How will this incidnet affect Transocean?

[Widgeonus]

What are yall's thoughts.

1. Lose all contracts with BP
2. Lose contracts with multiple operators.
3. Everything continues on with more strict guidelines.

Lot of people employed in the Gulf by both parties.

[fish_head]

answers 1 and 2.

[RkyMtn Paul]

Depends on who they really figure who was at fault. T/O will probably change names and not work in US waters. After the Valdez, AK spill, Exxon renamed their shipping company to Sea River to limit future liabilities to that company. The Valdez was renamed S/R Mediterranean and sent to overseas runs. It's still sailing under Panama flag and Hong Kong company. That incident also prompted OPA 90, which changed everything in our maritime world.

[tengineer]

Depends on who they really figure who was at fault. T/O will probably change names and not work in US waters. After the Valdez, AK spill, Exxon renamed their shipping company to Sea River to limit future liabilities to that company. The Valdez was renamed S/R Mediterranean and sent to overseas runs. It's still sailing under Panama flag and Hong Kong company. That incident also prompted OPA 90, which changed everything in our maritime world.

My guess is TOI will continue right along as they have been with a new slogan or two. They are "too big to fail" unless the world is in favor of much higher crude prices.
The biggest change I see coming is the possibility of having real auditors from a government agency review plans and tests of equipment. This may or may not help things, depends on the quality of the auditors and I doubt the government will pay enough to get the best talent. Currently TOI, BP and most other drillers and producers use either internal auditors or external auditors that they pay for. Rig crews are under pressure to do whatever is needed to pass the audit that day because a bad audit reflects upon them. It's not hard to hide these things because no one involved wants to be the one that tells the CEO his rig is unsafe because he didn't spend enough money on maintenance and his rig might turn into a roman candle. Oil companies don't want to hear that either because they have to produce more oil and better quarterly profits, there are bonuses to be paid in both cases. So chances are taken and you get by with it for a few years until there is finally a major "oh shit".
One must have some plausible deniability when an incident occurs so you hire someone to make suggestions and assure everyone everything is OK. The problem is this; they work for who hired them.
An analogy. You are out of work and are offered a job but have a bad back. You can get your own physical so you go to a friendly doctor, explain your situation and he says you're OK, on paper. He may tell you not to lift over 10 pounds or whatever but it's not on paper so you get the job. TOI and others routinely have their own internal auditors verify proper operation of DP and other critical systems and they rarely if ever fail if there's a contract coming up.
All that being said the industry has done a fair job of policing itself simply because it is expensive not to. I think four people were killed on TOI rigs last year and most likely there were some disabling injuries, this is expensive This disaster currently underway will cost these companies a lot of money and they don't like that. There is no altruism involved, it's a dollars and sense issue. The problem is the guys running the company want to have high profits, maximum production and excellent safety in that order at minimal cost. Plus most executives don't really want the truth, as Jack Nicholson said,"You can't handle the truth!" or a smaller bonus.