BP Offers $70 Million in Cash to Gas Station Owners

[Robbien]

Source: NPR

BP has announced plans to send cash to suffering gas stations in the US -- which is pretty revealing. It's evidence that the numerous boycotts against BP that have been orchestrated across the nation are indeed having a very distinct, very significant impact. Those boycotts and the bad PR have had a serious and immediate financial impact, and will validate such action in the eyes of many activists. But BP plans to push back.

NPR reports:

Oil giant BP PLC is floating a financial lifeline to the owners, operators and suppliers of the gas stations around America that bear its name and have been struggling because of boycotts prompted by the Gulf spill.

The head of a trade group that represents distributors of BP gasoline in the U.S. told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the company is informing outlets that they will be getting cash in their pockets, reductions in credit card fees and help with more national advertising.

A BP rep said that it was planning to send between $50 and $70 million, with more funds directed at gas stations around the Gulf.

Read more: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2010/06/bp-offers-70-million-cash-boycott-gas-station-owners.php

---

So much for the boycott not hurting BP. BP is liable for loss of business to its franchised gas stations if BP is the one who is at fault for harming the franchised brand.

[dixiegrrrrl]

1. Very telling.

Now if the people who are boycotting the stations can just drop a line to the WH telling them to
STOP leases to BP, that might prevent another tragedy at least in the USA.
I truly believe BP is LIHOP on destroying the Gulf, so they won't have to worry in future about
pesky environmental issues.

[BrklynLiberal]

9. BINGO! I agree. If there is nothing left in the Gulf to protect, they can drill to their heart's

content with no restrictions!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=480104&mesg_id=480112

[Lorien]

57. Absofreakinglutely

:grr:

[Hannah Bell]

2. impossible. boycotts don't work, & bp gas stations have nothing to do with bp.

so there must be another explanation.

[Robbien]

4. And if you don't believe that

there are those hundreds and hundreds of planted propaganda articles in every newspaper all shouting "boycotts only hurt the little guy".

[nyc 4 Biden]

5. huh?

"bp gas stations have nothing to do with bp"

um..do they not supply said gas stations with the gasoline? And doesn't BP get a cut of all the sales made at their gas stations, even in the store?

[Edweird]

13. :)

It's sarcasm :)

[nyc 4 Biden]

18. oh.

:7 ya never know around here these days. plenty of people on the other thread opposing the BP boycott.

[Edweird]

20. This is true.

[caseymoz]

16. They don't work when enough people aren't mad enough to make them work.

So far, we just haven't seen that happen often on our day and age. With the Gulf an oily dead zone, and the vast ranks of the unemployed cut off from aid, you might see that now, or soon.

[HockeyMom]

3. Daughter and I were out running errands yesterday

when she got hungry and thirsty. We stopped at BP convenience store and got hot dogs and drinks. The gas pumps were vacant, although people were inside buying lotto and refreshments.

When I reminded my daughter than she was low on gas, she said she would wait until we reached the CITGO station down the road to buy her gas.

See? We gave that BP station owner our money, but just not for GAS.

[Robbien]

6. That BP station owner then turned around and sent BP a check

for their monthly franchising fee.

BP got your cash.

[LanternWaste]

10. Self delete

self delete

[HockeyMom]

17. Maybe Nathans too

since their signs were all outside too. I think that is a franchise also.

[pipoman]

21. So you gave the gas money to Mr. Chavez?

[PacerLJ35]

41. Even the gas probably isn't BP gasoline...

BP refines the oil into different fuels, and then bulk ships the fuels to holding tanks that are a mixture of other company's fuels. The only thing in that gasoline that's 100% BP are the additives. The actual fuel is a mixture of BP and other brands.

The store itself is a wholly-owned business that simply has an agreement with BP to sell their branded gasoline (remember, the gas is a mixture, but the additives added prior to going in the station's USTs are BP additives). It's much like the stores that have agreements to market Coca-Cola products and hang a Coke sign outside...the stores aren't actually owned by Coca-Cola. Often the deals are multi-year contracts.

If you really want to do something, just start by conserving energy...be it by driving responsibly, operating an efficient car, walking/biking when able, turning off lights, and choosing products that have fewer parts made with petrochemicals (ie, plastics, etc). If people would do that, it would have a greater and longer lasting impact than simply putting a bunch of convenience stores out of business...after all, BP is still selling gasoline that's then re-branded as Exxon, Shell, Amoco, et al, because of how the industry works.

