BP pledges $20 billion for damage claims

[myp]

BP pledged to set aside $20 billion for damage claims resulting from the oil spill in the Gulf. The announcement was made after a meeting with President Obama regarding the spill and what action to take going forward. In order to come up with the money, BP is suspending dividend payments to shareholders and selling assets. The company also apologized to the American people for the spill.

Thoughts?

 

[David]

BP pledged to set aside $20 billion for damage claims resulting from the oil spill in the Gulf. The announcement was made after a meeting with President Obama regarding the spill and what action to take going forward. In order to come up with the money, BP is suspending dividend payments to shareholders and selling assets. The company also apologized to the American people for the spill.

Thoughts?

Not paying investors? Ya, BP is done. So who do you think will be buying up what BP in pawning?

 

[Calvin]

Not paying investors? Ya, BP is done. So who do you think will be buying up what BP in pawning?

As long as their is a market for the oil they dig out of the ground, the company will remain profitable - just not AS profitable. Its a good sign to try and smooth relations with the American public over. Finally, an end is in sight for this debacle.

 

[David]

As long as their is a market for the oil they dig out of the ground, the company will remain profitable - just not AS profitable. Its a good sign to try and smooth relations with the American public over. Finally, an end is in sight for this debacle.

Big Oil will keep going yes but not BP. If the company you were investing in suddenly refused to pay you, would you keep investing?

 

[myp]

Big Oil will keep going yes but not BP. If the company you were investing in suddenly refused to pay you, would you keep investing?

It really depends on how deep their balance sheet is. If they have a good amount of assets, they will be fine. They probably do, especially if they committed to this $20 billion without any major force making them. Remember, they have only suspended dividends, not stopped them forever.

 

[jdsingle]

I don't think BP is going under for this. Like myp said, there was no major force causing them to do this. I'm glad they are shelling out more than the previous $75 mil allocated by Congress back in the day.

 

[David]

It really depends on how deep their balance sheet is. If they have a good amount of assets, they will be fine. They probably do, especially if they committed to this $20 billion without any major force making them. Remember, they have only suspended dividends, not stopped them forever.

They're selling assets to pay for this. BP is done, maybe not know but they won't survive long-term. I'm thinking a buyout/merger, not a total collapse.

 

[Dirk]

Is this enough? I'm not sure. How much will the clean-up operation cost? How much should be paid to compensate for environmental damage? Etc.

 

[Calvin]

Is this enough? I'm not sure. How much will the clean-up operation cost? How much should be paid to compensate for environmental damage? Etc.

Why should anything be paid for environmental clean up, apart from the related industries that have been affected? Seriously, what did the US government ever do to make the environment so pristine in the first place? if the answer is nothing - and it is - then why does the US government have a right to insist the environment be put back into the state it was in previously?

 

[David]

Why should anything be paid for environmental clean up, apart from the related industries that have been affected? Seriously, what did the US government ever do to make the environment so pristine in the first place? if the answer is nothing - and it is - then why does the US government have a right to insist the environment be put back into the state it was in previously?

Because states (including my own) rely on it for our economies and as BP trashed the place, BP needs to clean it up. Not every place was a pre-60s gov't dump you know. Some areas were pristine, the Everglades, Mississippi Delta (away from the cities), the Florida Keys (again, away from the cities) and lets not forget that we Floridians claim a barrier reef 2nd only to the GBR in it's size and bio-diversity!

BP has ruined us all and so BP must pay in money, manpower and in all likelihood it's existence to repay us even a fraction of it's debt.

 

[jdsingle]

The Everglades thankfully are getting some type of fix up with a bridge that will let the waters flow once more. Just because they are a corporation doesn't mean they shouldn't be responsible for what they mess up. If I break something on a car in an accident, don't you expect me to pay for it? That same logic should be applied to everything else.

 

[ferrari353]

They're also responsible because in the beginning, they lied about how much they estimated was leaking, so we were less prepared to handle it. We didn't have enough of those rope things, the booms or whatever they're called.

 

[Calvin]

The Everglades thankfully are getting some type of fix up with a bridge that will let the waters flow once more. Just because they are a corporation doesn't mean they shouldn't be responsible for what they mess up. If I break something on a car in an accident, don't you expect me to pay for it? That same logic should be applied to everything else.

I agree. American consumers just don't seem to get it. Its not the corporation that totally responsible here, its the average American who has to drive his car everywhere - and is 50 pounds over weight as a result. The nation as a whole needs to share the blame on this one.

