User Community Developments, Part XI

We began discussing the reasons for establishing the user community and their service provider organizations in the oil and gas industry. We’re doing this to show that there are fundamental and necessary reasons for building the Preliminary Specification, the user community and service providers. And not just for the sheer joy of the exercise. What we do know is that in contrast to what we are doing, the bureaucrats are doing nothing about the issues in the industry for the luxury of doing nothing. One of the points that we discussed in the first post in this series was specialization and the division of labor of the user communities and service providers competitive advantage. Today I want to expand on that and look at that competitive advantage from the point of view of the oil and gas industry. What do these elements provide the industry and producers in terms of value above and beyond what has been detailed in this blog series and our value proposition.

What we said in the first post of this series was “Looking at the individual components of the user communities competitive advantage we’ll review the first item on the list and the part about flipping our working relationship with computers. Specialization and the division of labor is the only means in which economic development has ever been achieved. The difference between the economies size in the year 1800 and today is 100% attributable to the application of specialization and the division of labor. Therefore in order that the oil and gas industry can develop further, expand its output, grow efficiently and profitably is through the application of specialization and the division of labor. It’s here too that we can bring in the work of computers and have them do the storage and processing which is their specialty. Essentially a revised division of labor between people and computers. And therefore people can focus on their capabilities which include leadership, problem solving, determining what’s relevant, creativity, collaboration, research, idea generation, design, planning, thinking, negotiating, compromising, innovating, financing to name just a few. These are the areas we need to be focused on and stop moving data from one system to another and other redundant computer related tasks. With each user community member and service provider focusing on one process, they are specializing at a much higher level than what is available now or is ever going to be possible within any producer firm today. Therefore the amount of work they’ll be able to do will be substantially more efficient than what it is today and will continue to provide an enhanced and developing value proposition for the oil and gas industry.”

Today with each producer pursuing the development of their own administrative and accounting capabilities they are seeking to limit the costs incurred by their organizations. This is the only reasonable approach to the issue of high overhead costs in oil and gas. Building state of the art capabilities would be redundant in a generic and regulated function that is not a competitive advantage of the firm. Therefore using the tools that are available to boost the productivity of the administrative and accounting resources are limited to the quality of the firms resources in terms of education and experience in the industry. Getting things done is essentially the only thing that matters.

From an industry wide perspective this is highly inefficient. Within each producer these costs are being duplicated by each and every other producer. None of these administrative or accounting capabilities, as we’ve discussed are shared or shareable. In addition each producer only incurs a volume of transactions that provide for what I would call a “clerical nightmare.” There is no scale in which to provide the efficiencies for the producer to spend the time or money on automation or use specialization and the division of labor to increase the throughput of the resources they have. Therefore each producer struggles with these “clerical nightmares” of processing just enough transactions to make it not worthwhile to invest in their efficiency. It would be considered a waste of resources if each producer undertook the investment in automation, specialization and the division of labor on their own transaction volumes.

If it is accepted that overhead, which is unshared and unshareable, is contributing to each and every producers unprofitability. That overhead is driving the producer to higher levels of production in the high throughput production model, to offset as much of that overhead as possible. Then overhead is an issue in oil and gas. More efficient means of administering and accounting for oil and gas are necessary. The only way in which to increase the efficiency of these administrative and accounting resources is to expand their throughput through application of specialization and the division of labor. It is here that the producer is more or less stuck in terms of discovering any possible means to do so within the four corners of their operation. The need therefore for a reorganization that would facilitate specialization and the division of labor is the only method in which the industry is going to avoid chasing its tail with respect to attempting to cover off all of their overhead by overproducing.

Therefore we come down to the unshared and unshareable nature of today’s overhead. If we took the resources of each producer and organized them in a way in which they could compete based on specialization and the division of labor. They would need to form into groups, focus on one process and deal with the entire industries data set in order to be able to apply automation, specialization and the division of labor. With the Information Technologies that are available today this is reasonable and more than possible. The issue with doing this type of change would be the design of each process and its subsequent iterative changes being implemented. Those that manage a process would need to have the means in which to control the processes makeup and implementation. Particularly in an environment where the oil and gas industry was expecting to achieve higher throughput with the same resource, or in other words, lower overall overhead costs, in addition to turning the producers fixed overhead costs into the industries variable overhead costs.

What People, Ideas & Objects knows from our research is that as soon as we implement our software we will be setting in metaphorical cement that configuration into the industry. Nothing will be able to change unless the software changes first. That is why our Revenue Model is dependent on change, the user community members are the owners of the service providers. And the user community member is endowed with the necessary tools to implement changes that are necessary at anytime in the software. Otherwise we will just freeze the industry and producer in the definition of the Preliminary Specification as it stands today and be unable to deal with the issues and opportunities as they arise in the future.

