The Ugly Facts

 What is the probability that producer bureaucrats would be compelled or could now be motivated to act to develop the systems necessary to better manage the industry? They’ll be on their best behavior for as long as the threat of People, Ideas & Objects and its Preliminary Specification looms in the market. Don’t get me wrong, at sixty three years of age I’m as committed as ever and will see this through, yet… My age alone shows they have little time left to wait out their inevitable return to a permanent state of their glory years. This fact may also be the motivating cause that investors and bankers see that the bureaucrats have indeed won the war. If that would be a pro or con to the bureaucracy is unknown at this time? Would finance capitulate to the bureaucrats or permanently stay out of oil and gas? There is significant difficulty throughout the greater oil and gas economy. If the aged and committed have to endure and persevere thirty one years of hardship as I have in order to have these consequences play out then I can assure you that I'll not be a trendsetter. They say the struggle is the prize and I can state unequivocally that is how I see my case. The obstinance and do nothingness of the bureaucracy has been defined and is present in these efforts. Who will step up to finance the next drilling rig, expand industries fracing capacity, propose a necessary but controversial pipeline or make the industry profitable? When bureaucrats no longer need to be on their best behavior they'll be provided with the real and substantial personal riches they've been so desperately fighting for. I can at least claim that I tried everything within my power to avoid the inevitable consequences of their actions. Actions that were as predictable as this evening's sunset and tomorrow’s sunrise, assuming the person was concerned and watching their business. Now that the damage is realized we’ll see what their fortitude looks like, what their resources are in terms of their willingness to persevere. 

Intellectual Property is a valuable asset that I’ve earned in the process of my endeavors. This struggle of mine is not without significant value being attained. What, how and why the industry, service industry and producer organizations could operate as the most profitable means of oil and gas operations does mean something. This business model is a viable, theoretical model which is a necessary and general qualification that it will work in real life. It took a brain busting effort on my behalf, one that I have the medical records (five seizures between 2009 and 2011) to prove it almost killed me a number of times. I can’t imagine what someone else is going to have to do to bring a viable, workable model to the industry to solve the bureaucrats' difficulties? Who will spend the necessary ten years or more of research to figure out the “how” the “what” and “why” that a new solution needs to operate? A solution that excludes what is contained in the Intellectual Property of the Preliminary Specification. The difficulty that IP presents today’s bureaucrats is not so much legal as it is political. Investors have demanded they see a tier 1 ERP solution used by producer firms. Therefore what tier 1 ERP provider would allow their IP to be contaminated by an oil and gas solution containing pirated IP? And what director or officer of an oil and gas producer can accept an ERP solution from a vendor who does not have all of the underlying rights to the IP in which it uses? Either way, through the constructive development of appropriate systems to solve oil and gas issues or as an IP troll, my efforts will be compensated. I find it best to keep my options open.

Nonetheless I am finding it’s becoming difficult to sustain interest in People, Ideas & Objects when there's a market of $90 oil. I wasn’t doing this to be popular, I was doing it to solve problems and to earn the IP. I do have to question whether the diminishing interest in People, Ideas & Objects is a result of $90 oil or is it a diminishing interest as a result of the fact that nothing ever gets done? We’ve seen the most opportune times for action during negative $40 oil. People within the industry can see the issues as plainly as anyone else. Where the fault lies and what the solution to it is. They too are powerless when the financial resources are never devoted to resolving these problems. Therefore what should these people do? I started in 1991 and no one’s going to go through this difficult process for the high probability that nothing gets done. I can say that I’m losing momentum in the market, which may be fatal to the initiative no matter how hard I try. If nothing ever gets done it won’t be anyone but the bureaucrats fault.

I published the Preliminary Specification in August 2012, almost a decade ago. The basis of value that we attach to People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service providers is the differential between the base case the bureaucrats accept. Versus what the industry needs to generate in terms of profitability everywhere and always. This profitability is calculated as $5.7 trillion over the course of the next 25 years. For example the minimum may be the $130 price differential between today’s price and that which was accepted in April 2020. Making oil and gas into what is commonly referred to as a business. In addition, we replace the expectation by the bureaucrats that investors will fund the capital costs over these next 25 years. Compared to our ability in the Preliminary Specification to pass these capital costs on to the consumer and cycle them through the producer firms as the means to finance the expected $20 to $40 trillion in anticipated capital expenditures over that same 25 year period. Determining our value proposition falls within the range of $25.7 to $45.7 trillion. If this was valid since the time we published the Preliminary Specification in August 2012 then there may have been an incremental amount of $10.3 to $18.3 trillion earned by North American producers. The question therefore is, does this quantify the level of financial damage experienced throughout the industry as represented by the producers, the service industry, those who chose careers in either of those industries, the preparedness in terms of approaching what is unquestionably the most difficult and technically challenging period the industry faces during these next 25 years? Needless to say I think it does. A profitable industry is dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable for all concerned. When shareholders are satisfied through appropriate and accountable profitability that does not preclude the rest, it’s on the contrary. We’ve had an unprofitable industry for many decades, outside the bureaucrats, who has prospered? We mentioned the other day that Houston earlier this century was considered the center of the global oil and gas industry. I wonder what it cost in terms of effort to have earned that? I can certainly say, I don’t see where anyone earned anything for having given it away.

These are just the facts as I see them today. Our momentum is fading in relevance in the market at this time, and doing so for whatever reason. I’ve always maintained that people would remain focused on this project as long as they knew the financial resources were there and available for them to complete their work. They now know the answer to that question and the probability it will ever be available to them. I’ve also maintained that putting Humpty Dumpty back together again after people concluded that it was over would be just that. After the level of destruction that has occurred in the service industry, where Keystone XL was abandoned after $15 billion in investment and over a decade of work. None of these time and financial losses were incurred by producers themselves. People may now see that the grass may be permanently greener on the bureaucratic side and People, Ideas & Objects wisely never exposed them to any career risk by exposing them or their affiliation with us. These are the facts of the situation that I’m facing. Bureaucrats have always had complete control over the budget process and therefore what does and doesn’t happen. Throughout our thirty one years I can attest that our cumulative revenues are $0.00. We should note too the bureaucrats' satisfaction with the industry over the past four decades and the wealth of personal financial resources they’ve obtained. Times in oil and gas may never have been more promising for these bureaucrats. It’s just too bad about the rest of us. 

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

The Noun That's Also a Verb

 I want to clarify my argument on how People, Ideas & Objects perceive the recording and retirement of capital costs in oil and gas. I am looking purely from the financial reporting perspective of what is necessary to report a competitive, profitable offering of oil and gas’ performance in today’s capital markets. Understanding the risks associated with oil and gas exploration and production, with the extended timelines involved in the industry, today’s producers' financial reporting is the polar opposite from what would be necessary, in my opinion. There are tax, royalty and other regulatory requirements imposing a cut off between what is capital and operations, also the speed in which those capital costs are recognized and their expected return. Financial accounting determines performance and the basis of accounting in North America is standardized so that investors can evaluate firms on the basis of their criteria of acceptable risk based against their understanding of that accounting standard. Theoretically using GAAP a profit is a profit is a profit. When the accounting in oil and gas is skewed in the manner that it is, where the focus is on bringing the property, plant and equipment account to the approximate value of the independent reserves report, producers have violated the standard understanding of the investors framework. By implementing the Preliminary Specification and reorganizing the industry around the user community service provider organizations, producers focus will be on the basis of profitability everywhere and always. Profitability based on a standardized accounting across the industry that is consistent with investors understanding of profitability and performance. If the property is incapable of meeting that threshold of performance, then the producer shut-ins the property in order to maintain their corporate profitability at the highest possible level based on their production profile. Shut-in properties would therefore be the most lucrative opportunity for the producer to focus innovatively and return that property to profitable production. 

