Canadians...boycott all Petro Canada Gas stations from now on

RolandTD20KdrummerRolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
edited June 2007 in A Moving Train
This could actually work. Please copy and forward it to your email contacts.

Petro Canada is Canada's largest gasoline retailer.

Honestly....what the hell do we have to lose by doing this?

Read this if you aren't interested in paying $1.30 - $1.50 / liter this summer

This idea may actually work. Give it some thought.

"War On Gas"

This was originally sent by a retired Coca Cola executive. It
came from one of his engineer buddies who retired from Halliburton. It's
worthy of our consideration.

Join the resistance! I hear we are going to hit close to $1.50 a
liter by summer and it might possibly go higher! Want gasoline prices to
come down? We need to take some intelligent, united action. Phillip
Hollsworth offered this good idea.

This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy gas on a certain
day" campaign that was going around earlier! The oil companies just
laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to "hurt"
ourselves by refusing to buy gas. It was more of an inconvenience to us
than it was a problem for them.

Here's the idea:

Starting June 1 of 2007 DON'T purchase ANY gasoline from the
biggest Company in Canada . Petro Canada ! If they are not selling any
gas, they will be very quickly inclined to reduce their prices. If they
reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit. Think
about this. Petro Canada has 1500 retail locations and the entire
country consumes 68 million gallons a day. Yes per day. And Petro Canada
is Canada 's largest gasoline retailer, then doesn't it make sense that
the consumer can bring this giant to its knees and force them to lower
their prices.

But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of
Petro Canada gas buyers. It's really simple to do! Now, don't wimp out
at this point.... keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to
reach millions of people.

I am sending this note to 30 people. If each of us sends it to
at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ... and those 300 send it to at least
ten more (300 x 10 = 3,000)...and so on, by the time the message reaches
the sixth group of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION
consumers. If those three million pass it on to ten friends each, then
30 million people!!

Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all.

How long would all that take? If each of us sends this e-mail
out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all 30 MILLION people
could conceivably see this within the next 8 days!!!

Acting together we can make a difference. If this makes sense to
you, please pass this message on. I suggest that we not buy from Petro
Canada UNTIL THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES TO A REASONABLE PRICE AND KEEP THEM
DOWN.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.

http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    How about just not using as much gas. Lower the demand on oil by using alternative transportation methods.

    Quite frankly, I'm kinda hoping gas prices continue to rise and force people out of their cars.
  • sourdough wrote:
    How about just not using as much gas. Lower the demand on oil by using alternative transportation methods.

    Quite frankly, I'm kinda hoping gas prices continue to rise and force people out of their cars.

    Obviously that's the best case scenario... however completely improbable for a lot of people driving back and forth to work. Suburban sprawl is quite widespread.

    I think this plan could definitely work. Using less gas that is also cheaper is a definite bonus, and works just fine with the boycott principle.

    What you're saying is kinda like saying why not just breathe less so there's more oxygen for the planet.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    sourdough wrote:
    How about just not using as much gas. Lower the demand on oil by using alternative transportation methods.

    Quite frankly, I'm kinda hoping gas prices continue to rise and force people out of their cars.

    absolutely!! ...

    unless there is another way of getting people to use less oil - this seems to be the only language folks can understand ...
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Obviously that's the best case scenario... however completely improbable for a lot of people driving back and forth to work. Suburban sprawl is quite widespread.

    I think this plan could definitely work. Using less gas that is also cheaper is a definite bonus, and works just fine with the boycott principle.

    What you're saying is kinda like saying why not just breathe less so there's more oxygen for the planet.
    I understand that there are people who are dependant on their cars but many people (myself included) that have made changes not only because of the price of driving but because of the larger related environmental problems. Suburban sprawl is quite widespread, but it does not mean we should accept it or condone it. If gas is too expensive for people to live in these sprawling communities, people have the choice to move. Just as SUV drivers have the choice to drive smaller cars.
    The vast majority of people do have choices. You can have the large house in a sprawling community with cheap property, but prepare to deal with the high gas prices and long commutes. You can't have it both ways.
  • korbykorby Posts: 298
    HUSKY or MOHAWK
    its ok
  • Bwalker545Bwalker545 Posts: 162
    sourdough wrote:
    If gas is too expensive for people to live in these sprawling communities, people have the choice to move. Just as SUV drivers have the choice to drive smaller cars.... You can have the large house in a sprawling community with cheap property, but prepare to deal with the high gas prices and long commutes. You can't have it both ways.

