Doing Nothing is Working Well

What is the current financial condition of the North American based oil and gas industry? What is the extent of the damage it has sustained in this past decades downturn? Was there additional drainage of value realized before the current downturn as a result of the issues identified by People, Ideas & Objects? How will the industry remediate these difficulties and how will they approach the future? I am certain that these are the questions that are prevalent in the minds of the oil and gas investors and bankers. Where do we go from here? The status quo answer appears to be the continued building of the producers “balance sheet.” As if that is something worthwhile, we suggest profitability become the standard fare objective in the industry. Who generates any value from building “balance sheets?” In fact what bureaucrats are stating when they parrot this objective is that they’ll be resuming the spending like drunken sailors that brought us to this point.

Representing that their balance sheets are the real value of the enterprise is a distortion of where we are and how we got here. These bloated asset balances were derived from the chronic overspending in every category of the business. Even overhead such as the receptionists time, phone service and Post-It-Notes are represented in the capital asset balances of the producers “balance sheets.” Usually balance sheets represent the assets of the firm and are derived from shareholder investments, bank loans and the cumulative profitability of the firm. Oil and gas producers have never been profitable because they never accurately recognize the cost of capital in their calculations of earnings. Balance sheets only grow through chronic spending of all types. Therefore we can be assured that no profits will be available to build their balance sheets, and the investors and bankers have been on strike for the better part of three years. So ask them, where will the money come from? Bureaucrats will argue that these are historical accounting arguments that don’t consider the producers oil and gas reserves. To which I say if the oil and gas reserves are unable to be produced profitably, considering all of the costs on the basis of a reasonable and accurate accounting, then they’re truly worthless to anyone and everyone. To face this fact and admit that they’ve been involved in just an activity that has occupied their time these past four decades, just as they were occupied by their activities in daycare, is too much reality for them to process.

What is clearly not evident to the producers is no one is believing a word that they’re saying. The financial statements that they prepare are fairy tales that show profitability and the ever continuing demand for cash in order to produce. Just as all the financial statements have been for the past four decades. Show me a period of 20 months where the business of the oil and gas business performed better than it did in the past 20 months and I would be very surprised. Yet investors were rewarded with nothing, on average, as a result of no upward movement in the price of the stocks during that period. If bureaucrats think my tone has been harsh these past few years, if there is a downturn in the oil prices and further deterioration in the financial health of the business my “harshness” will be comparatively nothing. Walking around with their heads in the clouds mouthing words like building balance sheets in the face of the financial disaster that is the oil and gas industry, with so many vested interests sending them glaring messages of deep concern and demanding that action be taken. If this is the bureaucrats game plan then they’re riding the industry towards its destruction. That is the perception that I’m reading from outside of the industry. This perception has become the reality and has destroyed any faith the investment community had in the industry.

When tens of trillions of dollars have been invested in an industry and the sum total of that investment over the past decade has been a substantial drainage of cash then something has seriously gone wrong. Bureaucrats have managed to destroy the value that was given to them. The sum total of those tens of trillions of dollars that were invested are worthless when these “assets” demand cash to function. Which brings us to the logic behind the “muddle along” strategy and “do nothing” operating producer.” If they’ve messed up this bad the best thing for them to do is to do nothing, fill their pockets with what they can before they’re forced out or leave when things become untenable.

If we take the bureaucrats argument that ours is just historical accounting then I would ask what future do they propose? Where do we go from here, and more importantly, how do we get there? Sketching out their vision of industries capital demands for the globe are in the range of $20 to $40 trillion over the next 25 years excites the spendaholic in everyone in the industry. Then having representatives of the industry showing, as a result of that investment, the decline of societies use of oil and gas tailing off as a result of alternative energy sources in 2050 is highly motivating too. As we stated yesterday no one has made a penny on shale. It appears no one ever will either. Now it’s suggested that investors pony up an additional $20 to $40 trillion to wean society off of oil and gas in the next generation. Exciting. I think the problem might be that they forgot to say please.

There never has been a commitment to profitability in the industry. To be honest I don’t know what the game plan is. Growth through the further building of balance sheets doesn’t inspire me and I would suggest it doesn’t inspire anyone else. If the industry wants to move forward I would suggest that they gain that commitment to profitability. Make it that old time religion. The only way that I’m aware that they’d be able to do that would be for them to fund the development of the Preliminary Specification which provides the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. Always and everywhere. That as far as I’m concerned is my recommendation as there is no doubt in my mind that it’s also the least expensive and most credible alternative that the oil and gas industry has to choose from.

