Summary of all formal responses

Following the recent announcement that ICIS would be launching a formal methodology consultation process, we have received a number of responses from key market players. To read the anonymised public responses please click on the links below.

ICIS received in total 20 responses.

This summary takes into account all responses, both confidential and public.

Of the 20 respondents answering the question about the reliability of the current ICIS ethylene methodology, 19 respondents said that it provides a reliable measure of market value.

Some respondents had suggestions about limiting participation in the Europe monthly contract price negotiations, while others were in agreement with the current process.

Two of the 20 respondents wanted contributors to the reports to be bound by explicit guidelines for the behaviour of industry participants in giving information to ICIS.

A number of respondents asked whether ICIS could delay the release of certain contract information to the market.

One respondent felt that spot assessments should represent an average of deals done.

ICIS Initial Decision

The responses do not provide sufficient feedback for ICIS to change its current methodology for deals-based reporting of ethylene contract or spot markets in any of the geographical regions.

However, ICIS is sensitive to the various issues raised in connection with reporting the Europe monthly contract price, and will continue to consult with the industry about how this can be improved.

Industry suggestions to impose volume restrictions on the contract settlement process would rely on ICIS having full disclosure of contract partners’ current balances. ICIS will take further steps to gather this information with a view to implementing the proposed methodology changes. ICIS will deliver what the industry needs, provided that it delivers fair market value. The proposed changes will be ready for review by 1 October 2013 (GMC03/13).

ICIS will not delay the reporting of initial Europe contract settlements, as this would be counter to our Editorial Standards which require us to promote transparency, and would disadvantage ICIS subscribers.

To provide further comments or feedback on the ICIS ethylene methodology, please contact :

Barbara Ortner:

Nel Weddle:

This document is not open for consultation