Bad news.. BP only made 5.6 billion....

[thatone1967]

limpsfield said:

thatone1967 said:

Bing o said:

He may have calmed down, but I fear that he and several other posters on this thread will forever be stupid.

Is there a need for that?

I think there is. The thicko quotient on this website is going through the bloody roof.

So I am thick AND Stupid then?

prick!

[Dupont666]

thatone1967 said:

limpsfield said:

thatone1967 said:

Bing o said:

He may have calmed down, but I fear that he and several other posters on this thread will forever be stupid.

Is there a need for that?

I think there is. The thicko quotient on this website is going through the bloody roof.

So I am thick AND Stupid then?

prick!

you were misguided in stating the oil companies are screwing us over and now taking offence at it... but from they way its worded its a generic statement and not one aimed at you.

Again jumping in 2 footed without standing back and just taking time to realise it.

[munky]

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/...

basically:
Exploration and Production: $8.3bn
Refining and Marketing: $729m
plus other bits and bobs minus $3bn tax
= $6.1bn

so, digging the black stuff out of the ground accounts for nearly all the profit, not refining and selling petrol to motorists in petrol stations. In other words, they could simply sell crude on the open market to whomever and make most of the same profit.

Generally and perhaps simply, the higher the market price of crude the more profit they make. If their profit margin is x% of the price of the product they sell, and the open market price of that product increases, then they make more profit.

[Benny Saltstein]

And what percentage of that profit came from the Wild Bean Cafe? Probably more than you'd think.

[jshell]

Chris_w666 said:

Would a company like BP have several trading arms, one that extracts and ships the crude, one that does the distillation, and then various ones selling the fractions individually. Or is it one huge operation that does it all?

If they are taking each layer of crude and then refining it then that is a huge investment of money and research time, add the cost of running tankers, finding new oil, drilling, getting pipelines laid and secure, the profit (which I assume is quoted pre tax) Isn't as large as it seems, in financial terms it is a shed load of money but profit surely only is a true reflection of a companies sucess when viewed as a %age of annual turnover or a return on the running costs of the business.

They have several distinct businesses handling all aspects from exploration, to project execution, production operations, gas division, gas plants, refineries, transport, marketing, lubricants etc, etc. Some are seperate businesses, but all feed into the parent company.

Crude oil is a mix that is split via fractional distillation - ie, it seperates at different temperatures into 'light ends' - petrol/gases etc right down to 'heavy end' fuel oils, bitumen etc. Each field has a varying mix of these things. The lighter 'ends' are worth more money...

Some of the huge developments now are all gas, that's hwre a lot of cash is now.

[Chris_w666]

jshell said:

Chris_w666 said:

Would a company like BP have several trading arms, one that extracts and ships the crude, one that does the distillation, and then various ones selling the fractions individually. Or is it one huge operation that does it all?

If they are taking each layer of crude and then refining it then that is a huge investment of money and research time, add the cost of running tankers, finding new oil, drilling, getting pipelines laid and secure, the profit (which I assume is quoted pre tax) Isn't as large as it seems, in financial terms it is a shed load of money but profit surely only is a true reflection of a companies sucess when viewed as a %age of annual turnover or a return on the running costs of the business.

They have several distinct businesses handling all aspects from exploration, to project execution, production operations, gas division, gas plants, refineries, transport, marketing, lubricants etc, etc. Some are seperate businesses, but all feed into the parent company.

Crude oil is a mix that is split via fractional distillation - ie, it seperates at different temperatures into 'light ends' - petrol/gases etc right down to 'heavy end' fuel oils, bitumen etc. Each field has a varying mix of these things. The lighter 'ends' are worth more money...

Some of the huge developments now are all gas, that's hwre a lot of cash is now.

I understand the fractional distillation part of it and the amount of products that come from crude oil I just didn't know if BP (and others) simply took the lighter stuff and refined it then sold the heavy stuff off in a distilled but separated form or if they took every level and had a section of the company for it.

I think the worrying thing is that this article shows just how little information the average man in the street is given about what is going on, state funded media demonises the rich oil company for making a huge profit, feeding the politics of envy and playing into the hands of the Labour government that want the lower classes to believe they will make everyone equal.

When the truth is a big business works its arse off and contributes Billions to the tax pot of this country, makes enough to buy the kids some sweets after work and carries on trying to work out how it can keep going.

For a sub 10% Profit to make a living wage from a small business you would need to be turning over a minimum of £250,000 per annum and probably more like £500,000. Scale that up and BP are not the evil greedy monster the Beeb want them to be but most people tonight will ignore that when they watch the News at 10 and will be taken in by a forthcoming Brown statement about sharing the wealth.

[GT03ROB]

jshell said:

Some of the huge developments now are all gas, that's hwre a lot of cash is now.

.....and even more so once GTL is really up & running. On the subject of risk I think Shell could well do without another Pearl!

[oyster]

limpsfield said:

thatone1967 said:

Bing o said:

He may have calmed down, but I fear that he and several other posters on this thread will forever be stupid.

Is there a need for that?

I think there is. The thicko quotient on this website is going through the bloody roof.

+1.

The Daily Mail style of reactionary posting is increasing.

[limpsfield]

oyster said:

limpsfield said:

thatone1967 said:

Bing o said:

He may have calmed down, but I fear that he and several other posters on this thread will forever be stupid.

Is there a need for that?

I think there is. The thicko quotient on this website is going through the bloody roof.

+1.

The Daily Mail style of reactionary posting is increasing.

