Not all oil giants are prospering from the Iran war Exxon and Chevron have benefited less than their European rivals May 7th 2026 The third gulf war should, in theory, be a huge blessing for big oil. In January most analysts had expected Brent crude, the global oil-price benchmark, to average $60 a barrel in 2026. It ended the first quarter at $118; refined products have risen faster still. With most Gulf oil trapped behind the Strait of Hormuz, exports from America, Africa and Brazil are up. Western majors should therefore be collecting fatter margins on every barrel—and selling more of them, too. Since the war began the share price of Shell, a British giant, has risen by 4%; those of TotalEnergies, BP and Eni, its big European rivals, have soared by 14–17%. But Chevron and ExxonMobil, America’s twin colossi, are down by 1% and 2%, respectively. The war’s effect on Western majors, it
turns out, is uneven. First-quarter results, released in recent days, point to three reasons: hedging positions, trading gains and the location of production assets. In the three months to March 31st Chevron and Exxon reported net incomes of $2.2bn and $4.2bn—down by 37% and 46%, respectively, from a year before. These sharp declines are largely accounting illusions. Oil-and-gas sales are typically agreed weeks or months before delivery. To guard against price swings, the majors buy hedges—contracts that pay if oil prices fall in the interim. When prices soar, the hedges lose value, causing paper losses. These amounted to $2.9bn for Chevron and $3.9bn for Exxon in the quarter. Those markdowns will be offset by higher revenue when the sales are completed. But American rules require firms to recognise hedging losses immediately, not upon delivery. Moreover, American producers typically buy more price protection than European rivals. Exxon’s and Chevron’s first-quarter hedging losses were unusually large, but if prices keep rising hedging will weigh on their earnings more than those of their competitors. At the same time, European firms are posting trading profits that still elude American ones. Because they have been unable to rely as much on domestic production, Europe’s majors have spent decades building large trading desks that employ hundreds of people. These desks don’t just hedge cargoes; they buy and sell crude, refined products and gas to profit from price differences across regions and over time. BP, for example, trades around 12m barrels of oil per day, equivalent to nearly 11 times its production. In volatile markets, traders can make huge profits exploiting price discrepancies. The segment that hosts BP’s trading unit earned $2.2bn in the first quarter, up from almost nothing a year before. The unit housing Total’s made $1.6bn, a fivefold increase on the same period in 2025.
In recent years American majors have tried to catch up. The Gulf crisis shows how far Chevron has come, notes Kim Fustier of HSBC, a bank. It is increasingly routing its own production through its trading arm, rather than relying on third-party merchants, to place barrels where they can earn the highest margins. The firm expects to handle over 40% of its crude in-house next quarter—double last year’s share—helping to keep its refineries in Asia, where fuel is scarce, over 80% utilised. Exxon appears to be lagging behind. To make matters worse, its operations are being hit particularly hard by the Hormuz closure. Around a fifth of its oil-and-gas production is located in the Middle East, one of the highest exposures among the majors (see chart). Exxon pumped the equivalent of 4.6m barrels per day (b/d) over the first quarter, down from 5m in the previous one. If the strait remains shut until the end of June, the company says its output would fall to 4.1m–4.3m b/d. Both Exxon and Chevron say they have no plans to boost investment in America’s shale basins to take advantage of higher prices. The longer the war continues, the more the majors’ fortunes may diverge. They could widen even further if Donald Trump bans fuel exports, which analysts deem possible if petrol hits $5 a gallon in America. That would deepen the discount of West Texas Intermediate, America’s flagship crude
grade, to Brent, and stop domestic refiners from selling at global prices, cutting American firms’ upstream and downstream profits. Mr Trump, typically a cheerleader for big oil, is getting desperate. American majors are awaiting his next moves with rising dread, baby, dread. ■ To track the trends shaping commerce, industry and technology, sign up to “The Bottom Line”, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter on global business. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//business/2026/05/06/not-all-oil-giants-are-prospering- from-the-iran-war
