• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Let there be snark.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Cole is on a roll !

In my day, never was longer.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

Accountability, motherfuckers.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

Let’s finish the job.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

T R E 4 5 O N

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

Chutkan laughs. Lauro sits back down.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

The arc of history bends toward the same old fuckery.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you don’t.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

Peak wingnut was a lie.

It’s easy to sit in safety and prescribe what other people should be doing.

A lot of Dems talk about what the media tells them to talk about. Not helpful.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Economics / Free Markets Solve Everything / The Looting Begins in Earnest

The Looting Begins in Earnest

by John Cole|  May 17, 20109:11 pm| 32 Comments

This post is in: Free Markets Solve Everything, Going Galt

FacebookTweetEmail

This should surprise no one:

Five days after appearing before Congress to testify about its responsibility in one of the worst oil spills in US history, the Swiss company that owned and operated the oil rig that sunk into the Gulf of Mexico announced that it would shell out $1 billion in dividends to shareholders.

The revelation that Transocean is distributing a $1 billion profit to shareholders as one of its drill sites leaks millions of gallons of oil into the sea is sure to inflame an already smarting debate over offshore drilling and the company’s role.

Transocean has passionately argued that they don’t share financial responsibility for the disaster. A clause in a contract they had with BP says that the oil company is obligated to pay for any environmental damage, even though Transocean actually owned the rig. BP was leasing the rig from Transocean at the time of the accident.

As many of you pointed out a few days ago, this is a no-brainer. Have to get rid of the money before the lawsuits pile up.

Here is the excellent 60 Minutes piece on the disaster:


Watch CBS News Videos Online

In somewhat related news, Reason magazine is furious that the EPA regulates things.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Chuck Open Thread
Next Post: D.C. Douglas v. Freedom Works, Round 2 »

Reader Interactions

32Comments

  1. 1.

    Steve

    May 17, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    You can put all the indemnity clauses you want in a contract, but it doesn’t make your liability go away. It just means that if you get found liable, you can ask someone else to make you whole.

    I wonder how much Transocean’s US assets amount to, anyway.

  2. 2.

    JG

    May 17, 2010 at 9:26 pm

    I can’t really believe that paying this dividend has anything to do with stifling lawsuits. If anything, it might encourage them as potential litigants see a wrongdoer with deep, deep pockets shelling out money left and right.

  3. 3.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 17, 2010 at 9:33 pm

    I believe all drilling contracts include such a clause.

    In any event, the oil company is liable for the cleanup costs and specified damages under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

  4. 4.

    Drive By Wisdom

    May 17, 2010 at 9:34 pm

    Not that anyone here is interested in facts when Prius driving liberal hypocrites can pile on corporations or Mr. Stuck – here is the report on the Ixtoc 1 blowout in 1979, which dumped hundreds of millions of gallons into the Mexicans Gulf:

    None of the indirect economic effects exceed $1 million . These estimates, based upon the available data, support a statement of no significant indirect economic impact in the study region that can be attributed to the oil spills

    http://www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3930.pdf

    Cannot wait to see all the doom-and-gloom emails from the environuts proven wrong again.

  5. 5.

    WereBear

    May 17, 2010 at 9:34 pm

    Only the most foolish idiot (pause for Usual Suspects) is avoiding the realization that this is an immense disaster, the dimensions of which are still not clear.

    BP picked the wrong Presidential term to have their reckless disregard catch up with them.

  6. 6.

    Delia

    May 17, 2010 at 9:35 pm

    That was the best thing I’ve seen on 60 Minutes in a very, very long time.

  7. 7.

    beltane

    May 17, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    Why is it that only drug crimes involve asset forfeiture? It seems that we have a system where corporations have all the rights but none of the responsibilities of individuals.

  8. 8.

    SiubhanDuinne

    May 17, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    This is really off-topic, but y’know? I don’t give a rat’s.

    Aherm. So I was wondering, what has happened to Dennis G/dengre? He was putting up awesome posts nearly every day in April, but now that Confederate History Month is over, it’s like he’s forgotten all about us. Has he found a new (younger, cuter) commemorative month to hang out with?

    Love John and the front-page gang, but I miss dengre.

  9. 9.

    Comrade Kevin

    May 17, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    That 60 Minutes piece was excellent.

    As for that Reason piece, bwahaha! I do wonder, though, is this comment for real, or some sort of spoof?

  10. 10.

    Roger Moore

    May 17, 2010 at 9:40 pm

    @JG:

    I can’t really believe that paying this dividend has anything to do with stifling lawsuits.

