Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What are the fundamentals of the crude oil market?
Tulsa World ^ | 1/18/2009 | JOHN STANCAVAGE

Posted on 01/18/2009 11:05:53 AM PST by kellynla

When oil rocketed past $100 on its way to $147 a barrel last summer, analysts frequently commented that prices "were not supported by the fundamentals."

Now, with oil trading between $35 and $50 in recent weeks, a few questions keep crossing my mind.

Do the current "fundamentals" support $40 oil?

What price do the "fundamentals" support?

In 2009, with the world a different place after an economic meltdown, just what the heck are the modern "fundamentals" of the energy market?

I called John Olson, the co-manager of Houston Energy Partners, for some answers.

Olson told me that the fundamentals of pricing haven't changed. They remain supply and demand, with additional forces provided by Mother Nature, demographics, and global politics and related tensions.

"We're going through a down cycle right now," he said. "Things will sort themselves out in the next few months or quarters."

One thing is clear: Huge price swings bring huge problems. That's when fundamentals fly out the window, replaced by optimism and greed, or pessimism and fear.

"No one in the world could afford paying $147 a barrel for oil last July," he said. "And, in a different respect, no one can afford $38 oil now. Oklahoma can't afford it."

Sky-high crude helped bring on the global recession, while cheap oil hurts the energy industry, Olson noted.

While the average consumer may not tear up over oil companies reporting lower profits, those businesses do need to be able to drill the wells that will produce tomorrow's gasoline and other products.

'Drilling already is being cut back," Olson said. "The situation is that we produce about 86 million barrels a day, but the rate of decline now is about 6 percent. So, that's five million barrels a day we need to replace."

Every year, that decline curve will get steeper, he predicted. And, it will be more costly to reach the newer reserves.

Along with supply issues, a glance at the other fundamentals indicates that sub-$40 oil may not be around too long.

Mother Nature, Olson said, will affect supplies at some point. The global population still is growing. China and other countries continue to add large amounts of infrastructure. And, the recession will end eventually.

"Also, the world remains a dangerous place," Olson said, noting that an incident could restrict output from large producers.

Oil futures traders seem to recognize these fundamentals, he pointed out. Oil on long-term contracts ranges from $63 a barrel for the full-year 2009 to $74 in 2013. Some analysts even have predicted a return to $80 to $90 oil by 2011.

Speculators already are beginning to circle like sharks. In fact, they are out in the water right now, swimming around huge tankers they've leased and filled with cheap crude, waiting for prices to rebound.

"Circumstances have created some of the strangest spending cycles ever," Olson said. "The market is going to be sloppy and messy for a while."

Just watch out for those fins.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: crude; energy; futures; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 01/18/2009 11:05:53 AM PST by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney

ping


2 posted on 01/18/2009 11:06:08 AM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I figure I will only need ~500 bbl of crude for my land vehicular transportation out to age 90. I want to buy and hold that now. Any suggestions?


3 posted on 01/18/2009 11:13:37 AM PST by Paladin2 (No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
It's mostly political

If oil companies were allowed to drill where the largest deposits are (which are the cheapest areas for them to produce, wells capped when producing just fine etc) ,IE within 50 miles of the coast and in other places where it is blocked by the environmentalists.

Plus all the shale and coal put into federal park lands.

4 posted on 01/18/2009 11:13:40 AM PST by Syncro (Ti Ming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

You’re thinking just like me. Lock in your lifetime supply of oil. If oil prices go up, you’re covered, if they go down, you’re covered in the sense that you have more free cash due to the lower oil expense.

I like the price now. My plan is to buy a bunch of shares of USO, which is an ETF available just like a stock that tracks the present price of crude. Then, if I want, I will sell my 25 or so barrels each year, as I burn the oil.


5 posted on 01/18/2009 11:19:05 AM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Thanks for the tip. I'll look into it.

Next, we need a way to hedge future road vehicle fuel taxes. If they are now ~$1, there are those who want them at ~$3. It may be worthwhile to prepay the taxes on some of that fuel too.

6 posted on 01/18/2009 11:25:11 AM PST by Paladin2 (No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All

The bad news is amid all the upheaval and destruction of demand, total consumption is to be down no more than 1% this year, if that.

Out of 84 million barrels a day of global consumption.

