Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Executive (*53 Slots Left)

Kuwait’s oil chief says the country could be refining far more fuel than it is. What is missing, he says, is ships prepared to haul it away. Sheikh Nawaf Saud Al-Sabah, who heads state-owned Kuwait Petroleum Corporation (KPC) as Chief Executive Officer, told an energy forum hosted by Dow Jones in New York on October 21 that Kuwait had idled about 600,000 barrels a day of refining because too few tankers were willing to take the output, The Daily Upside and Al-Rai reported. On our arithmetic, that is about 42 percent of the 1.415 million barrels a day its three refineries can process. Kuwait has no pipeline around the Strait of Hormuz, so its oil must leave by sea, and KPC has been shuttling it out on its own ships. Those ships keep getting hit. Gosships could confirm six vessels of KPC’s shipping arm, Kuwait Oil Tanker Company, or KOTC, struck since March, the latest the product tanker Al Dasma on October 21. KOTC is buying anyway. Xclusiv Shipbrokers reported on October 26 that KOTC had acquired Kastos, a coated LR2 built in 2025, for $120 million, the figure Banchero Costa and Advanced Shipping & Trading also gave, while Lion Shipbrokers put it at $125 million. Xclusiv, which lists Kastos among Aframaxes, puts the price of ordering a new Aframax at $78 million, but VesselsValue says yard slots for new crude tankers now run into 2029 and 2030. That is the boring explanation, and it holds: Lion and VesselsValue both say a ship that can trade today commands a premium, and Kastos cost about 20 percent more than Xclusiv’s value for a resale, a ship just delivered or about to be. The less noticed part is the type of ship. LR2s are the biggest tankers regularly used to move refined fuel on long voyages, the International Energy Agency says, and strong crude earnings have drawn some owners to switch them into crude. Clarksons puts the share of the LR2 fleet now in dirty trades at two-thirds. On our reading, Kuwait is short of ships willing to carry its fuel, and it is paying to own one. This brief sets out what brokers say Kuwait bought, why so much of its refining is idle, what its ships have been through, what the price says, what changed this week and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• 🛢️ The Story:

  What brokers say Kuwait bought, why so much of its refining is idle, what its ships have been through, what the price says, what changed this week and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  About 600,000 barrels a day of refining idle, about 42 percent of Kuwait’s capacity, a reported $120 million for a 2025-built LR2 against $78 million to order a new Aframax, at least six KOTC ships hit since March, two-thirds of the LR2 fleet in dirty trades and KD 5.38 million of emergency contracts for KOTC

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and product trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Iran’s November 1 move against Sinokor, the November 3 midterms, the idled refining capacity, KOTC’s next purchase, the repair yard, the pipelines and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  On our reading, for a state with no pipeline around Hormuz, the tanker it owns is the one it can count on

🔗 Related Coverage

Subscribe To Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Executive (*53 Slots Left)

The best-performing US-listed exchange-traded fund of 2026 so far owns no ships and no shipping stocks. The Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF, ticker BWET, holds freight futures, with about 90 percent of its exposure in TD3C, the Baltic Exchange’s benchmark for shipping 270,000 metric tons of crude to China from the Middle East Gulf. Its shares closed 2025 at $19.26 and reached a record close of $1,012.75 on October 8, a more than 52-fold rise that ETF.com and Benzinga both put at 5,157 percent, and its net assets grew from $1.93 million at the end of 2025 to $232.1 million on October 19. It closed at $801.20 on October 20, 20.9 percent below that record. The boring explanation holds as far as it goes: VLCC freight soared after the United States and Israel struck Iran on February 28, and the fund’s futures rose with it. On our reading, the less noticed part is what the fund’s own annual report, filed with the SEC on September 25, says comes next. It says “the probability of a sharp correction in freight rates remains exceptionally high” and that once regional hostilities end and normal transits through Hormuz resume, “freight rates are widely projected to decline sharply from their current elevated baselines.” The futures it holds already slope down. On our arithmetic from the holdings its sponsor published for October 20, its March 2027 TD3C contracts are priced about 42 percent below its October contracts. On October 20, Iran told Pakistan’s army chief, a key go-between, that there would be “no talks with Washington until Tehran’s demands were met,” Reuters reported. The fund has been through a deal before. In June, the week after Washington and Tehran signed an interim agreement, BWET fell 41.2 percent in four sessions. After that deal fell apart, the fund went on to an October record almost eight times its June low. Separately, a trial over the TD3C benchmark itself, brought by the trader Mercuria, is reported to open in London on October 26. On our reading, a fall on the scale of June’s would not cost BWET its 2026 crown, but a deal would test its price in the way its own filing describes. This brief sets out how the fund rose, what its filing says, what its futures price, what happened in June, what Tehran is demanding, why the benchmark is in court and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  How a $1.9 million fund took the lead in 2026, what its own filing says, what its futures already price, what happened after the June deal, what Tehran is demanding, why the benchmark is in court and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The more than 52-fold rise to a $1,012.75 record close, the 20.9 percent fall by October 20, $232.1 million of net assets on October 19, March futures about 42 percent below October, June’s 41.2 percent fall and the trial reported for October 26

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and crude trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Washington’s answer to Tehran, the trial reported for October 26, the October contracts, the weekly reports due October 23, the November 3 midterms, a twice-leveraged BWET, the expense cap and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  On our reading, a fall on the scale of June’s would not cost BWET its 2026 crown, but a deal would test whether its price can survive the outcome its own filing describes

