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.

 

Exxon, $8.4 Billion First Quarter Profit

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   
SkepticOverlord

Everything in our country now a days that has to do with political issues are made into a big deal and manipulated for overall desirable reaction.

But the problem I see is that is also plenty of hidden agendas behind the hypes and propaganda that more often than not will go to benefit everybody in the political and their business links and not the population.




posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Well the numbers on Microsoft amply explain why most people - especially those who are hooked into their crappy operating system like me - hate Microsoft and the profiteering Bill Gates. These numbers should be viewed as an aberration, not as the norm.

Plus, MS do their best to operate as a monopoly. There was a superb comment from the judge who sat on their antitrust suit involving their attempt to bury Netscape, which involved MS claiming that Internet Explorer could not be detached from Windows, which would not run without it. The judge got a friendly geek to strip out IE and replace it with Netscape on a computer especially set up in his chambers. Despite all this, the MS lawyers continued to press their point. The judge wound up saying that

"Tribal wisdom has it that if your horse dies under you, you should get off and walk. The attitude of the Microsoft team seems to be that in that situation they would a) try to say that the horse was still alive, but if that failed, then b) that the horse performed better and was certainly cheaper dead, and then c) that they would try to harness several dead horses together for increased speed."



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Aelita
but don't you think that tax incentives etc was one of the factors that helped him turn profit at Exxon? And he gets the credit?

Certainly. But getting or preserving the incentives was likely a parameter of his job and one of the metrics under which his exit package was assembled. We can't fault corporations for getting tax incentives they ask for... nor CEO's for asking for them... that's just good governance for a public corporation. This is an administration issue.


Thanks for clearing this up for us SO. I will feel so much better knowing this
filling up my tank the next time.

Whew, silly me, I thought it was just corporate greed.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   
the lesser of two evils, microsoft and big oil companies. call me unpatriotic or whatever but capitalism seems to have failed us. there is no such thing as the public benefit if there isnt a private profit. Capitalism is based off of who can screw the other person out of their money quicker and more efficiently. Let me remind you this country was built on FREEDOM not capitalism. This country has changed, and i know exactly why. I am against having my nation change from free to capitalistic where people, like my father, get threatened by big business that they will not be hired if they dont work like a slave. Why can they do that, because capitalism allows them to do so. Wheres the american dream underneath all the threats and corporate screwing?

You want to tell me what america stands for? Because from what I see now, its not freedom. Its money, and who can make it the quickest. Your freedom and pursuit of happiness mean nothing in the eyes of capitalism, and that goes against the foundations of our country. Yet you all go along with it like we always had capitalism in our society and it was always about private business owning the government. The people use to own the government, and it was the people as a whole, not a couple CEO's. Yea we complain over which company is worse, yet people like my father have to work 7 days a week, just to keep his job. not because he needs the money but because the contract made sure he did or else they would hire illegal immigrants who would do it.

Wheres the american dream? It sounds like a capitalistic nightmare to me, with all the threats, meanwhile they make multibillion dollar profits. They dont invest those either. So while you argue about which multibillion dollar profit "is worse" then the other, think about the carpenter being told that he has to work 7 days a week or else they will get an illegal immigrant to do it for less. Unions cant do a thing about it either, because my father is in one and they are still pressured into it.



posted on Apr, 27 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Again, MICROSOFT IS WORLDWIDE!!!! China anyone?

Exxon... not so much.

Also, again, why do republicans freak out over a poor black person getting food stamps but are more then happy to give a billion dollars to billionaires?

I don't get it, "This poor person who's job we sent overseas wants a welfare check!!!!! KILL!!! WHat? Exxon, who made 12 bill in one quarter then 8 this quarter wants 2 billion dollars of tax payers money? Sure!"

[edit on 27-4-2006 by StarkMan]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Oh, those poor oil companies...

Chevron profits soar 49% to $4bn

Makes your heart bleed, doesn't it? As for those welfare scroungers, they deserve all they get. America is, after all, the land of opportunity...

...or is it?