The actual branded gasoline is a very small part of BP's bottom line, but a very big part of private small business owner's bottom lines. BP makes most of their money selling bulk fuels, oils, and petrochemicals.

[Nihil]

59. Someone will alert on you for using the "C" word ...

> If you really want to do something, just start by conserving energy...be it
> by driving responsibly, operating an efficient car, walking/biking when able,
> turning off lights, and choosing products that have fewer parts made with
> petrochemicals (ie, plastics, etc).

No-one gets away with saying "c*ns*rv*" around here ...

You're infringing people's freedoms dammit!

:evilgrin:

[Edweird]

7. But.. but it's 'fungible' and a bunch of DU 'experts' went to a lot of trouble

to explain how useless a boycott would be and how you shouldn't even try......

[HCE SuiGeneris]

29. Now You Did It!

retract your statement... Stat!

[Edweird]

56. LOL.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

58. !

:P

[Bluenorthwest]

8. And so many on DU claimed such an emotional reaction

could never have any impact on BP. Also for those who paint the owners of franchises as waifes living by peddling Chiklets to tourists, note that those owners have legal protections from harm caused by BP. They are not waifes, they are large investors.

[Kali]

22. "waifes living by peddling Chiklets to tourists"

:rofl:

[LanternWaste]

11. I'm please to hear that the "ineffective" boycotts...

I'm please to hear that the "ineffective" boycotts are now costing BP upwards of $70 million-- and that merely to date.

("Ineffective" being aimed solely at those who said any boycott versus BP would have zero effect on the company...)

[hack89]

12. They got that $70 million by selling oil to another oil company to refine

into gas - gas which you might have purchased. They will not have any problem selling all the oil they want. This is simply a PR gesture to keep the franchisee's (sp) happy - 70 million is a drop in the bucket to them.

[LanternWaste]

14. One drop in the bucket can capsize a boat...

One drop in the bucket can capsize a boat-- if it's applied at the proper time and in the proper place.

That being said, I doubt the board would have parted with the $70 million were the spill not to have not happened in the first place, yes? Hence, I believe we can safely presuime that whatever else, the boycott is not "ineffective"

ed: sp

[hack89]

24. $70 million represents one day's profit for BP

I bet they give away more than this every year in executive bonuses. This is not hurting them economically - especially since oil prices are trending up and this boycott has absolutely no impact on their ability to sell crude oil.

[caseymoz]

31. Then we gave them a bad day. Let's work to give them two.

That's a profitable day that they didn't have. If they are making moves they did not find necessary before, then you've hurt them, however little it looks right now. This is not totally ineffective, but if you think this is how would you go about hurting BP, or people who continue to hold stake in the company, that does not entail breaking the law?

Can you provide a suggestion rather than discouragement?

[hack89]

33. Destroying the livelihood of innocent Americans

is not what I would do. That is why I make a point of buying gas at BP - those people are my friends and neighbors and they need my support.

I am more than willing for the government punish BP with civil and criminal sanctions. Jail time would be a nice bonus.

[stlsaxman]

37. they entered a contract w/ bp... if bp hadn't decided to help the owners- they'd have been

dead to rights to walk away or turn around and sue to carry another brand. THAT is why people incorporate- to protect themselves.

[LanternWaste]

40. You can of course point us towards a large-scale

You can of course point us towards a large-scale, American-backed contemporary strike that hurts absolutely zero "innocent" Americans, yes?

As far as I know, each and every major strike in the industrial age negatively impacted many people across broad spectrum. It's ugly, it's horrid, and it's brutal-- by by God it works...

[hack89]

49. This will fail

just like the Exxon boycott. A simple fact you cannot overcome - while you are punishing the working poor, BP executives and share holders will prosper as rising oil prices erase any economic impact of your boycott. But you will feel better, I am certain, because you did something! And that poor slob without a job - well too bad.

[caseymoz]

68. See my post #67, and please don't add the lecture about the "working poor" too.

Gas station owners are not generally among the ranks of the "working poor." The working poor working for them can at least draw unemployment until other gas stations and convenience stores take up the slack and hire them. Talk instead about the "working poor" along the Gulf Coast, whose jobs are not coming back.

Boycotts are effective if enough people stay angry enough long enough and if they're proactive. When BP adjusts, the boycott has to adjust. Before the day of corporate propaganda, they were very effective. Ask Martin Luther King.