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe To Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Executive (*53 Slots Left)

Frontline, the tanker owner whose largest shareholder is Hemen Holding, held through trusts John Fredriksen established for his immediate family, lost $830.4 million of stock market value on October 15, on our arithmetic, as its shares fell 6.63 percent to $52.54 on a day the S&P 500 rose 0.33 percent. The day before, Reuters reported a US official as saying the Trump administration was weighing relief for blacklisted shadow fleet tankers, letting them haul crude and petroleum products that Washington does not sanction, in a bid to pull record freight rates down. Energy Secretary Chris Wright had floated the idea by video at Riyadh’s World Petroleum Congress on October 12. In Shanghai, COSCO Shipping Energy, China Merchants Energy Shipping and China Merchants Nanjing Tanker all fell by their 10 percent daily limit, and COSCO Shipping Energy’s Hong Kong shares closed 15.64 percent lower. In New York, DHT Holdings, International Seaways and Teekay Tankers lost about $681 million of market value between them, on our arithmetic. The analysts who count the ships say few would come back. Splash247 quoted a Sentosa Shipbrokers analyst saying relief was “unlikely to add genuinely usable fleet capacity” and reported SEB telling clients that extra mainstream capacity would be limited, while Energy Aspects said many ships blacklisted over ties to Russia or Venezuela were still trading. Frontline’s own results run the other way from its share price. Its second-quarter profit of $659.2 million was the highest in its history, after $379.1 million in all of 2025, and by late August it had covered 86 percent of its third-quarter VLCC spot days at $156,900 a day. On our reading, the market was not pricing a wave of returning ships. It was pricing a government that now says it wants freight rates lower, a week after its Treasury said a new round of sanctions “effectively neutralizes the vast majority of Iran’s remaining shadow fleet network.” This brief sets out what Washington floated, how the selling spread, what the analysts count, what the rate indices did, what Frontline has already earned and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What Washington floated, how the selling spread, what the analysts count, what the rate indices did, what Frontline has already earned and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $830.4 million fall in Frontline’s market value, the 6.63 percent drop against a rising S&P 500, about $295.2 million off Hemen’s stake, the Shanghai limit-down moves and Frontline’s record second quarter

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and crude trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Treasury’s decision, China’s October 29 results, the weekly rate indices, the November 3 midterm elections, Frontline’s November 30 report and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  On our reading, the market priced a government that wants freight cheaper, not a wave of returning tonnage

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

International Seaways agreed on October 16 to take over Bruton, an Oslo-listed company backed by Tor Olav Trøim that has one VLCC trading and three under construction, in a deal the New York-listed owner says puts Bruton’s worth at about $370 million. About 96 percent of the price is new International Seaways stock, roughly 3.12 million shares, with cash only for Bruton’s smallest holders. Holders of 50.5 percent of Bruton, among them Koch Inc. and Drew Holdings, which is owned by a trust for Trøim and his immediate family, have already agreed to swap their shares, and the rest follows through a merger once Bruton’s shareholders vote, around October 30. The buyer is flush. International Seaways estimates its third-quarter net income at $340 million to $350 million, including about $50 million gained from selling a 2012-built Suezmax, after $581.1 million in the first half, its filings show. That is over $920 million in nine months, more than the $726.0 million it earned in 2024 and 2025 combined, on our arithmetic. The VLCCs it is buying point to a later market. Two are fixed into 2027 at $95,000 and $105,700 a day, and the other two deliver in August and October 2027 with no charter announced, so on our reading International Seaways is buying exposure to VLCC earnings after the current spike rather than to the spike itself. The stock it is paying with closed at a record $125.04 on October 13, up from $48.55 at the end of 2025, Nasdaq and Yahoo Finance data show. Trusts that John Fredriksen set up for his family were selling it in the weeks before the deal. Their holding company sold 445,290 International Seaways shares between September 18 and October 8, at about $111 to $118.50 apiece, and still holds 13.54 percent, its latest filing shows. Trøim worked alongside Fredriksen for 19 years before stepping down from Fredriksen’s Seatankers group in 2014. This brief sets out what International Seaways is buying, what the $370 million leaves out, the record year behind the bid, the two VLCCs fixed and the two left open, who gets paid, the Fredriksen and Trøim threads and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What International Seaways is buying, what the $370 million leaves out, the record year behind the bid, the two VLCCs fixed and the two left open, who gets paid, the Fredriksen and Trøim threads and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $370 million valuation, the 3.12 million new shares, over $920 million of nine-month profit, the $180,000 a day fourth-quarter bookings and the 13.54 percent stake of the Fredriksen family trusts

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and crude trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Bruton’s meeting notice and fair value statement, the share exchange due around October 20, the vote around October 30, International Seaways’ November 5 results, Mount Horizon’s delivery and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  On our reading, International Seaways is paying with a share price near its record for VLCC earnings after the spike

