These Are Not the Earnings We're Looking For, Part XXXV
In the producers third quarter reports we see the continuation of the issues that are detailed in our white paper “Profitable, North American Energy Independence -- Through the Commercialization of Shale.” There is much activity in the marketplace as these issues become more mature with producers reporting a number of actions in an attempt to mitigate them. I feel their most important issue is cash and working capital. Nothing has been done to stop the flow of cash and working capital from diminishing in this industry. Under their current business model there is nothing that will stop these resources flowing out of the industry. It is the producers capitalization policies that create this situation. First, all the activities in the field, other than operations and royalties, are capitalized. Overhead and interest are also capitalized at material percentages. I believe the industry average maybe as high as 85% however there is no verifiable proof of any of these claims. Just as there is no one who can provide verifiable proof otherwise. The last element of capitalization that is draining cash is all of these capital costs are allocated to each molecule in the reserve base and only those reserves produced in the current period will have their allocated capital costs depleted on the income statement. This is the case whether the reserves will be produced this month, this year, this decade or century.
The effect of these capitalization policies is that it allows the producers to build the handsome balance sheets their so proud of. When all you do is spend, and then recognize only a portion of that spending as a cost in the current period you’ll always look profitable, even today, but the cash is being left in the ground for the month, year, decade or century to pass before that cash is returned to the producers. The capitalization of overhead is done too, I think, hide their size and uncontrollable, fixed nature. Many people in the industry believe that overhead costs may be as little as 4.94% of revenues. as our sample of 22 producers report. If this was the case why would any cost cutting layoffs ever occur? A 10% percent staff reduction would create a 0.5% reduction in overhead costs. These don’t account for the “billions” in cost savings that are alleged. And as we noted in the white paper, taking a view of all the buildings in the downtown cores of Calgary, Dallas, Houston, and Oklahoma city would conclude, understanding that these strata of people on those floors are paid handsomely, that does not total 4.94% of the revenues of the industry. Our estimate is the well rounded number of 20%.
What we have is all of these costs, which are the majority of the costs of the producer firms, being expended each month. With smaller portions of those costs being returned by way of depletion. Therefore we can conclude as a result of these accounting methods, the full cost of capital is not being recognized in the pricing of the oil and gas commodity products that are sold to the consumer. Most of these costs are being deferred, and continually so, to the future. Leaving the pricing of the commodities deficient in recognizing the full cost of exploration and production. They do cover the royalty and operations but the majority of the capital and overhead are not cost into the commodity prices that are realized by the producers. Therefore the producers are not generating a “float” of capital, overhead and interest costs that are returned to them in the form of cash on a 90 day basis from the prices of their sold commodities. Therefore they consume cash constantly and in spectacular fashion. Investors finally realized this and stopped enabling this foolishness by replenishing the cash balances of these bureaucrats each year. The scope of this cash consumption is not as severe as it was in the past, however, it will still lead to the demise of the producers. For the nine months ended September 30, 2019 our sample of 22 producers, invested cash flow of $67.9 billion and depletion of $39.8 billion, a $28.1 billion cash drain for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. It is also notable that these producers have $520.4 billion in property, plant and equipment requiring on average 8.3 dedicated years in which to eliminate. Dedicated meaning no additional capital expenditures would be spent for 8 years in order to fully realize the amounts that are currently recorded. At the current pace they will take decades to actually remove the current balances due to the additions under the current business model. This is the justification for the cultural propensity to “build the balance sheet.” Think of this balance as what it is, a $520.4 billion or one half of a trillion dollars of cash sunk in the ground by these 22 producers. This at a time when producers starve for cash yet report great profitability. Profits, profits everywhere, but not a nickel to spend.
Certainly there is cash flow, however over the decades of this type of business model, value has steadily eroded out of the industry. Allowing the built up value that was in the industry, and the subsequent investments made by investors to seep out of the industry into the hands of the energy consumer. Which equals the amounts recorded as property, plant and equipment on the producers balance sheets. Hence for the producers to generate adequate cash flows to cover the costs of this monthly claim on cash eventually diminishes. Cash flows have become proportionally smaller and cover less of these costs today than in prior years. There is less residual value in the industry generating the value needed to sustain itself. As a result, it begins to produce less to the point, where I think we are today, that it begins the process of value destruction. Anybody want to propose a solution to this situation? How about a new business model built on resolving these systemic, cultural issues such as the Preliminary Specification does.