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.

A Rip and Replace Scenario

People, Ideas & Objects are pleased to be offering options to the oil and gas investment community in these difficult times. Do they choose to work with the current producers in order to realize the value that sits otherwise dormant as property, plant and equipment on the producers balance sheets? Or do they adopt the oil and gas bureaucrats position and perceive that these past investment losses are sunk costs too? This leaving the investors with the option to start fresh with the full forces of creative destruction to weed out the archaic and lethargic management structures present today. We discussed these alternatives in our blog posts in the last few days. I would argue that there are more alternatives that we provide the investors which are more or less based on the two choices noted above.

To walk away from the $1.6 trillion in value that is represented in the industries collective property, plant and equipment accounts would be a difficult decision to make. The future of the industry is never that certain that an accumulation of that amount of value would be available for someone to realize. This value would be realized by the processing of these costs, which are the unrecognized capital costs of past production, in the two and one half year period after the Preliminary Specification is operational. Without the current producers these values are not available as they can not be transferred out into new organizations. The historical costs of one producer are the historical costs of that producer. There maybe a market value of these amounts contained within property, plant and equipment, however it would be foolish for the investors to pay for what it is that they already own. It is this $1.6 trillion in previously unrecognized capital costs of past production that will justify the higher commodity prices as part of the actual costs of oil and gas exploration and production the consumer will need to pay. Without these accounts in hand it would be difficult to justify charging the consumer for these costs that were incurred in other, probable defunct and written off, oil and gas organizations. When we look at the $1.6 trillion in property, plant and equipment contained within the current producers we should see them as a store of value if they could be monetized through to the consumer.

Now that the bureaucrats have an idea on how to maintain their reign of terror for another decade, or will that be another decayed. We should see that the ability to exercise this value is dependent on two critical objectives. Control of the producer firm and the development of the Preliminary Specification in order to realize the inherent value that has been built up in property, plant and equipment. Or in other words implementation of the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production models price maker strategy. The question therefore becomes what value do our good friends the bureaucrats provide? And secondly, how could the production profile of the producer firms be maintained during these proposed radical changes? Or, are these even issues in the pursuit of this value?

The Preliminary Specification will be providing those investors with the means in which to manage the industry. From an administrative and accounting resource point of view our user community members will be establishing service providers. They will be taking the producers administrative and accounting resources, which are resident in the producers today, and making them variable, industry based, administrative and accounting resources through their own service provider organizations. By doing so we are moving the fixed overhead of the producers to become the variable overhead of the industry. Variable based on production at the Joint Operating Committee. The service providers will be offering a standards based, objective and quality offering to all producers, large and small in the industry. The need to recreate the individual producers competitive advantages of the earth science and engineering resources, and the land and asset base would be the requirement of whatever new management the investors were able to replace the staid bureaucrats with. These resources that form the competitive advantages are in place and would require reorganization in order to optimize the performance of the producer.

Funding for the development of the Preliminary Specification is the first requirement of this “Rip and Replace” scenario. For our funding we suggest the ICO that we have proposed, and if necessary will be proceeding with independently in September 2019. Although this methodology will increase the costs of energy to the consumers, these incremental costs are as a result of the Permission Rights that are granted to the coin holders. These Permission Rights are the exclusive right of the coin holders to access the Preliminary Specification. These coin holders Permission Rights are then accessed by the producers through the fees they pay for their processing on the software and services that are derivative of the Preliminary Specification. If the oil and gas investor participated in our ICO then they would earn the fees that are provided by their ownership of these Permission Rights.

It is this transition that we see as the most effective. The most valuable to the oil and gas investor as it captures all of the past value that has been lost by the bureaucrats and enables investors to ensure that they only produce the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, once the Preliminary Specification is operational. The bureaucrats may be getting the short end of the stick for the first time, but we believe they may be in advanced stages of planning their exit anyways. Their inability to address these issues and hold together a sinking ship is “stressful” on them and they may not have the need for any further income. Therefore they may be as we speak, self-selecting in terms of their roles in the organizations. Making this scenario a much needed plan of how to deal with the fall out.