    No, it has to do with protecting their money from lawsuits. That way when they get sued into oblivion they don’t have any assets left to be seized to pay for the judgment. They can declare Chapter 7 bankruptcy and let all their creditors squabble over the remnants. The current shareholders won’t care because they’ll have their money already.

  11. 11.

    Alex

    May 17, 2010 at 9:54 pm

    How can anyone who cares about reality be a libertarian? Seriously, how? I’m glad I never read any Ayn Rand, if it’s this easy for her to grab hold of the brains of the young and impressionable and never let go.

  12. 12.

    Kirk Spencer

    May 17, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    @Drive By Wisdom: There’s a term for people who selectively [edit – QUOTE, not misquote] to misinform. The portion of the executive summary you quoted applied only to recreation (page 12). Allow me to quote from the very next page under the subtitle “Costs”:

    The IXTOC I oil spill is probably the world’s most expensive oil spill . The estimated loss of oil exceeded 5 million barrels of oil worth approximately $365 million . Damage claim suits that are pending in U .S . Courts total in excess of $400 million . The SEDCO-135 semi-submersive drilling platform, a complete loss, was valued at $21 million . PEMEX has reportedly spent over $70 million in capping operations and $42 million in clean-up operations . The expense to the U .S . Government is still being compiled, and cost estimates exceed $8 million . The cost to the state of Texas, for the clean-up measure, has been compiled by the involved agencies and totals to $331,389 . The Small Business Administration received 523 inquiries for economic recovery loans . They approved 238 business loans for a total of over $7 million .

    The CPI inflation rate from 1982 to 2009 is 2.19. In other words, $1 in 1982 is $2.19 in 2009. Adjust the preceding quote accordingly.

  13. 13.

    slag

    May 17, 2010 at 10:12 pm

    @Kirk Spencer:

    There’s a term for people who selectively [edit – QUOTE, not misquote] misquote to misinform.

    Republican?

  14. 14.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 17, 2010 at 10:21 pm

    @Roger Moore:

    First, it looks like the dividend has been in the works for a few months now.

    Second, since it looks like they have over $21 billion in net assets (if I’m reading this filing correctly), it’s doubtful a $1 billion dividend is going to protect them from much.

  15. 15.

    randiego

    May 17, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    Feh. 5 MILLION Barrels of Oil?? Is that all?

    Where’s the beef?

  16. 16.

    ChrisB

    May 17, 2010 at 10:37 pm

    @Roger Moore: Not really. Transocean has about $36 billion of assets (offset by a little under $10 billion of debt). It earns about $3 billion per year on $11 or 12 billion of revenue per year. The $1 billion dividend represent a 4.5% dividend yield at the current stock price, which is not unusually high. They have insurance and a good legal position against BP. They’re not going to be sued into oblivion.

    The dividend was proposed back in February, 2 months before the accident. Its ratification at this month’s shareholders’ meeting was bad timing, PR wise, but is not an attempt to spirit money away before going bankrupt. They’d been pressured for years to start paying regular dividends.

  17. 17.

    ChrisB

    May 17, 2010 at 10:38 pm

    @Zuzu’s Petals: You’ve got it right.

  18. 18.

    patroclus

    May 17, 2010 at 10:45 pm

    Most excellent reporting by CBS and 60 Minutes! It seems like years – maybe decades – since I’ve seen such effective investigative journalism from them. Prior to watching, I only had a vague idea of what actually happened; now, I feel informed. It was literally riveting.

    But the urgent situation isn’t over yet…and it’s getting worse. The media should be all over this 24/7 until the leak is plugged – kudos to 60 Minutes for leading the way.

  19. 19.

    Roger Moore

    May 17, 2010 at 10:57 pm

    @Zuzu’s Petals:

    Second, since it looks like they have over $21 billion in net assets (if I’m reading this filing correctly), it’s doubtful a $1 billion dividend is going to protect them from much.

    They have over $21 billion in book equity, but their balance sheet is heavily tilted toward long-term assets. That’s mostly property and equipment- stuff they need to keep in business- and goodwill- which is an intangible. If you look at their current assets- stuff that’s readily monetizable- they aren’t that much more than their short term liabilities. If they pass out $1 billion in dividends, they’ll be in a tight enough position that an unexpected hiccup would put them in a short-term cash crunch. I’d rather keep a larger cash reserve, especially given the recently demonstrated risks of the business.