    What about the people that live in the small apartments spread across the urban sprawl barely able to squek out a living working at a job they have to communte to across town to get to, in the areas where the rich people still need min. wage laborers to run their coffe shops, gas stations ect. but no one living in the area will work the jobs? Take the bus? what if you miss it one day, your a min. wage laborer you might lose your job cause your easily replaced...Its not as simple as "Just stop driving"
    "Almost unconsciously he traced with his finger in the dust on the table: 2+2=5" 1984
  • sourdough wrote:
    I understand that there are people who are dependant on their cars but many people (myself included) that have made changes not only because of the price of driving but because of the larger related environmental problems. Suburban sprawl is quite widespread, but it does not mean we should accept it or condone it. If gas is too expensive for people to live in these sprawling communities, people have the choice to move. Just as SUV drivers have the choice to drive smaller cars.
    The vast majority of people do have choices. You can have the large house in a sprawling community with cheap property, but prepare to deal with the high gas prices and long commutes. You can't have it both ways.

    Some cannot afford to live in the downtown core either due to insane property taxes and ridiculous house prices. What do you recommend those people do?

    Also every city would have to be radically redesigned to consist of endless rows of soaring high rises as far as the eye can see... no more backyard bar-b-que's (or backyards or front yards for that matter) everyone lives in a box... Sounds like a seriously shit reality to me...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • bharQbharQ Posts: 1,201
    hoooray sheep people... Let’s examine….


    Let’s say nobody buys gas at Petro Canada anymore. What happens? Does gas consumption drop? Nope. Consumer gas purchases remain exactly the same, because everyone’s still buying the same amount of gas, just from a different gas station. So demand has remained constant.

    But what happens to supply? Well, at those other gas stations, supply is going to get tighter, isn’t it? Suddenly you’ve got all these ex-Petro Canada customers flooding your Shell, and stealing all your cheap gas at $1.14. Bastards! There are two things that could happen here.

    The other stations RAISE prices. Since their supply is now constrained, as people are buying more from them, it’s like a long weekend ALL THE TIME.
    The other petro companies need to increase supply to keep prices constant. But how can they do that? They can’t just pump more out of the ground, they’re already maxed out. So where will they get it? Where will they find a ready supply of unused gas?

    That’s right folks, they’ll buy it…. From Petro Canada.
    09/04/05 - Calgary, AB
    08/02/07 - LOLLA!!!
  • bharQ wrote:
    hoooray sheep people... Let’s examine….


    Let’s say nobody buys gas at Petro Canada anymore. What happens? Does gas consumption drop? Nope. Consumer gas purchases remain exactly the same, because everyone’s still buying the same amount of gas, just from a different gas station. So demand has remained constant.

    But what happens to supply? Well, at those other gas stations, supply is going to get tighter, isn’t it? Suddenly you’ve got all these ex-Petro Canada customers flooding your Shell, and stealing all your cheap gas at $1.14. Bastards! There are two things that could happen here.

    The other stations RAISE prices. Since their supply is now constrained, as people are buying more from them, it’s like a long weekend ALL THE TIME.
    The other petro companies need to increase supply to keep prices constant. But how can they do that? They can’t just pump more out of the ground, they’re already maxed out. So where will they get it? Where will they find a ready supply of unused gas?

    That’s right folks, they’ll buy it…. From Petro Canada.

    Who will buy it from Petro Canada again?.....and at full retail price?.... uhm yeah...I don't think so dude...

    They are losing money either way. When you don't get business...you lose money it's that simple...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • sourdough wrote:
    How about just not using as much gas. Lower the demand on oil by using alternative transportation methods.

    Quite frankly, I'm kinda hoping gas prices continue to rise and force people out of their cars.


    Also be extremely careful what you wish for.

    As long as gas prices remain high and long-term...expensive gas means it's expensive to ship products by truck, and expensive to fly stuff around via air, and expensive to operate any combustion type machinery.

    All those increased costs means the cost of virtually any product you can think of will go up if gas prices stay high.

    So....you're going to feel it smack dab your pocketbook it no matter how many bicycles trips, long thoughtful walks, or bus rides you decide to take to work.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • edgarcampedgarcamp Posts: 100
    This is a hoax, it has been going around with Exxon Mobile in place of Petro Canada. It is totally useless. It shows up in inboxs everywhere, everytime gas prices go up.
  • edgarcamp wrote:
    This is a hoax, it has been going around with Exxon Mobile in place of Petro Canada. It is totally useless. It shows up in inboxs everywhere, everytime gas prices go up.

    how do you know? Why don't you try it, pass the information forward, and find out?

    how can you possibly know if it works? Did you read some studies on it from Petro Canada?

    You must be one of those there's zero strength in numbers people...

    ....or perhaps you are just being pessimistic and somewhat of a defeatist.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    Also be extremely careful what you wish for.

    As long as gas prices remain high and long-term...expensive gas means it's expensive to ship products by truck, and expensive to fly stuff around via air, and expensive to operate any combustion type machinery.

