Exxon given the nod to mount BP takeover

page: 1
49
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+10 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Exxon given the nod to mount BP takeover

Read more: www.thisismoney.co.uk...


Oil giant Exxon has been given clearance by Washington to mount a £100bn bid for BP as the embattled British company undertakes a high-stakes gamble to cap the Gulf of Mexico spill.


OK, I've had a good search through ATS and was surprised I didn't find this on here. If it is and I missed it, please disregard this thread and continue to post on the previous one.

It seems to me to be a little too much of a coincidence that through the horrendous Gulf of Mexico leak, BP finds itself in a position to be taken over by a rival oil giant, Exxon, with the full support of Washington and Obama.


If Exxon seized BP, it would place an energy behemoth worth in excess of £250bn fully in American hands - at a time when the world is struggling to find new sources of oil.


This just compounds my suspicions and I would presume those of many of the members here on ATS that this was far from being an accident and far more likely to be industrial/political sabotage.

Source

Please add any views you may have on this subject.

-Nik-

[edit on 12-7-2010 by nik1halo]




posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
If the story is to be believed, it might start to explain why President Obama was making reference to British Petoleum at the beginning of this, and wanted to drive the share price of a global company down so an American company could have a go at owning it.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 04:18 AM
link   
Things that make you go hmmm...

.. well, if the US government was warm on this idea, why would they not try to assist the take over by allowing bad publicity for BP thus reducing the take over price?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
actually BP stock was supposed to go down
to $25 before takeover started. But BP fought to bring
back the stock by nearly splitting the company into tiny shards
with bank loans all over the world. It was supposed
to go to a ME Oil Company instead of Exxon.

2 things BP did to speed this process up

1) seek international loans from non-oil sources
2) threaten to sell of $12B assets from Alaska

both of these would have sliced BP up into
splintered factions. Now we need to see what
names are connected on the shareholders list
of both BP and Exxon. If Exxon takes over BP
then they can still collect shareholders profits
as an Exxon shareholder even if the Gov freezes
BP. Exxon stock will rise


Of course this is all speculation



[edit on 12-7-2010 by boondock-saint]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
.. well, if the US government was warm on this idea, why would they not try to assist the take over by allowing bad publicity for BP thus reducing the take over price?

Goldman Sachs
helped keep the BP Stock price up
to make the takeover more difficult.
GS still has investment capital in BP.
Or you can call it Wall Street fraud

Keeping the stock value up, GS stands
to make more money in the takeover.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:13 AM
link   
This article gives a bit of info on Exxon, Does the name Rockefella Ring a bell!

Link,,,www.trivia-library.com...



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by iceblue20-12
This article gives a bit of info on Exxon, Does the name Rockefella Ring a bell!

Link,,,www.trivia-library.com...

lol
funny u should mention Rockerfeller for Exxon
as Rothschild is to BP

hmmmm

PTB wars ????

is there a division???
or is it just another show??



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   
They just messing with a bit of pocket change,Division-maybe,Or just another move on the monopoly board ??



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by iceblue20-12
This article gives a bit of info on Exxon, Does the name Rockefella Ring a bell!

Link,,,www.trivia-library.com...

lol
funny u should mention Rockerfeller for Exxon
as Rothschild is to BP

hmmmm

PTB wars ????

is there a division???
or is it just another show??


I actually doubt that either the Rockerfeller's or the Rothschild's will stand to lose much, if anything from this takeover. It could in fact be quite the opposite of a war and in fact be a merger of the Rockerfeller/Rothschild empires. The power that the united BP/Exxon conglomorate will hold will be immense!

This is what these people want, power, not money. They already have all the moey they want and are already extremely powerful. There's a finite amount of money in the world, but power is infinite!

On the other hand, it could simply be a transfer of power from Anglo to American control for some reason. It's a certain fact, IMO that TPTB are certainly up to something. Either that or I'm getting psychic, as I just knew something like this was in the works from a couple of weeks ago!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:49 AM
link   
I'm in no position to track the flow of money here, but is it possible this is good news for victims of the spill. If BP is taken over by Exxon that should mean deeper pockets for the eventual lawsuits by those affected?

I read a post a while back about BP setting up a fund for victims and in doing so, limiting their liability to that figure, with approval from the white house. Not sure if that's true and / or if it will really limit liability for everyone affected.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link   
I'm a little confused here...

Is the US ORDERING a takeover of a British company?

HOW DARE THEY! After all we've done for them as well...



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by BSG75
 


No, of course they're not. And to be honest, regardless of what it says in my OP, which is simply a quote from the source, BP is NOT a British company. It's an international corporation, 40% British owned and 39% US owned.

What is going on is that the US Gov't is allowing Exxon to attempt a takeover of BP. What worries me is the string of events that have led up to BP being in a position to be taken over and who has orchestrated it, because it sure as damn ain't a coincidence IMHO!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Man did I call this or what? I was predicting this since the first BP stock drop.

Wow I'm good!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
Man did I call this or what? I was predicting this since the first BP stock drop.

Wow I'm good!


Ditto brother!

I can't say I was exactly shocked when I read this, this morning.

I was more surprised by the blatantly obvious way that it's been done!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Ohw Exxon... Thank god... Now we are all save!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Me and many other ATSers have said this from the beginning. Not that the leak was intentional, but that BP would be "mergered" or taken over as soon as the spill was contained.

Most BP stations in my area have either closed or covered up their signs.

Sunoco seems to have been the local beneficiary of all these locations.

Exxon mergered after its fiasco, and they continued to make profits despite the Valdez spill. BP will do the same thing. They will have a name change, and an influx of money from some other oil giant, and everything will be peachy!

I wish I had a bunch of money to by BP stock right now. People are going to make a killing when the merger or takeover plans become official!!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by BSG75
I'm a little confused here...

Is the US ORDERING a takeover of a British company?

HOW DARE THEY! After all we've done for them as well...


No, they are approving the bid attempt. This means they have given Exxon the greenlight to create a behemoth company and they won't deny the stock ownership bid. They won't overly regulate, and they will allow the company to become "too big to fail."
We love those.

Why have friendly competition and innovation, when you can have giant, cumbersome, old school, poorly operated businesses dependent on Government allowances to stay in business, and run the little guys out of town with all their new-fangled ideas that might actually help the world?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
This, plus *snip* would not come on our side with the Falkland island soverignty question makes me believe that was the target... The yanks couldnt stomache the fact that we have all this untapped oil and mineral wealth and they want it... Time to bring our boys home and fortify the falklands...

We know who our friends are now.. The US administration isnt one., Obama can rot.

Staff Edit - 1g.) Political Baiting: You will not engage in politically-charged rhetoric, politically-inspired name-calling, and related right-versus-left political bickering while posting in any topical forum or discussion thread on AboveTopSecret.com. You will not alter political candidate names or party affiliations in order to insult or deride the opposition.

[edit on 7/12/10 by niteboy82]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
What's interesting too is that Exxon were linked to a takeover of Haliburton ?

And who was it that done the Cementing that caused this leak ?

Is that some dots i can see lining up.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 

That and the fact that bp has the right to drill the falkland islands makes the plot thicken further





top topics
 
49
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join