The Producers Choice
The worst performing stocks of the first quarter of 2017, on a global basis, are the North American oil and gas producers. Even though OPEC has tentatively committed to extending their production cuts until March of 2018. Oil prices remain barely above $50 due to the shale producers zeal to fill any void left by OPEC’s production sharing agreements. Producers all claim that they’re profitable at $34. This is attributable to the fact that they never recognize the capital costs of past production. The capital costs they do recognize are so insignificant, due to the fact they recognize them over the usual 15 year period of depletion. Causing their property, plant and equipment balances to bloat excessively on their “well protected balance sheets.” In the first quarter of 2017 our sample of 23 producer’s spent $10.2 billion on capital expenditures and recognized $14.3 billion in depletion. Reducing the property plant and equipment balance by $4.1 billion to $459.2 billion. At this rate another 112 quarters should clear these balances. The point of the exercise is clearly to store these costs for as long as possible, to never recognize them and pretend that they’re profitable under the basis of a perverted SEC ruling that is the exception and counter to all other industries.
Running a producer as a business is the solution. Moving the balances of property, plant and equipment to the income statement in a timely manner would have recorded a collective net loss of $397.3 billion. Providing key evidence to our claim that producers need a tripling of oil and gas revenues to survive. This would therefore also represent the amount that the investment community, the source of the capital to fuel those losses, has subsidized the energy consumer. With these costs sitting on the balance sheet for eternity the industry will always look profitable. Oil and gas is a capital intensive industry, the real costs are in the drilling and fracing operations not in the operation of pumpjacks. This is not just ludicrous from a business point of view, but from a practical manner as well. If the producers only produced profitable production as with the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production model and price maker strategy. They would obtain the prices necessary to eliminate the property, plant and equipment balances and recognize the real costs of the oil and gas business. In turn the “business” would generate cash that could be used to pay dividends, pay off debts and fuel future capital expenditures. Their property, plant and equipment account on the balance sheet would be replaced by current asset accounts they could use. That would however require they begin running a business.
Our price maker strategy is the issue the bureaucrats point to as being unacceptable. They will never intervene in the market to “make” prices. They want to see the “market rebalance.” Markets do one thing and only one thing and that is provide information by way of price. If the price is adequate for you to produce and make a profit, you produce, otherwise you don’t. And that is the way markets everywhere and our price maker strategy work. If the property earns a profit, considering all of the costs, including capital costs on a reasonable basis of recognition, then it produces, otherwise it’s shut-in. This is not collusion as the bureaucrats claim, its independent business decisions being based on actual factual accounting information. You’re in business to earn a profit. Why would you produce if you didn’t earn a profit? You wouldn’t. With the Preliminary Specifications reorganization of the producer and industry the shut-in production incurs a null operation, no profit but also no loss. The shut-in property will incur no royalties, operating costs and no overhead of any kind. Therefore the producers profits are maximized as a result of only producing profitable properties, no unprofitable properties are diluting their earnings. The commodity markets find the marginal costs of the commodities due to the marginal production being removed from the market. The reserves costs remain constant due to the fact that consecutive losses are not added to the reserves each year. And those reserves are saved for a time when they can be produced profitably.
I’ll admit that People, Ideas & Objects our user community and service providers are part of the lunatic fringe as a result of this thinking. We are absolute evil, and how dare we suggest that the industry be operated as a business. It’s just what we do. This industry has been operated on this basis now for four decades. Most of the people in the industry don’t know anything different. It is culturally ingrained and the destruction is beginning to be recognized. Note the word beginning. When you don’t recognize your capital costs for the first few years, or even decades, it’s an advantage. Then as the balances of property, plant and equipment build up, that advantage turns into a disadvantage in order to equal things out. Mostly due to higher depletion rates, large balances of debt and large numbers of shareholders offsetting these very high balances of property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet. Where’s the upside for a new investor? Outsized balances of property, plant and equipment will be the albatross of these producers for decades to come, under the current methodology. The other consequence of not recognizing your capital costs is that you report healthy profits in the early years which draws in excessive amounts of capital. You remember those good old days don’t you. That excessive capital leads to overproduction or over capacity. Which from a business point of view, I don’t think there is a more dire and difficult business problem to overcome. Most businesses can’t survive when they’ve invested into too much capacity. The increased overhead of the surplus capacity eats you alive. The oil and gas industry has invested into too much capacity. What will happen as a result? Will it be that the producers support one another by participating in the development of the Preliminary Specification, or drag each other down? With the only source of cash being “more” production I think we have our current answer.