This is not the capital market that producers think it is. Today’s is a sophisticated, lightning fast and highly performative market where new industries are reshaping the economy. An industrial revolution scale of change that is reaping rewards which have rarely been available before. Where a blogger can claim to provide the most profitable means of oil and gas production. And suggests that it’s not enough to just to own the oil and gas asset anymore, where it’s now necessary to have access to the software that makes the oil and gas asset profitable. But I digress. What may have been adequate in terms of performance for the oil and gas producer in the early 1980s is no longer valid or acceptable. It’s tragic, unnecessary and wasteful. Having a lot of assets means exactly what? You own a lot of things, but never any cash. This is not a great position to be in when the opportunity to be dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable demands so much more. We see few producers in North America able to qualify for that classification. 

The capital intensive nature of oil and gas should not be the reason that producer bureaucrats are involved in the process of “building balance sheets” or “putting cash in the ground.” Such lunacy has overtaken common sense in this industry and shows no sign of abating. It begs the question with the bureaucrats doing so well personally, is what’s really been going on? A capital intensive industry being managed through the Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service providers would seek to have the high costs of capital involved in the business passed on to the consumer in an efficient manner over an appropriate period of time. We believe that having the capital costs of the producer retired over the course of 2.5 years would provide a more competitive means in which producers would attract investors. Cycling their prior investments back into cash from the sale to consumers in profitably priced products. Enabling producers a reasonable distribution where capital costs, dividends and debt reduction each receive an equal share of that real profitability. And their capital costs would be fully funded through these internally generated cash distributions. Providing the only real and viable source of financial resources capable of meeting the needs of the horrendous capital demands of producers over the next 25 years. The industry's future capital costs are assumed to be financed by new investors which reflects the bureaucrats' speed and ability in which they can learn such important lessons as to why their investors left in 2015. 

There are two methods in which we look at the retirement of capital costs that are different from today’s bureaucratic balance sheet building. Through depletion on the basis of a more competitive offering in the 2.5 years that we mentioned. And the cutoff of where capital and operations are determined. The SEC’s requirement for producers is to ensure that their asset value in property, plant and equipment does not exceed the present value of the independent reserve report. Invoking the dreaded ceiling test with its consequential impairment of the assets that breach that criteria. If you want to know what the producer is doing and its value, look at its reserves. If you want to know how it’s performing based on the historical basis of the money invested etc look at the financial statements. Or one would reasonably assume. The highest performing oil and gas producer would theoretically have $0.00 as the amount in property, plant and equipment. That they’ve retired all of their capital costs and therefore have achieved the lowest cost producer from the real sense of the term in a capital intensive industry. This does not diminish the value of the assets of the firm as represented in the reserves report. 

The second element of our method of reducing capital costs faster, and hence recording the real costs of oil and gas exploration and production in the costs to the consumers. Is to begin treating assets as assets and operations as operating expenses. If we take a strict approach to our point of view, we see that everything in oil and gas can be classified as tangible or intangible. We’re suggesting that anything with a serial number, foundation or controllable be classified as an asset in property, plant and equipment or inventory / work in progress. Those aspects that don’t qualify should be classified, for financial reporting purposes, as operations. These would include the process necessary to cement the casing with cement. The noun that’s also a verb. Casing, drilling day rates, completion costs including fracing. If recognizing these as operations are too big a step for the producer bureaucrat to take, then these costs should at least be classified as intangible assets on the balance sheet. And therefore subject to their own, quicker I would suggest, recognition in terms of the time they remain as an asset. 

A critical review of the SEC and FASB accounting standards finds that producer bureaucrats are in compliance with the letter of the regulation governing capital assets and the inclusion of costs in property, plant and equipment. These regulations were introduced in the late 1970’s and have been used in oil and gas throughout North America since. They are the culture of the industry. That review of these requirements shows they only discuss the instance where the assets can not exceed the petroleum reserves value. There is no discussion on the minimum acceptable level of asset value a producer would attain. Why would there be? The culture of the industry has grown to the point that it has distorted the thinking of what the objective of the business is. “To build balance sheets” and “put cash in the ground” are the results of these cultural distortions after 45 years of practice. Picking up a set of financial statements of a North American oil and gas producer will tell you next to nothing about the firm other than it’s size as reflected in its revenue. After that you can apply the same formula to what the assets will be, the debt, the costs and the overall, spectacular profitable performance with never any working capital being the same percentage factors of the revenue of the producers. The only difference is the size of the producer firm as reflected by its revenue. Has the producer been effective in exploration and development of oil and gas? Don’t know. Is it a better investment than the producer firm headed by the village idiot? Don’t know. They’re not comparable and the homogeneity between each other is deceiving. Are these the principles in which the accounting profession was established? Are these the principles that the SEC and FASB were searching for when they established these regulations? Are these the basis of the investors understanding of the accounting framework they can apply their investment criteria to any industry? Absolutely not. 

The latest bright shiny object to have been floated by these bureaucrats is the term “zero net debt.” Which is supposed to mean something. A simple factor of long term debt less the current balance of all available cash. Which tells me… Cenovus is claiming their net debt in the fourth quarter of 2021 reached just $9.6 billion dollars. However, a closer read of their financial statements sees that the total liabilities listed equal $30.496 billion. It is for reasons such as this disparity that I question the validity of these claims and their motivation. Is it that they’re just seeking attention or are they looking for some kind of reward for making such statements. Or maybe it's a signal to the market that through the process of bankruptcy the only obligation they’re truly committed to is to those they’ve pledged their assets as collateral. And like their shareholders the other $20.896 billion in other liabilities are completely irrelevant when the bankruptcy comes, and therefore completely irrelevant now.

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

Were Beavis and Butt-Head Elon Musk's Heroes?

 We see in Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s response to the Canadian truckers that running away, hiding and not addressing the issues is as effective as covering your eyes, stomping your feet and yelling in kindergarten. Whether it’s politicians, the media or those that actively seek to deceive others through poor or no accountability, this tactic may have been effective at one time prior to its overuse and abuse. We are today witnessing that chickens do come home to roost. It’s a new day and there seems to be new rules coming into play, the benefit of the doubt is no longer being extended, and for those that took that opportunity in the past are no longer being given the time of day. This fourth quarter seems to be a time in which serious questions are being asked of what’s happening in oil and gas and the future of the North American producers. We’ve seen this past decade of oil and gas being more or less a lost decade and the curious are thinking, maybe it’s time to revisit the industry and approach it differently. Let’s look at the natural gas market and determine if events are shaping up to provide for a positive future as would otherwise be hoped for? 