    All those increased costs means the cost of virtually any product you can think of will go up if gas prices stay high.

    So....you're going to feel it smack dab your pocketbook it no matter how many bicycles trips, long thoughtful walks, or bus rides you decide to take to work.

    we should be paying the TRUE cost of gas ... not this overly subsidized amounts ... we should be paying for the environmental impacts of gas use as well ...

    for the simple fact that someone could argue driving is the most affordable means of transportation just goes to show how brainwashed we are that we NEED to drive everywhere ...
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Magus wrote:
    What about the people that live in the small apartments spread across the urban sprawl barely able to squek out a living working at a job they have to communte to across town to get to, in the areas where the rich people still need min. wage laborers to run their coffe shops, gas stations ect. but no one living in the area will work the jobs? Take the bus? what if you miss it one day, your a min. wage laborer you might lose your job cause your easily replaced...Its not as simple as "Just stop driving"
    My point is that people DO have choices. There are minimum wage jobs everywhere. In fact, there are more lower wage jobs in the cities. Furthermore, think of the savings for the poor minimum wage worker if they got out of their car :).

    Are the majority of car users poor people living in sprawling suburbs? Really? Sprawling suburbs rarelyhave apartments. People move out to them to get their hands on cheap houses so they don't have to live in apartments in the city.
  • thankyougrandmathankyougrandma Posts: 1,182
    boycott gas
    "L'homme est né libre, et partout il est dans les fers"
    -Jean-Jacques Rousseau
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Some cannot afford to live in the downtown core either due to insane property taxes and ridiculous house prices. What do you recommend those people do?

    Also every city would have to be radically redesigned to consist of endless rows of soaring high rises as far as the eye can see... no more backyard bar-b-que's (or backyards or front yards for that matter) everyone lives in a box... Sounds like a seriously shit reality to me...
    You're right. I can't afford to live in the downtown core, but there are busses that go in and out of it as well. Many people choose to live in sprawling communities because they choose to live in a bigger house at a cheaper price but the dichotomy of downtown core to sprawling community does not exist. In most cities there is choice.

    Many, many people manage to live in the city or in close proximity to it without being wealthy. My wife and I live half a block from a subway station in one of the most expensive cities in North America and we're surrounded by many other not so rich people. Its possible. there are choices.

    The reality is that land is a finite in quantity and our populations are cities are expanding in population rapidly. Cities will change and yes, some luxuries that we had in the past may not be feasable anymore. However, the legacy of sprawl, is more cars, more pollution, more oil demand, more time commuting and less time with family. That also does not sound like a good alternative.
  • chromiamchromiam Posts: 4,114
    sourdough wrote:
    How about just not using as much gas. Lower the demand on oil by using alternative transportation methods.

    Quite frankly, I'm kinda hoping gas prices continue to rise and force people out of their cars.

    There you go... use public transportation or other means that use less or no gasoline (carpooling, reducing frequency of trips, etc.). That's the only way to lower demand.

    This plan just moves the demand from one oil company to another. And then the larger company can just sell its oil to the other companies.
    This is your notice that there is a problem with your signature. Please remove it.

    Admin

    Social awareness does not equal political activism!

    5/23/2011- An utter embarrassment... ticketing failures too many to list.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    The only way to effectively lower gas prices is to stop buying gas and not go back to buying the same amount you were purchasing before the lowering of the price.

    It's like dieting. If you want to keep the weight off you have to stop eating.

    Reducing consumption is one of the better things we all can do.


    we use too much gas period. We need to combine trips, use public transit and walk/ bike more.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • We should just create hydrogen highways like one of the countries in Europe plans on doing. I think it was Norway but I'm not sure....just make sure not to crash...
  • korbykorby Posts: 298
    well. i gtg fill up my old SUV and drive to the hardware store to get a can of AEROSOL spray paint.
    its ok
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    Best method of protest...
























    Ride a bike.
  • All I'm reading is perfect world scenarios...

    bowing down to corporate greed and citing it as an environmental do good issue to back it up.

    There has to be some kind of deviation in the process instead of just sheeping it along as always... Surprising how people actually condemn this ideology.

    I for one will not live in a box so I can have the pleasure of riding a bicycle or a bus in the winter. That's just ass backwards. Unrest....I say shake the system up as much as possible until energy alternatives arrive. It will hasten their arrival if anything. Mess with the system at every opportunity...especially in this case.

    A perfect, green sparkling world would be great....were not there yet. We never will be burning coal and oil. essentially everything you touch and eat is made from it. We are getting 100% ripped off. It's already there in the ground...free.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • DerrickDerrick Posts: 475
    I like the idea in the OP, but the law of Supply and Demand will trump it...and that's if you could even get 5% of the population to buy in, which I don't think anyone could. Under 5% wouldn't even show a dent in their numbers.

