B.P.'s Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Thread (it's all here).....

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Nobody has any authority to tell BP how much they may give out as dividend (except the board of directors of BP).

That sometime means cutting corners so there share is as large as possible. Exxon already showed that no matter what the fine is collecting it is next to impossible.

It's only been a few years since you put me on ignore, why the early release? You teasing me, I have to admit putting Bear on and off ignore was rather entertaining for the time it lasted. lol

I don't have an issue withn companies making money as long as it is within reason. the bonuses they give themselves is way out of proportion to what they do. They get away with it because they make sure the shareholders get as much as possible, if they have to gouge the consumers so be it.
At some point consumer prices should fall if the profits are way large.
 

numbnuts

New Member
May 29, 2010
43
2
8
Oz
Yeah, right. How many BP shareholders do you think will contribute to it? I have a small BP holding (275 shares), I am not contributing a penny.
Well that says a lot about you, You are just as big an a-hole as the rest of the BP management. People like you make me sick.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
That is why if they ever did it, they should make it mandatory to contribute a % to the clean up.

Oh, absolutely. I have always said that I am a firm believer in free enterprise, but corporations need to be strictly regulated. So I am all for creating a mandatory fund, to which all the oil companies will contribute, so that the fund may be used for clean up when necessary.

But it must be mandatory. Male it voluntary and very few (if any) will contribute to it.

Well that says a lot about you, You are just as big an a-hole as the rest of the BP management. People like you make me sick.

It doesn’t say anything about me; it says plenty about human nature. Why should I pay for BP’s mistake? Why penalize me, what crime have I committed?

As I said, nobody can tell BP how much dividend they may pay. And if they don’t pay the dividend, I may be OK with that (it would be understandable, considering the circumstances). However, most investors will be mad at BP. If as a result of eliminating dividend, the stock holders dump the stock and it goes into toilet, that isn’t going to do BP any good.

Like it or not, these days the company’s loyalty is first to share holders (and perhaps to top management), then to everybody else.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
I think I still have Talisman stock. Right on! I'm ****ing evil!

Talisman should be doing pretty well, shouldn't it? I don't have any Talisman stock, but I assume they got over their difficulties?

And there is nothing wrong with owning Talisman stock (or BP stock, for that matter). It is all part of free enterprise, of making money. For instance, personally I don't own any tobacco stock, on principle. But I don't blame somebody if he does.

Anyway, I like BP stock because it pays good dividend. If it stops paying dividend, I may well decide to get rid of it.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
212
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Talisman should be doing pretty well, shouldn't it? I don't have any Talisman stock, but I assume they got over their difficulties?

And there is nothing wrong with owning Talisman stock (or BP stock, for that matter). It is all part of free enterprise, of making money. For instance, personally I don't own any tobacco stock, on principle. But I don't blame somebody if he does.

Anyway, I like BP stock because it pays good dividend. If it stops paying dividend, I may well decide to get rid of it.
This ain't about your frickin' stock portfolios, Porter....
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLM

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,267
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
Talisman should be doing pretty well, shouldn't it? I don't have any Talisman stock, but I assume they got over their difficulties?

And there is nothing wrong with owning Talisman stock (or BP stock, for that matter). It is all part of free enterprise, of making money. For instance, personally I don't own any tobacco stock, on principle. But I don't blame somebody if he does.

Anyway, I like BP stock because it pays good dividend. If it stops paying dividend, I may well decide to get rid of it.
Not as good as it should or has.

I ended up working for them in the early 90's after a local oil company who I as working for was bought out by Talisman and is why I still hold shares.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The world will never change until stock holders are made responsible for what their investments do. Too many unscrupulous people hide in the "Free" markets. If you invest in weapons you should be fired from a cannon into a concrete wall, reality TV would improve.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Not as good as it should or has.

I ended up working for them in the early 90's after a local oil company who I as working for was bought out by Talisman and is why I still hold shares.

For a while Talisman had a horrible PR problem. Nowadays it is not in the news any more and I assume that is a good thing.

Anyway, my opinion is that all the energy stocks have a bright future, the current turmoil notwithstanding.

The world will never change until stock holders are made responsible for what their investments do. Too many unscrupulous people hide in the "Free" markets. If you invest in weapons you should be fired from a cannon into a concrete wall, reality TV would improve.