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Bloomberg reported on October 9, citing Gibson Shipbrokers, that the cost of hiring a tanker for a US to China voyage had reached about $80 million, more than the $74 million list price of a SpaceX Falcon 9 launch. The Baltic Exchange’s own benchmark backs the broker. Its weekly report for the week to October 9 put TD22, a cargo of 270,000 metric tons from the lightering area off Galveston, Texas, to Ningbo in China, at $79,611,111, and Clarksons Research priced the trip at $37.50 a barrel, against $5 in 2025. TD22 topped the launch price for six business days from October 7, until a fall of $5,122,223 on October 15 took it to $70,583,333, in Baltic data published by the broker Optima Shipbroking. Bloomberg put the fare down to a global tanker shortage, and on our reading the market data show why VLCCs were so scarce. Roughly four-fifths of the crude that crossed Hormuz in the days to October 9 appears to have changed vessels in the Gulf of Oman, by Clarksons Research’s estimate, so each of those cargoes tied up two tankers. A standard VLCC also earned more than twice as much on the Middle East Gulf to China run that week as on the US route, on the Baltic’s figures and our arithmetic. One Asian refiner provisionally agreed to pay anyway. Japan’s Cosmo Oil has a VLCC on provisional charter at $81 million to lift US crude on November 19 to 21, Reuters reported on October 9. On spot arithmetic the trade does not pay. S&P Global reported on October 8 that soaring tanker rates had in effect shut the spot window for sending US crude east, with the WTI arbitrage to Northeast Asia sitting at minus $19.77 a barrel that day by the reckoning of CERA, S&P Global’s energy research arm. “Record freight and crude costs crushed margins in Europe and Asia, while discounted feedstocks propelled US margins to new highs,” the International Energy Agency wrote on October 14. On our reading, the buyers who agreed to rocket prices did so for term supply, diversification or security of supply more than for margin. This brief sets out the rocket comparison, what the fare means per barrel, why a VLCC costs this much, who still pays it, the arbitrage that closed, where the barrels go instead, who profits from the fare and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  The rocket comparison, what the fare means per barrel, why a VLCC costs this much, who still pays it, the arbitrage that closed, where the barrels go instead, who profits from the fare and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $79,611,111 benchmark voyage, the $74 million launch, the $81 million provisional charter, the $37.50 a barrel freight, the minus $19.77 arbitrage into Northeast Asia and the $637,675 a day record on the route

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and crude trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Friday’s Baltic report, the Cosmo Oil cargo, November’s export data, Shell’s third-quarter results, Hormuz before the midterms and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  On our reading, the US oil booked to sail east at rocket prices was bought mainly for reasons beyond spot margin

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Trusts that John Fredriksen set up for his family sold $50.7 million of International Seaways shares in the three weeks to October 8, when the New York-listed tanker owner’s stock closed at a record $121.82. It was their third round of selling this year, and each round came at a higher average price: about $75.52 a share in March, $84.72 from April 30 to May 11 and $113.88 from September 18. Filings show 1,458,124 shares sold for $132.3 million in all, and the trusts still hold 6,704,304 shares, 13.54 percent of the company. Their holding company, Famatown Finance, paid an average of about $20.34 a share in 2022, when it built a stake of about 16 percent in five weeks of open-market buying. International Seaways answered with a poison pill within two weeks, and in April this year it extended that rights plan to 2029, naming Famatown in its filing as an affiliate of a competitor. We found no reason for the sales in any of the trusts’ filings, and under the item for the purpose of the holding, each of this year’s three amendments reports no material changes. The trusts’ other big tanker stake looks different. Hemen Holding, which sits under the same two trusts, last reported 35.6 percent of Frontline in March, and we found no filing since that reports a change. A Seatankers Investment Director joined Frontline’s board in February. On our reading, the trusts are reducing the tanker stake where the company built its defenses against them and keeping the one where that director sits on the board. This brief sets out what the filings show, three rounds at rising prices, a stake built in five weeks, a poison pill aimed at Famatown, a truce and a longer pill, the market the trusts are selling into, the trusts’ other stakes and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What the filings show, three rounds at rising prices, a stake built in five weeks, a poison pill aimed at Famatown, a truce and a longer pill, the market the trusts are selling into, the trusts’ other stakes and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $132.3 million, the $50.7 million, the 13.54 percent, the October 8 record close of $121.82, the 20 percent trigger and the $803 million stake that remains

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and crude trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The next amendment, International Seaways’ third-quarter results, the Bruton review, Hemen’s Frontline stake, the rights plan and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  A contested stake, partly sold into a record

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Russia’s government said on Saturday that it had partly reopened diesel exports, clearing 500,000 tons for the world market at this stage, to carry out what it called the agreements between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. A day earlier Trump announced four tranches: more than 300,000 tons at once, another 500,000 during November, a million tons after that and, if Russia’s refineries allow, 3 million more soon afterward, or 4.8 million tons in all, worth about $7 billion at Friday’s US diesel futures prices by our arithmetic. The US Treasury has licensed the trade until April 7, 2027. The question is supply. Russia’s seaborne diesel exports ran at 143,000 to 190,000 barrels a day in the third quarter, depending on the tracker, against about 690,000 a year earlier. The International Energy Agency puts the fall in Russia’s diesel output at nearly 30 percent after Ukrainian drone strikes, and Russia has been importing fuel. The final 3 million tons alone is more than Russia shipped by sea in the whole third quarter. Washington’s own law sets a second test: by October 18 the Graham Act requires duties of up to 500 percent on all Russian goods entering the United States, petroleum products included, and the licence exempts nothing from them. We found no waiver. And the licence is American and silent on the price cap. The EU’s $100-a-barrel cap on Russian diesel still binds EU shipowners and insurers, while diesel trades near twice that. On our reading, the first tranches test Moscow’s willingness. The last one, by Trump’s own account, depends on its refineries. This brief sets out what Trump announced, what Moscow cleared, what Washington licensed, how much diesel Russia has, the October 18 test, who could carry it, where it would go and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What Trump announced, what Moscow cleared, what Washington licensed, how much diesel Russia has, the October 18 test, who could carry it, where it would go and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 4.8 million tons, the 500,000 tons cleared, exports under 200,000 barrels a day, the output fall of nearly 30 percent, the $100 cap and duties of up to 500 percent

