EXAMPLE PAGE: FYBR GOLD MASTER WORKS;Sample
| FOLLOWING THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD :SAMPLE |
Read below examples before ordering FYBR. if Author’s writing style not understood , please don’t order the publication, as it may be way beyond your ability to comprehend the Doctrine.
Page 46 -48
CREDIT: Shall mean “Financial Instrument”.
SLC: Shall mean “Stand-by Letter of Credit”. A SLC must never be used or implied to be used for the payment of goods, and is suitable only for the payment of Commissions or a Performance Guarantee (PG). If a SLC is used as per the rules supported under “International Stand-By Practices” as defined in the year 1998 by the ICC, then such a SLC is allowed to be transferred many times among Intermediaries, such a SLC is often defined using the acronym “ISP98 SLC”. A SLC defined as “UCP600 SLC” can only be transferred once from the Buyer/Seller to the End Buyer as issued from the Supplier, and must be marked as “Transferable”.
Intermediaries may use both said “SLC” applications but the “SLC UCP600” application of such is the preferred application.
Unlike a normal DLC used for paying of goods, a SLC is not activated based on conditions such as presentation of delivery documents, but rather issued as an unconditional instrument, that upon a certain single event occurring a SLC is allowed to be presented for collection unconditionally upon its first call.
Example 1: Delivery has failed to occur on the contracted time, the End Buyer collects upon the SLC unconditionally because the said Performance as it pertains to Delivery was late.
Example 2: Intermediaries presenting title delivery documents late will activate unconditionally and give right to the End Buyer to collect upon the SLC, even though the success of the deal still eventuates in closing.
Example 3: Commission pay order in the form of a SLC is issued by the Buyer/Seller and may be collected upon so long as a certain event occurs, such as the Buyer/Seller advising a signed “Confirmation Slip” which allows the Intermediary to deposit the SLC into his account to initiate collection procedures.
IDLC: Shall mean “Irrevocable Documentary Letter of Credit”. The DLC is the basic applicable premise to all Credit applications and has many variants to it issue depending on the deal being applied. “Irrevocable” means that the DLC cannot be cancelled once advised, under any circumstances once accepted by the Buyer/Seller, except for strong provable verifiable matters pertaining to fraud are provided to the issuing bank. Once an End Buyer issues an irrevocable credit in any form then the bank takes over in guaranteeing its payment by applying only UCP rules to the credit, so long as the credit states on its form, that “UCP 600 applies to its issuance”. This means that all parties must apply to transact on the financial instruments only within the permissible edicts of UCP600.
PA TIDLC: Shall supports the acronym “Pre advised Irrevocable Transferable Documentary Letter of Credit”. “Pre advised” means that the Credit is issued as operational and irrevocable but not yet formally activated, and is subject to a precondition before such activation can occur. Once the said “precondition” has been met under UCP600, the bank must make the credit active. Once such a credit becomes active it may be transferred as a Non transferable instrument, directly to the Supplier. A pre advised credit is a less expensive option for an End Buyer to consider especially when such a Buyer needs proof that the goods are genuinely offered. The Intermediary provides the “PPI” (an in-house created Policy Proof of Interest Certificate) to the End Buyer’s bank exactly as implied on contract, to which the issuing Bank of the End Buyer although now knowing the identity of the Supplier, must make the Pre advised credit active once its precondition has been met. This makes the “PA TIDLC” an ideal instrument for intermediaries to use, when issued as being transferable.
But take note, such a DLC is allowed to be issued as a financial instrument at the discretion of the End Buyer’s bank as allowed under UCP 600 banking rules. If such a bank does not want to issue such an instrument it may rightfully refuse to do so.
CIDLC: Shall mean “Confirmed Irrevocable Documentary Letter of Credit”.
