Financial, Operational, Political, Part I

It was during mid-February that we shifted our discussions to our user community and the 2017 earnings of our sample of 23 producers. We’ll return to a review of the first quarters earnings of 2018 some time after May 8, 2018, which is the day in which our last producer reports. And we will always return to our number one priority, our user community. You will recall that the 2017 earnings for our sample of 23 producers were $15.6 billion. A number that we reclassified to exclude the extraordinary items of the Trump tax cuts, a consistent level of depletion with 2016, Cenovus’ ludicrous reclassification of their assets based on the purchase price of the Conoco assets and the elimination of Conoco’s earnings on the sale of their heavy oil assets. The justification for these reclassifications is debatable, however, we reclassified these “earnings” to a loss of $31 billion for all of 2017 for our 23 producers. The debatable nature of these “earnings” would also have noted that these producers would have lost $173 billion if they’d adopt our recommended 2.5 year depletion schedule for their property, plant and equipment. Which I’ve noted would be ridiculous, but honest, just as keeping property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet for 27 years is ridiculous, but dishonest. If you never recognize your capital cost in a capital intensive business, then it's really not a business that your representing is it? Is your property, plant and equipment an asset or a cost? And why do producers never want to account for the money they spent?

Within the Resource Marketplace, Research & Capabilities, and Knowledge & Learning modules of the Preliminary Specification. We institute a major change in the manner in which the industry is operated. Oil and gas is a primary industry which means that it is involved in the extraction and collection of natural resources for direct sale. These generate direct revenues to the producer of the oil and gas. The service industry and other businesses such as pipelines are in the business of supporting the oil and gas industry and are dependent on the oil and gas producers paying them for their services. As secondary industries they are providing these services in the expectation of earning a profit. In the good times the secondary industries are called “lazy and greedy” and the in bad times they are the first to be laid off and as the “leeches” that they are, have their payments extended to eighteen months by the oil and gas producers. The change that is made in the Preliminary Specification is the recognition that without the service industry and companies such as the pipelines the producers would be unable to conduct any of their operations. People, Ideas & Objects create a more cooperative, collaborative and innovative environment to enhance the innovations that are generated from the service industry for the benefit of the oil and gas producers.

The CEO of Kinder Morgan says that their $7.1 billion “approved” Trans Mountain pipeline is untenable. We’ve discussed the associated gas issues in the Permian where pipeline takeaway capacity is an issue there too. Now we hear that producers are having difficulty sourcing what is needed from the service industry and staffing is difficult. Just google it and see the number of articles documenting the difficulties in sourcing water, sand, trucks, truck drivers etc. When I read stories like these I’m reminded of the stories that came out of the former Soviet Union during its collapse. How everyone, literally, was waiting in line at the bakery for bread. Methods of organization reach a point where they cease to generate value. Then they begin to destroy the value that was built before. Oil and gas is well past the point of generating value and we’ve passed into a destructive phase many decades ago. Accounting shenanigans hid the costs of the destruction from everyone while investors were hoodwinked by suspect accounting into pouring their money into the oil and gas industry each year to keep it afloat. Now the operational side is beginning to fall apart, which after the financial disasters is always the next thing to go. You can read more about this in the Preliminary Specification, which was designed to stop this crap.

Oil prices are up since OPEC’s production sharing agreement went into place. Anyone notice that oil and gas may follow the characteristics of price makers? Remove 2% of the production and receive 100% price gains! Right now the Saudi’s are talking about their goal of $80 oil which would be a good price for their production. Theirs being conventional production doesn’t cost much, and even at $60 they’re making plenty of money. I can almost guarantee that North American producers shareholders will be disenchanted with the first quarter of 2018’s performance, just as they’ve been disappointed these past number of years. $66 oil is half of what People, Ideas & Objects have determined that the North American producers cost is. Primarily due to the high levels of unrecognized capital costs of past production stored on the balance sheet as property, plant and equipment. Which I guess is better than selling oil at $29 / barrel.

Producing oil for $12 / barrel is claimed to be what it costs to produce in the Permian. That is their “breakeven” number. If the producers are making $54 / barrel they should use some of those resources to solve the logistical difficulties in the Permian and pipeline issues too. That would be a good place for that money to go because no one else is volunteering their “free” capital to burn to those oil and gas service businesses anymore, either. What I know for certain is that $12 / barrel cost is as dishonest as the day is long. It either takes the total capital cost and applies it to every molecule of reserves discovered. Which in shale is a substantial volume of reserves making the cost / barrel quite small. Or, are we to assume that royalties in the Permian are below 18% which is $12 / $66. The $12 / barrel being quoted is usually the operating costs of the producers alleged “breakeven price.” Therefore if we assume that all of the non-capital costs are included in the $12, that is not the breakeven price. That is the cost that is used to determine the contribution margin. In this case the contribution margin would be $54 / barrel which when you divide by the capital costs would give you the volume of barrels needed to be produced to achieve breakeven. Therefore the industries use of “breakeven,” as with so many other of the producers fancy financial footwork, is another sleight of hand.

