Don't Buy British Petroleum (BP)

Message boards : Politics : Don't Buy British Petroleum (BP)
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 7 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 16660
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 997589 - Posted: 21 May 2010, 17:33:55 UTC
Last modified: 21 May 2010, 17:35:26 UTC

So... BP were claiming a mere 5000 barrels of oil a day... Yet they now admit that they are siphoning off a small fraction of the oil blowout and that they are collecting more than that each day already!

To me, that looks like BP are playing a very dirty PR exercise...


Also consider:

EPA Investigator Scott West: US Has Told BP "It Can Do Whatever It Wants and Won’t Be Held Accountable"

... At a congressional hearing Wednesday, a professor at Purdue University told lawmakers that the oil spill may be nineteen times larger than BP’s estimate. Steve Wereley estimated the spill is leaking 95,000 barrels of oil, or four million gallons, a day. BP has put the spill at 5,000 barrels a day.

Also on Wednesday, a group of Democratic lawmakers called on the Interior Department to shut down the Atlantis, BP’s second-largest oil and gas rig in the Gulf of Mexico. The Atlantis operates in 7,000 feet of water, 2,000 feet deeper than the Deepwater Horizon. ...



There's going to be a very bad mess with all of this...

It's our only planet!
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 997589 · Report as offensive
Alex Filatov

Send message
Joined: 8 Feb 10
Posts: 90
Credit: 148,574
RAC: 0
Russia
Message 997697 - Posted: 22 May 2010, 1:23:41 UTC
Last modified: 22 May 2010, 1:29:43 UTC

I don't buy BP but because it's gasoline here is the baddest.
Ow, and i forgot, also because i don't have a car
ID: 997697 · Report as offensive
Profile Phil J Taylor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 09
Posts: 96
Credit: 603,521
RAC: 0
United States
Message 997821 - Posted: 22 May 2010, 9:11:48 UTC - in response to Message 997697.  
Last modified: 22 May 2010, 9:46:03 UTC

Live Video from ROV monitoring the damaged riser

On NPR an interview with scientists suggested that the leak might be 70-100 thousand barrels a day instead of 5 thousand. Here is a realated article from WBUR.

They made their estimates by analyzing the flow in the the live video stream mentioned above.
ID: 997821 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 16660
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1001967 - Posted: 9 Jun 2010, 1:49:56 UTC

Amazing, disgusting, and widely damaging all round that the oil is still gushing out after so long!


Oil spill: Barack Obama criticises BP boss Tony Hayward

One 'killer' comment in there is:

... He said that while BP had nearly doubled the amount of oil being funnelled from the leaking wellhead since Friday, it was now "trying to increase that production rate, close the venting valves and move to a greater capacity".

He said BP was hoping to move a second production platform into the area to increase the amount of oil that could be siphoned off.

Adm Allen added that BP was also preparing a bigger rig to process a greater capacity of oil in severe weather. ...


My interpretation of that is that BP considers it cheaper to let the oil leak out than to get more tankers there to collect it for processing or disposal.


Contrast that with a small idea of the consequences:

OIL KILL - The Gulf of Mexico Killing Fields BP Doesn’t Want You Thinking About

Commentary by Dr. Joe MacInnis ...

IMAGINE A SUBMERGED PLUME OF OIL four times as high as the Empire State Building. It begins at the seafloor, thundering out of a shattered twenty-inch pipe with so much force that the sediments seem to sway. ...

... As it rises, it swells into thunderheads, roiling clouds, and ragged columns. Smaller plumes break away from the main plume and drift sideways in the currents. Some of these shaggy, stunted plumes remain suspended and never reach the surface.

After rising more than a thousand meters, the widening plume slithers into the lower layers of the sunlit zone. Slow moving currents shear it into shattered smoke and upward streaming strands. For many kilometers in every direction, seawater is shot through with black threads, small droplets, and greasy vapors. When the oil reaches the surface, there are places where the smell of swamp rot and sulfur can make men sick. ...

The cell-swarm of killing continues right up to the surface where phytoplankton—the lungs of the planet—are savaged by the violence of the oil and the chemicals used to disperse it. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of dead diatoms and dinoflagellates rain down through the filthy procession of upward moving oil. In deep water they merge with uncounted corpses of copepods and in deeper water still, the lifeless remnants of big fish, small fish, turtles and invertebrates. ...