And I assume if you buy tobacco stock, you should be made to smoke two packs a day (and if you invest in a sugar company, you should be made to eat a pound of sugar a day).
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,267
14,263
113
Low Earth Orbit
For a while Talisman had a horrible PR problem. Nowadays it is not in the news any more and I assume that is a good thing.

Anyway, my opinion is that all the energy stocks have a bright future, the current turmoil notwithstanding.
Horrible PR indeed but it was well earned. TLM is/was BP's bitch that did/does the dirty work and flys under the radar as a BP sub instead of BP taking the hit. But what can you expect from the most corrupt resource industry to ever do business on this fine planet?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
This ain't about your frickin' stock portfolios, Porter....

Actually in a way it is. The large investment portfolios such as your pension fund demand big returns on their(your?) investment. Therefore management is forced to cut costs wherever they can. If senior management does not provide a big return to the vultures one of two things happen. Either the managers are sending out resumes or the large funds pull out.
The oddest thing is that often times the owners of these pension plans protest the actions of the very companies they are demanding huge returns from.
A prime example is TimberWest Forest. The Ontario teachers pension fund is one of the larger shareholders. Now this is a union fund so one would expect the owners to be supportive of union workers and ethical logging practices. Not so. We call it TimberWaste for a very good reason. Most of their West coast holdings is private forestry land so the Forest Practices Code does not apply. They closed all their mills, export most of their raw logs and laid off all their unionized crews,contracting all logging to the lowest bidder. They are also trying to remove much of their raped land from Private Tree Farm status which is supposed to be sustainable forestry and selling it for development.
No different with oil companies.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
So, how do you think his constituents will feel about his actions to limit the liability of those responsible, to the detriment of those very constituents?
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
The world will never change until stock holders are made responsible for what their investments do. Too many unscrupulous people hide in the "Free" markets. If you invest in weapons you should be fired from a cannon into a concrete wall, reality TV would improve.


Do you fill your car with gas DB?... How do you heat your house?.. Any idea how the food-stuffs get to your local grocery store?

It looks like you're one of those unscrupulous individuals that hides behind the big bad oil companies too. How should we hold you responsible?
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Yeah, right. How many BP shareholders do you think will contribute to it? I have a small BP holding (275 shares), I am not contributing a penny.
So basically, you are condoning their mishandling of the drilling operation.
Nice guy.

I have got a solid basis in fact. When Republicans were in power, they ignored most of the regulations on businesses and refused to enforce them. As Gorsuch, head of EPA bragged (if you had bothered to read the opening post of the thread by me), when she was in charge, clean water regulations by EPA were cut down from 6 inches thick to 1/4 inch thick. Republicans have a solid track record of ignoring business regulations and not enforcing them.

Based upon the track record of Republicans, it is an educated guess. If you don't like it, that is not my problem.
Bush deregulated a bunch of things. Were any of those things anything to do with oil?

It'd be nice if you'd back up your claims with some evidence. Until then, the rest of us may as well consider your posts to be of no better quality than eanassir's posts and just as religious.

That is why if they ever did it, they should make it mandatory to contribute a % to the clean up.
Actually dividends are a percentage of a company's profits. If the company chooses to give out dividends after a period of having no profit, it is taking a loss. Market shares go down. Bad news. I'd be surprised if BP shareholders get any dividends this year.

The Blame Game serves no purpose except for those with their own agendas because the damage has been done.
So then why do we even bother catching and convicting people for other things? Some guy murders someone else. We should not bother with the blame because the deed has been done.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
U.S. oil hypocrisy over Gulf of Mexico disaster makes me slick..

As Obama Barack says that "BP will pay" and American rednecks disgracefully and offensively trample on the British flag in protests against the Gulf of Mexico oil slick, it's time to say this: America's hypocrisy is overwhelming.

Apart from the fact that BP merely owned the oil rig and that the firm who were actually doing the drilling which caused the disaster were Halliburton, an American firm, it's a fact that this disaster may not have happened if the US wasn't so incredibly hooked on oil.

The US has just 5% of the world's population but consumes a quarter of the world's oil.

