Our Solution Part IV
The focus of People, Ideas & Objects derision of this process has been squarely on the SEC and the public accounting firms. They want to relate to the world that they are cool and understand the sciences of geology and engineering. So they've come up with this contrived process of capitalizing everything that the producer does and recognizing almost nothing in terms of the annual depletion of its capital costs. But who is it to say that what they do is wrong? And what’s to say the manner in which People, Ideas & Objects calculates profits at the property is the more appropriate method of dealing with the costs of capital?
If you look at the average oil and gas producer. And yes I am making generalizations here. The producer is expending approximately one third of their asset base in current year capital expenditures. These capital costs are what are required to sustain and grow the deliverability of the firm. These are all being added to the asset classes on the balance sheet. In addition the accountants capitalize most, if not all, of the overhead that is incurred in the head office. You will then notice, that most producers, take approximately 6 - 10% of their asset base as their depletion for the year. These capital costs are moved to the income statement of the producer. Leaving the asset life approximately equivalent to the reserve life index of the reserves. In most cases the reserve life index is ten years and the assets on a simple mathematical basis would therefore also be written off in ten years. This is what the public accountants would say they are doing. Matching the capital costs of the business to the life of the business.
To whose benefit does this provide any value. In a capital intensive industry the oil and gas producer needs to deploy their capital effectively. When every producer capitalizes every dollar spent each year. How do you assess the effectiveness of their capital deployment? According to the accountants using their process, you need to look at the firm from the point of view of the capital assets life, or reserve life index, or in this example the ten years. I feel the horse has bolted from the barn and locking the gate is useless. Investors need to have a more timely gage in which to assess the capabilities of the management of the producer firm. I would also suggest that the assets at the ten year mark will probably sit for a while longer yet. I suggest that we look at what the costs that were incurred to maintain and expand the deliverability. That this cost in the current fiscal year is the cost of capital necessary to maintain and grow the deliverability of the firm. And is therefore a cost that is spent. That this cost has been expended and is irretrievable, and therefore should be expensed in the current fiscal year. Or in other words the size of the capital asset depletion should be the same or even much larger than what the amount is expended in the current year to maintain and grow the deliverability of the producer.
Only then, when the capital costs of the producer firm flow from the balance sheet to the income statement, can the investor assess the performance of the producer. It will become apparent quickly who is wasting money and who is building a sustainable firm. All of the producers will be passing large costs to their income statements each year. If they are unprofitable then they are not going to be in business for long. Something that we can not assess of the current crop of producers. If they are profitable then they are operating the firm in a manner that is consistent with good business practices. If this is done in the short term as suggested by People, Ideas & Objects method of accounting for all of the costs at the property level. Then the investor has the ability to make the assessment of the producers performance. And they will conclude, as I have, that the investor will need to stop subsidizing the oil and gas industry in terms of the prices that are received for the oil and gas commodities.
Measurement of a firms assets and the timing of their movement to the income statement is a key principle in accounting. I think the public accountants and the SEC have messed it up badly in oil and gas. Leading to the investment community essentially subsidizing the oil and gas consumer by funding the capital expenditure programs of producers with no expectation of any return on investment, ever. This has to change if the industry is going to approach the needs of society in the next 25 years. Undertaking the $40 trillion in investment that is alleged to be necessary with nothing but disgruntled investors is not going to do it. Sure investors sit on producers that are well capitalized in terms of their assets on the balance sheet. But they never make any real money. And at the end of the day, all that happens is that a new day begins with the bureaucrats who run this business. We need a change.
The Preliminary Specification and user community provides the oil and gas producer with the most dynamic, innovative, profitable and successful means of oil and gas operations. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in these user defined software developments. Users are welcome to join me here. Together we can begin to meet the future demands for energy. And don't forget to join our network on Twitter @piobiz anyone can contact me at 403-200-2302 or email here.