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 08:53 AM
link   



Exxon Mobil 2Q Profit Jumps 36 Percent

Exxon Mobil Corp. said Thursday it earned $10.36 billion in the second quarter, the second largest quarterly profit ever recorded by a publicly traded U.S. company.

The earnings figure was 36 percent above the profit it reported a year ago. High oil prices helped boost the company's revenue by 12 percent to a level just short of a quarterly record.

Exxon Mobil's report comes a day after another large U.S. oil company, ConocoPhillips, said it earned more than $5 billion in the quarter and at a time when many drivers in the U.S. are paying $3 for a gallon of gas _ increasing the likelihood of further political backlash in Washington.

More...




posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I think this is a non-issue. As already said oil company profit margins are actually lower than many other industries. Petroleum is a hightly capital intensive industry, and there have been many times where they were actually losing money because it took more money to extract the oil from the Earth than they could sell it for. Now, they're making a nice profit, and I think it's deserved. If you think Exxon is going to be making huge profits going forward (again, as already said) buy some stock in it!



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I say we send some marines in to arrest all the board of directors and sieze the oil companies and nationalize them. Really what the hell is wrong with that? Then we can actually have those profits used to build refineries, researching better engines, invest in more alternatives. Energy should be in control of the people, not 10 people sitting in a board room pondering the size of their next yacht, island, personal theme park for kids, whatever.



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamburglar
It certainly puts it into perspective.


Indeed it does.


For the oil companies, people see them as evil for a quaterly profit margin under 10%.


The resource they are selling was not 'invented' by them and we are not 'running out' of oil while we certainly will run out of installation disks if Bill gets upset.


Microsoft, on the other hand, posts 31% profit, which is about 13 billion based on revenue. That is significantly more than the oil companies' profits.


Fact is at least Bill is giving us something we WANT, but can do without , while the oil companies are giving us something we NEED ,and can't do without. The high profit of oil companies is based on MASSIVE profit margins of a extremely plentifull resource they they choose not to exploit to drive up profits; it's not in fact justified.


Maybe all Windows owners should get $100 back from Uncle Sam.


For willingly enduring cruel and unusual punishment i suppose.



Or maybe SO is right on this one, and we are being led about by our nose on a non-troversial issue.


Cheap energy = freedom so it's restriction is a direct threat to not only your liberty but to your very survival. I would say it's a rather critical issue.

Stellar

[edit on 27-7-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
my 2 cents...

ExxonMobil's record profits break down this way...
approx 40% upstream (sale of crude oil to other refiners/marketers/governments)
approx 30% downstream (sale of refined gasoline/diesel/heating oil etc)
approx 30% chemicals (specialty products soild mainly to industry and govt's)

the price of crude as everyone knows is controlled mainly by activity on the commodities exchanges (speculation)

Exxon sells alot of crude and the price is way over inflated due to speculation so they make alot of money!

On the retail side, other refiners and marketers must buy crude at these high prices so they must increase the price of a gallon of gas proportionately. If Exxon and the other crude producers (BP Shell etc) did not match the refiners/marketers prices a) they would be stupid and b) everyone would be screaming about unfair predatory pricing by Exxon



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I think this is a non-issue. As already said oil company profit margins are actually lower than many other industries.


Most industries at least produce *something* ( even if no one wants or needs it) but all oil companies do is pump something out of the ground and attempt to convince us that it's somehow ( even if no data supports such a theory) scarce...


Petroleum is a hightly capital intensive industry, and there have been many times where they were actually losing money because it took more money to extract the oil from the Earth than they could sell it for.


Funnily it's more expensive to extract oil in Russia than in SA but the Russian government sees it fit to take all profit per barrel greater than 21 or 27 dollars ( i forget) as a tax. Now considering how many billions are already in that fund how is this industry capital intensive? They ALWAYS turn a profit and what drives up prices is companies competing to open up more expensive ( by a few dollars normally) fields by driving up prices and thus giving them added market share. It's got very little to do with capital expenditure and they will in fact waste billions yearly to drill dry holes just to 'prove' that oil is 'running out'.


