Maybe it was a stab by Charles Gibson to provide a national group therapy session for his 8 million viewers, but the ABC "World News" anchor aggressively questioned ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson on the August 14 broadcast for "obscene" profits and asked him to "justify" the company's success.
"As we said earlier, Rex Tillerson - who is the board chair and CEO of ExxonMobil, doesn't talk often to the press," Gibson said. "His company has reported remarkable profits in the first half of this year. The high price of gas brought ExxonMobil close to $22 billion in profit - in profit - for the first half of this year. I asked him how he justifies that amount, that some see as obscene."
But Tillerson explained to Gibson it was the nature of a large business that performs an incredible amount of transactions.
"Everything we do, the numbers are very large," Tillerson replied. "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 costs. We spend $1 billion a day just running our business. So, this is a business where large numbers are just characteristic of it."
As a report posted on American Petroleum Institute's Web site on July 25 explained, Exxon (NYSE:XOM) and other oil companies' profits reflect the size of the companies and the industry and aren't necessarily a good reflection of financial performance in terms of what they are charging at the pump. In other words, the profits are high because of volume, not profit margins.
Gibson also questioned Tillerson about the public's attitude toward Exxon and others. He asked the CEO if he could empathize with consumers - as if he had any ability to alter market forces which have drove the price of oil to record highs, which have since receded.
"Do you understand and can you appreciate from your position, with the escalation of the price of a gallon of gas, why people are fed up, angry, indeed disgusted, with the oil companies?" Gibson asked.
Tillerson wouldn't comment specifically on the public "anger," but he did question if it was or wasn't misguided. "Well, I can understand why people are very upset and why they're very worried and concerned about their ability to deal with these high prices," Tillerson said. "In terms of where they should direct their anger, I don't think it's useful for me to comment on that. Although, it does bother that much of that is directed at us."
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, they also need to
August 14, 2008 - 13:34 ET by SouthernRootsWell, they also need to understand we paid $4,000 a second in taxes.
Why do the MSM always intentially ignore the windfall taxes the government is raking in?
What is the government doing with these "excess" taxes?
I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them. - J.B. Books (John Wayne)
Big Government Windfall Inc.
August 14, 2008 - 13:53 ET by CrashFor sure! Last I checked COLOSSAL Government not only collects taxes on oil income, but, also on outcome ... and that's a number I can't even wrap my head around.
Percentage
August 14, 2008 - 13:44 ET by serfer62I understand that as a percentage of gross profit Google makes more then Big Oil
So where's gibsons outrage over Big Web...
Where's his outrage over
August 14, 2008 - 14:06 ET by danboWhere's his outrage over his own salary? Is it 8 mil?
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
I too have sinned
August 14, 2008 - 18:38 ET by wizardjrI got steak knives from Shell during the 70's.
"I understand that as a
August 14, 2008 - 14:53 ET by ckc1227"I understand that as a percentage of gross profit Google makes more then Big Oil"
By providing a far less-important service at that.
"Obscene" Profits
August 14, 2008 - 13:48 ET by CobraManProfits are only considered "obscene" by those who don't make any.
That's right, Cobra
August 14, 2008 - 13:51 ET by BlondeMy mom seems pretty happy with Exxon's "obscene" profits.
What is obscene is the amount of taxes...and if Obambi has his way, everybody bend over and grab ankles.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Charlie G, why would the oil
August 14, 2008 - 13:48 ET by CrashCharlie G, why would the oil companies who had to consolidate for the past three decades just to stay afloat be guilty of making a profit ... isn't that the name of the game?
I don't believe personalities, such as yourself, should get paid millions JUST TO READ "news."
Don't Follow The Money!
August 14, 2008 - 14:12 ET by ChasvsWould Gibson find it intereting to follow up on where the $4000/second in Taxes go?
That's nearly 3 times the Profit they make and there's no interest in that "obscene" number???
Since Charlie boy probably get limo service to and from work he's isolated from the real world...but want to be seen as simpathetic to the "little guy".
Don't ask something like ' what can we do to reduce the cost of gas at the pump... would drilling more of our oun oil help? No, No, thaose questions he'll ask of the no more drilling Democrats!!!!
Charles Gibson makes some
August 14, 2008 - 14:19 ET by USA4freedomCharles Gibson makes some where between $7-8 million dollars.
Let do that thing that all of the leftest like to do to big oil.
Work lets say Charlie works 52 weeks, (no vacation) x 5 days a week (no days off) x 30 min (like there are no comericals), a night (lets just say he talks the whole time). That works out to 7800 min. a year Charlie works. So I guess that works out to: $897 dollars a min. for the 7 mil. to $1025 dollars per min for the 8 mil.