And many species depend upon that area for spawning and for their continued existence.

Who knows what next?


It's our only planet.
Martin

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1001967 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 29427
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1002169 - Posted: 9 Jun 2010, 17:32:51 UTC - in response to Message 1001967.  

Amazing, disgusting, and widely damaging all round that the oil is still gushing out after so long!


Oil spill: Barack Obama criticises BP boss Tony Hayward

One 'killer' comment in there is:

... He said that while BP had nearly doubled the amount of oil being funnelled from the leaking wellhead since Friday, it was now "trying to increase that production rate, close the venting valves and move to a greater capacity".

He said BP was hoping to move a second production platform into the area to increase the amount of oil that could be siphoned off.

Adm Allen added that BP was also preparing a bigger rig to process a greater capacity of oil in severe weather. ...


My interpretation of that is that BP considers it cheaper to let the oil leak out than to get more tankers there to collect it for processing or disposal.

Of course it is cheaper to let it gush. There is a provision in US law that puts a cap on the damages. BP knows it will pay the max anyway so why bother to skim any up at all? Skimming and collecting costs BP cash. The duty is to the shareholders to not spend any money it doesn't have to spend. Ergo, let it gush!

I'm just waiting for the first human death not on the platform. Then the US can have its Bhopal trial of BP's exec's.

ID: 1002169 · Report as offensive
Profile ML1
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 16660
Credit: 7,508,002
RAC: 20
United Kingdom
Message 1002172 - Posted: 9 Jun 2010, 17:55:48 UTC - in response to Message 1001967.  
Last modified: 9 Jun 2010, 17:56:48 UTC

Amazing, disgusting, and widely damaging all round that the oil is still gushing out after so long!


Oil spill: Barack Obama criticises BP boss Tony Hayward

One 'killer' comment in there is:

... He said that while BP had nearly doubled the amount of oil being funnelled from the leaking wellhead since Friday, it was now "trying to increase that production rate, close the venting valves and move to a greater capacity". ...

My interpretation of that is that BP considers it cheaper to let the oil leak out than to get more tankers there to collect it for processing or disposal.


That does indeed appear to be the case:

BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns

... the effort cannot be expanded because the company does not yet have vessels big enough to capture more of the oil...

... So it must be considered cheaper to destroy the Gulf rather than hire more oil tankers.


And there's oil tankers to spare in the Caribbean:

Mixed Signals for Oil Tanker Market in April

... In the Caribbean market, rates were hit by ample tonnage availability...


Meanwhile, the mess gets worse:

Gulf oil spill 'may top 100,000 barrels a day'

BP’s oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico may be up to four times the scale estimated...


Battle to bring BP to account for oil spill intensifies

... Tuesday's meeting also gave a taste of the fury that many in Washington feel against BP. Edward Markey, chairman of the house energy and environment subcommittee, claimed that BP was "either lying or they are grossly incompetent" as he castigated the company for underestimating the amount of oil spewing into the ocean...


Contrast that with a small idea of the consequences:

OIL KILL - The Gulf of Mexico Killing Fields BP Doesn’t Want You Thinking About

Commentary by Dr. Joe MacInnis ...

IMAGINE A SUBMERGED PLUME OF OIL four times as high as the Empire State Building. It begins at the seafloor, thundering out of a shattered twenty-inch pipe with so much force that the sediments seem to sway. ...

... As it rises, it swells into thunderheads, roiling clouds, and ragged columns. Smaller plumes break away from the main plume and drift sideways in the currents. Some of these shaggy, stunted plumes remain suspended and never reach the surface.

After rising more than a thousand meters, the widening plume slithers into the lower layers of the sunlit zone. Slow moving currents shear it into shattered smoke and upward streaming strands. For many kilometers in every direction, seawater is shot through with black threads, small droplets, and greasy vapors. When the oil reaches the surface, there are places where the smell of swamp rot and sulfur can make men sick. ...

