Page 1382 of 1433 FirstFirst ... 3828821282133213721380138113821383138413921432 ... LastLast
Results 13,811 to 13,820 of 14329

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #13811
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    20,816
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    Good point. Although the investment could have been years ago, certainly some depreciation benefits incurred, but no impact on cash flow in 2020 (I don't think). Maybe it even helped their 2020 tax situation; I don't understand this stuff enough to know.
    "Could have been". "I don't think". "I don't understand this stuff to know."

    Very convincing.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  2. #13812
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    18,094
    You probably have extra cash lying around if you are buying back your own stock.

    The Exxon write down was for dry gas assets they had purchased in the past, that exist in the lower 48 states. No mention of refineries, or refinery upgrades.

    https://www.naturalgasintel.com/exxo...off-the-table/
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  3. #13813
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    20,816
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    You probably have extra cash lying around if you are buying back your own stock.

    The Exxon write down was for dry gas assets they had purchased in the past, that exist in the lower 48 states. No mention of refineries, or refinery upgrades.

    https://www.naturalgasintel.com/exxo...off-the-table/
    Hmmmm. That is a 100% scurrilous connection with that link. That proves nothing.
    Check page 61 of Exxon’s 2021 Financial Report. The stock buy back is a red herring.
    They spend in the Billions on yearly environmental infrastructure including and especially Refineries.
    To wit:
    ” Throughout ExxonMobil’s businesses, new and ongoing measures are taken to prevent and minimize the impact of our operations on air, water and ground. These include a significant investment in refining infrastructure and technology to manufacture clean fuels, as well as projects to monitor and reduce nitrogen oxide, sulfur oxide and greenhouse gas emissions, and expenditures for asset retirement obligations. Using definitions and guidelines established by the American Petroleum Institute, ExxonMobil’s 2021 worldwide environmental expenditures for all such preventative and remediation steps, including ExxonMobil’s share of equity company expenditures, were $4.6 billion, of which $3.4 billion were included in expenses with the remainder in capital expenditures. The total cost for such activities is expected to increase to approximately $5.3 billion in 2022, with capital expenditures expected to account for approximately 30 percent of the total. Costs for 2023 are anticipated to be higher as the Low Carbon Solutions business matures and the Corporation progresses its emission-reduction plans.”

    And Paul doesn’t think that any of this $4.6 billion is due to oppressive EPA regulations.
    Wild.
    Last edited by Masterofreality; 06-16-2022 at 07:29 PM.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  4. #13814
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    18,094
    It's difficult to have these sorts of discussions.
    I never said Exxon didn't spend money on meeting EPA regulations.
    I never commented on any 4.6 billion dollar figure, for anything.

    I noted they wrote off 25 billion, which proved to be for dry gas reserves that were overvalued on their books, NOT for refineries or anything connected to EPA regulations.

    Why do you conflate these issues? It doesn't make sense. Exxon is buying back stock...a lot of stock. $30 billion in cash to buy it back is no "red herring."

    Exxon began $30B in stock buybacks in 2022 (through 2023) thanks to its high profits, repurchasing $2.1B shares in the first three months of the year. This is a $20B increase from its estimate in December 2021
    https://www.accountable.us/news/exxo...onths-of-2022/
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  5. #13815
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    20,816
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    It's difficult to have these sorts of discussions.
    I never said Exxon didn't spend money on meeting EPA regulations.
    I never commented on any 4.6 billion dollar figure, for anything.

    I noted they wrote off 25 billion, which proved to be for dry gas reserves that were overvalued on their books, NOT for refineries or anything connected to EPA regulations.

    Why do you conflate these issues? It doesn't make sense. Exxon is buying back stock...a lot of stock. $30 billion in cash to buy it back is no "red herring."



    https://www.accountable.us/news/exxo...onths-of-2022/
    You cannot verify that. It’s scurrilous. It cannot be proved it was a write off for dry gas reserves. Go made it clear that it was “Actual Investments that were Capitalized” and that “capital that left the building” not write offs. I will pull the 2020 annual report. It may not all have been for refineries but some of it has to be.

