1
   

China and Unocal - The Beginning of the End.

 
 
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 07:20 am
Unocal Deal: A Lot More Than Money Is at Issue


By LESLIE WAYNE and DAVID BARBOZA
Published: June 24, 2005
The battle for Unocal, the large independent American oil company, is shaping into as much a test of Chinese-American strategic and economic relations as it is a boardroom showdown.

Most takeover battles can be settled by price - the highest bidder wins. But judging by the sharp reaction yesterday in Washington, that may not be the case with Unocal.

Just a day after the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, or CNOOC, one of China's largest state-controlled oil companies, made an unsolicited bid of $18.5 billion for Unocal, senators and representatives, as well as lawyers, bankers and lobbyists, are taking jabs at what may become one of the thorniest strategic business challenges facing the administration.

At issue is whether CNOOC can buy Unocal, which in April agreed to a $16.4 billion merger deal with Chevron, the American energy giant.

The unexpected foreign bid for Unocal comes at a time when oil prices are hitting $60 a barrel, energy reserves are gaining more value, and the United States is concerned about its own oil and gas resources. At the same time, the administration needs to work with China on trade and currency issues, even as concerns are increasing about the growing economic power of China.

"It does raise questions about how much of the country we are willing to sell to a Communist country that we might be fighting someday," said Michael O'Hanlon, an international military specialist at the Brookings Institution. But he added, "I'd be surprised if we really fall on our sword to prevent the sale."

CNOOC's bid is also forcing Unocal shareholders to weigh the higher price that the Chinese are willing to pay against the risks that the deal faces in Washington. On top of that, there is the possible backlash that might arise from selling a potentially strategic American asset to China.

Unocal said that it had received permission from Chevron to hold discussions with CNOOC.

The question is how - if Unocal decides to switch from Chevron to CNOOC - the politics will play out in Washington, where critics are already speaking out and where the deal would be subject to approval by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. The panel, a federal multiagency group, can prevent any foreign investment on the grounds of national security.

For years, the government has placed restrictions on the extent of foreign ownership in a variety of industries, from airlines to the media to military contractors. In the past, these restrictions have mostly affected developed countries like Japan and Britain.

"This is a remarkable arrival of China into the world of global big business deals and international investing," said Clyde V. Prestowitz Jr., a former trade negotiator in the Reagan administration and president of the Economic Strategy Institute in Washington. "And it does raise the issue of whether this gives influence or some kind of potential importance to a government that may not always be friendly to us."

In Washington, CNOOC is already laying the groundwork. It has hired Public Strategies, a public relations firm whose vice chairman, Mark McKinnon, led President Bush's media campaign in the 2004 election. The company has also lined up some of the nation's savviest financial advisers - among them Goldman Sachs and J. P. Morgan - as well as such well-connected legal and lobbying firms as Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and Davis Polk & Wardell.

Many in Washington said that the deal, on its merits, might gain approval from the foreign investment committee. In any case, the committee would not review the case until a formal deal is completed. In recent deals involving China, the committee's responses have been mixed.

In 2003, a negative review by the foreign investment committee caused Hutchison Whampoa, which is based in Hong Kong, to withdraw a bid for Global Crossing, the telecommunications carrier that later filed for bankruptcy. But this year, the committee permitted the $1.75 billion sale of I.B.M.'s personal computer business to Lenovo of China.

"The national security argument is a fair one," said William A. Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council and a former trade official in the Clinton administration. "When you talk about energy supplies, and the market is tight, there is a national security issue. You are going to have a lot of people pounding the table."

CNOOC is already trying to play down any concerns that the transaction could hurt the American oil and gas markets. It is stressing that 70 percent of Unocal's oil and gas reserves are in Asia and that its American reserves amount to only about 1 percent of America's oil consumption, with none of it now supplying the military.

Unocal also has a pipeline hooked up to American strategic oil reserves, as well as a rare-earth mine, the only one in the United States. CNOOC has said it will consider selling these assets, if that is necessary to close the deal.

In addition, CNOOC has promised not to take supplies from Unocal's oil and gas reserves in the United States and sell them outside the country. It also said it would retain "substantially all" of the American employees.

In Washington, two Republican congressmen, Richard W. Pombo, chairman of the House Committee on Resources, and Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, wrote to President Bush last week, saying that "such an acquisition raises many concerns about U.S. jobs, energy production and energy security."

"We fear that American companies will find it increasingly difficult to compete against China's state-owned and/or controlled energy companies, given their mandates to supply China's ever-growing demand for energy, which will increasingly need to come from foreign sources," the letter said.

For China, which is scouring the world for oil, gas and minerals to help power its economy, the deal is important. That puts the administration in an awkward position as it tries to negotiate a variety of trade frictions and geopolitical debates.

