Exxon Mobil Sets Profit Record

cevans

TDIClub Enthusiast, TDI Parts Ninja Vendor , w/Bus
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Location
Hingham, MA
TDI
2015 Beetle Conv. TDI 6-Speed & 2006 E320 CDI
Good point on the situation a few years ago AD.
 

RAST

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Location
Chicago
TDI
2012 Audi A3 TDI
Wow this thread has really grown a bunch!!

My point is that companies like Exxon are making windfall profits. They didn't develop new oil. They didn't make some new process. They didn't reduce cost or increase capacity to make more money. All they did was, well, nothing. Since they are making this huge profit ($10 billion is a huge number no matter how you slice it) they should have an obligation to help pay some extra for this war. After all without it they would not have made that much profit.

It's interesting to see people line up to defend a huge company like Exxon. They don't give a hoot about you and I. They'll happily take their profit and run while the average taxpayer is getting hit with a $700 Billion bill for this war.

I'm counting the days until I can crank up my TDI on Bio and flip Exxon and their buddies OPEC the bird!! :)
 

DrewD

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
MrMopar said:
And for the past five years running, Dick Cheney's income taxes show that he makes bazillions more dollars in "deferred compensation" from Halliburton than he makes being Vice President. Not like being Vice President is the huge payroll to begin with, but $250,000 (I think) would be really nice for about 99.99% of Americans.

What does this mean? It means that Halliburton agreed to pay Dick Cheney future deferred compensation depending on how well the company does with all the deals set in motion from when Dick Cheney was CEO. Not unheard of, as plenty of businesses have long term plans that can take years to work out a profit - and these plans might be set in motion by a CEO who might no longer be with the company when the deals pay off. So the CEO sets up to be paid in the future should the company make some serious bank from what he or she set up while running the place.


BUT (and that's a huge but) Dick Cheney is in the enviable position of being able to take his Vice President job, and use it to influence how his former employer does financially via the no-bid contracts and what-not.
This place is sure full of idiots. As a warranted contracting officer, I can assure you that Dick Cheney has not influenced a single no bid contract that I've ever awarded to Haliburton and other firms (mostly other firms). Please take your frustration out at the polls. Next time vote instead of smoking all of that dope that has clouded your judgement.
 

bhtooefr

TDIClub Enthusiast, ToofTek Inventor
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Location
Newark, OH
TDI
None
You're assuming that he didn't vote. And, if he didn't vote, you're assuming that he was allowed to vote.
 

madrean

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Location
Victoria, TX
TDI
02 Golf
get over it. if it's too expensive for you to drive, then don't. change jobs so you can ride the bus. get a bike. walk.

me personally, i think it's pretty GD incredible that it only costs a measly two and a half bucks to drive my butt more than 40 miles. sure beats walking.

find me a product whose price has not inflated as much as (gasoline) in the past 80 years.

try comparing it to a loaf of bread, or a meal at a diner.

take into account that waaaaaay back when however much you spent on fuel, it probably only got you what 10 miles per gallon?

buy some oil stocks. oil will be in demand for a loooong time and there is money to be made. trust me.
 

TornadoRed

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Location
Saint Paul (ex-San Diego)
TDI
2003 Golf GL 5-spd, red; 2003 Golf GLS 5-spd, indigo blue; 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, Candy White (SOLD); 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, silver
RAST said:
My point is that companies like Exxon are making windfall profits. They didn't develop new oil. They didn't make some new process. They didn't reduce cost or increase capacity to make more money. All they did was, well, nothing. Since they are making this huge profit ($10 billion is a huge number no matter how you slice it) they should have an obligation to help pay some extra for this war. After all without it they would not have made that much profit.
I read a couple articles about the Exxon-Mobil earnings statement, but I must have missed the paragraphs where it said Exxon "didn't develop new oil.. didn't reduce cost or increase capacity," and all it did was "well, nothing."