These points are considered value that is generated outside of our value proposition. More efficient costs in terms of overhead is a benefit to the industry and producer. Industry based variable overhead costs are a benefit to the industry and producer. Specialization, the division of labor and automation can also create cost reductions, increase the throughput of the industry and provide better quality information than what is available today. These are only available as a result of the changes being made to initiate and support the People, Ideas & Objects user community and their service provider organizations. To me this is a worthwhile exercise that brings value for all concerned. The understanding and implementation of the necessary tools for the user community to succeed in this transition are contained within the user community vision.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

User Community Developments, Part X

It would seem that we are conducting radical surgery on a patient that doesn’t need it when we reorganize the administrative and accounting resources of the oil and gas industry and producers. I can certainly understand this point of view and appreciate the concern with all of the changes that we’re implementing. There are however many reasons that the Preliminary Specification disrupts the industry in this manner. Reasons that we’ll now discuss in order to build the support that is needed for the user community and their service provider organizations.

The key concept is the transition from the high throughput production model that is in use today. To the decentralized production model that is used by the Preliminary Specification. In the high throughput production model producers seek to produce as much oil or gas as possible in order to offset the overheads that are incurred. With the decentralized production model the objective is; from Professor Richard Langlois.

In a world of decentralized production, most costs are variable costs; so, when variations or interruptions in product flow interfere with output, costs decline more or less in line with revenues. But when high-throughput production is accomplished by means of high-fixed-cost machinery and organization, variations and interruptions leave significant overheads uncovered. p.58

The nature and abundance of shale eliminates the concern for the scarcity of the commodities. In the past any production that was brought on was welcomed by the marketplace with immediate demand. In today’s market inventories swell and prices collapse quickly as a result of the ability to bring on high deliverability shale based reservoirs. These shale basins are well known and are able to be explored with little to no geological effort in comparison to the past. Everyone knows where the shale is and not much effort is being made to determine what new basins are available. Shale is also expensive. Although producers in the Permian state they can produce for as little as $12 / barrel this is after an allocation of the drilling and completion costs across the massive shale reserves they’ve exposed. Costs to drill and complete are orders of magnitude higher than conventional drilling and completion costs. These new shale based realities need to be dealt with. Investors can’t be waiting for decades to have their investments perform and commodity markets are quickly overwhelmed by the smallest volumes of overproduction. These issues demand a different business model than what has been used in the era of energy scarcity also known as the high throughput production model.

The Preliminary Specification is the result of what and how the industry and producers need to operate when we adopt the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer. It is our belief that in the 1960’s when computers were introduced to the oil and gas industry. The first question is what could be done with them. In accounting and administration the uses became obvious with the development of software for corporate accounting, tax, royalty and compliance needs. Over the past decades this has led to what I believe to be a cultural perspective of the oil and gas producers corporate model that exists today. Some systems in use today are unaware of the Joint Operating Committees existence and role within the operations of the producer firm and the partnership it represents. By adopting the Joint Operating Committee we are moving to the culture of the industry and accommodating that unique need.

Therefore each partnership or Joint Operating Committee will replace the reporting emphasis from the corporate to the Joint Operating Committee. Each property will have actual, detailed and full financial statements provided with the corporation being a consolidation of those operations interests. The Information Technologies used will bring the partners in the Joint Operating Committee much closer together and enable faster decisions and management processes through the Preliminary Specification. These render the use of the concept of “operator” to be redundant. With each producer having an interest in 100’s of Joint Operating Committees for a small producer to tens of thousands for an intermediate this becomes logistically difficult if not for the People, Ideas & Objects Information Technologies.

Accounting and administration in oil and gas is generic, regulated to a large extent and hopefully not a key competitive advantage for any producer. Each producer is challenged with their constant need to develop administrative and accounting capabilities that are unshareable with other producers. These generic processes as structured today are unshared and unshareable with each producer building the same capabilities within their own organizations as their partners, neighbours and the rest of the industry. Unshareable overhead processes are costing each producer their profitability. The Preliminary Specification seeks to change the dynamic of overhead in the producer firm from this static fixed overhead cost to a variable industry cost, through implementation of the user communities service provider organizations providing the unique process management on behalf of their clients, the oil and gas producers. Enabling these producers to determine the profitability of a property with the detailed overhead that is charged by each of the service providers for their process management to each individual Joint Operating Committee. Then if a property becomes unprofitable they can shut-in that property and generate a null operation, no profit, but also no loss. No overhead costs of the service providers would be incurred on the shut-in property through the Preliminary Specification. The producer could then invest their time, energy and money to return the property to profitable production through their earth science and engineering capabilities and innovations.

It is through these changes the producer is able to produce only profitable production at any level of their production profile. Unprofitable properties will no longer dilute profitable properties. Maximizing the producers profitability. The excess unprofitable production will be removed from the commodity markets ensuring that these find their marginal cost. The reserves will be saved for a time when they can be produced profitably and those reserves will not have to carry the incremental cost of additional yearly losses to be recovered with the capital costs. These benefits are facilitated by the user community and their service provider organizations. We are not executing change for the sake of change but to deal with the issues of today, the opportunities that shale reservoirs bring and the business and culture of the oil and gas business. These can only be achieved through the implementation of the service providers.

