What is with fuel prices?Follow

Sure. How about this?

The past 5 years have increased oil company net profits to *slightly* higher then the average, but not by much (5.8% versus 5.5%). But, as the article mentions, this is not normal. Usually oil company profits are lower then the rest of the business world (because they're regulated more strictly).

Remember, that 5.5% base comparison is *all* businesses. Not just big successful ones. You'd be surprised at how high the net profit rates are for some of the companies you've probably heard of. I recall someone talking about Amazon.com having something like a 40% rate. Google is sitting at around 50%. Oil companies really aren't ******** people over at all.

That site is taking a mass average of "Oil and Natural Gas Comapnies" for their comparison. Exxon, the company I cited with the $32bil profit, has an 8.6% profit. A touch higher than the 5.5% average on the ConcoPhillips site (or 6.x% accordin to Exxon's public relations advertising) and certainly not lower -- which is what you asserted. I couldn't find an easy source for a percentage for ConcoPhillips or Shell, the other two names in the "record profit" stories. Strangely, ConcoPhillips didn't put their profits into the "why we oil companies are okay people" FAQ and, if it's on their site, it's either buried in a PDF or else I missed it.

Regardless of whether or not they're "******** you over", the "gas prices are actually too low when you factor inflation!" argument is a crock. Which was my inital point.

For anyone who wants to, here's the site I've been grabbing these numbers from. If you can get a stock ticker symbol, you can find pretty much any company you want and see how much profit they're grabing.

Heh. Looks like Amazon.com took a big hit this last year. But google's got a 23.9% net profit rate...

Microsoft has a 31.6%
Qualcomm has a 37.3%.
Motorola is at 12.4%
Sony is at 1.6% (sucks to be them!)
Pfizer is at 15.8%
Bayer is at 5.8%
Wells Fargo 19.0%
Citi is at 20.5%
B of A at 19.4


Of course. I'm sure I could find a bunch of underachieving stocks from major companies if I look for them. But so far, out of a list of "well known" companies, all but Bayer and Sony outperformed those "record profit" "evil" oil companies.


Feel free to look up your favorite companies as you wish. I think that of "name brand" companies, the oil companies are *not* really taking that much in profits.

I mentioned the 2005 percentage because... wait for it... I mentioned explicitly the 2005 year for profits.No, the argument being made was that, if fuel prices were somehow gimped from an inflationary standpoint, the oil companies wouldn't be turning record profits. They would be deep in the hole. Unless either (a) they were ludicrously overcharging in the 70's/80's or (b) due to technology or what-have-you, the cost of producing it has dropped, thus allowing the oil companies to profit nicely even if there hasn't been a dramatic jump in pricing from 1985 to 1999 or whatever.

At least, that was my argument when I mentioned Exxon's profits in conjunction with the "inflation" argument. Hell, I'll even admit that no one had mentioned inflation in this particular thread but I've heard the argument all too many times before.
Same with pharmacuticals! And we all know how beloved finance and pharmacutical companies are...

Edit: "The would be deep in the whole"? WTF?

Edited, Mon Mar 27 22:58:46 2006 by Jophiel

That backs up my thoughts on the rate of demand - the percentage net has not changed substantially, but record profits are being recorded every quarter. With no serious change in the net percentage fuel companies would have to be doing a lot more business than usual.

So either demand is spiking, or they lie.

You've certainly nailed that one on the head. Congratulations on understanding the post. I thought it would sail right over your head.

Yeah, thanks for clearing that up. By the way, the quote in your sig is incomplete, leading to stupid ***-ed comments like the above. For reference, it goes as follows:

All clear now?

Thanks, I think I will.

EDIT: Why does Bob hate prepositions?

Edited, Tue Mar 28 12:46:11 2006 by MoebiusLord

well, heres the skinny.

the price you pay at the pump is not associated with the price of a barrow of oil. it is associated with what the ANTICIPATED price of that barrow of oil was expected to cost.

futures. you sell lots of oil you are GOING to aquire based on what you EXPECT to pay for them.

war in the middle east. Iraq peoduction down. xxx percent of our oil comes from Iraq requiring purchasing that oil else where.....mabe....at higher costs.

no actual shortage could be present, but oil companies bought oil futures based on what they EXPECTED to happen. price shoots through the roof because oil companies immediatly pass that additional cost on to the distributors, who immediatly pass it on to.....you.

summer. more americans driving. more oil EXPECTED to be used. weather we run short or not, they buy futures of oil to secure the amount of product at higher than normal costs which is immediatly passed on to you......then....if no shortage actually occures, they sell those futures to other buyers....for a profit.

you pay more., they make more, every one is happy.

prices are GOING to go up becuse oil companies EXPECT a higher demand, pass that increased cost down the line to secure the product they EXPECT to use, then sell what they dont use to someone else. like japan for instance.

all the oil we pump out of alaska is sold to japan. why? becuase they pay more for it than americans do. we buy cheap in the middle east, sell high to japan, and bully our way into the governments of oil producing countries to make sure no one else gets in on the action.....hence, the whole Russia / afganistan thing where we basically supported the taliban to make sure the ruskies dont hone in on our action.

hence why we attack Iraq when the people who attacked us came from Saudi Arabia and Afganistan. oil futures. we controll them now.

bush, cheney, rice all are from big oil.

you are paying more at the pumps because they EXPECT to make mo money from your stupid ******

soo, lets open up more land to oil in alaska, and off the florida coast so we can sell more to japan, and still buy cheap from Iraq, after all , they OWE us now.

get the picture yet? the moral majority working for you.

If you park closer to the pump, you can put the hose right into the car. No need to fill a wheelbarrow and carry it over.

You say that like its a bad thing. Making fun of the rest of his ideas grows tiring, given the veritable avalanche of sh;t he spews, so we are left with ridicule and mockery to entertain ourselves.

It's ok. I was making fun of his spelling, too.

http://www.bloomberg.com/energy/

Oil is confusing. I used to check that once in a while to make myself feel better, on days it showed a change in the red I was happy, especially when gas was at $3+ a gallon. Honestly, cost per barrel vs. cost at the pump doesn't seem any different to me. When gas was at $3 a gallon, the barrel prices topped 70, plus the whole Katrina crap went down so ya had gas stations just raising prices in anticipation of being spanked. Now price per barrel is 66'ish, and price at the pumps in northern Jersey are like 2.39 or so. Seems sorta right? Who the hell knows. Oil math is broken.

I dunno, I followed that real close for a few months until I realized that even if I figured out some big catastrophe was coming, I couldn't do jack **** about it, so just prepare a little and hope for the best :O Saves you a heart attack or two.

While I am not an english master, I do understand capital letters and periods. I think you should check them out sometime. They tend to be quite handy.