Let's see... $36 billion in net income... $23.3 billion paid in taxes... $7 billion in dividends distributed to shareholders... capital spending (that's investment) $17.7 billion for the year. Are you saying they did "nothing" with that $17.7 billion?
 

madrean

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Location
Victoria, TX
TDI
02 Golf
RAST said:
Wow this thread has really grown a bunch!!
My point is that companies like Exxon are making windfall profits. They didn't develop new oil. They didn't make some new process. They didn't reduce cost or increase capacity to make more money. All they did was, well, nothing. Since they are making this huge profit ($10 billion is a huge number no matter how you slice it) they should have an obligation to help pay some extra for this war. After all without it they would not have made that much profit.
It's interesting to see people line up to defend a huge company like Exxon. They don't give a hoot about you and I. They'll happily take their profit and run while the average taxpayer is getting hit with a $700 Billion bill for this war.
I'm counting the days until I can crank up my TDI on Bio and flip Exxon and their buddies OPEC the bird!! :)
i wonder where all the people like you were when people like my dad were getting laid off left and right because oil was too cheap. he's a chemical engineer and was laid off three times before i even got out of high school.
meanwhile, everyone was soooo happy about cheap oil. no rivers being cried back then over all those lost jobs, were there...
now if you work for a company that refines oil and you get to invest in their stock, you're probably GD rich!!! WOW!!! a reversal of fortunes???
guess all those RICH refiners should feel sorry for the poor oil addicts, just like ppl felt sorry for all the poor petro guys who lost their jobs back in the 80s.....:rolleyes:
boy i'm cynical tonight!!!:D
 

vikingrob

Veteran Member
Joined
May 18, 2004
Location
Minneapolis
TDI
2021 Tesla Model 3 (delivery estimate May 2021)
MrMopar said:
BUT (and that's a huge but) Dick Cheney is in the enviable position of being able to take his Vice President job, and use it to influence how his former employer does financially via the no-bid contracts and what-not.
If he does influence Halliburton's fortunes, then that would be a very blatant ethical violation, and probably rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors".
 

Long_Range

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Location
Arthur, IL , USA
TDI
Jetta Sedan GL 2004
RAST said:
Wow this thread has really grown a bunch!!

My point is that companies like Exxon are making windfall profits. They didn't develop new oil. They didn't make some new process. They didn't reduce cost or increase capacity to make more money. All they did was, well, nothing. Since they are making this huge profit ($10 billion is a huge number no matter how you slice it) they should have an obligation to help pay some extra for this war. After all without it they would not have made that much profit.

It's interesting to see people line up to defend a huge company like Exxon. They don't give a hoot about you and I. They'll happily take their profit and run while the average taxpayer is getting hit with a $700 Billion bill for this war.

I'm counting the days until I can crank up my TDI on Bio and flip Exxon and their buddies OPEC the bird!! :)
RAST how do you support your claim that http://www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/
does not “develop new oil”. Not sure what you mean by develop oil. Wasn't that done millions of years ago?

btw: We are not in Iraq for the oil. Unless you want to believe our enemies.
 

RAST

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Location
Chicago
TDI
2012 Audi A3 TDI
Lone --> I never, ever said we were in Iraq for oil. Read my original post and you'll get the idea. My point has been all along that Exxon is profiting because of high oil prices - caused by the war. Therefore Exxon should pay some of it's higher profits since they didn't really do anything - a windfall profit. Especially considering that the war is costing us $700 Billion we don't have.

By develop new oil I mean develop new oil fields. Oil is a finite resource since, as you noted, it was formed quite a while ago. Which is why I'm very keen on renewable energy for my TDI. I think there's a lot better things we could be using the oil than burning it in our cars!

Madrea --> I think our energy policy in this country has been very broken for a very long time. I blame Democrats (Clinton) and Republicans (Reagan, Bush, Bush). We've been foolish in our consumption. We use 25% of all the oil pumped worldwide every year! That can't continue for ever.

Thanks everyone for the discussion - it's been quite interesting!
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
Variant TDI said:
Send them an application.
It ironic how they're always looking for people with the skills and the balls to do the jobs that their detractors would never set up to.
As a matter of fact I DID look on Halliburton and KBR's websites for jobs when I graduated from college and before I got this (practically a dream job) job.

