><snip>
>>>And this claim that the foreign companies would keep 75% of the profits only as long as it takes to recoup their cost of developing the fields... that's endless. Halliburton alone is capable of misplacing nine billion in a year. They'd also include any cost for the infinite array of security forces, their beefed up Hummers, company jets flying around on a whim, bribes lobbying costs, bribes incentives to Iraqi MPs who would supposedly control them... this could go forever. And after that, what, 20%? How much do they make on Saudi oil?
>>>
>>>All your oil are belong to us.
>>
>>The oil companies will spend billions updating the infrastructure and will only be able to extract for a few years before Iraq nationalizes the entire industry. Hence the 75% early return. Watch the market's reaction when this is actually passed.
>
>Jake, do you think the oil companies are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts or do you think they might want to make a small ROI?

The oil companies are taking a huge risk with their investment dollars whenever they choose to build or re-build oil field infrastructure in countries where the government can sieze it at any time. This same scenario has played out time and again in the middle east, Russia and is likely to happen soon in Venuzuela. For this reason, the companies insist on a huge upfront return, because the long term is most likely not to be there.
The goal is obviously to achieve a return, but the long term numbers rarely materialize. The reason they try is because the reward is SO high, they have determined it's worth the risk.