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 XIII

As we noted yesterday the new oil and gas producer, the one that is enabled through the implementation of the Preliminary Specification, has acquired the business model that enables them to control all of their overhead. Their administration and accounting are handled by the service providers and charged directly to the Joint Operating Committee. Any overhead that they incur will be as a result of profitable operations and hence paid for. Any shut-in inventory of unprofitable properties will not attract any of the administrative or accounting overhead. What the shut-in inventory of unprofitable properties will attract is the hourly charges from the earth science and engineering resources time in which they’re working on these properties in an effort to return them to profitable production. These earth science and engineering resources charges would be considered capital costs in my opinion. While those geological and engineering resources are working to return these unprofitable properties they will be generating service revenues from billing the Joint Operating Committees AFE or lease for the work that they’re doing. Capturing the producers service revenues necessary to cover off the cost of maintaining the earth science and engineering capabilities of their producers competitive advantage.

Whether the new oil and gas producer is a startup or an intermediate they will be able to maintain profitability of their oil and gas production at all times. The startup producer can begin operations by reselling their earth science and engineering capabilities they’re developing prior to owning any oil and gas properties and remain profitable. The shareholders can begin their involvement as soon as the management have shown commercial use of their capabilities. In addition, participation in a few small properties is the beginning of an oil and gas producers production profile. In today’s environment this requires the staffing of administrative and accounting resources necessary to manage the firm's interest in those properties. With the Preliminary Specification and service providers in place shareholders won’t see millions of dollars being consumed in the maintenance of overhead during the startup phase of the organization. Only the fees for the service providers will be charged on the few properties that are owned by the producer. Attaining a 100% effectiveness of the administrative and accounting resources being charged on those properties vs. the extremely low percentage utilization the full time administrative and accounting resources the startup producer has to take on in today’s market. Unlike today, this will have proven to the shareholders that the management of the new oil and gas producer have an understanding of business and profitability, and will not indulge in development of a spendthrift organization such as today’s oil and gas producers.

This is not to say there will be no overhead that is not incurred at all times. The CEO, COO and CFO salary and benefits are not included in either of the two categories we mentioned. When the differences are analyzed between the overhead that is incurred by today’s producers and that which is incurred by a producer in the Preliminary Specification. They will not be carrying any of the costs to maintain and build their competitive advantages in the earth science and engineering capabilities. These would be self-supporting activities as they are a separate business model in the Preliminary Specification from oil and gas production. Direct overhead of the Joint Operating Committee will be incurred for any production that is profitable. This will involve the producers share and be offset by the revenues of oil and gas sales. Lastly there will be some overhead that the producer will be incurring above and beyond these areas in the management areas of the organization. These are not incidental costs and how the producer chooses to report them, as capital or costs, would be to their discretion.

Bureaucrats have been fooling themselves about how much they spend and where it should be classified. “Large explorers outspent their cash flow by 117% over the past seven years,” according to Barclays. “The top 15 oil companies have paid executives $2.8 billion over the past decade while delivering a smaller return to shareholders versus other industries.” That averages $18.6 million per year / producer. I can state unquestionably these are not the statistics that drive the day to day or any conversations anywhere in the industry. It is the pursuit of the engineering and earth sciences technical difficulties that occupy the minds of the oil men these days. Increasing their production profile in the face of such technical obstacles is the only thing that excites and challenges the people who work in the business. The financials will do what the financial will do.

Today the U.S. production sits at 10.5 million boe / day. This number is expected to be 10.65 million by the end of May 2018. That is 2 million boe / day higher than when OPEC implemented their production sharing agreement in November 2016. In shale the US natural gas production over past 50 years equalled.

1968: 51 bcf/d
1978: 52 bcf/d
1988: 47 bcf/d
1998: 52 bcf/d
2008: 55 bcf/d
2018: 81 bcf/d  (forecasted)

Shale, in the past ten years, is responsible for a 47% increase in the deliverability of natural gas in the U.S. Is it any wonder why the prices are so low? If industry increased deliverability by 8% in the prior 40 years, is this considered out of control? The fundamental collapse of the natural gas marketplace would seem to indicate that it is.