[hack89]

76. Do you believe that oil companies can manipulate gas prices?

because if they can, what economic damage do you think you will actually inflict? BP will sell the same amount of oil at a greater price and you will buy it at a non-BP station. Oil companies don't lose money - ever. BP will take any short term hit knowing that a year from now everything will be the same as it has always been. They know that once the well is capped the TV cameras will move on.

[caseymoz]

89. If they have to take any measure they wouldn't have taken before, you've hurt them.

Fact is, if you have them take any step they wouldn't have taken before, something they wouldn't have found advantageous or optimally profitable before, anything to change their procedure, you have hurt the company. It means they had to spend man-hours organizing those changes, it means that some of their stock got sold for lower prices than it would have, or they had to sell one more bond, or they had to report a few dollars off their profits. This is the way it works with corporate entities, cost them time, you cost them money, and money is their blood. They'll make the adjustments look easy, but actually, they've said, "ouch." Unfortunately, for your concern for "working people," it also means that they hire less.

I think it's going to be hard for cameras to "move on" after this one. With four states effected, and counting. Those oil plumes aren't going away. There are going to be dead animals washing up everywhere. If the oil is in the loop current it could end up on the Eastern seaboard and even in Europe. And there's no telling what the hurricane season will do with it.

Even if cameras do move on, we could still remain angry, or scared. We ought to both by now.

[hack89]

94. No you haven't

not if things are the same a year from now and they can recover all their excess costs.

[caseymoz]

95. How can you now know things will be the same a year from now

. . . and then use that assumption as an excuse for discouragement? More than that, how do you know, retroactive after a year, when there is no boycott, that in fact the lack of one didn't help BP? You can't. You can't run two different worlds and compare them and then take the better one, to base an argument on that is simply foolish.

And for you second point, if they have to take the time to recover the costs you've hurt them. The word "cost" should tell you that immediately, and the fact that the have to take "time" (which is money) to recover them should tell you that.

So, do you have any suggestions that you think are effective? Do you think we should do nothing? Do you think the situation is bad, but BP is supreme and untouchable so we all need to bend over? What are you arguing for?

[hack89]

97. Government regulation is the answer

why do you think we got in this mess in the first place?

As stated previously, civil and criminal sanctions are certainly called for as well.

But for all this to happen, pressure needs to be placed on the government, not BP. Because BP will withstand a boycott just like Exxon did. Boycotts have no impact on laws and regulations - thats what BP really fears. They are happy to give up a month or two of profit as long as they can return to business as usual.

[caseymoz]

98. And our corporate, sponsored government can't withstand pressure as well?

Fact is, at most, that would be another front in this. And why does putting effort into a boycott negate the opportunity to put pressure on the government? That's what I want to know.

Our government is shod through with corporate interests, our officials and elected representatives are bought by corporate money, and our regulatory agencies are infiltrated and run by corporate operatives. Laws regulating corporations are written by corporate lobbyists.

Now, with all that, other corporations operating in the government would be more than willing to throw BP under a bus, but only when it begins to reflect bad on all of them, and only when they see people aren't going to forgive and forget with BP. A lasting, successful boycott will have a political effect. It will also motivate corporations to see some interest again in having a government that actually polices them. Not that this will solve the problem.

The central problem is the supremacy of corporate power. That isn't going to be cut back by any one thing, but you can't count anything else until you count one.

[spinbaby]

63. The way to help them is not to buy gas

The station owners don't make their money on gas, they make money from the convenience store. Skip the BP gas and buy something from the attached convenience store if you want to help out the station owner.

[caseymoz]

67. They benefited from the damn logo.

That thing was flying above their business bringing them money, or at least, the franchise owners calculated that it would. That's not totally innocent. They also flew that phony green and sunny environmentalist logo above their businesses furthering the corporate propaganda, and they continue to now that it has been proved a sham. All the time, they had room and opportunity and responsibility to find out what kind of company BP was. I mean, the information was out there. If you're going to excuse people from that responsibility now that things have gone badly with their intimate business partner, why not excuse the shareholders too, lots of which are little old ladies who depend on it for their pensions, and really did not make any decisions. Why not the boards of directors as well? I'm certain many of them did not approve of all the corners cut on the Deepwater Horizon.

You're buying into a corporate mindset here: that profits and benefits are privatized while losses or responsibilities are socialized. That person flying that logo is a corporate stooge to some degree or another. Now that his once, profitable partner, whose practices he benefited from, is caught creating an uncontainable catastrophe with those very practices, the corporate stooge has no responsibility?

