This case begins by reporting a range of factors that could have contributed to the substantial Macondo oil spill, noting that its associates BP, and the government, all made decisions that helped cause the injury. It subsequently converses the retort to this spill by the authorities and BP. This facilitates in providing some context for the selection by the Obama administration to request $20 billion for a fund from BP and for the willingness to go along with this demand of BP.
The case also depicts the safety record of BP before this spill, which might also have contributed to the development of this fund. After this, the case describes the various ways in which the U.S. government is involved in offshore oil, including the leasing of tracts, the management of drilling, and the assessment of fines and damages. The case illustrates the expenditures carried out by Exxon succeeding the Exxon Valdez spill, to provide contrast with the payments of BP. The U.S. regulatory regime is then briefly compared with regimes in other countries. Succeeding a simple description of the way the fund set up by BP sought to dole out funds and the case conclude with the argument of possible regulatory rejoinder.
PUBLICATION DATE: September 16, 2010 PRODUCT #: 711021-PDF-ENG
This is just an excerpt. This case is about GLOBAL BUSINESS
Related Case Solutions & Analyses:
Active Coatings Inc.: Challenges in Managing Product Development (A)
Wainwright Industries (A): Beyond the Baldrige
Philip Morris Companies Bill of Rights Sponsorship Program Responses
Ad Councils AIDS Campaign (A): Advertising Strategy
IBM Corp.: Make It Your Business (B)
Managing in Different Growth Contexts
Wyoff and China-LuQuan: Negotiating a Joint Venture (B)
Aquarius Advertising Agency Case Solution
Bc2 Case Solution
Bgp Case Study Solution