Where a credit such as PA TIDLC is issued as being “Confirmed” defines the highest safest credit that an intermediary can hold. So a small Indian bank issues a PA TIDLC to the Buyer/Seller, which is confirmed by another world leading bank such as Citicorp USA or the like, or even by your very own large top class world ranked bank in which the DLC was advised into, then the smaller bank is being guaranteed it’s payment by another bank, in that, should the smaller bank fail to honour payment, the economically larger bank will do so instead. Thus only a good rated smaller bank limited only by financial resources and not because of a bad credit rating among its peers, would be able to secure another bank’s confirmation of its credit. A large economically powerful Top 300 world-class bank would not issue a confirmed credit, as they don’t need to. Smaller less economically powerful banks do need their credit issued as carrying confirmation of another. When a credit is issued as being “Confirmed” by the Advising bank of the Buyer/Seller the delivery documents only need to be presented at the Intermediary’s bank and not the issuing bank in allowing collection to apply. A credit confirmed by another bank on behalf of a smaller bank is a “Corresponding bank” to the advising bank, meaning that such a confirming bank is able to correspond with the Buyers/Sellers own Advising bank.
Example: Issuing bank: Bank of China, China may need to issue a credit to a Corresponding bank such as the “Bank of China New York”, who in turn is able to advise the credit to the Buyer/Seller’s ANZ Bank situated in Australia, who then transfer the credit to the Supplier’s bank, the SBER bank in Russia or another corresponding bank that may be able to transfer such a credit to the said Russian bank.
Page 54
In the real trading world "Proof of Product" cannot be given without disclosing the physical owner of the goods being offered by a Seller, as circumvention will prevail if given prior to the Buyer/Seller securing the required financial instrument from the End Buyer.
The “P.P.I.” certificate is written into the body of the contract as a blank. The Buyer/Seller is offering to fill in the blanks to disclose the Supplier of the goods, and his interests therein, but only after the required L/C to buy such goods has been advised and accepted by the Buyer/Seller. Thus the End Buyer cannot make excuses in regards of the suitability of the P.P.I. information once supplied, as the blank document, once filled in, is copied and returned to the End Buyer as already provided on the contract as a model document form once the required L/C has been produced, meaning that the “P.P.I.” advice that will be produced later has become a contract condition at contract signing time.
Page 57
WAYBILL: When FYBRII refers to “Evidence that the goods are on board” is required to be produced, the leading document is assumed to be an “Ocean Waybill”, which is not a title document, but merely an official “receipt” stating that the Goods are on board. In a “Free on Board” deal (F.O.B) the Intermediary is not required to produce Bill of Lading if they don’t wish to do so, but is required to “assist” the End Buyer to secure as such in accordance with Incoterms 2000 delivery rules, thus regardless if the Bill of Lading is produced or not the Intermediary must still provide a “leading” delivery document at presentation time, evidencing that the goods are indeed “on board” the End Buyer’s ordered ship.
Page 71
You are not an “End buyer” nor are you a “Supplier”. You are defined to be an independent private “Buyer” and “Seller” of commodities. Your job is to buy goods from a “Supplier” you have sourced and secured, then resell such goods to an “End Buyer” you have sourced then secured whether on your own or in part where you use other Sourcing Intermediaries to assist you.
Page 110
The first application is always to ensure you have personally sourced or verified the goods being offered from a Supplier, and secure said goods from such a Supplier as "Buyer". The second application is to find the "End Buyer” to resell such goods, either by yourself or using other Intermediaries to "assist" you.
intermediary next to the End Buyer (PI)
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary next to PIA (PI)
PIA (The much said Buyer/Seller)
And from PIA to the Supplier there could be let’s say 3 intermediaries to that side of the string contract, defined in a linear method as follows below. The below group and the nature of business being applied all give answer to PIA. The same applies to the above said group. PIA has to apply contract to a Principal via the group below, and has another contract to apply with the group above. Both sides are totally independent. Both sides become connected because PIA is the controlling Intermediary.
So PIA in effect has two sets of commission to protect, and has two sets of contracts to apply and is in fact dealing in two totally independent transactions.
