Shell BP PLC: Because the World Clearly Asked for Even More Greed, Pollution, and Corporate Arrogance
(This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by a human editor.)
WTF is happening at BP? Oh, just another glorious day in oil-world where ruthless ambition meets jaw-dropping incompetence, and the planet comes dead last.
Activist investor Elliott Investment Management – yes, that Elliott, the one famous for shaking down companies like a loan shark in a Gucci suit – has decided that BP isn’t already toxic enough. Elliott now holds a juicy 5% stake in BP, snuggled comfortably between oil-gluttons BlackRock and Vanguard (because who else?), and is demanding that BP replace its strategy chief and split itself into tidy, profit-friendly pieces. You know, to “improve accountability” – by which they obviously mean “squeeze more cash out of what’s left of the burning planet.”
According to a source, Elliott’s grand plan is to separate BP’s upstream and downstream operations. Because nothing screams “accountability” like chopping up your giant oil disaster into smaller, more manageable oil disasters.
And just in case you forgot who led BP into its spectacular renewable energy faceplant, allow us to reintroduce Giulia Chierchia, former McKinsey consultant and architect of Bernard Looney’s “Let’s pretend to care about the climate” strategy. Chierchia’s sustainability fantasies went so well that Looney got the boot, and BP has now abandoned all those pesky green ambitions in favour of—surprise!—drilling more oil.
Meanwhile, Gordon Birrell (production and operations czar) and Emma Delaney (customers and products queen) are busy running their respective bits of the empire – aka selling petrol and peddling overpriced snacks at BP service stations, because that’s what “downstream” apparently means when the world’s melting.
A BP spokesperson, stunned into silence, offered no immediate comment. Probably because the entire board is still choking on the fumes of their own hypocrisy.
Current CEO Murray Auchincloss, Looney’s former money guy (what could possibly go wrong?), took one look at the sinking ship and decided to torch the “transition to renewables” dream entirely. He’s now slashing costs, spending less, and hacking away at debt like Jack Nicholson with an axe. Smart move if your only goal is “make money now, leave apocalypse cleanup for someone else.”
Chairman Helge Lund, who cheered both Looney’s greenwashing and the current return to glorious oil gluttony, has conveniently announced he’s off sometime before 2026 – or whenever he can cash out the biggest bonus without looking too guilty.
Not that BP’s shareholders are thrilled: nearly 25% voted against Lund’s re-election at this month’s AGM, a fact so embarrassing that BP had to promise an “update” within six months. Translation: “Please don’t sue us until we figure out how to replace him without admitting everything’s on fire.”
Unsurprisingly, BP’s shares have flopped harder than an oil-slicked dolphin, underperforming even against Shell — you know, Shell, the gold standard of pollution, corruption, and colonialism, proudly bankrolled by good old BlackRock and Vanguard.
Elliott is also demanding BP magically boost its adjusted free cash flow from a pathetic oil-price adjusted $8 billion last year to a dreamy $20 billion by 2027. Sure, no problem. Just lay off some workers, gut safety standards, and frack the hell out of whatever land is still standing. What could possibly go wrong?
And speaking of corporate horror shows…
Word on the street is that Shell and BP — those two oil-slicked lovers from way back (remember their apartheid-supporting days and secret-agent shenanigans through Hakluyt?) — might be sizing each other up for a blockbuster merger. Shell BP Plc, anyone? A marriage made in… well, whatever flaming pit Shell’s PR team calls “corporate responsibility.”
A combined Shell BP monster would finally deliver the dream: one giant, greed-fuelled empire too big to fail, too ruthless to care, and too slick to catch.
Investors like BlackRock and Vanguard must be absolutely giddy. After all, when you’ve already bet your portfolio on environmental collapse, you might as well double down.
Elliott Investment Management has a reputation as a powerful and sometimes controversial activist investor, known for demanding changes in companies they invest in to improve their market value. They have a history of engaging with companies across various sectors, often pushing for significant changes like management overhauls, strategic shifts, and even wider restructuring. While their activism has been successful in some cases, they have also faced criticism, with some viewing them as a “vulture capitalist” focused on short-term gains.
-
Successful Activism:
Elliott Management has a track record of engaging with companies and driving positive change, with some studies showing high returns on their investments.
-
No-Holds-Barred Approach:
They are known for being assertive and not afraid to publicly challenge company management, making them a force to be reckoned with.
-
Long-Term Vision:
While known for their activism, they also aim for long-term value creation, sometimes investing for extended periods, as seen in their engagement with BP.
-
Vulture Capitalist Label:
Some critics view them as prioritizing short-term gains at the expense of long-term company health, leading to the label of “vulture capitalist”.
-
Employee Concerns:
While employee ratings are generally positive, some past reviews on platforms like Glassdoor and Trustpilot express concerns about their impact on certain companies, especially in the airline industry.
-
Public Face-Offs:
Their willingness to engage in public battles with company management can be perceived as aggressive and potentially damaging to the company’s reputation.