< 1% is not the sort of number that extend the lifetime of what’s in the tank. We, globally, are running out and there is no law of the universe that says the alternative is going to arrive before some desperate countries decide that there are ways to destroy demand other than recession.

Nuclear bombs come to mind. They would reduce demand, elsewhere.


7 posted on 01/18/2009 11:34:29 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
Sky-high crude helped bring on the global recession, while cheap oil hurts the energy industry

Boo hoo for the oil industry. If it comes down to the world versus Exxon, I know who I'm going to support. And if the "oil industry" dies a horrible, lingering death, it will be no more than they deserve.

This brief respite from oil tyranny should be the impetus we need to uncover any sources of energy we can that are not dependent on crude. I don't care if it means burning corn cobs and lawn clippings. We should never again rest our economy or our national security on the whims of amoral oil giants who have reached the point where they are economic superpowers in their own right.

8 posted on 01/18/2009 11:43:47 AM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

I assume you walk or ride a bicycle.

Otherwise your comments reflect zero content of reality!


9 posted on 01/18/2009 11:59:24 AM PST by texican01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Yep, IronJack lives in an alternate universe. Does not live in reality.
10 posted on 01/18/2009 12:06:16 PM PST by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
This brief respite from oil tyranny should be the impetus we need to uncover any sources of energy we can that are not dependent on crude. I don't care if it means burning corn cobs and lawn clippings. We should never again rest our economy or our national security on the whims of amoral oil giants who have reached the point where they are economic superpowers in their own right.

That is the damn truth!!

11 posted on 01/18/2009 12:09:37 PM PST by org.whodat (Conservatives don't vote for Bailouts for Super-Rich Bankers! Republicans do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Owen
I'm not a greenie, nor an oily, but we will never run out of that crap.

It's the second most plentiful fluid and the erf keps making more from way down below.

That's why it's called rock oil (petro - leum ).

12 posted on 01/18/2009 12:14:31 PM PST by norraad ("What light!">Blues Brothers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

You continue to read my mind. Actually, I was thinking of buying twice as many shares, just for that reason. Some of the Orwellian stuff, like road pricing, is really nasty. It would be great just to have the money pre-allocated and ignore Big Brother telling me where and when to drive.

(sorry for the delay, I had to burn some oil to pick up one of my kids)


13 posted on 01/18/2009 12:19:12 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
What price do the "fundamentals" support?

He might look at what Exxon does. When oil was well over $100, Exxon was reportedly basing its business decisions on $37 oil. If the project wouldn't work at that price, Exxon was taking a pass.

14 posted on 01/18/2009 12:30:16 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

The article said — “No one in the world could afford paying $147 a barrel for oil last July,” he said. “And, in a different respect, no one can afford $38 oil now. Oklahoma can’t afford it.”

But, Oklahomans have liked the lower pump prices (even if they have gone up in the last week or so...).


15 posted on 01/18/2009 12:35:02 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL
I had to shovel the driveway (again).

Maybe I could interest you in some fuel tax rate default swaps? ;-)

16 posted on 01/18/2009 12:41:32 PM PST by Paladin2 (No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: texican01
I assume you walk or ride a bicycle.

I do both. But I also drive.

Otherwise your comments reflect zero content of reality!

How's that?

17 posted on 01/18/2009 12:43:21 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
IronJack ... Does not live in reality.

No, I live in Minnesota.

18 posted on 01/18/2009 12:44:14 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

Let’s get serious here. The worst possible situation for the oil companies was $147 oil. It was WAY overpriced, so people would adjust and the kickback would be nasty (as in today’s oil prices). Also, companies got vilified along way and nearly had to deal with another “Windfall Profits” tax...and yes, they have been there with high prices and knew exactly what was coming their way as the prices went up again.

If the oil companies had the degree of control over the price, they would have never let the price shoot up. Rather they would have simply increased it something like 10% per year...they would have made plenty of money and pretty much stayed under the radar.

It’s nice to have enemies to blame, but the run-up, and now crash, is simple supply and demand. A lot has changed in the world economy over the past 6 months and the price of oil reflects it.


19 posted on 01/18/2009 12:52:16 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler; thackney
“...no one can afford $38 oil now. Oklahoma can’t afford it.”