Intermediaries are very confused in identifying the correct linear trading application. Most simply don’t understand the complex nature of the business being attempted.
Implied Seller Side
PIA (The much said Buyer/seller)
Sourcing Intermediary next to PIA (PI)
Sourcing Intermediary
Sourcing Intermediary next to the Supplier (PI)
Supplier
When the above "Sides" are applied together the end result would be defined by the following linear example.
The Whole String Contract
(a) End Buyer.
(b) Intermediary next to the End buyer. (Most of the time an intermediary is confused and thinks by holding such a position they are entitled to be defined as a Mandate holder of the End Buyer)
(c) Sourcing intermediary
(d) Sourcing Intermediary
(e) Sourcing intermediary
(f) Sourcing Intermediary
(g) Sourcing Intermediary
(h) Sourcing Intermediary
(i) Sourcing Intermediary next to PIA
(j) PIA (The Much said Buyer/Seller)
(k) Sourcing Intermediary next to PIA
(l) Sourcing intermediary
(m) Sourcing Intermediary next to the Supplier.
(Many times you will come across a confused Intermediary holding this position stating that he is a “Seller” or a “Mandate holder” of the Supplier, but will never produce the required Mandate ship papers to verify his position. This is the type of Intermediary that causes the most problems in a string contract, because such a trader does not understand that if PIA transfers a credit to him, such a trader is unable to transfer the credit again to the Supplier causing the deal to fall into a massive heap. In any case such a “Seller” is often found offering goods not from a Supplier but another even more confused Sourcing Intermediary.)
(n) Supplier
Thus defining accordingly that 14 people are involved in the above deal, 3 of which are "Principals" and eleven of such being intermediaries looking to collect commission for assisting or simply passing information from PIA. In effect PIA has to protect the interests of not just the Seller’s side, but to also those on the Buyer’s side.
Such said String contracts are not uncommon and the longer the “String” the bigger the headaches for PIA. There is a lot of effort needed to apply in the above String contract, so before PIA even considers such a transaction PIA needs to instruct his PI on both sides of the fence to do all the work in clearing a path all the way to the end Principals. PIA is only going to look at the information as supplied by his PI before considering entering into the “Seller/Buyer’s” position such a deal.
A String contract where a End Buyer, a few Sourcing Intermediaries, PIA then Supplier is obviously a superior application than trying to tackle the above defined String deal, and is the optimum deal PIA will give serious consideration in plying which will be the only type of deal PIA will consider, but only after PIA has learned fully the basic trading application. While training, in the first month or so it’s good to get involved in such a string deals, even if you are only a Sourcing Intermediary who is promised commissions by some other person. This will prove to you once and for all that such deals are simply unworkable. You will also learn much quicker on how to spot such a deal next time around and avoid accordingly.
PIA generally would be replying on information from the 2 Primary Intermediaries (PI) to do all the work in getting everyone to step back as defined under the defined String contract
Secure the Goods
FTN Exporting examines hundreds of offers every week. Most have been simply passed down a long chain on intermediaries, in where all, to each member in the chain have each been advised that the goods are “real”. Nobody has verified anything, and yet such traders continue to ply such goods accordingly, passing such an offer down a never ending intermediary line, each of whom have applied their own misguided commission amount to the previous price applied.
Page 170
The Offer to Sell
The End Buyer via the intermediaries (PI) has accepted the quote and the subsequent supporting offer. (In-depth matters of commission pay orders are tackled later.)
PIA received the previously issued quote from a potential End Buyer fully signed by hand via a PDF document. If PIA wanted to play mind games, then by defining on the offer that; "This offer is not legally binding", allows for the premise of time wasting to prevail. Ideally you make the basic quote non-legally binding, but when a formal offer is required then make sure the line defining that "This offer is legally binding" is applied to the body of the document, especially later as you begin to gain training experience. On the Supplier side of the deal you apply whenever possible to imply that the contract is the legally binding document and not the offer.
