BP - off the hook ? ...and a BUY ?

ChiefGrasscutter

BP subcontracted all the drilling and operating of the well etc to Transocean, who in turn subcontracted the cementing process (the likely problem) of the well shaft to Halliburton. All are experts in their field and are reputable oilfield contrators and operators. The Blow out preventor which seems not to have worked as it was meant to was constructed Cameron.

So far as I can gather BP were not involved in the decisions, processes or equipment used in the drilling operations.

This is all equivalent to you taking your car to be mended at your local garage who subcontract the bodywork repair needed to specialist in this field. In turn their use of some of their own equipment causes a fire which eventually devastates the entire industrial park:---- after which everyone turns up on you, the car's owner, doorstep and demand that you personally pay to clear up all the mess............

I expect the litigation on this one will last for years.

1echidna

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

BP subcontracted all the drilling and operating of the well etc to Transocean, who in turn subcontracted the cementing process (the likely problem) of the well shaft to Halliburton. All are experts in their field and are reputable oilfield contrators and operators. The Blow out preventor which seems not to have worked as it was meant to was constructed Cameron.

So far as I can gather BP were not involved in the decisions, processes or equipment used in the drilling operations.



This is all equivalent to you taking your car to be mended at your local garage who subcontract the bodywork repair needed to specialist in this field. In turn their use of some of their own equipment causes a fire which eventually devastates the entire industrial park:---- after which everyone turns up on you, the car's owner, doorstep and demand that you personally pay to clear up all the mess............

I expect the litigation on this one will last for years.

If it wasn't that the people down the line were comparatively men of straw and it wasn't such big bills I would agree with you. When contracts are set up the Federal Authorities have made quite sure under US law that BP is responsible for the pollution clear up, whether they can recover it by suing down the contracts or not will be a moot point. Liability for consequential damage (for example to peoples livlihoods) is more complex, but Hayward certainly has offered to pay, whether the sub contractors down the line have big enough wallets to help out much is dubious.. Although legally responsibility does rest with contractors oil companies know that they have to keep control of what goes on as it will reflect on them, thus I think it will be hard for BP to make it completely stick that the operation was nothing to do with them. You could be damn sure that if the operation had went well they would be saying how BP had drilled for this oil.

Edit. A large oil spill is an incredibly emotive subject hence the Feds phrase of keeping "a boot on the neck of BP" Don't imagine that there aren't other Feds boots in the picture and the possibility for BP to get a thorough kicking. I saw somewhere the comment that this affair has the potential to acquire an "explosive velocity"

1echidna

But waving off rig safety as none-of-its-business doesn’t look good – and I would say is potentially a public relations misstep that Hayward could come to regret.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/rowenamason/100005416/bps-blame-game-tightrope/

1echidna

It is no wonder that the companies involves with the current disaster, BP, Transocean et al, are pointing fingers at each other and running for cover. They know that whatever are the personal or environmental consequences of the disaster, a bigger disaster is awaiting them in the American Courts.

http://safetyatworkblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/bp-oil-rig-explosion-lawyer-video/

MacsReturns

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

BP subcontracted all the drilling and operating of the well etc to Transocean, who in turn subcontracted the cementing process (the likely problem) of the well shaft to Halliburton. All are experts in their field and are reputable oilfield contrators and operators. The Blow out preventor which seems not to have worked as it was meant to was constructed Cameron.

Oh dear - BP's fizznucked if they're up against Haliburton on their home turf

1echidna

Salazar met for several hours with BP executives at the company's U.S. headquarters in Houston. BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward was not present at the meeting, a company spokesman said.
"We will hold them accountable for doing what they are legally responsible for doing," Salazar said, referring to BP's legal obligation to clean up damage from the spill.
"Its life is very much on the line here," Salazar said, referring to BP. "Are they doing everything that they can possibly do? I hope that they are."

http://in.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idINN0614066320100506

lvader

I sold BP @560 today, then made some money on the big price swings on Barclays.

1echidna

Been watching what goes on on the Internet in connection with BP. This story is likely to increase in intensity rather than subside. Selling very good move I think.

worldtraveller

Personally, I'd rather put my money in the slots in Vegas!

1echidna

Dome seems very likely to have failed. Hydrates being the problem.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gulf_oil_spill