Tell us Charles, could someone call that... obscene.. profit for someone that just reads a telaprompter?
Ronald Reagan, 1962: I did not leave the Democratic party, the party left me.
Insert: your name, 2008, and the Republican party.
Sounds to me like Charlie
August 14, 2008 - 14:14 ET by Clear thinkerSounds to me like Charlie is jealous.
45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm
1st of all Charlie Gibson has it wrong from the top.
August 14, 2008 - 14:18 ET by Gary Hall1st of all Charlie Gibson has it wrong from the top.
No Charlie, it's the high price of oil - crude - that created the high price of gasoline. It's the high price of crude that generated the profits. The margins and profits on gasoline are down.
The best way to cut down on ExxonMobil's profits, Charlie? Go with Bush and McCain here. Open up ANWR and coatal plain to drilling. ExxonMobile's operation costs will increase, the price of crude will fall, and their profits will suffer.
Of course the other result will be the pain felt by the US Treasury, which will see the current record corporate tax revenues being collected from the oil giants shrink once again - and the budget defict will increase as a result. The corporate taxes paid to the Federal treasury, by the way, Charlie, make the profits look small. Tillerson noted that they are paying $4,000 a second in taxes! Charlie didn't flinch. (;~> gary
Gary - I saw the interview too and the $4,000 in taxes a second
August 14, 2008 - 14:55 ET by Dee Bunkwas excellent but unfortunately most liberals like Gibson just gloss over that. They don't really understand finances or numbers.
I thought Tillerson did an excellent job and he and other execs should probably go on television more often. I do think he missed the opportunity to talk about how other industries have higher profit margins and he should have been stronger on Obama's windfall profit tax. He should have explained how he owes his stockholders a certain rate of return on their investment and higher taxes would either only raise the price or send investors to look elsewhere.
It's hard to say what was edited out though also. That is why most execs don't like to go on TV - because they edit them to look bad. More people should demand live and/or uncut interviews like Ann Coulter does.
Dee..
August 14, 2008 - 15:02 ET by Gary HallDee.. "just gloss over it." Exactly. What Tillerman should have done (same for McCain, every day, on a variety of issues) is turn the conversation on the reporter, Gibson in this case.
"Charlie, Charlie." Why, Charlie, are you glossing over the information I just provided to you. We are paying $4,000 a second in taxes, Charlie. We are filling the federal coffers, Charlie. Charlie, why don't you resond to why you folks are so committed in keeping the whole story away from your viewers - the voters and the taxpayers?"
Gary
I agree Gary - but Gibson could just edit it out.
August 14, 2008 - 15:30 ET by Dee BunkGibson set up the segment vilifying him and then questioned him as if he were a criminal. Just once I'd like to see them do the same to a Democrat or someone in the Hollywood or Entertainment or Sports industries and drill them about their "windfall profits" as if they were criminals for legally making their money.
It's sad because ABC is by far the most professional of the three major networks but they still are very lopsided in presenting the liberal point of view over the conservative one.
Like this, Dee..
August 14, 2008 - 15:50 ET by Gary HallAs we said earlier, Al Gore, - who was once the VP, never talks to the press when he knows that there is a chance they might ask him a real question," Gibson asked: Mr. Gore, "Sir, just how do you justify your hypocrisy here; calling for converting all of the US fossil fuel use (currently 86%) to alternative within 10 years, when you are the player behind the largest privatization of government controlled oil and gas reserves, the Elk Hills deal with Occidental Petroleum, for whom you provided political cover for their activities on the lands of the indigenous tribe in Colombia during your 2000 presidential bid by refusing to answer questions from the press about the standoff down there; you own and maintain on your property in Tennessee the largest open pit zinc mine in the United States - no, shut up Mr. Gore, I'm not finished with your pissy little arse yet -- how do your justify your pathetic existence which some see as obscene?"
Like that Sue? (;~> gary
Gary - can you please get yourself on Television?
August 14, 2008 - 19:14 ET by Dee BunkI like your questions much much better than Gibson's.
What is the profit margin?
August 14, 2008 - 14:24 ET by mattmWhat is the profit margin? That's the salient issue. I bet ABC's margin is waaaay higher than Exxon's - and ABC doesn't even produce anything of value.
And that's ....
August 14, 2008 - 14:26 ET by 10ksnooker"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 costs. We
spend $1 billion a day just running our business. So, this is a
business where large numbers are just characteristic of it."
The rest of the story, the context that makes you go, oh WOW. The context that is omitted by nearly all of the drive by propagandists, and the reason that 55% say media bias is a bigger problem than campaign finances.
