BP looking like a bad bet suddenly
BP looking like a bad bet suddenly
Author
Discussion

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
Amazing how quickly things can go wrong and as much as it pains me to say it I really do think this could be a killer blow for BP either triggering a distressed take-over or worse. I really don't think America will allow BP to get away with this like Exxon did in Alaska.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8650620....

For those of you that can, have a look at your pension share distributions...

Tony*T3

20,911 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
Olf said:
Amazing how quickly things can go wrong and as much as it pains me to say it I really do think this could be a killer blow for BP either triggering a distressed take-over or worse. I really don't think America will allow BP to get away with this like Exxon did in Alaska.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8650620....

For those of you that can, have a look at your pension share distributions...
Insurance would cover it surely, therefore its LLoyds that gets a pasteing?

SmoothRB

1,700 posts

202 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
Should probably look at liabilities in this case.

They have some big direct costs such as drilling the relief well, but how does insurance work in this situation?

The blow-out may not even have been their fault as such.

How much does it hurt shareholder value?

SmoothRB

1,700 posts

202 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
Tony*T3 said:
Olf said:
Amazing how quickly things can go wrong and as much as it pains me to say it I really do think this could be a killer blow for BP either triggering a distressed take-over or worse. I really don't think America will allow BP to get away with this like Exxon did in Alaska.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8650620....

For those of you that can, have a look at your pension share distributions...
Insurance would cover it surely, therefore its LLoyds that gets a pasteing?
You would think so.

But what about if they are dragged through federal courts later and hit with a punative fine?

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
The fine for texas city ended up at 600 million if I remember correctly and the original punitive damages for on Exxon Valdez was 2.5 billion.

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
SmoothRB said:
Should probably look at liabilities in this case.

They have some big direct costs such as drilling the relief well, but how does insurance work in this situation?

The blow-out may not even have been their fault as such.

How much does it hurt shareholder value?
It's reputational damage you have to consider as well. BP have big commitments in the Gulf of Mexico. This on top of Texas city looks frankly careless whatever the reasons. What are the chances the US Government say, well thanks but no thanks?

Edited by Olf on Thursday 29th April 12:48

leon_t

296 posts

234 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Would have thought it all depends on the terms of the contract, who was responsible for maintenance of the rig, function testing of the safety devices etc.


SmoothRB

1,700 posts

202 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
It could or could not be.

Depends what happened.

Don't forget there are 11 dead and their bodies will probably never be found. That is the sad thing.

With the rig on the sea bed and 11 witnesses dead it is possible any inquest will be inconclusive.

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Well simply put - at the end of the day whose oil is that heading towards the coast? It's not Transocean's. BP will have to foot the bill for this, one way or the other.

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
leon_t said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Would have thought it all depends on the terms of the contract, who was responsible for maintenance of the rig, function testing of the safety devices etc.
That's all academic now in the face of 210,000 gallons a day gushing into the gulf with no quick way to switch it off.

SmoothRB

1,700 posts

202 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
Looks like BP are trying to blame Transocean.

"The head of BP Group told CNN's Brian Todd in an exclusive interview Wednesday that the accident could have been prevented, and he focused blame on rig owner Transocean.
CEO Tony Hayward said that Transocean's blowout preventer failed to operate before the explosion."

Olf

Original Poster:

11,978 posts

248 months

Thursday 29th April 2010
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
That's, err, optimistic.


hornetrider

63,161 posts

235 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
I'm very surprised there's not more discussion on this - it is looking like becoming the world's largest ever oil catastrophe. Or have I missed another thread?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/76533...

Fittster

20,120 posts

243 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
BP do seem to be either an unlucky firm or one who don't focus on safety.

Political Pain

983 posts

198 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
Because one half decent hurricane will do the job of clearing up the mess.

It is light crude, the gulf will shrug it off easily.

The hurricane will just deposit oily rain all over the southern states causing a few accidents and dirty cars.

Natural forces will deal with this.

I expect that somewhere on the internet there is site with hurricane forecasts.


jshell

12,106 posts

235 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
Fittster said:
BP do seem to be either an unlucky firm or one who don't focus on safety.
Depends on the environment, the oil industry safety standards in the Gulf of Mexico are fairly lax in comparison to European standards. Having worked extensively with both, I'm always surprised at what the GoM guys see as acceptable.

cannondale

210 posts

222 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
Should there not be some sort of worst case scenario contingency plan.

For example if the rig sinks causing the well to become untapped or breached surely there should be a plan in place to stem the flow or divert the oil into containers on the surface?

We all know how dangerous the flow of uncontrolled oil can be.

Fittster

20,120 posts

243 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
jshell said:
Fittster said:
BP do seem to be either an unlucky firm or one who don't focus on safety.
Depends on the environment, the oil industry safety standards in the Gulf of Mexico are fairly lax in comparison to European standards. Having worked extensively with both, I'm always surprised at what the GoM guys see as acceptable.
Without being an expert on the oil industry I was think more generally. Last oil indusry issue I can think of was BP's Texas plant going bang.

An odd problem is to be expected but when the same firm is at the centre of the issues you start to wonder.

jshell

12,106 posts

235 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
cannondale said:
Should there not be some sort of worst case scenario contingency plan.

For example if the rig sinks causing the well to become untapped or breached surely there should be a plan in place to stem the flow or divert the oil into containers on the surface?

We all know how dangerous the flow of uncontrolled oil can be.
There is, it's the BOP - blow out preventer. For some reason it hasn't operated properly this time!

The BOP is an utterly crucial piece of kit.

cannondale

210 posts

222 months

Friday 30th April 2010
quotequote all
jshell said:
cannondale said:
Should there not be some sort of worst case scenario contingency plan.

For example if the rig sinks causing the well to become untapped or breached surely there should be a plan in place to stem the flow or divert the oil into containers on the surface?

We all know how dangerous the flow of uncontrolled oil can be.
There is, it's the BOP - blow out preventer. For some reason it hasn't operated properly this time!

The BOP is an utterly crucial piece of kit.
Should there not be a plan for when this happens as well though? It seems ridiculous that this massive disaster could happen at another drilling site and the 'what if' question hasn't been thought out thoroughly enough.