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 American energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects have published a white paper “Profitable, North American Energy Independence -- Through the Commercialization of Shale.” that captures the vision of the Preliminary Specification and our actions. 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 effect of these capitalization policies is that it allows the producers to build the handsome balance sheets their so proud of. When all you do is spend, and then recognize only a portion of that spending as a cost in the current period you’ll always look profitable, even today, but the cash is being left in the ground for the month, year, decade or century to pass before that cash is returned to the producers. The capitalization of overhead is done too, I think, hide their size and uncontrollable, fixed nature. Many people in the industry believe that overhead costs may be as little as 4.94% of revenues. as our sample of 22 producers report. If this was the case why would any cost cutting layoffs ever occur? A 10% percent staff reduction would create a 0.5% reduction in overhead costs. These don’t account for the “billions” in cost savings that are alleged. And as we noted in the white paper, taking a view of all the buildings in the downtown cores of Calgary, Dallas, Houston, and Oklahoma city would conclude, understanding that these strata of people on those floors are paid handsomely, that does not total 4.94% of the revenues of the industry. Our estimate is the well rounded number of 20%.
What we have is all of these costs, which are the majority of the costs of the producer firms, being expended each month. With smaller portions of those costs being returned by way of depletion. Therefore we can conclude as a result of these accounting methods, the full cost of capital is not being recognized in the pricing of the oil and gas commodity products that are sold to the consumer. Most of these costs are being deferred, and continually so, to the future. Leaving the pricing of the commodities deficient in recognizing the full cost of exploration and production. They do cover the royalty and operations but the majority of the capital and overhead are not cost into the commodity prices that are realized by the producers. Therefore the producers are not generating a “float” of capital, overhead and interest costs that are returned to them in the form of cash on a 90 day basis from the prices of their sold commodities. Therefore they consume cash constantly and in spectacular fashion. Investors finally realized this and stopped enabling this foolishness by replenishing the cash balances of these bureaucrats each year. The scope of this cash consumption is not as severe as it was in the past, however, it will still lead to the demise of the producers. For the nine months ended September 30, 2019 our sample of 22 producers, invested cash flow of $67.9 billion and depletion of $39.8 billion, a $28.1 billion cash drain for the nine months ended September 30, 2019. It is also notable that these producers have $520.4 billion in property, plant and equipment requiring on average 8.3 dedicated years in which to eliminate. Dedicated meaning no additional capital expenditures would be spent for 8 years in order to fully realize the amounts that are currently recorded. At the current pace they will take decades to actually remove the current balances due to the additions under the current business model. This is the justification for the cultural propensity to “build the balance sheet.” Think of this balance as what it is, a $520.4 billion or one half of a trillion dollars of cash sunk in the ground by these 22 producers. This at a time when producers starve for cash yet report great profitability. Profits, profits everywhere, but not a nickel to spend.
Certainly there is cash flow, however over the decades of this type of business model, value has steadily eroded out of the industry. Allowing the built up value that was in the industry, and the subsequent investments made by investors to seep out of the industry into the hands of the energy consumer. Which equals the amounts recorded as property, plant and equipment on the producers balance sheets. Hence for the producers to generate adequate cash flows to cover the costs of this monthly claim on cash eventually diminishes. Cash flows have become proportionally smaller and cover less of these costs today than in prior years. There is less residual value in the industry generating the value needed to sustain itself. As a result, it begins to produce less to the point, where I think we are today, that it begins the process of value destruction. Anybody want to propose a solution to this situation? How about a new business model built on resolving these systemic, cultural issues such as the Preliminary Specification does.
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 American energy independence. People, Ideas & Objects have published a white paper “Profitable, North American Energy Independence -- Through the Commercialization of Shale.” that captures the vision of the Preliminary Specification and our actions. 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.
