Oil Company Profits

[MDM4AU 332]

Heard an interesting stat. I'll try to find something to back it up for those who will doubt it.

Gas at it's highest price following the hurricanes was $.16 more per gallon than it is now. Yet, gas is $5 a barrel more right now.

Also, the government makes more per gallon than the oil companies. Currently, $.54 per gallon goes toward refining and profit (not sure why they grouped thee two together) while $.69 per gallon goes to the government. I'm not sure if that is Fed & State or just Fed.

Here is where the EVIL CONSERVATIVE in me comes out. As much as I hate to pay what I am per gallon and as much as I realize how it hurts the "little man," how in a capitalist society can we put a cap on what a business makes? And when is the Government going to give the people a break on the taxes on fuel to help the "little man?"

[80Tiger 899]

By no means am I anything but a conservative when it comes to these issues, but I have a couple of problems with the current situation as regards to oil companies and refining. In a pure free market, the market would correct itself. Other companies would see how much the current oil companies are making and they would get in the business. They would find a source of oil and build wells and refineries and sell to the market. In today's regulation world that cannot happen. There is plenty of oil in Alaska to be drilled but our Congress has not/ will not pass legislation for that and our president has not made enough of an issue for it. I do not know for a fact, but from what I have read the regulation surrouding building a refinery is staggering. The point is there are many impediments that keep the market from correcting itself. I would love for Wal Mart to get in the oil drilling and refining business.

Because of this, oil companies are more like utilities than free market businesses. I am not advocating regulation by the govt. That does not ever seem to work, but that these companies should be self regulating in a sense. There is such a thing as being morally and ethically responsible. This product they sell is a necessity, not a luxury. It is critical to the economy. Why can they not operate under a "cost plus" scenario while the crude prices are this high. In other words pass on the cost of the "raw material" (crude) and nothing else. There operating cost and distribution cost have not changed, just their raw material. As an example, when gas was $1.50 per gallon as an assumption, if crude oil made up 50% of that cost or $.75 and everything else including profit was $.75 per gallon. Crude has pretty much doubled since that time so crude now makes up $1.50 per gallon and everyting else $.75 for a total of $2.25 per gallon in this example not $3.00 plus.

My overall take is that the oil companies are taking advantage of this market and what it will lead to is gov't intervention which will be a bad thing in the long run.

[quietfan 233]

You raise some interesting questions.

I also wonder why the "refining & "profit" figures are lumped together. Anyone have a link with these separated? Most of what I hear on the news seems to imply company profits are up, but I have no hard data to support anything. (And really no time right now to do the research to find it.) Are profits per gallon rising with crude prices, or is all the increase we see at the pump strictly due to crude costs?

A second question: Isn't the government's share, i.e. tax, based on volume, not value? That is, aren't fuel taxes set by the gallon and not as a percentage of price? In which case, the recent increases in price would not results in any increases in tax. In fact, under those conditions, declining demand would lower the actual dollar amounts going into local, state, or federal gov'ts and those entities might be suffering like the consumer. (Whether $0.69 is a fair or appropriate amount to begin with is a deeper issue.)

IF (and again, I have no hard statistics on way or the other) profits are up, then obviously they're making that extra profit on the backs of masses who struggle to pay their gas bill. Under those conditions, I would think the fair thing to do is: If say, increased prices are costing the consumer an extra 10 % in his/her fuel budget, then it would be noble for the companies to also voluntarily take a 10 % cut in their profits. (I know, cutting profits hurts the individual stockholders, not just the high-end CEO's, but pump prices still affect more people than stock dividends.)

As far as caps on what a business can make, the only caps I know of are anti-trust laws to keep businessmen from conspiring to fix prices. Some say the oil companies are a cartel that does engage in such price fixing, but others argue the point. In the big picture, there are only a handful or so major oil companies worldwide, but is there any hard evidence of such a conspiracy? I haven't seen any concrete proof, but it does seem like if they acted truely independently, there would be some price wars going on with some trying to undercut the others in such an inflationary market.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Let me turn this around - remember, I work in the industry, for a company who has both an operator (meaning oil producer) subsidiary and a contractor (meaning oilfield service provider) subsidiary.