Strange you say now that you make a point of buying gas at BP because they are friends and neighbors. How serious should I take your point that a boycott is ineffective against BP, then? How can I know if you care that it is effective? How much do you want your friends and neighbors to keep them in business dealing and sending money to a company that's massively slagging the planet and impoverishing hundreds of thousands of people, if not eventually millions?

I don't know how to break this to you: it's not going to be easy to fight this corporate domination of our culture, our politics and our economy. People are going to get hurt, at least economically, but the innocent people are the people along the Gulf, like the ones with the tour boats, not the one who sells gas in BP's name. More actually innocent people will get hurt if we're not willing to assign the responsibility that's actually clearly there, if we would just block out the propaganda and interference and think clearly about it.

If we do not fight this corporate domination, though, this, or something as bad or worse, will happen again. And if we survive this over the long haul, something that's an open question, we won't survive two or three more of these.

[hack89]

74. So find a way to punish those in charge without needless collateral damage

and I will be right with you. The fact is you can't touch those who are really to blame but your need to punish someone is so great you will rationalize punishing those you can actually hurt - a bunch of working Americans.

[caseymoz]

88. My need to punish, how about the need to change things before we're extinct?

I look at an accident on the Gulf, and I see the lives of seven billion people on the line if we have a few more accidents like this. That's the collateral damage I'm worried about. This alone could poison the whole Atlantic, if it's not far worse. It's going to cost a lot of lives over months and decades. It already has cost lives in the gulf.

Reread my post and what I said: they are not innocent, and the damage to them is not collateral. I built an argument on to that. Tell me please why you disagree.

CEO's are also, when you come down to it, "working people" too. Wasn't the BP-CEO's line the working-class weary, "Hey, I just want my life back?" It's just a job for him, too. I mean, they go to work, and they care about raising their families and providing the best for them. They simply make obscene amounts of money, their decisions have further consequences, and they have more power to escape responsibilities for what they do.

Yes, except he shouldn't be responsible because he's one of the hardest working, most productive people in our economy, so say conservatives.

[fishwax]

69. boycotting BP won't destroy the livelihood of innocent Americans

anymore than shopping at BP will destroy the livelihood of innocent Americans. Unless people are actually cutting consumption (which would, in itself, be a good thing), then the money they would have spent at that local convenience store will be spent at some other local convenience store.

[LanternWaste]

39. Yet my position still stands..

Yet my position still stands... we can righteously minimize the impact all we want to, but we would be lying if we said the boycotts were ineffective-- especially as corporations are not in the habit of giving out one day's profits as a matter of course to the distributors... :shrug:

It's working. You may easily minimize the effects, but the effects are indeed there.

[hack89]

50. If it don't cause long term change, then it is a waste of time

BP is willing and able to spend some extra cash now to ensure business as usual 6 months from now. Want to take a bet that once the well is capped the American people will move on to the next crisis?

[caseymoz]

92. You're not going to prompt long-term change without measures like it.

And none of them are, by themselves, going to cause it. Like a single battle or even a single theater didn't win WWII, and battling corporate power is at least as big and probably as important now. You're not going to get any grand plan to make change without measures that are, by themselves, ineffective for long-term change.

I'll make a bet with you that the oil is still there and visible after the BP caps the well. That fishing will never come back, that the city of New Orleans will be dying, that people in the area will start to get deathly ill from inhaling petroleum by-products constantly, that things like blue-fish tuna will be missing or extinct, that several species will disappear all together and dead wildlife will wash up on the shore, that States on the eastern seaboard will see oil wash up on their shores, that those oil plumes will be visible for years after they cap the the well . . . and that the Gulf will be dead zone, and that the effects of BP's dispersants will resurface in the news time and again. None of these are going away after BP caps that oil well, and they all make far better news than a video of the pipe spewing oil.

Also, ask Martin Luther King if boycotts work or not. Of course, that was in the age before corporate propaganda harped upon us the unquestionable wisdom that boycotts do not work, they only hurt little people, so don't ever, ever do them. Strangely similar to what they say about unionizing, really.

[caseymoz]

19. If it were economically better for them to do that

They would have been doing it as much before the boycott. They are doing something slightly disadvantageous to their profits, then. So, it isn't true it has not hurt them. So far it's just a splinter but the fight has hardly begun.