Guess what? There ain't no "employment opportunities" links anywhere on any of their websites. Clearly, you have to KNOW PEOPLE. So your argument holds nary a drop of water :rolleyes:

It's a good ole' boys club of the rich, for the rich, by the rich, pure and simple. Why do you feel the need to whitewash out its ugliness and defend the indefensible? I don't get this. How do you profit from some corrupt POS company raping the taxpayers? Huh?:rolleyes:

[/rant] War profiteering is very much alive and well! We are to blame. We voted for this corrupt, sick government. If you think Jack Abramoff is just 'one bad apple' then you are taking drugs. He's just the tip of the iceberg of evilness, corruption, graft, and war profiteering present in our government. Oh, and this nonsense about "the media" is liberal/anti-corporate/anti-Bush/blah blah....are some of you on drugs??? The mainstream media is owned by only six or seven multinational mega-corporations! The media sold Bush and then this war to us. The mainstream media is about the nastiest bunch of corporate whores that ever inhabited the planet. What's ironic is that the only honest "reporter" on television is John Stewart on The Daily Show...which follows puppets making crank phone calls on Comedy Central. Now that's irony![/rant]

On topic: I agree with this 100%:

RAST said:
I think our energy policy in this country has been very broken for a very long time. I blame Democrats (Clinton) and Republicans (Reagan, Bush, Bush). We've been foolish in our consumption. We use 25% of all the oil pumped worldwide every year! That can't continue for ever.
 
Last edited:

rotarykid

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Location
Piedmont of N.C. & the plains of Colorado
TDI
1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
Sortova said:
The oil industry is heavily subsidized and thus could hardly be called "free enterprise". Your tax dollars went into allowing Exxon to make those profits. As much as I might hate Microsoft and their profits, no American soldiers died for Windows.
Americans die every day in the middle east to keep the cheap oil coming . A it is still cheap or no one would ever buy a low mpg pick up truck or SUV . In truth if we had to add the actual military cost on top of the show cost to imported oil price would be well over $100 a barrel . As it should be .

I don't know about you but I am tired of susidizing oil to keep the price low so all the stupid people out there can afford to drive their 10 mpg pick up truck or SUV .
 

TornadoRed

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Location
Saint Paul (ex-San Diego)
TDI
2003 Golf GL 5-spd, red; 2003 Golf GLS 5-spd, indigo blue; 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, Candy White (SOLD); 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, silver
RAST said:
Lone --> I never, ever said we were in Iraq for oil. Read my original post and you'll get the idea. My point has been all along that Exxon is profiting because of high oil prices - caused by the war. Therefore Exxon should pay some of it's higher profits since they didn't really do anything - a windfall profit. Especially considering that the war is costing us $700 Billion we don't have.
Iraq is only one theatre in a global war... a war that started in 1967 or 1973 or 1979 (not 1991 or 1993 or 1997 or 2000), but the US didn't recognize that we were at war til 2001.

Wars or other disturbances increase the risk of supply disruptions. Iraq was not producing or exporting at maximum capacity before the March 2003 invasion and regime change. It has not increased production as much since then as some had hoped. But if Iraq stopped exporting entirely, it would have little impact on the global supply.

What the markets have been worried about are: production in Venezuela, Nigeria, and now Iran. The reliability of Russia. Longer term, there are concerns about the stability of the Saudi monarchy.

(In the very-short term, Katrina and Rita are still negatively affecting oil and gas production and oil refining. Many offshore rigs are still not producing, and several refineries are still out of service, including one very large refinery owned by BP.)

And on the demand side: China and India.

Iraq is now an area of very low risk, and has been for nearly three years. Crude oil was $28-31/barrel during the months right before the invasion of Iraq in spring 2003, but dropped to $21-25/barrel during the months right after. Reason: risk declined.

Toward the end of 2003, with Iraq no longer an important factor in oil prices, the other sources of risk added to the booming global demand led to the start of the long upward climb in oil prices. About $28 at the start of 2004, about $34 at the start of 2005, about $51 at the start of 2006.

(These are trade-weighted import prices, not to be confused with the benchmark West Texas Intermediate, and includes lower-priced sour crude from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wtotusaw.htm )

In conclusion, your claims that the war in Iraq has raised oil prices and Exxon's profits are unfounded. Oil prices are up, Exxon's profits are up, profits for all other oil-producing and oil-refining companies are up -- but Iraq is not the reason.

PS: Exxon's profits increased 24.5%, but Exxon paid 46.5% more in income taxes. So regarding your desire that Exxon pay more taxes -- it already is.
 

deltagammatdi

New member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Location
CO
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
Our government is to ****.. Nuff said... You honestly can not say they rebulicans arent behind the whole oil ordeal.. Bush said tonight to push for other sources of energy.. But he still offers only subsities.. I mean if he really wanted to go to different sources he would do more.. He could help setup more refinaries..