Yes, all the talk right now is on profits. But what most people don't understand is that the profits in the oil field are high because the risk involved for the exploration companies is so incredibly high. Who do you think provides the money for the initial scientific research, the geology reports, the costs to obtain leases and mineral rights? Who provides the money for the seismic equipment to determine where to drill and then crosses their fingers, hoping he's right? Who pays the contractors to bring their rigs and roustabouts on a well site 24 hours a day to hopefully strike a viable source? Who pays for more contractors to come out and enhance production to maximize the reservoir? What about the cost of insurance to cover all this? What about the payroll for administration and support people to back all this up? What about all the regulations and the fees and the environmental traps they have to run in every stage of the process? What about the fees they pay to have their oil or gas shippied via pipeline to their refineries? What about the refining costs? What about the costs to plug and abandon the well when it has reached the end of its productive life? What about the costs to rebuild platforms and pipelines after a hurricane, or worse, the cost to decommission a platform or well or pipeline too badly damaged to continue operating?

The oil companies pay all these costs themselves UP FRONT in this crapshoot of an industry WAAAYYYY before they ever see one dime of profit. Why do you think there are so few independent oil companies anymore? Turning large profits is the result of investing millions upon millions on something that might not even pan out. Dry holes are the norm rather than the exception. Every well you drill has a strong potential to be a bust. Profits are their means to continue to explore and develop new potential reservoirs. It's not like they put all that money in the bank and sit on it, or dole it out to their employees. You have to spend money to make money, and believe you me, they spend it.

Granted, when the costs of oil from overseas supplies goes up, they make money, but why is that a bad thing? People that invested their money in these oil companies did so knowing that they might not ever see a dime of return on their investments. This is America - capitalism rules.

Why hasn't anyone tried a windfall tax on the profits Bill Gates makes every time he issues a new version of Windows and stops supporting all the old versions so everyone has to run out and buy the new one? You can't tell me that computers are not just as valuable to the American way of life as our cars are.

Throw in all the b***s**t environmental crap that drives up the costs to explore for and produce oil, and there's yet another factor towards $75/barrel foreign oil. Drilling in the ANWR would not have any significant impact on the earth's environment. It would not kill baby caribou. It would not melt the polar ice caps. It would not make two headed otter babies. The greenies scream about not damaging the US environment, then scream about dependence on foreign oil, then scream about more alternative fuel sources. Yes, there are ways to reduce energy consumption - but how am I supposed to recharge my hybrid car in the middle of Montana? How am I supposed to refuel my ehtanol car if the corn farmers are already backlogged and unable to produce enough ethanol right now to supply fuel additives for gasoline? You cannot shift energy sources overnight, and blocking drilling in ANWR and off the coast of Florida and off the coast of California is not going to make the switch happen any sooner, regardless of what some hemp wearing hippie in SanFran thinks. It just drives up consumer costs even though there are currently no viable alternatives. Makes me nuts thinking about it.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

I also wonder why the "refining & "profit" figures are lumped together. 

232258[/snapback]

Because for most of these companies, there is not a profit until the product is refined and sold.

Which brings up another point - what about the times when the cost per barrel was low, and the cost to refine was at or near the break even point? When the profit was about the same as the cost to produce and refine? People say that the cost to refine has not gone up, but breakthroughs in refining technology have only come after years of R&D of that new technology - and the MILLIONS of dollars spent on that R&D. Then once you develop the new technology, your refinery has to go offline while you install and test, then switch over and hope for the best. And lets not forget the new environmental crap that requires more and more pollution reduction controls - that equipment costs money too. And don't think that the greenies sell that cheaply. They know they have the oil companies by the short hairs because this stuff is required by law. Talk about exploitation - but hey, it's capitalism. If they cared about the environment and hated capitalism , then why aren't these greenies donating the pollution control equipment for the good of mankind?

[tigerfan1234 0]

People need to take the environment seriously and beging to switch to alternative energy sources. Drilling in Alaska should not be the answer. It is the world's last pristine place and I will not condone humans screwing that up so we can drive $50,000+ luxury SUV's. Oil is on the final leg and the sooner the U.S. admits it the better. There are plenty of energy sources already in production that can easily be mass marketed. That is my two cents.

