If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC DFW)   ExxonMobil's 3Q profit falls 18%, company only clears $8 billion. Executives now restricted to lighting their Cuban cigars with only $50 bills   (nbcdfw.com) divider line 46
    More: Unlikely, ExxonMobil, cigars, Cuban  
•       •       •

385 clicks; posted to Business » on 02 Nov 2013 at 10:16 AM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-02 10:44:43 AM
The US should fund the Pentagon with a gas tax.
 
2013-11-02 10:46:48 AM
Better give them tax breaks and raise gas prices in black neighborhoods.
 
2013-11-02 10:54:38 AM
More subsidies, Stat!
 
2013-11-02 10:54:47 AM
$8 billion in profits on $112 billion in sales.

In other words, about seven percent.

For a company that's worth about $400 billion.

Not really that great.
 
2013-11-02 10:57:03 AM

cirby: $8 billion in profits on $112 billion in sales.

In other words, about seven percent.

For a company that's worth about $400 billion.

Not really that great.


Don't confuse people with facts.
 
2013-11-02 10:57:48 AM
There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?
 
2013-11-02 11:02:45 AM
Dancin_In_Anson:
Don't confuse people with facts.

Hey, we already had one "subsidies" comment. People still think that "letting oil companies have the same tax breaks that every other company gets" = subsidies."

We should get rid of the few actual subsidies, for sure (marginal well production credit, for example), - but they're hardly a drop in the bucket compared to the amount that we collect in actual taxes from oil production.

When most of the lefties say "end subsidies (and tax writeoffs we're pretending are subsidies)" they're really saying "tax the oil companies higher than everyone else because we don't like them."
 
2013-11-02 11:06:04 AM
jaytkay:
There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?

No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people who jump into threads to try and make fairly boring businesses sound evil for making fairly average profit margins.

Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.
 
2013-11-02 11:15:02 AM

cirby: jaytkay:
There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?

No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people who jump into threads to try and make fairly boring businesses sound evil for making fairly average profit margins.

Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.


Yah well, until Exxon actually pays up for the damage it did back in 19-farking-89 in Alaska I can't think of a more suitable company to apathetically hold up as an example of evil corporate shenanigans that should be reigned in and held to the fire at every opportunity.  They still owe 4.5 billion for that (they've paid a paltry 500 million), so yah, fark them in the farking ear for getting away with shiat like that despite making 8 billion in profit this year.
 
2013-11-02 11:15:04 AM

cirby: Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.


Probably owns a Mac too.

BTW...what's Apple's margin running right now?
 
2013-11-02 11:18:41 AM
Considering that ExxonMobil announced recently they were going to start offering benefits to same-sex couples in reaction to DOMA being struck down, I'm not surprised their profit fell this quarter.
 
2013-11-02 11:20:39 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: cirby: Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.

Probably owns a Mac too.

BTW...what's Apple's margin running right now?


about 37%
 
2013-11-02 11:22:10 AM

cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.


encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com

politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.
 
2013-11-02 11:40:37 AM

BumpInTheNight: cirby: jaytkay:
There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?

No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people who jump into threads to try and make fairly boring businesses sound evil for making fairly average profit margins.

Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.

Yah well, until Exxon actually pays up for the damage it did back in 19-farking-89 in Alaska I can't think of a more suitable company to apathetically hold up as an example of evil corporate shenanigans that should be reigned in and held to the fire at every opportunity.  They still owe 4.5 billion for that (they've paid a paltry 500 million), so yah, fark them in the farking ear for getting away with shiat like that despite making 8 billion in profit this year quarter.


FTFY. There's no real reason to not get all the way mad when they can pay off that whole balance in under two months, but won't because fark you or something.

/maybe they can pay it off as a 25th anniversary present
//which is like 4 months away
///why the fark are they getting away with it
 
2013-11-02 12:06:48 PM

cirby: Dancin_In_Anson:
Don't confuse people with facts.

Hey, we already had one "subsidies" comment. People still think that "letting oil companies have the same tax breaks that every other company gets" = subsidies."

We should get rid of the few actual subsidies, for sure (marginal well production credit, for example), - but they're hardly a drop in the bucket compared to the amount that we collect in actual taxes from oil production.

When most of the lefties say "end subsidies (and tax writeoffs we're pretending are subsidies)" they're really saying "tax the oil companies higher than everyone else because we don't like them."