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.

Contrasting Strategies

Politicians are pleased with the deliverability out of the oil and gas industry. Providing them with the ability to state the success of their policies. Drilling wells has always been what the producers do. They’ve perfected it maybe. There is more to an oil and gas producer than just drilling wells however. It has to be done in a competitive environment and that demands that producers produce profits. Otherwise it’s destructive and consumes people times in activities for the sake of activities. Wastes valuable resources such as the oil and gas reserves when they are produced without any value gained through that production. And lets not forget this current downturn, which is inevitable when an industry doesn’t earn any money, the societal impact to all the people that are associated with the industry and are taking a financial hit themselves personally. What we should really do then is include the politicians with the bureaucrats as being the benefactors of the oil and gas industries activities. Outside of that I’m not seeing anyone else. We could maybe include the consumer but the amount they’ll pay for their gas today vs. what they’ll pay when the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production models price maker strategy is effective will be marginal. From CNN Money.

The average driver buys about 11 gallons of gas a week, which means they'll spend $1,400 at the pump this year, down from $1,950 in 2014. The most expensive year for drivers was 2012, when they shelled out $2,100. The overall economic impact is big, giving consumers about $130 billion more to spend.

Median household income rose to $56,516 in 2015, up 5.2% from a year earlier, according to data released by the U.S. Census Bureau Tuesday.

Therefore to fuel their driving, average drivers are spending approximately 2.4% of their income on gasoline. If through our price maker strategy we doubled the cost of gasoline for the 2.5 years that are necessary to retire the current balances of property, plant and equipment then the cost to the consumer would total 5%. Then after that prices would decline somewhat and be adequate to cover the current exploration and production costs based on a reasonable and accurate accounting. This also involves providing the oil and gas producers with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. This is the vision of the Preliminary Specification. To cease the consumers discount that has been financed through continual investments by investors and bankers to make up for and eliminate the chronic cash shortfall in oil and gas production. Our vision is not unreasonable as it assumes the end user will pay, and based on the average income of the consumer, 5% of their income is not material to their budget. The increase is temporary and returns the past subsidy the consumer realized in order that the investors are compensated for their efforts. As we are seeing without investors and bankers, society is not benefiting from the exploration and production of oil and gas.

Contrast our vision to the one that is proposed today by the oil and gas producers. The investors and bankers will continue to forfeit $20 to $40 trillion over the next 25 years in order to continue their subsidy of the consumer. But also wean the consumer off of oil and natural gas by 2050. I’m not sure but the producers may also be implying that their balance sheets will be built to monumental levels in 2050 and be rewarded, somehow, for their good work in doing so.

There is no understanding whatsoever that oil and gas exploration and production is a commercial operation. It’s an activity. One that will continue until 2050 as far as the bureaucrats are concerned. They’re just waiting for the investors to give up their strike and resume their annual stock offering participation. After all that is what investors do. There never has been any profits earned in the past four decades. Ever since the change in the late 1970’s to the SEC’s accounting, where property, plant and equipment only needs to be below the value realized of the commodity price times the known reserves, not one cent has been earned in the industry. Slowly what I witnessed was a cultural change from recording costs to recording anything and everything as an asset in property, plant and equipment. Interest paid on debt is not a cost its an asset. Overhead is not a cost its an asset. Royalties are not a cost their assets. Well the producers didn’t get away with that last one. The SEC are suing PennWest officers as we speak in court about the validity of that scam.

The issue for investors is a difficult one and in this post I’ve assumed that they’ve made the decision to work with the current producers. The reason they would do that is that the amount that currently sits on the producers balance sheets as property, plant and equipment is material at approximately $1.6 trillion. This represents their investment that hasn’t performed. It also represents the amount of the discount that has been provided to the consumers due to the fact that these “assets” were never recognized as costs. They are the capital costs of past production. Therefore recognizing them as costs when the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production models price maker strategy is effective will pass these costs on to the consumer when they are priced into the price maker strategy. Effectively returning the cash that is tied up in these “assets” back to the producer firm. Enabling them to fund their own future capital expenditures, declare dividends to their investors and pay down their bank debt. Doing all three of these activities is what a firm does and the oil and gas producers will be making profits and will be able to join the legion of commercial operations where the profits are distributed to investors, bankers and capital expenditures instead of choosing just one of those as they have since the late 1970’s.

