EXXON CHAIRMAN GETS $400 MILLION RETIREMENT PACKAGE AMID SOARING GAS PRICES

ABC News via Drudge ^

[aShepard]

April 14, 2006— Soaring gas prices are squeezing most Americans at the pump, but at least one man isn't complaining.

Last year, Exxon made the biggest profit of any company ever, $36 billion, and its retiring chairman appears to be reaping the benefits.

Exxon is giving Lee Raymond one of the most generous retirement packages in history, nearly $400 million, including pension, stock options and other perks, such as a $1 million consulting deal, two years of home security, personal security, a car and driver, and use of a corporate jet for professional purposes.

Last November, when he was still chairman of Exxon, Raymond told Congress that gas prices were high because of global supply and demand.

"We're all in this together, everywhere in the world," he testified.

Raymond, however, was confronted with caustic complaints about his compensation.

"In 2004, Mr. Raymond, your bonus was over $3.6 million," Sen. Barbara Boxer said.

That was before new corporate documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission that revealed Raymond's retirement deal and his $51.1 million paycheck in 2005. That's equivalent to $141,000 a day, nearly $6,000 an hour. It's almost more than five times what the CEO of Chevron made.

"I think it will spark a lot of outrage," said Sarah Anderson, a fellow in the global economy program at the Institute for Policy Studies, an independent think tank. "Clearly much of his high-level pay is due to the high price of gas."

Exxon defends Raymond's compensation, pointing out that during the 12 years he ran the company, Exxon became the largest oil company in the world and that the stock price went up 500 percent.

A company spokesman said the compensation package reflected "a very long and distinguished career."

Some Exxon shareholders are now trying to pass resolutions criticizing the company's executive pay policies. The company is urging other shareholders to vote against those resolutions.

[MikeHu]

You're free not to buy their product.

[hinckley buzzard]

Seems like a lot, but its not my money nor my place to tell Exxon what to do with theirs.

Agreed. HOWEVER...the next person who tells me they need these high profits to fund research and exploration, or to tide them over market swings, deserves a good swift kick.

[stockstrader]

Free market? I guess that Royal DUTCH Shell, CITGO (Venezuela), BP (Great Britain) and LUKOIL (Russia) don't count in that competition, right?

And I guess the fact that US oil companies control a WHOLE TWO PERCENT of the world oil market explains why the spot price of oil is so high, too, right?..lol

[HawaiianGecko]

Not buying your explanation

Well that certainly is your right. But it is exactly the explanation to your question. Your entire argument that competition doesn't exist because gasoline prices are not different really doesn't fly.

Two competing station on opposite corners selling gas for $1.00 wouldn't be competing for your money using your logic. What about two stations selling a gallon for a nickel? Are they not competing?  In fact using your logic, if these two stations were both paying you $1.00 for the privilege of filling your tank they wouldn't be competing.

The fact is that one may be paying more for his product, but he also sells more coffee and Hostess Donut Gems allowing him to match his competitor's lower price.

 

[stockstrader]

K..just checking. You never know for sure online...:)

[the invisib1e hand]

Why isn't Exxon trying to bury Shell?

My response was not an insult to your question. It is a reasonable question, although it seems based on presumptions about the costs of doing business; i.e. that there is no cost basis justifying the current high price of gasoline, which is popularly assumed but has no basis in fact. If the industry has narrowed the margins to a reasonable rate, and pushing them lower begins to put someone out of business, would the market be the winner?

Think for a minute what would happen if they did. How would that affect the supply-demand situation, the position of the US in the energy market (though Royal Dutch Shell plc/Koninklijke Nederlandse Shell NV is not American owned, it clearly does significant business here).

There's a basic question to ask yourself, that most of the experts probably wouldn't bother asking themselves. If Exxon "buried" Shell, you would have fewer choices and less price competition.

It is mythical to understand the term "free market" to be "darwinian." This is because a) darwinism is a myth and b) the best management of resources is ensured by a diverse and highly skilled private industry -- not one, single, dominating "fittest survivor," as is implied by popular misconceptions about the function of free markets.

[ConTex]

I try not to, but gas comes out of one refinery and goes to many station names. It's nearly impossible to avoid Exxonmobil products, but trust me we try to.

[TheOracleAtLilac]

oligarchy

oligopoly ?

[managusta]

Remember at least $300 million will be claimed by the Govt in taxes.

[ConTex]

oligopoly

[stockstrader]

Since kjo is not responding to my questions, just ask him what would happen if there was ONLY one station on that corner, and not two?

Also, just for the heck of it, asking why the heck he is even considering buying gas at that SHELL station--since the gas comes from Royal DUTCH Shell and not a US company?..:)

[HighWheeler]

This is the Exxon CEO??? He looks like he should be wearing a helmet.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Good for him. He's not running a charity or public service operation. Every business has its day if its around long enough.

In theory, yes. Kinda like how Solomon's proposal to split the baby in half was completely logical, on paper.

A conquering army can slaughter every last woman and child in theory, but in practice there are reprecussions and such decisions can lead to unanticipated negative blowback over time. I'm a stockholder, and I'm pissed as heck. No good justification for such an obscene payment to a single man. None whatsoever. This is the kind of crap that allows Democrats to get their foot in the door, and bad policy overreactions to get passed into law.

[MikeHu]

It's not like it's a government monopoly/mandate -- like the public schools.

They force you to buy their product -- in addition to the product you really want.

[lepton]

The oil companies or more of a drain on the American economy than an asset because they drive up the costs for almost every other business in the country.

Ummm. They drive down costs. ...Otherwise we'd be doing those things that cost us less.

...Or is there some mandated program that requires you to buy gas for the heck of it?

[Diddle E. Squat]

Ya know, you are probably the biggest knee-jerk yap dog around here.

[nopardons]

BRAVO!

[Clemenza]

GOOD FOR HIM! It was in his contract, let him enjoy his rewards!

All of you folks who complain are just jealous. ;-)

[Centurion2000]

bump for later.

[hinckley buzzard]

It's long past time that SOMEBODY looked into how these companies do business. And I mean somebody that can't be bought. Who? I have no idea.

Well, Dennis Kucinich thinks he's the one. He has started legislation which will levy a 100% "windfall profits tax" on oil companies and only oil companies. He thinks he knows the answer, although he never says how an extra tax on the oil company will help the consumer.