Although it is radical surgery to implement the Preliminary Specification, the user community and service providers. It is needed for these reasons. Oil and gas is facing an existential threat to its financial health. Oil prices may be higher today, but not high enough to cover the costs. Overproduction as a result of shale is the reality that needs to be dealt with. Natural gas prices are woefully inadequate and no one even talks about that side of the business anymore. The producers have fundamentally destroyed the natural gas business. Oil is different in that it has not been destroyed, yet. Given time however it will certainly follow the natural gas business. It is through these business changes, the difficulties the industry and producers face and the opportunities that are presented to them that the user community and service providers are enabled.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

User Community Developments, Part IX

People, Ideas & Objects now return to focus on our customers, the user community, and continue the discussion we had prior to our review of the producers 2017 earnings season. In a series of eight parts in February and March 2018 we were able to review the user community and service providers competitive advantages, corporate structure, role within the industry and their role in the development of the Intellectual Property that makes up the Preliminary Specification. As we discussed, the overall objective of the user community is that they’ll become the state-of-the-art providers of leadership and capabilities in terms of oil and gas administration and accounting in North America.

The topic that I want to discuss today is leadership and it’s development within the user community. I recently stumbled upon what I think is a game changing analysis of leadership from PriceWaterhouseCoopers and Harvard Business Review. Entitled “Strategy That Works: Five Acts to Transform Your Future.” The pertinence of these ideas to the work that will be done in the user community and the service providers is directly relatable. I highly recommend reviewing the following short video to capture the differences that this thinking represents in comparison to traditional ideas. The video is a summary of the book they’ve published “Strategy That Works.” More information on these and the entire thrust of their initiative can be sourced from here.

PWC and HBR state that business strategy is broken, and state there are five unconventional acts that companies can use to win. The first of these acts is “Stop chasing the market.” People, Ideas & Objects offer a substantial business opportunity for those in the oil and gas administrative and accounting fields. Working over the mid to long term we believe those members of our user community will be able to establish themselves as leaders with the competitive offerings and advantages we’ve discussed in this series. These opportunities are not available to generate revenues tomorrow, but chasing the market doesn’t build value, in my opinion, and appears to be consistent with the ideas of the authors of this book and video. What members of the user community will be able to do is position themselves to generate the revenues in the mid to long term.

The second act is “Translate the Strategy into the everyday.” Which is exactly what we will be doing in People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification, the user community and their service provider organizations. “Start blueprinting and building unique cross functional capabilities.” Taking the existing oil and gas and service industries, and the vision of the Preliminary Specification and determining, with the direction of the producers, what, how and why things need to be done in the industry. Build the software that will identify and support that structure and implement it across North America. From both a software and capabilities point of view determine the organizations necessary to support the user communities customers, the profitable oil and gas producers.

Act three is “Put your culture to work.” Everything that is done in the Preliminary Specification, the reorganization of the industry and the producer is done to align with the culture of oil and gas. The development of the user community and service provider is to accommodate the unique culture of the oil and gas industry. Using the Joint Operating Committee as the basis of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer is the source of all of the changes that are made in the design of the Preliminary Specification. What we are doing is we are moving the compliance and governance framework of the hierarchy into alignment with the Joint Operating Committees legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, innovation and strategic frameworks. The alignment of these seven frameworks is what provide us with the speed, accountability and profitability that we desire in our oil and gas producers.

I am very critical of the cost cutting that is done in the oil and gas industry. Reading my past posts in our “These Are Not the Earnings We’re Looking For” series will show the areas of our concern. The fourth act in the video is “Cut costs to focus on strategy.” And I could not subscribe to their recommendation more than I am now. The authors suggest that cutting aimlessly is, I’ll put words in their mouth, useless. Instead focus your cost cutting on areas that are redundant to your strategic needs and into areas that will “supercharge” growth. One area that I believe the North American oil and gas producer can participate in this type of investment is by sponsoring the Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers.

“Shape your future.” Is act Five. It is here that we come into alignment with the author's thinking once again. The user community is being looked too to provide the leadership and capabilities to the oil and gas industry for the mid to long term. We have endowed the user community with the tools necessary for them to orchestrate the changes that the oil and gas producers will need to maintain their profitable operations. These tools include our software developers only look to the user community for their input. And the user community is in control of the Intellectual Property making up this initiative.

The point here is that People, Ideas & Objects and these authors are in complete alignment in terms of what the future needs of organizations and industries are. I am elated with this work, and very pleased to be offering the user communities participation to those who are the future leaders in the oil and gas administrative and accounting fields.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part XII

One thing that the Preliminary Specification provides is a performance basis of evaluation of the producer firm. Since only profitable production will be enabled through our decentralized production models price maker strategy. Producers will seek to maximize profitability at all times by ensuring that their unprofitable properties are shut-in and aggressively worked over so they can be returned to profitable production. Our basis of profitability is based on a competitive investment environment that exists in the 21st century. Allowing assets to bloat on the balance sheet for decades provides no value for anyone other than for the CEO to brag amongst their friends. This accounting sleight of hand has been enabled for the past four decades by the SEC’s very odd accounting for oil and gas. Producers have over these decades taken the capitalization of every cost they incur to ridiculous levels to ensure that they report the highest “accounting” profits they possibly can. Accounting in oil and gas is about deceiving everyone that your profitable, integral and a good corporate citizen. Performance never enters into the mindset of anyone. If there was a performance mindset they would want to recognize the capital costs stored in property, plant and equipment to the income statement as quickly as possible.