We have three graphs from the February 3, 2022 EIA Natural Gas Weekly Update that describe different aspects of the U.S. natural gas marketplace. The first is natural gas storage volumes showing that natural gas demand remains healthy and the response by producers may have been inadequate to maintain the volume of storage that was traditionally expected. Specifically, on December 31, 2021 storage volumes were 528 BCF higher than the five year minimum and dropped in the course of four weeks to less than half that at 228 BCF above the five year minimum on January 28, 2022. The steepness of this drawdown is significant as it represents a somewhat flat footed response by producers to maintain production volumes. Mid to late March is the time in which storage begins to refill and the amount of storage that may be drawn down during the next 7 - 8 weeks may become an issue. 

Our second graph shows the total number of rigs drilling in the U.S. With this volume of activity, the question needs to be asked if this will provide the turnaround needed to meet the renewed demand and refill the probable depleted storage volumes? The apparent answer at this point is no, it will not.

Our last graph shows what appears to be a break between the response in the producer's activity level and the price of natural gas. Prices are breaking upwards while active rigs are remaining at levels that appear to be too low to have an impact.

What is the cause of this lack of response by producers? Bureaucrats would suggest that the amount of dividends and stock buyback programs are causing them to divert their cash to those causes. This is self-serving and an admission that the bureaucrats have not rehabilitated themselves from their spending addiction. Businesses generate profits that are adequate to meet the needs of the business, which happens to include all aspects of the business, and to compete in the capital markets. It's not an A / B choice, it's C All of the Above. The reason they don’t have the cash resources is due to their flat footedness and refusal to act in terms of reacting to the changing environment of their business over the past 4 decades. Bureaucrats may also claim they haven’t the field capabilities and capacities necessary to conduct the necessary level of activity, the service industry has just not kept up. Which is true, drilling companies were never successful in their diversity initiatives in the restaurant business. The fact of the matter is that while these bureaucrats were enjoying their party they didn’t pay any attention to the business. It has atrophied all of the value and as they have done throughout this protracted period they have blamed, accused and generated viable scapegoats of everyone and everything, other than themselves. The fact that industry doesn’t have the financial wherewithal and it doesn’t have the ability to conduct the field activity is true. These are symptoms of their chronic mismanagement that I’ve documented with the fallout consequences predicted would happen. They’ve had alternatives. 

Would producers be having the difficulties they’re having if they had the appropriate ERP systems? I’m not in any way blaming the current ERP systems providers. They’ve done stellar work in impossible conditions due to the fact that producer bureaucrats have wanted to and starved them financially so that producer accountability was never discovered or discoverable. The fact that investors have pointed out that oil and gas producers must obtain tier 1 ERP systems as a precondition for their return is not a comment towards the ERP providers in the market today. It is the understanding of the dynamic that producer bureaucrats have created where accountability is as impossible to determine as can possibly be achieved. 

There is a wall of common sense and logic that has betrayed the bureaucrats each and every move these past four decades. What should have been done was always circumvented by taking the short term opportunity without any understanding of the consequences it would cause. We have moved from self-inflicted crisis to self-inflicted crisis and back again in a comical act of “building balance sheets” and “putting cash in the ground.” The sad part is that it has gone on for so long that the majority believe it. It is culturally ingrained and the way they do things. They can only laugh at those that don’t follow this prescribed script. What today's graphs show about the natural gas market in North America is that it will soon be influenced by the global natural gas market. European natural gas import prices averaged $28.26 U.S. for the month of January. LNG will continue to have the effect of taking what was a continentally priced commodity and making it a globally priced commodity. 

Even with the endowment of shale North American producers will not be able to respond to the demand for production. Leaving the prospect of much higher prices being realized across this continent. Some may ask if that’s not what People, Ideas & Objects have been suggesting should be what our future should be? Hardly, higher prices are the necessary component of a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable industry and for all concerned. Higher prices are also the reallocation of the financial resources towards innovation. With our good friends the bureaucrats nothing of the like will occur. No one will be prospering in the industry as a result of the continued litany of decisions whose consequences were never considered at the time. Our current self-inflicted crisis is this legacy of hedging that has gone on since the April 2020 covid induced oil price crash. These shenanigans have the potential to bring the industry down quickly. 

At some point today EQT will publish their fourth quarter report. They are the largest U.S. natural gas producer and have found themselves in a bit of a dilemma when it comes to their hedging practices. EQT are not part of our sample of producers that we analyze and I am generally unfamiliar with them and their operation. After the third quarter report I only noticed that their hedging losses had dropped their net revenues into negative numbers totalling $775 million for three quarters of 2021. They’ve also recorded a net $4.3 billion current derivatives liability. Indicating this would be coming due before September 30, 2022. I don’t have the requisite understanding of the derivatives market to understand what strategy EQT is employing. It appears to me that they’re seeking to mitigate their downside risk of natural gas prices going below $2.20 and $2.32. The volume of gas under these contracts is considerable at a total of 4.5 TCF of gas over the course of next three and six years.

With respect to the derivative commodity instruments held by the Company, the Company hedged portions of its expected sales of production and portions of its basis exposure covering approximately 2,554 Bcf of natural gas and 5,146 Mbbl of NGLs as of September 30, 2021 and 1,955 Bcf of natural gas and 3,462 Mbbl of NGLs as of December 31, 2020. The open positions at September 30, 2021 and December 31, 2020 had maturities extending through December 2027 and December 2024, respectively.

With these volumes and prices over this period it is clear that EQT assumed that in an unchanging natural gas market they expected to obtain the least viable level of their perceived definition of profitability as acceptable. With the dynamic changes in the prices of natural gas, the upside of their natural gas business will be paid to others. However, royalties are paid on the price realized and at $28 the royalty will cause EQT’s net price to be far lower than the hedged price and that will be before any other capital, operating or overhead costs are recognized. I do not see this as an ideal situation. In addition, working capital of EQT is not what would have been expected of a producer seeking to mitigate its risk. They are the proud owners of negative working capital of $3.9 billion. A large part being the liability to the hedging contract, which brings up this interesting difficulty that the company may be faced with. (Note, EQT current rating by Moodys is speculative at Ba1, which is one step below the defined investment grade Baa3 of the contract.)

Certain of the Company's OTC derivative instrument contracts provide that, if the Company's credit rating assigned by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (Moody's) or S&P Global Ratings (S&P) is below the agreed-upon credit rating threshold (typically, below investment grade), and if the associated derivative liability exceeds the agreed-upon dollar threshold for such credit rating, the counterparty to such contract can require the Company to deposit collateral. Similarly, if such counterparty's credit rating assigned by Moody's or S&P is below the agreed-upon credit rating threshold, and if the associated derivative liability exceeds the agreed-upon dollar threshold for such credit rating, the Company can require the counterparty to deposit collateral with the Company. Such collateral can be up to 100% of the derivative liability.

The question that needs to be asked is in the context of the next self-inflicted crisis. Where do the hedging liabilities fall in terms of the call on the resources of a bankrupt producer? If the derivative liability is invoked, what effect will that have on the company's other debt covenants?