"The deal has got the administration over a barrel," said Michael R. Wessel, a member of the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a group established by Congress. Not only is the administration trying to work out trade issues with China over textiles, currency and a number of other matters, it is also increasingly relying on China to play a more aggressive role in containing North Korea.

"We want the Chinese to invest part of their dollars in our economic system," Mr. Wessel said, "yet we have to worry about the impact of this transaction on our national security. Everyone is concerned about the migration of jobs and research and development to China. Now we have oil hitting $60 a barrel. China is going to be on the center of our radar screen."

For CNOOC, an offshore oil company, Unocal offers huge gas reserves in 14 countries. It has Asia's largest storehouse of liquefied natural gas. A combined company would go from a Chinese offshore oil producer with high expenses, as it searches for oil around China, to a diversified oil and gas company with global reserves.

Oil industry analysts offered mixed views about a potential deal.

"There are a lot of people in Washington who are really torn," said Robin West, chairman of PFC Energy, an oil consultant in Washington. "They believe in open markets and don't want to exacerbate matters with China. Yet, do you want a Chinese company that doesn't play by American rules to take advantage of American rules and get an American company?"
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 818 • Replies: 10
No top replies

 
thethinkfactory
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 07:23 am
When you read that article - look at all the groups that support free markets and would fight anti-trust laws tooth and nail are now griping about 'taking advantage of American rules' to build a company that is succesful.


TTF
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 07:34 am
You say that this is 'the beginning of the end'; and I can't help but agree with ya.

Most people don't realize just how huge the reserves of Dollars China has built up actually are. If they start to make real moves in the international market, the effects upon our economy could be severe.

Fight back - stop shopping at Wal-Mart! Stop buying Chinese crap that you don't need!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2005 07:42 am
I'm certainly not familiar enough with all of this to make an educated comment, but I don't think education matters here.

HELL NO! Why would such a deal even be considered?
0 Replies
 
Jim
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jun, 2005 08:50 am
My gut level feeling is of course I don't want an American oil company bought by the Chinese...but...

The USA is living between 3 to 4 billion dollars a day beyond our means. That's the combined Federal budget deficit and our trade deficit. The Chinese Central Bank has accumulated several hundred billion of these dollars over the past few years.

What do you expect our Chinese friends to do with all these dollars? Just let them sit around in Treasury Bills forever? Look at this as "a preview of coming attractions", or, as the song goes "You ain't seen nothin yet".
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jun, 2005 09:18 pm
squinney wrote:
I'm certainly not familiar enough with all of this to make an educated comment, but I don't think education matters here.

HELL NO! Why would such a deal even be considered?


the almighty dollar. profit apparently trumps patriotism in the post 9/11 world.

the corporatations suck.
0 Replies
 
Jim
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Jun, 2005 09:53 pm
Don't Tread - how do you figure this has to do with "corporations suck"?

IMHO this one can only be laid to rest at the feet of the American People who have demanded to live beyond their means now for too many years.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2005 01:37 pm
Jim wrote:
Don't Tread - how do you figure this has to do with "corporations suck"?

IMHO this one can only be laid to rest at the feet of the American People who have demanded to live beyond their means now for too many years.


to answer your question, the corporations have become monolitic in their attitude. cash is king and no other considerations come into the decision making process now.

though it's been quite a while since, i spent the first 13 years of my work history working for a corporation of some kind or another. at the time, corporations of regional, national and international scope, though of course having a healthy regard for the profit motive, maintained a relatively long term strategy. in turn they realized that in order to reach those long term goals sucessfully, it was in the best interest to focus on good value to dollar consumer benefit, measured growth and customer/employee loyalty.

of course their was concern for stakeholders getting good return on investment. but, at some point the ideology began to change and the mission statement went from "keep the customer satisfied" to "separate the customer from his money as quick as possible", divy up the loot and find a fresh mark.

it was a strange metamorphosis to witness from the inside.

at the headquarters of a retail chain where i was a buyer, i literally watched the maintainence guys take down the mission statement of 90+ years and replace it with one that started out with something like "to insure maximum profits to the stakeholders..."

and with that came an incredible barrage of bad decisions in the c.e.o.'s office and at the complex corporate level. attempts to sell badly made imports at premium price points, wresting local and regional decisions from those onsite and reassigning them to people 3500 miles away that never set foot in our area. the first steps in indiscriminate downsizing. having "blockbuster sales" several times a month (65% OFF !!! and today, take an ADDITIONAL 10% OFF !! ), and then wondering why traffic was light when those sales were not in force.