I am not seeing any changes in the numbers or the attitudes of the producers regarding the time frame in which their depleting their capital assets. If they did change their time frame and adopted our recommendation that all of the property, plant and equipment currently on the balance sheet should be depleted within the next 2.5 years. Then the scam would be exposed for what it is. Producers have been selling oil and gas for decades at discounted prices to the consumer. This would become evident in an appropriate performance based accounting. Losses would be chronic, systemic and spectacular. These losses have been mitigated in the past decades by not recognizing the cost of capital in a capital intensive business. And having the shareholders fleeced annually for additional capital to make up for the cash shortfall the organizations incurred due to the low commodity prices they’re charging. To me this has been industry “common sense” since the time the SEC implemented their policies in the late 1970’s. It has become the culture of the industry to distort their performance in this way.

The attribute that keeps the doors open and the pumpjacks pumping is the fact that the industry is a capital intensive industry. The amount of capital that was taken from shareholders in the last number of decades. Annually and seemingly by every producer, is substantial. These investments now provide the cash flow that fuel the standard of living that our friends the bureaucrats enjoy. Whatever they spend and how they spend it in this area is never really known or understood. Overhead for our sample producers ranges from 1.5% to almost 20%. I would suggest the producer that is incurring the 20% is accurately reporting their overhead. The average for our sample of 23 producers is 6.21% which I think shows the extent of the capitalization of what others would call overhead costs. The game of who can capitalize the most costs came to somewhat of end a few years ago when individuals were charged by the SEC for capitalizing royalties. That as we know was PennWest, who now call themselves Obsidian so that people will forget that they tried that. The point is that this is evidence that these people can be embarrassed, and the fear of embarrassment will affect their behavior.

As good as that news is about the cash flow continuing and the bureaucrats keeping the show on the road. The overcapitalization of the industry is the dead weight, the albatross that they can never get out from under. What took decades to build up will not be resolved with accounting trickery in the next 15 minutes. As easy as it was to defer the recognition of your capital costs as a young, upstart producer with shiney profits. That deferral comes back to haunt you at some point. On an industry wide basis these balances have been bloating for the past four decades. Bureaucrats have been so enamoured with them that they use the property, plant and equipment account as evidence in the valuation of acquisitions and divestitures. Paying billions of dollars for big numbered assets is a fools game. Sure you can substantiate the validity of the value with the present value of the reserves. However if you critically evaluate the performance of the producer the assets have been sucking their shareholders down a big black hole. That big black hole, I’m suggesting, is only going to be getting bigger and its gravitational pull will be getting stronger.

In light of all of this. The one question that I have is why are we leaving this cash flow that is being used to support the bureaucracy in their hands? That is the only question I have based on my analysis of the sample of 23 producers that I reviewed. The only purpose to the existence of these organizations, other than drilling more wells that do nothing for the business, is unknown to me. Just drill more until the market collapses again. And maybe there is a performance and productivity here that I am unaware of. Nonetheless, why are we leaving the cash flow in the hands of these bureaucrats?

We’re going to shift back to our discussion of the user community and other topics next Monday. Today is the beginning of reporting season and annual general meetings. We’ll return to these topics and why they’re not the earnings we’re looking for after our sample of 23 companies have published their first quarter reports.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part XI

Big numbers continue to be produced when it comes to anything associated with the Permian basin. The volume of associated gas production is stratospheric at approximately 10 bcf / day. The expectation is that this may exceed 16 bcf / day when all the screaming and hollering is done. That is more natural gas production than all of Canada. As it stands today Permian gas competes directly with Marcellus gas for the least expensive gas in the U.S. This being a result of the lack of take away capacity in the region. Almost 8 bcf in pipeline capacity will soon be coming on line to move the Permians associated gas to LNG facilities. Producers are sitting around waiting for these pipeline companies to build this new takeaway capacity at which time they will be able to release that trapped gas into the larger U.S. market. As I’ve stated before I think that’s what they’ll be doing, moving their trapped gas from low priced, depressed areas like the Permian and Marcellus to flood the market and depress the natural gas prices across the country. Unleashing the constrained gas in the Marcellus and Permian may have the unintended consequence of overwhelming the rest of the continent’s natural gas market with suppressed deliverability about to come online.

Recently Concho Resources announced a merger with RSP Permian Inc that is subject to both firms shareholders approval and is scheduled to be closed in the third quarter of 2018. Concho’s acquisition of Permian is valued at $8 billion. Concho has about $13 billion in total assets generating $2.5 billion in revenue per year. To give you an example of how far gone these oil and gas companies are, and how far I think they’ll need to travel in order to right themselves. It would be my opinion that Concho should have $2.5 billion in property, plant and equipment generating $13 billion in annual revenues. Since the merger deal includes the value of the debt, it would seem the premium paid for Permian is about $2 billion. Concho or the merged entity will have $21 billion in assets and approximately $3.5 billion in revenues. The only game in oil and gas is to have the biggest balance sheet, which will enable the CEO to strut like few before him.

