Case Study On Exxon

The valuation process firms undergo when looking to acquire a company is very complex, but when a company, especially a foreign one, makes the conscious decision to enter another foreign market is even more complex and tricky. In this case three western oil firms the neophyte Philbro; the legacy Mobil; and, the middle weight Conoco all have to determine if and how they want to enter the newly open Russian Oil market. The Russian oil market is characterized as high risk for potentially high rewards. High risks include but are not limited to obsolete and poor infrastructure; murky and opaque governmental (and subsequently economic) policies; unreliable Russian geologic surveys; and, etc. Furthermore, Russian inflation is soaring and the

The divestiture of Conoco by DuPont also reflected changing conditions in the energy industry. As noted in a May 12, 1998, article in the New York Times: DuPont bought the oil company in 1981 as insurance against the pricing and supply tactics of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. But oil prices have been far less volatile than it feared, and DuPont continues to de-emphasize the petrochemical side of its

     Chevron Texaco, or Texaco Shell, is the leading competitor to ExxonMobil. Texaco is in the same areas of business as Exxon. Their petroleum products and lubricants are sold in the same markets, stores, and in many cases opposite street corners from each other. The two companies are very similar, but Exxon’s recent petroleum deals in the Middle East and Africa have allowed its stock price to jump ahead for the time being (1). In the industry, the two companies mainly compete for the ability to negotiate for new production. The competition is not made at the pump or at the local auto store. It seems that it’s more important to control oil than it is to sell it quickly. Because oil has so much value and power in the world, the industry is made of semi-friendly companies. Surviving and making as much profit as possible, is more important than trying to put people out of business.

From the recent case data, ExxonMobil has not acted irresponsibility in pricing its gasoline products. Outside of the grocery industry, I have not heard of any business segments surviving on less than a 5% profit margin. In reading that ExxonMobil reported only a net profit of 8.5%3, it is difficult to state that the firm over priced its products to reap abnormal profits. Although Mr. Lee Raymond’s $400 million retirement seems grossly out of proportion in utilitarian terms, adding these funds back into the firm’s bottom line would not change the profit results. With profit margins of less than 10%, it is unlikely that ExxonMobil would be able to keep the price of gasoline fixed if sweet crude oil were to increase from $80 per barrel to $88. This 10% increase in raw material cost would have to be passed through to the customer in the form of higher prices for the firm to survive.

Despite the considerable decline in the oil and gas prices the company for the fourth-quarter reported earnings of $0.58 per share that outpaced analysts’ estimates of $0.46 earnings per share by a large margins. In effect, its earnings for the quarter were 71% higher than its earnings of $0.34 per share in the fourth-quarter of 2014. More importantly, this strong growth for

Shell is the largest oil, gas, and energy company compared to Total, Exxon, Chevron, and BP. Shell is very competitive and innovative because they out-think their competition & always change their strategy to be the best. Shell changed their name from Shell Oil & Gas to Shell Energy to set them aside from the competition which was a brilliant move. Peter Voser, the Chief Executive Officer of Royal Dutch Shell stated, “We are delivering a strategy that others can’t easily repeat, with unique skills in technology and integration and a worldwide set of opportunities for new investment”. Shell recently invested and merged with BG Group and changed the entire portfolio which could possibly make them billions in the

ExxonMobil is a United States based transnational oil and gas corporation. Founded on the 30th of November 1999 after the merger between Exxon and Mobil, reuniting the original breakup of standard oil company (Folsom Jr 1998). It is the world’s largest publicly traded oil and gas company by market value and as of 2016, the sixth largest in terms of revenue at $246 million per year (Decarlo 2016) . ExxonMobil’s oil and gas exploration stretches across six continents with

The Standard Oil Company of California(Socal) is trying to determine how much to bid on the Gulf Oil Corporation. George Keller, the CEO of Socal, would need to borrow 14 billion dollars in order to make a substantial bid. While banks are willing to lend the money because of Socal's low to debt ratio, the loan would put the company in a highly leveraged position. In order to alleviate that debt, some of Gulf's assets could be sold. Keller has to consider the value of Gulf's exploration and development program when calculating future returns. Two billion dollars were being spent on the exploration and development program. This money could instead be used to reduce the debt if Socal acquired the company. However, the exploration program

Exxon and Chevron are so different in a number of ways. When you compare Chevron to Exxon, Chevron is a smaller firm. The ratios of Exxon are relatively larger than Chevron's. Nevertheless, Chevron has a got a wide net working capital and market ratio than its counterpart Exxon. This therefore, means that because its larger networking capital, Chevron needs a lot of money

Arbitrage opportunities exist in both Royal Dutch and Shell. To exploit the price differentials for Royal Dutch, one would buy shares in the European market (for $141.368) and sell them in the market in New York (for $141.375). To exploit the price differentials for Shell, one would buy shares in the European market (for $124.222) and sell them in the market in New York for ($126.554).

3. Is ExxonMobil acting responsibly with respect to pricing its product? Can it keep its prices stable (or even lower them) when the market price is increasing? Should it even try?

Exxon Mobile is one of the most successful companies in the oil and energy industries today. But what makes them so successful? In an effort to answer this question, a thorough internal investigation can be helpful in determining what aspects of this company are making it an industry leader. Two aspects of this internal analysis of Exxon Mobile are the company’s resources and capabilities.

When thinking of the energy industry, the great Halliburton always will come to mind. According to their company history, Halliburton began in 1919 in Oklahoma as a small company mixing different elements for oil drilling ("History of Halliburton," n.d., para. 1 and 2). The company has since grown into a corporate giant, with revenues exceeding 18 billion dollars by the end of the third quarter in 2015 (Halliburton Company, p. 1), and currently runs two sectors: “the Completion and Production segment and the Drilling and Evaluation segment” (Halliburton Company, p. 8). While known as an energy industry giant, Halliburton is also known for war time profiteering. As reported by Young, Halliburton

and Schlumberger has a 2010 current ratio of 1.67. Therefore, Halliburton is in a better financial

In 2010 Shell revenue is US$ 368.056 billion, operating income US$ 35.344 billion, profit US$ 20.474 billion, total assets US$ 322.560 billion, total equity US$ 148.013 billion and employees 97,000