No, I say let's end subsidies. You want to cut food stamps by 25%? I want farm subsidies cut by 25%. You want heating assistance cut by 25%? I want oil / coal subsidies cut by 25%. You want to cut the home tax credit (mortgage deduction) by 25%? Cut the corporate interest deduction by 25%.

You will see corporations running for cover and begging, I mean outright pleading, for those programs to go without changes. We may have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, but our effective tax rate is among the lowest. Let's not confuse people with facts though.

Let us have the REAL cost of energy shine through. The clarity of the market Randroids talk about. You will see executives either raising pay or running out of the country. They won't want to be lynched.
 
2013-11-02 01:18:45 PM

mr lawson: Dancin_In_Anson: cirby: Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.

Probably owns a Mac too.

BTW...what's Apple's margin running right now?

about 37%


And Microsofts is about 28.5%.

/and Samsung's sits around 20%
 
2013-11-02 01:20:18 PM

moefuggenbrew: cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 280x180]

[politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com image 560x361]

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.


The Gulf Oil spill was BP.  Not Exxon.

/I now return you to your fake outrage
 
2013-11-02 01:34:10 PM

moefuggenbrew: cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 280x180]

[politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com image 560x361]

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.


www.blackjack.org

p.twimg.com
 
2013-11-02 01:35:44 PM

gingerjet: moefuggenbrew: cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 280x180]

[politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com image 560x361]

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.

The Gulf Oil spill was BP.  Not Exxon.

/I now return you to your fake outrage


Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!
 
2013-11-02 01:47:49 PM

itcamefromschenectady: gingerjet: moefuggenbrew: cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 280x180]

[politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com image 560x361]

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.

The Gulf Oil spill was BP.  Not Exxon.

/I now return you to your fake outrage

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!


Oh yeah, that was BP. Exxon was the gulf of Alaska.
 
2013-11-02 02:04:10 PM

Ego edo infantia cattus: itcamefromschenectady: gingerjet: moefuggenbrew: cirby: No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

[encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com image 280x180]

[politicalclimate.files.wordpress.com image 560x361]

I'd would say that knowing something like this might happen because of shortcuts on materials, and not caring, then destroying evidence that implicates your company because it means more profit - that would be the corporate greed thing. Not to mention the artificial barriers to entry manipulation of those markets to the point of having nothing to do with supply/demand. Yep, I found it, there's you're corporate greed.

The Gulf Oil spill was BP.  Not Exxon.

/I now return you to your fake outrage

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!

Oh yeah, that was BP. Exxon was the gulf of Alaska.


Also corporate profit is not the same thing as executive salaries. The CEO of Exxon makes less than two hundredths of a penny for every dollar in profit the company earns.
 
2013-11-02 02:05:57 PM
The trick is to write off the whole $100 bill, then extinguish after burning less than half of it. Then, off the books, redeem the remains.
 
2013-11-02 02:18:40 PM
They light their own cigars?
They sound poor.
I have mine lit by butane-filled flame-throwing virgins that queef an eternal flame while standing on their heads.
Also, gold, and diamonds.
And them fish eggs.
 
2013-11-02 02:27:44 PM
$8 Billion in profits?  Wow, they're as evil as Apple.  Ok, just kidding.  Apple only made $7.5B last quarter.
 
2013-11-02 03:13:34 PM

cirby: Dancin_In_Anson:
Don't confuse people with facts.

Hey, we already had one "subsidies" comment. People still think that "letting oil companies have the same tax breaks that every other company gets" = subsidies."

We should get rid of the few actual subsidies, for sure (marginal well production credit, for example), - but they're hardly a drop in the bucket compared to the amount that we collect in actual taxes from oil production.

When most of the lefties say "end subsidies (and tax writeoffs we're pretending are subsidies)" they're really saying "tax the oil companies higher than everyone else because we don't like them."


So you are in favor of subsidies for clean energy companies... you sound like a commie-nazi hippy librul scumball.
 
2013-11-02 04:24:06 PM
Cold Fusion.
 
2013-11-02 04:26:13 PM

The Bananadragon: BumpInTheNight: cirby: jaytkay:
There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?

No, there are people who jump into a thread to point out that making a seven percent profit hardly qualifies as massive corporate greed.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people who jump into threads to try and make fairly boring businesses sound evil for making fairly average profit margins.

Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.

