hit, we might be waiting for Godot here, not TACO." "We're definitely in the retarded simulation now, for sure." Philip, we might be, but at least we have you to explain it Philip Pilkington

The oil market is being manipulated to hide a CRISIS that's already here, and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will hit critical levels BEFORE the midterms... Economist Philip Pilkington returns with his most alarming assessment yet: If Hormuz, the Bab el-Mandeb, and the Gulf pipelines are all disrupted simultaneously, that is roughly 20-22% of world oil supply offline... His comparison for what that looks like? COVID. "You'd have to shut down about a fifth of global economic activity, fuel rationing, QR codes for diesel, military doing school runs, it's the same as the lockdowns without the masks." China just ended its 60-day oil purchasing pause and is moving back toward 12 million barrels a day, which he believes was always the deadline after which Beijing would return to the market regardless of any deal. The crack spread on diesel is already significantly higher than the diesel price itself, meaning the actual cost of fuel delivery is far above what futures markets show. Whoever is suppressing the paper oil price is prolonging the war by giving Trump a false picture of the energy situation. On negotiations: "It's become completely controversial now to even talk about diplomacy in Iran, and I think the Americans have pretty much reached the point where they may actually not be able to negotiate." On where this ends: "My underlying assumption is anything that can be hit will eventually be hit, we might be waiting for Godot here, not TACO." "We're definitely in the retarded simulation now, for sure." Philip, we might be, but at least we have you to explain it Philip Pilkington

Mario Nawfal

319,624 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

CFTC Chair Michael Selig says he’s not an expert on betting lines and can’t distinguish between ones on sportsbooks and prediction markets. Rep. Vasquez: “That’s exactly the problem, because consumers can’t either though the purpose of the activity is exactly the same.” “I understand the CFTC’s role has been overseeing derivatives markets. Traditionally that has been helping businesses hedge real economic risk. Airlines hedge fuel costs. Farmers hedge crop prices. That is very different than putting money on the outcome of a baseball game. On a prediction market consumers can trade on whether Astros second baseman Jose Altuve hits a home run in tonight’s game against the Rockies. Does a contract on a single player’s performance on a single statistic hedge any real economic risk?” Selig: “Congressman, there are many risks that could be hedged through various contracts on our markets. The bottom line is that these markets need to be well functioning and comprehensively regulated by the CFTC. Our statute mandates it and we’ll continue to do it.”

CFTC Chair Michael Selig says he’s not an expert on betting lines and can’t distinguish between ones on sportsbooks and prediction markets. Rep. Vasquez: “That’s exactly the problem, because consumers can’t either though the purpose of the activity is exactly the same.” “I understand the CFTC’s role has been overseeing derivatives markets. Traditionally that has been helping businesses hedge real economic risk. Airlines hedge fuel costs. Farmers hedge crop prices. That is very different than putting money on the outcome of a baseball game. On a prediction market consumers can trade on whether Astros second baseman Jose Altuve hits a home run in tonight’s game against the Rockies. Does a contract on a single player’s performance on a single statistic hedge any real economic risk?” Selig: “Congressman, there are many risks that could be hedged through various contracts on our markets. The bottom line is that these markets need to be well functioning and comprehensively regulated by the CFTC. Our statute mandates it and we’ll continue to do it.”

Sam McQuillan

41,757 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

AI is creating a new kind of creator economy. One where anyone can launch complex apps, agents, trading systems, research tools, games, and community experiments in minutes. Not just content people consume. AI-native experiences people can use, share, and grow together. That is the bigger idea behind the AI Trading Arena: a live DeFAI environment where AI-created strategies compete on real crypto prices, with every trade, tick, P&L update, and leaderboard visible to everyone. The latest expansion makes it even more fascinating: AI is now designing new trading strategies and adding them into the Arena to compete with strategies from frontier models like GPT-5, Claude, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek, and Llama. Just agents, markets, and performance in the open. And the Arena is only one example. On ChainOpera AI, creators can launch AI-native experiences in minutes, then grow them with the community that uses them. $COAI is the fuel for this creator economy: creators launch, users participate, and AI-native apps come alive through real community usage. What would you be built next?

