Name change after 100 years because it better aligns with our core strategy? How exactly? Complete BS. It was done for financial, reporting, tax or selling purposes. We have too mainly people running around making up work and developing new types of businesses when we use to do extremely well financially by being a traditional O&G company. These only work streams are going to force more cost cutting, including staff cuts, to help pay for this nonsense. What ever happened to maximizing shareholder return? This group is going to run it into the ground making it even easier (ie cheaper) to be acquired by someone else. The only problem is that we would have sold off all best performing assets. I'm 58, 31 years so I will take the next SVS and waive goodbye but for those new or recent joiners, why would you even stay for this? If you really want to make a difference you should join a new startup that is really going to do something in the new energies space.
6 replies (most recent on top)
Oh dear. The wind down begins.
Agreed, those who are paying attention will see Shell USA, Inc. spun off at some point in the future. It's just a matter of time.
Good Message. These other clowns are clueless until they are the ones on the streets kicking cans trying to find a job
all part of the plan to spin off US.
O&G isn’t cool or profitable anymore, just look at WTI… oh wait
Ok boomer