Internal USA law of contract dictates that once an offer is accepted, it still could be made avoidable, not so in superior English law. Since you are trading in an International arena, then the premise of your contracting obligation is indeed based on English law, because, among other things - English law and its application are spread far and wide globally via England's long and historical colonial past spreading into Europe, Africa, India, Hong Kong and all the way down under to remote Australia, just to name a few.
It’s only on the Supplier side that application of strict English law is relaxed, but only in a very limited area as it applies to the offer. If you have a real Supplier, then the last thing you want to happen is to become legally bound to such, before getting the Buyer’s DLC into your account as accepted. With the End Buyer’s deal, the opposite is true, you want to force a legally binding situation as soon as possible, and secure the DLC ass early as possible. If you have supply capability then you have nothing to lose in forcing an End Buyer to become legally bound to you, on the other hand sealing a contract with a Supplier where you have not secured the End Buyer could land you in serious trouble.
Page 340
So you thought you were going to get 10 dollar per MT on the deal - but now you take the suppliers invoice and prepare your own invoice which “SHOULD” include as per Incoterms : To debit the buyer “AGREED PRICE” or “ACTUAL COST”, commission charges ( in your case its Gains, Consultancy charges, or Operating expense) Freight, and Insurance Premium, and credit him for the freight premium which the will need to pay- etc..etc..
Note the term AGREED PRICE or ACTUAL Cost - this now becomes an inter interpretation of contract- (nothing to do with banks) If you are required to present Insurance declaring a 110% cover of goods then by presenting the invoice as such defining all expenses to equal the total end buyers DLC, then the DLC and presentation document will comply
Page 598
The USA equivalent to Incoterms 2000 “UCC” (United Commercial Code) once applied on the offer as the ruling governing application, would overrule such matters if applied - in that; the party issuing the offer has indicated preference of “UCC” as the preferred rules of application- thus, by default , even if an offer states that the signing of such becomes a legally binding document, “UCC” defines that such an offer can indeed be cancelled after signing-
but take note; An intermediary using “UCC” as a escape edict to avoid later its obligations may still face a breach of contract situation, especially if the intermediary has gone further into a transaction as to examine contracts, only to seek defence of the “acceptance” rule of avoiding the signing of a contract many weeks later. Also Note; End Buyer’s and Supplier’s will not be readily too keen to entertain the services of an offer, which can readily be accepted at one moment , and cancelled a few days later- Thus specifically applicable to USA intermediaries assume that the acceptance of an offer could be cancelled if a reasonable time frame application is applied. Thus accepting an offer then cancelling it within a validity time frame of lets say under 3 days could be applied to mean that such a cancellation has applied within a “reasonable” time, so long as the offer stipulates such a “cooling off” period but not so if such were to apply lets say 3 weeks later.The premise here is very clear you accept an offer from a supplier then attempt to cancel such an offer in lets say 3 weeks time after the supplier has incurred expenses in getting your shipment ready, means that the supplier is not going to be too happy. A supplier would be hard pressed to prove any expense being incurred if the offer was cancelled a day or a few days after signing- hence their lays the very basic foundation that defines to distinguish the difference between a “ICPO” and “Offer” - Whether USA intermediaries or not an ICPO carries without an “Irrevocable” status ones signed as accepted- in where an “offer” can be applied as being only being legally binding when accepted, if applied by an intermediary that such acceptance is subject to final contracts- In essence the ICPO and the “offer” stand on the same platform of application, except one carries with it an Irrevocable commitment to perform immediately- Intermediaries must apply to use the attributes of an “Offer” and not “ICPO”. A ICPO is often used as a internal locally applied USA protocol,especially spot deals - yet even offers coming from lets say dubious Russian “traders” using USA internal commercial processes already provides clear indication that the offer should be immediately treated as RF (Rubbish Fodder)
Page 614
NCND Agreement: Another ill advised application- intermediaries cannot apply to rely of such a document to protect themselves form anything let alone circumvention- The contract applies such matters as to such “Confidentiality ” issues.
