Jump to content

Exxon, Chevron earnings soar on record oil prices


july425
 Share

Recommended Posts

Exxon, Chevron earnings soar on record oil prices

Fri Feb 1, 2008 10:02am EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp, the world's largest non-government-controlled oil company, on Friday posted the highest-ever quarterly and yearly profits by a U.S. company, propelled by record oil prices.

Chevron, the second-largest U.S. oil company, said its fourth-quarter earnings rose 30 percent as the soaring crude prices outweighed relatively weak refining profits.

Exxon's net income in the quarter rose nearly 14 percent to $11.66 billion, or $2.13 a share, from $10.25 billion, or $1.76 a share, in 2006. Analysts, on average, were expecting earnings of $1.98 per share.

"They performed across the board, upstream, downstream, U.S. and foreign," said James Halloran, who helps manage about $35 billion at National City Private Client Group.

Revenue in the quarter rose to $116.64 billion from $90.03 billion in 2006.

The company's quarterly result as well as its full-year earnings of $40.61 billion set new records for U.S. profits, beating out previous marks also set by Exxon.

Oil prices averaged more than $90 a barrel during the quarter and nearly hit $100 due to tight supplies, geopolitical risks and the weak dollar. They averaged just over $60 a barrel in the same period a year earlier.

Full article: http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNew...WEN373020080201

Link to comment
Share on other sites

july425 (2/1/2008)
Exxon, Chevron earnings soar on record oil prices

Meanwhile, jobs are being lost and salaries are declining for workers:

February 1, 2008

U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Sheds 17,000 Jobs

By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM

The economy lost 17,000 jobs in January, the Labor Department reported on Friday, the first decline in four years and the most striking evidence yet that the United States may be slipping into a recession.

Jobs disappeared across a broad spectrum of professions, with the steepest losses coming in the manufacturing, construction and goods-producing industries.

The unemployment rate, after jumping to 5 percent in December, fell back slightly, to 4.9 percent.

This is the clearest signal yet that the job market is either in or teetering on a recession, said Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington.

With the collapse of the housing market, trouble on Wall Street and the continuing fallout of the subprime mortgage crisis, many economists have pointed to the continued growth in the labor market as the final holdout in a sluggish economy.

But the employment report puts the job market in a startlingly different light. Economists had predicted a substantial gain in January payrolls, and early signs pointed to a relatively strong report. Instead, the government reported the first decline in jobs since August 2003.

There s a race going on between an economy that s gathering weakness and aggressive monetary and fiscal policy, said Ethan Harris, chief United States economist at Lehman Brothers. Whether we have a recession in the U.S. or not depends on which of these two forces moves quicker.

Mr. Harris noted that the employment data can be quite volatile from month to month. The last reported monthly decline, in August 2007, was later revised up to a 74,000 gain.

Just last month, the December report showed an anemic 18,000 rise in payrolls, prompting a significant downturn in the stock market. On Friday, the Labor Department raised that estimate to a gain of 82,000 jobs.

People were saying the recession started in December, Mr. Harris said. Look, it didn t. December was fine.

Still, there were several signs of weakness in the employment report. Payrolls at private companies increased by a mere 1,000 jobs. Businesses are reducing the number of hours that their employees work.

And workers salaries have effectively fallen in the last 12 months. The average hourly wage for rank-and-file workers about 80 percent of the total work force rose 3.7 percent since last January, below the pace of inflation.

Average hourly earnings ticked up 0.2 percent last month, slowing from a 0.4 percent rise in December.

The government also sharply lowered its estimates for employment in 2007 as a whole. In November, for example, the government had said 115,000 jobs were created. That number was reduced to 60,000 in the latest report.

The jobs report was accompanied on Friday by a batch of mixed economic data. Manufacturers appeared to recover from a sudden drop in business in December, as a closely watched indicator a survey by the Institute for Supply Management ticked up on a surge in foreign and domestic demand.

The I.S.M. index had fallen to 47.7 in December, setting off concern on Wall Street, but that figure was revised up to 48.4. The index was at 50.7 for January, suggesting that December s downturn was a momentary blip.

Despite the waves of bad economic news, American consumers were more confident about the state of the economy in January, according to a survey by the University of Michigan and Reuters. Consumer confidence rose to a reading of 78.4 from 75.5 in December.