Maybe the fairness doctrine can fix this ...
Oil and gas vs the sports and entertainment profits...
August 14, 2008 - 14:27 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasExxon and other oil companies profit from decades of investment and structuring their businesses so that they would be successful. But as Tillerson pointed out it costs 1 billion a day to run their business.
Exxon and other oil companies provide a product that is not just essential to our economy but to our WAY OF LIFE. Their success really is our success. But this isn't my point. Someone wants obscene, here is obscene. People that get paid MILLIONS of DOLLARS and an industry that takes in BILLIONS of dollars for a product that in the end provides mostly only one thing, ENTERTAINMENT. There is really little of tangible value the entertainment industry provides in the end when compared to the oil and gas industry.
Tom Hanks, Jodie Foster, Adam Sandler, Denzel Washington, Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Will Smith, Angelina Jolie, Nicole Kidman, Rene "Welldrinker", Jim Carey, Johannsn, Diaz, Depp...and the list goes on and on.
If anything is obscene it is what THESE people, along with the REST of the sports and entertainment industry get paid to produce what??????? No, not fuel to take you to work to support your family, not fuel to heat your home or to run the factories that produce more good to support your family...hell they don't even produce a DAMNED SANDWICH you can eat. They produce PLAYS for God's sake! Plays!
The answer to terrorism IS war. Next Please!
But losses
August 14, 2008 - 14:30 ET by kimschof $15.5 billion in the 2nd quarter by GM don't get a mention.
Everytime they use the dollar amounts and not the percentages they are misleading the public.
If I had a $100 profit on sales of $1,000 it would amount to the same percentages that Exxon had. Of course, billions of dollars sounds like a lot more than $100, but it's the same percentage. Will they take some of my obscene 10% profit too?
kimsch
"CEO of ExxonMobil, doesn't talk often to the press"
August 14, 2008 - 14:44 ET by JTPWhy should they with the treatment they get from it?
"I need more cowbell!" SNL
Exactly!
August 14, 2008 - 15:08 ET by KC MulvilleThat was the first thing that came to mind.
On the other hand, not to defend Gibson (well, yes, OK, to defend Gibson ...) he did give the man a chance to answer, and the answer was pretty damned good. To me, that's what journalists ought to do. I don't care how tough the question is, or how biased, so long as you give the guy a fair chance to answer.
Now, what would have made me more comfortable (and appealed to my contrarian nature) would be for the CEO to ask Gibson how high profits have to rise to be considered obscene? Who created that yardstick? Why does class warfare have to be assumed?
ExxonMobil Profits and Taxes
August 14, 2008 - 14:45 ET by nandrelliI also read that, in the quarter that ExxonMobil posted profits of $12 billion, they paid taxes of $32 billion. Over the course of a year, that would come out to a total of $128 billion.
Since the feds budget is about $3 trillion, and there is about a $500 billion deficit, that means that ExxonMobil will be paying about 4% of the government's tax revenue. That is an ASTOUNDING number!
Of course, ExxonMobil doesn't pay a penny of tax. The taxes are all rolled into the price of the gasoline, and is paid by the consumer. So if you want to pay more taxes on gasoline, let Obama and the other Democratics charge that windfall-profits tax, so you get the privilege of paying even higher gas prices than you pay now.
Profit Margins
August 14, 2008 - 14:50 ET by PurdueMattWhy do liberals always have such a hard time with the simple concept of profit margins?!
Um, Purdue...
August 14, 2008 - 14:59 ET by BlondeBecause they can't do math?????
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
I have an idea. The oil
August 14, 2008 - 15:16 ET by ckc1227I have an idea. The oil companies should ask government and the American people what they feel is an appropriate amount for them to earn each quarter. Then, once the oil companies reach that amount, they should just not sell any more oil, gas, etc until the next quarter.
obscene profits
August 14, 2008 - 15:22 ET by goldboughMicrosoft's fiscal 4th quarter profits are up 42%! Where's the outrage?? That was an excellent answer by the CEO about the government taking so many taxes.
Doesn't often talk to the press
August 14, 2008 - 15:26 ET by YahooWatcherThat's because he's WORKING.
Gibson and his ilk don't
August 14, 2008 - 15:49 ET by dboGibson and his ilk don't understand the role of corporate profits in society. It's logical to assume the higher the profit the greater ther service provided by the company. If Exxon is making more profits than XYZ company, they must be providing a better service. Otherwise, more of us would be using XYZ company instead of Exxon. Profits are good. The more the profit, the more valuable to society a corporation is.