[tigerfan1234 0]

Jenny, you wouldn't be making those comments if you lived in the New Orleans area and have seen what our need for oil has done to the environment. The Oil Companies and Corps of Engineers screwed up the Louisiana coastline by slicing through the marshland for years. Now Louisiana loses miles of coastline every year and the rest of the country and the Feds are bitching about whether or not New Orleans is worth saving.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

People need to take the environment seriously and beging to switch to alternative energy sources.  Drilling in Alaska should not be the answer.  It is the world's last pristine place and I will not condone humans screwing that up so we can drive $50,000+ luxury SUV's.  Oil is on the final leg and the sooner the U.S. admits it the better.  There are plenty of energy sources already in production that can easily be mass marketed.  That is my two cents.

232323[/snapback]

Did you even read my post? Do you honestly think this country can switch from petroleum based products and natural gas overnight? Are you prepared to go out tomorrow and lay solar panels on your roof to power your home? Are your kids going to ride bicycles in wintertime? And we are not just talking about gas for SUV's. There are so many petroleum based products in common use today, your life would be forever altered without viable alternatives - WHICH ARE JUST NOT COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE NOW. Are we all just supposed to stop driving next week and stay home, waiting for someone to develop a hydrogen fuel cell that works, and then waiting for the automakers to create enough cars for the entire population of the US? Give me a break. Until we create alternative sources of energy that are commercially feasible, we have no choice but to continue to develop existing petroleum reserves. This is not an area where we can all go cold turkey. You are a fool if you beleive it.

And if you think Alaska is pristine, you obviously have never been to Anchorage. You obviously have also never read anything about the very small slice of the ANWR that would be utilized to tap their oil reserves.

Please, enlighten us. Name ONE energy source already in production that can easily be mass marketed. By mass marketed, I mean it has to be affordable for all Americans, even those on fixed incomes or government assistance. It has to also be readily available for purchase in every state.

Yeah, good luck with that...

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Jenny, you wouldn't be making those comments if you lived in the New Orleans area and have seen what our need for oil has done to the environment.  The Oil Companies and Corps of Engineers screwed up the Louisiana coastline by slicing through the marshland for years.  Now Louisiana loses miles of coastline every year and the rest of the country and the Feds are bitching about whether or not New Orleans is worth saving.

232325[/snapback]

The problems in Louisiana are problems of the state's own making. When your State Dept of Homeland Security guys embezzle the money that was supposed to go for levee repair, don't come running to me when they collapse. Government corruption played the largest role in the problems you stated. I know exactly the concerns - my company does a great deal of work in Louisiana. I can also point out that the largest employer in the state of Louisiana are those self same oil companies and the contractors that work for them. Hey, i know - let's quit drilling for oil in Louisiana, lay off thousands upon thousands of people and destroy what little economy the state has! YAY! Then they can all go grow corn to make ethanol.

My apologies for sounding harsh towards you, but this is a huge thorn in my side - people only know what the media and the greenies feed them - they never see the other side of the issue. One picture of a baby seal and people lose their minds... drives me nuts.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Economics 101

You cannot tax a corporation. No exceptions.

Look, a corp is like a machine. It takes stuff in, performs some process that adds value to the raw materials, and outputs other stuff.

In the case of the oil industry, it takes in raw materials (crude oil), refines it (adds value), and distributes oil products. To do these processes, the corp needs cash to buy the crude and sells the products to bring in cash.

This "end" cash is then divided up for raw matl replacement, payroll, benefits, reinvestment, etc. The corp also makes...PROFITS These PROFITS are then used to repay the investors that loaned the corp the money to buy the capital and raw matls in the first place. The corp actually has no need to keep anything as PROFITS The PROFITS are then used to pay dividends on the stock the comany issued to shareholders.

Who are these shareholders? They are employees, stockholders, and people like Joe Sixpack down the street that buys into a 401k. That is where the PROFITS go!

IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO FOLLOW....

By taxing corps, the taxes go to reduce the total PROFITS All you are doing is taxing the shareholder. You are taxing the employees, the shareholders, and Joe Sixpack and his 401k. I wont even go into the the double and triple taxation of corp PROFITS The end receiver of all the PROFITS is already taxed to death.

Raising taxes on corps is just a very convenient political job. That is all. It makes no sense other than to FOOL those too stupid to think about it for a few minutes. The imposition of taxes is corp nuetral. They will just raise prices to cover the costs. So you screw the consumer too. What a deal! Two screws for the price of one!

