Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 3, 2010 at 7:07 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559950June 3, 2010 at 7:07 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #560053
UCGal
ParticipantWell… since they had 6 Billion in profits for the first quarter… they should be able to come up with the coin.
June 3, 2010 at 7:07 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #560334UCGal
ParticipantWell… since they had 6 Billion in profits for the first quarter… they should be able to come up with the coin.
June 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559285UCGal
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]The don’t want to stop it really. It’s a choice between collecting oil or stopping the leak. They can siphon but not stop it the way the damage happened. I suppose the could siphon enough to pay for the cleanup, maybe a little more, but people would not be too happy about them not stopping the leak.[/quote]
Let’s “Bring some Data”:
20,000 barrels per day at $75 per barrel. That’s assuming you could siphon all of it at neglibible cost (unlikely). But anyway, that would mean the value of what’s leaking is $1.5M per day.Uh, they’ve spent a billion already, and likely going to be on the hook for say at least $10B. The current hit to their market cap is like $40B right?
10B/1.5M = 6667 days, or about 18 years. But I believe I heard the well would run dry on its own in 3 years…
I’m thinking all in all they’d prefer to stop the flow ASAP.[/quote]
It’s worse than that – minimum penalties for spilled oil are $1100/barrel. It could go up to $4300/barrel
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64O75Q20100526
I’d say they have motivation to stop or slow the leak. If you use the most conservative numbers presented – 5000 barrels/day – that’s $5.5M/day. That starts to add up to real money as the weeks go on.
June 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559388UCGal
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]The don’t want to stop it really. It’s a choice between collecting oil or stopping the leak. They can siphon but not stop it the way the damage happened. I suppose the could siphon enough to pay for the cleanup, maybe a little more, but people would not be too happy about them not stopping the leak.[/quote]
Let’s “Bring some Data”:
20,000 barrels per day at $75 per barrel. That’s assuming you could siphon all of it at neglibible cost (unlikely). But anyway, that would mean the value of what’s leaking is $1.5M per day.Uh, they’ve spent a billion already, and likely going to be on the hook for say at least $10B. The current hit to their market cap is like $40B right?
10B/1.5M = 6667 days, or about 18 years. But I believe I heard the well would run dry on its own in 3 years…
I’m thinking all in all they’d prefer to stop the flow ASAP.[/quote]
It’s worse than that – minimum penalties for spilled oil are $1100/barrel. It could go up to $4300/barrel
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64O75Q20100526
I’d say they have motivation to stop or slow the leak. If you use the most conservative numbers presented – 5000 barrels/day – that’s $5.5M/day. That starts to add up to real money as the weeks go on.
June 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559885UCGal
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]The don’t want to stop it really. It’s a choice between collecting oil or stopping the leak. They can siphon but not stop it the way the damage happened. I suppose the could siphon enough to pay for the cleanup, maybe a little more, but people would not be too happy about them not stopping the leak.[/quote]
Let’s “Bring some Data”:
20,000 barrels per day at $75 per barrel. That’s assuming you could siphon all of it at neglibible cost (unlikely). But anyway, that would mean the value of what’s leaking is $1.5M per day.Uh, they’ve spent a billion already, and likely going to be on the hook for say at least $10B. The current hit to their market cap is like $40B right?
10B/1.5M = 6667 days, or about 18 years. But I believe I heard the well would run dry on its own in 3 years…
I’m thinking all in all they’d prefer to stop the flow ASAP.[/quote]
It’s worse than that – minimum penalties for spilled oil are $1100/barrel. It could go up to $4300/barrel
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64O75Q20100526
I’d say they have motivation to stop or slow the leak. If you use the most conservative numbers presented – 5000 barrels/day – that’s $5.5M/day. That starts to add up to real money as the weeks go on.
June 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559988UCGal
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]The don’t want to stop it really. It’s a choice between collecting oil or stopping the leak. They can siphon but not stop it the way the damage happened. I suppose the could siphon enough to pay for the cleanup, maybe a little more, but people would not be too happy about them not stopping the leak.[/quote]
Let’s “Bring some Data”:
20,000 barrels per day at $75 per barrel. That’s assuming you could siphon all of it at neglibible cost (unlikely). But anyway, that would mean the value of what’s leaking is $1.5M per day.Uh, they’ve spent a billion already, and likely going to be on the hook for say at least $10B. The current hit to their market cap is like $40B right?
10B/1.5M = 6667 days, or about 18 years. But I believe I heard the well would run dry on its own in 3 years…
I’m thinking all in all they’d prefer to stop the flow ASAP.[/quote]
It’s worse than that – minimum penalties for spilled oil are $1100/barrel. It could go up to $4300/barrel
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64O75Q20100526
I’d say they have motivation to stop or slow the leak. If you use the most conservative numbers presented – 5000 barrels/day – that’s $5.5M/day. That starts to add up to real money as the weeks go on.