[Ian David]

15. VICTORY IS MINE! n/t

[Yeahyeah]

23. Jean-Michel Cousteau-Gulf Stream will take oil spill to England.

http://www.cbs.com/late_night/late_late_show/video/?vs=Full Episodes

at end of show, 38:15 in

Usually it's BP executives going to England on Gulf Streams.

[elocs]

25. Ask some poor clerk at a BP station who lost their job because of the boycott how they feel,

how the boycott hurt them as they are just trying to make a living. That makes it kind of hard to feel proud of being a boycotter of BP especially when that person may be a neighbor or friend.

[Cattledog]

26. People lose jobs all the time.

[elocs]

28. Well, just wait until it's your turn. Not so funny then, is it? n/t

[Robbien]

27. typical

when people do nothing about an outrage, people scream where is the outrage?

but when people do something, people scream but hey little guys may get hurt in the process.

Sorry that your friend or neighbor lost his job working for an awful horrid company. Any other new job else would be a step up.

[elocs]

30. Typical. Do something where somebody gets hurt, but so long as it's not you it's ok.

I suppose that's the same attitude the military has about civilian casualties in Afghanistan. "Well, sometimes the little guy has to get hurt".

What a fricking too bad, so sad attitude, especially when it does not effect you at all when you are not that little guy. But it's important to feel like you are really doing something when you are not.

[Robbien]

32. If it didn't effect you or yours

You probably wouldn't give a second thought about the boycott and wouldn't be writing all these posts saying oh poor me. "Forget about all those other hundreds of thousands of people and animals and the environment which were hurt, pity me."

[crikkett]

38. This is why we should never end war. All those people making missiles

would be out of work.

[hack89]

35. What's wrong with criminal and civil sanctions

that target the executives but lets the working poor keep their jobs? Or don't you care at all about working people?

[Robbien]

36. Because our justice system doesn't prosecute corporations any more these days

They only fine companies a couple of bucks leaving the crooks to go ahead with their corrupt practices.

The only way to get a company to feel the effect of their actions is for the public to directly take action.

The court system would be a better choice, but it is one we do not have these days.

[hack89]

48. So your answer is to punish the working poor?

because they are the only people in your power to punish?

[hack89]

34. That's why I buy gas at BP

I support American workers.

[Uncle Joe]

42. Who are the people working in BP's competitor fuel stations?

I know we have an immigration problem but they can't all be Mexicans.

[PacerLJ35]

44. Those competitor gas stations are probably selling fuels made with BP products

See my post below.

[Uncle Joe]

45. Those competitor stations are not paying BP franchise fees. n/t

[PacerLJ35]

46. BP franchise fees are a very small part of BP's income, and this is hurting small business far more

Besides, you're blaming people for signing up with BP when they have ZERO idea whether or not BP is being run responsibly...just think if you were in the business....it's just chance that you'd sign up for the wrong company.

[Uncle Joe]

51. BP has a long term track record of abuse, which any prospective station owner could have researched.

Those station owners will now be reimbursed some money from the brand which betrayed it's "green" image and I suspect more may be on the way.

Those station owners can also sue and change brands or not renew their franchise, future prospective station owners will be more reluctant to align with a radioactive brand.

Mega-corporations have hid behind their "willing" pawns for too long as shields against public accountability, when they destroy vast numbers of people and their livelihoods without any regard.

The environment is irreplaceable and they've fought; kicking and screaming against necessary changes to protect humanity's very existence.

[PacerLJ35]

53. That could be said with regard to any large energy corporation...

What would the prospective business store owner choose now that would be free of any issues?

Exxon? Hmmm, they had a major oil spill...they've had environmental issues in the past too.

Shell? Hmmm, what about the issues in west Africa?

I could continue but you get my point. The average convenience store owner probably only knew BP from the outside in...that is, they projected a green-friendly facade. If they took the time to dig real deep, they'd probably find a pretty even record among all the companies.

Again, you're not punishing BP. You're punishing people that are only marginally related to the company. Had they all known ahead of time that BP had a lot of engineering problems and their emergency response plans were shoddy, etc, and continued to sign on with them, then I'd say you have a point. But you don't.

[Uncle Joe]

61. Re: The Exxon Valdez Spill, BP's role in it and the issue of shoddy emergency response plans.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4397307

CBS/AP) Since a busted oil well began spewing crude into the Gulf of Mexico a month ago, the catastrophe has constantly been measured against the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster. The Alaska spill leaked nearly 11 million gallons of crude, killed countless wildlife and tarnished the owner of the damaged tanker, Exxon.

