Talk:Vitol
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vitol article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Misspelt company name
[edit]In line with Wikipedia's COI policy, I am a representative of Vitol and would like to propose an edit to the page before making any changes. Vitol Kompany as stated on the page is incorrect, and it is simply Vitol, in line with company branding and how the company describes itself. Both on its website www.vitol.com and social media. Thankyou. Csell2 (talk) 15:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Misleading Revenue Figure
[edit]Checked the source for the $331B revenue claim and it's a blog post of theirs claiming $331B in turnover. Classifying this as "revenue" seems kind of misleading as I am fairly certain their turnover shows their total transaction volume, not just the net amount they earn on fees and spreads.
It's like claiming Robinhood has $500B in yearly revenue since total trading volume on their platform is that. No, we look at net revenue.
I therefore propose removing this claim, or at least clarify this as being something else. ButtonForest9 (talk) 15:15, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- Start-Class Switzerland articles
- Low-importance Switzerland articles
- All WikiProject Switzerland pages
- Start-Class Netherlands articles
- All WikiProject Netherlands pages
- Start-Class company articles
- Top-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- Start-Class energy articles
- Mid-importance energy articles