Neither of these firms has ever truly been profitable. They collectively have reported almost $1 billion of those oil and gas type of earnings between them over the lives of their firms. Even over the long term considering an inflation induced business model. Under People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specifications decentralized production model the most effective use of a producer's time, energy and money would be to return their inventory of shut-in, unprofitable properties to profitable production. This would be done through the hard work and innovations of the producers earth science and engineering capabilities. Only when they have no inventory of shut-in properties would it be reasonable or justified for them to turn to the marketplace for more land, production or acquisitions. This rushing of everyone into the asset that grabs most of the press headlines has been part of their inflation induced business model and has been going on for 40 years. It’s almost like gaming the stock price is the objective. Today it’s the Permian, recently the Marcellus, prior to that any shale formation, heavy oil had its day and before that it was SAGD. On and on the spendaholics rush around with sirens ablaze that they’re in a panic to acquire the only thing of value. Chesapeake was the prior darling of the day. Acquisition of reserves at any price to boost the balance sheet is the name of the only game that is ever played in oil and gas. Reserves are useless if they can’t be produced profitably. What the acquisition of Permian by Concho shows is that this fact has not been learned and the status quo that has brought these very difficult times in this industry remain well entrenched.

What I think this merger looks like is two swimmers who are in jeopardy of drowning, then decide they have a better chance of survival by holding on to each other. Maybe these mergers will become the strategic flavor of the day! My suggestion would be for the industry to look northward to the pleasant business environment in Canada. I haven’t held out much hope for Canada these past few years. The business model here has been the same as in the U.S. Although the U.S. is much larger, they may be able to learn that continuation down this same old, same old road will present similar difficulties to the ones now being faced in Canada. More or less it’s get out of Canada as quick as you can. Shareholders are fleeing, Pipelines under development are being stopped and maybe the smart producers are moving to the states. There is nothing much for anyone here in Canada except for the bottom feeders. It is far easier to bail on the Canadians then it ever would be to bail on the American producers. Which doesn’t mean it can’t and won’t happen. I’ve been saying oil and gas is in serious jeopardy for a few years. It just doesn’t have to be this way.

What will the Canadian producers do to fix this? They like the rest of the industry have certainly done nothing so far. The problem still exists even after a decade of natural gas overproduction. Market rebalancing, discipline and every other excuse has been put forward and nothing has been done. Now it’s expected that we’ll just leave them alone and they’ll do their thing? What if these are the good times? What if the next 5 years present more difficulties than the past 5 years? Oil prices peaked at $145.29 and natural gas at $13.58 on July 3, 2008. Both collapsed as a result of the financial crisis to well below $45 for oil and $4 for gas. Neither has truly recovered since, but oil did have 2011 to 2014 in which the price averaged almost $100. We’re all aware of the sharp decline in prices since then and the efforts of OPEC to “rebalance” the market. If producers future is dependent on their stock price matching the changes in commodity prices. Is it reasonable to think the future is theirs? If just drilling more wells is their future, what could go wrong?

Natural gas as a business has been fundamentally destroyed by overproduction. Nothing is being done about that, or even discussed. Oil prices are up therefore drilling for oil is the “thing” to do. Around 1,000 rigs are operating now. Up from the days when oil collapsed. What is important to understand is that there’ve been innovations in the service industries. The speed and overall time to drill and complete a shale well has collapsed. Therefore on an annual basis those 1,000 rigs will drill and complete more wells. Oil prices are high today. Certainly not high enough to make the reserves profitable. But no one in the industry will be concerned about that until the commodity prices collapse again.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part X

Bureaucrats have a point about the Preliminary Specification. It’s expensive. Which is also one of the few things that I agree with them about. What producers should be concerned about is the value proposition that the Preliminary Specification provides them. The $25.7 to $45.7 trillion in additional revenues they would earn in the next 25 years as a result of using the somewhat expensive, $6 billion Preliminary Specification. $20 to $40 trillion of those industry revenues cover the costs of what are believed to be the future capital costs that the industry needs to incur in order to meet the consumers energy demands. These capital cost estimates are from a variety of sources. Under the current business model the bureaucrats expect shareholders will fund these capital expenditures. Just as they’ve done for the past four decades. People, Ideas & Objects believe that these costs need to be incurred by the consumer. In doing so these capital costs will need to be recaptured by the producers through their revenues as a result of using the Preliminary Specifications price maker strategy. More or less it is this point that is the fundamental difference between the producers existing business model and the business models contained within the Preliminary Specification.

Having systems that are mission critical developed in the vision of the Preliminary Specification is difficult and risky. I would also agree with that statement if it were 1998, 2005 or even 2010. Today I believe the technical risks being incurred by the producers in developing the Preliminary Specification have been mitigated by the maturation of Information Technologies. Producers believe that their current systems, such as Qbyte, which was conceived of in the pre-Internet era of DOS, will continue indefinitely. At some point it is necessary to deal with these 30+ year old systems. When the business model of the producers and the industry has fundamentally failed, what better time to address this?

The industry and producers future demands will not be met by today’s software offerings. It is rumoured that iTunes, which is 15 years old, is in need of, and being rewritten, Qbyte which is 30+ years old is just beginning in its infancy in oil and gas. If a non-mission critical music application has had its best days and is being rewritten, why wouldn't a 30+ year old ERP application? In addition People, Ideas & Objects are providing the industry with a software development capability that is permanent and a key part of our business model. We are change based software developers. Changes in the Preliminary Specification are accommodated by the existence of the permanent user community and our permanent software development capability. If the Preliminary Specification needs to be replaced by a new business model People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers will be the ones that make it happen.