And, as if by magic, the Wail headline:

BP doubles profits to £3.6bn... as motorists suffer record petrol prices

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/index.html

Although in fairness the comments on the article are stressing how much of the pump price is tax

[Bing o]

thatone1967 said:

Bing o said:

He may have calmed down, but I fear that he and several other posters on this thread will forever be stupid.

Is there a need for that?

Frankly, yes.

This get's discussed every year when BP/Shell announce their profits.

And the same old ignorant bks gets trotted out by idiots who should worry more about Strictly X Come Dancing in the Jungle, because that is all their mental faculties are capable of dealing with.

This is not a debate, the facts are very clear, and only one group of posters are correct.

You are not one of them.

[bob1179]

GT03ROB said:

cs02rm0 said:

bob1179 said:

After all, do you realise how much it costs to explore, extract, refine then deliver your fuel to your local petrol station?

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

Volume.........field developments cost 10's of billions, not billions. The costs of this business are huge & high risk. Not BP but check out Kashagan if you don't believe me, $140bn & still rising.

Edited by GT03ROB on Tuesday 27th April 09:28

I was at Eskene West for 18 months, very interesting project and absolutley vast.

[GT03ROB]

bob1179 said:

GT03ROB said:

cs02rm0 said:

bob1179 said:

After all, do you realise how much it costs to explore, extract, refine then deliver your fuel to your local petrol station?

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

Volume.........field developments cost 10's of billions, not billions. The costs of this business are huge & high risk. Not BP but check out Kashagan if you don't believe me, $140bn & still rising.

Edited by GT03ROB on Tuesday 27th April 09:28

I was at Eskene West for 18 months, very interesting project and absolutley vast.

Closest I got was a few weeks at Fort Shevchenko!

[chippy17]

if you take the price of a litre when oil was at its peak and calculate back to the price at repsent even taking into account the drop in the value of the £ there is about a 20% difference, ie petrol should be about £1 a litre, so can someone tell me where the 20% has gone? I know there is a bit of a tax increase...

Edited by chippy17 on Tuesday 27th April 13:30

[anonymous-user]

thatone1967 said:

This really does p1ss me off....
Combination of the Oil Co's and Winky, we are being royal scr3w3d!

chances are you own them via your pension fund.
chances are you pay less tax as a result of the 3 billion in corporate tax they just paid.
fuel is expensive because it has over 200% tax on it

duh

cs02rm0 said:

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
you dont pay 70% tax. 70% of the cost is tax. that means you pay 233% tax

Edited by fbrs on Tuesday 27th April 13:42

[bob1179]

GT03ROB said:

bob1179 said:

GT03ROB said:

cs02rm0 said:

bob1179 said:

After all, do you realise how much it costs to explore, extract, refine then deliver your fuel to your local petrol station?

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

Volume.........field developments cost 10's of billions, not billions. The costs of this business are huge & high risk. Not BP but check out Kashagan if you don't believe me, $140bn & still rising.

Edited by GT03ROB on Tuesday 27th April 09:28

I was at Eskene West for 18 months, very interesting project and absolutley vast.

Closest I got was a few weeks at Fort Shevchenko!

Ahhh, good old Aktau! I actually enjoyed my time in Kazakhstan, spent almost two years in total there. It was a bit of a learning experience...

[Chris_w666]

fbrs said:

thatone1967 said:

This really does p1ss me off....
Combination of the Oil Co's and Winky, we are being royal scr3w3d!

chances are you own them via your pension fund.
chances are you pay less tax as a result of the 3 billion in corporate tax they just paid.
fuel is expensive because it has over 200% tax on it

duh

cs02rm0 said:

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
you dont pay 70% tax. 70% of the cost is tax. that means you pay 233% tax

[GT03ROB]

bob1179 said:

GT03ROB said:

bob1179 said:

GT03ROB said:

cs02rm0 said:

bob1179 said:

After all, do you realise how much it costs to explore, extract, refine then deliver your fuel to your local petrol station?

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

Volume.........field developments cost 10's of billions, not billions. The costs of this business are huge & high risk. Not BP but check out Kashagan if you don't believe me, $140bn & still rising.

Edited by GT03ROB on Tuesday 27th April 09:28

I was at Eskene West for 18 months, very interesting project and absolutley vast.

Closest I got was a few weeks at Fort Shevchenko!

Ahhh, good old Aktau! I actually enjoyed my time in Kazakhstan, spent almost two years in total there. It was a bit of a learning experience...

Ah ha, you went to the Flamingo Bar (is that what it was called?) in Tengiz

Aktau...frikking dump in the middle of nowhere, makes you average inner city slum look like leafy Surrey. Flew from there to Almaty, was convinced the plane wasn't going to make it. Some clapped out old russian thing that looked like it was falling to bits. Pilots had definitely been drinking. Had to drink several large bottles of central Asian beer myself on the flight to calm my nerves!

[crmcatee]

Kazakstan..


Many many happy days there just after it opened up to the west. Almaty had nothing. Used to stay at a Sanitariam as there was no where else to stay. $50 a night.. Satellite phone on the balcony and a bottle of whisky to while away the hours..


Happy days...

[cs02rm0]

fbrs said:

cs02rm0 said:

Peanuts relatively, surely? How else could they turn a profit in the billions, again, on a product that we pay 70% tax on?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
you dont pay 70% tax. 70% of the cost is tax. that means you pay 233% tax

The second I read that back I knew some pedant would jump on it, and I didn't even nearly care enough to edit it!

[Nidjit]

I remember when fuel hit £1 a litre. There were blockades and panic-buying, etc. Now it's gone up by at least 20% but... nothing. No go-slow's or anything.

Where's the carry-on? What's changed?