    Canada is built for the automobile. We are spread out. We have piss poor transit systems within cities and between cities. We like big yards and privacy. Plus, our autumns, winters, and springs make cycling and walking even less appealing.

    Beyond that, there is the issue that an unnatural balance of large-number employers are condensed into metropolitan centres that increase the likelyhood of commuters. People live in Collingwood and work in Toronto. That's just WRONG, but it happens every day.

    If you want to attack the gasoline prices, I salute you. I really do. I just don't think the Canadian consumer is the way to go. This is a place where, if public transit were suddenly free, people still wouldn't use it.
  • chromiamchromiam Posts: 4,114
    All I'm reading is perfect world scenarios...

    They are all real world scenarios. Try carpooling to work with 3 or 4 other people, ride a bike when possible, don't drive to a different store everyday (run errands on the same day to save fue)l, use public transportation. These are all possible and plausible real world solutions.

    Again, by not buying gas from one company you just create more demand on the others and the company which you are boycotting can just sell its surplus fuel to the other companies. So basically you accomplished nothing other than changing who you buy your fuel from.
    This is your notice that there is a problem with your signature. Please remove it.

    Admin

    Social awareness does not equal political activism!

    5/23/2011- An utter embarrassment... ticketing failures too many to list.
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    the only issue i have with this campaign is that basically - if you want to use it - then you need to pay for it ... even at these prices - it is still subsidized and well below the true cost ... your desire for cheap gas impacts people like me who choose to avoid driving as much as possible ... we've already had like 5 smog alerts and its barely june here ...
  • even flow?even flow? Posts: 8,066
    I need gas? I stop at whatever station happens to be on the corner when I look up. Dosen't matter if it is Shell, Pet-Can, Esso, etc. I drive. I pay. Do I complain when the prices go up? I only moan. ;) And then I fill my tank up. I take the extra 2.5 (at least) hours it would take me to use public transit to get to and from work and put it to good use.

    The only boycott that would work would be for nobody to turn up at work for a week and blame it on gas prices. But that is as easy to do as getting people to boycott Pet-Can.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • chromiam wrote:
    They are all real world scenarios. Try carpooling to work with 3 or 4 other people, ride a bike when possible, don't drive to a different store everyday (run errands on the same day to save fue)l, use public transportation. These are all possible and plausible real world solutions.

    Again, by not buying gas from one company you just create more demand on the others and the company which you are boycotting can just sell its surplus fuel to the other companies. So basically you accomplished nothing other than changing who you buy your fuel from.

    Real world scenarios sure...likely scenarios...no. Just like I could fly to the moon but it's likely I wont anytime in the next 20 years.

    If gas is a $1.50 and Petro Canada has to sell off to their competitors to move it...they sure as hell aren't going to get 1.50 (street price) for it are they?

    I'm under the impression they are just a gasoline retailer buying gas from various refineries. Petro Canada is not a refinery to my knowledge.

    Would lack of business not force them to make their product more appealing price-wise?

    anyone?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oil_refineries#Canada

    oh well I just found this...

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/gasout.asp
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • 12 tips to save

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18660972/


    another 10 on gas buddy...where else?

    http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_tips.aspx


    such a shame...my turbo loves a few more drops of juice with each deep breath...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    All I'm reading is perfect world scenarios...

    bowing down to corporate greed and citing it as an environmental do good issue to back it up.

    There has to be some kind of deviation in the process instead of just sheeping it along as always... Surprising how people actually condemn this ideology.

    I for one will not live in a box so I can have the pleasure of riding a bicycle or a bus in the winter. That's just ass backwards. Unrest....I say shake the system up as much as possible until energy alternatives arrive. It will hasten their arrival if anything. Mess with the system at every opportunity...especially in this case.

    A perfect, green sparkling world would be great....were not there yet. We never will be burning coal and oil. essentially everything you touch and eat is made from it. We are getting 100% ripped off. It's already there in the ground...free.
    If that is what you want, than that is your choice but be prepared to live with the consequences including high gas prices. It just seems like you want the convenience and benefits of living away from the city and use your car but without any of the drawbacks. Sprawling communities cost tax payers far more money because they are inefficient and low density areas. This is precisely why it is difficult to provide good transit to them. They are economically bad decisions and environmental disasters.
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Real world scenarios sure...likely scenarios...no. Just like I could fly to the moon but it's likely I wont anytime in the next 20 years.
    Really??? Flying to the moon? Its that hard? Is the concept of getting out of your car that foreign and unachievable?
Sign In or Register to comment.