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and fuel trader, the underwriter and compliance officer and the ship financier and investor

• 👀 What To Watch:

  October 18, the first cargoes, Russia’s export data, the refinery strikes, the price cap and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  The licence was the easy part

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

In late September the VLCC Atherina, a supertanker built in 2011, changed hands for $146 million. No valuer we checked puts a newbuilding that high: the top figure is $139.6 million, at VesselsValue, and Scorpio Tankers has just agreed $135 million apiece for two new VLCCs due in 2028. In January, a VLCC of the same vintage sold to Sinokor for $68 million. We found no statement from anyone involved on who is paying. VesselsValue now lists as the buyer MSC, the largest container shipping company in the world. Advanced Shipping & Trading and Splash247 name Sinokor, the Korean group in whose tanker arm MSC agreed in February to take a half share. Allied Shipbroking, Star Asia and Banchero Costa say the buyers are based in the United States. Atherina began life as the F Whale, an ore-oil carrier built for the Taiwanese shipowner Nobu Su, and went through a court auction in 2018 at a reported $45 million. On October 8 it was still sailing as Atherina off Namibia, bound for India. This brief sets out what was sold, the three answers to who bought it, the partnership behind two of them, the previous VLCC VesselsValue assigned to MSC, the vessel’s past, why buyers pay newbuilding money for 15-year-old tonnage, the payback arithmetic and what the record supports.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What was sold and for how much, three answers to who bought it, the partnership behind two of them, the previous VLCC VesselsValue assigned to MSC, the ore-oil carrier from Nobu Su’s fleet, why buyers pay newbuilding money for old tonnage, the payback arithmetic and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $146 million, the newbuilding range, the $68 million January sale, the 50 percent stake, the $277,995 a day and the January 2031 survey

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the ship financier and investor, the charterer and trader and the underwriter

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The name on the stern, Korea’s competition ruling, the next valuation reports, VLCC earnings and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  A $45 million auction lot and a $146 million question

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Gold Executive Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Donald Trump met Ursula von der Leyen, who leads the European Commission, at Turnberry, in Scotland, on July 27, 2025, and the two agreed a trade framework under which the European Union intends to buy US energy worth $750 billion through 2028, a sum the Commission put at $250 billion a year.

The first 12 months of trade data since then fall far short. From August 2025 to July 2026, the EU imported €81.43 billion of US mineral fuels, the oil, gas and coal category in Eurostat’s trade statistics.

At the European Central Bank’s monthly exchange rates, that is $94.78 billion: 37.9 percent of the yearly figure, and $14.23 billion more than in the previous 12 months. On our calculation, more fuel and a weaker dollar account for that rise, not higher prices in euros.

The yearly figure equals 83 percent of everything the United States exported in energy in 2025, by the count of the US Energy Information Administration.

Among the European deals announced by the US exporter Venture Global since the framework was agreed, both 20-year contracts start delivering in 2030, after the pledge period ends.

On October 6, von der Leyen said that the EU wants a market operator to buy energy jointly, in a speech that did not mention the United States.
In December, Trump hosts the G20 at his Doral resort.

This brief sets out what was promised, what was bought, where the rise came from, who does the buying, where America’s cargoes went, what the gap means in vessels, the case for the pledge and what it means for tanker and LNG carrier owners, charterers, traders and compliance officers.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What was promised, what the EU actually bought, where the rise came from, who does the buying, where America’s cargoes went, what the gap means in vessels, the case for the pledge and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $750 billion, the $250 billion a year, the $94.78 billion, the 37.9 percent, the 83 percent and the gap in LNG cargoes, about 3,100 a year

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the LNG carrier owner and financier, the charterer and trader and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The European Council, Eurostat’s monthly figures, the midterms and the G20 at Doral, America’s new LNG capacity and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  The promise, the cargo and the gap between them

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

On October 4, 41 days after a Chinese shipyard delivered it, the Dynacom-managed tanker Lipsi was hit by a projectile as it crossed the Strait of Hormuz and was left adrift with engine room damage. It was the third tanker managed by George Procopiou’s Dynacom to be hit around Hormuz since July, and the second to be hit about six weeks after delivery: the VLCC Acheloos was struck on the night of July 19 to 20, about six weeks after its own delivery, within hours of a strike on the product tanker Kavomaleas, which was later reported towed toward the Iranian side of the strait. Iran’s new strait authority has since put Kavomaleas and a second Dynacom tanker, Pserimos, on its list of vessels it says broke its transit rules. The crews of all three tankers hit were reported safe. Dynacom kept sailing. By April, Bloomberg was calling it “by far the biggest non-Iranian shipper” through the strait, and on October 2 the Baltic Exchange put a supertanker’s round-trip earnings on the Gulf to China route at $1,221,893 a day. Procopiou gave his reasons in public in June, and he framed them as service and freedom of navigation. This brief sets out what happened to each tanker, what Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and the strait authority have said, what Procopiou has said, what the strait pays and costs, why the record does not show Dynacom being singled out and what it means for tanker owners, charterers, underwriters and compliance officers.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What happened to Lipsi, the two tankers hit in July, Iran’s list, what Procopiou has said, what the strait pays and costs, the other vessels hit, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The three tankers, the 41 days, the $1,221,893 a day, the war risk premium of up to 10 percent, the two blacklisted tankers and the 6.5 million barrels

