Bp Accounting RatiosJoin now to read essay Bp Accounting RatiosA company?s financial statements and ratios are good indicators of its performance over the years. This report specifically compares the ratios for 2004 and 2005, with some additional insight into 2003, 2002, and 2001.
The current ratio has increased by 0.0534 from 0.9900 to 1.434. As the current ratio is a measure of liquidity and ability to meet short-term debt requirements, BP was more able to meet their short term debt obligations in 2005 than 2004. From 2001 to 2003 the current ratios were 1.0767, 0.9733, and 0.9600 respectively. In 2001, 2002, and 2004, BP?s current liabilities were greater than current assets, indicating that BP may have faced some difficulty in meeting short-term debt obligations during these years. In 2003 and 2005 the current ratios were greater than 1, representing that BP?s current assets were greater then its current liabilities for the year. BP?s current ratios are less than the industry average, which simply means that there are other companies that are more successful at meeting short term debt obligations than BP for the industry. The industry median for the current ratio is 1.26.
[table]
This table gives total short-term debt for the past 3 years, with average long-term debt averages of 1.28 and 0.82, the largest single average of recent years. To account for high liquidity, BP has taken steps to make short-term debt more profitable by using cash flow adjustments that have helped to reduce long-term debt levels for the financial market. BP?s cash flow changes have also improved over the past year. The change in short-term debt was a result of adjustments to operating and operating results that occurred between 2005 and 2006. The change is indicative of a change in the financial conditions of BP?s capital. The increased performance of cash flow to date has helped, through the continued expansion of financial reporting and the gradual decline in long-term debt, improve the current financial condition of those operating companies.
[table]
Table A: Total Short-Term Debt for the past 3 years, with average long-term debt averages of 1.25 and 0.84, the largest single average of recent years
Table B: Average Long-Term Debt for the past 3 years, with average long-term debt averages of 1.32 and 0.89, the largest bare-line average of recent years
Source: Table A: Total Short-Term Debt for the past 3 years, with average long-term debt averages of 1.35 and 0.91, the largest bare-line average of recent years[/p]
The growth rate of capital has led to significant revenue increases from offshore subsidiaries and from additional subsidiaries of BP. The rise in business revenues has led to high average long-term debt levels and to a significant increase in cash flows in 2013. Total long-term debt is also being managed by restructuring the management of the entire operations so that they are more transparent. These restructuring efforts will be key to reducing systemic risk during the period of high capitalization. On a global scale, BP is also providing financial services through its non-disclosure agreement with BP?s Chief Executive Officer, Mike Moore. The agreement is currently being reviewed to determine if all the services must be made available to shareholders for the period to be included in calculating its long-term debt.
The Financial Times: BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources and Exxon Mobil by Russian and Chinese companies at a later date was reported “on Monday.”
Analyst:
“BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources and Exxon Mobil by Russian and Chinese companies at a later date was reported “on Monday.”
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
U.S.-based BP officials and analysts are reported to have been informed earlier this year that Exxon Mobil’s shares are in tatters and have been sold off within a matter of hours.
Oil analyst, George R. Mathews, told Bloomberg: “I don’t think any of this has changed because of the lack of oil. … BP’s approach to the U.S. market is the same as any other international energy company. It’s what ExxonMobil does. When you look at the overall cost of producing about 70 percent of the world’s oil, BP is, I think, a very good investment. What’s going to happen is (the oil producers) are going down the drain, and the overall impact of the new shareholders going into their business of being more transparent in a given year of investment and making long-term capital investment for their businesses is positive in some respects.”
A number of reports say that BP officials were aware of the sale of all of its assets in 2008 and has since been held in high regard by the Board of Governors for its efforts to ensure the stability of its business and operating balance sheet.
Oil analyst, Michael Kohn, stated: “BP is the one company that can effectively control any price, whether it’s China’s or Ukraine’s – if it chooses to trade around that price scale. And that’s not something that’s going to change.”
(For more analysis of these and other reports, please see the Energy and Oil Index. It is based on data collected by Reuters (see page 9B of Disclosure of Information), which can be found at www.reuters.com.
Editorial:
“BP says it’s moving against what it said it was fighting against,” says the Observer.
“BP’s move shows a clear disregard for shareholders’ obligations of trust.”
(For more analysis of these latest reports, please see the Energy and Oil Index. It is based on data collected by Reuters (see page 9F of Disclosure of Information), which can be found at www.reuters.com.
The Financial Times: BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources and Exxon Mobil by Russian and Chinese companies at a later date was reported “on Monday.”
Analyst:
“BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources and Exxon Mobil by Russian and Chinese companies at a later date was reported “on Monday.”
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: “BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
Energy Economist: BP’s “no-name” takeover of Lilliputian Resources
U.S.-based BP officials and analysts are reported to have been informed earlier this year that Exxon Mobil’s shares are in tatters and have been sold off within a matter of hours.
Oil analyst, George R. Mathews, told Bloomberg: “I don’t think any of this has changed because of the lack of oil. … BP’s approach to the U.S. market is the same as any other international energy company. It’s what ExxonMobil does. When you look at the overall cost of producing about 70 percent of the world’s oil, BP is, I think, a very good investment. What’s going to happen is (the oil producers) are going down the drain, and the overall impact of the new shareholders going into their business of being more transparent in a given year of investment and making long-term capital investment for their businesses is positive in some respects.”
A number of reports say that BP officials were aware of the sale of all of its assets in 2008 and has since been held in high regard by the Board of Governors for its efforts to ensure the stability of its business and operating balance sheet.
Oil analyst, Michael Kohn, stated: “BP is the one company that can effectively control any price, whether it’s China’s or Ukraine’s – if it chooses to trade around that price scale. And that’s not something that’s going to change.”
(For more analysis of these and other reports, please see the Energy and Oil Index. It is based on data collected by Reuters (see page 9B of Disclosure of Information), which can be found at www.reuters.com.
Editorial:
“BP says it’s moving against what it said it was fighting against,” says the Observer.
“BP’s move shows a clear disregard for shareholders’ obligations of trust.”
(For more analysis of these latest reports, please see the Energy and Oil Index. It is based on data collected by Reuters (see page 9F of Disclosure of Information), which can be found at www.reuters.com.
[table]
According to the Department of Justice,[p] and other industry reports, BP continues to have a record of managing financial risks and providing critical financial services. As such, the current performance of BP has been determined somewhat differently by industry and the regulatory frameworks in place to handle this emerging industry. BP?s current performance can be compared to that of the alternative financial services industry, and it can potentially have higher or lower long-term capital values than the other financial services industries. As BP’s corporate governance and financial services operations have largely been based around high-pressure operational decisions, and low-level governance, this can affect an operational decision in most industries. If these organizations make a high-pressure decision and allow their management team to make decisions based on the perception of the industry and environment, this can impact financial services and other industries. If the organizations make other management and financial services decisions based on perceived threat level, this could negatively impact their bottom line. As such, BP?s corporate governance has to deal with the potential risks of the industry that some of its employees may face. When the ability to meet funding requirements exceeds the ability to meet capital requirements, and the current and future performance is not in line with industry standards, other industries may have the
The quick ratio has increased