"But, Oklahomans have liked the lower pump prices (even if they have gone up in the last week or so"

I believe he's referring to people in the oil business...
“thackney” is a lot more knowledgeable than I on this subject but I believe the break even point for American oil production these days is about $40/barrel.

20 posted on 01/18/2009 12:52:36 PM PST by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

I recieve oil money and so do a lot of folks like me ...Strangely Big Oil is comprised of a whole lot of little people.You have bought into something that does not exist


21 posted on 01/18/2009 12:56:17 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

You said — “I believe he’s referring to people in the oil business...”

Yeah, I’m sure that’s what was being referred to. But, my interests may not be their interests... :-)

And then you said — “thackney” is a lot more knowledgeable than I on this subject but I believe the break even point for American oil production these days is about $40/barrel.

I think I’ve been reading that it might have to go down to $20 a barrel before it “finds the bottom” and then works back up again.


22 posted on 01/18/2009 12:57:11 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
"the break even point for American oil production these days is about $40/barrel"

I'd guess that the BE point for producers is all over the place. The question of interest to me is what is the price point for domestic producers to grow domestic output at, say 10%, per year?

Would it then be cheaper to invade Mexico or Venezuela to get off Arab Oil.?

23 posted on 01/18/2009 12:57:44 PM PST by Paladin2 (No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Syncro
"If oil companies were allowed to drill"

Indeed.

And it's not just oil. The last refinery was built in this country 30 years ago.

They've been trying to build one in Yuma for about a dozen years but think about it, 30 freaking years. It amazes me supply hasn't been a problem. 30 years!

So when there's a cold snap and a big increase in heating oil demand and the price of gas goes up people are surprised?

Sigh, I guess that won't happen once the government takes over that market and sends all the capitalists to reeducation camps.

24 posted on 01/18/2009 1:10:11 PM PST by Proud_texan (Scare people enough and they'll do anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BobL
My plan is to buy a bunch of shares of USO, which is an ETF available just like a stock that tracks the present price of crude.

"Buying Oil"

25 posted on 01/18/2009 1:10:52 PM PST by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Looks like it would be best to buy an oil well.


26 posted on 01/18/2009 1:19:08 PM PST by Paladin2 (No, pundits strongly believe that the proper solution is more dilution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

“This brief respite from oil tyranny should be the impetus we need to uncover any sources of energy we can that are not dependent on crude. I don’t care if it means burning corn cobs and lawn clippings. We should never again rest our economy or our national security on the whims of amoral oil giants who have reached the point where they are economic superpowers in their own right.”

What the heck are you talking about. Except for those that are part of a cartel, oil giants have very little power. They are the playthings of governments and the market.


27 posted on 01/18/2009 1:20:51 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Interesting...I’ve been to a bunch of web sites regarding USO and none of them have noted what’s stated here...rather they stated that the ETFs simply track the current price, but, yes, they do trade futures. So I’m not sure...but I’m going in anyway.


28 posted on 01/18/2009 1:37:04 PM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler; All

“Oklahoma can’t afford it.” I having been spending a fair bit of time at Market Watch, reading oil related articles. Here are some facts and opinions that I have encountered:

1) Cushing, OK, a major oil depot has nearly filled its capacity. A lot of oil is being stored on oil tankers, and the world appears to be running out of storage space. Everyone is waiting for oil/gasoline sales to move back up so they can sell at a higher price than now. The contracts for “futures” in the next few months are higher than the futures for next month. This is called “contango”, not to be confused with the Argentinian dance of a similar name.

2) A lot of sentiment there was expressed regarding not resuming big spending on gasoline. I decided to take a straw poll of people planning to continue to conserve, and those planning to return to “the good old days”. The vote was 35 conserve, 8 use more. I wonder if that would match the FR sentiment.

3) While OPEC may holler about cutting back, they can’t just turn off the wells, as it is too expensive to get them started again. There or at FR it was mentioned that both Russian and Iran may have a stake in encouraging the Gaza war to increase the price of oil, so they probably won’t intervene effectively to stop it.

4) Sentiment is mixed as to whether oil will drop into the 20’s, vs. moving up to the 60’s and 70’s. Sentiment is pretty strong that it was the speculators that drove the price up into the 100+ area, and this is not likely to happen again in the near future (until amnesia sets in again, my comment).


29 posted on 01/18/2009 1:56:54 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Proud_texan; All

“It amazes me that suppy has not been a problem.”