[tigerfan1234 0]

Louisiana has been lobbying for years to repair the vast marshland that has been destroyed by oil production and shipping lanes being cut. Just five years ago, Lousiana was lobbying congress for 15 billion to repair the damage done by years of drilling on OUR coastline. Yes, that is alot of money, but how much has the state of Louisiana given this country in return. Multiply that by hundreds. Now the coast to repair South Louisiana will be 200+ billion. Everyone loves coming down to Mardi Gras, eating the great food, listening to great music and experiencing the charm of the Southern Louisiana culture. But now that the state really needsd help, the rest of the country is dragging its feet. For years Big Oil shafted Louisiana out of its royalties, while compensating your state of Texas handsomely. Don't start with that comment about what little economy Louisiana has and the corruption bit. Every state in the union has corrupt politicians. I am not denying that Louisiana has its share of skeletons that are now coming back to bite them. The whole argument that Lousiana politics has caused its own demise is blown out of proportion. Fact is, Louisiana does not get the much respect nationally because it is still seen as a southern backwater place with nothing useful to offer the rest of the country, which is a bunch of baloney. I never said the entire country should switch overnight to alternative energy sources. I am saying that we all should begin making an effort to adjust our lifestyles and search for better ways to live.

[tigerfan1234 0]

Tell me why Exxon, Chevron, and the rest can't use their ungodly amount of profits to produce cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. They can, but they just don't feel enough pressure to do it, YET.

[MDM4AU 332]

Cost increases since 1982:

Tuition/Childcare - 325%

Medical Care - 225%

Rent/Housing - 100%

Food - 75%

All Consumer goods combined - 67%

Gas - 60%

In 1982 Congress made $69,800 each. Today they make $165,200. A 100% increase would be $139,600. Congress has raised their rates over 235%!

Who needs to be investigated now?

Don't get me wrong, the gas prices are killing me. But let's get a little perspective.

[quietfan 233]

I understand that alternative fuels technology cannot be developed and deployed overnight, but it seems to me that any time there is talk of a new oil field it just delays investment and R&D in this area. We've known since the 1970's that oil wouldn't last forever, and that dependency on foreign oil was a threat to US security, but there was never enough pressure to get serious about alternative energy sources. We could be driving in ethanol or hydrogen cars now, but instead we just kept looking for another oil source.

I believe the same will happen if we drill in Alaska--it'll just cause more postponement of the inevitable as psychologically we think "well, we've got enough oil in Alaska for a little while longer". [Actually, there's a lot of debate over how much oil is there and how long it would last anyway--how much oil is required to justify the environmental risk...6 months worth?, 6 years worth?, 6 decades worth?] And while new technologies can't be developed overnight, the full North Slope in Alaska can't be developed overnight either. The current Alaska pipeline is showing its age, and how much other infrastructure will have to be in place before we see any significate return from new North Slope fields? How does that time frame compare to the alternative fuels time frame?

I'd rather just see us bite the bullet now and go full speed into alternate technology development, even if it does mean higher gas prices for the short term. Sure it will take time and cause hardship for now, but it will have a big payoff in the future. Plus, petroleum is used for a lot of things beside running cars. Let's run our cars on something else and save what remaining oil there is for us and future generations to make pharmaceuticals, fertilizers, plastics, etc. with.

Also, the political influence of petroleum is just going to grow in the future as developing 3rd World economies demand more and more of a dwindling resource. The more we wean ourselves away from the black gold teat, the less foreign entanglement we have to deal with.

[jaydubb121 22]

The average business in America makes 6.8 cents on each dollar it spends.

The oil companies are making an average of 7 cents on each dollar.

Suck it up people. It's not them making themselves rich, its you.

[AUloggerhead 2,229]

Tell me why Exxon, Chevron, and the rest can't use their ungodly amount of profits to produce cleaner and more efficient sources of energy.  They can, but they just don't feel enough pressure to do it, YET.

232335[/snapback]

Here's a question for you: what's stopping YOU from producing cleaner and more efficient sources of energy? Not feeling enough pressure to do so, YET?

Natural gas burns about 98-99% clean. If you can find another cleaner, more efficient form of mass-produced energy, then tell us about it.

