XOM versus BP versus MSFT versus NOVL - Linux

This is a discussion on XOM versus BP versus MSFT versus NOVL - Linux ; Some food for thought. Regrettably, I did not get a chance to catch a certain prime-time infomercial (and such is not directly relevant to COLA anyway), but I can go on a more general rant regarding oil companies -- and ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: XOM versus BP versus MSFT versus NOVL

  1. XOM versus BP versus MSFT versus NOVL

    Some food for thought.

    Regrettably, I did not get a chance to catch a certain
    prime-time infomercial (and such is not directly relevant
    to COLA anyway), but I can go on a more general rant
    regarding oil companies -- and other, more COLA-relevant
    companies.

    First, identification of the oil/gas companies appears to
    be limited to about 3:

    XOM - aka Exxon-Mobil.
    BP - British Petroleum
    CVX - Chevron Corporation

    (this according to http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=XOM )

    Total net income for all three: about $89.1B, of
    which XOM corrals $43.64B -- almost half.

    BBC news reports "Another record profit for Exxon",
    with the figure of $14.83B.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7699892.stm

    The figures are easily reconciled; ttm versus last quarter.
    Not a big issue.

    What might be relates to another company, namely MSFT.
    This company has $17.77B yearly net income according to

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=MSFT
    (or http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=MSFT if one prefers).

    Microsoft also has a higher gross margin: 81% versus
    Exxon's 41% and BP's 19% and Chevron's 28%. Presumably,
    Microsoft's margins are a reflection of their creating
    product out of nothing but coffee, donuts, electrical
    power, and whatever else the R&D groups consume during
    the development thereof. ;-) Contrast this to XOM et al,
    who must toil long and hard with drilling rigs and mining
    trucks and labor in order to get the stuff out, plus
    untangling red tape (or exploiting corruption in the halls
    of Congress and the Executive Branch, if one prefers), land
    deeds, mineral rights, environmental impact reports, etc.

    (Microsoft's margin isn't all that high in the industry,
    actually. RHT has an even higher margin at 84%, and
    the industry average is 71.7%. The industry average for
    oil apparently is 33.6%.)

    So who is more evil: the company making record profits by
    pulling sticky stuff out of the ground and selling it at
    what might be overly high prices, or the company making
    record profits by pulling sticky stuff out of random term here> and selling it at overly high prices?

    And is this a proper metric? Or perhaps we should
    define some other measurement method?

    Even RHT is not immune; they gather the stuff from various
    sources (while archiving them, of course, as required by
    [L]GPL), and then package them for attractive sale. At
    least in RHT's case I, or anyone else sufficiently technically
    literate, might have a chance at getting at the source code
    and building a system myself, given sufficient time, effort,
    and resources. Presumably, the ability to allow an arbitrary
    individual to do so blunts much of RHT's evil, if one can
    call capitalists/corporations such (I can't say without a
    more thorough discussion of "evil", which I'll reserve for
    another time).

  2. Re: XOM versus BP versus MSFT versus NOVL


    "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message
    news:d4c7fc8f-6a98-44da-a4ae-0d13dbc913f7@40g2000prx.googlegroups.com...
    > Some food for thought.
    >
    > Regrettably, I did not get a chance to catch a certain
    > prime-time infomercial (and such is not directly relevant
    > to COLA anyway), but I can go on a more general rant
    > regarding oil companies -- and other, more COLA-relevant
    > companies.
    >
    > First, identification of the oil/gas companies appears to
    > be limited to about 3:
    >
    > XOM - aka Exxon-Mobil.
    > BP - British Petroleum
    > CVX - Chevron Corporation
    >
    > (this according to http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=XOM )
    >
    > Total net income for all three: about $89.1B, of
    > which XOM corrals $43.64B -- almost half.
    >
    > BBC news reports "Another record profit for Exxon",
    > with the figure of $14.83B.
    >
    > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7699892.stm


    Not just another "record profit" but I believe that XOM made more profit
    this quarter than any company has ever made in a quarter.


    > The figures are easily reconciled; ttm versus last quarter.
    > Not a big issue.
    >
    > What might be relates to another company, namely MSFT.
    > This company has $17.77B yearly net income according to
    >
    > http://finance.yahoo.com/q/co?s=MSFT
    > (or http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=MSFT if one prefers).
    >
    > Microsoft also has a higher gross margin: 81% versus
    > Exxon's 41% and BP's 19% and Chevron's 28%. Presumably,
    > Microsoft's margins are a reflection of their creating
    > product out of nothing but coffee, donuts, electrical
    > power, and whatever else the R&D groups consume during
    > the development thereof. ;-) Contrast this to XOM et al,
    > who must toil long and hard with drilling rigs and mining
    > trucks and labor in order to get the stuff out, plus
    > untangling red tape (or exploiting corruption in the halls
    > of Congress and the Executive Branch, if one prefers), land
    > deeds, mineral rights, environmental impact reports, etc.
    >
    > (Microsoft's margin isn't all that high in the industry,
    > actually. RHT has an even higher margin at 84%, and
    > the industry average is 71.7%. The industry average for
    > oil apparently is 33.6%.)


    Exactly with the profit margins. They certainly vary from industry to
    industry. If you look at total revenue XOM sold about $140 billion worth of
    product this quarter. Microsoft revenue is about 1/10th this. It's expected
    that with such high revenue figures that unit profit margins would be lower
    but they make it up on quantity.

    > So who is more evil: the company making record profits by
    > pulling sticky stuff out of the ground and selling it at
    > what might be overly high prices, or the company making
    > record profits by pulling sticky stuff out of > random term here> and selling it at overly high prices?


    Neither. Why is employing thousands of people and creating jobs evil? Nobody
    is forced to buy either software or oil and if this is something that
    consumers feel they "must" have then there are alternatives.


    > And is this a proper metric? Or perhaps we should
    > define some other measurement method?


    Measurement metric of what - evilness?

    > Even RHT is not immune; they gather the stuff from various
    > sources (while archiving them, of course, as required by
    > [L]GPL), and then package them for attractive sale. At
    > least in RHT's case I, or anyone else sufficiently technically
    > literate, might have a chance at getting at the source code
    > and building a system myself, given sufficient time, effort,
    > and resources. Presumably, the ability to allow an arbitrary
    > individual to do so blunts much of RHT's evil, if one can
    > call capitalists/corporations such (I can't say without a
    > more thorough discussion of "evil", which I'll reserve for
    > another time).


    Good luck getting all that to build. I took a look at some router firmware
    once. Setting up the proper build environment would be a full time job.



+ Reply to Thread