Producer bureaucrats chose to take the least profitable opportunity by locking the firm into the hedging contract. While actively choosing to ignore the opportunity to work hard and build the Preliminary Specification and our user community to rebuild a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producer firm. An opportunity that has been available to them since 2012 and at a comparatively minimal cost to the firm, though it would disintermediate the bureaucracy. Therefore who is going to commit to be the first to fund the Preliminary Specification and our user community? And how? People, Ideas & Objects budgetary roadblocks I’ve instituted are the realities of the situation the bureaucrats have created for all participants in the tier 2 and tertiary industries supporting oil and gas. There are no opportunities for any investor returns in oil and gas ERP systems. Therefore this is my dilemma and around and round we go. No one in oil and gas ERP has made any money for investors. How would I suggest that I would? I also need to deal with the fact it is software which banks are violently allergic to. Therefore the bureaucrats have created a situation where they’ll never be held accountable or need to deal with their rolling incompetence. What I see is a lack of concern for the decisions that are made, but then they’ll muddle through. The continued waste of natural resources is tragic in the least. A close read of history will show that once organizations have been destroyed in this manner, and I would suggest that their ability to understand how to make money is their deficiency, they’ll never come into being again as viable, prosperous contributors to the greater good. It’s good to know that Beavis and Butt-Head had at least the oil and gas bureaucrats looking up to them. 

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

Vision Without Action is Merely a Dream

 Vision without action is merely a dream. Action without vision just passes the time. Vision with action can change the world. 

Joel A. Barker

With this quote we see the three options where the industry can be directed to. The reality of the situation as far as we know, is that People, Ideas & Objects is the only ERP solution being brought to the market. However, since 2004 when we initially proposed the solution of using the Joint Operating Committee as one of the key organizational constructs of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producers. The issues we identified, most notably the chronic overproduction, has financially decimated the North American producers and associated infrastructure. The interests of the bureaucracy have been exposed as not an accountable, objective, responsive and profitable concern but an unaccountable, unconstrained and self-interested group who’s concern does not extend beyond their own skin. We have extended the initial idea of using the Joint Operating Committee and completed a decade of research into “what and how” the oil and gas industry’s ERP system and business model based on these need to be configured in order to succeed and ensure producers attain profitable production everywhere and always. What we call the Preliminary Specification has solved these issues and offered the benefits of a profitable industry. During this process People, Ideas & Objects incidentally conducted the disintermediation of oil and gas, a process that is and will affect all industries which challenges bureaucracies directly through far more efficient business models. Our budget was published in the first quarter of 2014, and identified clearly the scope and scale of the issues that are now plainly clear for all to see. I think that People, Ideas & Objects can not only claim to have foreseen and understood the issue, in August 2012 we were able to provide a viable solution in an innovative business model but also scoped out the implications of inaction and the scale of the issue. A scope and scale that has unfortunately been validated through bureaucratic inactivity.

We’ve now moved beyond the financial degradation and destruction issues of the producers. The financial rebuilding process will need to be financed through the higher commodity prices, such as the Preliminary Specification provides. However the recognition of these issues is not addressed by industry. The value that was handed down has now been exhausted through bureaucratic neglect. The decades of investor cash that was pumped into producers has followed. After seven years of investor withdrawal we see many events and further implications happening that prove the Preliminary Specifications validity and the destruction by the bureaucrats that was both unnecessary and highly counter productive. These will not be remedied in the short term and not by those who willingly orchestrated this destruction.    The legacy of costs remaining and value that has been extinguished will need to be a deliberate rehabilitation effort. Petroleum reserves are worth nothing if they can’t be produced profitably and profitable in the real sense of the term. The behaviors of the bureaucrats when the dire consequences of their actions became evident did nothing to change their ways. Now, with money on the table from higher commodity prices, and the potential for far greater financial resources in the future, who should we trust to manage that resource? This does nothing to suggest how the far more complex future of oil and gas will be approached. Their model is an uncompromising and culturally constrained method that can’t, won’t and will not ever change.

Once financial degradation has occurred the natural follow on consequence is the degradation of capabilities and capacities of a firm. As has happened in oil and gas, and the service industry. Cash and the inability to source adequate volumes of it, due to the lack of real profitability, and the continued specious accounting that has overhead consuming the bank account each month. The lack of any action by the bureaucrats is the key constraint to any progress. It appears to me that OPEC+ concern for the North American producers' chronic overproduction into the market no longer exists. It appears to me that commodity pricing has become more dependent on the production quota decisions of OPEC+ and its member countries than on the North American producer bureaucrats ability to deceive their investors. And in natural gas the political fortunes of those climate change truthers in Europe are living the consequences of their past decisions. Production may become profitable, even in the real sense, however the deprecation of the industry will hold off energy independence, even in the shale era, for the short to medium term. North American dependence on foreign sources of oil, and the societal implications of that may now be a reality. This being the first of many steps in which societal damage is being experienced as a result of the bureaucratic laziness and sloth identified above. 

The dynamic nature of the bureaucracy is on display most clearly in their response to the funding strike their investors and bankers began in 2015. There is no more significant message that can be sent to management than for their investors to say no. If your investors don’t have faith in you then they’ll keep their money. If you subsequently make no changes to deal with the investors lack of faith and identified issues for what is now seven years, that is very disconcerting. Particularly when the issues from overproduction have been clearly defined since the great depression, the 1986 initial oil price declined due to overproduction, the numerous repeat events of both oil and gas overproduction, the publication of a solution to overproduction in August 2012 and these investors actions starting in 2015. 

This was always the “plan” of the bureaucrats in their muddle through strategy. As part of that strategy which includes “market rebalancing,” whatever that means, capabilities and capacities of the industry would diminish to the point where the bust in the boom / bust cycle would diminish supply to the point where it would match with demand and alleged profitability would return. Where are we in this version of “market rebalancing” and is it now providing a clear and predictable future? Has market rebalancing been achieved and can we assert that it’s nothing more than the willing and deliberate destruction of the value of the industry. 

As I’ve mentioned before I can’t be convinced that all is well when the build back better balance sheets continue to balloon and profitability soars while cash and working capital evaporate. Well it's a “capital intensive industry” they’ll say. To which I say that’s correct, but producers never recognize their capital costs in terms of what the capital markets expects in returns. Capital costs are never realized or passed on to the consumer, only collected and cherished on the CEO’s balance sheet as he struts it proudly down main street. These producer firms are spending machines, not organizations and certainly not the type that could ever be confused with being a commercial operation. It’s about stellar engineering facilities with balance sheet empires that they can prove to anyone that should ever question them. These are empires built on 20 lbs copy paper 8-½” x 11” sheets. And you must never question that.

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

Trying to Stay Within the Confines of This Galaxy

 Whether oil and gas is in the state that it’s in or not is to be determined by each and everyone of us. We hear in the media today that producers are rolling in cash from higher prices. Yet, hear a comprehensively different tone and discussion at People, Ideas & Objects. If people believe the oil and gas producers are in good condition and their future is bright then they’re correct. There’ll be nothing that I can say or do to convince them otherwise. I’ve been doing this for a while and I don’t like what I see. I’d be willing to accept that I’m wrong yet the producers haven’t convinced me of that yet. The situation has only declined and degraded and is in a state where I think we’re in a lot of difficulty. And not just from an oil and gas point of view but a societal point of view. 

The world is a dangerous place to live not because of the people who are evil but because of the people who don’t do anything about it. 

