Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

It could just be MW timing the recession by selling high. In three years he can buy the campus back for Pennie’s on the dollar.

My guess is the following. The lease will be in place until exec leadership retire, at which time everyone will be forced to move to tx, or Idaho, or somewhere outside CA. CVX will still have presence in CA with the refineries.

"... sources previously told the Wall Street Journal that company leadership has pushed for a permanent move to Texas, Chevron’s long history in California coupled with its Richmond refinery has kept the company in the Bay Area. ..."

EVs are all the rage in California and have been doubling market share of sales every two years. 2024 - 30%. 2026 =60%. And so on. The 2035 goal will be met before 2030.

The California mandate in 2035 applies only to sales of new gas powered cars and light trucks. It has no impact on gas powered vehicles sold before that date. It will likely take more than a decade, perhaps two, to turn over the fleet. Zero emission vehicles already make up 16% of current sales.

No one in CA is talking about what it will take to upgrade the infrastructure to support New son’s mandate. Put pen to paper…it doesn’t add up, the infrastructure won’t be there. Although I certainly support lower carbon, we can’t be stupid about it and have the state push mandates for which they flat out won’t be ready for. I think we’ll be on CA awhile longer….what’s the phrase “cut off one’s nose despite one’s face?”.

I’ll bet anyone 10-1 odds the notion of California going zero gasoline powered in 2035 or whatever the near term year was announced by Gavin Newsom, that two things will definitely happen before that time comes; 1- Newsom will not be the Governor of California or in California politics for that matter. He’ll be onto newer pastures blowing hot air by that time. 2- The California legislature or the Governor in office at that time will extend the date further out. I may add in point #3- The majority of Californians will realize all this was a con job and the electric vehicle they bought will be hardly worth a quarter of what they paid.

@bpa and @tge - bingo. lets all be honest, the writing is on the wall. the NIMBYs and "blinded" public do not want any oil/gas (or traditional fuel sources) in CA. The fact that Sacramento is ran by a supermajority which gives the sector a negative light doesn't help. Then again, when you only view energy in a negative light and not the whole picture, you are bound to be blinded by all sorts of things. Plus, many people will talk about oil/gas/energy is expensive, but no one wants to talk about how CA GHG, Cap/Trade, CARB blends, minimization of open refineries all adds into the difficulty of running the industry.

This is clearly a drawn-out exit plan. Chevron will lease space only as long as it takes for SR senior management to retire.

There currently about 70 homes for sale in West U so some will be stuck in Bellaire or Afton Oaks.

The new lease space is enough for 600 people so 1400 must be moving. That will strain West U housing for sure.

@lur, I hope you’re not a financial advisor or anyone dispensing serious advice to people. Why would Chevron sell prime real estate it owns and uses as its headquarters to go rent somewhere else? Answer: Because it has already planned its exit from San Ramon or California altogether.

When is CEMREC going away now that this sale has been completed? MB is waiting for her golden parachute!

3 year lease for a couple hundred offices.

California will remain the headquarters for some time, if not forever. Chevron just has too many ties to the state and a long history there. And as long as upper management wants to stay there for whatever reason, that’s where they will be.

Conveniently they left out length of lease they signed...could be 1yr, 5yr, 10yr, 20yr who knows

No. Writing is on the wall for those who didn't take the "voluntary" relocation offer earlier this year.

Nope