The alternative strategy is to start over with new producers and allow the full forces of creative destruction to take effect. Wiping out the old to start anew would lose the amounts in property, plant and equipment as these dollars are not transferable out of the existing producer firms. Therefore these costs would be unable to be costed in the pricing calculations of what are needed to determine the oil and gas prices necessary for profitable operations.

It is People, Ideas & Objects opinion that the cumulative losses of the producers need to be accounted for. They are material and these losses, in our opinion, have attached themselves to the reserves of the properties costs. Bureaucrats currently think that the past is the past and there is no need to reflect on that in any manner. The materiality of these costs has created the current downturn and without an accounting for these costs then the bureaucrats are only seeking to be forgiven for their past sins while they expect to resume their circus for the next generation. We believe this is unnecessary. There is no requirement of the SEC’s that each producer value their property, plant and equipment at full value of their reserves times the price. It is an aberration that each producer attains that value each year and this has been assimilated as part of the culture. It is why the pursuit of “building balance sheets” is the only motivation that we hear. What the SEC have done is defined the outer limit. Not policy to do so. A competitive, commercially oriented oil and gas producer, in our opinion, would seek as a competitive advantage to maintain the lowest balance of property, plant and equipment as possible. Therefore increasing their working capital and short term assets.

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.

It Will Apparently be the Investors Fault

If there is no reasonable and fair method of production allocation in the oil and gas industry. Not only will shale always overwhelm the commodity markets but there is nothing to constrain the producers from continued overproduction. Then through their accounting shenanigans these  producers will always shift the costs of oil and gas exploration and production from the consumers to the investors. The motivation to do so is to report the highest profits and largest balances of property, plant and equipment. This is particularly detrimental in oil and gas when cost escalation as a result of each barrel of oil produced is more challenging and difficult than the prior barrel of oil. Cost escalation is an inherent feature of the industry and these costs end up being covered by the investors. Without the Preliminary Specifications decentralized production models price maker strategy, which allocates production in the most reasonable and fair manner, producers will always regress to discounting the price of their products to the consumer. Until People, Ideas & Objects decentralized production models production allocation method is implemented, which sees all production produced profitably everywhere and always, this regression to the now fully ingrained cultural ways of the industry will always be a risk for the investors in the industry. The following comment was made in World Oil in an article entitled There are fears about an oil spike above $150.

“If oil demand continues to grow to 2030 and beyond, the strategy of returning cash to shareholders and under-investing in reserves will only turn out to sow the seeds of the next super-cycle,” the analysts wrote. “Companies which have barrels in the ground to produce, or the services to extract them, will be the ones to own and those who do not will be left behind.”

The expectation of the investors to subsidize the consumer continues. Note there is not a hint of financial performance or profitability intimated anywhere, only the possibility of “missing out.” Now it also appears that it will be the investors fault for higher commodity prices from potential resource scarcity due to the diversion of producers cash flow from operations to the investors. Shaming investors won’t change their minds and reverse the flow of funds back into the oil and gas producers. What might be considered innovative would be providing investors with a clear accounting based on reasonable and accurate numbers and providing a competitive return in comparison to what other industries are offering their investors. What this quote reflects to me is a continuation of the systemic cultural forces aligned against the investor. “The objective is to drill wells because that’s where the money is.” Except there is no money and the investors are saying that they’re displeased with the financial performance of the industry and will not be participating any further. They want their money back and feel that the story that has been told of high profits and highly valuable companies is not valid. Do the bureaucrats listen to anyone?

Why is new capital required anyway? For the last number of decades many “successful” oil and gas companies have had CEOs that were from the financial community and were there for the ability to raise capital. We certainly don’t see that configuration anymore. Raising the annual capital expenditure budget from the capital markets was an annual ritual that was enjoyed by most oil and gas companies. The business model was “take money from investors, drill wells.” With no other consideration whatsoever. Would there be any need for additional midstream or pipelines? “Not my business.” Would there be a need to cultivate the service industry to better meet the producers needs? “Not my business.” If issues did arise then producers were very capable of all singing from the same hymn sheet. Usually this involved bullying someone into doing something that they’ve chosen not to do for business reasons. A good example of this would be the quote above that is part of a probable new campaign by the producers to have funds released from investors. Let me restate the above for clarity. “The boogeyman of higher prices will come and haunt you if you the investor don’t change your ways.” Such is the business of today’s oil and gas producer.