Albert Einstein 

The scope and scale of what it is that People, Ideas & Objects are undertaking here is comprehensive. That we would aspire to undertake this in the normal course would be unheard of. I don’t believe we’re in an environment where we are anywhere near normal and what is accepted as normal today is unacceptable. There are serious consequences now as a result of what the bureaucrats have authored. Houston can barely make decisions as to which business they’re in. Stay tuned for what they may be saying tomorrow! And yes it is that bad. Outside of People, Ideas & Objects I don’t see anything going on or any concern being raised on any front. The media are promoting the industry as they always have and I don’t see their perspective. I personally felt compelled to do something about this after the 1986 oil price decline when it was obvious that producers just needed to shut-in some production for a while. And yet here we are today. Maybe their objective is to never be accountable or profitable? I’m glad that I’ve done what I’ve done and think this solution is worthy of proceeding. And that would be a natural position for me to take after this much work. However with the state of affairs in oil and gas being what it is today. These are the questions that need to be asked.

If not you, then who? If not now, when? 

Hillel, First - Century Jewish Scholar

Time is now of the essence. Churchill claimed to have saved the Soviet Union in WWII. An assertion that I agree with. The British had moved into North Africa and spanked the Italians back home with quick dispatch. Control of the Suez Canal was the prize everyone was after, and hence control of the Mediterranean. A fixture that was part of the British Empire for many decades. While the Germans were moving into North Africa to take their shot at it. They also moved down into Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia and Romania. The Albanians and Greeks were dealing with Mussolini as well. The British did move to support the Greeks and attempt to unify Hungary, Yugoslavia with the Greeks in fighting the Germans however they were unable to cooperate with one another. This fighting was unsuccessful for all concerned but the Germans. With the British also losing Crete, almost losing Iraq and Syria. All of this occurred during the March, April and May time period of 1941. On December 18, 1940 Hitler decided that May 15, 1941 would be the launch date of Operation Barbarossa, the Soviet Invasion. However with the protracted distraction the British caused in the Mediterranean this was delayed on March 27, 1941 to June 15, 1941 and subsequently on June 22, 1941 Operation Barbarossa began. What we know of history is that the Germans were stuck in the mud in October and then frozen for the entire winter. Giving the Soviets time to form alliances with the British and Americans and organize themselves to deal with the attack. Although it is probably not a good thing to claim to have saved communism, the alternative of having Hitler with the resources of the Soviet Union would have been pre determinant. 

My point here is that time is wasting and there are consequences of actions and inactions by good people that are having much greater implications than we’re realizing when they subsequently occur. As much as I belittle the bureaucrats it’s obvious to everyone that inaction by them is in their DNA. We can't and should not expect anything from them. They’ll continue to deny us the resources we need to proceed. However that is not a reason to sit and watch this tumble further downwards. There should be no doubt of the need to rebuild the industry in my opinion. It’s too important not to. It will be far easier to rebuild than trying to compromise and deal with the bureaucrats and end up with something that may not work. 

I have defined our user community and their service provider organizations to fall within the domain of the North American oil and gas administration and accounting roles and responsibilities. Our objective is to provide the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas producers with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations everywhere and always. There is a misunderstanding between myself and areas of the general industry as to what those roles and responsibilities of administration are involved. And these include the operational, exploration, land and traditional areas of administration of the producers that are included in the domain of user community and their service providers. This is a data rich environment and the need to have these captured in an ERP system are paramount. The feeding of multiple systems with the same data is due to the fact that these systems bridge different domains in the bureaucracy and conflict between the bureaucratic empires of the producer is one of the key impediments to the lack of integration in the current systems. These have been implied and well understood with regard to our user community.

Where the general industry misunderstandings arise is in the area of the change in delivery of the software and services of the Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations. In delivering a cloud administration and accounting service we’re introducing changes that may not be realized by some. We’re employing what is now commonly referred to as a Software as a Service (SaaS) style of offering to the North American oil and gas industry and the implications of that are broad. The following diagram shows from a systems and services perspective what this consists of and who should address these areas of concern. These areas are what were traditionally considered the Information Technology domain. What People, Ideas & Objects consider to fall under the administrative role in the administration and accounting of our user community and their service provider. From the book “IaaS for Dummies” page 8, John Wiley and Sons.

Therefore let’s look at these areas of concern that fall under the SaaS model of delivery. And give a brief overview of how the specific user community and their service provider organizations will be involved in the development of the Preliminary Specification and then how it is they’ll support the industries producers within this model. Starting from the bottom and working to the top we’ll break down these services. 

Data Center, Networking, Storage and Servers

These form part of the Oracle ERP Cloud offering and are supported by their regions located around the world. We have discussed briefly the method that we’ll be incorporating the Preliminary Specification within the Oracle ERP Cloud offering and will state at this point we are implementing Oracle’s recommended method. We are writing our Java application within the Oracle Fusion code itself into the Oracle Fusion Middleware Server. It will not be a series of separate modules that sit on top of Oracle Cloud ERP which has been the traditional approach. It is in this way that either People, Ideas & Objects or Oracle may update their respective code bases on the currently scheduled quarterly release without impacting one anothers code. Using the full value of Java’s inheritance, polymorphism and most specifically encapsulation. 

These four base elements of a SaaS are determined at definition by the user of the Oracle ERP Cloud offering. Selecting the data center, processor, storage type and all other manner of configurations are available. People, Ideas & Objects are employing a microservices architecture that will map their single administrative or accounting process that the service provider is delivering to industry to the domain of concern to one specific microservice. In the employment of specialization and division of labor we do not expect the service provider to be conducting the accounting involved in an individual process to also be involved in the IT related SaaS roles and responsibilities. These are mutually exclusive capacities and capabilities. There will be other members of our user community with their own service provider organizations that are used to manage elements of the SaaS offering on behalf of the population of service providers.

Virtualization

Within the Oracle ERP Cloud offering there is a registry service for the various images that we will have developed and published and those that Oracle have published. These will be deployed as needed by the service provider that may be configured just for managing the registry or deploying the “month-end” processes, etc. Virtualization is a way of life in the cloud and it is evolving at a remarkable pace with the future configuration and architectures of systems being derivative of these technologies in some form or another. The core of Oracle ERP Cloud, including the modules of the Preliminary Specification, will be run on centralized servers in a more traditional sense where these microservices will access their data and defer their heavy processing to. 

Operating System, Middleware, Runtime, Data and Applications

This software stack will have a myriad of configurations contained within the virtualization registry. Whatever the process needs to operate will remain in the image and the remainder of the operating system, database and others are removed to have a lightweight configuration for the sole purpose of conducting that one process. There will also be the main configuration where Oracle ERP Cloud and People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specifications core applications will be operational at all times. Service providers will deploy virtualized images of what they need when they’re needed. Oracle has taken their Linux operating system and most importantly their Database in the automated direction with machine learning technologies. By reviewing the logs of the system it can make changes to the configuration and tune the database as needed without the need for human intervention. The work of Database Administrators no longer need to concern themselves with table size growth as the automated database will drop tables when required, etc. It is here where our service providers and their ownership by the user community will be able to make the impact that I think will be significant. The motivation behind the user community is that they are business people who are building their own business based on serving the producer population with the objective of ensuring the most profitable means of oil and gas operations. They’ll have the motivation, the tools by way of access to the Intellectual Property and our developers, but also exclusive access and attention of the producer firms to determine what is the best method to meet their objective and hence to build their business. 