Doesn't the majority of our oil not even come from the middle east.. Inderectly.. Not directly..

Anyway excuse some logical mistakes I might have made.. I know what I am saying tho!!
 

ADSmith

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Location
Colorado
TDI
2000 Jetta 5 speed
RAST said:
Lone --> My point has been all along that Exxon is profiting because of high oil prices - caused by the war. Therefore Exxon should pay some of it's higher profits since they didn't really do anything - a windfall profit. Especially considering that the war is costing us $700 Billion we don't have.
This argument sounds good on the surface but would merely backfire. If we start doing things like this, all we have done is raise the RISK of operating in the oil business, since you never know when the government will take your profits from you. So what happens to the price of a product when the business RISK increases? You got it! They GO UP to compensate the risk taker (the business) for taking the risk. That is one of the reasons oil is so high now - with terrorism going the way it is, it is more risky than it was in years past to operate, so there has to be more profit potential to make it worthwhile to take the risk. I also have a problem morally with deciding that someone is making too much money operating in a particular business so we should just take it from them after the fact(Robin Hood anyone?) I'm fine with a higher gas tax (stay away from diesel though:D ) if that's what would help out with the financial situation - of course that would decrease consumption as well wouldn't it?

RAST said:
Madrea --> I think our energy policy in this country has been very broken for a very long time. I blame Democrats (Clinton) and Republicans (Reagan, Bush, Bush). We've been foolish in our consumption. We use 25% of all the oil pumped worldwide every year! That can't continue for ever.
I definitely agree with this point Rast. We have been wasting money for many many years trying to gain the appearance that we're taking care of the problem instead of putting the money where it has the best chance of actually changing something. IMO most of the money spent on alternative energy has been spent to buy votes, not in any genuine attempt to help solve our long-term problem. Why are we subsidizing electric cars and gas/electric hybrids that pollute so MUCH MORE overall than our beloved TDI's? Because it looks good to Joe Q. unthinking Public, not because it's actually doing something positive to help the problem. If hybrids are so cool, why not a diesel/electric hybrid? That would be 20-30% more economical right off the bat. But the reality is that we're way more concerned about NoX/particulate emissions at the tailpipe (image) than we are about TOTAL pollution produced and TOTAL oil consumed (substance).
 

Variant TDI

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Location
SS, MD.
TDI
2002 Golf Variant, Reflex Silver
nicklockard said:
As a matter of fact I DID look on Halliburton and KBR's websites for jobs when I graduated from college and before I got this (practically a dream job) job.
Guess what? There ain't no "employment opportunities" links anywhere on any of their websites. Clearly, you have to KNOW PEOPLE. So your argument holds nary a drop of water :rolleyes:
Then you must be blind. Don't roll eyes at me, pal. Do you think I'm dumb enough to take any of your rhetoric at face value? Talk about not holding water? Have you ever listened to yourself?

There's over 500 KBR job listings in Iraq alone. And there are thousands of other jobs in other countries, including subcontracts that Halliburton gives to small businesses. I was packed and ready to go to Mosul in 2003, when my employer screwed his DoS contact (who held our overseas insurance bond), and they pulled the plug on all our overseas work, and I was left slumming in the DC metro.

Soon after, I parted company with that firm, but not before I met with a KBR rep at a job fair, and they were begging me to work for them with my overseas Technical Security experience. But with my wife pregnant... My time to to long term overseas work was done.
 

03_01_TDI

Banned
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Location
Denmark
TDI
Na
nicklockard said:
As a matter of fact I DID look on Halliburton and KBR's websites for jobs when I graduated from college and before I got this (practically a dream job) job.

Guess what? There ain't no "employment opportunities" links anywhere on any of their websites. Clearly, you have to KNOW PEOPLE. So your argument holds nary a drop of water :rolleyes:

