The FTC is a joke

[Mobil]

The FTC is supposed to preserve competition. When Chevron and Texaco merged they forced Texaco to sell all their Houston-area stations to what already was a near-monopoly, $hell.

They also let the two largest oil giants in the world merge. Exxon and Mobil were already enormous companies. Even after the FTC forced them to sell off thousands of stations they are still a monster.

[Mobil]

Originally posted by tbennett

Originally posted by Mobil
The FTC is supposed to preserve competition.

Finally, someone else agrees with me.  Have they already forgot about the Sherman Antitrust Act and what it stands for?  I do agree with you on the Exxon/Mobil thing.  Did you know that Exxon has private ties to British Petroleum (BP) now and has since its days as American Oil Company (Amoco)/Standard Oil?  THERE is a big monopoly that someone is not picking up on - and the only thing that makes Exxon/Mobil "competition" with BP is the nameplate.

As far as I know, Shell has no connections with Exxon.  The only thing that makes a red flag fly in my mind is that the owner of the local BP - who has owned the station for nearly 30 years - told me of their connection with Exxon.  I take everything I hear with a grain of salt, but the owner of our BP (which was a former Amoco) wouldn't lie!

Tyler

Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, and Amoco were all part of the infamous Standard Oil originally. ExxonMobil was not a merger, but get this, an $81 billion acquisition of Mobil by Exxon. Shocking. Also in the Houston area, they should have stopped Kroger from buying many Albertsons stores. This is the same FTC that recently let Miller and Coors merge, Rite Aid buy Eckerd, and Sirius buy XM. Keep in mind that Coors already bought Molson in 2005. I found THIS on the Rite Aid website:
This press release may contain forward-looking statements, which are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements.  Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements include our high level of indebtedness, our ability to make interest and principal payments on our debt and satisfy the other covenants contained in our senior secured credit facility and other debt agreements, our ability to improve the operating performance of our stores in accordance with our long term strategy, our ability to realize the benefits of the Brooks Eckerd acquisition, our ability to hire and retain pharmacists and other store personnel, the efforts of private and public third-party payers to reduce prescription drug reimbursements and encourage mail order, competitive pricing pressures, continued consolidation of the drugstore industry, changes in state or federal legislation or regulations, the outcome of lawsuits and governmental investigations, general economic conditions and inflation, interest rate movements and  access to capital. Consequently, all of the forward-looking statements made in this press release are qualified by these and other factors, risks and uncertainties. Readers are also directed to consider other risks and uncertainties discussed in documents filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Forward-looking statements can be identified through the use of words such as "may", "will", "intend", "plan", "project", "expect", "anticipate", "could", "should", "would", "believe", "estimate", "contemplate", and "possible".