Exxon shatters profit records

binauralonthecape

i need to buy their stock....

slightofjeff

binauralonthecape wrote:

i need to buy their stock....

No, you needed to buy their stock last year, when it was $20 cheaper per share ... buy low, sell high

searchlightsoul

Everyone needs energy so what is so surprisong about this? Their in a high (highest) demand industry so good luck to them. Besides, every single person on this board has contributed to this profit at some point.

SundaySilence

searchlightsoul wrote:

Everyone needs energy so what is so surprisong about this? Their in a high (highest) demand industry so good luck to them. Besides, every single person on this board has contributed to this profit at some point.

Nothing surprising about this. Its not about luck. Every single persons contribution has more to do with the lack of competition in the industry than tacit irrevocable approval as it seems you are suggesting.

As you point out, the demand curve for this industry is relatively inelastic. This leaves it vulnerable to supply side manipulation. A noncompetitive supply side facilitates this. The lack of refinery capicity is no accident. It has been orchestrated deliberatly to maximize profits of big oil at your expense.

Our national energy policy was drawn up in closed door meetings with big oil and the vice president. And they lie to congress about it. The influence of big oil has led to disasterious policy consequences from middle east instability to the manipulation and retardation of scientific understanding of climate change.

SundaySilence

Kel Varnsen wrote:

But doesn't it stand to reason that in these areas are unstable the costs to operate them are going to go up? I mean if you are running oil in a country that could blow up at any minute it seems pretty reasonable that it is going to cost more to get people to work there, it is going to cost more to get equipment delivered there, it is going to cost more to insure your holdings and so on.

US tax dollars paying marines and blackwater for protection of oil facilities takes the bite off. And menial labor becomes cheap when you obliterate a country into massive unemployment.

Also the increase in the price of oil benefits big oil producers in Texas. The US is the third largest oil producing nation behind Saudi Arabia and Russia, producing almost twice as much oil as the fourth, Iran.

know1

Good for them. Companies are supposed to make profits.

blondieblue227

People in politics are in business with the oil companies. Is that true? Isn’t that corrupt? Why can’t anybody blow the whistle on them? DON’T ELECT PEOPLE TIED TO OIL COMPANIES!

Commy

blondieblue227 wrote:

DON’T ELECT PEOPLE TIED TO OIL COMPANIES!

We get to choose between A or B and there are no real differences between the condidates. In the US foreign policy hasn't changed in 60 years, economic policy pretty straighforward, give it all to companies involved with the military. And so on...

Its a 1 party system, the definition of fascism.

Pacomc79

blondieblue227 wrote:

People in politics are in business with the oil companies. Is that true? Isn’t that corrupt? Why can’t anybody blow the whistle on them? DON’T ELECT PEOPLE TIED TO OIL COMPANIES!

All of our politicians are tied into some industry, some with big donations from insurance companies who have far greater profit margins than energy companies others financal groups or otherwise. It'd be nice to say the general attitude is towards "getting the bastards" out but it's not. The country want's pork in it's budget, they hate special interests but only the ones that don't directly benifit them.

searchlightsoul

SundaySilence wrote:

Nothing surprising about this. Its not about luck. Every single persons contribution has more to do with the lack of competition in the industry than tacit irrevocable approval as it seems you are suggesting.

As you point out, the demand curve for this industry is relatively inelastic. This leaves it vulnerable to supply side manipulation. A noncompetitive supply side facilitates this. The lack of refinery capicity is no accident. It has been orchestrated deliberatly to maximize profits of big oil at your expense.

Our national energy policy was drawn up in closed door meetings with big oil and the vice president. And they lie to congress about it. The influence of big oil has led to disasterious policy consequences from middle east instability to the manipulation and retardation of scientific understanding of climate change.

The global petroleum industry is hardly lacking competition- their are literally hundreds of companies competing for limited exploration licenses available. For example Shell, Chevron, Woodside, BHP, BP are all enormous companies competing with Exxon. Of course Exxon may be the largest but the industry is far from a monopoly as you suggest. People also seem to forget that less than 10 years ago the industry was laying off hundreds of experienced employees because the oil price was so low. So I guess a short memeory is fine for people who like to bitch about the cost of petrol now but forget how good they have had it in the past.

With regard to servicing companies such as Haliburton, than yes there is a serious lack of competition-the only other major company is Schlumberger. However with regrd to middle-east politics I think that Haliburton stood to gain more through its defense contracts with the US government than from oil.

polaris

again ... profits is not bad nor evil ... generating those profits by an illegal war is! ... reaping those profits from the bodies of innocent people is!!

Commy

polaris wrote:

again ... profits is not bad nor evil ... generating those profits by an illegal war is! ... reaping those profits from the bodies of innocent people is!!

Maybe not evil.

But having selfishness behind the motivation for labor isn't the ideal situation for society...crime is a byproduct, for example...consumption a must, degradation of the environment another product and so on.