    Hey, don’t make trash accusations against a company that you say is “Price Gouging” and screwing the fuel supply with buy backs if the discussion is “Difficult to have.”
    Typical lib. Stand there and throw stones and at American corporations who are being slandered and hindered by present governmental policy. Policy that CAUSED the current problems. But nah. Don’t admit that the Libs are responsible.
    Last edited by Masterofreality; 06-16-2022 at 07:47 PM.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  6. #13816
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    18,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    You cannot verify that. Itís scurrilous. It cannot be proved it was a write off for dry gas reserves.
    You think I just make this stuff up? Why don't you take it up with Exxon. Good grief.

    Another action ExxonMobil is planning to take involves the removal of less strategic assets from its development plan as a result of the growing strength of its portfolio.

    Assets removed include certain dry gas resources in the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana and Arkansas in the United States, and in western Canada and Argentina.

    The decision will result in a non-cash, after-tax fourth-quarter impairment charge of approximately $17 billion to $20 billion.
    https://www.offshore-energy.biz/exxo...pairment-ever/
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  7. #13817
    Supporting Member bobbiemcgee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    10,404
    Trump crazy his advisors say, but then 60% we already knew that :

    https://www.newsobserver.com/news/po...262566032.html
    2018 Big East Champs!

  8. #13818
    When just one isnt enough X-band '01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The Overlook Hotel
    Posts
    12,786
    Barry Loudermilk is going to have to answer a few awkward questions about a tour he was giving of the Capitol the day before (while the building was closed to the public due to Covid protocols).

    That said, there have been threatening letters and calls made to his office once this revelation went public. It is equally inexcusable and repugnant.

  9. #13819
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,426
    Quote Originally Posted by X-band '01 View Post
    Barry Loudermilk is going to have to answer a few awkward questions about a tour he was giving of the Capitol the day before (while the building was closed to the public due to Covid protocols).
    Why? Please tell me you're not falling for this BS.

  10. #13820
    Voice of Reason Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    20,816
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    You think I just make this stuff up? Why don't you take it up with Exxon. Good grief.

    https://www.offshore-energy.biz/exxo...pairment-ever/
    Yeah, you do make it up. You have only spewed BullShit trying to connect some “write off” of “Dry Gas resources” that aren’t even near the number. Good Grief, indeed!!
    I don’t have to “Take it up with Exxon”. All I have to do is research their 2020 Annual Report.
    Your numbers in whatever the hell you tried to cite don’t even equate to the “mystery” $25 billion. This does:
    From the 2020 Exxon Annual report:
    Page 64:
    “ XON 2020 Annual Report: Page 64:
    Impairment Assessment of Certain Upstream Property, Plant and Equipment, Net
    …..the Corporation’s consolidated upstream property, plant and equipment (PP&E), net balance was $167.5 billion as of December 31, 2020, and related impairment expense for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $25.3 billion.”

    Page 72(Explanation of Impairment):
    “ Impairment Assessment. The Corporation tests assets or groups of assets for recoverability on an ongoing basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable. Among the events or changes in circumstances which could indicate that the carrying value of an asset or asset group may not be recoverable are the following:
    a significant decrease in the market price of a long-lived asset;
    a significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which an asset is being used or in its physical condition including a
    significant decrease in current and projected reserve volumes;

    a significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate that could affect the value, including an adverse action
    or assessment by a regulator;

    an accumulation of project costs significantly in excess of the amount originally expected;
    • a current-period operating loss combined with a history and forecast of operating or cash flow losses; and
    a current expectation that, more likely than not, a long-lived asset will be sold or otherwise disposed of significantly before
    the end of its previously estimated useful life
    .”


    Hey, I’m no accountant but It sure does look like “Plant and Equipment” was related to a $25 billion “impairment expense”.
    I’ll admit that I cannot say that the $25 billion was necessarily used to “upgrade” the refineries, but it logical to say that Exxon, because of excess and oppressive EPA regulation caused them to have to spend $25 billion to either change or take those properties off line or take a charge for them which reduced capacity and crimped supply. See my post #13798 where the Wall Street Journal laid this out clearly. Plant & Equipment Paul!’
    Interestingly enough, despite the charges leveled at them by this Adminstration, Exxon drilled more wells in the US in 2020 than they had in previous years. Ostensibly because Trump encouraged production. That number dropped precipitously in 2021 due, I suppose, to Biden’s opposition to issuing permits and the red tape to get through to get them.
    1 well drilled in the US in 2021. Disgusting.
    Last edited by Masterofreality; 06-16-2022 at 10:53 PM.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •