[UCGal]

Well… since they had 6 Billion in profits for the first quarter… they should be able to come up with the coin.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/B/bp_first_quarter_2010_results.pdf

[UCGal]

Well… since they had 6 Billion in profits for the first quarter… they should be able to come up with the coin.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/B/bp_first_quarter_2010_results.pdf

[UCGal]

Well… since they had 6 Billion in profits for the first quarter… they should be able to come up with the coin.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/B/bp_first_quarter_2010_results.pdf

[UCGal]

[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.

[UCGal]

[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.

[UCGal]

[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.

[UCGal]

[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.

[UCGal]

[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.

[UCGal]

Napa’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.

[UCGal]

Napa’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.

[UCGal]

Napa’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.

[UCGal]

Napa’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.

[UCGal]

Napa’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.

[UCGal]

Just 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.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/homepage/STAGING/local_assets/bp_homepage/html/rov_stream.html

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.

[UCGal]

Just 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.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/homepage/STAGING/local_assets/bp_homepage/html/rov_stream.html

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.

[Author]

Posts