In the so-called Draghi Report, published in 2024, it is proposed that regulators should be able to set limits for financial positions or apply dynamic caps if the spot or derivative price in the region deviates significantly from the global market price. Apart from the fact that the market price can not only develop downwards and market forces are then "praised", but that high prices are also possible - as is the case now - prices must be analysed on the right basis. Apples should be compared with apples and pears with pears. The Japan Korean Marker (JKM) price is currently the equivalent of €48.87/MWh, while €52.90/MWh is being demanded on the TTF. The JKM, which covers the markets of China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, refers to LNG deliveries on a "Delivery Ex Ship" (DES) basis. This means that the price quoted includes the price of the commodity LNG and the transport costs to the port of destination. Unloading and any customs and other formalities are to be carried out by the buyer or a person authorised by the buyer. It can be seen that, taking this costly work into account, the prices are very close together and it is certainly not currently possible to speak of a significant deviation of the TTF price from the JKM - despite the fact that LNG ships currently have to wait to be unloaded in the aforementioned JKM markets. Rather, it is the case that the two prices are - to a certain extent - mutually dependent. The global LNG market is short and one can confidently speak of "nervous volatility". What could be done to relax the markets somewhat in view of the refilling of natural gas storage facilities in late spring/summer/autumn 2025? The obligations regarding the minimum storage filling level could be relaxed (somewhat) and at the same time proof of another form of hedging could be demanded. This could be done by demonstrably purchasing natural gas futures, for example - whereby other hedging instruments would have to be purchased when such positions are sold. This would reduce the pressure, and therefore the natural gas price, somewhat during the storage refill period - at the same time, the price of Cal 26 natural gas futures would probably rise somewhat. Such an approach would mean that slightly less natural gas would have to be withdrawn from storage in Q1 2026, meaning that a low storage fill level would be possible at the beginning of November 2025 - with the consequence of lower demand for natural gas in spring/summer/autumn. This option may not be utilised due to the slow decision-making process in the EU, although Germany has just submitted an application for an exemption from the storage refill lower limit. Austria should consider this option as soon as possible and follow the same path.