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and trader, the marine underwriter and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  Lipsi, the two blacklisted tankers, Iran’s fee bill, the election timetable and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  The owner who keeps sailing, what the strait pays and the bill it has sent him

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

In its 50th year, Zodiac Maritime has ordered 14 tankers and gas carriers worth about $1.77 billion, on this brief’s count of shipyard filings, broker prices and trade press reports. Five are gas carriers ordered from Hanwha Ocean for about $845 million: three very large ammonia carriers, which Splash247 called Zodiac’s “first major step into ammonia shipping,” and two LNG carriers, its first. The other nine are four VLCCs and five suezmax tankers, ordered at yards in China and Vietnam. In late September, Zodiac sold one of the suezmaxes as a resale, so the 13 vessels it still holds from these orders come to about $1.68 billion, or about $2.32 billion with the eight containerships linked to it in July. Its Chief Operating Officer told Lloyd’s List in September 2025 that Zodiac would order new vessels only when there was a need, and Lloyd’s List reported his view that newbuilding prices were probably too high for speculative orders. By May, Lloyd’s List put Zodiac’s backlog at more than 50 newbuildings, up from 20 due by the end of 2027 when he spoke. No charterer has been named for any of the 14 in the sources read for this brief, and Hanwha’s filings describe the buyer only as a shipowner in Africa. This brief sets out what Zodiac ordered, where and for how much, what one resale has changed, how this year compares with last, what Zodiac says about its program, who has chartered its vessels before, the market it is ordering into and what the orders mean for tanker owners, charterers, lenders and compliance officers.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What Zodiac ordered this year, one resale and an unsettled count, its move into ammonia and LNG, how this year compares with last, what Zodiac says about its program, who has chartered its vessels before, the market it is ordering into, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $1.77 billion, the $845 million in gas carriers, the 14 vessels, the resale, the backlog and the markets Zodiac is ordering into

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and trader, the lender and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The options, the first named charterer, the ninth suezmax, the deliveries and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What Zodiac ordered, what it said a year earlier and what this brief could not find

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

J.P. Morgan Asset Management, part of JPMorgan Chase, is tied to at least 28 newbuildings contracted this year, on this brief’s count of shipyard filings, broker reports and trade press. In late May, Andrian Dacy, the asset manager’s Global Head of Transportation, put its own count at more than 30 newbuildings of tankers and gas carriers in about six months. The vessels are being bought for funds that the asset manager runs for institutional investors, and the reasons it gives are demand from charterers, scarce shipyard capacity and an aging world fleet. Eighteen of the 28 appear in South Korean filings: 16 at Samsung Heavy Industries, filed for a buyer described only as a Bermuda region shipowner, and two at Hanwha Ocean, filed for a North America region shipowner. Together those 18 are worth KRW3.46 trillion, about $2.33 billion at the exchange rate each filing states. The other 10 were reported at Chinese yards. The 24 vessels with a filed or reported price come to about $2.87 billion, and four VLCCs without a confirmed price take the total above $3 billion. At Samsung alone, the 16 are more than a third of the 46 merchant vessels the yard has booked this year, including seven of its 14 crude oil tankers. Shipbrokers, shipbuilding sources and the trade press tie most of the orders to Global Meridian Holdings, the asset manager’s Bermuda-based shipowning platform, and the three LNG carriers to a second platform, Oceonix. This brief sets out what was ordered, where and for how much, how JPMorgan’s own count compares, whose money it is, why JPMorgan says it is buying, who has chartered its vessels before and what the orders mean for tanker owners, charterers, lenders and compliance officers.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What the filings and brokers show, what JPMorgan says it has ordered, more than a third of one yard’s book, oil tankers or gas carriers, whose money it is, why JPMorgan says it is buying, who has chartered its vessels before, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 28 vessels, the 18 in shipyard filings, the 16 of 46 at Samsung Heavy, JPMorgan’s own count and the split between oil and gas

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and trader, the lender and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The next filing, the next total, the options, the first named charterer, the deliveries and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What the count measures, whose money it is and what this brief could not find