Bureaucrats will no doubt look towards Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning to solve their problems. Big data is the clue to the solution! Putting their house in order and getting organized profitably for the future is contrary to the health of the bureaucrats, which is why building the Preliminary Specification is more of a concern and priority for them to avoid than it is a wise strategy. It’s best that the bureaucrats remember that no one believes anything they say anymore. Their credibility is shot and if bureaucrats shop these Information Technology based ideas around then people will know their circus still has more dates on its calendar. “It’s the business, stupid,” Bill Clinton I believe once said.

If you were to build a bridge you wouldn’t expect the manager to initiate a corporate entity to raise capital and generate a business that will support the investment that needs to build the bridge. People, Ideas & Objects is a capital project where the vested interests, the producers, need to pay for our costs to enable their profitable future. This endeavor is not a commercial operation from the regular perspective of a corporation. It is very much a project with a business model to support the user community and software developments after initial commercial release. This is the manner in which the oil and gas industry has to be approached in terms of the development of ERP software. Building the Golden Gate Bridge on speculation wasn’t practical or necessary a century ago. Building ERP software for the oil and gas industry on speculation is not practical today. Only bureaucrats believe it to be necessary.

With our Preliminary Specification in place for 2018. We have calculated based on our sample of 23 producer firms 2017 fiscal years financial statements. That the prices necessary to be profitable were $135.67 / boe on average throughout the year. The industry generated actual industry-wide revenues of $430.8 billion, whereas if these same volumes were produced at our proposed prices, they would have generated $1.243 trillion. An overall differential of $812 billion. From this we would assume the following. 25% royalties of $203 billion on that differential. Gross taxes at 21% for $127 billion on that differential. Distribution to the Coin Holders that provide the funding to this project of $158 billion, or 33% of the net after taxes and royalties. Leaving the industry with an incremental $322 billion in net revenues. Industry wide capital costs of $215 billion would be fully funded. Leaving $107 billion in debt reductions and dividends. Of note 2017’s capital expenditures are down from about one half trillion only a few years ago. And the amount of industry wide property, plant and equipment is estimated to be $1.642 trillion. After all the bureaucrats and I are only arguing small differences on the margin. And they wonder why their having such difficulty in their business?

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part IX

During this annual report and general meeting season bureaucrats will focus on their diligent and ethical spending of shareholders money on their capital projects. This has been the case in oil and gas for many decades. Producers claim that capital discipline is one of their key attributes which makes them such a good investment. If only integral capital spending was the only attribute needed for a profitable operation. The thing they won’t, and don’t, talk about is the spending of the resources that are returned from those investments. The revenues that the oil and gas investments earn for all intents and purposes are for the bureaucrats to do with as they please. This being another reason why the annual shareholder fleecing, or offering, was such a mandatory part of the oil and gas producers operation. Nothing they did with these revenues have any impact on the profitability / loss of the operation as the costs of capital would rarely ever pass through the income statement during their tenure. And there were always new shareholders available for next years capital expenditure needs. We need to ask which is the higher cost, drilling, completion and equipping wells (capital) or the electricity for the pump jack (operations). Therefore these oil and gas revenues were to be done with as the bureaucrats pleased. Oh, did I say that out loud?

The first priority of the oil and gas bureaucrat and the first thing for them to utter anywhere is their efforts to reduce their costs. Cost reduction is the holy grail of accountability and responsibility. This in an industry whose costs fit conveniently and profitably under a 1970 oil price of $1.72. A period in which the general economy has experienced 640% inflation, yet the price of oil is 3250% higher. And remember it’s People, Ideas & Objects claim that the producers have also been taking these annual shareholder proceeds as compensation for the discount that they’ve continued to provide the energy consumer in the form of lower oil and gas prices. At 3250% the current oil prices are understated in our opinion. We’ve calculated they need to be $135.67 / barrel which would be 7887% inflation. It has been much easier to provide the consumers discount at shareholder expense than to run a truly profitable operation. In an environment where costs are escalating rapidly it is a necessity for the producer to recognize their capital costs quickly. It is on the basis of the failure of their cost control that these bureaucrats should be summarily fired for incompetence. There I got that out of my system, we can finish the rest of this post. My other point would be that any attempt to control costs in an industry where the costs of oil and gas exploration and production will be higher as a result of the never ending increase in effort necessary to bring the commodities to market, is futile is it not? In an increasing cost environment it should be a concern to these producers that these ever increasing costs are recovered quickly and profitably. Pushing the recognition of your costs out beyond a decade would be a deception in an environment of rapidly escalating costs. Bureaucrats would be looking to inflation to reflect their performance over time as opposed to earning real profits.

