What if the biggest market story isn’t the one everyone is watching, but the one nobody wants to discuss? There is a fascinating disconnect unfolding in global markets right now. On the surface, everything seems orderly: a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran; a rocket company soaring to the stars; retail investors euphoric. But beneath this exterior, something else is stirring—something that has little to do with “geopolitics for dummies” or “space tourism:” the oil market is far from okay, and perhaps it was never meant to be.
The Silent Squeeze
Let’s start with a simple fact: the physical oil market is tighter than it has been in years. The storage tanks at Cushing, Oklahoma—America’s primary crude hub—are running dangerously low. Not “we should watch this” low, but “we’re approaching the operational floor” low. The last time inventories were this depleted, prices went haywire. That was “Covid 2020,” but in reverse. Back then, storage was overflowing and prices collapsed, briefly into negative territory. Today, the opposite dynamic is at play: there isn’t enough crude to go around, and the futures market is contorting itself into backwardation so steep it’s practically a warning siren (“backwardation” is when near-term prices are higher than future prices; it signals an acute physical shortage and the market desperately bidding for immediate delivery).
Every Wednesday, the Energy Information Administration releases its storage data, and every week the numbers have been worse than expected. In this respect, the diplomatic theatre with Iran was timed suspiciously well, with MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) announced just as the latest drawdown hit the wires. A coincidence? Possibly. But the market isn’t exactly buying it. The “peace premium” evaporated almost as quickly as it appeared, and the front-month contract continues to trade at a stubborn premium to future months (this means that the contract for delivery next month is more expensive than contracts for later months, the opposite of a “normal” market where future prices are higher to account for storage costs; it is the market’s way of screaming “we need oil NOW”). The barrel is physical reality. The mask is narrative, a story so captivating that it allows investors to ignore the constraints gathering underneath it.
Enter the Rocket
Now, pivot to what the world is actually watching: SpaceX. The “IPO of the century” has been nothing short of spectacular—a retail frenzy of truly historic proportions. In its first days of trading, SpaceX options set records. Retail investors poured in, and the company briefly surpassed Microsoft in market capitalization, despite generating a fraction of the revenue. Well, let’s call this “the mask” (or, more fittingly, Musk’s mask). Because here’s the detail that gets lost in the euphoria: only a sliver of SpaceX shares is actually available for trading. The float is tiny—around 5%—and the rest is locked up, waiting for a release date in mid-August. When that happens, a wave of insider shares could hit the market. But that’s a problem for later. For now, the rocket is the story that is drowning out everything else.
What is being drowned out? Quite a lot—starting with artificial intelligence. The AI narrative has been a pillar of the bull market, but the economics are starting to fray. OpenAI, the poster child of the revolution, is losing billions: $21 billion in losses against $13 billion in revenue last quarter. Microsoft, its largest supporter, is scaling back commitments. It has walked away from a $3 billion cloud lease and is exploring cheaper, open-source alternatives. Even DeepSeek is reportedly being considered as a lower-cost option. The AI trade has been a story of limitless potential, but the margins continue shrinking. Token costs are down 20% this month alone and computer rental prices are at one-month lows. The AI trade increasingly resembles a classic technological paradox: exploding adoption alongside collapsing unit economics. Investors may eventually discover that these are not the same thing.
Here the risk is not merely that oil prices rise, but that higher energy costs arrive in a market built on optimistic assumptions about growth, inflation, and monetary policy. Shortages become crises especially when they collide with leverage, and modern markets remain heavily dependent on leverage of one form or another.
Hormuz and the Monetary Trap
Today, 20 June, Iran’s military announced it was closing the Strait of Hormuz, because of continued Israeli strikes in Lebanon, which Iran and Hezbollah view as a violation of the ceasefire deal that was supposed to underpin the broader US-Iran agreement. The agreement, it seems, lasted just long enough for markets to believe in it. The BBC’s own reporting captures it perfectly: “The deal between Iran and the United States was always fragile and torturous in the making. Already there are signs it is unravelling.”
By now we all know that the Strait of Hormuz is the world’s most critical oil chokepoint, through which 20% of global oil passes daily. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy issued a stark warning to all vessels: “Do not approach the Strait of Hormuz; otherwise, your security will be jeopardized.” The US military immediately pushed back, claiming that 55 merchant ships had transited and that safe passage remained intact. But while the US is counting barrels in real-time, trying to project calm as the foundation cracks beneath it, the real question is: why does this soap-opera “deal”—already declared and broken multiple times—matter for the monetary game? Because oil is the lynchpin, and the US knows it.
The Federal Reserve is puffing its chest, trying to talk tough on rates. But it has a problem: oil. Crude is the one commodity that is both deeply financialized and fiercely industrial. It is the bridge between Wall Street and Main Street. And because of that, it is the Fed’s favourite scapegoat—as well as its ultimate constraint. When oil spikes, the Fed can say: “Inflation is out of control, we must hike.” When oil crashes, it can say: “Growth is at risk, we must cut.” The price of crude gives the central bank cover for almost any policy decision.
The Asymmetric Trap
Here is the perverse logic at the heart of this game, now supercharged by yet another “Hormuz closure” headline. Things could still develop as follows:
Iran closes the Strait. Oil supply is disrupted. Prices spike.
The US economy, already fragile, faces a stagflationary shock. Higher energy costs = higher inflation + lower growth.
The Fed, despite all the chest-puffing, cannot hike into a supply-driven oil shock. Doing so would accelerate the recession and break the financialised economy entirely.
So the only way out is down. The US must “accept” a recession that kills demand and cools prices. Once the recession is confirmed, the Fed pivots—cutting rates and injecting stimulus to manage the fallout. Covid 2.0.
This is the game within the game. The US needed the latest “Iran deal” to buy time and manage market psychology. But you cannot negotiate with material reality: oil is real and its shortage is even more so. However, what policymakers can do is use physical reality to justify decisions they already wish to make.
So now the central bank is signalling hikes, and the market is pricing them in. But if oil spikes hard enough on the back of a confirmed and continued Hormuz closure, the economy will buckle, and the Fed will have no choice but to pivot fast. That means the hawkish rhetoric is vulnerable to a single and highly manipulable variable: crude. The real game is about the survival of an over-leveraged, hyper-financialised economy. And survival, in this context, requires lower rates.
The Unwinding
Where does this end? Perhaps the mid-August lockup triggers a bout of volatility that forces the Fed to blink. Perhaps the oil market decides it has had enough of geopolitical farces and reprices to reflect the physical reality. Perhaps the AI margin compression becomes too obvious to ignore, and the retail euphoria fades. Or perhaps the rocket keeps flying, the Hormuz closure tightens to then untighten, and the silence continues. But silence is just noise deferred, not safety.
The game is far from over. It has not even reached its most “interesting” chapter. And now the final act might be unfolding faster than anyone expected.
 | A guest post by
|
One thing your analysis left out Fabio, is the sudden and rapid uptake of EVs. Sales of electric vehicles have surged world wide and show no sign of abating. We already have electric buses and I've read accounts of electric long haul trucks in the US.
Throw in developments in solar panels and battery storage, I doubt these folk will go back to fossil fuels.
That might drop a spanner into the machinery of the global economy.