 

[myp]

Good news on this front as BP has made some progress with a new system to capture the oil. Projections show that the leak may even be clogged by early to mid-August: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65O5TA20100711

 

[Kochbiel]

I think that BP have gone further than needed when dealing with this oil crisis, because it wasn't their fault - it was an acident. And while the ramifications of the event are massive and tragic, if we blame BP it just becomes another part of the blame cultre, where someone is to blame for every accident. BP owes America nothing, especialy as they A) Power thier cars, buses, traisn and many other things, B) Americas (Mainly Obamas) reaction to the spill. I doubt BP will go bust or merge with another company, because for all the American shares sold, they will probably be bought by British investors or other Americans. But yes, BP have been incredibly kind and generous in dealign with this crisis, and I think should be thanked, not victimised.

 

[David]

I think that BP have gone further than needed when dealing with this oil crisis, because it wasn't their fault - it was an acident. And while the ramifications of the event are massive and tragic, if we blame BP it just becomes another part of the blame cultre, where someone is to blame for every accident. BP owes America nothing, especialy as they A) Power thier cars, buses, traisn and many other things, B) Americas (Mainly Obamas) reaction to the spill. I doubt BP will go bust or merge with another company, because for all the American shares sold, they will probably be bought by British investors or other Americans. But yes, BP have been incredibly kind and generous in dealign with this crisis, and I think should be thanked, not victimised.

BP ordered safety measures ignored to cut costs. BP owned the drilling lease (legally obligating them to deal with anything that might go wrong). BP lied about how bad the spill was. BP has thrown up legal roadblocks to slow legally required (see my 2nd point) reparation payments to state gov'ts and merchants effected by the spill. How is this not BP's fault/responsibility?

 

[Kochbiel]

BP have not been found guilty of any negligence or wrongdoing by any court, and none of the claims against BP made by a whistleblower (a former Alaskan oil engineer who is not named) have been verified, and so cannot be taken as fact as they may be lies. And so, because of this, BP cannot and should not be charged or blamed for the disaster as they must be presumed innocent until proven guilty (The Presumption of Innocence). And how can BP have lied about how bad it was when they set up a camera which shows live feed of the oil gushing out into the Gulf of Mexico. Simply looking at that shows how bad it is. So BP have been entirly truthful, and cannot be legally charged with anything as their is no evidence against them.

 

[David]

BP have not been found guilty of any negligence or wrongdoing by any court, and none of the claims against BP made by a whistleblower (a former Alaskan oil engineer who is not named) have been verified, and so cannot be taken as fact as they may be lies. And so, because of this, BP cannot and should not be charged or blamed for the disaster as they must be presumed innocent until proven guilty (The Presumption of Innocence). And how can BP have lied about how bad it was when they set up a camera which shows live feed of the oil gushing out into the Gulf of Mexico. Simply looking at that shows how bad it is. So BP have been entirly truthful, and cannot be legally charged with anything as their is no evidence against them.

1. BP is, by contract, at fault for anything. Blease don't let misplaced nationalism blind you to this fact. 2. A camera offers no context for how much oil is spilling, they said 5,000 barrels/day when it was closer to 100k and they denied the existence of a known subsurface oil cloud until tar balls washing up on shore made it impossible to continue to do so.

BP isn't 100% at fault, they didn't run the rig but they directed it's use, violated safety laws (they had about 800 or so citations last year from safety inspectors, the industry average is about 8/year), they own the drilling lease, ect.

 

[jdsingle]

BP have not been found guilty of any negligence or wrongdoing by any court, and none of the claims against BP made by a whistleblower (a former Alaskan oil engineer who is not named) have been verified, and so cannot be taken as fact as they may be lies. And so, because of this, BP cannot and should not be charged or blamed for the disaster as they must be presumed innocent until proven guilty (The Presumption of Innocence). And how can BP have lied about how bad it was when they set up a camera which shows live feed of the oil gushing out into the Gulf of Mexico. Simply looking at that shows how bad it is. So BP have been entirly truthful, and cannot be legally charged with anything as their is no evidence against them.

Not yet. If they were completely free of any guilt, do you think they would have pledged 20 billion without any federal push mandating that amount? There is plenty of evidence saying they neglected safety issues which led to this spill.

 

[Kochbiel]

Not yet. If they were completely free of any guilt, do you think they would have pledged 20 billion without any federal push mandating that amount? There is plenty of evidence saying they neglected safety issues which led to this spill.

Nothing has ben proved. As I said before, the Presumption of Innocence means we must take the veiw that BP is innocent untill proven guilty. However, if it comes to light and is proved that BP are responsible, I would probabaly change my attitude slightly. Although I still woudln't say they need to pay anything to America until America admits and pays up for the hell its casued to the enviroment. For example, the use of Napalm in Vietnam (Already mentioned in thread).

NB - Also, America is in no position at all to critisise BP for the damage done when America won't sign the Kyoto Protocol, or consider using fuels that are renewable, as opposed to fossil fuels. As well as the use of Napalam.