The cell-swarm of killing continues right up to the surface where phytoplankton—the lungs of the planet—are savaged by the violence of the oil and the chemicals used to disperse it. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of dead diatoms and dinoflagellates rain down through the filthy procession of upward moving oil. In deep water they merge with uncounted corpses of copepods and in deeper water still, the lifeless remnants of big fish, small fish, turtles and invertebrates. ...




And many species depend upon that area for spawning and for their continued existence.

Who knows what next?



It's our only planet.
Martin
See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)
ID: 1002172 · Report as offensive
Profile Es99
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 10874
Credit: 350,402
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1003101 - Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 18:19:51 UTC

You've just gotta love the British response to Obama expecting BP to clean up it's own mess.

Cameron faces 'anti-British' row over BP


Reality Internet Personality
ID: 1003101 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64943
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 1003126 - Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 18:58:49 UTC - in response to Message 1002172.  

Amazing, disgusting, and widely damaging all round that the oil is still gushing out after so long!


Oil spill: Barack Obama criticises BP boss Tony Hayward

One 'killer' comment in there is:

... He said that while BP had nearly doubled the amount of oil being funnelled from the leaking wellhead since Friday, it was now "trying to increase that production rate, close the venting valves and move to a greater capacity". ...

My interpretation of that is that BP considers it cheaper to let the oil leak out than to get more tankers there to collect it for processing or disposal.


That does indeed appear to be the case:

BP will pay 'many billions of dollars in fines' for oil spill, White House warns

... the effort cannot be expanded because the company does not yet have vessels big enough to capture more of the oil...

... So it must be considered cheaper to destroy the Gulf rather than hire more oil tankers.


And there's oil tankers to spare in the Caribbean:

Mixed Signals for Oil Tanker Market in April

... In the Caribbean market, rates were hit by ample tonnage availability...


Meanwhile, the mess gets worse:

Gulf oil spill 'may top 100,000 barrels a day'

BP’s oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico may be up to four times the scale estimated...


Battle to bring BP to account for oil spill intensifies

... Tuesday's meeting also gave a taste of the fury that many in Washington feel against BP. Edward Markey, chairman of the house energy and environment subcommittee, claimed that BP was "either lying or they are grossly incompetent" as he castigated the company for underestimating the amount of oil spewing into the ocean...


Contrast that with a small idea of the consequences:

OIL KILL - The Gulf of Mexico Killing Fields BP Doesn’t Want You Thinking About

Commentary by Dr. Joe MacInnis ...

IMAGINE A SUBMERGED PLUME OF OIL four times as high as the Empire State Building. It begins at the seafloor, thundering out of a shattered twenty-inch pipe with so much force that the sediments seem to sway. ...

... As it rises, it swells into thunderheads, roiling clouds, and ragged columns. Smaller plumes break away from the main plume and drift sideways in the currents. Some of these shaggy, stunted plumes remain suspended and never reach the surface.

After rising more than a thousand meters, the widening plume slithers into the lower layers of the sunlit zone. Slow moving currents shear it into shattered smoke and upward streaming strands. For many kilometers in every direction, seawater is shot through with black threads, small droplets, and greasy vapors. When the oil reaches the surface, there are places where the smell of swamp rot and sulfur can make men sick. ...

The cell-swarm of killing continues right up to the surface where phytoplankton—the lungs of the planet—are savaged by the violence of the oil and the chemicals used to disperse it. Trillions upon trillions upon trillions of dead diatoms and dinoflagellates rain down through the filthy procession of upward moving oil. In deep water they merge with uncounted corpses of copepods and in deeper water still, the lifeless remnants of big fish, small fish, turtles and invertebrates. ...




And many species depend upon that area for spawning and for their continued existence.

Who knows what next?



It's our only planet.
Martin

BP's upper Execs may be both lying and/or grossly incompetent, One to cover the other and their fat reeking profits.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1003126 · Report as offensive
Profile Blurf
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 06
Posts: 8960
Credit: 12,678,685
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1003132 - Posted: 11 Jun 2010, 19:05:52 UTC - in response to Message 1003126.  

BP's upper Execs may be both lying and/or grossly incompetent, One to cover the other and their fat reeking profits.


