I don’t view the Ben, PetroChina–Trafigura transaction as evidence of a short squeeze, nor do I see it merely as a routine spot trade. The pre-booking of cargoes by physical buyers, Europe’s storage needs, transportation risks in the Middle East, and the upward slope of the JKM curve all point in the same direction. My primary conclusion is that, in the current LNG market, the marginal buyer with the lowest tolerance for supply disruption is setting the price—and this may signal a broader regime shift far beyond a single Trafigura transaction. The key data to confirm this will be how many independent physical cargoes changed hands in the first week of November at $33–35 per MMBtu. If multiple buyers are paying these prices, the thesis of broad market acceptance gains strength. If purchases dry up and only a few traders transact at these elevated levels, the explanation of short-covering and temporary squeeze becomes more plausible. It’s possible Trafigura covered a short position or closed a physical delivery gap, but existing data points to a broader physical LNG supply constraint. There is a pricing behavior here that cannot be explained by the panic of a single buyer. Moreover, market data surrounding the October 30 transaction helps us make this distinction. Are Asian buyers truly paying these prices? Here, S&P Global’s research from October 22 is critical for comparison. China’s state-backed buyers have secured LNG cargoes for December delivery. A South Korean LNG importer has purchased at least five to six cargoes for December–January delivery. Taiwan is also expected to make new purchases due to Middle East supply risks. In contrast, China’s second-tier importers have stayed on the sidelines due to high prices. Thus, physical demand is real, but it cannot be said that all buyers are accepting these prices. I believe this reflects a security-of-supply premium rather than a classic demand surge. https://t.co/5Z1EkbMSGp