And it's not as if the US itself hasn't been to blame for major industrial catrastrophes. The US firm Union Carbide killed 15,000 people in India in 1984, and the survivors got less compensation that they would have got if they were Americans.

And, when British soldiers are dying in Afghanistan, trampling on the Union Jack is, quite frankly, offensive.

U.S. oil hypocrisy over Gulf of Mexico disaster makes me slick..

By Brian Reade
3/06/2010
Daily Mirror


As they were the ones who were actually doing the drilling, US firm Halliburton are more to blame over the disaster than BP, who merely owned the rig - but it's suitable for Americans to blame the foreign company.

I don't claim to be the most patriotic of citizens.

I'd rather sing God Save The Natterjack Toad than God Save The Queen and during the World Cup there's as much chance of me flying an Israeli flag from my car as the Cross of St Dixons.

But the sight of American rednecks stomping on Union Jacks in Louisiana, chanting "British scum" and calling us "oil pigs" - simply because one of the world's biggest multinationals has British in its title - almost had me crocheting John Bull underpants.


US firm Union Carbide killed 15,000 people in India in 1984

BP has cocked up bigtime and deserves all the billion-dollar lawsuits heading its way for causing an ecological nightmare in the Gulf of Mexico.

But it's an industrial accident and they happen. (Remember the 15,000 Indians that US firm Union Carbide killed in Bhopal?)

And there will be more of them as companies dig deeper for the Earth's last few trillion gallons of oil to satisfy our insatiable consumerist thirst.

For Americans to blame foreigners for birds washing up on their shore like Al Jolson impersonators takes their blind hypocrisy to dizzying heights.

Yanks are hooked on oil like heroin junkies.

They believe their constitution gives them the right to fill their gas-guzzling Chevvies up for a few dollars less. They view cheap oil as their birthright, consuming 25% of the world's supply despite having only 5% of its population.

They condemn climate change data as an updated communist manifesto.

They were happy to impose lax regulations on firms like BP, encouraging them to dig for oil one mile below the seabed in the hazardous Gulf of Mexico, as long as they piped it to their gas stations.

They turn a blind eye to West Africa where American firm Exxon is overseeing spillages on a worse scale and regularity than the Gulf disaster, because it supplies almost half their oil imports.

They were happy to send their sons to die in an illegal war in Aye-Rack if it meant getting their paws on the second-biggest supply of oil in the world.

Oil production is now flowing so bountifully in post-war Iraq, America's puppet government has just awarded the contract to its biggest oilfield at Rumaila.

And which firm has been given the biggest chunk of it because of its unparalleled expertise at bringing up black gold? Those Limey Oil Pigs BP.

Americans are in denial. About their own lifestyles, about their reliance on oil to fuel those lifestyles, about the increasing risks needed to extract it and about what it's doing to the planet.

Don't take the British out of BP and blame us.

You live by the black stuff, you die by the black stuff.

And now those beached birds in body bags threaten to outnumber beached whales in swimwear on your shores, maybe you'll start to realise it's YOU who is killing the world.

U.S. must jack in British oil protests

Tony Parsons
5/06/2010
The Mirror


Disgraceful: Yank rednecks trample on the Union Jack during a protest over the oil spill

It was touching to see Barack Obama giving Paul McCartney an award at the White House and to hear the President say that: “America was grateful a young Englishman shared his dreams with us.”

I have never seen McCartney so visibly moved. It was almost as if the special relationship was still special. But at anti-BP demonstrations in the States, it is now routine for Union Jacks to be trampled under foot.

As the United States struggles to cope with the worst environmental disaster in its history, we can all understand the frustration of ordinary Americans who have had their livelihoods destroyed by the BP oil spill.

But they are wiping their cowboy boots on the Union Jack at the very moment that British soldiers are fighting and dying alongside American soldiers in Afghanistan.

It’s nothing to do with us, buddy.

No more than the explosion of the American-owned Piper Alpha oil rig in the North Sea in 1988, which killed 167 people, had anything to do with the average American.

So don’t disrespect the Union Jack, mac. Not when British soldiers are dying in Afghanistan.

mirror.co.uk
 
Last edited:

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
So basically, you are condoning their mishandling of the drilling operation.
Nice guy.