Therefore what’s the point of bringing all this technological discussion into our business focus? It’s our job to ensure that we’re covering these technical aspects of our offering on behalf of the North American oil and gas industry. We’ve never specifically made this point before and I’ll be including this discussion in the service provider page of the Preliminary Specifications wiki. Our job is comprehensive and multidisciplinary with nothing of the sort ever being attempted before. I don’t believe the industry has a choice as the energy we consume is too critical to our way of life. Just ask the German’s. We’re waking up to this fact all over the world and the North American producers haven’t failed us, they fundamentally and deliberately betrayed us by taking the goods for themselves. Action or inaction is dependent on your point of view, and I have a definitive opinion of what I think needs to be done. I’ll be interested to see how this unfolds and what happens. 

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

Proof as to Why Overhead is Such an Issue

 Remember the days when Houston rightly claimed to be the global center of the oil and gas industry. That was the industry that was passed down just a few decades ago. These bureaucrats have achieved so much in their pursuit of financial damage and destruction. Now, we’re just a bunch of old guys reminiscing about the good old days. Dare I say… Houston, we have a problem.

The secondary reason that profitability is unattainable in North American oil and gas is the level of overhead incurred by producer firms. Overheads appear reasonable on financial statements due to the significant level of overhead that’s capitalized. It is these capitalization policies that are the primary and indirect reasons there’s a constant drainage of cash from the producer firm. Demanding producers to find new sources of capital to replenish the firm's cash. This drainage of cash has been unaddressed by producer bureaucrats throughout these past decades as they’ve had the willing supply of investors wanting to invest. Investors driven by the specious profits reported when producers focus of the firm was to “build balance sheets” and “put cash in the ground.” Over reported asset values such as these create equal and commensurate over reported profits. Few if any costs outside of operating costs, royalties and the smallest amount of depletion were recognized in the current period. 

Granted I will admit that the overhead issue is symptomatic of the larger issue today and the one that I am indirectly addressing in this post. I’m trying to reconcile the two perspectives between People, Ideas & Objects and the bureaucrats. Why is it that we believe we must make radical changes to the structure of the industry to alleviate the difficulties that plague oil and gas? Capitalized overhead represents the beginning of industry’s decline and is well represented throughout that decline. Taken over the lifetime of this practice, which began in the mid 1980s, the cumulative amount of overhead, in our opinion, is how we assign the material classification. There’s more to it than that however. It became the source and method of how bureaucrats game the system. And then it became the means in which, indirectly, accountability slipped out of the conscious thought of these bureaucrats. Subsequently, the greater destruction is represented in the chronic and escalating erosion of producer value to the point where the costs of oil and gas production are not, and have not been captured and passed to the consumer and recovered in the commodity prices sold. Today efficiencies of the industry are as comprehensively degraded as the value represented in the financial statements are mythical. And what would be the bureaucrats' alternative hypothesis of their performance? The investors gave producers the investment to establish a Lamborghini dealership and now own a “pick-n-pay” junkyard. What future does that provide?

The majority of costs of the producer are being capitalized and depleted over the usable life of the reserves based on the independent reserve reports. Decades would pass before all of these costs would be recognized and substantial incremental investment would be necessary to maintain the reserves. Shale reserves have brought about the era of abundance complete with new cost dynamics. What producers were unconcerned about is that the cash that was consumed and “put in the ground” was not being returned for decades, they had investors. Their financial deception enabled them to continue to the point where the financial performance of the assets, because they were not objectively being evaluated, due to the bloated profitability and balance sheet, and lack of critical financial evaluation, dropped well below what a commercial operation would need to sustain itself. As a result of this long term erosion, eventually the majority of the producer's costs could not be recognized in the prices of the commodities they were selling to the consumer. The consumer was paying for a sliver of depletion, operating costs and royalties with little room for anything else. It is best to consider the capital costs were just being inventoried on the ever growing, built back better balance sheet. Causing cash to be permanently and comprehensively consumed on a monthly basis, where a revolving cash “float” was never established with new cash being replenished from the sale of commodities. Today a cash level that is adequate to cover all of the producer's costs is unattainable in any pricing environment due to the depth of the erosion of the producer's performance. People, Ideas & Objects believe that a capital intensive industry should have their capital intensive costs passed on to consumers in the price of the commodity. This was not done when investors were available to make up for the cash shortfall. 

Overhead’s consequences have therefore been material in nature in the industry. How much is a mystery and there’s no evidence anywhere to support my claims. As a result of these allegations some producers have begun detailing the amount of the overhead they incurred and the amount that was capitalized during the year. I’ve reviewed the numbers of those producers who’ve published them. I’m not of the opinion they fully capture the issue, and are inconsistent with my understanding of the material nature of overhead. Based on our sample of producers, field activities in 2020 dropped to 25% of 2019s. Why did 2020s capital expenditures remain at 60% of 2019’s expenditures for our sample of producers? Conversely, why did increased activity levels in 2021 not have a commensurate increase in the volume of capital expenditures? Is there some fixed cost involved, or are capital expenditures not discretionary? There are too many anomalies and I’ve reviewed too many producers in my career to know better. The deficiency of cash as a result of what I believe to be this overhead issue is systemic across the population of North American producers. Is there some issue above and beyond these consequences of capitalized overhead that’s causing the chronic leakage of cash? And why was the lack of cash so material that investors were called upon annually. And since 2015 when their funding ceased, why has that lack of funding caused producers so much distress? 

The Preliminary Specification turns all of the producer's costs variable based on production. We achieve this outcome by reorganizing the accounting and administrative resources of the producers into our user communities service providers. Each service provider will be focused on one process and will have the entire industry's producer base as their clients. Therefore if the property is profitable and therefore operational then it will be incurring these overheads, such as the recording and calculation of royalties at that specific Joint Operating Committee. Enabling the producer to be able to capture all of their overhead costs in the current period when service providers charge their process fees directly to the Joint Operating Committees. With the preparation of financial statements for each Joint Operating Committee each month, a process which is not done and cannot be done with today's ERP systems and methods of accounting. In the Preliminary Specification if the property remains profitable, these overhead costs are therefore intuitively being captured in the price of the commodity sold. And returned to the producers as cash within the next few months instead of the next few decades. If the property is unprofitable it is shut-in and moved to the producers inventory of innovative projects to return it to profitable operations. While there it will incur no costs, create no profit, but also no loss, a null operation. Producers remain profitable at any level of their production profile. Recognizing the actual costs of the products sold enables these costs to be included in the determination of the Joint Operating Committees profitable operation and therefore recovered from the sale of the commodities. In addition to the overhead, a monthly allocation of the producer's remaining asset balance for that property will be depleted consistent with the capital markets expectations of financial performance. By obscuring and attempting to exclude these costs from recognition has all but destroyed the industry. And what would be the bureaucrats' resolution to their hypothesis as to why their cash began to diminish in the late 1980s. And why was this never resolved outside of their demands on investors?