AI is creating a new kind of creator economy. One where anyone can launch complex apps, agents, trading systems, research tools, games, and community experiments in minutes. Not just content people consume. AI-native experiences people can use, share, and grow together. That is the bigger idea behind the AI Trading Arena: a live DeFAI environment where AI-created strategies compete on real crypto prices, with every trade, tick, P&L update, and leaderboard visible to everyone. The latest expansion makes it even more fascinating: AI is now designing new trading strategies and adding them into the Arena to compete with strategies from frontier models like GPT-5, Claude, Gemini, Grok, DeepSeek, and Llama. Just agents, markets, and performance in the open. And the Arena is only one example. On ChainOpera AI, creators can launch AI-native experiences in minutes, then grow them with the community that uses them. $COAI is the fuel for this creator economy: creators launch, users participate, and AI-native apps come alive through real community usage. What would you be built next?

ChainOpera AI

16,700 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Are we confusing how important AI is with how safe it is to invest in? Today I’m sitting down with Jeremy Grantham - a man whose firm managed up to $165 billion and helped create one of the world's first index funds. He has spent more than 60 years studying markets, money, and human behaviour. Along the way, he’s built a legendary reputation for spotting financial ‘bubbles’ long before most people admit they exist - those rare, dangerous moments when pure excitement and FOMO push asset prices completely out of reality, far beyond what they are actually worth. And Jeremy believes that exact pattern is happening with AI right now... We broke this down some more: - Could AI be revolutionary and still become a dangerous bubble? - Why do the most exciting stocks often fall the hardest? - What would happen if AI stocks dropped by 70%? - How did Amazon fall 92% and still become one of the biggest companies on earth? - Are markets driven more by psychology than numbers? - Why is Jeremy moving his own money out of US stocks? - Could house prices still have further to fall? And this conversation didn’t stop at markets… Jeremy also opened up about what’s happening to human fertility… He broke down why sperm counts have dropped so dramatically since 1970 and the hidden role that pesticides, plastics, and PFAS are playing that most people completely fail to realise. What became clear to me during our chat is that Jeremy isn't just warning us about AI. He's warning us about our behaviour around risk - the assumption that because something will matter in the future, any price we pay for it today must be justified. He wants us to know that something can be revolutionary and STILL be overpriced… For anyone trying to understand what we might be missing in this AI moment and beyond, this is an essential conversation.

Are we confusing how important AI is with how safe it is to invest in? Today I’m sitting down with Jeremy Grantham - a man whose firm managed up to $165 billion and helped create one of the world's first index funds. He has spent more than 60 years studying markets, money, and human behaviour. Along the way, he’s built a legendary reputation for spotting financial ‘bubbles’ long before most people admit they exist - those rare, dangerous moments when pure excitement and FOMO push asset prices completely out of reality, far beyond what they are actually worth. And Jeremy believes that exact pattern is happening with AI right now... We broke this down some more: - Could AI be revolutionary and still become a dangerous bubble? - Why do the most exciting stocks often fall the hardest? - What would happen if AI stocks dropped by 70%? - How did Amazon fall 92% and still become one of the biggest companies on earth? - Are markets driven more by psychology than numbers? - Why is Jeremy moving his own money out of US stocks? - Could house prices still have further to fall? And this conversation didn’t stop at markets… Jeremy also opened up about what’s happening to human fertility… He broke down why sperm counts have dropped so dramatically since 1970 and the hidden role that pesticides, plastics, and PFAS are playing that most people completely fail to realise. What became clear to me during our chat is that Jeremy isn't just warning us about AI. He's warning us about our behaviour around risk - the assumption that because something will matter in the future, any price we pay for it today must be justified. He wants us to know that something can be revolutionary and STILL be overpriced… For anyone trying to understand what we might be missing in this AI moment and beyond, this is an essential conversation.

Steven Bartlett

160,974 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Philip Pilkington: ‘They have manipulated oil futures in the past after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Houthi attacks, but they never went NUCLEAR on it. They NEVER did as much manipulation as they're currently doing. I think those two, you could have gotten away with. Ultimately, the Russian situation was not actually lost energy to global markets. It was rerouting energy. I don’t think the Red Sea was enough to seriously impact global supplies alone. I think you needed the Hormuz Strait and the Red Sea. The problem now is you're dealing with probably 20% of the world's oil supply. And so what you're seeing that you didn't see last time is inventories are crashing.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Philip Pilkington: ‘They have manipulated oil futures in the past after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Houthi attacks, but they never went NUCLEAR on it. They NEVER did as much manipulation as they're currently doing. I think those two, you could have gotten away with. Ultimately, the Russian situation was not actually lost energy to global markets. It was rerouting energy. I don’t think the Red Sea was enough to seriously impact global supplies alone. I think you needed the Hormuz Strait and the Red Sea. The problem now is you're dealing with probably 20% of the world's oil supply. And so what you're seeing that you didn't see last time is inventories are crashing.’ Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Going Underground

27,884 просмотров • 22 дней назад