🔗 Related Coverage

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Raízen, the Brazilian joint venture of Shell and Cosan, whose Shell-branded network in Brazil counted 6,734 fuel stations in March, has asked its shareholders to let its board issue up to 200 billion more shares. That is 100 times the two billion its bylaws allow today, and the vote is on October 30. The 200 billion is not a forecast of what will be issued. It follows from a price. Under the out-of-court restructuring plan that a São Paulo court ratified on July 30, creditors who take the share option convert 45 percent of their claims into new shares at R$0.25 each, and Shell pays R$3.5 billion in cash for new shares at the same price. The plan binds about R$61.4 billion of unsecured financial debt. On this brief’s arithmetic, if every bound claim took the share option, creditors alone would receive about 110.5 billion shares, against 10.35 billion in issue today. Once the capital increase is done, Raízen says, it will no longer have a controlling shareholder with more than half of its voting capital, and Shell, which owns 44 percent today, says the conversion would dilute its stake. This brief sets out how the 200 billion is built, who would own Raízen afterward, what Shell gets for its money, what creditors were offered, how Raízen would split in two, where its fuels business meets the sea and what the restructuring changes for tanker owners, traders, lenders and compliance officers.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What goes to a vote, where the 200 billion comes from, who would own Raízen, what Shell gets for its money, how the debt built up, what creditors were offered, how the split works, the fuel network and its terminals, the R$1 problem, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 200 billion limit, the 10.35 billion shares in issue, the R$0.25 price, the R$61.4 billion of debt, the 45 percent conversion and Shell’s R$3.5 billion

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and trader, the lender and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The October 26 deadline, the two October 30 meetings, the creditor window, the share count, the three milestones that fall on March 31, 2027, the split, the sale process and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What the 200 billion measures, who pays and who would own the company behind the Shell name

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Gunvor Group is now Centalion Group, and the headquarters it plans to move to Singapore is in Nicosia, not Geneva. The parent company, Gunvor Group Ltd, has been registered in Cyprus since January 2011, according to company registry data. It is wholly owned by its employees, about 60 of whom bought out co-founder Torbjörn Törnqvist in December 2025, and their partnership voted for the new name. On October 2 the company also announced a plan to make Singapore the parent’s legal home in place of Cyprus. Geneva stays. The release names Geneva and Houston as main trading offices alongside Singapore and says Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pedersen is based in Houston. Singapore is not new ground. Gunvor Singapore Pte Ltd was incorporated there in May 2006, and Clearlake Shipping, the group’s wholly owned chartering arm, in March 2011. On our reading, the new name and the planned new domicile follow from a change of ownership completed in December 2025, and the legal home would move to where the group’s shipping arm already operates. The company’s stated reasons are below, along with the steps a move out of Nicosia requires, what the tax rates show and what changes for tanker owners, charterers and lenders.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What the partners voted for, where the headquarters is, how much of the group already sits in Singapore, who owns it now, what the old name carried, what leaving Cyprus takes, what the tax rates show, where rival trading houses are registered, the Glencore precedent, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 86.1 percent stake, the 60 or so employee buyers, the loan of up to 10 years, the $144 billion of revenue, the 184 time-chartered vessels and the $1.366 billion Asian credit line

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the tanker owner and broker, the charterer and trader, the lender and the compliance officer

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The Cyprus notices, the Singapore registration, the subsidiary names, Clearlake’s new gas carriers, the next annual results and the falsifier that would change this brief’s reading

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What the new name changes, what it leaves alone and the one tie to the co-founder that remains

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Capital Tankers, the Oslo-listed crude tanker company built from Evangelos Marinakis’s Capital Maritime & Trading, counts 15 VLCCs in its fleet, and one of them is in service. Marinakis is the Greek shipowner who bought Nottingham Forest in 2017 and owns Olympiacos, according to Forbes. On Monday, September 28, Capital Tankers announced the delivery of the dual-fuel Suezmax Ayrton, which lifted the number of vessels it has in service to 16. The 14 VLCCs not yet in service are under construction in South Korea and China, the first due in January 2027 and the last in May 2028. At the end of June the company still had $1.8066 billion of newbuilding payments scheduled across 20 vessels, those 14 VLCCs among them. Until December 31 it can also buy 11 more VLCCs and two Suezmaxes from Capital Maritime at shipbuilding contract prices that its own presentation totals at $1.4963 billion. Capital Maritime held every share before the Oslo listing and was to keep about three quarters after it, the company’s notices show. Those notices, the second-quarter report and the September 1 results call let this brief answer the headline’s question in three parts: who has paid so far, who pays the $1.8066 billion still due at June 30 and who would pay for the 11 option VLCCs. All three answers are below.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  One VLCC in service and 14 under construction, how Capital Tankers was built from Capital Maritime, the bills still due, what management says covers them, the December 31 options, one shipowning group’s three newbuilding programs, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 15 and 14 VLCCs, the $1.8066 billion schedule, where the money has come from, the funding still to come, the 13 option vessels and Capital Maritime’s stake

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the VLCC broker, the charterer and crude trader, the lender and lessor and the shareholder

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The November Suezmax, the November 30 report, the December 31 option deadline, the Athens listing, the next VLCC delivery in January 2027 and the falsifier that would change this brief’s answer

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  Who has paid so far, who pays next and who would carry the 11 option VLCCs

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Norway exported about 1.5 million barrels of crude oil a day in 2025, according to Norskpetroleum, the government’s petroleum portal, yet it requires emergency fuel stocks equal to only 20 days of domestic consumption. Sweden and Finland, which fall under international stock rules that exempt Norway, require 90. Norway has one refinery, Mongstad, and depends on imported diesel and jet fuel, a study by the defense research institute FFI found in March. Every level now on the table would at least double that 20-day floor. On May 26 parliament asked the government, by 88 votes to five, to set out 61-day and 90-day options with the 2027 budget, which it presents on Wednesday, October 7. A separate proposal asking for a plan, by October, for capacity of up to 90 days failed by two votes. In August, consultants commissioned by the government recommended 61 days over the long run, with about 45 held in Norway and the rest stored abroad. Labor members of parliament’s energy and environment committee put the cost of buying 70 days of fuel, the distance from today’s floor to 90 days, at about NOK 7 billion, or about $731 million. On this brief’s arithmetic, each extra day of gasoline, auto diesel and jet fuel is about 14.4 million liters, and 70 extra days would be about one billion liters, or 6.4 million barrels, to buy, carry and store.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  The 20-day floor, why the 90-day rules never applied to Norway, one refinery and imported diesel, how parliament got to 61 and 90 days, what the consultants recommended, what 70 days means in liters, the refinery idea in the north, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The 20 and 90 days, the crude exports, the daily liters, the May votes, the 45-day and 61-day recommendation, the NOK 7 billion estimate and the barrels behind each option

