Why are people attacking Sasol?

S

sox63

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
8,709
Reaction score
243
I heard on the radio that the FF+ is investing alternative ways in which the petrol price is made up, and going to present it to DME. I have no problem with that, good initiative.

But then they, like a lot of people, decided to take a shot a Sasol and say they make their fuel from coal and hence should be forced to make that fuel cheaper. Which is nonsense!

Back when the petrol price was lower, nobody was saying "Ag shame, they not making as much money as the oil guys, lets let them charge more.":rolleyes:

Let Sasol profit from their innovativeness, IMO.
 
sox63 said:
I heard on the radio that the FF+ is investing alternative ways in which the petrol price is made up, and going to present it to DME. I have no problem with that, good initiative.

But then they, like a lot of people, decided to take a shot a Sasol and say they make their fuel from coal and hence should be forced to make that fuel cheaper. Which is nonsense!

Back when the petrol price was lower, nobody was saying "Ag shame, they not making as much money as the oil guys, lets let them charge more.":rolleyes:

Let Sasol profit from their innovativeness, IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree, its not as if it costs oil companies $130/barrel to drill for and transport oil, some it would cost e.g. $20 and others $60, nobody's claiming that those producing for $20 should sell it for less.

One argument which does make more sense is that Sasol were subsidised before when oil prices were low.
 
As far as i know sasol was built with taxpayers money so why should they reap anything extra?
 
diesel said:
As far as i know sasol was built with taxpayers money so why should they reap anything extra?
Click to expand...

Because they are now a publicly listed company with private investors like you and I. Their origins are irrelevant.

I reckon their price should be market related however Sasol is missing a huge trick here - they have the margin built in to afford to take a knock so to speak and provide a discount to their consumers. By discounting the price and following this with a marketing/PR campaign about how they are trying to help South Africans out, they could secure immense brand recognition, brand confidence, brand loyalty and increased revenues.
 
diesel said:
As far as i know sasol was built with taxpayers money so why should they reap anything extra?
Click to expand...

Sasol was privatised at some stage (I'm not sure of the details) so the taxpayers presumably got a ROI when it was sold.
 
DJStealth said:
Because they are now a publicly listed company with private investors like you and I. Their origins are irrelevant.

I reckon their price should be market related however Sasol is missing a huge trick here - they have the margin built in to afford to take a knock so to speak and provide a discount to their consumers. By discounting the price and following this with a marketing/PR campaign about how they are trying to help South Africans out, they could secure immense brand recognition, brand confidence, brand loyalty and increased revenues.
Click to expand...

Are they allowed to discount prices? Isn't that illegal with the regulated fuel price?
 
diesel said:
As far as i know sasol was built with taxpayers money so why should they reap anything extra?
Click to expand...

Sasol is there to make a profit. If farmers were to be subsidised, would we dictate to them what they must charge for their crops?
 
I think it might be TBH. I dont know about the regulations
 
The same argument goes for PetroSA (old Mossgas). I have heard (cannot confirm reliability) that Sasol and PetroSA contribute around 50% of our fuel requirement. One can argue, then, that the current price would have been even more expensive without their input.
 
Sasol has the current capacity to produce enough petroleum to cover South Africa's entire fuel demands. However, the problem comes that now that Sasol is "privatized" and is now a listed company, they now export the majority of petroleum that they produce, for a nice little price too
 
Sasol provides 40% of our oil.
60% is imported.

Unfortunately for us, despite Sasol's cost to produce being considerably cheaper then importing Oil they are forced (o the agony) to sell at the same price as Oil is imported for.

So we get dick and they make a killing.

SA having Sasol does a big fat 0 for our fuel price.

I'm not against profit, just obscene profit margins.
 
Alchemist said:
Sasol has the current capacity to produce enough petroleum to cover South Africa's entire fuel demands. However, the problem comes that now that Sasol is "privatized" and is now a listed company, they now export the majority of petroleum that they produce, for a nice little price too
Click to expand...

Earning SA forex in the process, not a bad thing.
 
TheShogun said:
Sasol provides 40% of our oil.
60% is imported.

Unfortunately for us, despite Sasol's cost to produce being considerably cheaper then importing Oil they are forced (o the agony) to sell at the same price as Oil is imported for.

So we get dick and they make a killing.

SA having Sasol does a big fat 0 for our fuel price.

