Don't know about that, I'm not really following the story, but as far as rate goes, a 40% increase in net profits can mean going from 8% to 11%, it does not mean going from 10% to 50%. If you are talking just comparative numbers and saying a 40% difference from one year to the next, it tells you even less unless their capital investment expenditures and other 'Above the line' expenses were relatively similar, there were no massive write-offs for litigation settlements, or such.
I seem to recall there was some industry-favorable court ruling concerning petroleum contamination of North Slope waters this year, which may have affected profits by reducing a contingent liability for them, but I don't directly own any stock, so I don't have a deep interest in the details. I could be misremembering on that one.