I admit running the business of oil and gas as a business is highly controversial. I first proposed the decentralized production model and shutting in production to enhance profitability on January 5, 2007 in this blog. It should be clear to the investors at this point that producers believe it’s easier to get the investors back to the table then it is for them to admit they’re running a scam. Discussion of this type is not welcome. Luckily we live in the era of the Internet. The cultural and systemic way in which the industry is operated is ingrained in everyone who occupies space there. What the above quote also shows is that nothing has changed and nothing will change if left to the bureaucrats who are in control today. Rip and Replace is the scenario that we believe is the operational choice for the oil and gas investor. There may as a result be some disruptions in field operations here and there however those can be remedied in the long term. What we know now is that the status quo is never going to achieve profitability. And they certainly will never achieve profitable energy independence in North America.

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.

The Motivation, Energy and Drive?

We are well into the second decade of the shale era in natural gas. Applying multi-lateral fracing of shale formations for oil production didn’t begin until such time as the natural gas prices collapsed. Freeing up the field resources so that they could be applied to the areas where oil was more promising. Nonetheless has anyone made any money yet? After all the screaming and yelling and the production of so many volumes of oil and gas from shale, we are nowhere close to making any money. I think the difficulty is that the producers have no plans to make any money, and the issue of whether they’re making any money or even if they should be is not an issue, concern or discussion point in the industry. Where is the energy that is necessary to turn the industry into a profitable operation, where is the drive to make the changes to do so? I don’t see either, just excuses that enable the bureaucrats to continue to “muddle along” as their strategy and “do nothing” as their operating procedure.

An EIA report has been published that I think shows the source of the overall issue that is prevalent in oil and gas. The issue that we’re talking about here at People, Ideas & Objects and have proposed our solution in the form of the Preliminary Specification. At the bottom of the EIA report it shows “Capital Expenditures for 83 Publicly Traded Exploration and Production Companies” with one of the graphs showing the dollars per barrel of oil equivalent “World Weighted Average.” Note that it is in decline since 2014 and we’ll discuss this below. The point I want to make here is that these are how the industry accounts for their capital costs. Based on the total capital that was incurred to drill, complete and equip the well for production divided by the total proven and probable reserves that were discovered or increased. For engineering and geological purposes these “finding costs” may be appropriate and provide them with valuable information, I am not aware what their specific needs would be. For accounting purposes this allocation to the entire reserves base certainly meets the principle of matching of costs to revenues. However, is this just the application of an inappropriate accounting rule for the purposes of distorting the accounting for other purposes?

The overall purpose for accounting is the measurement of performance. When the costs of the assets will not be recognized for many decades to come, because they’ve adopted this allocation of capital costs to the total reserves base, provides the bureaucrats with a measure of performance that is quite attainable. At approximately $16 / barrel for the cost of capital its easy to show a profit when prices are $74. In fact all of the financial statements reflect the genius levels of profitable capabilities that each of the producers have attained. The point is that producers also spent decades worth of cash in the pursuit of those “assets” and will not recognize those “capital costs” for decades in most cases. This creates the cash shortfall that is epidemic at this point in the industry. So although the producers are reporting healthy profits they demand cash in order to produce. By what measure of performance is that an accurate accounting?

Industries are competing for capital on the basis of the speed in which they are able to turn that capital over. In some industries as quickly as six months. In oil and gas the speed in which capital is turned over is in excess of a decade. Is that competitive? To add insult to injury most of the overhead that is incurred in this industry, which incurs moderate levels of overhead, is capitalized and will therefore be recognizing these costs over the course of the next decade as well. Therefore all the downtown staff, office space, computers, pencils and erasers are capital costs and recognized over the course of a decade. Leaving the producer without the cash that is incurred on these “costs” each and every month of their existence. These costs should be recognized in the period that they’re incurred so that they can be turned back into cash to finance the next month’s overhead costs. This assumes of course that producers were charging their customers enough for the products that they produce. That is not what has happened in oil and gas. Investors have had to fill the void of the cash deficiencies as a result of the chronic and massive spending that producers do with no regard for how they’ll have that money returned. By what measure is this performance? What bureaucrats refuse to do is to charge the appropriate price for their product so that the consumer pays for the actual, appropriate cost of exploration and production in the current period. Instead the bureaucrats were raised with Daddies credit cards that were magically paid each month and that is how the world works.