Performance Guarantee and not “Performance Bond” is the correct application that intermediaries MUST apply to use and that; the intermediary does not assume that the “PG” is a normal trading application- Sometimes it’s required, most times it’s not-
If a “PG” is required then the supplier has to agree to issue a ISP 98 SLC (Can be transferred more than once) or UCP600 SLC (Can only be transferred once)- Such a ‘PG” must be advised within 5 days of you transferring the “DLC” for the purchase of the goods
A SLC cannot and MUST never be used to pay for goods especially Crude oil /fuels-Intermediaries can only use DLC applications. Soon as MT 103 or SLC payments are requested RF the deal - Move on.
When seeking from a supplier wanted goods, inform them that you will require the FTN created application of “LDD” (Late Delivery Discount) on contract- in that; the supplier agrees to lets say I.e:.USD$10.00 per MT discount applied on the suppliers invoice for each late shipment delivery of crude oil. The supplier will be much more receptive to such an application than you making demands for a “PG” SLC. Thus once an “LDD” is assured, the Buyer/Seller offers the same on contract to the end Buyer- at a slightly lesser rate. Nevertheless if you can get a Confirmed SLC PG do so I.e: So the supplier’s offer has been tested as being genuine and on it a 1.5% P.G SLC is offered, then don’t ask for the LDD accept the PG SLC , but still only offer the LDD as a first option to your end buyer.
In all cases the P.G SLC must never exceeding 2.0% of goods value- To an End buyer only offer the LDD application and try and keep the SLC as your own protective instrument for each failed delivery- If the End Buyer is stubborn then transfer at a lesser value of the ISP98 SLC accordingly as a last resort-if you had secured one to start with.( Making sure the P.G SLC gap is adjusted)
P.G Gap: In Brief- Supplier offer FTN 1.5% P.G of USD$300 MT Value of goods =USD$4.50 per MT - FTN is selling such goods to the end Buyer to ensure commissions are earned for USD$310.00 per MT. The end Buyer is expecting a P.G for USD$310 per MT thus providing to transfer 1.4 % (or even less) of the USD$1.5% SLC held defines that you are offering the end buyer USD$4.34 per MT as a PG supported by a SLC. You can’t transfer the original 1.5% percent value as secured from the supplier, because the end Buyer is expecting PG coverage at USD$4.65 per MT. 15 cents differential may not seem much. Apply that to 1 million BBls per month offer, and you can see how such a small the shortfall can very quickly become a deal breaker.If you have secured a PG SLC ensure the gap is addressed otherwise avoid such P.G application altogether and stick to the invented and tested “LDD” protocol.
