This is obviously pointless. It’s pretty easy to back up your assertions when you say the reason there is no proof for what you believe is that people are lying and the books are cooked. Of course, there is no evidence that the books are actually cooked, so what gives you the special knowledge of corruption that no one else has? If you think the oil companies are hiding profits, then please produce some evidence. You can’t simply say that since Enron did it all companies do it. That’s a ridiculous assertion.
Petrol here in the UK is down to 89.9p/litre. That’s US$6.33 per US gallon. Not so long ago it was over $7 equivalent. Just saying…
Gonzo, a quick reading of the site shows that $.58 of a gallon of gas is the total cost spent on refining that gallon, not just “profits”. Same thing with distribution/marketing - that’s all costs, not just “profits”.
Your sites aren’t even saying what you say they’re saying. 
What I find interesting is this:
In 1997, the price of a barrel of oil was ~13 and the price of a gallon of gas was .97. Given that one can get 19 gallons of gasoline from one 42-gallon barrel of oil, that means that the gas companies were clearing $18.43 in gasoline sales on a $13.00 barrel, a “41% profit margin” one would argue if one were ignorant of finance.
However, a barrel of oil today costs $70. Filling up on the way to work cost me $2.45/gallon… hell, for the sake of argument I’ll say it was $3.00/gallon. $3X19gallons = $57?
Gonzo, where did the extra profits go? If the evil oil companies were charging so much for gas back in 1997 that they could replace a barrel merely by selling 13 gallons of gas… why aren’t they doing the same? Why isn’t gas $5.38 rather than the current $2.45?
http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=read&id=2140695 Owning the oil in the ground and getting money (unneede) from the government will help the bottom line. They profit from every step in the integrated oligarchy.
Fine, Michael Kinsey doesn’t understand economics. However, you have still failed to show why you persist, in the face of all evidence, to believe that oil companies are lying about their profits and that they make more than 10 cents a gallon profit. You also fail to produce any proof that a secret cabal is manipulating prices to benefit the GOP, as you have claimed. I challenge you once again to produce any evidence you may have to sustain your beliefs.
I have produced site after site,hoping something would grab you. You can not be reached. The case against your dime has been clearly and totally made. the cabal is difficult to flat out prove. I am sure you know that collusion is extremely difficult to prove. Even in court with supoena power it is a liong process. I trust that the fact that many pundits and politicians saying that something stinks wont be persuasive to you. Corporations making what even pols call excess profits and debating a tax for them would mean nothing to you. An administration that felt tax givaways should be given to the most profitable corps in the world would give you no pause.
Wea re at war with Iraq . oil We are pounding the drums for war with Iran. oil
Oil in Saudi Arabia is still pretty secure to get. no war.no push although 19 of 23 911 terrorists were from there. No even a hint of Bush anger toward them.
No, you didn’t. You produced news stories on Enron (which isn’t an oil company), press releases from politicians who have called for investigations and for more taxes (which proves only that politicians have called for investigations and for more taxes), opinion pieces long on rhetoric and short on fact, and information on refineries that merely details their costs and profits in the same column. You have given no cites for anything that backs up your assertions. If you have, simply point to the cite on this thread and I’ll be happy to look at it.
Where? Please point to the post on this thread that has done so, because I can’t find it and it appears no one else can, either.
Please forgive me for not agreeing with your assertions when even you admit that it is “extremely difficult to prove.” Since you can’t even produce any evidence that would lead to proof, I’m going to be kind of hard to sway.
Why should it be? These politicians and pundits are simply playing off the economic ignorance of the public, and are doing a great job. They can call for all th investigations they want, but in the end these investigations always find there is nothing rotten happening.
How would politicians know what “excessive profit” is?
I’m not in favor of corporate welfare for any corporations, but that has little to do with this debate.
Really? I didn’t notice.
So what? That has nothing to do with this debate.
Gonzomax,
back in post 106 you linked to accuracy.org and a someone there indicates a value of 24%, and suggest the oil companies are being dishonest about the 10% profits. You later reference 24%, not sure if this calling on the same number.
The Oil cos are quoting their Return on Capital. This is not the same thing as net profit. ROC is you net income (post tax) / Total assets (minus your cash in hand). Give or take some subtle variations.
It is a measure of how efficient a company is with the money invested in it by the investment community. It is entirely appropriate that large capital intensive companies use this as a selling point when trying to attract the bankers dollars. It is a different beast to net profits, and it is not being dishonest to quote the ROC and the net profits so long as you are aware they are different things.
Least original name Ever, my point, which was badly made, was to add a couple of numbers to the prior post, but also to suggest that if one is involved in high risk operations (financially speaking) you need to have a very large cash flow to undertake such risks. A small cap oil company could not afford to undertake a deepwater of geologically challenging exploration well, because if it did not pan out, the operator would go bust, all for one well.
The supermajor International Operating Companies (who incidentally pale into insignificance in terms of access to reserves when compared to the National Oil Companies) do have the financial capability to assume these risk, it just takes 350 billion revenue to do it, and 10% of that is 35 billion. It seams like a lot, but is just 10%.
All of which has nothing to do with the original question of controlling the price of gasoline.
In my humble opinion, to control the price of gasoline in the US you would have to,
- control the production rates and shipping of the raw product including political instability in Venezuela, Nigeria and the middle east (and little bit of Russia)
- Manipulate the spot for crude products in 3 different key trading centers. Contract delivery prices are tied to the spot price. Incidentally you need to get all the investment banks and other assorted commodity traders on board here.
- Arrange for outages in pipelines, hurricanes to delay tankers and maybe take out a couple of tankers for repair.