June 3, 2010 at 3:47 PM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #560269UCGal
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]The don’t want to stop it really. It’s a choice between collecting oil or stopping the leak. They can siphon but not stop it the way the damage happened. I suppose the could siphon enough to pay for the cleanup, maybe a little more, but people would not be too happy about them not stopping the leak.[/quote]
Let’s “Bring some Data”:
20,000 barrels per day at $75 per barrel. That’s assuming you could siphon all of it at neglibible cost (unlikely). But anyway, that would mean the value of what’s leaking is $1.5M per day.Uh, they’ve spent a billion already, and likely going to be on the hook for say at least $10B. The current hit to their market cap is like $40B right?
10B/1.5M = 6667 days, or about 18 years. But I believe I heard the well would run dry on its own in 3 years…
I’m thinking all in all they’d prefer to stop the flow ASAP.[/quote]
It’s worse than that – minimum penalties for spilled oil are $1100/barrel. It could go up to $4300/barrel
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64O75Q20100526
I’d say they have motivation to stop or slow the leak. If you use the most conservative numbers presented – 5000 barrels/day – that’s $5.5M/day. That starts to add up to real money as the weeks go on.
June 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM in reply to: Is it possible to assume a properties old prop 13 tax rate? #559185UCGal
ParticipantNapa’s assessor site has an example that would suggest this wouldn’t work.
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294968559
Here’s another article that also suggests it wouldn’t work.
http://www.paullawgroupsf.com/articles/property-taxes-qa/As I read both links – the transferred portion would be taxed at the new rate, at the time of the transfer. Exceptions would be if it were transfers between spouse, parent/child, into/out of a trust.
June 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM in reply to: Is it possible to assume a properties old prop 13 tax rate? #559288UCGal
ParticipantNapa’s assessor site has an example that would suggest this wouldn’t work.
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294968559
Here’s another article that also suggests it wouldn’t work.
http://www.paullawgroupsf.com/articles/property-taxes-qa/As I read both links – the transferred portion would be taxed at the new rate, at the time of the transfer. Exceptions would be if it were transfers between spouse, parent/child, into/out of a trust.
June 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM in reply to: Is it possible to assume a properties old prop 13 tax rate? #559785UCGal
ParticipantNapa’s assessor site has an example that would suggest this wouldn’t work.
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294968559
Here’s another article that also suggests it wouldn’t work.
http://www.paullawgroupsf.com/articles/property-taxes-qa/As I read both links – the transferred portion would be taxed at the new rate, at the time of the transfer. Exceptions would be if it were transfers between spouse, parent/child, into/out of a trust.
June 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM in reply to: Is it possible to assume a properties old prop 13 tax rate? #559888UCGal
ParticipantNapa’s assessor site has an example that would suggest this wouldn’t work.
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294968559
Here’s another article that also suggests it wouldn’t work.
http://www.paullawgroupsf.com/articles/property-taxes-qa/As I read both links – the transferred portion would be taxed at the new rate, at the time of the transfer. Exceptions would be if it were transfers between spouse, parent/child, into/out of a trust.
June 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM in reply to: Is it possible to assume a properties old prop 13 tax rate? #560170UCGal
ParticipantNapa’s assessor site has an example that would suggest this wouldn’t work.
http://www.countyofnapa.org/Pages/DepartmentContent.aspx?id=4294968559
Here’s another article that also suggests it wouldn’t work.
http://www.paullawgroupsf.com/articles/property-taxes-qa/As I read both links – the transferred portion would be taxed at the new rate, at the time of the transfer. Exceptions would be if it were transfers between spouse, parent/child, into/out of a trust.
June 3, 2010 at 10:03 AM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559061UCGal
ParticipantJust an fyi… I was looking at the live feed on bp’s site… it’s only one camera… and it’s showing nothing right now.
Then I found this site – it has multiple cameras (one for each ROV).
http://globalwarming.house.gov/spillcam/
Interesting watching the Skandi ROV1 camera – that’s the one shooting out deep water dispersant. It’s cool to see multiple angles, too.
June 3, 2010 at 10:03 AM in reply to: OT: Anyone watching the live feed of BP cutting the stack? #559163UCGal
ParticipantJust an fyi… I was looking at the live feed on bp’s site… it’s only one camera… and it’s showing nothing right now.
Then I found this site – it has multiple cameras (one for each ROV).
http://globalwarming.house.gov/spillcam/
Interesting watching the Skandi ROV1 camera – that’s the one shooting out deep water dispersant. It’s cool to see multiple angles, too.
-
AuthorPosts