Cloud computing takes a capital intensive, technically difficult and difficult to support corporate necessity and removes these elements for its customers. Replacing it with an easier to use service available for pennies per hour. It introduces a shared and shareable model of use of these resources where the surplus capacity that customers need to build into their systems for just-in-time purposes and other redundancies are eliminated. Where cloud computing providers are able to specialize and divide the labor in ways that are unique and value generating to the customer. Value that was unavailable and unattainable in the customers previous model of operation. People, Ideas & Objects are adopting this shared and shareable criteria in developing, supporting and implementing the Preliminary Specification in the North American producer market and extending it through our development, user communities and their service provider organizations. Taking the full scope of administration and accounting out of the producer firms and reorganizing them on the basis of a shared and shareable service provider offering. Producers today are replicating, duplicating and consuming vast overheads in order to conduct these capabilities and capacities in-house. There is a just-in-time surplus capacity that is necessary for those times when more is required from the producer's administrative and accounting resources. In today’s workplace and despite even Exxon’s size the scope and scale of specialization and division of labor is limited in its application. By introducing the shared and shareable model with our user communities service provider organizations these capabilities and capacities become variable costs, timely, accurate, standardized, actual, objective and more cost effective than each producer having to maintain these same non-competitive, unshared and unshareable capabilities within each of their domains. It is these costs of these unshared domains in each and every producer that are redundant and the secondary reason for the lack of profitability in oil and gas. People, Ideas & Objects et al will provide the industry with higher levels of throughput from the same resource base due to the use of specialization and division of labor that ensures profitable energy independence is achieved on the continent. 

People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service providers with the Preliminary Specification are introducing a complex and comprehensive ERP system on top of the Oracle Cloud ERP offering. By far the most comprehensive ERP system ever used in oil and gas, once built. To introduce this complexity into each and every producer, which includes the start-up producers, that fall within our domain of concern of all North American producers, is something that was considered untenable. However, just as the technical infrastructure provided through cloud computing no longer needs to be purpose built within each producer firm. The combination of our user based developments and the service providers being owned and operated by our user community members. There will be a layer of service oriented accounting and administration resources that are instrumental in the development, implementation, support and transaction processing of these software and services. All of this is available on a variable cost based on usage when profitable production occurs and only if the specific process of that service provider is used. Dare I ask what alternatives are there? Isn’t this type of system the reality of what we’re dealing with in today’s disintermediated business world and particularly with the financial issues in oil and gas? And what exactly are the bureaucrats proposing? (Please note this eliminates the impossible situation where start up and junior producers have to create an excess of $3 million / year in cash flow to cover the base overhead costs of what a public producer requires. And offers those software and services on an as required, variable cost basis. This I believe is the appropriate and value-added use of the Internet.) 

Until 2015 these arguments were summarily dismissed. Investors finally realized they were the mark in the room when shale began to look like an expensive science experiment and a losing proposition. Shales tremendous reserves allowed so much more costs to be absorbed over their usable life. And when depletion takes total “capital” costs divided by proven reserves, the amount of capital costs per barrel were negligible, and therefore profitable under today's methods. And therefore none of these capital costs were being captured in the price sold to the consumer so that producers could always claim profitability in order to “build balance sheets.” The continuous erosion of cash and value has diminished the performance of the industry to the point that the dependence on outside capital sources was absolute and necessary. My estimate was this process began during the very late 1980s. With the 2015 investor withdrawal of outside capital, bureaucrats sought other areas which included abuse of the service industry, enhanced overproduction, and now what we suspect to be the active cannibalization of partner producers cash flow. It is the end of the road for the bureaucrats as even today's prices are woefully inadequate to deal with the cumulative effect of these issues and value degradation they’ve created. Last year bureaucrats even declared that shale was not viable! They drilled it and then figured that out? And just as they’ve chased every other industry trend in the style of the Keystone Kops. It was to run out shale’s back door and onto the riches in clean energy down the alley. There is never any subsequent effort to put in the hard work to make shale or any of the previous trends viable. Even with People, Ideas & Objects pointing out how to do it for them. What is their thinking here, or am I advancing them too much credit in asking?

Chevron’s fourth quarter report states it may lose 3% of its production in 2022. That it will be focused on profitable production. Why are they stating this, are they admitting they never produced profitably before and what’s changed to make them profitable now? Saying something is what oil and gas producers do. Outside of that there’s never any action or follow through. This is their culture and their reputation. There is no persistence or desire to perform. There’s no understanding of the concept and with the culture they’ve created, what changes are they able to make? Where’s the vision and what’s the plan? Outside of higher prices, how? They’ve always found that people believed them, and when it came time to act or perform no one asked them. It’s not that no one remembered. And now we see profitable production is the new trend in the industry so the Keystone Kops are sure to catch that bandit this time. If we remember, and if you can imagine they said the industry wasn’t viable just last year!

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.

An Understanding You Could Rely Upon

 Bureaucrats had traditionally passed on the decision of how they’d allocate their earnings, or in their case cash flow. The three traditional alternatives of a firm were they could spend it on capital investment, pay down debts or dividends. In oil and gas the culture was to spend it all on capital, however it needed to be augmented by the generosity of investors' annual cash injections. “It was a capital intensive industry, don't you know.” No appreciation for the full understanding of that concept and the need to pass that capital on to consumers in the price of the commodity, not to “build balance sheets” or “put cash in the ground.” Nonetheless commercial businesses generate adequate volumes of profit or cash flow necessary for them to do all three of these tasks with the theoretical allocation being one third to each of capital, debt reduction and dividends. And in adequate volumes that would be able to satisfy the demand for the capital costs of the firm without outside assistance. It is here that we see the structural disconnect of today’s North American oil and gas producer and the state of performance degradation when the cash flow is inadequate to fuel even the capital investment demands. It is not a commercial business, it's a spending machine. A business, yes even in a capital intensive industry, would be generating adequate cash flow to pay for its internal needs, reduce its debt and satisfy its shareholders. Oil and gas producers, until recently, proudly bragged they never pay dividends. 

To dilute their shareholders by issuing additional shares each and every year was not an issue to the bureaucrats as I don’t think they understood the negative implications of doing so. The idea is to use your capital structure in ways that leverage your shareholders interest so they’re upside is fully realized. If your outstanding shares are fixed in number the value that is realized in the firm is magnified and evenly distributed to the shareholders who took the risk. To be diluting their upside each and every year disrespects the shareholders that began with the company and held on through the difficult times. Diluting them annually only removes shareholders upside, provides more capital to the bureaucrats who have more to spend and rewards their non-performance by removing the impetus for them to do the hard work of conducting a commercial operation.  

To argue the position that the North American oil and gas producers business approach was not focused on value is reasonable. To argue that overproduction was learned to be highly detrimental as it was in 1929, that the first oil price collapse in 1986 was due to chronic overproduction in North America, that a solution to this and other issues was developed and published in the form of the Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations in August 2012 and the investors saw this situation clearly and therefore stopped participating in 2015. Which makes a reasonable argument that nothing more than bureaucratic laziness and sloth is what we have seen to this point in 2022. Producers cash flow remains more than adequate to meet the needs of the producer bureaucrats personal needs and therefore these issues are feigned not to be understood and at the same time considered moot. 

People, Ideas & Objects concern for the investors are evident in everything that we’ve written. We are capitalists and believe it to be the most productive system available in comparison to all others. There is discussion today about stakeholder capitalism and some may consider that we’re oriented to that concept. Our focus on the impact of others in terms of the consequences of the bureaucrats inability to operate a functioning business has had broad implications. I don’t however buy into stakeholder capitalism. If an industry is held to account for the productive value generated by its participants, through appropriate accounting, then a profitable, prosperous and productive economy is the net result. As proof of this concept we only need to look around the North American oil and gas industry to fully comprehend that no one has been winning here. What is needed is clear accountability and profitability which would then be realized everywhere. Another simple fact that doesn’t seem to permeate the minds of those in control. Demand for accountability and profitability fall under the domain of the investors and their abstinence is the strongest message they can send.

