TheNiche Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Exxon should build a new head quarters downtown. A signature building. Downtown needs a new skyscraper.Profoundly unlikely. Exxon is very slow to make big capital investments in its non-core business.Incidentally, however, that's about the only way that we're likely to get a new skyscraper. We'd need a big firm to anchor the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I wish I still had the one I got when I was a little kid, but it was lost long ago. There's a pic of one at a recent eBay auction, but that one is brown; I distinctly remember the one I had as being plain white plastic. Mine was white as well. After asking my oldest sister what happened to it, she told me my deranged middle sister took it out in the garage, sawed the top off and took MY pennies to the 7-11 and bought herself SlowPokes!!!! I'm seriously considering confronting her at Thanksgiving as long as I'm assured ahead of time that she has been thoughrouhly medicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Profoundly unlikely. Exxon is very slow to make big capital investments in its non-core business.Incidentally, however, that's about the only way that we're likely to get a new skyscraper. We'd need a big firm to anchor the building.Yes, it may be unlikely that Exxon would themselves build and own such a building. That is the case with most (or at least very many) headquarters buildings. But they nevertheless get built. For example, Shell has never owned their HQ building, nor has Marathon, nor did Pennzoil. Anadarko did not own their HQ building in Greenspoint; I'm not sure about their new Woodlands HQ building. Devon Energy does not own their Houston building or their OKC HQ buildings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Yes, it may be unlikely that Exxon would themselves build and own such a building. That is the case with most (or at least very many) headquarters buildings. But they nevertheless get built. For example, Shell has never owned their HQ building, nor has Marathon, nor did Pennzoil. Anadarko did not own their HQ building in Greenspoint; I'm not sure about their new Woodlands HQ building. Devon Energy does not own their Houston building or their OKC HQ buildings...It was built by Humble Originally I believe (not owned of corse).I am not sure if anyone remembers, but the Kellogg Tower was built by (then) Dresser, (now Smith International, or MI/SWACO), and was almost built taller then the current Exxon Building. But Since Exxon was a customer of Dresser, they didn't want to build a taller building, and let them think they were doing better, and perhaps getting too much money from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EspersonBuildings Posted November 6, 2006 Share Posted November 6, 2006 Does anyone remember the funky lotus shaped fountain pools on the plaza? I tryed to get one when we redid the plaza and basement, ground and mezzanine levels. Instead of giving them away, they destroyed them. They were tacky in front of the building but one of them would have looked FABULOUS in my back yard! Yea, they kind of looked like funky upside down bowls. Agree, they were tacky but would rock in someones back yard! she told me my deranged middle sister took it out in the garage, sawed the top off and took MY pennies to the 7-11 and bought herself SlowPokes!!!! I'm seriously considering confronting her at Thanksgiving as long as I'm assured ahead of time that she has been thoughrouhly medicated. I hope, FOR YOUR SAKE, your sister does not lurk on this board! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pshaddock Posted June 18, 2007 Share Posted June 18, 2007 I worked there for a few years. What is say is mostly hearsay, but most of the rumors I come across with my MBA pals at ExxonMobil pan out in time. Have a friend working at Exxonobil GREF (Global Real Estate and Facilities) who keeps me in the loop. The project is to keep the building from shedding it's pea gravel panels on traffic below, and to reinforce aging rebar, as mentioned above. Surprisingly, the work is being done at a cost that is higher than if Exxon simply bought the ENRON tower. Exxon mgmt refused to take an expense "hit" if the building were sold or decommissioned. Bonuses could be affected. No one wants to take that to Dallas (HQ). Repairs are in the $80 - 90M range, and are capitalized and expensed over 30 years, so only $3m a year in expense, versus a huge (approx $40M) one time hit if the building were torn down. So they keep adding to it, capitalizing over the years the major improvements, and it will not be sold or torn for many years to come due to accounting standards, not reasonableness or good business judgement.As an aside, I was one of the loners doing financial close when Mexico's west coast was hit by a 7. something earthquake in 2003 or so. I took the express elevator down from 19 and ran like hell. The old girl was creaking, blinds swinging, sounded like it was coming down. Security gaurds thought I was crazy when I ran by yelling "earthquake!". i called my wife at home...nothing on the news. After I returned, a half hour later, they laughed at me. Checked the paper the next morning, hunch confirmed. Next day they apologized as it turned out there was an earthquake for real and ceiling tiles fell down in a number of offices and conference rooms.Surprisingly, I heard the surface lots to the north, south, east, and west had "no build" provisions in the deed and city records that prevent anyone from developing as long as the Exxon building still exists. That explains why, although Exxon does not own them, they will remain parking lots for some time to come. One story structures are all that are allowed, supposedly to serve as parking lot offices. Look at the old Enron daycare facility to the West. Gotta run,P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Wow, looking back on this thread, it appears the renovations (those ugly tarps over a bunch of floors) started in 2005 and they have still not taken the tarps down. When I first moved here I thought the building was abandoned or something, the way the windows on 4 or 5 floors were all covered with tarps. I figured the windows had been broken out or something. Now I'm kinda used to it, but it still looks ugly. I can see those tarps all the way home from work along Almeda. I wonder when it'll really be done. I don't really care for the building but I think it would look better if they took the tarps down.Why would they possibly want to disallow construction on any adjacent lot? I know they may have parking concerns, but couldn't somebody just build a garage on one of those lots and then build other towers some day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.