Slog - Comments on Twilight of the Good Times

Comment by nathan

nathan — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:54:45 -0800

Good thing they didn't have to make much of a payout for Valdez!

Comment by monkey

monkey — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:59:49 -0800

Evil fuckers!

Comment by DanFan

DanFan — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:02:00 -0800

Ugh, isn't that something. Yet they can't do anything about rising gas prices, huh?

Comment by PC

PC — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:03:37 -0800

Hey that's the price of the light rail expansion (not counting finance, operations, etc.)--

Coincidence?

Comment by raindrop

raindrop — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:12:32 -0800

Excuse me? Exxon's tax bill is also in the billions. A company the size of Exxon needs large capital to invest in development. How come you didn't call them evil during the oil bust of the seventies? If you think making a profit is evil, please do us a favor and move to Havana.

Comment by It's Mark Mitchell

It's Mark Mitchell — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:14:07 -0800

I don't have a motor vehicle of any kind, but that makes me want to go out and buy a few gallons of gas just to make a contribution!

Comment by Bellevue Ave

Bellevue Ave — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:17:33 -0800

What was their profit margin? Only fools look at absolute numbers to form an opinion.

Comment by Nat

Nat — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:18:09 -0800

Hilariously, Exxon managed to have the best quarter of any company in US history while still failing to meet analyst expectations.

Comment by Toe Tag

Toe Tag — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:19:24 -0800

On revenues of $138B, a whopping 8% return.

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:20:46 -0800

@5,

Yes, well wouldn't it be nice if they actually put money into development, instead of crying to Congress about how they can't afford it without tax breaks and then lining their pockets with the proceeds of those tax breaks.

Comment by news reporting machine

news reporting machine — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:22:09 -0800

Thanks for the insightful, helpful commentary, Charles. Not.

Comment by Bellevue Ave

Bellevue Ave — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:24:47 -0800

@10, thats an indictment of our political process and rent seeking behavior.

Comment by Sodo Dan

Sodo Dan — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:27:07 -0800

So what? Exxon sells a lot of stuff and makes a bit of profit. Also from that article: "Revenue rose 40 percent, to $138.1 billion, from $98.4 billion"

ExxonMobile's makes a 10% net profit. And that's considered outrageous?

If that's the case, we should all stop listening to our iPods, now! Apple's profit margins are well above ExxonMobil's, at nearly 20%?

And where's the umbrage about Microsoft--where the net profits stand at 30% of sales, or triple that of ExxonMobile?

If you all want to weirdly tie profit margins to your consumption guilt, there are other better companies to take it out on. Seriously.

Comment by Ryan

Ryan — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:29:09 -0800

What should be noted by anyone reporting on this is that their profit margin is still very small. But because their revenues are so huge (partly because of the price of oil) their profits are huge, too.

Not that I feel good about defending Exxon or anything.

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:58:42 -0800

Profit margin on WHAT? After they pay record amounts to the CEO and top execs? After they deduct - yes, they do - LOBBYING expenses to drive America down the WRONG path?

And don't forget all the other "costs".

Comment by John Bailo

John Bailo — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:00:31 -0800

Does that mean public television stations can stop all those annoying fund drives for a while?

Comment by infrequent

infrequent — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:46:02 -0800

regardless of any explanation, their income rose while gas prices skyrocketed, contributing to our current economic woes. they are profiting more while we are paying more. they could choose to make the same, or even a little more. they have instead chosen to record the highest-ever increase.

Comment by Mahtli69

Mahtli69 — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:11:10 -0800

@13 - Except Apple and Microsoft's products can more easily be considered "luxury items". Exxon's products are much closer to what should be considered a "public utility".

Not to turn this into an argument about our lack of infrastructure, mass transit, and affordable housing in urban cores, but people buy gas because they have to.

Without gas, our society grinds to a halt. Without iPod's and X-Box's, I think we'd manage to survive somehow.

And, I agree with @17. Even with a fixed margin of 8%, 10%, or whatever it is, it's a windfall for Exxon when the price of oil more than doubles, as it has in the last few months.

Comment by CA

CA — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:19:13 -0800

Exxon Mobil is a publicly traded company. Millions of Americans own Exxon Mobil shares in their retirement portfolios. I'm glad they're making lots of money.(both the share holders and the ceo's)

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:53:43 -0800

Heck, I own Exxon Mobil thru my Vanguard Energy mutual fund ... and used to own them via direct shares (something like 600 as I recall, bought them after they got rid of racist board members, sold them later for a killing).

But you're still getting ripped off. And you're still subsidizing them more than wind, solar, or other energy companies.

Comment by GK

GK — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:10:00 -0800

That margin argument is idiotic.

WALMART operates on paper-thin margins.

VOLUME. Duh.