CRUDE WRAP: WTI (V6) SETTLES USD 2.43 LOWER AT 100.05/BBL; BRENT (X6) SETTLES USD 3.02 LOWER AT 104.61/BBL

The crude complex was lower on Friday, paring some of Thursday's notable gains amid some profit-taking and slightly more constructive geopolitical developments. During the European morning, the FT reported that Gulf foreign ministers plan to meet with their Iranian counterpart as part of efforts by Oman and Iran to secure an agreement on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. Elsewhere, Saudi Crown Prince MBS reportedly called President Trump twice on Thursday, urging him to launch strikes against the Houthis, although Trump declined.

More recently, and adding further pressure to crude benchmarks, Iran's Foreign Ministry said it is "planning to hold a regional meeting with the participation of the Persian Gulf coastal countries." As such, attention will remain firmly on any further US/Iran and regional developments over the weekend following the sharp gains in WTI and Brent this week.

On the supply front, CNN reported, citing sources, that the Saudi Arabian oil pipeline system was struck by projectiles, triggering fires.

Away from the Middle East, the IEA OMR said it expects 2026 world oil demand to fall by 2.5mln BPD (prev. forecast: -1.6mln BPD), citing the impasse in US-Iran talks aimed at resolving the conflict. Meanwhile, the weekly Baker Hughes rig count saw oil rigs rise by 1 to 450, and natural gas rigs increase by 2 to 132, leaving the total rig count up 3 to 591.

Episodes in which crude prices are driven by prospective de-escalation around Gulf shipping have historically followed a familiar sequence: a geopolitical risk premium builds on disruption fears through the week, then bleeds out on any credible diplomatic channel, with the front of the curve and the Brent-WTI spread doing the moving rather than outright fundamentals. Reports of Gulf-Iran talks over the Strait of Hormuz fit that pattern, and the conflicting signal from a strike on Saudi pipeline infrastructure illustrates the standard tension in such episodes, where supply-side damage and diplomatic progress pull in opposite directions and the premium tends to track whichever thread is newer. The distinction worth drawing is between headlines that threaten physical flows and those that merely reprice the probability of disruption: actual infrastructure damage has historically had more durable effects than negotiation chatter, which fades if talks stall. The IEA's downward demand revision adds a slower-moving bearish layer, though agency forecast cuts of this kind have typically mattered more for the back of the curve than for prompt pricing. The rig count is marginal at the margin. Weekend headlines on US-Iran and regional developments are the obvious follow-on, and gaps at the Sunday reopen have been the recurring signature of this kind of setup.