White House Taking Advantage Of BP

[JimofPennsylvan]

The White House is totally off base expecting BP to pay the full salary losses of layed off oil industry workers in the Gulf of Mexico because of the White House's six months moratorium on deep water oil well drilling in the Gulf. Let's call a spade a spade here the White House is trying to lift their reputation, trying to pander for popular support, in this effort here to get BP to pay the salaries of these layed-off oil industry workers.



The need for a moratorium here is not BP's fault it is the Federal Government's fault. The federal governemt should have anticipated blow-out preventers on deep water wells failing and they should have had a back-up system authorized by the regulations to protect the country from an economic catastrophe. The White House needs to get their "A" game up and running on getting this off-shore oil and gas well drilling indusrty back in business. Why does the moratorium have to be six months? Any person with claims of good judgment knows that ultimate solution to preventing such an out of control oil well in the future is that the blow out preventers on these wells will have to be redesigned so that the pipe potruding from the top of the preventer doesn't have to be cut if there is a leak in the pipe that connects from the preventer to the oil rig but rather this protruding pipe has a mechanical interface with the oil rig piping which can be mechanically separated and new no leak piping from the oil rig can be mechanically reattached to the preventer; and, the preventer has to be redesigned so as to be able to withstand much higher pressures than current specification so if a blow out occurrs and the preventer shearing mechanism fails feed hoses can be attached to the preventer and well mud can be pumped from a surface ship at high pressure to stop oil and natural gas flowing out the well. Common sense indicates that it will be longer than six months before such new preventers are ready to be put into service and so the only responsible course for the government is to require deep-water oil and gas drillers to drill two relief wells at the same time as they drill a deep water well so if there is an uncontrolled leak on a well it can be plugged in a timely manner using the relief well. Further, in light of the true environmental catastrophe of a deep water well leak like the deep water horizon's, in the future even with new blow-out preventers drillers by government regulation should always be required to drill at least one relief well when drilling a deep water well. The answer for the oil industry worker lay-off issue is for the White House to dramatically shorten the time-period of this moratorium and just require for all deep water wells, two relief wells have to be drilled at the same time as the original well is being drilled!

 

[Dixie]

The White House is totally off base expecting BP to pay the full salary losses of layed off oil industry workers in the Gulf of Mexico because of the White House's six months moratorium on deep water oil well drilling in the Gulf. Let's call a spade a spade here the White House is trying to lift their reputation, trying to pander for popular support, in this effort here to get BP to pay the salaries of these layed-off oil industry workers.

The need for a moratorium here is not BP's fault it is the Federal Government's fault. The federal governemt should have anticipated blow-out preventers on deep water wells failing and they should have had a back-up system authorized by the regulations to protect the country from an economic catastrophe. The White House needs to get their "A" game up and running on getting this off-shore oil and gas well drilling indusrty back in business. Why does the moratorium have to be six months? Any person with claims of good judgment knows that ultimate solution to preventing such an out of control oil well in the future is that the blow out preventers on these wells will have to be redesigned so that the pipe potruding from the top of the preventer doesn't have to be cut if there is a leak in the pipe that connects from the preventer to the oil rig but rather this protruding pipe has a mechanical interface with the oil rig piping which can be mechanically separated and new no leak piping from the oil rig can be mechanically reattached to the preventer; and, the preventer has to be redesigned so as to be able to withstand much higher pressures than current specification so if a blow out occurrs and the preventer shearing mechanism fails feed hoses can be attached to the preventer and well mud can be pumped from a surface ship at high pressure to stop oil and natural gas flowing out the well. Common sense indicates that it will be longer than six months before such new preventers are ready to be put into service and so the only responsible course for the government is to require deep-water oil and gas drillers to drill two relief wells at the same time as they drill a deep water well so if there is an uncontrolled leak on a well it can be plugged in a timely manner using the relief well. Further, in light of the true environmental catastrophe of a deep water well leak like the deep water horizon's, in the future even with new blow-out preventers drillers by government regulation should always be required to drill at least one relief well when drilling a deep water well. The answer for the oil industry worker lay-off issue is for the White House to dramatically shorten the time-period of this moratorium and just require for all deep water wells, two relief wells have to be drilled at the same time as the original well is being drilled!

