|
Post by redwolf on Feb 1, 2008 8:55:43 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Feb 1, 2008 10:26:14 GMT -6
You can thank everybody who voted for Bu$h - either time. Thank the Supreme Court in 2000, while you're at it. Bu$h said he would persuade his Saudi friends to keep oil prices low. That sure worked, huh?
After the 1973 oil crisis, the Los Angeles Times calculated how much Mobil stock you would have to own to offset the higher gas prices. It's a good defense if you have $$. I have a portion of my rollover IRA in PBR, Petrobras Brasileiras, and it's done quite nicely, thank you. It was $10 five years ago, and it's about $110 now.
I had some COP, Conoco Phillips, stock until I received their annual report, and found Richard Armitage, one of the traitors who outed Valerie Plame, on their board. Sold it for a profit, anyhow.
GB
|
|
|
Post by db on Mar 12, 2008 19:00:17 GMT -6
I second that, you can blame everyone who voted for the Criminal Bush.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Mar 23, 2008 14:20:42 GMT -6
Apparently the link to the AOL article no longer works (like most everything else on AOL). However, I found a link from Yahoo that appears to be for the same article. from AP/Yahoo.com: biz.yahoo.com/ap/080201/earns_exxon_mobil.htmlExxon Posts Record Profits on Oil PricesFriday February 1, 2008 By John Porretto, AP Business Writer " Rising Oil Prices Help Exxon Mobil to U.S. Record Annual, Quarterly Profits
Exxon Mobil Corp. posted the largest annual profit by a U.S. company -- $40.6 billion -- on Friday as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from historic crude prices at the end of the year. Exxon also set a U.S. record for the biggest quarterly profit, posting net income of $11.7 billion for the final 3 months of 2007, beating its own mark of $10.71 billion in the fourth quarter of 2005.
The previous record for annual profit was $39.5 billion, which Exxon Mobil had in 2006.
The eye-popping results weren't a surprise given record prices for a barrel of oil at the end of 2007. For much of the 4th quarter, they hovered around $90 a barrel, more than 50% higher than a year ago." (That would have made year-ago prices about $60/barrel. With current prices over $100/barrel, that makes current prices over 65% more than they were in February 2007.)" Crude prices reached an all-time trading high of $100.09 on Jan. 3 but have fallen about 10 percent since then." (And now, as of March 23, 2008, they have risen to over $100/barrel)" The record profit for the October-December period amounted to $2.13 a share versus $1.76 a share in 2006. Year-ago net income was $10.25 billion.
Also extraordinary was Exxon Mobil's revenue, which rose 30% in the fourth quarter to $116.6 billion from $90 billion a year ago. For the year, sales rose to $404.5 billion -- the most ever for the Irving, Texas-based company -- from $377.64 billion in 2006." For reference, World GDP is ~ $45,000 billion. Exxon's $404.5 billion sales equals almost 1% of total world GDP. In comparison to US GDP, Exxon's $404.5 billion in sales is the equivalent of 62% of the US's $650 billion current-dollar GDP growth for 2007." In addition to benefiting from higher commodity prices, the company said its results were evidence of a well-run, globally diverse operation that's investing billions to find more energy supplies. (And has invested even more in the past to buy out competitors, to increase it's control of the market, reduce competition, and maintain higher prices.) It noted that its capital and exploration spending amounted to nearly $21 billion last year, up 5% from 2006." In contrast to that +5%, Exxon's revenue increased +30%. Exxon certainly doesn't need ANY tax breaks to increase available capital, nor do they need any Federally-subsidized loans for further investment. They've got abundant capital from their increased revenue to fund further exploration. " Exxon Mobil produces about 3% of the world's oil." (And again, Exxon earns 1% of the world's GDP from selling that oil.)" Its shares....have traded in a 52-week range of $69.02 to $95.27.
Higher commodity prices in the quarter were clearly evident from earnings at Exxon Mobil's exploration and production arm, known as the upstream. Income rose 32% to $8.2 billion from $6.2 billion a year ago.
On an oil-equivalent basis, production increased nearly 1% from the fourth quarter of 2006, driven by higher demand for natural gas in Europe. Excluding the expropriation of its Venezuelan assets last year, divestments and other factors, production rose nearly 3%." Awww. Poor babies. Call the Waaaambulance. " Refining and marketing, or downstream, earnings were $2.3 billion, up from nearly 2 billion in the year-ago quarter, as improved refining operations offset lower U.S. refining margins....