Won't be the first time, won't be the last among upper corporate muckity-mucks


ID: 1003132 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1003981 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 11:55:22 UTC - in response to Message 1003969.  
Last modified: 14 Jun 2010, 11:56:06 UTC

Neither the British people nor the British government have any responsibility for what a private company got up to in the Gulf of Mexico.


Then who does have responsibility when a multi-national screws up like this? All of us pointing fingers at each other does no good. Shouldn't each country and each individual be doing everything they can to fix this mess, and prevent the next? If the UK government and people have any clout with BP, use it! If you tell me that no country or individual has any clout with a large multinational, then it is time to rethink how these organizations operate. A simple act of the UK parliament (or any other major world government) could change things very quickly.

As is usual with the tabloid press, they just want to find scapegoats and sell copy.


As much as I hate the yellow rags, they may be doing us a favour by stirring up public reaction.

ID: 1003981 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64943
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 1004000 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 13:04:49 UTC
Last modified: 14 Jun 2010, 13:07:12 UTC

I hopefully didn't say this before, But in the US, BP owns exactly zero gas stations, Ones on the News said they had a contract for 20 years to sell BP Gas, As they are otherwise just a franchisee, Just like Burger King is. So I can't participate in a useless Boycott of BP when It just hurts the gas station owners and not BP. Besides I usually buy from whomever sells gas for the least cost and It usually isn't ARCO+AM/PM+BP.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1004000 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 1004007 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 13:31:28 UTC - in response to Message 1004000.  

generally speaking Gasoline retailers buy their product from Wholesalers not from the individual Gasoline producers. Additives are added when they purchase the gas from the Wholesaler. It would be incredibly inefficient if every gasoline company had its own supply in every city across the country. they get gas much like we your Grocery store gets its products, from a wholesaler


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 1004007 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1004012 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 13:41:56 UTC

The nature of the gasoline business today means that many of you can be sending money to BP without being aware of it. Each of the major oil companies operates several "profit centres". The production division sells crude to anybody who wants it. The refining branch buys crude from wherever, and then sells refined product wherever. As the earlier post said, the retailer buys from whatever refiner gives him a good deal at the time.

Not to let BP off the hook, but they just happened to be the first major producer to be this unlucky. It could be anybody next time. Our best bet in the long run is to apply pressure to ALL oil producers, by calling for stricter regulations and oversight, and to show our general dissatisfaction by buying less of EVERYBODY'S oil products.

ID: 1004012 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64943
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 1004019 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 13:57:02 UTC - in response to Message 1004012.  

The nature of the gasoline business today means that many of you can be sending money to BP without being aware of it. Each of the major oil companies operates several "profit centres". The production division sells crude to anybody who wants it. The refining branch buys crude from wherever, and then sells refined product wherever. As the earlier post said, the retailer buys from whatever refiner gives him a good deal at the time.

Not to let BP off the hook, but they just happened to be the first major producer to be this unlucky. It could be anybody next time. Our best bet in the long run is to apply pressure to ALL oil producers, by calling for stricter regulations and oversight, and to show our general dissatisfaction by buying less of EVERYBODY'S oil products.

All the Oil companies in the US need to put oil money into an alternative energy fund and participation should be mandatory. There are lots of ordinary people who could use money like that for photovoltaics and the correctly sized inverter which would include the labor to install, pay for permits, etc, to lower peoples electric bills in the south and the southwest and It should not be a tax rebate or a tax credit so that all can apply for this equally on a 1 page form.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1004019 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,199,902
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1004080 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 16:39:24 UTC

Taken to its extreme, if no one bought BP at all, not wholesalers or re-sellers or consumers of gasoline and other oil products, then BP's income would dry up and as a publicly owned company they would have to make some hard decisions about what to do to with their assets. At some point the company would have to declare bankrupcy, sell off their assets and shut down. If that happened, who would be responsible for the clean-up and compensation to individuals and businesses affected by this spill?
ID: 1004080 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1004083 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 16:50:16 UTC - in response to Message 1004080.  

Taken to its extreme, if no one bought BP at all, not wholesalers or re-sellers or consumers of gasoline and other oil products, then BP's income would dry up and as a publicly owned company they would have to make some hard decisions about what to do to with their assets. At some point the company would have to declare bankrupcy, sell off their assets and shut down. If that happened, who would be responsible for the clean-up and compensation to individuals and businesses affected by this spill?


