----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 10:53 PM Subject: Re: Minimal Profits for Halliburton
> At 06:46 PM 1/3/2004 -0600 Dan Minette wrote: > >Any corporation worth its salt can have small or zero profits from certain > >international operations. > > So, so you are saying that you disagree with the conclusions of the NY > Times' investigation? > > If so, on what grounds? I have no doubt that the facts that they report are accurate. I'm saying that they are, virtually, meaningless. In a corporation, the splitting of the profits and costs between different cost/profit centers is fairly arbitrary. For example, a corporation may work in a country that prohibits taking profits out of that country. So, they make no profit in that country. However, the division of the company that rents tools to that operations in that country makes a nice profit. In addition, if there is anything like a cost plus bidding with a poor paper trail, it becomes a cost sink. Anyone who can get their costs association with that project can make their division balance sheet look a lot better. There are bonuses riding on those sheets, so there is an overwhelming incentive to do this. I'm not assuming any unusual bookkeeping here, just the stuff that oil service firms have been doing for decades. > If not, then what *are* you saying, other than simply saying that no > evidence will sway you from your pre-determined conclusion that Cheney & > Co. are looting America and Iraq for the profiteers at Halliburton? But, I never said that it was looting. I'd just be shocked if they didn't maximize return by using Iraq as a wonderful cost sink. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
