If the well remained uncapped, it very well may spew for 20 years. However, the rate will decline.
Here’s a simple guess on how much the well would be worth.
Assumptions
Initial rate of 20,000 barrels a day declining 10% per year (likely would decline at a much fast rate)
Produces for 20 years (based on your statement)
Price of oil is $80
$10 lifting cost
No taxes (obviously incorrect)
No capital expenditures required (obviously incorrect)
80% 8/8ths net revenue interest (it will be somewhere in this ballpark)
BP has 65% working interest (we know this)
10% discount rate
That would result in the well having a present value of $1.38 billion. If you think any of my assumptions are unreasonable then do the calculations for yourself.
I appreciate the compliment, but I was not insinuating anything. I was making a factual statement about the origin of BP’s name because Happy Poster was saying that politicians are using the old name for scapegoating reasons - which was a point I disagreed with. I don’t think any single company is to blame here (and I already said so upthread). Apportioning blame by nationality would be stupid. These mistakes were made by individuals.
It is a lot of oil, no question. A metric shitload of oil. BP is spending a metric shitload of money, as they should be, in trying to stop it. (The relief wells, by the way, are to plug the well, not to draw on it.)
Your response in no way refutes Longhorn Dave’s assertation that BP is spending more in a week on dealing with the catastrophe than they would gain in a year of tapping it as a normal, common (or garden variety) producing well, especially when you add in that BP is going to have to compensate pretty near everyone who has spent money on the disaster, or who has lost money due to it.
Is it American to set up headquarters in foreign lands to avoid paying American taxes.? They can not pull that crap and call themselves an American company. Like Transocean, do you think they really are a Cayman Islands company? There are buildings in the Caymans that are mail drops for thousands of American businesses.
American as apple pie. If you’re asking me if it is patriotic, all I can say is that I don’t care. Transocean was founded in the U.S. but acquired by a Norwegian company decades ago so they do at least have some claim to being a foreign company- although they are obviously in the Caymans as a tax shelter. I don’t see why the nationalities of these companies matter.
Whatever it is, though, I find it hard to believe that it would be framed as an attack on all things British (aside from the tabloids, of course, because any country’s tabloids would love that kind of angle).
Anyway, are you asserting that BP did not contribute to this accident in any significant way by either action or inaction, up to and including any lobbying they might’ve done to lighten the regulatory/inspection pressures on them?
Look dude. BP has replaced Al Qaeda as the world’s Public Enemy #1. The window dressing is that BP has caused far more damage than AQ could have dreamed, and, remarkably, has presented itself to be far less believable in their statements.
What do I want? For Uncle Sam to lance the Wyrm through its heart. Then, to feast upon the corpse until I vomit! :mad:
Now, what if this were a koan? The Wyrm is BP getting killed, that much is obvious. But feast on the corpse? I think that means seize it’s assets and let those pay to compensate for BP’s delays and shortfalls, starting probably next year. Nothing I have seen suggests there is any evidence that BP recognizes this to be a 25-100+ year compensation package.
Well, congratulations, until you withdraw such an asinine mod statement you’ve made it impossible for me to contribute any further in this thread past this post, but to address the issues in it:
Of course I want BP to do well. Like anyone else with a sensibly managed long term pension porfolio I am a part owner, indirectly. They are a major component of the FTSE.
It was not offered as a way of citing my argument, but as a way of pointing out that the OSHA cite on its own is meaningless unless put into some context, which I tried to do briefly but failed. Anyone wanting to use those numbers to convince any thinking person of anything does have to put them in context though.
I could have sworn there was a bit more to your post but tapatalk seems to have removed it; in any case I won’t post again in this thread unless you withdraw your bizarre insinuatuion, which a better man would frankly apologise for.
Sort of
Transocean is and pretty much always has been a Norwegian company. A US company Sonat Offshore Drilling did purchase Transocean (after a bidding war with Reading and Bates) and then called the combined outfit Transocean Offshore. Then in 1997 Transocean merged with Sedco Forex to become Transocean Sedco Forex . Sedco was the South Eastern Drilling Company, as US drilling contractor, which was merged with Forex Neptune ( a French outfit made from a merger of Forex and Neptune) when they were purchased by Schlumberger to become Sedco Forex.
After the merger TSF (Transocean Sedco Forex) purchased Reading & Bates (the same who Sonat was in the bidding war with, and R&B had not long prior to that purchased Falcon Drilling and were Falcon Reading and Bates for a few months). They may have been called TSF R&B for a while who knows. Then later they bought Global Santa Fe (who were a merger of Global drilling and Santa Fe Drilling). At some point sanity was restored with a name change to just Transocean (although you may see it referred to as ADTI , just don’t ask) as TSFFRBGSF in its full form would have necessitated the off shore crews to wear comedy sombreros as head protection so the name could be written on them around the edge of the brim.
I may have forgotten a couple of other purchases, it all gets fuzzy after a while.
So where TO is from is not a simple question, what is simple is that they are large and currently registered in Switzerland, not the Caymans.
And soon after I typed that I heard the news stories today about how much they’ve lost already. And stories about their dividend. And the nice ironic quote from investor relations, I guess, saying they have no idea about events that could be responsible for the loss of shareholder value.
We often hear that regulation is unnecessary because management would never be stupid enough to do something to destroy shareholder value. This is yet another counterexample to that.
its you that is making the argument about bp being more unsafe. I have explained why i do not accept the cite. I have also explained what could be done to make me accept the cite.