Dare I ask the question once again. Where is the motivation, the energy and the drive to make these changes through the implementation of the Preliminary Specifications? Here we sit in our 27th year of trying to convince these “business people” of what is necessary. The average cost per barrel noted in the EIA report shows a substantial decline in the capital costs since 2014. From a peak of $32 / boe in 2014 to today’s $16 / boe. Ah the magic of numbers. This miracle is alleged to have occurred as a result of the “innovations” that occurred in the producers. Nothing of the sort has happened, innovations require motivation, energy and drive. These capital cost declines are as a result of the expansion of the number of years in which the capital costs will be depleted. Taking the denominator from 8 years to 16 years has the same effect as halving the costs. Run your own numbers if you don’t believe me. Secondly, if it’s not attributable to the change in the rate of depletion then it represents the level of abuse the bureaucrats have been able to exercise over the service industry in terms of the price they’ll pay for drilling, completion and equipping services. The only innovations coming out of oil and gas producers is how to stack reams of paper higher in an office building.

The cumulative money that has been invested, spent and subsequently lost in oil and gas is tragic. There is no desire to expose this and account for it now. These losses were incurred last year, the year before or last decade. They are sunk costs as far as the bureaucrats are concerned. Not relevant to the decisions of today. The point that I would make is that the scope of the irrelevance of these past losses in the industry has become relevant. Investors left a while ago. As we documented yesterday, producers stocks have essentially recorded a flat performance since November 2016. A time when the performance of the business recorded almost a 100% increase in the oil price, 23% increase in oil volumes and 12% in natural gas volumes reflecting a period in the industry that is doubtful that it could ever have been better. Yet producers have done nothing but lose money while they’ve muddled along! Maybe the past doesn’t need to be accounted for. The way that I see it someone needs to account for it and it's not me. I got kicked out of the industry in 2004 for these ideas. Kicked out I might add because the bureaucrats knew that I was dangerous to their health, well being and most importantly personal cash flow.

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.

Your Ticket to Ride

With oil prices as handsome as they are producers will be rolling in cash and profits in this the second quarter of 2018. Last Friday not only represents the end of the quarter but for all intents and purposes the end of OPEC’s production sharing agreement. They were able to stick to the agreement and achieve compliance rates of up to 250% of the quotas they established. Now with Venezuela in economic meltdown and Iran being subject to renewed sanctions OPEC is being asked to produce at their full production profile. This has been positive for the commodity market as oil prices have been stronger as a result of this news than they were prior to it. Overall OPEC were able to achieve significant price increases during the term of their production sharing agreement. In the beginning oil prices were $38.56 for November 2016. On Friday’s close they were $74.25, a 92% increase. Who says oil and gas are not subject to the principles of price makers.

American producers can also look to the fact that their production volumes during this time have, for lack of a better word, exploded. Moving from approximately 8.6 million barrels per day to what is believed to be 11 million barrels per day. A 28% increase in volumes. Give me any business that has experienced these types of increases in not only price but also volume and I’d be sure to be making money by the barrel. The fact is the oil and gas industry has experienced maybe the best period ever in its history. But this is where the wheels fall off the bus. Natural gas prices over the course of the OPEC production sharing agreement were down almost 4% since November 2016. Production volumes in that side of the business also “exploded” during this period from 87.67 bcf to 98.5 bcf in April 2018, an increase of 12.3%. Oil and gas bureaucrats seem to be maintaining their policy of not resuscitating the natural gas side of the business. Therefore any upside profitability, cash flow, working capital, cash balances and for the oil and gas investor, market capitalization would be mostly attributable to the oil side of the business.