Conversely I don’t think producers have thought through the implications of implementing the Preliminary Specification. What happens when the $1.6 trillion in capital that currently resides in property, plant and equipment is retired through the decentralized production model? Clearly their legacy costs of oil and gas exploration and production / boe are going to go down. But only after the investors who have supported the industry are compensated and the assurance is given that they will not be directly subsidizing the consumers again. Destruction of the natural gas business was quickly followed by the destruction of the oil business. Today the financial health of the producers, when you consider the bloated nature of property, plant and equipment on the balance sheet, is astonishing. It is worthless and demands capital to maintain an operating deficiency. Even though the investors are not returning there is no discussion or understanding in the industry of what is happening or what to do about it. Returning money to shareholders who provided it in the past certainly doesn’t stir any discussion outside of this blog. There must be wells that need to be drilled.

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 XII

Administration and accounting are driven by deadlines. The need to report in a timely and accurate manner within the prescribed period. These leave little opportunity for the accounting and administrative resources to apply the technologies that are just at their fingertips, technologies that could make their lives that much more efficient. The time to do this type of work is never, and the cost to apply these technologies is beyond everyone’s budget. The difficulties faced in one producer are replicated within each and every other producer. The inability to organize and implement a solution across the industry is the primary reason for the failure to advance beyond primitive systems. This is where the user community and the service providers step in and take the opportunity that is present here and realize it on behalf of the oil and gas industry. The cost of the Preliminary Specification across the industry may be high. The value to each producer is substantial in resolving these issues. People, Ideas & Objects, the user community and service providers value proposition would be realized by all.

Many in the software vendor community may take offense to my comment regarding primitive systems. Particularly since the Preliminary Specification is vaporware on steroids. The thing about vaporware in oil and gas is you get what you pay for. Producers have refused to pay for any systems development for decades now. Oracle left the industry late last century for this reason, and IBM sold out around 2005. If the producers are unhappy about the state of the Preliminary Specifications vaporware then they should do something about it. The maturation of Information Technologies since the time the big IT companies left the industry has been dramatic. People, Ideas & Objects are not a technologically focused solution provider, we rely on Oracle for that. We are focused on the business, but when it comes time to implement the technologies we are certainly able to punch above our weight. We look forward to the opportunity to display these capabilities when the time comes.

As we discussed yesterday the specialization and division of labor that the user community and service providers will be able to implement will be far greater than one producer can, or could ever do. The same is the case for the innovations that can be made on the processes that are under management by the People, Ideas & Objects software that will be managed by the individual service providers. This will also apply to their ability to implement their technical excellence into the process that they’ll manage. It would seem contrary to think of technical excellence as a competitive advantage when your processing large data sets. However, it will be in these large data sets where I think the value and the quality of information that the service providers will generate for their clients, the oil and gas producers. We are clearly defining a division of labor between computers and people with computers doing the processing and storage, and people conducting the leadership, problem solving, decision making, creative, collaboration, research, ideas, design, planning, thinking, negotiating, compromising, innovating and financing. Tasks best suited for our user community and their service provider organizations, not computers.

When we consider the differences, productivity, and overall benefits of organizing the administrative and accounting resources in the fashion of the user community and service providers. We see a distinct difference to the current method that is employed by each and every producer working hard to get these administrative and accounting tasks done. People, Ideas & Objects are proposing a better way, one in which the performance of the user community and service providers will be driven and capable of providing incremental value for the industry and each individual producer. Our value proposition is wholly dependent on the configuration of the service providers as described within the Preliminary Specification. Without that configuration the overhead costs will not become the industry based variable overhead costs that provide so much flexibility to each of the producers operation. The competitive advantages of the user community and service providers bring a level of competition and quality to the fields of administration and accounting in oil and gas. These attributes replacing the focus on cost control and efficiency that each of the producers struggle with today. Without the user community and service providers as described within the Preliminary Specification the industry and producer will be unable to deal with the profitability issue that plagues them today. And they won’t be able to address the future issues and opportunities without them either.

People, Ideas & Objects have proposed a viable and valuable idea in the Preliminary Specification, its user community and service providers. Compared to today’s situation it is a clear decision as to which method should be chosen. The question that I have is what alternatives do the producers have? If there’s a better way in which to configure the overhead costs of the oil and gas industry, what would that be? If there were any alternatives I’d be surprised. The development of the Preliminary Specification took me a while to figure out and I don’t see anyone working on it anywhere else. Which begs the question, what’s the hold up in moving forward?

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 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.