[tigerfan1234 0]

What's stopping me is money and the fact that I am not educated in engineering or understand how to develop new technologies. My point is that Exxon and Chevron and all the rest have the money and brainpower to develop new sources of energy. If these companies switch to producing new sources of energy and educate their employee base on the new technologies, everyone would be fine. Companies adapt all the time and the energy industry should be no different. There are plenty of alternatives in development or on the market that would become commnplace if Big Oil decided to invest its' resources into newer, cleaner, and safer energy sources.

[CCTAU 3,325]

Jenny, you wouldn't be making those comments if you lived in the New Orleans area and have seen what our need for oil has done to the environment.  The Oil Companies and Corps of Engineers screwed up the Louisiana coastline by slicing through the marshland for years.  Now Louisiana loses miles of coastline every year and the rest of the country and the Feds are bitching about whether or not New Orleans is worth saving.

232325[/snapback]

First off, the building and maintaining of the city of New Orleans itself is the biggest factor of those losses. The oil guys just sped it up a little. That area was meant to be flooded on a regular basis in order to replentish the earth that is sinking there.

I'm not saying the oil guys had nothing to do with it, but I have seen more documentaries on the demise of that area due to the city itself moreso than the oilers.

If any of you actually believe we have enough products out there to create enough ethanol to run this country, You are crazy. I drive a diesel and I would love to get hold of some biodiesel on a regular basis. But there just is not enough vegetable based products to produce a sufficient quanity to mass distribute this. Hopefully in the future they can get more on the market but for now, we don't produce enough vegetables to do this. We use SOOOO much oil that there is no way to replace it short of a new miracle breakthrough.

Oh yeah. I do feel the oil companies are milking this for all they are worth. Not sure how much will go into new research though.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

What's stopping me is money and the fact that I am not educated in engineering or understand how to develop new technologies.  My point is that Exxon and Chevron and all the rest have the money and brainpower to develop new sources of energy.  If these companies switch to producing new sources of energy and educate their employee base on the new technologies, everyone would be fine.  Companies adapt all the time and the energy industry should be no different.  There are plenty of alternatives in development or on the market that would become commnplace if Big Oil decided to invest its' resources into newer, cleaner, and safer energy sources.

232535[/snapback]

Man, I wish I could live in Utopia...

[TexasTiger 12,858]

Let me turn this around - remember, I work in the industry, for a company who has both an operator (meaning oil producer) subsidiary and a contractor (meaning oilfield service provider) subsidiary. 

232321[/snapback]

Do you work full-time?

[DKW 86 7,419]

May I suggest, as I have several times here, that if you are tired of oil company profits, you can:

Buy stock and get those profits yourselves.

Buy a smaller car and spend less money at the pump.

Drive less miles.

Take public transportation.

Ride a bike or motorcycle.

Quit taking all those small, short, gas wasting trips all over town.

Buy alternative fuel cars.

Invest in a car/truck that will run bio-diesel.

You get the idea.

Complaining about spending too much money on gas is falling on my deaf ears. I was hacked apart not so long ago for suggesting that they need to raise the already horrendous gas tax to get us off of mid-East oil. To me this is a way in which we arm sending al Qaeda the money to attack us.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

May I suggest, as I have several times here, that if you are tired of oil company profits, you can:

Buy stock and get those profits yourselves.

Buy a smaller car and spend less money at the pump.

Drive less miles.

Take public transportation.

Ride a bike or motorcycle.

Quit taking all those small, short, gas wasting trips all over town.

Buy alternative fuel cars.

Invest in a car/truck that will run bio-diesel.

You get the idea.

Complaining about spending too much money on gas is falling on my deaf ears. I was hacked apart not so long ago for suggesting that they need to raise the already horrendous gas tax to get us off of mid-East oil. To me this is a way in which we arm sending al Qaeda the money to attack us.

232596[/snapback]

AMEN! I am with you, brother!

Simple changes to the way we go about our day-to-day routine can save us a sizable chunk of money and keep some money out of the terrorists hands.

To do this, we need to engage the crafty minds of this country and leave the politicians out of it (otherwise it will never get fixed). I propose a competetion to see who can come up with a viable alternative to arab oil. Winner gets $25 million or so, and we lose our dependence on foreign oil. We put a man on the moon for Christs sake, we should be able to design a motor that works on something other than terrorist juice.

[TexasTiger 12,858]

May I suggest, as I have several times here, that if you are tired of oil company profits, you can:

Buy stock and get those profits yourselves.

