Hello, Fool! | Login | Signup | My Fool
Jul 24, 2008 7:24 AM ET | Site Changes | Help
The Company's principal business is energy, involving the worldwide exploration, production, transportation and sale of crude oil and natural gas and the manufacture, transportation and sale of petroleum products.
View All Commentary (XOM)
Recs
simon78 (34.81) Submitted: 2/21/08 12:05 AM : Start Price: $87.32 XOM Score: 1.07
The oil price will not remain at over $100 as the global economy slows and the situation in the Middle East becomes less bad. Also, we may see some substitution from oil as occured in the 1970s. All of this is bad for Exxon, which has also firmly positioned itself on the wrong side of the green debate.
Report this Post Replies: 16 | Reply
Oops! There appears to be a problem with your comment. Check to see if there's something you left out.
ilyaz1 (86.90) Submitted: 2/26/08 4:08 PM
Recs: 2 | Rec This
Even if the world goes into a recession i belive that opec will cut production in order to keep prices inflated. As far as the green debate i belive we are many years away from anything substantial being done to move away from oil. Exxon is verticly inergrated and looks to profit from every uptick in the price of oil, so for at least the short term i belive it will easily outperfom the S&P.Thanks
Report this Post Reply
350rick (41.80) Submitted: 4/25/08 12:29 AM
Recs: 0 | Rec This
crazy. oil is going to go through the roof until the dinosaurs run dry. people are feeling and accepting the limited resource of oil. with markets like china and india coming on line, and the world's biggest refinery being built in india, demand will not decrease. this is a limited resource. it will run out. why would the price go down over time? i personally want gasoline, not bio-diesel, and i will keep my 350z stoked with 91 until i'm sucking toes for gas. $120 oil? no problem. extrapolate 1970s gas prices to 2008 dollars and you'll see there is plenty of room for price hikes. buy exxon
Elfmobile (38.57) Submitted: 4/25/08 1:02 PM
Agreed, however, in the short term I still think this stock will rebound enough in the short term to profit. I'm sticking with it for at least 3 weeks.
Elfmobile (38.57) Submitted: 4/25/08 1:33 PM
Sorry, I meant to say that I am sticking with Exxon for 3 years.
vermonty (67.80) Submitted: 5/01/08 12:56 PM
Recs: 1 | Rec This
The "green debate" is not relevant (to predicting the price of oil) when everyone on any side of the debate is buying Exxon's product every week, without fail. Oh... and the easy oil is all gone, by the way. The Arab states can't just turn on the tap like they used to, to drive prices down and keep other OPEC nations in line. Also, the global economy is not slowing...just the US economy. The US is not the center of the universe any more. Ethanol is a joke, feeding cars and starving people. Electric cars won't be practical unless we build a lot of nuclear power plants, and people on the "correct" side of the green debate won't admit they were wrong about nuclear. Oil will dip below $100 again, and Exxon will dip with it. When that happens, I will back up the truck and buy as much Exxon as I can. Suncor too . And Oil Service HOLDrs. And Petrobras.
FourthAxis (69.99) Submitted: 5/09/08 9:12 AM
Then again...maybe you've forgotten the fact that we haven't found any new oil and we've added a few billion or so to the population since the 1970s. Good Luck Bro.P.S. When the world is able to change over to green energy....which will take at least a generation....Exxon will still be kicking ass and taking names. I mean...the largest profit ever reported in the history of the world isn't a testament for you to how well this company is run? WOW.
blackmonday2007 (58.00) Submitted: 5/09/08 11:52 AM
PBR found the second coming of Saudi Arabia its just 2-3miles under deep sea waters off coast of Brazil give them 2-4 years to get the taps flowing with Black Gold
1joker60 (62.51) Submitted: 5/13/08 2:37 AM
In reality, these executives should be tried fo treason! They have singlehandedly caused the worst economic situation in over 40 years! When brought before congress and asked about their profits, they basically told congress to mind their own business! These bastards should be tried like the Rosenbergs!
idchucky (62.91) Submitted: 5/14/08 2:25 PM
Don't think the barrel of oil will go down below $100 ever again. Middle East getting worst not better.Chad and Sudan is looking at more than just a proxy war in the coming year.Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa in hole is looking at more military like tensions.If al Sadr army are attacked or taken guns from them look for al sadr's army to attack major Iraqi pipelines in the South and North of Iraq.Look for the strength of the dollar continue to shake, from outside influences not including the credit crisis.Exxon is making a money grab in Iraq so why would they want to see the barrel go below $100 while the US military occupies Iraq.Ethanol is a loss liter for lesser mileage per gallon, damage to engines, etc.When food prices start jumping back up, farmer might change back to core food crops.The Hurricane season has not even started, look for 3 hurricanes strength 9 or 10 hit the Gulf this year 2008. $100 a barrel more like $160 per barrel by end year of 2008...ha, ha.
corsigf1 (40.32) Submitted: 5/14/08 9:42 PM
I don't think it is the oil executives that should be tried, it should be Congress and every Administration from Carter to Bush II. Exxon will remain a strong performer for years to come.