Yet the leader of botched containment efforts in the critical hours after the tanker ran aground wasn't Exxon Mobil Corp. It was BP PLC, the same firm now fighting to plug the Gulf leak.

BP owned a controlling interest in the Alaska oil industry consortium that was required to write a cleanup plan and respond to the spill two decades ago. It also supplied the top executive of the consortium, Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Lawsuits and investigations that followed the Valdez disaster blamed both Exxon and Alyeska for a response that was bungled on many levels.

People who had a front row seat to the Alaska spill tell The Associated Press that BP's actions in the Gulf suggest it hasn't changed much at all.

The OP is a direct contradiction to your premise, if corporate BP didn't see a threat or wasn't getting hurt by the boycott, they wouldn't be shelling out 70 million dollars to their stations.

Furthermore these station owners have recourse of their own, if they believe BP negligently destroyed the brand, they could sue to be released early from their franchise agreement early, possibly obtain damages, not renew their franchise agreement when it expires and change brands.

For that matter I believe strong, effective public boycotts to be the most effective way of motivating reckless mega-corporations to change their destructive behavior, look what happened to the Exxon Valdez settlement after their spill and prolonged years of expensive court battle.

Edit for Exxon Valdez Settlement link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8509234

On June 15 2009, Exxon Mobil Corp was ordered to pay $507.5 million in punitive damages for the Exxon Valedez Oil Spill that occurred off the coast of Alaska in 1989. The $507.5 million settlement is only "a fraction of the $5 billion in punitive damages originally awarded to fisherman, Alaska natives, business owners and other litigants by a jury" in 1994.

After the 1994 court ruling requiring a settlement of $5 billion, Exxon launched a series of appeals. At a trial in 2006, the jury agreed to cut the settlement in half to $2.5 billion. In June 2008, Justice David Souter ruled that punitive damages cannot exceed the approximately $500 million Exxon has already paid to victims of the oil spill and their families.

Interestingly, the $507.5 million settlement only amounts to about 1/5 of the $2.5 billion cost of cleaning up the oil spill, which flooded the alaska coastline with 10.8 billion gallons of oil and is known as one of the most destructive man-made environmental disasters in history.

[PacerLJ35]

96. I'm sure the small gas station owners got to review those shoddy ER plans

[hack89]

52. Americans - I support them too.

I think that every working person deserves the chance to support themselves and their families.

[fishwax]

71. and BP convenience stores are the only ones employing American workers?

:crazy:

[hack89]

73. No - I think it is wrong to pit worker against worker

I support them all.

[fishwax]

77. so you shop at every single store?

[hack89]

78. I make it a point to shop at as many local stores as I can

I view it as a civic duty to support my town and my neighbors.

[fishwax]

80. and the ones you don't? I guess you don't care about workers there?

Of course, I doubt that's really true. In the same way, it's simply absurd to say that going to a Mobil station instead of a BP station is not being supportive of American workers.

[hack89]

81. I live in a small town - I spend money at every gas station.

When out of town I plan to go out of my way to spend money at BP because I think this boycott is so misguided. I figure the workers need the economic support.

[fishwax]

82. Does that mean you want the workers at the non-BP stations on your trip to lose their jobs?

"When out of town I plan to go out of my way to spend money at BP because I think this boycott is so misguided. I figure the workers need the economic support."

God knows workers need economic support. I'd guess the vast majority of people boycotting BP are providing the same amount of material support to workers that they were before the boycott, in spite of all the tsk-tsk'ing.

[hack89]

85. Why would they lose their jobs if your boycott is so successful?

won't they be getting more business? At worse my actions will cancel out yours and we are left with the status quo. I don't see why this is so hard to grasp.


The irony of the boycotters is that they are still providing material support to BP as they buy BP gas at non-BP gas stations.

[fishwax]

90. it's quite easy to grasp -- you don't like the boycott, and plan to take it out on the working poor

You're doing the exact same thing that the boycotters are doing--passing up one station and going to another.

"The irony of the boycotters is that they are still providing material support to BP as they buy BP gas at non-BP gas stations."

Sure, but not as much material support as if they went to BP.