"duh... gee. i dunno boss. maybe the customers caught on that we've been selling badly made imports at premium price points, and they pay what the stuff is actually worth if they wait a month to buy it ?"

the bottom line is that the corporations became a whole lot less about customer driven and a whole lot more driven by stakeholder insistance on more and faster.

some of us with long experience wondered what the hell they were doing. ya don't take a goose that lays golden eggs and eat it.

the net result has been that virtually every corporation i worked for (and a couple were HUGE ) is now either pushing up daisies or was picked up for a song by another bigger, stakeholder driven corporation. which was owned by an even bigger stakeholder driven corporation.

some of them have found the same fate.

now, you're wondering "why should i care ?? it doesn't effect me."

but it does. here's a few effects of the newer corporate model;

a greatly diminished american textile industry. imports flow in from korea, thailand, malaysia, indonesia, mexico, china etc.

a greatly diminished american electronics industry. imports flow in from korea, japan, china, mexico and now to a lesser extent australia.

a greatly diminished american automobile industry, including tires. imports flow in from germany (guilty here Embarrassed ), japan, korea.

a greatly diminished family farming industry. the tomatos and apple's i get from trader joe's (and others) come from mexico and chile.

people that spent bucket loads to attend school for highly technical work have seen an ungodly portion of the work out sourced to other continents. so if ya just hocked the first 10 or 15 years of your career income to pay for that programming degree, sorry 'bout that. c-ya !

"so what's the problem ? americans can now get things cheap at wal-mart (china's 6th largest export buyer).

the problem, using wal-mart again is that the people who are making the sacrifice for wal-mart's big profitability are it's employees. the pay isn't so great.

studies have additionally shown that most american workers who have been displaced by corporate massaging of the bottom line have generally wound up, after how many retrainings, taken much lower wages with fewer fringe benefits. at the same time, increased workloads, longer hours and "eat lunch at your desk while you work (though you'll still get docked 30 minutes)" phraseology is commonplace. along with "you're not allowed to be sick", "that vacation time is not gonna happen". incredibly, a woman my wife works with was told that she could not leave early to attend her daughter's graduation.

does that sound like americans having a life to you ?

but because of the climate of the last few years, most of us have been over the barrel and instead of "work to live", it's now "live to work."

and that sucks.

what will suck more, is when communist china buys unocal. when they buy wal-mart and the land it sits on. taking all direct benefit out of the hands of the american worker, who in turn will then have not even his smaller paycheck to buy the cheap imports.

china does indeed have an increased need for oil. so yeah, buying a huge oil company makes sense, right ?

but it's the communist chinese government that is looking to buy. not a chinese company.

if you don't think that it's occured to them that it would be just great to topple the american economy and dominate what we buy and who we buy it from, ya might want to consider it. the chinese, like many non-westerners tend to think in long term strategies to achieve their goals.

by abandoning that philosophy, the american corporations, what's left of american owned corporations anyway, are in ideological terms, stepping on a dollar to pick up a dime.

meanwhile the idea that a strong, self sufficient america is best has been abandoned for the hoots of "i got mine, suckers."

therefore, i made the comment that profit trumps patriotism.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2005 01:38 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:


Fight back - stop shopping at Wal-Mart! Stop buying Chinese crap that you don't need!



and what happens if the 2nd, 3rd and 4th biggest markets in the world stop buying the colas and the pizza and other useless crap ?
0 Replies
 
Jim
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jun, 2005 10:43 pm
Don't Tread - thank you for the explanation. I agree with just about everything you wrote.

I have no trouble remembering when I was a kid. Things made in the USA lasted forever (or so it seemed), and if something said "Made in Japan" on it, it was a piece of shoddy garbage. We've done a complete 180 since those days, that is assuming you can find anything still made in the USA.

To be The Devil's Advocate for a moment, sooner or later the world standard of living has got to begin to equalize, and the only way I can think of for that to happen is trade. I doubt if there will ever be a total equalization, no more than there is between NYC and Max, North Dakota. But what we have now is America uncompetative in manufacturing for seemingly just about everything. One could probably write a PhD thesis on the reasons for this - lazy and incompetent management, zillions of government regulations, a workforce that has priced itself out of the market, or a host of others.

As I wrote before, the superficial cause of the Chinese bid for Uncoal is that Americans are living beyond their means, financed by borrowed foreign dollars. And now the Chinese have enough of those dollars so they can afford a massive shopping spree. But unlike the USA (our shopping spree is for Nintendo games, Ipods, plasma TVs, etc), the Chinese are buying up natural resources.

Our living beyond our means is about 50:50 Federal Budget Deficit and trade deficit. I'm not smart enough to know how to fix the trade deficit (restore a competative manufacturing base to our economy), but the Federal Defecit could be solved - that is if we had the guts to elect a Congress with a backbone. At least if there was no Federal Defecit, then China would only have half the dollars to fuel her spending spree.

I've been working overseas for 13 years because my line of work (oil refining/petrochemical) is a shrinking business in the States. That has worked out to be a decent enough solution for my family and I, but I fear for the future of our country.
0 Replies
 
pragmatic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2005 12:21 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Stop buying Chinese crap that you don't need!


Even if you don't need it, please don't refer to chinese items as "crap."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » China and Unocal - The Beginning of the End.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 06:23:54