It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Royal Dutch Shell's has reported a 25 percent rise in first-quarter earnings, crediting strong increases in energy prices.
Shell's first-quarter profit has soared to $9.08 billion thanks to record prices for crude oil.
Europe's largest oil company said Tuesday its average selling price of crude oil leaped by 66 percent to over $90 per barrel from the first quarter a year ago.
That sent net profit soaring to a record $9.08 billion. Sales were up 55 percent to $114 billion
(s)hell's first-quarter profit has soared to $9.08 billion thanks to record prices for crude oil.
Originally posted by theBLESSINGofVISION
Well of course it did...
Gas prices go up = profits up.
these crooks must be stopped!
We need a hero because we arent standing up for ourselves fast enuff...
[edit on 4/29/2008 by theBLESSINGofVISION]
Originally posted by Solarskye
They may be breaking records in profit but everything is going up in price and their profit margin is too. They have to buy the barrels of oil that just keep rising, then they have to spend their profit to produce certain grades of oil for different states, then they have to deliver this oil to the customer and still pay all their employees.
Originally posted by marg6043
Still you don't see them spreading their wealth with the consumers in US in the way of incentives.
Shell’s net income in the first three months of the year rose 25 percent to $9.08 billion and BP reported its profit increased 63 percent to $7.62 billion. Shares of Shell and BP trading in London rose more on Monday than they have in at least two years. At BP, oil and gas production was unchanged at 3.9 million barrels of oil equivalent a day, the company said. Shell’s output remained unchanged at 3.5 million barrels of oil equivalent a day, though several recent events had disrupted production.
ut how likely is it that the price of gasoline will hold steady, when it already shot up 8.8 cents in just the past week to $3.13 per gallon? Should prices rise to $4 per gallon in the next two months, bringing the average price for the first four months of the year closer to, say, $3.50 per gallon, then consumers will be paying about $1 more per gallon than in 2007. For the average U.S. household, that would be $381 more out the door in 2008 before the stimulus check even arrives. So, if you are a two-paycheck family with two kids, the $300 rebate you're expecting for one of your children will already have been sent to the Saudis (and other oil producers).
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Crude's surge last week took its price to an eye-popping $100 a barrel. The rise comes on top of a 57 percent jump for 2007 and puts oil within reach of its all-time inflation-adjusted high above $102, hit back in 1980.
Did you know that gas price gouging almost never occurs as prices rise? Rather, it's most often when dealers keep prices artificially high even as their costs fall.
Fixing The Price Of Gas
Oil companies set the price of gas at company-owned stations. What they say, goes. With lessee-dealers, the relationship is more complex.
Lessee-dealers are charged a 'Dealer Tank Wagon' (DTW) price by the oil companies. The DTW price is set either by the oil company's central or regional office, and is driven by both the spot and futures markets. Most importantly, oil companies determine the DTW price by looking at the prices of other stations in the market. This is why two stations with the same brand a block away from each other can have different prices.
Lessee-dealers can't negotiate a DTW price since they sign contracts with just one oil company that require them to purchase a minimum amount of gas. Oil companies allow dealers to sell gas at a slightly inflated margin to ensure a profit stream so the dealers can put food on their family's table. That margin can range from 3-10 cents per gallon.
Why don't dealers just raise the prices more, like 20 cents a gallon, so they can give their families even more food? Some do. If they're caught, you can bet anything the next DTW price will be higher, bringing their profit margins back to normal - only now, their gas is more expensive than their neighboring stations and they have a competitive disadvantage.
DTW pricing is the product of an exceedingly complex and secretive pricing scheme known as zone pricing. A zone can be as small as a single gas station, or as large as a city. The testimony of a Mobil representative in 1997 revealed that Mobil had 46 zones in Connecticut. Most dealers have no idea what zone they are in, even though the DTW price given to their neighboring stations can determine their standing in a local market.
Oil companies, like politicians reapportioning voting districts, rely heavily on technology to slice apart local markets. The DTW price in each zone will be different, taking account several factors including nearby competition, demographics, and the historical demand of the zone. Oil companies also seek to determine the price elasticity of each zone, or how much the zone will pay for gas before looking for alternative suppliers. For some zones, that breaking point is a penny, for others, it two or three cents, and some will stay with their station out of a sense of loyalty. These factors can cause the price of gas in neighboring zones to fluctuate by as much as a dime.
Oil companies adjust zone price by considering what their competitors are doing. The price of rival gas stations will be surveyed two or three times a week, or the data will be relayed to the oil companies by refiners.
Every day, traders, buyers and sellers of oil, evaluate supply and demand, look at the outlook for oil producers and consumers, analyze political and economic risks, and look for any news that could impact the market, such as a hurricane heading toward the Gulf of Mexico. Using sophisticated mathematical models, the day's news, rumors and gut feelings, they bid crude prices up or down.
Originally posted by Sublime620
They have the oil, they're making the money.
OPEC said Friday it believed the world would need less oil from its 13-member group this year than in 2007 because global oil supply growth was set to outpace demand growth, particularly given signs that the U.S. was on "the brink of recession."
This is the lesson of the infamous windfall profit tax (WPT) on oil firms imposed under the Carter Administration in 1980 and repealed under the Reagan Administration in 1988. Then, as now, anger at "big oil" over high prices led to calls for a punitive tax. But according to the Congressional Research Service, "The WPT reduced domestic oil production from between 3 and 6 percent, and increased oil imports from between 8 and 16 percent. This made the U.S. more dependent upon imported oil." The tax hikes in the current bill have different names and operate somewhat differently, but the end result would be the same.
On August 8, 2005, President Bush signed into the law the energy bill; on July 28,the U.S. House of Representatives voted 275 to 156 to approve the energy bill; and on July 29, the U.S. Senate voted 74 to 26 to approve the energy bill.
Since 2001, energy corporations have showered federal politicians with $115 million in campaign contributions—with three-quarters of that amount going to Republicans. This cash helped secure energy companies and their lobbyists exclusive, private access to lawmakers, starting with Vice-President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force, whose report provided the foundation of the energy bill passed by Congress and signed by President Bush on August 8.
Originally posted by nyk537
The second part of that article, to me, highlights part of the reason why the oil situation has become as bad as it has. It seems as though Democrats in Congress believe that it is the responsibility of oil companies to invest in and fund the development of new energy technologies. Why do they think this?
If the government is so interested in developing new technologies to replace oil, shouldn't the government be the ones funding and investing in this? Why should a private organization be held accountable for something like this?