Bittbull (44.76) Submitted: 5/17/08 11:17 PM
In reality, 1joker60 these executives should praised for bringing the oil to the market place. So I and every other american can buy it. To heat our homes, drive our cars,boats and motorcicles. In realty, these executives should bring congress before them. And ask them why are they stopping them from drilling,in Alaska or the Gulf of Mexico. No one in congress can bring oil to the market place. But they make the biggest profit all TAXES!! One last thing. Oil is the life blood of a capitalist socicty, all ways has been and will probably be for the next 50 years or so.
TheParadox (63.80) Submitted: 5/20/08 11:18 AM
Well, i really disagree with what a lot of people say about oil, politics, but this is the the reason i marked XOM an out perform:1) they have a good business. Good fundamentals and good management.2) There is nothing near enough to compete with oil.3) Oil being a commodity business, is dependent on market prices. While this usually isn't good because it does not leave XOM to have any pricing power, oil is a bit of an exception to the rule. Maybe someday electricity will be used in everything from lawnmowers to farm tractors, trucks, cars and fire engines whatever. but honestly, thats because the infrastructure is there. Electricity can be produced from oil.... or coal... or gas... and while we like to believe solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, nuclear, tidal... are great alternatives, they don't make sense on the bottom line right now. less than 10% of the US power is nuclear, and less than 1% is solar... solar is "free" and never runs out.When a feasible, strong, reliable and cost effective replace is found for oil, then XOM will have trouble. but none the less, even with more efficient cars, power plants, jet engines, and the wide array of petroleum burning engines... they still use it.It should also be known, that while past performance is not a measure of future performance, we can learn some insight on if anything these key facts:1) Energy has been the third highest outperforming sector in the S&P 500 (the goal of caps). The only ones higher have been consumer staples and health care from the time periods 1957 - 2006.2) Stocks that pay a dividend and have a good dividend policy, outperform the S&P 500 in general (despite the S&P Pays a div.) XOM pays a dividend3) from the 20 largest companies in 1957 till 2007, the top 7 were oil companies, the largest return was from Socony Mobil Oil (which was bought by Exxon) the others are known as: royal dutch pet., Standard oil of NJ ., shell, std oil ind., gulf oil, std oil of Cali., then general electric.4) Size doesn't matter: Despite XOM at the time of 1957 being one of the largest oil companies in the world (the 13th), they produced the highest annual compounding rate of return... 13.85% per year. AT&T was the largest in 1957 and matched the S&P, while the second largest standard oil of NJ, performed at 13.31% per year. The return from the S&P was 10.88% over that time frame.5) 9 of the top 10 highest returns from 1957 till 2006 were oil companies.6) All these oil companies are here today after merging and name changing, despite any political, economic or "replacement" prospects (early 90s had solar start ups, wind... ect.)7) Lastly, no one, not even these companies the own the wells, know how much oil is left. One guy says everything is fine, another says there running out... even the most educated, reliable and reasonable assumptions about oils supply, have been inaccurate or just plain wrong. even if you look at a broader time line that demand will fall due to technological advancements in cars, it can also be argued that supply will also diminish too. That point is mute.
TechEnergyGuru (< 20) Submitted: 5/21/08 8:08 PM
"some substitution from oil"? I worked at a chemical facility that built a coal gasification plant (with govn't strategic subsidies). They ran it, proved it, and shut it down. There ARE alternatives but, until they are cost competitive, not NEAR an option to the millions of Americans that need them. 20 to 50 years....maybe.
TechEnergyGuru (< 20) Submitted: 5/21/08 8:11 PM
WOW, u really got a major chip....... and NO facts to back it up. Good job. Nothing like hysteria to help the situation.
TechEnergyGuru (< 20) Submitted: 5/21/08 8:16 PM
TheParadox has said it all, and lucidly. Well said. I can add no more.
TechEnergyGuru (< 20) Submitted: 5/21/08 8:15 PM
I lied. One PS---------- I was replying to 1joker60 with my "hysteria" comment.
Terms & Conditions
RSS Headlines
Fool UK