Already, ConocoPhillips has said record oil prices at the end of 2007 helped it post a 37% increase in 4th-quarter profit, even as it produced less crude and natural gas than a year earlier." Increased profits from reduced production--now there's a great "free market" outcome for you. Sounds like the "invisible hand" has morphed into the "invisible finger." " [ConocoPhillips'] quarterly net income rose to $4.37 billion versus $3.2 billion a year earlier." If ConocoPhillips' $4.37 billion quarterly net income is annualized, it gives a total of $17.5 billion, compared to Exxon's $40.6 billion." ConocoPhillips is the nation's 3rd-largest integrated oil company behind Exxon Mobil and Chevron Corp.
Chevron reported separately Friday that its profit rose 29% in the 4th quarter, as surging prices for crude oil offset weak results from its refining business. It earned $4.88 billion, or $2.32 per share, from $3.77 billion, or $1.74 per share, a year earlier. Revenue rose 29% to $61.41 billion from $47.75 billion." Assuming the $61.41 billion is quarterly revenue, that makes annualized revenue $246 billion, or about 0.55 % of total world GDP. In comparison to Chevron's $246 billion revenue, US current-dollar GDP increased $650 billion in 2007. " On Thursday, Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Europe's largest oil company, posted a 60% gain in 4th-quarter profit to $8.47 billion on asset sales and higher oil prices. Shell said full-year net profit was a company record $31.3 billion, up 23% from the prior year." biz.yahoo.com/ap/080201/earns_exxon_mobil.html
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Mar 31, 2008 4:26:03 GMT -6
And they are still trying to weasel out of paying for the cleanup and compensating the victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, a clear case of criminal negligence on the part of Exxon Mobil by putting a drunkard in charge causing the biggest environmental disaster ever at the time.
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Jun 9, 2008 11:19:12 GMT -6
From Feb 1, above: "I had some COP, Conoco Phillips, stock until I received their annual report, and found Richard Armitage, one of the traitors who outed Valerie Plame, on their board. Sold it for a profit, anyhow."
Madison, Wis., PBS ran the full Frontline, "Bush's War" yesterday. I had time to watch only the first part, up to the war. They showed Armitage being one of the good guys in State Dept. Was he blamed unfairly for outing Valerie?
Guess I should have learned more about him before dumping the stock. I bought it at 60 about three years ago, and sold it for 70 late last year. It's now 95...
GB
|
|
|
Post by agito on Jun 9, 2008 11:59:03 GMT -6
40.6 billion off of 404.5 billion gross. not that "gross" is just us paying at the pump, but that's $0.0996 on the dollar that we spend. ...aka, they could take 15 to 20 cents off a gallon of gas and still have a 20 billion profit. (this doesn't factor in the increased demand though...)
|
|
|
Post by proletariat on Jun 9, 2008 14:41:15 GMT -6
Madison, Wis., PBS ran the full Frontline, "Bush's War" yesterday. I had time to watch only the first part, up to the war. They showed Armitage being one of the good guys in State Dept. Was he blamed unfairly for outing Valerie? GB What do you mean Madison, WI PBS, are you from Madison.
|
|
|
Post by Cactus Jack on Jun 9, 2008 17:17:20 GMT -6
..and that $40.6 billion profit (during 2007) only represents a investment return of profitability of 7-9%. In the first quarter of 2008, the profits of Exxon-Mobil amounted to $10.9 billion, inspite of the fact that from 2007 to 2008, fuel prices rose $1.50 per gallon (in some markets) which would have one believe if the prices went up so much, Exxon-Mobil should have turned a larger profit in 2008 but is actually about equal with the profits per quarter in 2007. But in comparison to other industries and corporations, Big Oil giant, Exxon-Mobil isn't turning as large of margin of profits as some businesses and corporate giants, like - Home Depot reported a 24% quarterly profit margin, in spite of the construction industry slowdown - posted May 20, 2008; just think what that would be if they controlled as big of share of the construction market as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
- Dell Inc reported a 22% profit margin in the quarter - posted May 30, 2008; just think what that would be if they controlled as big of share of the personal computer market as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
- Fujitsu Electronics, reported on May 12, 2008, a quarterly profit margin of 39.9%; just think what that would be if they controlled as big of share of the electronics market as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
- Chevron reported on May 3, 2008, quarterly profits of 9.6% relative to costs for finding, recovery, and refining of petroleum.
- Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) India, a major financing component of sales of Chinese products into U.S markets, reported its first quarter net profits rose 40.90%; just think what that would be if this corporation controlled as big of a share of the financial industry as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
- Microsoft revenue profits reached $16.37 billion, or a 30% over the previous year, ending May 31, 2008 - that's 40% of what Exxon-Mobil made over the same period: just think what Microsoft would have made if it controlled as big of a share of the software market as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
- The profitability of National Semiconductor for Q1 2008 amounts to 65.9%; just think if Nat'l Semiconductor controlled as big of a share of the semiconductor market as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry how much they would have made.