Now, they're making a nice profit, and I think it's deserved. If you think Exxon is going to be making huge profits going forward (again, as already said) buy some stock in it!


We should all be taking part in the stock market as that is after all where all our taxes go after handouts to the corporate elite. Even if you make a killing your at best going to get some of your own money back. Best one can manage in such a corrupt system.


Stellar



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by rich23
Well the numbers on Microsoft amply explain why most people - especially those who are hooked into their crappy operating system like me - hate Microsoft and the profiteering Bill Gates. These numbers should be viewed as an aberration, not as the norm.

Plus, MS do their best to operate as a monopoly. There was a superb comment from the judge who sat on their antitrust suit involving their attempt to bury Netscape, which involved MS claiming that Internet Explorer could not be detached from Windows, which would not run without it. The judge got a friendly geek to strip out IE and replace it with Netscape on a computer especially set up in his chambers. Despite all this, the MS lawyers continued to press their point. The judge wound up saying that



Rich, do you own a business, or are you a CFO? If not, stop complaining, because microsoft makes all of their money on Licensing Agreements. You paid $100 to run their operating system on your computer.... not worth crying about. If you don't like it go buy an Apple, lol! I'm sorry don't ever do that, my bad-- how bout downloading Linux for free!



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
In regards to microsoft, it is a choice to use their product. Anyone can build a cheap system and use linux or similiar to run their hardware for free. This is why people don't care as much about microsoft. People are also a lot more lax about it do to all the piracy as well.

But in the oil industry we don't have alot of choices. We only have gas (as most places don't have ethanol and the public in general is to uneducated on the subject to realize how it can benfit). For instance the "low mpg" is not a hoax, BUT turbo charged cars retain 90% or above their MPG. So in light of this most people should be able to convert their turbocharged cars right? Well the EPA says no. Then there is the cost of conversion. (think at least 1k)

Compare how much it cost to convert fuel to an alternative($1k+) vs running linux instead of windows($0).

You can see how the oil companies have monopolized.



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
To Sceptic Overlord:

what about the tax breaks for the oil industry? Do you agree they should have those? If yes, why? I sort of feel the $400M retirement package for the outgoing Exxon CEO comes from our W-2s and 1040s, don't you think?


REPLY: He worked as CEO for 30 years; that's only $10.3 Million per decade. Very reasonable, actually, considering what he did for the company and shareholders (many of whom are middle-class retirees). Who here wants to take money away from grandma and grandpa, because they invested?



posted on Jul, 27 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   
For what it's worth, this should be on BTS!!!


Well the numbers on Microsoft amply explain why most people - especially those who are hooked into their crappy operating system like me - hate Microsoft and the profiteering Bill Gates. These numbers should be viewed as an aberration, not as the norm.


REPLY: There are many operating systems out there, so you choose among them. On the other hand, get a few of your buddies together, write 300 million lines of code that will work with most every single piece of software, add-on card, mainboard, etc, and see how you do. $5 million per day goes to organizations who help those less fortunate (mostly) lazy, uneducated people.


Let me remind you this country was built on FREEDOM not capitalism.


REPLY: Capitalism Noun def: An economic system based on private ownership of capital.
It's been that way since about two years after the pilgrims landed here. Nothing else works as well, and never will.

djohnsto77: Are we the only two here who actually know anything about economics?

For the rest of you, here's some facts:

WalMart makes 4 cents on the dollar;
Oil companies Avg. 12 cents per dollar invested;
banking institutions profit 15% to 29%;
Intels is 60%;
Starbucks is 50%.

Anyone here bitching about their banks profits? I didn't think so.

As for "gouging": from 1977 to 2004, american oil companies have profited $640 Billion dollars. Over the same period Federal and state taxes totalled $1.4 TRILLION dollars for doing absolutely nothing. Now THATS gouging, and there should indeed be an investigation.


The high profit of oil companies is based on MASSIVE profit margins


REPLY: Again.... 12 cents per dollar is a massive profit???



"...invest in the stock market .... where all our taxes go after handouts to the corporate elite.