Transferability: The buyer issue a transferable Documentary letter of credit (DLC) to the middle controlling intermediary, who in turns advises to the supplier an non Transferable Credit- A Transferable UCP600 DLC credit can only be transferred once- Thus by default, the reason is given why the middle controlling intermediary cannot deal with another intermediate “Seller/Buyer”, as such would not be able to transfer the credit to the supplier, and the deal at hand will collapse-
Even if the other said “buyer/seller’ could accept a non transferable “DLC” and there are ways and situation that one could apply as such- the matter of “Genuine supply” is still of concern depending on another “Buyer/Seller’ for “Supply” is simply unacceptable application, in where a hard earned deal could collapse, if the other misguided intermediary “thought” he had real supply and later it’s found that he had nothing in the first place , but only “ thought” he could get real supply , if he had the money- ( Unfortunately as often happens, defines the real trading regime on the net today)
So many intermediaries think they can get supply if the had the funds- when in fact they can’t-
Page 643
TOLERANCE FACTOR MEANS IF YOU ORDER OR ARE SEEKING OR ARE SELLING LETS SAY 140,000 MT OF CRUDE OIL AND ONLY 135,000 MT FINALLY ARRIVES AS INDICATED ON THE BOL, THERE IS NO BREACH OF CONTRACT- AND NO BREACH ON THE CONDITIONS OF THE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT- BECAUSE BOTH MATTERS FALL BETWEEN THE 5% TOLERANCE FACTORS WHICH ARE ALLOWED TO BE IMPLIED-
IF I54,000 MT ARRIVES THEN THIS TOO DOES NOT BREACH THE 10% -/+ FACTOR AS IT APPLIES TO QUANTITY, BUT MIGHT BREACH THE 5% +/- FACTOR IN MATTERS OF PAYMENTS- TO WHICH THE BANK WILL NEEDS TO ADVISE THE END BUYER IF THEY ARE PREPARED TO PAY FOR AN EXCESS OF ?% ABOVE THE MAXIMUM TOLERANCE LEVEL OF THE PAYMENT INSTRUMENT- THE END BUYER THEN AUTHORISES HIS BANK TO ISSUE AND AMENDMENT TO THE CREDIT TO PAY FOR THE EXTRA QUANTITY OF GOODS ON BOARD-
Page 660
Forget about ULCC (Ultra Large Crude Carriers) - These carriers are so huge that they actually slow down if they are required to travel against the earths rotation as such vessels usually seeks to traverse oceans going with the earths rotation to optimise speed- Not may such carrier exist for Charter, no many ports can berth such carrier for loading and unloading either- the maximum loads such carriers can hold can exceed 550,000 or nearly MT 4 million barrels-
Page 667
SHIP: GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND PRACTICE:
Oil tankers generally have up to 12 holding tanks, in where each tank is split into two or more independent compartments by fore-and-aft bulkheads. All such tanks are numbered with tank one being the forward most. Individual compartments are referred to by the tank number and the athwart ships position, such as "one port", "three starboard", or "six centre " defines correctly implied tank positions- A “Cofferdam” is a small space left open between two bulkheads- such a space provides to give protection from heat, fire, or collision. Tankers generally have “Cofferdams” forward and aft of the cargo tanks, and sometimes between individual tanks.
A “Pump room” houses all the pumps connected to a tanker's cargo lines. Larger tankers usually have two pump rooms. A pump room generally spans the total breadth of the ship.
LOADING CARGO
Oil is pumped on and off the ship by way of connections made at the cargo manifold inlet outlet-
Oil is pumped on and off the ship by way of connections made at the cargo pump manifold.
In the Loading an oil tanker, such action consists primarily of pumping cargo into the ship's tank or tanks. As Crude oil or fuel enters the tank, the vapours inside the tank must be somehow expelled or dispersed.
Depending on local regulations and statutory laws of port in use, the vapours can be expelled into the atmosphere or discharged back to the pumping station by way of a vapour recovery input line.
It is also common for the ship to move water ballast during the loading of cargo to maintain and ensure proper trim.
Loading starts very slowly at a very low rate of pressure to ensure that equipment is working correctly and that connections at flanges are secure. In turn slow pressure turns into steady pressure which is maintained and achieved and held until the "topping-off" phase when the tanks are nearing capacity. “Topping off”process is a very dangerous time in handling oil, and the procedure is applied in a very regimented cautious manner.
Tank measuring equipment is used to define change on how much space is left in the tank, and all tankers have at least two independent methods for tank measuring applications . As the tanker fills, crew members open and close valves manually to direct the flow of product and maintain close communication with the pumping facility to decrease and finally stop the flow of liquid.