- Manipulate refineries in light of the source of supply to ensure appropriate outages etc
- Time everything with the driving season demands and the predicted sales of the various gasoline blends in the various states.
- Control another spot market in gasoline futures replete with its set of investment bankers and assorted trading dudes.
- Control inventory levels and makes sure the futures guys are betting in the right direction.
- control demand at the customer end
- get some buy in from the distributors and franchises selling on the gasoline
- probably a lot of other things as well.
To me it just seams like there are too many variables and too many others involved to pull off a dip in gasoline prices in the run up to elections or whatever.
I agree that in general in the US and elsewhere large multi national companies have too much sway with the govt, the army of lobby chaps is probably not a good thing. However they don’t control you gas price in any realistic fashion, and they don’t lie on tax returns to the gov unless the CEO wants to go to jail.
I would hazard a guess that the lobbing is mostly related to ensuring the tax regime encourages use of their product (or at least not discourage its use), ensures access to resources in country, leverages the US international status and trading agreements to gain access to resources outside the US and minimize cost by keeping unfavorable legislation to a minimum. Good or bad, that is up to each individual.
Anyway I better go, a fax has just come through from Evil Oil Inc HQ with fresh instructions, I do hope it is not kitten stamping again.
Repeat after me. In my opinion, from the data as I see it. You do not know for a fact they do not manipulate. I do not know for a fact they do. I find the evidence compelling that they do. You do not. However the scenario you just posted is completely plausable ,excepting you think every gas producer would have to be in cahoots. I suspect that if I was an exporter , and someone made it so I could make tons of money with no extra work. I would be tempted. You do not require meetings and documents to fix. The willingness to go along will sufice.# 8 would be difficult and unneeded . The distributors are under control, they have a very narrow range to play with since they pay what the oil companies tell them they have to.
Economics is voodoo magic to me. So, someone kindly explain this:
Three months ago I was paying nearly $3 a gallon. Let’s be generous and say I’m now paying $2.50.
The price of gasoline has dropped by about 16% from my little narrow perspective. So, given all the reasons that gas was going up before, which of those reasons is now a smaller part in the equation that would result in a 16% drop?
-Joe
On the actual crude supply side, the situation in nigeria appears to be easing and the alaska pipeline is ramping back up. Some talk of big finds in the gulf of mexico may have helped a little, although actual delivery is many years off and no one agrees on the size of the finds.
On the crude supply side regarding concerns over future supply, it appears the atlantic hurricane season will not be as bad as expected and concerns over Iran shutting down supply have reduced.
Inventories in crude are up as well.
A weakening global economy is supressing demand.
So over all crude is trading down.
On the refined product supply side, refined product inventories are up and the cost of crude is down.
Demand is down due to end of sumer driving season and general economic issues.
So price of gasoline is down.
Enjoy and go buy a bigger car, the stuff is practically giving itself away.
From now on the cat drinks unleaded *
*thankyou Mr B. Breathed
cheers
Except you’ve produced no data that companies are colluding or manipulating prices. You have no data to back up your beliefs, and you’ll find no one who actually looks at the data who supports your assertion.
If you are going to assert something, then you must prove it. For example, I don’t know for a fact that my neighbor isn’t a mass murderer. However, I have no proof that he is and no one has given such proof, either. So I’m not wrong to think that he’s not a mass murderer and if someone asserts he is, to demand proof. And then think it quite lame when that person produces no proof but weakly says “you don’t know for a fact he’s not a murderer.”
Again, what evidence is that?
Tha Alaskan oil is beset by rusted pipes. I thougt they would require fixing first. Talks of potental finds decreases use. Well I live and learn. American drop after the vacation driving, which was way down this year, offsets the steadily increasing use of India and China. Thats good. Both the industrial and automotive sectors in China and India were supposed to grow steadily .Now they do not. OK
I have presented my side as my opinion according to the info I have shown you over and over. You have stated your opinion as fact. Renob read the sites .I have amassed data you have presented you side as fact. Who needs to prove theguywith the sites or the one arrogant enough to say his side is fact.?
Again, gonzo, what cites have you given? I freely acknowledge you are the master of giving out website addresses on this thread, but none of them show that there is manipulation of the market or collusion happening. They are cites that talk about Enron, press releases from politicians that show nothing, and cites about Enron.
And, you may notice, it’s not just me who disagrees with you here. Almost everyone disputes your views of the oil companies. Until you present some facts on this thread (or show me where you previously presented any facts), then your case is completely unproven.
$2.09 and dropping. $1.98 for E85 but that doesn’t really count.
Again Renob has declared this debate over.He is of course the ultimate authority and now claims a majority. Magiver has proven the claim of this thread.
No, gonzo, I simply said you gave no evidence to back up your position that collusion is happening among the oil companies and/or that the oil companies are manipulating prices to benefit the GOP. I simply asked you to either produce evidence of your assertions or show me where on this thread you previously produced such evidence. I said that in the absence of such evidence there was no reason to believe your assertions.
As far as Magiver proving anything, all he/she did was say that gas prices are falling. That certainly doesn’t prove the assertion made at the beginning of this thread that these falling prices are the result of some kind of oil company conspiracy to help the GOP.
You know what would be interesting? Graphs of gas prices by week over the last 2 decades, graphs of the change in price by week over the last 2 decades, and graphs of the % of the price change. That would give us some real meat to bite into.
spaz, go here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html
Under “Area” click on “United States” and it will give you weekly gas prices going back to 1991 in an excel spreadsheet. While not a graph, it gives you the info you’re looking for.