"jps" wrote in message
...
I've had one hell of a time justifying the expense of fuel and,
consequently, over the last year our boat has been out very little.

Now I come to find that Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton have made more
money this past year than at any time in history and our rate of savings
hasn't been this low since 1933.

10bil profit on revenue of 100bil seems about right to me.

In article _ytDf.23848$5G.17707@trnddc08,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...
I've had one hell of a time justifying the expense of fuel and,
consequently, over the last year our boat has been out very little.

Now I come to find that Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton have made more
money this past year than at any time in history and our rate of savings
hasn't been this low since 1933.

10bil profit on revenue of 100bil seems about right to me.

Depends on industry.

It's obscene profit on the backs of Americans. A form of taxation that
skips the government collection process, instead going directly into the
pockets of corporations to spend as they see fit.

I'd rather see investment in alternative energy research than finding
another way to wring out profits in a short-term, quarter to quarter
profit strategy.

jps

"jps" wrote in message
...

I'd rather see investment in alternative energy research than finding
another way to wring out profits in a short-term, quarter to quarter
profit strategy.

jps


Unfortunately, that's their job. The driver is the shareholders. The
shareholders want a return - the bigger the better.

The shareholders are people like you and me and millions of other easy money
speculators.

RCE

In article ,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...

I'd rather see investment in alternative energy research than finding
another way to wring out profits in a short-term, quarter to quarter
profit strategy.

jps


Unfortunately, that's their job. The driver is the shareholders. The
shareholders want a return - the bigger the better.

The shareholders are people like you and me and millions of other easy money
speculators.

RCE

That's a nice theory.

However, as DSK pointed out, shareholders haven't been substantially
rewarded for the climb in profits.

jps

"jps" wrote in message
...

That's a nice theory.

However, as DSK pointed out, shareholders haven't been substantially
rewarded for the climb in profits.

jps

Higher profits usually produce higher stock prices. Few public companies
pay dividends anymore. It's all in the stock price.

I am not saying it's right - I am just saying it's the way it is. A CEO
that does not show bottom line growth ain't gonna be a CEO for long. And
although publicly reported quarterly, most large companies now report
monthly and even weekly, internally. That's why I don't work for one
anymore.

RCE

That's a nice theory.

However, as DSK pointed out, shareholders haven't been substantially
rewarded for the climb in profits.



RCE wrote:
Higher profits usually produce higher stock prices. Few public companies
pay dividends anymore. It's all in the stock price.


Actually, that's not true. It was true that many
investors... and many 'investment writers' widely
published... back in the late 1990s were loudly disdainful
of dividends.

Nowadays investors are very definitely interested in
dividends, and the stock-touters talk about them a lot.


I am not saying it's right - I am just saying it's the way it is.

Maybe we follow very different segments of the financial
news media.


... A CEO
that does not show bottom line growth ain't gonna be a CEO for long.

Well, no. He pockets his $50 million and saunters off stage
left, whistling a happy tune. And his platinum parachute is
paid for by the employees & common stockholders. It's the
new corporate kleptocracy... profits are irrelevant.


.... And
although publicly reported quarterly, most large companies now report
monthly and even weekly, internally. That's why I don't work for one
anymore.


And the auditors have become paid consultants on how to
cheat. Did you notice that Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling might
actually have a court date? Good thing the Bush
Administration is really cracking down on corporate
malfeasance... how many years has it been now?

But I digress.... I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

Regards
Doug King

In article ,
says...

Well, no. He pockets his $50 million and saunters off stage
left, whistling a happy tune. And his platinum parachute is
paid for by the employees & common stockholders. It's the
new corporate kleptocracy...

I love it.

We're not experiencing fascism, we're the subjects of a kleptocracy.

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry.

jps

On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 23:09:41 -0500, DSK wrote:

I own several oil company stocks, and the
neither dividends nor price appreciation has not followed
reported profits... yet...

Then you haven't owned them long enough. Oil will be king until
alternative energy sources are developed, and that won't happen until
gasoline hits 5 to 10 dollars a gallon. On second thought, that might
happen sooner than we think.

My guess is that WW III will be all about oil and that history will
not be kind to the US energy policies of the last 30 years.

George F wrote:
"jps" wrote in message
...

I've had one hell of a time justifying the expense of fuel and,
consequently, over the last year our boat has been out very little.

Now I come to find that Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton have made more
money this past year than at any time in history and our rate of savings
hasn't been this low since 1933.


10bil profit on revenue of 100bil seems about right to me.


First post here, George? Welcome.

10% is a hefty net profit but it's really about 8.48% (XOM). Compare it
to HD at 6.8% or WAG at 3.7%. Few complain about their prices.

Dan