Buy a smaller car and spend less money at the pump.

Drive less miles.

Take public transportation.

Ride a bike or motorcycle.

Quit taking all those small, short, gas wasting trips all over town.

Buy alternative fuel cars.

Invest in a car/truck that will run bio-diesel.

You get the idea.

Complaining about spending too much money on gas is falling on my deaf ears. I was hacked apart not so long ago for suggesting that they need to raise the already horrendous gas tax to get us off of mid-East oil. To me this is a way in which we arm sending al Qaeda the money to attack us.

232596[/snapback]

AMEN! I am with you, brother!

Simple changes to the way we go about our day-to-day routine can save us a sizable chunk of money and keep some money out of the terrorists hands.

To do this, we need to engage the crafty minds of this country and leave the politicians out of it (otherwise it will never get fixed). I propose a competetion to see who can come up with a viable alternative to arab oil. Winner gets $25 million or so, and we lose our dependence on foreign oil. We put a man on the moon for Christs sake, we should be able to design a motor that works on something other than terrorist juice.

232598[/snapback]

I got one. Everyone driving a big truck and doesn't need it for work, or an SUV could buy a car that get's 35 miles to the gallon. That should cut our dependence in half right there.

But one of the issues here is also outrageous CEO salaries. If they were truly investing the obscene profits we're hearing about back into developing or finding more fuel, that would be one thing. That's simply not the reality. Check out the outgoing Exxon CEO, for example.

[CCTAU 3,325]

May I suggest, as I have several times here, that if you are tired of oil company profits, you can:

Buy stock and get those profits yourselves.

Buy a smaller car and spend less money at the pump.

Drive less miles.

Take public transportation.

Ride a bike or motorcycle.

Quit taking all those small, short, gas wasting trips all over town.

Buy alternative fuel cars.

Invest in a car/truck that will run bio-diesel.

You get the idea.

Complaining about spending too much money on gas is falling on my deaf ears. I was hacked apart not so long ago for suggesting that they need to raise the already horrendous gas tax to get us off of mid-East oil. To me this is a way in which we arm sending al Qaeda the money to attack us.

232596[/snapback]

AMEN! I am with you, brother!

Simple changes to the way we go about our day-to-day routine can save us a sizable chunk of money and keep some money out of the terrorists hands.

To do this, we need to engage the crafty minds of this country and leave the politicians out of it (otherwise it will never get fixed). I propose a competetion to see who can come up with a viable alternative to arab oil. Winner gets $25 million or so, and we lose our dependence on foreign oil. We put a man on the moon for Christs sake, we should be able to design a motor that works on something other than terrorist juice.

232598[/snapback]

I got one. Everyone driving a big truck and doesn't need it for work, or an SUV could buy a car that get's 35 miles to the gallon. That should cut our dependence in half right there.

But one of the issues here is also outrageous CEO salaries. If they were truly investing the obscene profits we're hearing about back into developing or finding more fuel, that would be one thing. That's simply not the reality. Check out the outgoing Exxon CEO, for example.

232606[/snapback]

That's crap. You pick on SUVs and big trucks withyour head up your butt. I drive a big truck (F250 diesel) and get 17/21 or better. I get 17 pulling a 30 ft camper. Now why should I be punished or singled out becuae my family and I choose to stay in our camper and not some cum-ridden hotel room?

Not to mention, there are more vehicles on the road that get 18/23 mpg than anything else. Just about any vehicle with a 6 cyl gets mpg close to what I get, but yet you single me out. We have the technology with diesel to make cars that get great gas mileage. But this is America where driving is considered one of the grat priveleges of our time. It's what in the past has allowed even the poorest of us to explore our country. But that cannot be done in a crackerbox. You guys want Europe. I don't I've been there. Other than the nice history, everthing else sucks(gvmts, healthcare, taxes, etc)

Biodiesel for me is a great way to go, but its hard to find.

THERE IS NO SHORTAGE OF OIL, GAS, OR any fuels. Just the perception of it driving prices up where the oil companies like them to be. The oil cmpanies are here to make money, not support a nation. If we want that then the feds need to get into refining. Then watch it all go to hell.

But do not single out just one class of perceptive abusers. There s only a small percentage drivint the huge gas guzzlers. Todays technology has V8s getting comparable MPGs as the 6cyls which most have.

So to say that only these guys buying a car that gets 35mpg would make a dent in things is rediculous.

Either you have car-size envy or penis envy. You make the call. But at least research it before you buy that shiny red corvette that gets 18/28 mpg....

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Let me turn this around - remember, I work in the industry, for a company who has both an operator (meaning oil producer) subsidiary and a contractor (meaning oilfield service provider) subsidiary. 

232321[/snapback]

Do you work full-time?

232579[/snapback]

Yes. I am the in-house contracts manager for five subsidiaries plus the parent company. Why?

Also, explain this to me how THIS is Exxon or Chevron's fault:

Tobias Fulton, General Sales Manager of Sterling McCall Toyota in Houston sells 100 percent of his Prius’ every month and says that the minimum wait time for a new one is four to six months.

Toyota only produced 100,000 hybrid cars last year. Ford planned to sell about 20,000 of their hybrid Escape in 2005.

As of 2000 (the last year data was available), there were over 133 MILLION cars in the US. Those cars run on gasoline, remember?

So, even if every single one of us wanted to rush right out and buy a hybrid, the current supply will not meet a FRACTION of a FRACTION of the demand. And if GM goes under, then that is one less auto maker.

That has been my point all along. You cannot make a switch of this magnitude overnight, and refusing to allow additional development of oil and gas resources is not going to force the shift to happen any faster.

And what about people currently living on government subsidies, but still own a car? Are you going to give them a hybrid to drive? Or are the car makers just going to be so green and so environmentally conscious that they will give them away free? Oh, I know, maybe Exxon and Chevron will pitch in and use their profits to give everyone a green car...

Bill Gates is one of the richest man in the world. He made his BILLIONS off software developed by the company he heads up. What about his obscene paycheck? Why should running an oil company be considered any different than running a software company when it comes to a paycheck for the CEO? Bill Gates's money all came from the same place that Exxon's money came from. But the Exxon guy can't make a huge paycheck and get stock options for making his company into the world's largest oil and gas company? That is hypocritical to differentiate between two American companies that both take risks, answer to stockholders and provide products that we all depend on every day.

In March, Tillerson (Exxon) told a gathering of analysts in New York that the company's costs for drilling rigs, pipes and other equipment rose about 5 percent in 2005... The company plans to spend $5 billion this year on refinery expansions and new chemicals plants. The refinery projects will increase the amount of crude the company can process into products such as gasoline and jet fuel.

from Bloomberg.com

Not to mention that there is a vast difference between PROFIT and PROFIT MARGIN. But that doesn't look as sexy when you get down to brass tacks...

For instance, in 2004 Exxon Mobil earned more money -- $25.33 billion -- than any other company on the Fortune 500 list of largest corporations. But by another measure of profitability, gross profit margin, it ranked No. 127.

Most financial institutions, such as commercial banks, are routinely more profitable than Exxon Mobil was in its third quarter. For example, Exxon Mobil's gross margin of 9.8 cents of profit for every dollar of revenue pales in comparison to Citigroup Inc.'s 15.7 cents in 2004. By percentage of total revenue, banking is consistently the most profitable industry in America, followed closely by the drug industry.

Altria Group, the maker of Marlboro and other cigarettes, made 22 cents for every dollar of revenue in 2004, and pharmaceutical company Merck made 25.3 cents for every dollar of revenue in 2004.

By other measures, such as profit per employee, return on invested capital and free cash flow, Exxon Mobil is nowhere near a standout.

Oil industry analysts yesterday also pointed out that while times are good for oil companies, one of the reasons is the huge American demand for gas at a time when supply is constrained. And the cost of extracting and refining oil in the coming years is only going to increase, requiring hundreds of billions of dollars of investment. Energy research firm John S. Herold Inc. last month predicted that despite short-term increases in profits, higher costs will probably make many U.S. oil companies less profitable in the next five years, even as their revenue grows rapidly.

Link

In the routine filing with the Securities Exchange Commission, the company also revealed Windows desktop profit margins were as high as nearly 86 percent.

TAX BILL GATES!! MAKE HIM GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK!! WE ALL NEED TO STOP USING WINDOWS AND GO TO A GREENER FORM OF OPERATING SYSTEM! SHUT DOWN WINDOWS NOW!!!

Please.