[hack89]

93. But since your boycott is so successful

how can I possible harm workers at other gas stations? I am just one man standing against the boycott juggernaut - trust me, I wouldn't be doing this if I thought it would hurt anyone.

[Ignis]

65. Just like some poor schmuck working for KBR or Halliburton, right?

:shrug:

[fishwax]

70. assuming people still buy gas, then they're simply supporting clerks at other stores

:shrug:

[Hugabear]

75. Cry me a river, boo-hoo-hoo

You work for an evil corporation, I can't say I feel too sorry for you. Same way I feel about people who work for health insurance companies, who are "just doing their job" as they do everything they can to fuck people over.

We've been blasting Big Oil for years. I wouldn't shed a tear if every last Big Oil company went out of business. We need to develop clean, renewable sources of energy, not raping and polluting the planet like BP is doing.

[elocs]

83. Well, don't expect anyone to cry a river if you were to lose your job either.

Unlike Republicans and freepers I expect Democrats to have more empathy and compassion for people, especially for the little guy. That's why I find Democrats who display your kind of attitude to be especially disgusting and pathetic.

Fortunately, for me, I won't ever have to read any of your posts again. I have put others on my "ignore" list, but never anyone so deserving as you.

:puke: :nuke:

[Dark]

84. OR: Ask the wildlife what it's like to be covered in oil and burned alive.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4449616

Fuck BP. If I owned a franchise, I'd be suing their asses to get out of my contract over this.

[Bidault]

91. I assume you are against boycotting any company in the world

Since virtually all companies have poor clerks. There's no such thing as a rich clerk.

[PacerLJ35]

43. If you REALLY want to do something to show your frustration/anger...

Don't boycott BP...because in the end you aren't doing much to dent BP. $70 million isn't much to them, but it's turning the lights out on small business and the people that work there.

The best thing to do is to be energy-responsible...drive responsibly (don't accelerate quickly, etc). Operate an efficient car that gets at least 30 mpg. Walk/bike when you can. Buy products that rely less on petrochemicals...for example I bought metal sprinklers rather than the all-plastic kind. Turn off your lights and keep your heat/air at reasonable levels. Invest in energy efficient technologies for your car, house and other applications when able.

Doing the above will have a far greater and longer lasting effect than simply boycotting business that had very little other than name association with the oil spill. What am I talking about you wonder?

Well, when companies like BP produce oil, they send it to refineries. These refineries then create products that are useful to other industries...such as auto gas, diesel fuel, jet fuel, other oils, and petrochemicals used in plastics, etc. The bulk products are shipped through pipelines and in tank cars to holding areas where other companies such as fuel brokers then sell the fuel to gas stations all over. Often, the gasoline sold this way is a mixture of many brands. By the time it gets to the pump, the only thing that's still 100% BP are the additives added to the fuel...that's what makes it "BP gasoline", although the fuel itself could have been produced and refined by Exxon, Shell, etc. When you buy gasoline at Exxon, Shell, etc, you are likely buying a product that's partly made with BP-processed fuel, among others.

The businesses that sell "BP gasoline" usually have multi-year contracts to sell BP gasolines, which as I said is a mixture of various brands, then have BP-derived additives added prior to being pumped into the gas station's UST. It's much like having a Coca-Cola sign outside because your business has a contract to sell Coke products for the next 5 years...even though your business isn't owned by Coke. So if people boycott your business, YOU lose, Coke doesn't because there are many other places it sells its products.

People here are always referring to "knee jerk" reactions that aren't well thought out. Well, the boycott of BP gas stations is one of those things.

[Uncle Joe]

47. I agree with you regarding conservation, but the kind of long term, chronic disregard exhibited

by BP toward the environment, the economy of entire regions and even the safety of their workers demand a moral/economic cost for such "Money is God" based destructive behavior as an inducement never to let it happen again.

70 million isn't much to BP but it's a start and they wouldn't be paying that to those small businesses if the boycott wasn't effective.

If your conscious won't let you boycott, fine, but don't get in the way of the people whose conscious demands it.

[PacerLJ35]

54. You act like BP was the only petroleum company that had issues

Actually, ask anyone on the street prior to the BP oil spill and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that had a notion that BP was on a collision course with an environmental disaster, since they expended a lot of time promoting a "green" image.

I say if the convenience store owners knew ahead of the time that they were associating themselves with a "reckless" corporation, then fine. But it's more than likely they had no idea of the internal issues within BP. To them, they were just another brand of gasoline.