:
looks like you should have went to a better college. My dad went to school in a one room building on a dirt road in middle MO. Didn't even make it past the 9th grade. He was able to find and apply for work with KBR.. My brother is also a high school drop out. He just shipped out Sunday for KBR.
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
03_01_TDI said:
looks like you should have went to a better college. My dad went to school in a one room building on a dirt road in middle MO. Didn't even make it past the 9th grade. He was able to find and apply for work with KBR.. My brother is also a high school drop out. He just shipped out Sunday for KBR.
When I graduated in June of '04, the economy plain sucked. I took a FT job for $11 stinking bucks/hr and took on 3 part time jobs (math/science tutoring for learning-disabled adults, private calculus tutoring, and volunteer English writing tutoring), raising my pay to $15.50. :rolleyes: Out of pure frustration, I checked Halliburton and KBR's websites. Of course I also had my resume on Monster, Hotjobs, etcetera. Now I had finished 3 summers of research internships at UNM and Pacific Northwest National Laboratories. NO ONE was hiring chemists/scientists/chem-tech's west of the Mississippi river. Period. I can't relocate to the east w/o losing out time with my son...but even so, out of frustration at busting my nuts and getting nowhere, I tried KBR and Halliburton. As I said: zero, nada, zip...not even an employment link ANYWHERE on any of their websites. Not even a "contact us" link. Hey, maybe they show up at job fairs where you are, but I went to all the science/engineering fairs at OSU and made good contacts, but KBR and Halliburton were never there, not once in 3 years. I scoured the employment boards online and at Oregon employment department (which has been a source in the past before I got my degree.)

It's hard for me to believe that I went to the 'wrong college.' I know we're just a poor state school, but I got my money's worth. Does KBR/Halliburton avoid Oregon schools career fairs? Dunno...maybe. But they also avoid Hotjobs, monster, careerbuilder.com, etc...

I'm glad for your father and brother. That's great Craig, but clearly KBR/Halliburton is not looking for my skill set, nor do they want people contacting them, at least as of Summer of 2004. Maybe their websites are rich in employment opportunities now. I have no idea. Since I found appropriate work in my field of course I no longer care.

I guess this detracted from my main point: they're raping the taxpayers (it's documented), yet people who aren't even benefiting are defending it:eek: It's indefensible, plain and simple. Wrong is wrong and it doesn't change. Plenty of honest corporations (like the one I work for) are upstanding community citizens. There's no call for making excuses for the cheaters of the system.

As far as Exxon goes: I do not agree that they should be taxed for windfall profits. The fault for high fuel prices ultimately is high demand--you and I. You, I, all of us need to make (painful) choices as fuel gets more expensive (it will, brace yourselves.)
 
Last edited:

Thunderstruck

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Location
Chicago
TDI
2015 GTI SE 6M
The question to ask is "did their earnings per share increase, or not?" And if they did, why? If, as they claim, they are just passing on the higher cost of crude then their earnings would have stayed flat. If the cost of a barrel of oil goes up 50%, and they raise the price of a gallon of gas 50%, even though dollar volume goes up profits stay flat. OTOH, if they use increased crude as an excuse to raise prices, this will show since instead of making a dollar a share, suddenly they would be making a buck fifty a share.
 

PDJetta

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Location
Northern Virginia
TDI
'04 Jetta GLS TDI Pumpe Duce Platinum Grey w/ Leather
I think we forget that Exxon-Mobil does more than refine oil into products (and that they buy oil to do this). They also extract it from the ground. So, if crude oil increases 50% in price, the profit from a gallon of fuel, because of the increase in the value of the oil they extract from the land they have mineral rights too, the profit per gallon increases by a great deal.

--Nate
 

madrean

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Location
Victoria, TX
TDI
02 Golf
wow, it must be really easy to get oil from the ground. i can prolly just pick a spot, drill a little hole and get some oil out of it. it's just plain wrong that refiners like exxon are making so much money when all they have to do is drill a little hole in the ground.

it's just not fair.
 

ADSmith

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Location
Colorado
TDI
2000 Jetta 5 speed
Thunderstruck said:
The question to ask is "did their earnings per share increase, or not?" And if they did, why? If, as they claim, they are just passing on the higher cost of crude then their earnings would have stayed flat. If the cost of a barrel of oil goes up 50%, and they raise the price of a gallon of gas 50%, even though dollar volume goes up profits stay flat. OTOH, if they use increased crude as an excuse to raise prices, this will show since instead of making a dollar a share, suddenly they would be making a buck fifty a share.
Your calculations are completely off-base. Let's say (for sake of argument) that they buy oil for $.50/gal and sell gas for $1/gal. That's a profit of $.50/gal right? Now prices double, so they buy oil for $1/gal and sell gas for $2/gal. What the profit? $1/gallon! The entire energy industry is built on margins, and as prices increase, typically so do margins. When the price is low, everyone goes out of business. I work in the NGL industry and we endured 7 years of little/no profit due to the extremely depressed prices, just like the oil industry did. What they're making now has not even come close (yet) to making up for what they didn't make for all those years.
 