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the product tanker broker, the fuel importer and trader, the terminal owner and the storage operator in a neighboring country

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The October 7 budget, the proposals on diesel and jet fuel production, the requested talks with Nordic neighbors and the UK, the refinery proposal, the budget vote, the monthly fuel data and the falsifier that would change this brief’s numbers

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What the 45-day, 61-day and 90-day levels would each mean in barrels, and who would pay for them

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

China’s 15 percent tariff on US liquefied natural gas (LNG) took effect on February 10, 2025. Within weeks, US cargoes had all but vanished from Chinese customs data. Chinese buyers kept lifting them anyway. Bloomberg reported on September 21 that they were still honoring their US contracts and selling the cargoes on in Europe and Asia, beyond the reach of China’s tariff. On September 24 the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) estimated what reselling US and Australian LNG has been worth to Chinese companies since 2021: $4.6 billion in profit through June 2026. Two state companies, CNOOC and PetroChina, accounted for 64 percent of the resales made by Chinese charterers in 2025, it said. Before Xi Jinping’s state visit to Washington, Reuters reported, citing two people briefed on the discussions, that lower or zero Chinese tariffs on US LNG were on the table, together with a framework of reciprocal tariff cuts covering roughly $30 billion of goods each way. The framework arrived. On September 28 China’s commerce ministry said it would lower tariffs on some $30 billion of US goods, a list of 1,619 items. Coal is on it. Liquefied natural gas and crude oil are not. On IEEFA’s figures, China imported 66 million tonnes of LNG in 2025, against 79 million tonnes at the 2021 peak, yet the report sees its contracted volumes climbing to 114 million tonnes by 2028. It puts 2025’s resales at 17 million to 19 million tonnes. On this desk’s arithmetic, that is equal to 26 to 29 percent of what China imported. The cargoes China does not need still have to sail somewhere. Of those resold by Chinese charterers last year, 42 percent went to Northeast Asia and 32 percent to Europe, and the largest destinations were South Korea, Japan and the Netherlands, IEEFA’s analysis of vessel-tracking data shows. US LNG still faces a combined Chinese tariff of 25 percent, according to ICIS and Forbes, and the trade truce between Washington and Beijing now runs to January 10, 2027.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What IEEFA found, the two companies behind most of the tracked resales, the US cargoes China stopped importing, the summit that left LNG off the list, who takes the surplus, the contracts still to come, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $4.6 billion, the 17 million to 19 million tonnes, the 64 percent, the roughly 260,000 tonnes, the 114 million tonnes and the 25 percent tariff

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the LNG carrier owner and charterer, the LNG trader and portfolio seller, the US exporter and project lender and the utility buyer in Seoul and Tokyo

• 👀 What To Watch:

  China’s September trade data, PetroChina’s third-quarter results, the bonded terminals, the January 10 deadline, new contracts and the falsifier that would overturn this brief’s main finding

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  Where the LNG China does not need went in 2025 and what would bring it home

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

BP and Shell agreed in May 2024 to sell their assets at Sapref, the Durban refinery that once had 35 percent of South Africa’s refining capacity, to the state’s Central Energy Fund for one rand. Reuters and the investigative group Open Secrets have reported that the sellers also agreed to pay between R280 million and R286 million toward the first year’s operating costs. The fund has since recorded an interim gain of R1.8 billion on the purchase. The bill now runs the other way. On September 22 the fund presented Parliament with a revival program estimated at R117 billion, about $7.15 billion, for a refinery of about 400,000 barrels a day, more than twice Sapref’s old capacity, with scope to reach 650,000. Gwede Mantashe, minister of mineral and petroleum resources, wants the National Treasury to fund it directly. Four months earlier, the chair of Parliament’s mineral and petroleum resources committee said the fund’s group had a R65.8 billion project pipeline, of which R64.1 billion was expected to come from a strategic partnership, and warned of a material strategic risk should private capital fall short of what was projected. No strategic partner had been announced by September 27 in the reporting reviewed for this brief, and the Treasury is in a close-out period until October 20, the day before its medium-term budget statement. For tankers the stakes can be measured. South Africa imported 20.0 million tonnes of refined petroleum oils in 2025, against 8.5 million in 2019, while its crude imports fell from 18.2 million tonnes to 7.3 million. On this desk’s arithmetic, a 400,000 barrel-a-day refinery running at capacity would need about 73 VLCC cargoes of crude a year, roughly what the whole country imported in 2019. At $7.15 billion it would cost about $17,900 per barrel of daily capacity, against about $30,800 at Nigeria’s Dangote refinery and about $61,600 at Mexico’s Olmeca, on the same arithmetic.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What the state bought for one rand, what BP and Shell kept, the plan and its estimated cost, who is being asked to pay, what $7.15 billion buys elsewhere, what it means for tankers, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $7.15 billion, the one rand, the R1.8 billion gain, the roughly 400,000 barrels a day, the import tonnes and the cost per barrel of daily capacity