[Uncle Joe]

60. People making major investments by purchasing fuel stations and determining which brand to

associate with have a higher threshold of repsonsibility in regards to knowledge than "anyone on the street."

BP had a worse track record than most oil corporations and investors could/should have researched that information.

[hack89]

64. What does that have to do with punishing the clerks

and other working stiffs who have jobs at all those BP stations? Are you really sure you can't satisfy your desire to punish someone without impacting all those low wage workers? Are you hurting them just because they are the only ones you can hurt?

[Uncle Joe]

66. You must not have read the OP, so I will repost a segment here for you reading pleasure.

BP Offers $70 Million in Cash to Gas Station Owners
Source: NPR

BP has announced plans to send cash to suffering gas stations in the US -- which is pretty revealing. It's evidence that the numerous boycotts against BP that have been orchestrated across the nation are indeed having a very distinct, very significant impact. Those boycotts and the bad PR have had a serious and immediate financial impact, and will validate such action in the eyes of many activists. But BP plans to push back.

So obviously this part of your post is false.

What does that have to do with punishing the clerks
Posted by hack89
and other working stiffs who have jobs at all those BP stations? Are you really sure you can't satisfy your desire to punish someone without impacting all those low wage workers? Are you hurting them just because they are the only ones you can hurt?

Furthermore my post was addressing the responsibilty of those gas station owners as a response to your post which I listed below.

I say if the convenience store owners knew ahead of the time that they were associating themselves with a "reckless" corporation, then fine. But it's more than likely they had no idea of the internal issues within BP. To them, they were just another brand of gasoline.

[hack89]

79. Do you believe that oil companies can manipulate gas prices?

because if they can, what economic damage do you think you will actually inflict?

BP is willing and able to spend some extra cash now to ensure business as usual 6 months from now. Want to take a bet that once the well is capped the American people will move on to the next crisis? What happens when the TV cameras move on?

[Uncle Joe]

87. The writing is on the wall and the oil companies are gradually losing their power.

I don't believe this is the end, but it's the beginning of the end.

This isn't the 70's, the American People are far more aware of global warming climate change, peak oil, the ever increasing in scope, direct environmental and economic damage created by our suicidal reliance on fossil fuels.

The people are more than ready for change, should the oil corporations start "manipulating" prices upward, the development and use of alternative energy will accelerate as that becomes more cost effective and the oil corporations know this as well.

Some cameras and much of the Internet will not be moving on for a while, the Gulf region isn't a remote sparsely populated location as was northern Alaska; easy to hide from the nation's eyes.

The economic consequences to the nation from this catastrophe will be far more severe and the hurricanes haven't even hit yet.

But even when the cameras do move on, much of the political demographic; most damaged by this catastrophe is one the fossil fuel industry least wanted to hurt, this is the political equivalent of ongoing, long term "friendly fire."

[fishwax]

72. um, reducing consumption would hurt the little guy much more than a boycott would

People who don't buy gas at BP but still consume the same amount of gas will simply be spending their gasoline dollars at other places. They're supporting some other small business rather than the BP convenience store.

On the other hand, people who actually consume less gasoline actually won't be buying as much gas. If all of BP's customers cut their fuel consumption by 10%, that would clearly hurt small businesses.

I'm not saying people shouldn't conserve fuel--they absolutely should. I'm just pointing out that the argument that "boycotting BP will hurt small businesses" seems to me to be one of those " 'knee jerk' reactions that aren't well thought out."

[MellowDem]

55. 50-70 million is nothing...

I am surprised BP is helping out the franchises, since it doesn't have to, but I'm betting that it's doing this for good PR. BP helping out the little guy so to speak. And it's incredibly cheap PR. 50-70 million dollars is nothing. If the best the boycott can do is give BP another opportunity for good PR to the tune of 50-70 million, I have a hard time seeing how it is "effective" or will cause gas companies to change their ways in any way at all.

A year after the spill is stopped, almost nobody will remember or care about boycotting BP and it will be back to business as usual. And nobody will care that they spent their money at some other oil giant's gas station that spills gas in some third world country temporarily to feel good about it.

[superconnected]

62. It would normally go to lobbyists and politicians.

[sofa king]

86. Sometimes I have to still buy gas from BP

Because it's the only station for 20 miles around in an area where I frequently fish. But seeing as my moped only has a one gallon tank, and I keep a bag of dirty pennies and nickels just for BP, I don't feel too bad about it.