The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for North America’s energy independence. 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.
Running a producer as a business is the solution. Moving the balances of property, plant and equipment to the income statement in a timely manner would have recorded a collective net loss of $397.3 billion. Providing key evidence to our claim that producers need a tripling of oil and gas revenues to survive. This would therefore also represent the amount that the investment community, the source of the capital to fuel those losses, has subsidized the energy consumer. With these costs sitting on the balance sheet for eternity the industry will always look profitable. Oil and gas is a capital intensive industry, the real costs are in the drilling and fracing operations not in the operation of pumpjacks. This is not just ludicrous from a business point of view, but from a practical manner as well. If the producers only produced profitable production as with the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production model and price maker strategy. They would obtain the prices necessary to eliminate the property, plant and equipment balances and recognize the real costs of the oil and gas business. In turn the “business” would generate cash that could be used to pay dividends, pay off debts and fuel future capital expenditures. Their property, plant and equipment account on the balance sheet would be replaced by current asset accounts they could use. That would however require they begin running a business.
Our price maker strategy is the issue the bureaucrats point to as being unacceptable. They will never intervene in the market to “make” prices. They want to see the “market rebalance.” Markets do one thing and only one thing and that is provide information by way of price. If the price is adequate for you to produce and make a profit, you produce, otherwise you don’t. And that is the way markets everywhere and our price maker strategy work. If the property earns a profit, considering all of the costs, including capital costs on a reasonable basis of recognition, then it produces, otherwise it’s shut-in. This is not collusion as the bureaucrats claim, its independent business decisions being based on actual factual accounting information. You’re in business to earn a profit. Why would you produce if you didn’t earn a profit? You wouldn’t. With the Preliminary Specifications reorganization of the producer and industry the shut-in production incurs a null operation, no profit but also no loss. The shut-in property will incur no royalties, operating costs and no overhead of any kind. Therefore the producers profits are maximized as a result of only producing profitable properties, no unprofitable properties are diluting their earnings. The commodity markets find the marginal costs of the commodities due to the marginal production being removed from the market. The reserves costs remain constant due to the fact that consecutive losses are not added to the reserves each year. And those reserves are saved for a time when they can be produced profitably.
I’ll admit that People, Ideas & Objects our user community and service providers are part of the lunatic fringe as a result of this thinking. We are absolute evil, and how dare we suggest that the industry be operated as a business. It’s just what we do. This industry has been operated on this basis now for four decades. Most of the people in the industry don’t know anything different. It is culturally ingrained and the destruction is beginning to be recognized. Note the word beginning. When you don’t recognize your capital costs for the first few years, or even decades, it’s an advantage. Then as the balances of property, plant and equipment build up, that advantage turns into a disadvantage in order to equal things out. Mostly due to higher depletion rates, large balances of debt and large numbers of shareholders offsetting these very high balances of property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet. Where’s the upside for a new investor? Outsized balances of property, plant and equipment will be the albatross of these producers for decades to come, under the current methodology. The other consequence of not recognizing your capital costs is that you report healthy profits in the early years which draws in excessive amounts of capital. You remember those good old days don’t you. That excessive capital leads to overproduction or over capacity. Which from a business point of view, I don’t think there is a more dire and difficult business problem to overcome. Most businesses can’t survive when they’ve invested into too much capacity. The increased overhead of the surplus capacity eats you alive. The oil and gas industry has invested into too much capacity. What will happen as a result? Will it be that the producers support one another by participating in the development of the Preliminary Specification, or drag each other down? With the only source of cash being “more” production I think we have our current answer.
The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for North America’s energy independence. 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.