  20. 20.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 17, 2010 at 11:45 pm

    @Roger Moore:

    But your argument was that they were issuing the dividend so there wouldn’t be “any assets left to be seized to pay for the judgment” if they were sued. As you agree, there actually would be about $10 billion worth of assets to be seized even after short-and long-term liabilities are paid off.

    And BTW, it’s hard to see how getting a $3+ per share dividend equals the shareholders “having their money already” if the company goes belly up and they lose their initial $50-$60 per share investment. I’m pretty sure they’d care.

  21. 21.

    Martin

    May 17, 2010 at 11:52 pm

    @Roger Moore: It’s a clean enough balance sheet that they probably won’t fold under any costs under $10B. It’ll depend on how badly the stock goes to shit and whether anyone would loan to them based on the outcome of all of this.

    All the money in the oil industry is in drilling, not in refining or distribution or retail. Since the business is really quite profitable and realistically, you only risk having one rig blow up on you, you’re better off using that cash to expand the business and if anything happens, you borrow against future earnings from the rest of your fleet.

    Transocean is fine. $3B in profits? That’s seriously not bad. That’s half of what HP earns, almost a quarter of what Microsoft earns. They’ll weather this just fine.

  22. 22.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 18, 2010 at 12:15 am

    @Martin:

    Interestingly, they did not pay bonuses to any of their executives last year because they wanted to improve their safety record.

    It made sense financially because a company’s safety record is paramount in getting and maintaining business in a competitive industry.

  23. 23.

    TenguPhule

    May 18, 2010 at 1:15 am

    It made sense financially because a company’s safety record is paramount in getting and maintaining business in a competitive industry.

    Relatively speaking of course. There are firing ranges safer then BP related properties.

  24. 24.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 18, 2010 at 1:21 am

    @TenguPhule:

    My comment was about Transocean.

  25. 25.

    Roger Moore

    May 18, 2010 at 1:37 am

    @Martin:

    It’ll depend on how badly the stock goes to shit and whether anyone would loan to them based on the outcome of all of this.

    Not the stock; the credit rating. Given that their drilling fleet constitutes hard assets, they could probably borrow enough to cover a substantial judgment.

    I guess I’m just too fiscally conservative. I think it makes sense to have a good sized cash reserve so you can deal with unexpected crises (or opportunities). Most businesses seem to disagree; they’d rather put that money into something productive- or into dividends- and deal with the unexpected by borrowing. Given how easy credit has been, they’re probably on to something.

  26. 26.

    shortstop

    May 18, 2010 at 8:41 am

    OT and petty: Why are there only about five people in the world who know that the simple past tense of “sink” is “sank”?

  27. 27.

    Xenos

    May 18, 2010 at 10:27 am

    I made it through 15 seconds of the Reason video. Incredibly shallow and jejune. A brilliant comeback being to claim that EPA regulations are not mentioned in the Constitution, and so they must be unconstitutional.

    You can’t argue with willful stupidity.

  28. 28.

    crack

    May 18, 2010 at 10:54 am

    Sounds like there could be a good case for breaking the corporate veil.

  29. 29.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 18, 2010 at 5:34 pm

    @shortstop:

    It does seem weird. But some dictionaries list “sunk” right along with “sank” as the past tense of “sink.”

    From Grammarphobia:

    In the history of English, the use of “sunk” in the past tense has been “extremely common,” according to the Oxford English Dictionary.

  30. 30.

    Steeplejack

    May 19, 2010 at 12:19 am

    @shortstop, @Zuzu’s Petals:

    Ditto for stank and shrank. This is very disheartening (which is why I am moved to post extremely late). Even the New York Times has been letting sunk go the last few years or so.

    And don’t get me started on Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. Ugh.

    Steep, former copyeditor.

  31. 31.

    Zuzu's Petals

    May 19, 2010 at 1:20 am

    @Steeplejack:

    Yep, that Grammarphobia writer makes some of the same points.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Gulf Oil Spill the Size of the Entire Maine Coastline - Surprisingly Spry says:
    May 18, 2010 at 2:43 pm

    […] others would just call it what it really is: Looting. Environment assholes, deepwater horizon, drill baby drill, it's the end of the […]

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • RaflW on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:50pm)
  • Uncle Cosmo on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:44pm)
  • mvr on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:31pm)
  • Ivan X on Open Thread: Exciting News — Andy Kim Is Contesting Menedez’s Seat (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:27pm)
  • Adam L Silverman on War for Ukraine Day 577: The Ukrainians Commissed Another Russian Submarine Today (Sep 23, 2023 @ 11:23pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!