Exxon

#26
#26
volinbham said:
I believe that Sarbanes - Oxley would have something to say about trusting the figures put out by publicly held companies. They cannot manipulate the numbers in any way near the way you suggest.
Click to expand...


We wouldn't have the need for such legislation if there hadn't been abuses. And one wonders whether the legislation (or the regs yet to be fully adopted and enforced) will really curb it, when it does occur.


allvol123 said:
An attorney commenting on the ethics or lack thereof from other professionals is rather amusing though.
Click to expand...


Har de har har. Har.


utvolpj said:
what does Exxon's profit have to do with whether they owe damages or not? I ask since the OP suggests there is a correlation.
Click to expand...

A defendant's resources are often a factor to be considered in awarding punitive damages. The theory is that you shouldn't bankrupt the defendant, but you should make the award enough to make them sit up and take notice.
 
#27
#27
lawgator1 said:
What!? Like any of us should really expect Exxon or Mobil to plunge their profits into technologies that would make themselves obsolete.
Click to expand...

Exxon, Shell, BP and Chevron combined, own about 6% of world's known oil reserves. I think they would most certainly find it in their vital interests to seek new technologies.
 
#28
#28
BigPapaVol said:
I know I'm on a self-imposed vacation from the board due to the influx of idiots, including Gainesvol, but this post nearly made me hurl.

If I thought you knew one single thing about what you were saying, I would have actually thrown up.
Click to expand...

Actually, I agree with the original post. I've worked directly in the Acctg Department of public government contractor. I worked with them prior to going public, during going public, and after. The ability to manipulate numbers is surprising. People tend to believe that Acctg is straight-forward math when it is most certainly an art form about painting a believable picture.


volinbham said:
I believe that Sarbanes - Oxley would have something to say about trusting the figures put out by publicly held companies. They cannot manipulate the numbers in any way near the way you suggest.
Click to expand...

I totally disagree. SARBOX is only a small step in the right direction. I'm not saying all companies are misleading or all numbers are wrong -- but the ability to move numbers around for reporting purposes is startling.
 
#29
#29
lawgator1 said:
A defendant's resources are often a factor to be considered in awarding punitive damages. The theory is that you shouldn't bankrupt the defendant, but you should make the award enough to make them sit up and take notice.
Click to expand...

and they probably were 20 yrs ago when it happened. Raising them because they're now making more money (dollar-wise) is just...
 
#30
#30
utvolpj said:
and they probably were 20 yrs ago when it happened. Raising them because they're now making more money (dollar-wise) is just...
Click to expand...


I lost you somewhere along the way. Did someone advocate increasing the award based on current profits?

There are plenty of cases reducing punitive awards from whatever the trial court originally awarded, usually on grounds they are excessive. But to increase one beyond which the trial judge or jury awarded is, well, a slight procedural due process problem.
 
#33
#33
lawgator1 said:
I lost you somewhere along the way. Did someone advocate increasing the award based on current profits?

There are plenty of cases reducing punitive awards from whatever the trial court originally awarded, usually on grounds they are excessive. But to increase one beyond which the trial judge or jury awarded is, well, a slight procedural due process problem.
Click to expand...

My question was, what does this

kptvol said:
Additionally, Exxon just posted the greatest single year profit of any company in the history of the world ($40 billion).
Click to expand...

have to do with a 20yo lawsuit? Absolutely nothing and I was asking the OP why he felt compelled to add that tidbit
 
#34
#34
allvol123 said:
Exxon, Shell, BP and Chevron combined, own about 6% of world's known oil reserves. I think they would most certainly find it in their vital interests to seek new technologies.
Click to expand...


I think that's a perfect example of the ability to manipulate numbers. The big oil companies don't usually own the fields -- they have the contract to produce the oil and refine it. At most, they lease production rights.
 
#35
#35
utvolpj said:
what does Exxon's profit have to do with whether they owe damages or not? I ask since the OP suggests there is a correlation.
Click to expand...

I didn't intend to imply that. I think they deserve to pay damages. The fact that they make tons of money, to me, means that the quarrels over the amount shouldn't be this difficult to resolve.
 
#36
#36
utvolpj said:
have to do with a 20yo lawsuit? Absolutely nothing and I was asking the OP why he felt compelled to add that tidbit
Click to expand...

They made 40 billion. They recently had the amount of damages cut in half. I think the amount has got to be pretty fair at this point. They've already been given a break. If 2.5 billion was going to significantly hurt Exxon, I'd see a reason for considering another reduction.
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
I think that's a perfect example of the ability to manipulate numbers. The big oil companies don't usually own the fields -- they have the contract to produce the oil and refine it. At most, they lease production rights.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. It means they are at the mercy of others. People want to paint Exxon as the bad guys. They are chumps compared to Iran and Saudi Arabia and so forth.
 
#38
#38
utvolpj said:
My question was, what does this



have to do with a 20yo lawsuit? Absolutely nothing and I was asking the OP why he felt compelled to add that tidbit
Click to expand...


My guess is he is saying they could afford it, and easily, so he is asking why they keep fighting. IMO, they are worried about the precedent and think their long-term interests are better served by drawing it out.

I can't see anyone saying it ought to actually be increased based on new profits (though as I say interest might be an issue).
 
#39
#39
allvol123 said:
Irrelevant. It means they are at the mercy of others. People want to paint Exxon as the bad guys. They are chumps compared to Iran and Saudi Arabia and so forth.
Click to expand...

Not sure if you were indicating me, but I did specifically mention that my main problem was with the Supreme Court.
 
#41
#41
any viable alternative energy ===== big money, and that is why the majority (if not all) of the major oil companies invest big money in alternative energy research. BP for instance just set up a $500 mil grant to Cal for alternative energy research.
 
#42
#42
Don't assume based on my comments that I ''hate'' or ''blame'' big oil for high gas prices. I don't think they are doing much different than they did before. The difference is the weak dollar, speculators, big demand from Indonesia and China, and inadequate reining capability.

Big oil could do a lot more to improve their image and, IMO, are taking the wrong approach in just being defensive about it.
 
#43
#43
lawgator1 said:
My guess is he is saying they could afford it, and easily, so he is asking why they keep fighting. IMO, they are worried about the precedent and think their long-term interests are better served by drawing it out.

I can't see anyone saying it ought to actually be increased based on new profits (though as I say interest might be an issue).
Click to expand...

Jumping in here.... does anyone notice it looks like Exxon's future goal is to close shop? Their long term picture looks to be based on oil dropping back to about ~$50 and if not they will liquidate?
 
#44
#44
the fact is if the oil companies (or OPEC for that matter) had any control over prices they surely wouldn't have allowed the collapse in oil in the 80s where 70% of them well out of business and certianly wouldn't have allowed $30 oil for the 20 years after that.
 
#45
#45
MontereyVol said:
Jumping in here.... does anyone notice it looks like Exxon's future goal is to close shop? Their long term picture looks to be based on oil dropping back to about ~$50 and if not they will liquidate?
Click to expand...

Huh? companies with billions in earnings usually don't shut it down.
 
#46
#46
Thats what is so strange about it. Jim Jubak did an article on it and it sounds like they want out?

Looking for article...
 
#49
#49
I think it's a testimony to how powerful the oil lobbyists are.

Could you imagine a private citizen trying to withold paying taxes for that amount of time after a court order?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top