Bush deregulated a bunch of things. Were any of those things anything to do with oil?

It'd be nice if you'd back up your claims with some evidence. Until then, the rest of us may as well consider your posts to be of no better quality than eanassir's posts and just as religious.

Actually dividends are a percentage of a company's profits. If the company chooses to give out dividends after a period of having no profit, it is taking a loss. Market shares go down. Bad news. I'd be surprised if BP shareholders get any dividends this year.

So then why do we even bother catching and convicting people for other things? Some guy murders someone else. We should not bother with the blame because the deed has been done.

Of course anyone who has B.P. shares has to be at least partly responsible for the fiasco and those who do and do not contribute to the rectification are shirking their responsibility, not to say being highly hypocritical..................:lol::lol::lol:
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
So, how do you think his constituents will feel about his actions to limit the liability of those responsible, to the detriment of those very constituents?
Apathetically, mostly. A few might take it seriously.

Actually, Blackleaf, the rig was owned by a Swiss company (Transocean) and BP was renting it.

Of course anyone who has B.P. shares has to be at least partly responsible for the fiasco and those who do and do not contribute to the rectification are shirking their responsibility, not to say being highly hypocritical..................:lol::lol::lol:
I disagree. If BP shareholders had any conscience they'd quit supporting BP and get shares in something else.
Crap like this is the reason we dumped our shares in oil companies years ago. We refused to support oil and its pollution that way any more.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,063
10,993
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Uhm....this Thread is now an amalgamation of TEN different Threads on the
same Topic. If they could stay together without another ten being created,
that would be much easier to keep track of.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
For a while Talisman had a horrible PR problem. Nowadays it is not in the news any more and I assume that is a good thing.

Anyway, my opinion is that all the energy stocks have a bright future, the current turmoil notwithstanding.



And I assume if you buy tobacco stock, you should be made to smoke two packs a day (and if you invest in a sugar company, you should be made to eat a pound of sugar a day).
No, but you're a part owner of BP. That's what a shareholder is.

Do the ethical thing SJP and send your dividends to Haliburton so they can work on the cleanup. We're holding you partially responsible for all this.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Actually in a way it is. The large investment portfolios such as your pension fund demand big returns on their(your?) investment. Therefore management is forced to cut costs wherever they can. If senior management does not provide a big return to the vultures one of two things happen. Either the managers are sending out resumes or the large funds pull out.
The oddest thing is that often times the owners of these pension plans protest the actions of the very companies they are demanding huge returns from.
A prime example is TimberWest Forest. The Ontario teachers pension fund is one of the larger shareholders. Now this is a union fund so one would expect the owners to be supportive of union workers and ethical logging practices. Not so. We call it TimberWaste for a very good reason. Most of their West coast holdings is private forestry land so the Forest Practices Code does not apply. They closed all their mills, export most of their raw logs and laid off all their unionized crews,contracting all logging to the lowest bidder. They are also trying to remove much of their raped land from Private Tree Farm status which is supposed to be sustainable forestry and selling it for development.
No different with oil companies.

Private enterprise is all the same, whether controlled by unions or by rich private individuals. The first and primary objective of any corporation is to make money, and rightly so. That is why I never subscribed to the conservative and Republican notion that there should be minimal regulation on businesses. In my opinion, businesses need to be strictly regulated.






So, how do you think his constituents will feel about his actions to limit the liability of those responsible, to the detriment of those very constituents?



No, but you're a part owner of BP. That's what a shareholder is.

Do the ethical thing SJP and send your dividends to Haliburton so they can work on the cleanup. We're holding you partially responsible for all this.

Hey, if government wants BP to pay, they should try to persuade BP not to give out any dividend. I have said before, I would be OK if BP decides not to pay out the 10 billion $ in dividend. But that will be a business decision.

However, it is absurd to demand that stockholders give the dividend back (to BP?) for clean up efforts. So essentially what you are saying is that stockholders receive the dividend, pay tax on it, and then return it to BP or whoever for clean up efforts. Nice move, and good luck with that. Besides, didn't Haliburton get rich and fat on Iraq war money? They have got money to burn.

Dividend is already taxed twice, once in the hand of the company and once in the hand of the individual. Government will have to be content with that.
 
Last edited by a moderator: