Wednesday, August 13, 2008

ExxonMobil CEO Defends High Profits: Exxon Spends $1 Billion Per Day To Run Its Business

ExxonMobil CEO and chairman Rex Tillerson defended his company's staggering $11.7 billion in profits for the second quarter, saying that the company's earnings reflected the magnitude of its business operation.

"I saw someone characterize our profits the other day in terms of $1,400 in profit per second. Well, they also need to understand we paid $4,000 a second in taxes, and we spent $15,000 a second in cost," Tillerson told ABC News' Charles Gibson. "We spend $1 billion a day just running our business. So this is a business where large numbers are just characteristic of it."


At 8/14/2008 3:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He is so right.

At 8/14/2008 4:40 AM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

Hey, how can libtards maintain their perception of EEEEEvil Business when you guys absolutely insist on placing things in context?

I mean, really -- what's a libtard to do?

At 8/14/2008 8:00 AM, Blogger save_the_rustbelt said...

$4000 of tax on $1500 of profit?

I think Exxon is including gasoline and sales taxes paid by consumers and passed through to the government.

Or maybe they have the world's worst accountants?

Something doesn't add up.

At 8/14/2008 8:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


yeah they probably are counting sales tax, but they also are likely counting the employer's portion of payrol taxes (which liberals insist is paid by the company and not implicitly through lower workers wages), as well as drilling royalties which can be quite high. Add in property taxes too. Even if you exlude the sales tax, it is very possible that they are paying more in taxes then after tax profits when you add everything up.

Im so glad finally someone is laying out the context. Its sad that the media isnt doing this naturally anyway, and instead reporting the dumbed down absolute number? Are they stupid, lazy, or have a populist political agenda and want to propogate class warfare? Maybe a little of each. This is why i dont watch tv news anymore and rely on online sources for news.

At 8/14/2008 9:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


These are after tax profits.

At 8/14/2008 1:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of particular interest are Tillerman's comments on Senator Obama's target for 100% energy from renewables in 10 years.

"it's going to be very challenging to achieve that goal, in that period of time. And again, so much of the energy issue that the United States deals with and the world deals with, people I think do not have an appreciation for the lead times that are required."

"We can't drill our way out of this problem, just like we can't conserve our way out of this problem, just like we can't alternative fuels our way out of this problem," he said. "There is no one solution to this; there's an integrative set of solutions. And you have to undertake them all. So when the whole debate focuses around we have to choose this one solution or that, people are missing the point."

At 8/15/2008 4:27 PM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

Nukes. Flinkin' nukes. Should've had a standardized interchangeable design for the bloody things decades ago.

No, it doesn't deal with the transportation issue, at least not directly, but it does have the ability to jack up capacity as needed whenever there is some form of electricity-based alternative, such as hydrogen or some really really vastly improved fuel-cell/battery technique.

At 8/16/2008 1:25 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Exxon could trim 300 million in cost by just adjusting their tire pressure......

At 3/24/2009 10:22 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would be interesting to see an industry equivalent i.e. all U.S. operators not just Exxon. If you graph this out in Excel, it is dramatic - $1 of profit per $13 returned to the economy (NOW THAT'S WEALTH CREATION!) in taxes and costs paid out like dividends, contractors etc. and perhaps focus on direct benefits to US economy, as well as worldwide. Could we send it to Thomas Friedman and Fareed Zakaria? a 7% return on investment is hardly 'obscene'


Post a Comment

<< Home