Market Watch comments also indicate that refineries are only producing at 82.5% of capacity, because they want to prop up the price of gasoline. It probably would be a good idea to have some more refineries built well away from hurricane and tornado territory, just in case. Another MW topic concerned the Bakken oil production area in our own west. One story said this area has reserves from 200 to 500 billion barrels, more than Saudi Arabia. The only problem is that only 3 or 4 billion are recoverable at current technology and pricing. People who push the high figure are trying to sell hype. Who knows?


30 posted on 01/18/2009 2:05:35 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

Yes on #1. I’m just a few miles east of there (in Tulsa). And from the news I’ve read, it’s about ready to overflow... :-)

On #2, I’ve cut way back. I know I’m doing a lot less on gasoline consumption than ever before. Of course, it’s not summer yet... :-)

On #3, I can understand that and it’s most likely true. However, how about slowing down the output on many different wells, instead of shutting them down. Wouldn’t that drastically lower output?

On #4, well, even if gasoline is “up” it seems that oil is “down”. So, we’ll see which one of the two “breaks”...


31 posted on 01/18/2009 2:06:22 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Read later.


32 posted on 01/18/2009 2:07:24 PM PST by Joya (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
They are the playthings of governments and the market.

LOL! You must be joking! The Big Five oil companies control gross revenues far greater than most COUNTRIES on this planet. They can buy and sell governments! Not even an economy as powerful as America's is immune to energy manipulations.

There is NO legitimate reason whatsoever that the world's economic health should be held hostage to these godless cartels. Their product is an abomination that should have been obsolete after World War II demonstrated the fragility of the supply line. Instead, we go through these ridiculous cycles of fabricated shortage/fabricated oversupply and we grumble about it but no sooner start to do something and the price drops ... just like it has recently.

Price be damned! Now is the time to drive a final stake into the withered hearts of these economic ghouls by developing ANY and EVERY other source of energy we can: ethanol, biofuels, shale, coal, nuclear, wind, solar, flatulent methane, I don't care. Every day that we depend on oil for our lifeblood, we trade our liberty for ease. This country is made of better stuff.

33 posted on 01/18/2009 2:55:43 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
The Big Five oil companies control gross revenues far greater than most COUNTRIES on this planet.

Who do you consider the the "Big Five"?

34 posted on 01/18/2009 3:04:31 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin
Market Watch comments also indicate that refineries are only producing at 82.5% of capacity, because they want to prop up the price of gasoline.

Do you understand that for several months, the stocks of gasoline have been growing in the US? The production and imports continue to be more than the demand.


35 posted on 01/18/2009 3:10:32 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Who do you consider the the "Big Five"?

1. Exxon Mobil
2. Royal Dutch Shell
3. BP
4. Chevron
5. Conoco Phillips

36 posted on 01/18/2009 3:35:17 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

“The Big Five oil companies control gross revenues far greater than most COUNTRIES on this planet”

No, they don’t “control” their revenues. That is, they don’t control future revenues. They have to earn them.

“Price be damned!”

That about sums up your “economic” analysis.


37 posted on 01/18/2009 3:37:17 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

“Their product is an abomination that should have been obsolete after World War II demonstrated the fragility of the supply line”

A war involving hundreds of nations and millions of people probably demonstrates the fragility of the supply lines for plenty of resources.


38 posted on 01/18/2009 3:39:09 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
If you look closely at some of those wonderful charts Thackney posts there are no meaningful fundamentals in the classic sense. One year ago there was suppose to be a 1.5 -1.7 mbpd gap in use vs production. Now it is just the opposite. I think oil based upon currency and availability should be about $55/b. BTW the gasoline market is even more broken.
39 posted on 01/18/2009 3:45:00 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (Government only does one thing well - WASTE MONEY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
If Exxon Mobil were a country, its 2007 profit would exceed the gross domestic product of nearly two thirds of the 183 nations in the World Bank's economic rankings. That is 2007, before $150-a-barrel crude. And that is Exxon Mobil alone. Add in the others and you've got an economic superpower, a nation without borders, without a government, and with no ethic driving it except greater and greater profit.

Now start factoring in the crude owned and controlled by foreign (and hostile) governments, and it is clear that the oil industry represents an enemy that can very likely accomplish what no other enemy ever did: defeat us.

40 posted on 01/18/2009 3:45:33 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
That about sums up your “economic” analysis.

The inevitable fallback of the oil company apologist: the ad hominem attack.

41 posted on 01/18/2009 3:46:31 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
A war involving hundreds of nations and millions of people probably demonstrates the fragility of the supply lines for plenty of resources.

Your point is?

WWII showed us that wars can be won or lost not on the strength of one's army, but on the might of a nation's industry. AND the ability to deliver that materiel to where it is needed.

Patton's tanks ran out of gas as he was pushing toward the Rhine in 1944. Hitler suffered chronic shortages of fuel, which hampered his efforts to prosecute the war on every front. When the Allies looked for strategic targets to bomb, the Ploesti oil fields were at the top of the list.

We should have learned our lesson then, and said "Never again." Never again will this country be put at risk because we lack adequate fuel. And if we can't get that fuel from oil, which apparently we can't -- at least in sufficient quantities to control the prices to any reasonable extent -- then we need to get it somewhere else. ANYWHERE else.

42 posted on 01/18/2009 3:52:25 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: IronJack; Star Traveler; Tublecane; thackney; All

If I remember correctly an article I saw last year in “The Economist”, uk, said that the “seven sisters” oil companies now control a much smaller percentage of oil resources than they once did. I am only guessing from memory, by I think the figure was less than 20%. The biggest players are now the countries: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, etc. The tools that can be used to influence countries are rather different than those possible with corporations.


43 posted on 01/18/2009 5:57:15 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
The fundamentals are "oil" and "demand for oil".

I hope that clears things up.

L

44 posted on 01/18/2009 6:00:13 PM PST by Lurker ("America is at that awkward stage. " Claire Wolfe, call your office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Then, if I want, I will sell my 25 or so barrels each year, as I burn the oil.

Your vehicle runs on oil? Mine runs on gasoline.

L

45 posted on 01/18/2009 6:02:09 PM PST by Lurker ("America is at that awkward stage. " Claire Wolfe, call your office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IronJack

“The inevitable fallback of the oil company apologist: the ad hominem attack.”

I clearly attacked your analysis, not your self.


46 posted on 01/18/2009 6:42:03 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
In terms of control of oil supplies, None of those make the top ten, some of those companies don't even make the top 20.

1 Saudi Aramco
2 NIOC
3 INOC
4 KPC
5 PDV
6 Adnoc
7 Libya NOC
8 NNPC
9 Pemex
10 Lukoil
11 Gazprom
12 Exxon Mobil
13 Yukos
14 PetroChina
15 Qatar Petroleum
16 Sonatrach
17 BP
18 Petrobras
19 ChevronTexaco/Unocal
20 Total
21 Royal Dutch/Shell
22 Petronas
23 Surgutneftgas
24 ConocoPhillips/Burlington
25 Pertamina

Understanding Today’s Crude Oil and Product Markets
http://www.api.org/aboutoilgas/upload/OilPrimer.pdf

47 posted on 01/19/2009 4:58:26 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Proud_texan
Sigh, I guess that won't happen once the government takes over that market and sends all the capitalists to reeducation camps.

Think again. Maybe they'll have a 'special' camp for the folks in the oil patch. Liberals are rare as lizard fur coats out here.

48 posted on 01/19/2009 5:29:11 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
If Exxon Mobil were a country, its 2007 profit would exceed the gross domestic product of nearly two thirds of the 183 nations in the World Bank's economic rankings.

Yes, this means the ExxonMobil is equavilent to that economic powerhouse of the World, Bulgaria. It edged out the world renowed economic master of Lithuania.

A rather meaningless number. How many individuals around the world are stock holders are in ExxonMobil? I would guess it may exceed the population of these countries as well.

At the same time, ExxonMobil paid over $105 Billion in Taxes. Where do the taxes paid ranked compare as countries GDP? Moves quite a bit farther up the list.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP.pdf

49 posted on 01/19/2009 5:37:44 AM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: thackney

As I said, that figure is true for Exxon Mobil ALONE. Combine it with the other “Big Five” and the economic clout these megaliths swing is on par with an industrialized nation. Add in the state-owned oil powerhouses and it is arguable that the oil industry commands economic power in excess of most nations on earth.


50 posted on 01/19/2009 3:31:16 PM PST by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson