It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Halliburton to Close Down Iran operations. (For War)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Source:
Yahoo! News

Article Says:
By KRISTEN HAYS, AP Business Writer

HOUSTON - The oil services conglomerate Halliburton Co. will wind down its operations in Iran and seek to separate its engineering and construction subsidiary KBR from the parent, chairman and CEO Dave Lesar said Friday.

Lesar made the disclosures Friday to analysts in a conference call after the company disclosed its fourth-quarter loss narrowed to $201 million from a loss of $947 million in the same period a year ago.

Halliburton does business in Iran through a foreign-owned subsidiary, which is allowed as long as Americans don't participate in or direct that business. But a federal grand jury is investigating whether the Houston-based company or its executives deliberately violated a U.S. ban on trade with Iran.

Lesar said services the company provides in Iran aren't illegal, but they are "miniscule" in comparison with the company's other work and that Iran's business environment "is not conducive to our overall strategies and objectives."

"We have decided to wind down our operations there while fulfilling our existing contracts and commitments," Lesar said on the conference call.

Shares fell $2.67, or 6 percent, to close at $40.84 Friday on the New York Stock Exchange still near the high end of their 52-week range of $26.45 to $43.58.

Lesar told analysts Halliburton will return to Iran if U.S. sanctions are lifted in the future and more of its major customers go there.

[Click here to continue reading the rest of the article]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Is there an alternative reason why they are moving operation out of Iran? Possibly, because they know things before the general public does? They knew a lot about Iraq before former CEO Cheney invaded it.







[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]




posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   
..to pave the way for the war. We're going in. There's no stopping them now.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Fix your title please.

Yes, I was informed of this earlier today. I don't think its very much to go by as Haliburton lost millions in the Iranian hostage crisis. They're just being careful.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Division Bell

Originally posted by LadyV
Why are you yelling part of this title.....


TO try and get more people informed.


All cap titles are reserved for administration use in official announcements. Please edit, and remove additional distractions of spacing and characters.

Or a mod will.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   
You have no idea this is for war.

I've spoken to Haliburton people and they make a pretty solid case for being careful.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Division, i totally agree...as i said before, the invasion is near. Strap on your seat belts we're going for a ride..



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
You have no idea this is for war.

I've spoken to Haliburton people and they make a pretty solid case for being careful.


Ofcourse, I do not KNOW. But there is good suspicion considering the past wars. Did you speak to Halliburton executives and who? Because I have spoken to my Uncle who has worked there for 29 years, so I guess I have spoken to Halliburton representatives also. He is just an engineer though.

We do know one thing for almost-sure, Cheney is a liar and has done deals with Libya, Iran, and Iraq during his tenure as Halliburton CEO. Citing article below:
www.truthout.org...



I guess foreign affairs and the plight of citizens living in a non-democracy doesn't matter when it comes to the quartly reports for Halliburton, right, Mr. Cheney?





======================================================

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 09:57 PM
link   
I don't think much can be read into this at this time. And I mean that in omnidirectional ways.

1. The statement by Lesar that Halliburton's returns on work in Iran versus the liabilities and aggravations associated with it not coming out positive to the bottom line cannot be dismissed. After all, companies usually make the bottom line decision.

2. It should be kept in mind that in 1979 when the Iranian hostage crisis occurred and all U.S. firms had to get out of Iran, Halliburton took a huge hit (in the 10's of millions) on capital equipment left behind and never recovered.

With those two rational thoughts brought in...this decision could be translated either way. But most definitely cannot be taken as a firm evidence of either interpretation.





[edit on 1-28-2005 by Valhall]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:07 PM
link   
After the 1979 issue, why did they go back to Iran? (Just a rhetorical question because there are no answers, so don't try to answer it.)
And why are they now withdrawing business action in the nation? (Rhetorical)
Especially, if since they have lowered amount of debt in their sub. company from last years report, because that is a good sign in business if you can sustain during debt? (Rhetorical)



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Halliburton seemed to have had considerable amounts of foreknowledge pertaining to the pre-emptive strike on Iraq. A company even of their size should've had difficulty moving into place the necessary resources needed to sustain operations there. Halliburton is a multi-national oil company, but the resources needed to be in Iraq, both human resources and material resources, would have had to been organized at the very least eight months to a year ahead of time. Just that alone leaves me to question where & how their knowledge was & has been obtained.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Division Bell
After the 1979 issue, why did they go back to Iran? (Just a rhetorical question because there are no answers, so don't try to answer it.)
And why are they now withdrawing business action in the nation? (Rhetorical)
Especially, if since they have lowered amount of debt in their sub. company from last years report, because that is a good sign in business if you can sustain during debt? (Rhetorical)


First off, don't ever tell me not to try to answer something.

They apparently had a subsidiary reinstalled in the area because there was a perceived (not just perceived, but realized) profit. That's what companies are for. Contrary to welfare belief, companies operate for a profit - and nothing more. So there is an answer - whether you like it or not.

Lesar gave an answer to why they are withdrawing business - and it wasn't rhetorical - The profit is so small, to the larger picture of profit with Halliburton, that it does not justify the aggravation and political attacks associated with it. Whether that is the true reason or not, it makes sense. I stated in my first post, I do not know if this is the real reason for the withdrawal, or whether there is something else spurring it.

Your last "rhetorical" question...a reduction of debt doesn't mean squat if it doesn't result in a return on investment higher than you can realize by investing your money in another area. So, no...your implication that any reduction in debt in the subsidiary must in some way equate to them staying there, is wrong.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   
The war is coming. It shall be known as the Gog/Magog war.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall


First off, don't ever tell me not to try to answer something.



First off, not everything is about you. I wasn't asking you directly to not answer it, I wasn't even directing my comments towards anyone. So, don't take it personally.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
companies operate for a profit - and nothing more.


Don't belittle me by stating something as obvious as that.



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

So, no...your implication that any reduction in debt in the subsidiary must in some way equate to them staying there, is wrong.


I may not be the most intelligent person to ever live, but there is a strong certainty that you are doing something "right" when you reduce debt by 75%. Even if it is in a sub-company. I trade stocks and that is basic knowledge when investing.

My current stock tips, SMTR.OB and TSBI.OB, both are risky. Trade TSBI.OB at .0015 wait til .0018 and sell. Buy SMTR.OB at .027 and sell at .03. Learn the trend of the stocks and sell based on that.






[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Division Bell

Originally posted by Valhall

So, no...your implication that any reduction in debt in the subsidiary must in some way equate to them staying there, is wrong.


I may not be the most intelligent person to ever live, but there is a strong certainty that you are doing something "right" when you reduce debt by 75%. Even if it is in a sub-company. I trade stocks and that is basic knowledge when investing.

My current stock tips, SMTR.OB and TSBI.OB, both are risky. Trade TSBI.OB at .0015 wait til .0018 and sell. Buy SMTR.OB at .027 and sell at .03. Learn the trend of the stocks and sell based on that.

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]


Okay, I can see you are a highly superior being...so I'm going to leave you to spend your investments as your big brain sees fit. GOOD LUCK!



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Thanks, Valhall. I am glad you were able to see my superiority. Please go back to being a subordinate, thanks. (Just kidding)












[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Division Bell
Thanks, Valhall. I am glad you were able to see my superiority. Please go back to being a subordinate, thanks. (Just kidding)

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]


No problem, and please don't ask me to fund your welfare check when you're belly-up..(Just kidding)



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Back to the subject, Halliburton has found many loopholes in the U.N. sanctions and other things. We need to investigate Halliburton futher, perhaps through the ATS research forum?



posted on Jan, 28 2005 @ 11:45 PM
link   
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." --Albert Einstein

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein

"You can't say that civilization don't advance, however, for in every war they kill you in a new way." --Will Rogers

[edit on 28-1-2005 by The Division Bell]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join