Page 687
Many have seen the term “REBCO” used in defining Russian crude Oil- Even Nymex uses such a term- When in fact, as usual over time even Corporate giants can get it wrong- Any Russian crude oil is exportable if export permits are obtained- Urals crude oil is correctly defined as
“RCMB” meaning “Recombined”- Since Russian extraction comes from varying oil wells of different grades, the product are “blended to form the final 31-33 API range and since Urals is a heavy blend- due to its high sulphur content, then don’t assume for one moment that many USA refineries have the required capabilities to refine such a blended heavy product- and that the Asian or Indian market is the best buyer market for such crude oil is the first assumption the intermediary makes-
This is what we mean when we say “Skill of the intermediary” and “experience” - The controlling intermediary has to advise its sourcing intermediary to offer the crude to mostly Asian markets is an important factor in getting such goods noticed or sold quickly- as time is of the essence.
Page 808
CRUDE OIL IS CLASSIFICATION;
Light, medium, or heavy, according to its measured API gravity.
- Light Crude has an API gravity higher than 31.1 °API.
- Medium Crude has an API gravity between 22.3 °API and 31.1 °API.
- Heavy Crude has an API gravity below 22.3 °API.
EIA
The acronym for the Energy Information Administration. Created by Congress in 1977, the EIA is a statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Energy. The EIA's mission is to provide policy-independent data, forecasts, and analysis to promote sound policy making, efficient markets, and public understanding regarding energy and its interaction with the economy and the environment.
F.O.B.
The acronym for Free on Board. The F.O.B. price excludes cost, insurance, and freight charges, whereas the CIF price includes them- Under the USA commercial code (UCC) FOB slightly varies to the meaning as applied Under Incoterms 2000 as defined under ICC Paris France- USA traders more so than anyone else must stipulate FOB as follows- ICC FOB “Name Port of Shipment”
In Container business the FOB is replaced by “FCA” meaning “ Free carrier”
NYMEX
The acronym for the New York Mercantile Exchange.
OPEC
The acronym for Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.
RESIDUAL
What remains from crude oil after removing the more valuable products, such as diesel, gasoline, kerosene, and naphtha.The end product being used as bitumen
SOUR CRUDE
Crude oil that has a high sulphur content. The minimum level varies, depending on who's defining, but 2.5% sulphur by weight is high enough by any standard.
SWEET CRUDE
Crude oil that has a low sulphur content. The maximum level varies, depending on who's defining, but 0.42% sulphur by weight is the cut off for the NYMEX Light, Sweet Crude Oil Contract.
WEST TEXAS INTERMEDIATE
A grade of crude oil that has its main delivery point in Cushing, OK. The spot price for WTI delivered to Cushing is the ultimate settlement price for the NYMEX oil futures contract.
WTI
The acronym for West Texas Intermediate.
Addition: Added July 2010
Page 818
CRUDE OIL : RUSSIA
Please be advised that the United States and the Russian Federation are signatories to the Hague Convention of October 5, 1961. In accordance with the Convention, in order for U.S. documents to be valid in Russia, they must bear an Apostille - certificate confirming the capacity of the government official signing the document, authenticity of the signature and, where appropriate, of the seal or stamp on the document. Documents with Apostille do not require any further legalisation. (Apostille: A notation. A marginal note:Noted-)
As it applies to USA Government so does it applies to many other countries - Accordingly if you get goods from Russian intermediary , then the contract in matters of export has to be endorsed by the government Authority allowing exporting goods , unless the company is a government owned body-
So much for the many Crude oil offer out there-
Upon legalisation of contract by Ministry of Energy, Russia Federation, copies of legalised contract issued are exchange to all parties within one week of signatory electronically.
And typically some of the main delivery documents- to included ;
Copy of License to Export: Department of the Russian Ministry of Energy
Copy of Approval to Export: Department of the Russian Ministry of Justice
Copy of Statement : Availability of the Product
Copy of the Russian Refinery Commitment to Produce the Product
Copy of *Transneft pipeline Contract/ to Port of loading
Copy of the Russian Port Storage Agreement
Copy of Tank Receipts and SGS Report
In effect- you get an offer for Russian fuels/Crude- then test the offer - Ask the “Seller” to stipulate delivery documents - If you get something like above , continue If not- RF it .
*Transneft owns the pipeline rights and not because they own the product being offered.