Our capitalist system provides organizing constructs of logic, law and frameworks of understanding that are available to guide people in society, including investors. People, Ideas & Objects have adopted these five key organizational constructs in the Preliminary Specification. Today's discussion is from a different perspective which sees the implications of these five constructs working together to enable a structure where all of society gains an understanding of the oil and gas industry operations. This understanding forms the culture of the industry and how it will operate is derivative of these. Defined and supported by the software and services of our offerings. We are not recreating the wheel, that’s what bureaucrats are doing by manually managing the business in their methods. We are securely bolting the wheels to the vehicle. People, Ideas & Objects et al provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always.

Joint Operating Committee

Is the legal, financial, operational decision making, cultural, communication, strategic and innovation framework of the North American oil and gas industry. Moving the compliance and governance frameworks of the hierarchy into alignment with the seven frameworks of the Joint Operating Committee brings about speed, accountability and profitability in the producer firms. This is the source of the foundational concept of the partnership model of oil and gas operations. The legal basis of the Joint Operating Committee that we are suggesting is being undermined in our speculation of active cannibalization currently being undertaken today by bureaucrats in the industry. The need to source cash has been never ending since investors left, losses on hedges are material and we suspect the only source of cash to pay these losses is to divert the partners cash flow. Therefore our speculation suggests that the trust inherent in the partnership model of the industry will irretrievably break down and therefore need to be rebuilt.

Markets and the Price System

The Resource, Financial and Petroleum Lease Marketplace modules are three of the thirteen modules of the Preliminary Specification. They anchor the Preliminary Specification in the three markets that a producer competes in to achieve their objectives. There is also the decentralized production models price maker strategy that ensures producers attain the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. It is these principles of the capitalist system that have been replaced and circumvented by the hierarchy as a poor facsimile. Leading to their failure. 

Specialization and the Division of Labor

All the value that has been gained in the world since 1776 can be attributed to specialization and division of labor. We are using these principles throughout the Preliminary Specification in order to enhance the productivity of the producer firm and industry. Expanding the industries throughput of capacities and capabilities from the same resource base will be necessary in order to achieve the enduring, profitable North American oil and gas independence necessary. Our user communities service provider organizations are structured around individual processes which they operate on behalf of the entire industry as their client base. Enabling specialization and division of labor's value to be realized through the administrative and accountings enhanced performance. Granted this deny’s the bureaucrats the ability to build empires in these domains. However we believe that overhead is the secondary cause of chronic unprofitability. Each producer builds these duplicate, non competitive attributes to conduct the same functions as all other producers in an unshared and unshareable manner. Our Cloud Administration and Accounting shares these resources on a variable cost basis.

Information Technology

Information Technology applied to the business to increase its value, not for the purpose of having the latest technology. People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service providers have implemented IT in ways that are unique, productive and value enhancing. Such as taking the cloud computing paradigm and expanding it to include the administrative and accounting needs of the oil and gas industry. Where any and all producers will be able to have their accounting and administration conducted on a consistent, objective, standardized and variable cost basis through this cloud administration and accounting service. Consistency and standardization are necessary to ensure the accounting criteria that evaluated a property as unprofitable and therefore should be shut-in, received the same consistent, fair and objective basis that all other producers' properties were evaluated under and may have been deemed profitable and continue production. 

Intellectual Property

Two words the bureaucrats love to hate. IP is the basis of how People, Ideas & Objects user community and their service providers, our developers and the producers will access the software and services of our offerings. The glue that holds it all together. It’s also the foundation of why Americans remain dominant in the science and technology fields. Anyone with an idea can take the chance to move it forward for their own benefit. By using the organizational construct of Intellectual Property the Preliminary Specification enables producer firms to advance the scientific basis of oil and gas technology in innovative ways. Working with the service industry to develop their capabilities and capacities in new and innovative ways. Having those with new ideas able to secure them and expand on them as products and services provides the motivation for themselves personally, with the overall benefit of everyone. IP also eliminates the redundant and wasteful duplication of ideas. A strategy currently exploited by bureaucrats to control costs through excess competition; however, a strategy that has done nothing but destroy the motivation for anyone to try something new. 

Locking the development, implementation and deployment of the Preliminary Specifications into these and other minor frameworks provide a solid grounding for the understanding of how everyone in the industry can proceed for the next 25 years. ERP systems define and support the organizations that use them. The bureaucracy is defined and supported through the implementation of their current ERP offerings. Existing oil and gas ERP systems do not recognize any of these frameworks and therefore the only default is to rely on the hierarchy to manually “fill in” the blanks as required. In the 21st century this is unnecessary and unacceptable. It is a defined ask of the investors that their return is premised on the basis of producers use of tier 1 ERP systems such as People, Ideas & Objects use of Oracle Cloud ERP. Making the phone call to Oracle doesn’t qualify to meet the investor demands. Producers will need to have a defined vision of what the system will be, how it will enhance their accountability and ensure their profitability is real, but also established everywhere and always. A commitment in terms of the full financing of the ERP systems development budget. And once the system is implemented and the results of the system are obvious to the investors where the performance and value generation they expect of oil and gas producers exists and can therefore compete in the capital markets. They’ll then commit their financial resources back into the industry. This is why outside of People, Ideas & Objects you don’t hear anything today in the ERP marketplace. Investors have heard abundant talk from bureaucrats and are able to reread their Prospectus’. These words are soothing, however actions that lead to successful outcomes are not what these bureaucrats are known for. 

On the other hand we have no shortage of work to do. Much needs to be done in the next few years. The Preliminary Specification needs to be built. The engineering and geological explicit knowledge needs to be captured as Intellectual Property and developed. New oil and gas firms need to be formed, capitalized and organized. Assets need to be transferred to these new producers in innovative, strategic and tactical ways. In this process we’ll all be helping the current producers to travel faster down their chosen journey to clean energy by disposing of dirty oil. This transition to the Preliminary Specification is something that must be done to deal with the financial difficulties the industry is plagued with from the current administration. This also needs to be done as preparation for the future. And to learn from the experience of this transition as we’ll be faced repeatedly with situations that share this same scope and scale of change in the near future of this business. We’ll therefore be somewhat prepared and experienced in challenges of this nature. Please review our Production Rights to see how everyone can participate in making this new oil and gas industry happen. An industry where it will be less important who you know, but what you know and what you're capable of delivering, what the value proposition is that you’re offering? We know we can, and we know how to make money in this business.

Those interested in joining our user community are People, Ideas & Objects priority and focus. The Preliminary Specification, our user community and their service provider organizations provide for a dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil and gas industry with the most profitable means of oil and gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. In addition, our software organizes the Intellectual Property of the exploration and production processes owned by the engineers and geologists. Enabling them to monetize their IP for a new oil & gas industry to begin with a means to be dynamic, innovative and performance oriented. Providing a new investment opportunity for those who see a bright future in the industry. A place where their administrative, accounting, exploration and production can be handled for the 21st century. People, Ideas & Objects have joined TBD and can be reached there. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.