Finally, the Commerce Department reported that spending on construction projects fell 1.1 percent in December. The decline was mostly due to the problems in the housing markets, as home builders cut back on groundbreakings in response to lagging sales. Nonresidential construction was flat for the month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramen (2/1/2008)
july425 (2/1/2008)
Exxon, Chevron earnings soar on record oil prices

Meanwhile, jobs are being lost and salaries are declining for workers:

February 1, 2008

U.S. Economy Unexpectedly Sheds 17,000 Jobs

By MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM

The economy lost 17,000 jobs in January, the Labor Department reported on Friday, the first decline in four years and the most striking evidence yet that the United States may be slipping into a recession.

Jobs disappeared across a broad spectrum of professions, with the steepest losses coming in the manufacturing, construction and goods-producing industries.

The unemployment rate, after jumping to 5 percent in December, fell back slightly, to 4.9 percent.

This is the clearest signal yet that the job market is either in or teetering on a recession, said Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington.

With the collapse of the housing market, trouble on Wall Street and the continuing fallout of the subprime mortgage crisis, many economists have pointed to the continued growth in the labor market as the final holdout in a sluggish economy.

But the employment report puts the job market in a startlingly different light. Economists had predicted a substantial gain in January payrolls, and early signs pointed to a relatively strong report. Instead, the government reported the first decline in jobs since August 2003.

There s a race going on between an economy that s gathering weakness and aggressive monetary and fiscal policy, said Ethan Harris, chief United States economist at Lehman Brothers. Whether we have a recession in the U.S. or not depends on which of these two forces moves quicker.

Mr. Harris noted that the employment data can be quite volatile from month to month. The last reported monthly decline, in August 2007, was later revised up to a 74,000 gain.

Just last month, the December report showed an anemic 18,000 rise in payrolls, prompting a significant downturn in the stock market. On Friday, the Labor Department raised that estimate to a gain of 82,000 jobs.

People were saying the recession started in December, Mr. Harris said. Look, it didn t. December was fine.

Still, there were several signs of weakness in the employment report. Payrolls at private companies increased by a mere 1,000 jobs. Businesses are reducing the number of hours that their employees work.

And workers salaries have effectively fallen in the last 12 months. The average hourly wage for rank-and-file workers about 80 percent of the total work force rose 3.7 percent since last January, below the pace of inflation.

Average hourly earnings ticked up 0.2 percent last month, slowing from a 0.4 percent rise in December.

The government also sharply lowered its estimates for employment in 2007 as a whole. In November, for example, the government had said 115,000 jobs were created. That number was reduced to 60,000 in the latest report.

The jobs report was accompanied on Friday by a batch of mixed economic data. Manufacturers appeared to recover from a sudden drop in business in December, as a closely watched indicator a survey by the Institute for Supply Management ticked up on a surge in foreign and domestic demand.

The I.S.M. index had fallen to 47.7 in December, setting off concern on Wall Street, but that figure was revised up to 48.4. The index was at 50.7 for January, suggesting that December s downturn was a momentary blip.

Despite the waves of bad economic news, American consumers were more confident about the state of the economy in January, according to a survey by the University of Michigan and Reuters. Consumer confidence rose to a reading of 78.4 from 75.5 in December.

Finally, the Commerce Department reported that spending on construction projects fell 1.1 percent in December. The decline was mostly due to the problems in the housing markets, as home builders cut back on groundbreakings in response to lagging sales. Nonresidential construction was flat for the month.

What the **** does that have to do with what he posted?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp, the world's largest non-government-controlled oil company, on Friday posted the highest-ever quarterly and yearly profits by a U.S. company, propelled by record oil prices.

Does this mean that alot of the the other gas companies are run by the government and making huge profits as well. If some are govt run then the people are getting taken advantage of. The govt makes profits off the gas and then charges the people large amounts on this marked up gas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

goatehall (2/1/2008)
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp, the world's largest non-government-controlled oil company, on Friday posted the highest-ever quarterly and yearly profits by a U.S. company, propelled by record oil prices.

Does this mean that alot of the the other gas companies are run by the government and making huge profits as well. If some are govt run then the people are getting taken advantage of. The govt makes profits off the gas and then charges the people large amounts on this marked up gas.

There are not any government-owned oil companies in America, unless you want to gripe about subsidies as I often do.

However MOST of the oil companies in the world are owned by foreign governmenrts, most of them despotic.

Want to know why oil is so expensive? THAT is why!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

octoslash (2/1/2008)
Yes!