Today producers have lost the point. Concerned that they don’t get more expensive than solar or wind energy. Concerned that the public will get angry if they are perceived to be raising prices to cover the costs of oil and gas production and exploration. They are stricken with brief attention spans that fluctuate with the daily changes in direction of the price of oil and gas. Change is too difficult for them to undertake, its unwanted as it conflicts directly with the bureaucrats best interests and as far as their concerned, not needed now. The ability of the existing producers to execute the necessary changes has now proven to be impossible. Oil and gas producers are not competitive, they’re stale, chronically overproducing into the marketplace. We’ve noted that only 5 of the last 32 years have been “good years” for the oil and gas industry. Bureaucrats have enjoyed 32 “great years.” For everyone else it hasn’t been so prosperous during any of that time. Come to think of it things weren’t that much better before 1986 either. When will the industry begin to be managed as a viable going concern?

This reporting season will be the same as it has been for 32 years. “Prices are low, oh whoa is me and please send cash.” It could be different however. People, Ideas & Objects enables producers to capture their capital costs quickly and profitably. Providing them with the capital to fund their capital expenditures, reduce their debt and issue dividends to investors. By only producing profitable production and recognizing all of their costs within a reasonable time frame producers would maintain a mature, yet profitable industry for the long term. One that investors, service industry representatives and the people who have invested their careers in oil and gas would be able to prosper in everywhere and always. Where these people who work in oil and gas would not have to be subject to the same kind of seniority that a common laborer out of high school experiences. There will be losers however. The Preliminary Specification disintermediates the bureaucracy, eliminating them from the scene, which is why they’ve chosen to run the industry into the ground instead.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part VIII

One of the concerns that we’ve expressed here at People, Ideas & Objects is the fact that North America holds 17% of all shale formations. What happens when the rest of the world begins to deploy the shale based capabilities that have been available somewhat exclusively to the North American market? The past number of years we’ve seen these technologies successfully deployed in Argentina, what happens when the rest of the world catches on? How will the industry be profitable when the abundance that we’ve seen in North American oil and gas commodity markets becomes the case elsewhere? It is this abundance in both oil and gas that have led to steep declines in the price of oil these past four years. And created a comprehensive market collapse in the natural gas market over the past decade, or should I say decayed.

Bahrain is a small country in the Middle East that has a population of 1.45 million people. Recently it held reserves of 125 million barrels of oil and 3.25 tcf of natural gas which provided for their consumption and Bahrain's primary export. To contrast, it’s neighbor Saudi Arabia has oil reserves that are in the region of 266 billion barrels. An order of magnitude difference. Bahrain recently contracted Schlumberger to drill a shallow offshore well in a tight formation that has been independently evaluated to hold 80 billion barrels of oil and 13.7 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. (Of note Halliburton will be drilling the next few wells.) How much of that oil could be produced is unknown and the completion of that well, particularly the fracing of the shale, offshore would be technically difficult. Although these technical and other issues will delay the development of these reserves, there are oil and gas shale reserves held in areas other than the North American marketplace. Not all of them will be as difficult to discover or produce as those in Bahrain, which is a small country. What we can be assured of, knowing the status quo’s muddle along strategy and do nothing operating procedure, in the decades to come, is that more than just North American producers will be exploring and producing expensive shale resources unprofitably.

Eventually, unquestionably and definitively there will be a need for a methodology of production allocation that is fair and equitable to all. People, Ideas & Objects have chosen the profitability of the property as that fair and equitable production allocation methodology. Only the decentralized production model of the Preliminary Specification can provide that. Producers need to implement our production allocation methodology within the North American marketplace as soon as possible and ensure that it is available to other regions as the high cost, tight formations around the world begin to be produced. Otherwise oil and gas will continue with this status quo for decades, which can best be described as a non-commercial operation where capital goes to die.

Conventional producers are happy with the price of oil today. Saudi Arabia’s cost to produce is well under $10 / barrel. They’re also happy to sit and wait while the North American producers prove to the rest of the world that their accounting has not only been suspect but deceptive and their earnings never existed, ever, we believe in the past 4 decades. OPEC for all intents and purposes will remain profitable in the conventional resource plays they produce. North American producers at some point will have to prove their claims of profitability and financial health. Something that they’re having difficulty doing even today at these commodity prices. It’s a slow bleed and the producers are the only ones that seem to be “allegedly” fooled by their accounting statements.

The claims of North American producers profitability in today’s marketplace have two deceptive elements to them. One is the shell game of stating that today’s “lower” drilling and completion costs apply to the historical cost that were incurred in prior fiscal years. Your costs are historically fixed, they don’t go down. Today’s costs may be lower but they can’t be retroactively adjusted to what was paid for in prior years. Secondly the fact is that their costs of capital per barrel this year are lower than last years. Which is a direct contradiction of what I just said. However that second point is not an accounting statement, nor is it an accounting statement being made by the people in industry when they say their costs are going down year over year. Reserves are booked on the basis of their commercial viability based on the current market price. The number of the reserves volumes are much higher when the price is $100 and much lower when the oil price is $29. That is to say that the reserves volumes change on the basis of the prices that are realized. As the price increases more reserves are able to be produced “commercially” and as a result the reserves value of the producer is increased by both volumes and prices. So when we look at the capital cost per volume of the reserves at $29 or at $100 we have a much different picture in terms of the capital cost per barrel of oil. This is not part of the accounting function and as I stated this is what is being quoted by the press when producers claim that their costs have come down in an environment of increasing oil prices from the high twenties to the low sixties.