I think you draw some valid conclusions here. This reminds me a bit of the payouts to families of 9/11 victims. I suppose I'll be trounced roundly for saying this, but why did those families deserve all that money because a loved one died? People die everyday, including our military men and women. Not even their survivors get anything even remotely close to what those of 9/11 did. It's always been my opinion that we did a lot of grandstanding in the aftermath of 9/11. The public was mostly pleased and I don't recall anybody questioning the validity of those payouts.

So, Obama does his version with the Gulf situation. I noticed earlier that he's now going to meet with the families of the victims of that oil rig explosion. Eh? Just why? We both know why...he's under a lot of pressure to appear more personally involved in this crisis, so he's caving. It's infuriating. I read a tongue-in-cheek piece earlier today that suggested a monarchy for the U.S. The thinking behind the proposal was that the head of our government really needs to be focusing on more serious issues and a king and queen could do all of the photo ops and such, freeing him to do so. Ha! Dang article made to much sense.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The ban is not necessary, it is political.

Experts Disavow Salazar’s Drilling Moratorium - Washington Wire - WSJ

 

[Political Junky]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AAa0gd7ClM]YouTube - BP Spills Coffee[/ame]

 

[my2¢]

I wish to see BP act responsibly in cleaning up the oil. That being said I fail to see the reasoning for them paying laid off oil industry workers if at the same time they're paying for all the additional workers needed to clean up their mess.

 

[Care4all]

pajesus!

BP IS RESPONSIBLE for both...

THEY CHOSE their methods, they were the ones negligent, in their choices.
do you blame the cop for not being able to stop a murder, or do you blame the murderer for murdering?

Bp and who they hired, made this catastrophe happen....THEY KNEW THEIR RISKS, and they took them, with little regard to the citizens or environment.

 

[WillowTree]

good news folks, obie wan and the left wing media have so demonized BP that their stocks are approaching worthless, anyone having pension money in BP both Americans and British can kiss it good bye and furthur,, Americans can look forward to picking up the tab for this mess,, nice going gang,, I don't know how much more of a clusterfuck you guys want with all this demonizing,, but you've really cut off your noses to spite your faces this time round.

 

[Political Junky]

good news folks, obie wan and the left wing media have so demonized BP that their stocks are approaching worthless, anyone having pension money in BP both Americans and British can kiss it good bye and furthur,, Americans can look forward to picking up the tab for this mess,, nice going gang,, I don't know how much more of a clusterfuck you guys want with all this demonizing,, but you've really cut off your noses to spite your faces this time round.

Oh, those poor poor corporations, my heart bleeds for them.

 

[Valerie]

"It is in everyone's interests that BP continues to be a financially strong and stable company," Cameron said, according to his office.

Osborne said the British government "understand(s) the concerns of the U.S. administration," but added "the prime minister is also clear that we need constructive solutions and that we remember the economic value BP brings to people in Britain and America."

Svanberg insisted that the company was doing all it could to stop the spill.

"We have done everything we can to try to fill the well and we have said we would do everything expected from us in cleaning up the beach, taking care of all the claims and learn from this incident and make deep sea drilling an even safer place," Svanberg told broadcaster ITN after the Treasury meeting.

Thursday's share turmoil came after U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said he would ask BP to compensate energy companies if they have to lay off workers or suffer economically because of a six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling imposed by the Obama administration following Deepwater rig explosion.

The chief executive of Britain's National Association of Pension Funds said Friday that investors might be receptive to a suspension of the dividend to protect the company's long-term future. Joanne Segars told the BBC that BP's "long-term" future was far more important.
BP shares rebound despite dividend suspension talk - Yahoo! Finance

Check out the MASSIVE selling this week (the column with the bold is the volume):