This all boils down into an
August 14, 2008 - 16:16 ET by Hunter12This all boils down into an attempt by the MSM on behalf of the liberals to create class envy and get you to vote for some rich guy espousing a code of behavior for you that this rich liberal and his will never have to adhere to. Meanwhile, the rich liberal will live like the people they want you to resent and despise. Live green, insure your neighbors, queue up for healthcare, work till you die, and leave a large part of your estate to the government. Someone has to do it.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill
One more example of the
August 14, 2008 - 16:23 ET by SnappyOne more example of the left in this country and their incessant need to penalize and punish success through higher taxation and public criticism. Playing the percentages or not giving the whole percentage relationship for perspective. Drives me crazy, doesnt anyone take the view of "I wish I was there and if I was I would gladly take those "obscene" profits - So good for them for their hard work paying off."
Instead of the "I will never be there and because they are lets take their profits away from them?"
Exxon profits are no
August 14, 2008 - 16:30 ET by deerjerkydaveExxon profits are no different than other fortune 500 companies.
Gibson's whole tone in the interview was that profits are evil and that it is morally fine to mug a rich guy and take his money. This is basically what Obama wants with his windfall profits tax which is supposed to be passed on to the consumer. Obama is the 21st century Robin Hood, he steals from the rich and gives to the poor. The problem is that this helps neither the rich nor the poor.
The other question that Gibson asked which caused me to wince was whether Exxon could do "anything" to make prices cheaper, as if Exxon is sitting on their hands. Gibson doesn't realize that competition forces Exxon to do everything they can to provide their product for as little as possible. Remember, this is the same Gibson who complained that people don't watch his news program because they always show commercials for old people. If he can't wrap his head around how his own industry works, why should he be trusted in other economic matters?
allow me to love
August 14, 2008 - 18:59 ET by JIMMY1660allow me to love America
okay, as a dumb dumb.
how about if the BIG OIL companies take headquarters off shore.
here, here, tax burden relief or not.
if so. bye bye. seems funny Nancy P spoke bad of Haliburton, CEO headed to Dubai. Have not seen Haliburton in the news lately. Funny, but not haha.
Oil profits
August 14, 2008 - 19:00 ET by KansasgirlI'm far more disgusted with Nanny and the libs than profitable business. I have 401 accounts that have oil stocks. At least I won't have to ask for government handouts to live comfortably in my old age.
Frankly, I wish XOM stock
August 14, 2008 - 20:32 ET by ConservativeRexFrankly, I wish XOM stock would go up quite a bit more, then split in the next 3 years. ; )
The Public is ignorant of the facts on Exxon and Oil Prices
August 14, 2008 - 21:12 ET by PopularTechThe reason the public is mad at Exxon is because they are ignorant of the facts:
Give me a break - Oil Prices (Video) (5min) (John Stossel, 20/20)
- Gas Prices must be adjusted for inflation (EIA)
- The average amount of tax on gasoline in the United States is 49.4 cents per gallon (API)
- The average amount of tax on diesel in the United States is 56.4 cents per gallon (API)
- 95% of the world's known oil and gas reserves are controlled by national oil companies (Forbes)
- Only 44% of U.S. oil imports come from OPEC (EIA)
- Only 16% of U.S. oil imports come from the Middle East (EIA)
- The largest supplier of oil to the U.S. is Canada (EIA)
- The second largest supplier of oil to the U.S. is Mexico (EIA)
- Only 0.005% of U.S. domestic oil production is exported (EIA)
- Only 1.5% of the United States electrical generation comes from oil (EIA) (48% Coal, 20% Natural Gas, 19% Nuclear)
- No new refineries have been built in the United States since 1976 (CEI)
- The U.S. uses 25% of the world's oil supply because it produces over 25% of the world's economy (World Bank)
Evil Exxon (Cato Institute)
Exxon's Earnings: No Apology Necessary (Cato Institute)
Exxon Mobil Needs a Hug (Ben Stein, The New York Times)
Exxon Posts Record $32.36 Billion Tax Payment (iStockAnalyst)
Should Oil Executives Be Strung Up? (Ludwig von Mises Institute)
- The average amount of net profit an oil company makes on gasoline is 5 cents per gallon (Source)
- Exxon Mobil's total U.S. tax bill exceeded its U.S. revenues by $19 billion over the past five years (WSJ)
The Anti 'Man-Made' Global Warming Resource
"The reason the public is
August 14, 2008 - 21:16 ET by Clear thinker"The reason the public is mad at Exxon is because they are ignorant of the facts: "
Dead-on-accurate!
45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goals.htm
I agree Clear and Poptech's
August 14, 2008 - 21:48 ET by Dee Bunklists rock! He is the man - I'm so glad he does it because I don't have the time to.