- Even quarterly profits at Costco were higher than Exxon-Mobil, earning profits of 13% over costs of operation; just think how much wholesaler could have made if it controlled as big a share of the merchandise sold as Exxon-Mobil controls in the petroleum industry.
... there are more corporations who turn greater margins of profit than Exxon-Mobil does but the chronic complainers about fuel prices aren't fussing about those corporational profits as loudly as they do when it comes to profits by Big Oil which for what they have to do to find, bring in, transport, and turn crude oil into motor fuels at the prices consumers have paid in the past, doesn't match the reality of the situation. Big Oil does make big profits in the U.S from its ventures around the World but insomuchas they are one of one a few major oil corps that do, gross incomes are expected to be enormous considering their lack of competitors, still a profit return of 7-9% is a very little return for their costs. Last year Big Oil (cumulatively) turned a profit of about $600 billion ..while U.S Federal and State governments (in total) collected $1.43 trillion in excise taxes on motor fuels. If any complaints should be forthcoming, those should be fired at Govt and its wasteful monetary practices and not at BigOil since if they don't provide you with your gasoline, diesel or kerosene you demand at the costs you expect, who will? Nancy Pelosi? The U.S. House of Representatives? Dick Reid? The U.S. Senate? The Supreme Court? Maybe even the next President of the United States (John McCain or Barack Hussein O'bama)? Or will your State governor, Legislature be responsible for doing so?
|
|
|
Post by agito on Jun 9, 2008 22:29:13 GMT -6
yeah TXdirt, it's those types of stats that has me cringe anytime people suggest nationalization or "windfall taxes" (different things i know). And of course, this is assuming they aren't sheltering profits elsewhere unseen. Argue what you will against big oil, two things: - they are efficient
- they pay their workers well
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Jun 10, 2008 6:29:12 GMT -6
I don't know how you gauge the efficiency of big oil.
I know a guy who works for ExonMob, and he has shown pix of fires at the refinery where he works, blaming the cheapscrew company.
How much of ExonMob's wealth is at risk in exploration? They aren't drilling deep in the gulf because they apparently don't have the technology. Boeing, for example, bets the future of the company when it launches a new plane. Where's that risk by big oil?
Microsoft, btw, seems to control its market, and its profit shows it.
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Jun 10, 2008 6:36:11 GMT -6
Look at this thread, near the bottom of the page:
"Is Exxon Mobil Running Dry? - Jubak"
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 11, 2008 19:08:41 GMT -6
If home depot really made 24% profit why are they closing stores and severely cutting back on their new store construction.
Maybe windfall profits tax might not be the way to go ( I am still not convinced) there is the very real likelihood that it would simply be passed on to the consumer, we definitely should stop immediately the subsidies and tax breaks the oil industry gets from the top secret cheney "energy" policy, especially during this time of record profits - the biggest ever for ANY industry in histroy
Lets not too easily discount the effect that the threat of increased scrutiny and regulation had in keeping big oil in check during the clinton years
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Jun 11, 2008 20:30:50 GMT -6
Proletariat, I live in SoCalif, not too far from UC, but never met him. I'm in Rockford, Ill, for a month, trying to sell Granny's plantation. (Yeh, wish me luck.) We're on minimal cable, receiving PBS from Chicago and Madison. No CNN, no MSNBC, no tivo/dvr: really roughing it. This is the first time I've ever watched Cspan, the tv here is that bad.
GB
|
|
|
Post by agito on Jun 12, 2008 0:55:34 GMT -6
because the corp has to maintain that profit ratio or else it's stocks will drop. If next year they only make 12% profit less profit compared to the year previous, investors pull out. Anticipating that they can't possibly deliver those sales numbers, they are eliminating costs.
tru dat. I remember when clinton released oil from the reserves in 99, i thought it was the stupidest thing in the world. I had accepted that gas was always going to rise (it was approaching 2.00 where i was), so the measure seemed shortsighted. I felt reaffirmed in that sure enough the price went to .99 (!) and then back to 1.40-1.60 where it had been floating. In retrospect i understand what he did and realize it was a birlliant move. Unfortunately we run the risk of hurting our very own retirement hedge funds if we do that this time.
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 12, 2008 4:19:29 GMT -6
so depots profits is a "on paper" profit from closing stores and cutting headcount, not from any sales increase or market share gains or 280% increase in prices
|
|