Yah well, until Exxon actually pays up for the damage it did back in 19-farking-89 in Alaska I can't think of a more suitable company to apathetically hold up as an example of evil corporate shenanigans that should be reigned in and held to the fire at every opportunity.  They still owe 4.5 billion for that (they've paid a paltry 500 million), so yah, fark them in the farking ear for getting away with shiat like that despite making 8 billion in profit this year quarter.

FTFY. There's no real reason to not get all the way mad when they can pay off that whole balance in under two months, but won't because fark you or something.

/maybe they can pay it off as a 25th anniversary present
//which is like 4 months away
///why the fark are they getting away with it


That's also like 75% of the cost of one of their fancy new deep sea drilling rigs (I think they're close to $6 billion a piece). So yeah. They don't care.
 
2013-11-02 05:11:01 PM

mr lawson: Dancin_In_Anson: cirby: Sorry to harsh your politically-correct mellow.

Probably owns a Mac too.

BTW...what's Apple's margin running right now?

about 37%


what sort of product does apple make that is required to fundamentally run our economy?
 
2013-11-02 05:24:00 PM

Korzine: That's also like 75% of the cost of one of their fancy new deep sea drilling rigs (I think they're close to $6 billion a piece). So yeah. They don't care.


Drilling rigs don't cost nearly $6 billion. Try a few hundred million. And Exxon doesn't buy them, they lease them from rig companies.
 
2013-11-02 05:32:28 PM
I can't wait until those greedy bastard's profits are ZERO!
 
2013-11-02 05:49:29 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: cirby: $8 billion in profits on $112 billion in sales.

In other words, about seven percent.

For a company that's worth about $400 billion.

Not really that great.

Don't confuse people with facts.


That's right, journalists and Farkers haven't ever wanted to know the difference between gross profit and profit margins.

Meanwhile, over at Apple Al Gore is lighting his patchouli candles with stock certificates.
 
2013-11-02 06:15:55 PM
No one on Fark has a 401k? Really?
 
2013-11-02 06:23:10 PM

inglixthemad: No, I say let's end subsidies. You want to cut food stamps by 25%? I want farm subsidies cut by 25%. You want heating assistance cut by 25%? I want oil / coal subsidies cut by 25%. You want to cut the home tax credit (mortgage deduction) by 25%? Cut the corporate interest deduction by 25%.


Cutting by 25% isn't "ending". You should go for 100% cuts to "end" them. Which would be great, but will never happen. It seems that people and organizations tend to become angry when you remove sources of revenue from them for which they have to do nothing at all to receive.
 
2013-11-02 09:57:11 PM

jaytkay: The US should fund the Pentagon with a gas tax.


They kinda do. Consider the government make about $0.49 per gallon sold while the oil companies make about $0.07 and $0.08 per gallon.  It's he government who really is making a killing.

And that's just the fuel tax
 
2013-11-02 10:41:22 PM

itcamefromschenectady: Also corporate profit is not the same thing as executive salaries. The CEO of Exxon makes less than two hundredths of a penny for every dollar in profit the company earns.


You can't be serious with this shiat.  Don't try to make him a sympathetic figure, the farking guy is making over $40M a year.

Maybe he should try proving his worth by not letting profits fall 18% in a quarter.
 
2013-11-02 10:46:57 PM

BumpInTheNight: Yah well, until Exxon actually pays up for the damage it did back in 19-farking-89 in Alaska I can't think of a more suitable company to apathetically hold up as an example of evil corporate shenanigans that should be reigned in and held to the fire at every opportunity.  They still owe 4.5 billion for that (they've paid a paltry 500 million), so yah, fark them in the farking ear for getting away with shiat like that despite making 8 billion in profit this year.


Well, no they don't.  Their compensatory damages weren't even 500 million, they were 207 million.  The final punitive damages were 507 million, the 5 billion was vacated.

But it doesn't matter, because Exxon spent over 2 billion in cleanup costs that weren't related to the court case at all, in addition to another billion for settling civil claims.  Like most hysterical liberals, you're claiming a ruling that was overturned as a baseline for money spent, without actually doing any of the math to find out what really happened.  You also fail to credit Exxon for any money they spent outside of the court ruling that was overturned, which actually went towards paying for the damage they caused.

Punitive rulings do not pay for damages.  They are to make sure you don't do it again.  I can understand, given your complete lack of research into the issue, how you can make such a mistake.
 
2013-11-02 10:50:56 PM

uber humper: jaytkay: The US should fund the Pentagon with a gas tax.