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the product tanker owner and broker, the crude trader and VLCC owner, the lender and project financier and the fuel importer at Durban

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The October 21 budget statement, Parliament’s follow-up, the investment decision, the first-phase contracts, the moorings, the trade data and the falsifier that would overturn two of this brief’s findings

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  Who has paid so far, and who is being asked to pay next

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Vitol keeps appearing among the companies carrying Iraq’s crude to buyers through the war. Bloomberg reported on August 12 that Vitol and TotalEnergies had until then been “the major carriers of Iraqi crude”, and it named both again on August 27. On August 24 Patrick Pouyanné, TotalEnergies’ chief executive, put the cost of a VLCC round trip through Hormuz at about $20 million, which he said added about $10 a barrel. SOMO, the state marketer of Iraq’s oil, has sold mostly at the loading port, which leaves that passage to the buyer. It offered August-loading Basrah Medium at discounts of $25 to $27 a barrel, according to Reuters and Bloomberg, and for September it cut the discount to as little as $15. On this desk’s arithmetic the August discount covered Pouyanné’s figure about two and a half times, and the September floor covers it one and a half times. On the oil ministry’s figures, exports rose. The ministry put September’s average at about 2.6 million barrels a day up to September 21, against about 70 million barrels for all of August, or about 2.26 million a day by this desk’s arithmetic. On this desk’s reading, two changes in late August may explain part of both moves: Iran allowed some tankers laden with Iraqi oil through Hormuz, IRNA reported on August 22, and SOMO put cargoes up for collection by ship-to-ship transfer off the Omani coast. Vitol declined to comment to Reuters. What Iraq took home per barrel in August, how freight east of Oman moved in September and which October numbers will test the $15 floor are set out below.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

How Iraq sells its crude in wartime, the companies with the vessels, what the August discount covered, what changed for September, what Iraq took home, the volume, the ordinary explanation, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

The August and September discounts, Pouyanné’s $10 a barrel, Iraq’s August barrels and revenue, the revenue per barrel, September’s export rate and freight east of Oman

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

What it changes for the crude trader, the VLCC owner and broker, the refinery buyer of Basrah grades and the analyst following Iraq’s oil income

• 👀 What To Watch:

SOMO’s October terms, the ministry’s September figures, freight east of Oman, Iraq’s quota request to OPEC and the falsifier that would overturn this brief

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

What the discount, the cost and the volume say about the companies carrying Iraq’s crude

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more

Gosships Intelligence Is Published At Gosships.com

For Sponsorship And Partnership Inquiries Contact intelligence@gosships.com

|⚓ About Us | 🛢️ Exclusive Report | 📋 SwiftAction Training |

🏅Black Gold Membership (*53 Slots Left)

Between them, broker reports and VesselsValue's sales register now name Onex DMCC, a Dubai-based oil trader, as the buyer of six tankers for about $690 million. Earlier this month this brief asked whether anyone had actually bought the $200 million tanker, partly because the valuer's entry for that sale named a seller and a price but no buyer. Xclusiv's weekly sale and purchase report has since put Onex's name against it, and Compass Maritime counts it among at least five VLCCs it says Onex DMCC has bought. The $200 million is less than a third of the spending. The rest went on five vessels built between 2007 and 2010: the VLCCs Norns, Nissos Heraclea and Ashoka and the Suezmaxes Evridiki and Orpheas. Across the six, Onex paid about $80 million more than VesselsValue's valuations at the time of each sale. The owners who sold Nissos Heraclea had bought it for $53 million in June 2024 and sold it for $112 million. The English High Court has described Onex's trade as "largely focussed on the sale of oil that originates in Iraq". The prices can be measured against two earnings figures. At the average VLCC spot earnings in Banchero Costa's table for September 18, a $112 million VLCC repays its price in about 155 days, before running costs. At the one-year charter rates Banchero Costa and Compass Maritime quoted between September 18 and 21, it needs 622 to 706 days of hire. Which of those two figures holds matters most for the five older vessels, built between 2007 and 2010, which have the least working life left.

📋 In This Issue:

• ⚖️ The Story:

  What the records now show, who Onex is, what it paid over the valuer, the two clocks behind every price, who sold to it, the two VLCCs this brief leaves out, the case against this brief and what the record supports

• 📊 By The Numbers:

  The $690 million, the $80 million over valuation, the Suezmax premiums, the spot and one-year charter rates, the payback days and the sellers’ entry prices

• 🌍 Why It Matters:

  What it changes for the sale and purchase broker, the owner and lender marking a fleet, the charterer and the marine underwriter

• 👀 What To Watch:

  The broker tables due September 25, the next valuation report, the one-year charter rate, the registries, the two disputed VLCCs and the falsifier that would overturn this brief

• 🚨 Gosships Signal:

  What the spot and one-year clocks mean for Onex’s six tankers

🔗 Related Coverage

📊 Order Our Exclusive Report
→ Global Tanker Market Outlook Q3 2026 Edition

📋 Competency-Based Maritime Training → SwiftAction

Subscribe to Gosships Intelligence!

Subscribe now

Read more