REPLY: Let me get this straight... AFTER you get your taxes, you want to invest them, after they all go to the corporate elite??? If it "all" goes to them, what are you going to invest???

Listen folks... the numbers mentioned for record profits are pre-tax dollars, of which about 38% goes to taxes. over 60% of those profits were from sales to the rest of the world..... it didn't all come out of your pocket.


"...most places don't have ethanol and the public in general is to uneducated on the subject to realize how it can benfit.."


REPLY: You might fall into that category. We had to import over 500 million gallons of ethanol as it is, and you get less miles per gallon using it. What's E85 going for now?


[edit on 27-7-2006 by zappafan1]



posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
Anyone here bitching about their banks profits? I didn't think so.


Well banks at least serve some kind of purpose which would be far harder to dispense with than anything big oil gives us. We have had alterantive sources of energy for nearly a century and all they have done is help prevent those being introduced into the general economy.


As for "gouging": from 1977 to 2004, american oil companies have profited $640 Billion dollars. Over the same period Federal and state taxes totalled $1.4 TRILLION dollars for doing absolutely nothing. Now THATS gouging, and there should indeed be an investigation.


Well last i checked governments occasionally use some of the tax money to build a road/bridge airport or even a hospital that they are supposed to. Oil companies consider 'charity' to mean handouts to their friends and officials in government, which might help them steal from us even more effectively, and that's just about the closest they come to actually doing something 'beneficial' ( and i hate using the word in this context) with the money they gouge. I would much rather have a system that might become less corrupt with pressure from citizens ( government) than one who is inately tyrranical and without responsibility ( big business).


REPLY: Again.... 12 cents per dollar is a massive profit???


I do not know where you came up with that figure but here is one of mine....


With prices riding high, Russia rakes in about US$550 million (euro430 million) in oil and gas revenues per day -- US$380,000 (about euro306,000) every minute. The state gets 65 percent of that. Oil and gas exports account for about 60 percent of federal budget revenues and 60 percent of its exports.

The oil windfall has meant that, since the August 1998 financial collapse, Russia's hard currency reserves have soared from a feeble US$12.5 billion (euro9.8 billion) to US$247.1 billion (euro193.2 billion) -- and given its economy a stronger claim to belonging in the elite group of nations whose leaders will meet in St. Petersburg this week.

Meanwhile, the government is busy funneling oil companies' profits above US$27 (euro21) per barrel into an inflation-fighting stabilization fund, which as of the end of June stood at US$76 billion (euro59 billion). This year it will use US$22 billion (euro17 billion) of that to pay off its remaining debts to the Paris Club of creditor nations. That's a far cry from the years when it could scarcely make the interest payments on its foreign borrowings.

www.businessweek.com...


So the government gets 60% of their tax revenue from oil taxes and that is only after the oil giants rake in 27 USD per barrel ? The idea that a ' oil poor' ( well according to everyone that's what Russia was not so very many decades ago) country can make so much from oil alone kinda blows that 12 cents on the dollar right out of water unless American industry is somehow totally incompetent. Why should we let industry control such a vital resource anyways?


REPLY: Let me get this straight... AFTER you get your taxes, you want to invest them, after they all go to the corporate elite??? If it "all" goes to them, what are you going to invest???


I obviously meant that your tax money going to the federal governments ends up being used as corporate bail-outs and subsidies and the only way to get it back in the current system is to learn how to play the stock market. Clear now?


Listen folks... the numbers mentioned for record profits are pre-tax dollars, of which about 38% goes to taxes. over 60% of those profits were from sales to the rest of the world..... it didn't all come out of your pocket.


It did as the US government spends US tax payers dollars to keep the middle east 'secure" ( well actually insecure but that's another story) so that the oil companies can pretend that their exploiting it when their aim is really to shut down and destroy as much of the competitions infrastructure as possible so as to disrupt oil supplies and generally get a higher return on original investment.

Stellar


df1

posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
Anyone here bitching about their banks profits? I didn't think so.