Yet that is not what we’re seeing. Certainly the market capitalization of the producers have had a good quarter. However over the period of time when prices doubled and volumes were up 27% on oil and 12.3% on natural gas the average market capitalization of the sample of 23 producers that we follow was up 6.6%! My only question is why keep the bureaucrats around if they’re that expensive? After a resurgence of almost 100% in the price of oil, a 27% increase in oil production and a 12.3% in natural gas volumes investors get essentially nothing? Over the course of 20 months they are provided with 6.6% which is an annual return of 3.96%. About the same as if they put their money in a savings account. What I guess the investors can be assured of is the future will be filled with this magnitude of volumetric and price increases over the same short periods of time for the rest of time that consumers use oil and gas. The bureaucrats guarantee it.

Is there a problem in oil and gas? The effect of the financial crisis was detrimental to all businesses and the natural gas business does not appear to have recovered at all. Oil prices are up 38% since 2009 so it is arguable if that side of the business has recovered. The cash and working capital situation of the industry and the individual producers are abysmal. In our sample of 23 producers which represent all types of North American producers. Cash balances eroded from $31.6 billion as of October 2016 to $24.7 billion in the first quarter of 2018. Working capital was $20.4 billion as of October 2016 and $14.2 billion in the first quarter of 2018. It's been a decade since the instability brought about by the financial crisis was in full force. Every other industry has recovered and is moving forward with the issues from that era behind them. Therefore I think it is reasonable to state unequivocally that the issue that the oil and gas industry is suffering from are not associated with the financial crisis in any way. There must be something that is causing the difficulties that is unidentified in the producer firms that is endemic, chronic and unresolved.

For discussion of that issue, and most importantly the solution that is recommended by People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and service providers, please review our Preliminary Specification which addresses and resolves the issues and opportunities of the oil and gas industry. Issues that have been prevalent since at least 1986 and who’s origins lay in the accounting changes made by the SEC in the late 1970’s. Simply the accounting for capital permits producers to capitalize everything for decades. Never recognizing the costs in a capital intensive industry creates a number of issues. First it causes the over reporting of assets, profits and cash flow attracting investors to the industry. Then over investment in the industry leads to overproduction that collapses the price of the commodities. Creating a situation where no one is making any real money other than the false profits created as a result of not recognizing any of the capital costs of past production. The cash shortfall from these activities are tremendous and tragic, and have traditionally been backfilled by the annual shareholder fleecing, or as the bureaucrats call it, share issuance. Investors are now wise to this situation and have bowed out and cancelled their involvement in these fleecing’s and dilutions, and expect producers to live off their own cash resources. As we see the industries cash shortfall is critical and represents the fact that the investors had in essence been subsidizing the consumers for their energy consumption by financing a discount in the energy price. Even at $74 oil prices producers are not covering their costs. The second point is that oil and gas commodities are subject to the economic principles of price makers. Where small changes in the production volumes will have large impacts on the prices. This has been confirmed by OPEC’s activities in the marketplace these past few years. The chronic unprofitable overproduction by North American producers will continue until such time as these producers adopt some method of production allocation that is reasonable and fair. The Preliminary Specifications decentralized production model’s price maker strategy implements a production allocation methodology based on profitability at each individual property. If the property is capable of producing a profit based on a reasonable, standardized accounting then it produces. Otherwise it is shut-in where the reserves are saved for a time when they can be produced profitably, where those reserves will not have to carry the cost of successive years of unprofitable production, where unprofitable production will no longer dilute profitable production and the commodity markets will find the marginal costs when the unprofitable production is removed from the market. In other words run the oil and gas industry as a business.

Today is just the current point in the never ending cycle of up and down where the producers ramp up activity that will lead to future declines in commodity prices. Oil prices are “good enough” to not do anything about these issues we’ve been discussing here. Issues which will only lead to difficulties down the road. Over and over again. The shale phenomenon is underestimated in terms of its deliverability in both oil and gas in each and every quarter since its beginning. The unconstrained fashion in which the oil and gas producers approach their production profile will ensure that overproduction will continue until such time as the Preliminary Specification’s production allocation methodology is implemented industry wide. The current culture of the industry is that it will always perceive the future oil and gas prices opportunistically. Hope is the key to the future in the oil and gas industry. This is the circus that is the oil and gas industry. The ride has its ups and downs but the bureaucrats ask, isn’t that why you bought a ticket?

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.

