Post by firstname.lastname@example.org
A few years ago Exxon asked received approval from BP (SOHIO), the last
marketer to use a Standard in their name, to retake control of the Esso
name. Exxon then requested approval from the courts and was awarded
rights to the Standard ESSO name once again.
At the time Exxon said it had no plans to reintroduce the Esso name in the USA.
All that said, Esso (Exxon) has been selling of their stations around
the world as the trend seems to be going. As a part of the sale
(Ireland for example) they maintain supply of the station for x number
of years but give up the management of and marketing of the station.
Seems to me the profits in stations must be far less then it used to be
and the risk of a boycott is greatly diminished when the consumer has
no idea where the fuel actually comes from.
Will be interesting to see if Exxon ever returns the Esso name to the USA.
I think a lot of it is predicated on getting rid of leaking UST
liability. I was involved in the transfer of stations in Maryland, CT,
and New York, and from speaking with station operators, it seemed that
the transfer costs depending on the amount of fuel product in the soil
and groundwater, the size of the station, and traffic of the
station--I'm sure there were other factors but that was what I was told.
I am not sure about all of the details, but it appeared that some of
the stations had enough contamination that they were transferred to
another owner either for nothing or with Exxon/Mobil giving the new
owner some cash in exchange for assignment of polluation liability away