The conspiracy of the corrupt american banking system is probably one of the most discussed conspiracies on the internet and it strikes directly at the root of bank profits. And like the oil conspiracy, the banking conspiracy is stacked in favor of the corporate interests.

The FED is a serious scam.
When are we going to take action?
The FEDERAL RESERVE & IRS Conspiracies

I suggest that you think again.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Well, banks at least serve some kind of purpose which would be far harder to dispense with than anything big oil gives us.


REPLY: That still does not go against the fact that 12 cents per dollar invested is not a great amount. People see that high dolar amount per barrel, yet have no clue as to the tens of thousands of products made from it, or it's derivatives...... which we most certainly cannot do without.

Drilling one hole (off-shore) to 13,000 feet costs up to One million per week, and it's only an 85% certainty they will hit reserves the first time.... even with the newest technology.


I say we send some marines in to arrest all the board of directors and sieze the oil companies and nationalize them. Really what the hell is wrong with that? Then we can actually have those profits used to build refineries, researching better engines, invest in more alternatives. Energy should be in control of the people, not 10 people sitting in a board room pondering the size of their next yacht.


REPLY: ...... and screw all the investors, many of whom are middle class grandma's and grandpa's??? Governmental control of ANYTHING is a big mistake, as has been obvious for decades.


We have had alterantive sources of energy for nearly a century and all they have done is help prevent those being introduced into the general economy.


REPLY: Incorrect. If companies can make a profit from it, awhich creates more jobs in the process, they will develo the technology.

Literally billions has been spent since the 1970's in alternative evergy sources, and has resulted in hundreds of advances. Because of those investments, solar technology (panels) has an efficiency of 12% to 17%. That's still not much, and most of the energy produced, because of low amperage, would be lost in it's transmission over long distances.

Hydrogen is not the answer, because even with all the investment, no efficient storge container has been developed, and it still takes more energy to produce than the net energy gained. Actually, one has only to look at the Periodic table to see that efficient storage may never be attained, because the Hydrogen molecule is smaller than all others, so how do you "contain" it? You could fill the tank, let the vehicle sit unused for a couple of days, and lose half the contents.

Ethanol isn't the answer, either, since we have to import most of what we now use. Have you checked the price of E-85? Importation is the reason.


".... after the oil giants rake in 27 USD per barrel


REPLY: You still have to balance that with their expenditures.


The conspiracy of the corrupt american banking system is probably one of the most discussed conspiracies on the internet and it strikes directly at the root of bank profits. And like the oil conspiracy, the banking conspiracy is stacked in favor of the corporate interests.


REPLY: The Central Bank is another issue, but I agree it should be abolished. However, it is totally different from the oil issues.

A pint of bottled water here is about 85 cents.... a gallon of gasoline is currently $3.12. So, many of the people who complain about the price of gas drink bottled water (something they can do without), which comes out to $8.12 per gallon.

That bottled water most likely came from a factory within 1000 miles away.

The oil companies buy the oil, pay people to load their tankers, bring it from (avg) 3000 miles away in ships that burn 50 gallons of fuel every 200 yards; then pay people to unload it at the storage depots; then pipe it to refineries (more wages), then process it (more wages) and store it again. Then it's put in tankers and delivered to other storage facilities around the country, then delivered to the gas stations.

Every step of the way people profit, which raises the price. Then you have the 13+ different (rediculous) "designer blends" which has completely ruined our national delivery system, which again drives up the prices. They've done a remarkable job at keeping the prices as low as they are.

Even Hybrid cars use more energy in their lifetime (from design to construction to upkeep to disposal) than does a Hummer, so they're not the answer, either.

[edit on 3-8-2006 by zappafan1]


df1

posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1
The Central Bank is another issue, but I agree it should be abolished. However, it is totally different from the oil issues.

If you follow the flow of the oil money Id bet that it ends up in the hands of the same banking interests that dominate the federal reserve. Various countries including iran have proposed an oil bourse based on euros instead of dollars and this is a direct threat to both the oil giants and the federal reserve system so I do not see the difference which you see. Imho most of the military action in the ME is to protect the interest of these two groups.







 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join