Independence Day

Canada Day

Third Friday

Specialization and the Division of Labor

Throughout the Preliminary Specification we have applied the principles of specialization and the division of labor to the oil and gas producer and industry. These two tools have been the only reason for any economic development over the past 242 years when Adam Smith wrote the Wealth of Nations. Organizations evolve and expand their capabilities through further divisions of their labor and specialization of the work that is undertaken. For the oil and gas industry to increase its production profile, to expand its deliverables efficiently and effectively with the same resource base requires that they develop their organizations through the application of specialization and the division of labor. This is the only manner in which to evolve and expand, there are no other proven methodologies available.

One of the issues that has been noted and documented in the last few decades is from Professors Anthony Giddens and Wanda Orlikowski. Structuration and the model of structuration essentially states that society, technology and organizations move together or a failure will occur. People, Ideas & Objects documented Structuration in our Preliminary Research Report and believe that our friends the bureaucrats fully understood the implications. If Information Technology defines and supports the organization, then IT and more specifically ERP systems should take a heightened role in the organization. Bureaucrats have since invested nothing in ERP systems and limited their exposure to any IT capabilities on a deliberate basis. The reason for this is to ensure that they would be unchallenged in their franchise. If solutions such as the Preliminary Specification were enabled then they would be out of a job and as a result they ensured that no innovations in the organization or technologies have succeeded in the industry for the past number of decades.

For the industry to increase its oil and gas production profile to the level of profitable energy independence requires an investment in the manner that it will approach that goal. We’re not going to get there by simply applying “more.” As I have been critical of the job that has been done, with its focus on drilling wells, I’ve shown that the industry has to expand the types of work that it’s doing in order to be successful. The industry has identified that there are key constraints building in the earth science and engineering disciplines that will need to be addressed if we are to expand our throughput. And lastly the never ending pursuit of oil and gas demands that each and every barrel of oil and gas is more complex and costly to produce than the previous one. The amount of work that is necessary in the future will be substantially greater than what it is today.

These are some of the considerations that have been made in the Preliminary Specification. The solution we have proposed is contrary to the best interests of the bureaucrats in the sense that it ends their job security and / or would require them to do some hard work for once. The reorganization of both the producer firms and the industry are necessary to deal with the issues that are plaguing the producers today. Moving the administrative and accounting resources of the producers to the service providers where they specialize on one process and use the entire industry as their client base. This specialization will enable these service providers to compete based on a variety of new and dynamic competitive advantages. These include their innovations based on their administrative and accounting expertise. Service providers are owned by the user community providers who define and determine what the People, Ideas & Objects software does. Additional competitive advantages of the service providers will include automation of the process that they manage, constantly expanding their specialization and division of labor in order to increase their value proposition to the producer and industry. Dividing the labor between computers and people in a way that the computers will be able to focus on the tasks that are oriented to computing, tasks such as processing and storage and leave the leadership, problem solving, decision making, creativity, collaboration, research, idea generation, design, planning, thinking, negotiating, compromising, innovating and financing to the humans that do it well.

There is also the pooling concept that is introduced in the Preliminary Specification that seeks to deal with a number of issues that producers face today and will face in the near future. Pooling allows greater specialization of the earth science and engineering capabilities of each producer to be undertaken with the understanding that these will be provided to the Joint Operating Committees that they have an interest in, and in combination with the other working interest participants capabilities and specializations. The pooling of these providing the overall scope and scale of the demands that are needed within each of the Joint Operating Committees in the industry.

People, Ideas & Objects are not proposing the Preliminary Specification as a static solution. We are providing the most profitable means of oil and gas operations for the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producers. Our user community will be constantly developing new and better ways in which the software will be able to be used within the industry. The user community participant is also the principle in the service provider and will therefore have a first hand look at the issues and opportunities in their area of expertise. Developments and innovations will constantly be made based on their capabilities and will continue to provide incremental value to the producer firms and industry.

When it comes to evaluating the People, Ideas & Objects value proposition it should be considered what the value of these attributes of specialization and the division of labor are. We have been able to calculate what our price maker strategy provides the industry by defining the quantitative value at $25.7 to $45.7 trillion in the next 25 years. The tools of specialization and the division of labor however will be incremental to this value and will be able to enhance the deliverability of the industry with a lower resource base than what is incurred today. A substantial value proposition on its own. Providing opportunities for the industry to pursue profitable energy independence in North America and possibly even more.

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.