ADSmith

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Location
Colorado
TDI
2000 Jetta 5 speed
This is one of those topics that I think could go on forever.

[Rant]
I have observed that people generally fit into one of two categories - those who accept responsibility for what they have control over and those who want to blame someone for all the woes of the world. If everyone did their part and stopped driving Excursions and the like with 1 passenger in them, and building ever bigger houses, and consuming so much stuff, the demand for energy would go down and this problem wouldn't be so much of a problem. Let's stop trying to blame everyone (Bush, Congress, Exxon, men in black helicopters, ad nauseum) for what's wrong and let's do what we can (individually) to fix it - like drive a TDI and tell everyone we know how cool and efficient they are!
[/Rant]
 

dieseldorf

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Oct 11, 2000
Location
MA
TDI
ex- 1996 wagon, ex-2000 Jetta
Shell Shock !

Updated: 13:11, Thursday February 02, 2006

Oil giant Royal Dutch Shell has unveiled the highest profits in UK corporate history - equivalent to £1.5m an hour. :D

Shell recorded a surplus of £12.96bn - up nearly a third on last year when it set a UK record with profits of £9.8bn.

The results follow a year in which the cost of crude jumped from below $45 a barrel to a record high of more than $70.

Shell's haul is enough to build more than 17 Wembley Stadiums or to snap up two of the UK's biggest retailers, Marks & Spencer and Boots, outright at current prices.

The bulk of Shell's profits come from getting oil and gas out of the ground. This division has been boosted by the spiralling cost of crude oil due to a particularly bad hurricane season in the Gulf of Mexico.

Shell filling station

Output in 2005 was about 3.5 million barrels of oil a day - at the bottom end of the target laid out by Shell earlier this year due to damage caused by hurricanes.

Investors will want to be reassured that the cost of repairs is not higher than Shell's estimates at the end of October, and that efforts to get the Mars platform in the Gulf of Mexico back into operation are progressing to plan.

Motoring groups will check on the profitability of its network of filling stations to see whether Shell has been using high oil prices to boost margins at the expense of drivers.

Shell's results follow news earlier this week that Texas-based oil giant Exxon Mobil made £19.2bn in its last financial year - the biggest surplus yet in corporate history.

UK rival BP is also due to report full-year figures next week, with analysts pencilling profits before exceptionals of around £12.2bn.
.
.
.
 

TornadoRed

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Location
Saint Paul (ex-San Diego)
TDI
2003 Golf GL 5-spd, red; 2003 Golf GLS 5-spd, indigo blue; 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, Candy White (SOLD); 2003 Jetta TDI wagon, silver
Thunderstruck said:
Here's something that will really p*ss most of you off.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/3627131.html
Here're the key parts:
San Antonio-based Valero Energy Corp., the nation's largest fuel producer, said Tuesday it slowed output from its refinery in Ohio by more than 10 percent for economic reasons.... Earlier in the week, British energy giant BP slashed fuel production from its refinery in Whiting, Ind., by 10 to 15 percent because of lower profit margins in the region, market sources said....

Oil refiners traditionally slow fuel production when profit margins fall into the red — something that happens when the cost of crude rises too high relative to the selling price of gasoline and heating oil....

"Inventories in that part of the country are high and pipelines are full," the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association said in a prepared statement.
It seems to me that this is how the market is supposed to work. If there's a lot of gasoline in the Indiana-Ohio region, and prices are too low to make it profitable when West Texas crude is $67/barrel, then it makes sense NOT to buy so much of that crude and NOT to keep making gasoline and selling it at a loss.

It'd be great if they made more #2 diesel -- but maybe with crude at $67/barrel, it's not profitable to make more of that, either.

If refiners stop buying $67 crude, then it will have to come down in price.
 

Variant TDI

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Location
SS, MD.
TDI
2002 Golf Variant, Reflex Silver
TornadoRed said:
If refiners stop buying $67 crude, then it will have to come down in price.
Well... We're agreed. That's what we'll do. We can start tomorrow. ;)

{I added the wink, just so the tongue in cheek nature of the comment is not lost on those without the humor gene}
 
Top