Accounting is about measuring performance based on historical cost. Accountability by the engineers and geologists is based on their terms and understanding of reserves. Hence the two basis of discussing the oil and gas industries financial dynamics. It is People, Ideas & Objects opinion that the development of reserves is the appropriate approach for the industry to pursue, no question. However, development of the reserves within the business community it operates in is a necessity. Reserves are essentially useless if they remain terminally unprofitable. Ignoring the producers performance based on a reasonable accounting evaluation of what the owners of the firm invested and what was left after paying the bills is the only way in which to evaluate the commercial performance of the firm. It is on that basis that we state that these are not the earnings we’re looking for. Oil and gas needs to compete for the capital resources it requires as a capital intensive industry. Turning over its capital once every two decades is not adequate in the 21st century, nor is it going to be adequate in dealing with the low cost producers from OPEC or future global shale producers.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.

Some Time Off

I will be taking some time off, returning April 9, 2018

These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part VII

As much as I think the message has been getting through regarding “bloated balance sheets” and not recognizing the capital costs of past production by the producers. A few producers have reduced their periods of depletion from many decades to within single digits in some cases. What we see in those producers is that the effect has been minimal in terms of retiring the balances of property, plant and equipment. These producers and the industries balances are still outsized. Even after the hit they took to earnings as a result, they’ll need to redouble their efforts from here. For example Hess has been aggressively moving in this direction at great cost to their profitability which has created conflict within their boardroom with some shareholders.

Now that we’re seeing the “harvesting” of the investment that was made in oil and gas being undertaken by the shareholders and bankers. For all of the screaming and yelling I’ve done about this issue, with respect to the existing producers, it’s probably a moot point now. What they do in recording their performance is irrelevant to the shareholders and bankers, and nothing is going to change their minds in terms of their strategy of “harvesting” their oil and gas investment. Once these types of decisions have been made they’re not revisited or reversed. Therefore it’s time to turn towards the future and start building the new oil and gas industry.

In terms of the establishment of the new oil and gas industry, based on the new producer firms there is much to do. In reading the Preliminary Specification we find that there are two business models in the way these new producers generate revenues and deal with their costs. We have discussed the decentralized production model here many times and will only note that this is the manner in which the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producers ensure that only profitable production is produced. The second business model deals with generating revenues from two of the four competitive advantages of an oil and gas producer, those being the earth science and engineering capabilities. The producers other competitive advantages are its land and asset base.

In terms of the earth science and engineering capabilities of the producer, these become revenue generating activities within this new industry we’re creating. First recall that overhead of the administrative and accounting resources won’t exist within the new producers because these resources have been reallocated to the service providers who are charging for their services directly to each individual Joint Operating Committee. Any overhead of this type will be as a result of profitable oil and gas production and charged to the Joint Operating Committee. The revenues from the earth science and engineering capabilities are generated as a result of the time of these resources being charged directly to the Joint Operating Committee as well. Whether that is a property that the producer has an ownership interest in, or is conducted on a consulting basis to other producers who are in need of the specific competitive offering of the producers earth science and engineering capabilities.

With the potential shortage of earth science and engineering resources in the future. The industry needs a method in which to deal with how they’ll be able to profitably expand the throughput of the industry. With the retirements and the lack of new graduates this may become a protracted issue for many decades. To expand the deliverability of the industry we can rely on an expanded division of labor and specialization both in terms of the professions and the activities of the producer firms. Expanding the division of labor and specialization of geology and engineering are never ending demands due to the complexity of the science basis of oil and gas. The difficulty here is that the ability and capability of each producer to cover off the full scope and scale of these professions diverse offerings will ensure the new oil and gas producers remain unprofitable attempting to support an ever expanding specialized resource. Therefore specialization within each producer firm will be necessary with a pooling of capabilities of the producers involved in the Joint Operating Committee becoming a necessity. Those Joint Operating Committees that are not fully represented by its ownership producers capabilities will need to invite other producers with the requisite specialization into the Joint Operating Committee on a consulting basis to ensure full coverage of what is required. Note that the concept of operatorship has never been a part of the Preliminary Specification.

It is the understanding and expectation that the charging of the geological and engineering resources of the producer firms directly to the Joint Operating Committees is the other business model of the producer. The charging to the Joint Operating Committee will be generating the revenues necessary to support the specialization and capability as if it were a stand alone enterprise. It is within the modules of the Preliminary Specification that this business model is included with the Work Order system capturing and invoicing the time of these resources to the Joint Operating Committee.

The ownership understanding and development of these producers specialization needs to be a deliberate act when these new producers are formed. We believe the specializations will be such that the building of the firm around specific capabilities in terms of facilities and resources will have to be done. Formation of these organizations are the beginnings of the new oil and gas industry.

The Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Setting the foundation for profitable North America’s energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects Revenue Model specifies the means in which investors can participate in our future Initial Coin Offering (ICO) that will fund these user defined software developments. It is through the process of issuing our ICO that we are leading the way in which creative destruction can be implemented within the oil and gas industry. 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.