Profits = good for the ol' portfolio!:D

(Oh...sorry. I meant to say "THOSE BASTERDS!" :angry:.)

pssshhh. We are on the brink of an economic collapse. A major market correction is very near and the U.S. dollar is be devalued at an alarming rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)
Yes!

Profits = good for the ol' portfolio!:D

(Oh...sorry. I meant to say "THOSE BASTERDS!" :angry:.)

Profits are fine. Even record profits are great.

But record profits on the back of $15 billion in subsidies and tax benefits is obscene.

Not to worry Neuman.

President Clinton's already pledged to "take those profits" from the oil companys.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)

Not to worry Neuman.

President Clinton's already pledged to "take those profits" from the oil companys.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!

I don't want any wealth redistribution. Profits are the benefit of doing business, and should be kept by those doing business.

I just want the oil companies to pay taxes at the same rate as every other corporation, especially at the same rate as those that compete with them. In a time when our addiction to oil is costing us both lives and billions of dollars, our government is actively ensuring that no competition can come on the market on equal footing.

Doesn't stop me from having a huge energy portfolio, though. Only safe place to put money right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fanboy3000 (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
Profits are fine. Even record profits are great.

But record profits on the back of $15 billion in subsidies and tax benefits is obscene.

Quit being so effin scarce on the boards! We need your sanity.

Been pretty busy for me lately. It's hard to stay focused on the 'net when there's SO MUCH BEER around.

[/rant]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)

Not to worry Neuman.

President Clinton's already pledged to "take those profits" from the oil companys.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!

I don't want any wealth redistribution. Profits are the benefit of doing business, and should be kept by those doing business.

I just want the oil companies to pay taxes at the same rate as every other corporation, especially at the same rate as those that compete with them. In a time when our addiction to oil is costing us both lives and billions of dollars, our government is actively ensuring that no competition can come on the market on equal footing.

Doesn't stop me from having a huge energy portfolio, though. Only safe place to put money right now.

Doesn't matter though.

The more the companies have to fork over in taxes, the more you and I pay for the product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)

Not to worry Neuman.

President Clinton's already pledged to "take those profits" from the oil companys.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!

I don't want any wealth redistribution. Profits are the benefit of doing business, and should be kept by those doing business.

I just want the oil companies to pay taxes at the same rate as every other corporation, especially at the same rate as those that compete with them. In a time when our addiction to oil is costing us both lives and billions of dollars, our government is actively ensuring that no competition can come on the market on equal footing.

Doesn't stop me from having a huge energy portfolio, though. Only safe place to put money right now.

Doesn't matter though.

The more the companies have to fork over in taxes, the more you and I pay for the product.

I actually see that as a good thing.

All the subsidies and tax breaks do is lower the percieved price of fossil fuel. We still pay the higherer cost, only the government steals from us to give kickbacks to the oil companies to keep the consumer-cost lower at the pump.

If the entire cost of the fuel was paid for at the pump, you'd see alternatives in a much more competetive light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ethanga62890 (2/1/2008)
What the **** does that have to do with what he posted?

It shows how lopsided the economy is right now that energy companies (who receive taxpayer subsidies) are doing better than ever while workers and average Americans are slipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)
alfred e. neuman (2/1/2008)
octoslash (2/1/2008)

Not to worry Neuman.

President Clinton's already pledged to "take those profits" from the oil companys.

HELP IS ON THE WAY!!

I don't want any wealth redistribution. Profits are the benefit of doing business, and should be kept by those doing business.

I just want the oil companies to pay taxes at the same rate as every other corporation, especially at the same rate as those that compete with them. In a time when our addiction to oil is costing us both lives and billions of dollars, our government is actively ensuring that no competition can come on the market on equal footing.

Doesn't stop me from having a huge energy portfolio, though. Only safe place to put money right now.

Doesn't matter though.

The more the companies have to fork over in taxes, the more you and I pay for the product.

I actually see that as a good thing.

All the subsidies and tax breaks do is lower the percieved price of fossil fuel. We still pay the higherer cost, only the government steals from us to give kickbacks to the oil companies to keep the consumer-cost lower at the pump.

If the entire cost of the fuel was paid for at the pump, you'd see alternatives in a much more competetive light.

Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ramen (2/1/2008)
Ethanga62890 (2/1/2008)
What the **** does that have to do with what he posted?

It shows how lopsided the economy is right now that energy companies (who receive taxpayer subsidies) are doing better than ever while workers and average Americans are slipping.

While i do agree with that, i missed the point as to why you posted that article to prove it, anyone with a clue pretty much knows this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...