That's why we have bankruptcy courts. BP's creditors under legislation or regulatory fines or resulting from civil negligence move to the head of the list when it comes time to carve up the corpse.

A major, messy bankruptcy, with the traditional creditors like banks and major suppliers looking on helplessly as BP is cut up and fed to the masses, might be what we need to wake up the rest of the oil industry.

In any event, if we believe the BP CEO's public statements, thay have money in the bank right now to cover the cleanup costs. It would still be there if BP went bankrupt today. We just need to make sure the money is used for that, and not spirited away to the shareholders while nobody is watching.

Actually, something like Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today would be in the public's interest. This would allow the courts to control how BP spends the money in the bank, and how they shuffle other assets to avoid liability.

ID: 1004083 · Report as offensive
Iona
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 07
Posts: 790
Credit: 22,438,118
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 1004134 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 19:41:41 UTC - in response to Message 1004083.  

Taken to its extreme, if no one bought BP at all, not wholesalers or re-sellers or consumers of gasoline and other oil products, then BP's income would dry up and as a publicly owned company they would have to make some hard decisions about what to do to with their assets. At some point the company would have to declare bankrupcy, sell off their assets and shut down. If that happened, who would be responsible for the clean-up and compensation to individuals and businesses affected by this spill?


That's why we have bankruptcy courts. BP's creditors under legislation or regulatory fines or resulting from civil negligence move to the head of the list when it comes time to carve up the corpse.

A major, messy bankruptcy, with the traditional creditors like banks and major suppliers looking on helplessly as BP is cut up and fed to the masses, might be what we need to wake up the rest of the oil industry.

In any event, if we believe the BP CEO's public statements, thay have money in the bank right now to cover the cleanup costs. It would still be there if BP went bankrupt today. We just need to make sure the money is used for that, and not spirited away to the shareholders while nobody is watching.

Actually, something like Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today would be in the public's interest. This would allow the courts to control how BP spends the money in the bank, and how they shuffle other assets to avoid liability.




I think we all know, that in such a scenario, the 'legal eagles' and the so-called administrators would end up richer than their wildest dreams of avarice. Twenty or so years ago, I worked for a company in administration and the fees that Arthur Andersen were 'charging' would've made anyone's eyes water - even today! If it were not for the insanely high fees, for actually doing nothing (apart from staying in the best hotels in the county and eating extremely well), the company would've been OK. Still as it was only about 200 workers who were out of a job, I guess that made it OK, when they stripped it bare. The company being put into administration, only came about, through one large Japanese customer, not paying for what they'd received.....I won't name them, but I've never bought any of their products, even if they do make some nice digital cameras. I don't think the 'knock-on' effect has been considered, in this.




Don't take life too seriously, as you'll never come out of it alive!
ID: 1004134 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1004143 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 20:15:32 UTC - in response to Message 1004134.  

I think we all know, that in such a scenario, the 'legal eagles' and the so-called administrators would end up richer than their wildest dreams of avarice.


I hear you. But what choice do we have? Let the BPs of the world carry on their own merry way because the legal fees are high?

I don't think the 'knock-on' effect has been considered, in this.


Knock-on effect on anybody living and working on the Gulf has already begun. Knock-on effect on anybody living or working near the Atlantic is next. Knock-on effect on BPs suppliers and shareholders is just one of many issues.

ID: 1004143 · Report as offensive
Profile Qui-Gon
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 May 99
Posts: 2940
Credit: 19,199,902
RAC: 11
United States
Message 1004144 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 20:18:08 UTC - in response to Message 1004134.  
Last modified: 14 Jun 2010, 20:26:24 UTC

Taken to its extreme, if no one bought BP at all, not wholesalers or re-sellers or consumers of gasoline and other oil products, then BP's income would dry up and as a publicly owned company they would have to make some hard decisions about what to do to with their assets. At some point the company would have to declare bankrupcy, sell off their assets and shut down. If that happened, who would be responsible for the clean-up and compensation to individuals and businesses affected by this spill?


That's why we have bankruptcy courts. BP's creditors under legislation or regulatory fines or resulting from civil negligence move to the head of the list when it comes time to carve up the corpse.