I'm not against profit, just obscene profit margins.
Click to expand...

But its an asset to SA.
Fuel will(estimate) be drained by 2015 while coal will be here till 2030.
SO whatever happens to international oil, SA can still survive .... a lil bit.
Main problem is Sasol CAN ONLY provide 40% fuel for us.
So whos buying? and how much?
 
Syndyre said:
Its a stupid law but AFAIK you can discount diesel to an extent within the retail margin but petrol you can't at all.
Click to expand...

Well yes and no. It maintains competition, although this is debatable considering the price is regulated so the consumer doesnt feel the affect of competition. But by regulating the price, I assume they ensure a gap for competitors as a Sasol could just easily discount their price to kick out the competition. We are then stuck with a monopoly supplier who can effectively control the price we pay. I think we all know the effectiveness of monopolies :rolleyes:
 
JK8 said:

But its an asset to SA.
Fuel will(estimate) be drained by 2015 while coal will be here till 2030.
SO whatever happens to international oil, SA can still survive .... a lil bit.
Main problem is Sasol CAN ONLY provide 40% fuel for us.
So whos buying? and how much?
Click to expand...

2015? thats quite a thumbsuck.

All the environmental loons blathering on about oil reserves actually have no idea just how much oil is left. no one does.

But 7 more years? I think not. They just found oil under Antarctica and are investigation potential drilling ventures.

Sasol might be an asset to SA but considering what they charge they might as well not exist.

I was listening to a bunch of economists commenting on Tito's speech yesterday and the fact of the matter is Oil is about 40% of our inflation and food about another 20%.
If both of those were taken our of the equation we'd be sitting around 6.5% inflation.

If Sasol was actually any benefit they'd be affecting the cost we pay for fuel. Right now they're just another large company making lots of money.
 
TheShogun said:
2015? thats quite a thumbsuck.

All the environmental loons blathering on about oil reserves actually have no idea just how much oil is left. no one does.

But 7 more years? I think not. They just found oil under Antarctica and are investigation potential drilling ventures.

Sasol might be an asset to SA but considering what they charge they might as well not exist.

I was listening to a bunch of economists commenting on Tito's speech yesterday and the fact of the matter is Oil is about 40% of our inflation and food about another 20%.
If both of those were taken our of the equation we'd be sitting around 6.5% inflation.

If Sasol was actually any benefit they'd be affecting the cost we pay for fuel. Right now they're just another large company making lots of money.
Click to expand...

Yep 7 years! But before we get to those fuel prices will be so high that most countries wont even be able to buy it, that when the bidding war starts, he with the most money can have the fuel.
I dont understand it though, the US now has all the oil in Iraq yet their prices are affecting the whole world.... doesnt make sense right?
By the end of this year, it can reach $200 a barrel...??:confused:
We will pay R15.00/L!!!! Scary but true.
The US economy controls the world, their buying power keeps other countries afloat, they go down, the world goes down.
My opinion, thats what they want, (hides tin foil cap) they have all the oil in Iraq, they push oil so high and drain as much as they can till its to expensive, while the world suffers they gain, come 2015 Mr Obama will have lead the US into reccession, totally stuff things up, then theyll pick it up again.


Sasol has to charge the same as the international companies, imagine if they didnt. Everyone will use Sasol!! Sasol just needs to make it 5c cheaper and everyone will want Sasol, its cheap and proudly SA.
BUT Sasol cant keep up with the potential demand. If they could believe me they would. Its only 5c.... right?
 
DJStealth said:
Well yes and no. It maintains competition, although this is debatable considering the price is regulated so the consumer doesnt feel the affect of competition. But by regulating the price, I assume they ensure a gap for competitors as a Sasol could just easily discount their price to kick out the competition. We are then stuck with a monopoly supplier who can effectively control the price we pay. I think we all know the effectiveness of monopolies :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

True although you could argue the same for any market. There are a lot of big players that would be hard to kick out, I don't think BP or Shell would go bankrupt within a month.
 
Syndyre said:
True although you could argue the same for any market. There are a lot of big players that would be hard to kick out, I don't think BP or Shell would go bankrupt within a month.
Click to expand...

Its not about going bankrupt - its more about the fact that it would no longer be viable to maintain a presence in the country anymore. We would have one supplier and they would have to become a parastatal to ensure the consumer isnt raped for all he is worth once the competition was eliminated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X