The remarkable revival of eBay The internet’s flea market is back—and GameStop wants to buy it May 7th 2026 The first thing sold on eBay was a broken laser pointer. In 1995 Pierre Omidyar, the founder, listed the item to test the idea of an online auction. A bidding war ensued and the pointer was sold for the princely sum of $14.83. From that humble start eBay grew into a vast bazaar. By 2005 it was worth almost $80bn, about four times the value of rival Amazon. That shine slowly faded as its customers left for bigger rivals and niche marketplaces. But over the past few years eBay has mounted a surprising comeback. Consider its results for the first quarter. Sales grew by 17% year on year. The number of buyers, which had been falling, has stabilised at around 135m a year. Investors are pleased. EBay’s share price has jumped by around 150% since the start of 2024. So buzzy has it become that GameStop, a video-
game seller beloved of retail investors that has lately been expanding into collectibles, has offered to buy it for $56bn. EBay’s comeback started with a new boss. Six years ago Jamie Iannone, a former eBay manager who went on to work at Walmart, returned to take charge. Market share was being lost to rivals including Amazon and Walmart, which offered countless products and used their logistics networks to deliver them quickly, along with niche second-hand markets, such as the RealReal, a fashion-resale platform, and StockX, a marketplace for trainers. Mr Iannone’s solution was to focus on what he calls the “heritage of eBay”, such as used, refurbished and out-of-season goods. That meant prioritising a small number of “focus categories”, including collectibles, fashion and car parts, which account for a third of the total value of goods sold on the platform. In these areas management worked to improve customer trust. Learning from rivals such as the RealReal, it rolled out ways of authenticating valuable goods. A set of Pokémon cards or a Gucci handbag can first be shipped to one of eBay’s experts to verify that it is real, for example. Some refurbished goods now come with warranties. EBay has boosted its focus categories with acquisitions. It bought Goldin, a marketplace for collectibles, in 2024. The next year it snapped up Caramel, a car-selling platform. In February it acquired Depop, a second-hand marketplace, from Etsy. It has also made buying and selling easier. Sellers rave about eBay’s international shipping service, which allows them to send foreign-bound packages to the marketplace, which takes care of the rest, including customs forms and tariffs. (The buyer typically picks up the tab.) Artificial- intelligence tools help to create listings. Expensive cards can now be stored in an eBay-run, climate-controlled vault in Delaware, so they can be exchanged without buyers taking physical delivery. To help fund all this, Mr Iannone has been trimming costs across the business. In February eBay said that it would lay off 800 staff, equivalent to 6% of its workforce.
The turnaround has benefited from factors outside eBay’s control. A boom in the trading-card market, thanks in part to pandemic-era stimulus cheques, has endured. Demand for second-hand clothing is roaring, too, especially among Gen Z. Geopolitical uncertainty has sent the prices of gold and silver rocketing, helping sales of bullion and collectible coins. Even so, eBay’s revival is impressive. Michael Morton of MoffettNathanson, a research firm, notes that online marketplaces are particularly hard to turn around: “When you start losing buyers, vendors look for other places to sell.” Ryan Cohen, GameStop’s boss, has had a harder time reversing its fortunes of his company. Its revenue fell by 14% year on year in its most recent quarter, as e-commerce has continued to erode its business. Mr Cohen may hope that bringing the firms together would give GameStop a speedy way to expand its online presence while providing eBay with a retail footprint to lure in passers-by and act as a distribution network. But such a deal would be tricky to pull off: the proposed offer is nearly five times the current market value of GameStop. If Mr Cohen wants a bargain, he will have to look elsewhere. ■ Editor’s note: This article has been updated. To track the trends shaping commerce, industry and technology, sign up to “The Bottom Line”, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter on global business. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//business/2026/05/03/the-remarkable-revival-of-ebay
Can a beauty mega-deal save Estée Lauder? America’s cosmetics champion wants to buy its way back to better days May 7th 2026 In the world of posh cosmetics, two firms have long dominated. On one side of the Atlantic is France’s L’Oréal, owner of swanky labels such as Lancôme, as well as drugstore stalwarts such as Maybelline. On the other side is America’s Estée Lauder, home to a range of high-end brands typically found in department stores. Lately, however, Lauder has been looking dishevelled. The American company’s market value, having shot from $16bn in 2010 to $133bn in 2021, has since slid back to $31bn—a seventh of L’Oréal’s figure. Its sales in 2025, at $14.7bn, were down by 17% from their peak four years earlier, even as the beauty business as a whole has boomed. In pursuit of a glow up, Lauder is spending big: it is said to be planning a takeover bid for Puig, a