They kinda do. Consider the government make about $0.49 per gallon sold while the oil companies make about $0.07 and $0.08 per gallon.  It's he government who really is making a killing.

And that's just the fuel tax


The federal gas tax is $0.184 and $0.244 for diesel. $30 billion per year .

Enough to run the Pentagon for about two weeks (not including veterans benefits and the interest on the $3 trillion borrowed for the Afghan and Iraq wars).
 
2013-11-02 10:56:25 PM
Remember that oil companies are masters at hiding profits.  When I interviewed with an oil company to work in their IT department, they billed other companies in the oil companies family. You didn't pay a reasonable rate, you paid the stupid high rate.  And the C* level of the mother company was the C* from each sub company.  So the IT department would bill like 1000/hr of which 900 went to the C* level and the rest for doing the actual job.  It worked for all purchases.  All the divisions that made loads got charged stupid levels because it helped kill the profits but not the C* level pay.  And because on the mother companies filings had to show what the C* level was paid from only the mother company they got away with bags of loot without having to prove in the stock filings.

How much a company makes for profit is a matter of what they want to show.  Did they buy back stock?  Pay a future bill today?  Write down a non-tangible asset "Our brand is worth less now, lets depreciate it".

They didn't bury Jimmy Hoffa, they gave him to an accounting firm, they know how to hide bodies!!
 
2013-11-02 11:10:44 PM
Cost of oil is lower. Exxon's profits are lower.
 
2013-11-02 11:20:52 PM

jaytkay: uber humper: jaytkay: The US should fund the Pentagon with a gas tax.

They kinda do. Consider the government make about $0.49 per gallon sold while the oil companies make about $0.07 and $0.08 per gallon.  It's he government who really is making a killing.

And that's just the fuel tax

The federal gas tax is $0.184 and $0.244 for diesel. $30 billion per year .

Enough to run the Pentagon for about two weeks (not including veterans benefits and the interest on the $3 trillion borrowed for the Afghan and Iraq wars).


That's federal.  State tax takes a cut, too.
 
kab
2013-11-02 11:42:05 PM

jaytkay: There are people who jump into a thread to white knight Exxon? Really?


The only thing surprising is how many posts it took.
 
2013-11-03 12:11:45 AM
Fuel is the most necessary thing we have in this country. Without it nothing else is possible.
 
2013-11-03 06:11:25 AM

Lsherm: Well, no they don't. Their compensatory damages weren't even 500 million, they were 207 million. The final punitive damages were 507 million, the 5 billion was vacated.

But it doesn't matter, because Exxon spent over 2 billion in cleanup costs that weren't related to the court case at all, in addition to another billion for settling civil claims. Like most hysterical liberals, you're claiming a ruling that was overturned as a baseline for money spent, without actually doing any of the math to find out what really happened. You also fail to credit Exxon for any money they spent outside of the court ruling that was overturned, which actually went towards paying for the damage they caused.

Punitive rulings do not pay for damages. They are to make sure you don't do it again. I can understand, given your complete lack of research into the issue, how you can make such a mistake.


You're putting a lot of words in my mouth that only you think are true.  Punitive is good, they should be punitively punished for that royal colossal fark up but some how they wriggled out of it as the farking 24 farking years went by.  I'm going by the numbers that were originally pinned on them, not the numbers their army of lawyers and decades of appeals managed to wear the courts down to.  I'm sure Exxon is glad you're here to white knight them though.
 
2013-11-03 09:25:07 AM
If punitive damages are supposed to keep a company from doing the same wrong again, and Exxon got away with paying less punitive damages than they should have, then what has deterred Exxon from having a few more Valdez incidents in the meantime?
 
2013-11-03 02:47:22 PM

Cataholic: If punitive damages are supposed to keep a company from doing the same wrong again, and Exxon got away with paying less punitive damages than they should have, then what has deterred Exxon from having a few more Valdez incidents in the meantime?


Read Private Empire and you'll see what they've done in response to Valdez....they sold off and/or shuttered several subsidiaries and instituted a comprehensive corporate culture re-do to prevent this kind of crap in the future.

I'm looking forward to when the (I think it was Arkansas where the pipeline ruptured in the neighborhood)  AG files criminal charges and Exxon hands over the DB responsible for it on a silver platter
 
2013-11-03 06:46:29 PM

StrikitRich: That's right, journalists and Farkers haven't ever wanted to know the difference between gross profit and profit margins.


I don't know if they've ever "wanted" to know, but it's obvious that they "don't" know.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report