Date Open High Low Close Volume Adj Close*
Jun 10, 2010 32.16 33.04 30.89 32.78 222,267,400 32.78
Jun 9, 2010 33.96 34.45 29.00 29.20 240,373,900 29.20
Jun 8, 2010 35.83 36.12 34.15 34.68 95,404,800 34.68
Jun 7, 2010 38.13 38.15 36.65 36.76 44,289,000 36.76
Jun 4, 2010 38.50 38.99 37.06 37.16 62,577,400 37.16
Jun 3, 2010 38.92 39.41 37.12 39.27 90,373,200 39.27
Jun 2, 2010 37.27 38.17 36.47 37.66 90,105,900 37.66
Jun 1, 2010 37.34 38.53 36.20 36.52 120,257,000 36.52
May 28, 2010 43.64 43.84 42.47 42.95 31,854,800 42.95
May 27, 2010 45.20 45.57 44.35 45.38 55,880,000 45.38
May 26, 2010 42.35 43.27 42.12 42.41 33,144,000 42.41
May 25, 2010 40.61 42.60 40.61 42.56 33,271,200 42.56
May 24, 2010 42.49 43.04 41.86 41.86 32,302,300 41.86
May 21, 2010 43.75 44.46 43.31 43.86 28,860,600 43.86
May 20, 2010 45.17 45.70 43.96 44.58 37,662,200 44.58
May 19, 2010 45.82 46.12 45.00 45.27 28,174,100 45.27
May 18, 2010 46.77 46.78 45.27 45.38 20,338,300 45.38
May 17, 2010 47.20 47.56 45.41 46.57 27,485,900 46.57
May 14, 2010 47.17 47.24 46.00 46.87 34,753,500 46.87
May 13, 2010 48.18 49.00 47.93 48.10 19,204,200 48.10
May 12, 2010 48.76 49.05 47.86 48.50 23,295,500 48.50
May 11, 2010 48.12 49.51 48.05 48.74 26,604,300 48.74
May 10, 2010 49.12 49.89 48.16 48.75 31,336,500 48.75
May 7, 2010 49.75 50.32 48.00 49.06 24,092,300 49.06
May 6, 2010 51.38 51.69 48.01 50.33 37,343,500 50.33
May 5, 2010 51.00 52.00 50.07 50.99 42,225,300 50.99
May 5, 2010 $ 0.84 Dividend
May 4, 2010 50.51 51.32 48.44 51.20 55,665,100 50.36
May 3, 2010 49.36 51.29 47.35 50.19 156,810,500 49.37
Apr 30, 2010 52.43 53.38 51.36 52.15 61,635,600 51.29
Apr 29, 2010 56.39 56.49 51.88 52.56 85,065,100 51.70
Apr 28, 2010 57.21 57.69 56.64 57.34 9,568,300 56.40
Apr 27, 2010 56.77 57.72 56.21 56.33 18,287,000 55.41
Apr 26, 2010 59.77 59.87 57.90 57.91 13,117,800 56.96
Apr 23, 2010 58.85 59.91 58.75 59.88 5,333,900 58.90
Apr 22, 2010 59.14 59.55 58.86 59.55 5,332,600 58.57
Apr 21, 2010 60.19 60.57 59.84 60.09 4,079,500 59.10
Apr 20, 2010 60.45 60.70 60.29 60.48 3,790,200 59.49
Apr 19, 2010 58.86 59.52 58.81 59.48 5,524,800 58.50
Apr 16, 2010 60.41 60.50 59.33 59.88 6,216,500 58.90
Apr 15, 2010 60.56 60.98 60.48 60.57 5,288,500 59.58
Apr 14, 2010 59.99 60.10 59.67 60.00 5,968,200 59.02
Apr 13, 2010 59.55 59.60 58.71 59.29 3,691,100 58.32
Apr 12, 2010 59.27 59.62 59.21 59.34 3,896,600 58.37
Apr 9, 2010 59.12 59.50 59.03 59.46 6,550,500 58.48
Apr 8, 2010 58.26 59.04 58.08 58.97 4,117,500 58.00
Apr 7, 2010 58.98 59.16 58.59 58.78 4,961,800 57.82
Apr 6, 2010 58.53 59.42 58.41 59.36 5,790,300 58.39
Apr 5, 2010 58.27 58.67 58.00 58.51 3,636,100 57.55
Apr 1, 2010 57.45 58.07 57.43 57.74 6,979,700 56.79
Mar 31, 2010 56.69 57.28 56.61 57.07 6,330,300 56.13


BP: Historical Prices for BP p.l.c. Common Stock - Yahoo! Finance

 

[Valerie]

The White House on Thursday released a letter inviting Svanberg and "any appropriate officials from BP" to meet next week with senior administration officials.

Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, who leads the U.S. government response to the crisis, said Obama would join part of that meeting. Obama has yet to meet with any BP official since the explosion.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs did not rule out the possibility of a meeting next week between Obama and Hayward, who is to testify next Thursday at a House Energy subcommittee hearing into the spill.

Meanwhile, BP announced a $25 million grant to Florida to support the state's contingency plan to deal with a leak from a BP well, and the same amount to help the state's tourist industry.

BP shares rebound despite dividend suspension talk - Yahoo! Finance

 

[Valerie]

BP's shares plunged this week and investors scooped up insurance to protect against the possibility the company will default on its debt.

For now, though, experts who sort out bankrupt companies say there is little likelihood that financially strong BP will need to seek protection from creditors.

"At this moment, the likelihood of BP filing for bankruptcy is probably remote because it has access to billions of dollars in credit, solid cash flow and a healthy balance sheet," said Brad Sandler, a bankruptcy attorney with Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones in Wilmington, Delaware.

Jon Pack, a BP spokesman in Houston, said the company had not been in discussion with anyone regarding bankruptcy.

The big question: How long will it be before BP finally caps the well that is spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico, befouling shorelines and threatening fishing grounds?

Stephen Lubben, a professor at Seton Hall University School of Law in Newark, New Jersey said he didn't think BP would seek bankruptcy unless "we're still talking about this in 2011 and the price tag has reached $75 billion or $100 billion."

BP has said it has the financial flexibility to deal with liabilities related to the spill, which to date have cost it about $1.4 billion.

The financials tell the story of a trim company in peak condition. Its assets exceed its liabilities, a measure of solvency or shareholders' equity, by more than $100 billion. It has had at least $24 billion in net operating cash flow for each of the last five years, according to financial filings.

BP is no Lehman Brothers, which vanished into Chapter 11 virtually overnight in a market panic.

Analysis: Possibility of BP bankruptcy seen remote for now | Reuters

 

[Gatekeeper]

This government, along with others should have made it mandatory for deep water wells to have every available hi tech or any other device that would at least attempt to prevent an incident such as this.

A question begging to be asked, if not already is:

How many other deep water wells have NO devices installed,in case of an similar emergency, to prevent this from occurring elsewhere?

 

[Valerie]

Tony Hayward, BP’s chief executive, has insisted that his giant will weather this storm. BP is indeed a money machine: it turned a profit of nearly $17 billion last year.

“The strength of cash-flow generation in recent quarters has provided us with a balance sheet that allows us to fully take on the responsibility for the Gulf of Mexico response,” Mr. Hayward told employees last Friday.

But that hasn’t stopped the deal crowd from blue-skying potential outcomes. Here is some of the math:

BP’s costs for the cleanup could run as high as $23 billion, according to Credit Suisse. On top of that, BP could face an additional $14 billion in claims from gulf fisherman and the tourism industry. So while conservative estimates put the bill at $15 billion, something approaching $40 billion is not out of the question. After all, little about this spill has turned out as expected.

The company has about $12 billion in cash and short-term investments, but there is already a debate about whether it should cut its dividend out of fear that it could run out of money. Of course, it could sell assets or seek loans, which in this environment is still not that easy.

But all those numbers don’t account for the greatest possible threat: a jury verdict against BP [for punitive damages]. Such a verdict might push the cost of the spill into the hundreds of billions. If that happened, even BP might buckle.

Imagine the BP case playing out in a Louisiana courtroom, against the backdrop of an oil-choked local economy, high unemployment and an angry public. How high can you count?

Dealbook Column - Imagining the Worst in BP?s Future - NYTimes.com

 

[hboats]

pajesus!

BP IS RESPONSIBLE for both...

THEY CHOSE their methods, they were the ones negligent, in their choices.
do you blame the cop for not being able to stop a murder, or do you blame the murderer for murdering?

Bp and who they hired, made this catastrophe happen....THEY KNEW THEIR RISKS, and they took them, with little regard to the citizens or environment.

Sorry, but while you're partly correct, you're basing your opinion on incorrect facts. BP did in fact make choices, but their choices were also limited by government. Do you think that BP would be drilling in 5,000 feet of water if they had an option to drill in 1,000 feet or even less? I've got news for you, BP is at fault here, but so is our government and SOME of the stupid regulations they've put in place for the oil industry.

Rick