A major, messy bankruptcy, with the traditional creditors like banks and major suppliers looking on helplessly as BP is cut up and fed to the masses, might be what we need to wake up the rest of the oil industry.

In any event, if we believe the BP CEO's public statements, thay have money in the bank right now to cover the cleanup costs. It would still be there if BP went bankrupt today. We just need to make sure the money is used for that, and not spirited away to the shareholders while nobody is watching.

Actually, something like Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today would be in the public's interest. This would allow the courts to control how BP spends the money in the bank, and how they shuffle other assets to avoid liability.

I think we all know, that in such a scenario, the 'legal eagles' and the so-called administrators would end up richer than their wildest dreams of avarice. Twenty or so years ago, I worked for a company in administration and the fees that Arthur Andersen were 'charging' would've made anyone's eyes water - even today! If it were not for the insanely high fees, for actually doing nothing (apart from staying in the best hotels in the county and eating extremely well), the company would've been OK. Still as it was only about 200 workers who were out of a job, I guess that made it OK, when they stripped it bare. The company being put into administration, only came about, through one large Japanese customer, not paying for what they'd received.....I won't name them, but I've never bought any of their products, even if they do make some nice digital cameras. I don't think the 'knock-on' effect has been considered, in this.

I think we also know that bankrupcy is a gamble for any creditor, but the corporate creditors would have a better chance than, say, the Nature Conservancy or some shrimp boat owner, at getting assets from a bankrupt BP. The big losers would be stockholders, who are currently selling off their holdings (which explains the stock's huge drop in value). The stockholders didn't make the decisions that caused the oil spill, but the execs and board members, who are more directly to blame, will do just fine.
ID: 1004144 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64943
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 1004150 - Posted: 14 Jun 2010, 20:23:53 UTC - in response to Message 1004144.  

Taken to its extreme, if no one bought BP at all, not wholesalers or re-sellers or consumers of gasoline and other oil products, then BP's income would dry up and as a publicly owned company they would have to make some hard decisions about what to do to with their assets. At some point the company would have to declare bankruptcy, sell off their assets and shut down. If that happened, who would be responsible for the clean-up and compensation to individuals and businesses affected by this spill?


That's why we have bankruptcy courts. BP's creditors under legislation or regulatory fines or resulting from civil negligence move to the head of the list when it comes time to carve up the corpse.

A major, messy bankruptcy, with the traditional creditors like banks and major suppliers looking on helplessly as BP is cut up and fed to the masses, might be what we need to wake up the rest of the oil industry.

In any event, if we believe the BP CEO's public statements, they have money in the bank right now to cover the cleanup costs. It would still be there if BP went bankrupt today. We just need to make sure the money is used for that, and not spirited away to the shareholders while nobody is watching.

Actually, something like Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection today would be in the public's interest. This would allow the courts to control how BP spends the money in the bank, and how they shuffle other assets to avoid liability.

I think we all know, that in such a scenario, the 'legal eagles' and the so-called administrators would end up richer than their wildest dreams of avarice. Twenty or so years ago, I worked for a company in administration and the fees that Arthur Andersen were 'charging' would've made anyone's eyes water - even today! If it were not for the insanely high fees, for actually doing nothing (apart from staying in the best hotels in the county and eating extremely well), the company would've been OK. Still as it was only about 200 workers who were out of a job, I guess that made it OK, when they stripped it bare. The company being put into administration, only came about, through one large Japanese customer, not paying for what they'd received.....I won't name them, but I've never bought any of their products, even if they do make some nice digital cameras. I don't think the 'knock-on' effect has been considered, in this.

I think we also know that bankruptcy is a gamble for any creditor, but the corporate creditors would have a better chance than, say, the Nature Conservancy or some shrimp boat owner, at getting assets from a bankrupt BP. The big losers would be stockholders, who are currently selling off their holdings (which explains the stock's huge drop in value). The stockholders didn't make the decisions that caused the oil spill, but the execs and board members, who are more directly to blame, will do just fine.

Yeah thanks to Golden Parachutes most likely.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 1004150 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 7 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Don't Buy British Petroleum (BP)


 
©2022 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.