Revisions to the Preamble Part 3
Accounting for Capital Costs
Allowing producers to have their balance sheets bloated with capital assets that are never written down. And as a result, their income statements realize only small portions of the real costs of capital incurred in the exploration and production processes leaves the investors waiting for a return of their capital from the industry. Although the bureaucrats may report profits. They really are just the gross margins of the producer firm. The actual overhead and capital costs of the property are never moved to the income statement. The repeatedly stated purpose has been to “build balance sheets” and to “put cash in the ground.” The overhead of the producer is capitalized to the balance sheet and sits there for eternity to pass. The net result of this process is the producers look spectacularly effective in their operations. Their assets continue to grow as long as they spend money from banks and investors. Their profits are high no matter how successful they are from an engineering or geotechnical point of view. However in terms of really producing anything of value, the investors have learned absolutely, oil & gas has been a lost cause since the late 1970s.
Having high asset values on the balance sheet provides no one with any value. In a capital intensive industry, the oil & gas producer needs to deploy their capital effectively. When every producer capitalizes every dollar spent each year. How do you assess the effectiveness of their capital deployment? According to the bureaucrats you need to look at the firm from the point of view of the capital assets life, or reserve life index, or in this example generally ten years. I feel the horse has bolted from the barn and locking the gate after that decade has passed is useless. Investors need to have a more timely gauge in which to assess the capabilities of the management of the producer firm. I would also suggest that the assets at the ten year mark will probably sit for quite a while longer. Instead of this generic, cultural method, People, Ideas & Objects suggest separating the distinct capital costs incurred to maintain and expand their deliverability. That the total current capital cost in the fiscal year has always contained the costs necessary to both maintain and grow the deliverability of the firm. Or in other words these costs which are easily identified based on their activity should either be capitalized and depleted, or seen to be incurred as operations. As a result the future producers' size of their capital assets account in the form of property, plant and equipment will be much smaller and we suggest depletion would be larger than what is necessary to maintain and grow the deliverability of the producer.
Justification for the different accounting treatment by separating the maintenance and expansion of the production profile in this manner exists in the looming debt crisis that is now threatening. Producers' erosion of their capital structures has limited investment capital remaining after serious losses have occurred. Bank debt is supported predominately by property, plant and equipment account balances as many producers have limited, to negative working capital. Based on their financial statements these producer firms are therefore highly leveraged going into a rising interest rate environment. However, their issue today may be an exaggerated leverage position on the basis of the overcapitalization that we’ve been discussing and the potential that the maintenance capital costs of holding the production profile constant would be better represented in the current period as operations or prior periods depletion. The leverage of these producer firms would therefore be vastly understated based on their current financial statements. Reflecting the real status of their capital structures. The justification for the proposed separation of maintenance and expansion accounting treatment coming about based on the highly concentrated nature of oil & gas being a capital intensive industry. Indicating that the costs passed to the consumer would be predominately capital in nature.
Measurement of a firm's assets and the timing of their movement to the income statement is a key principle of accounting. I think the public accountants and the SEC have caused a distortion in oil & gas accounting from recognizing performance to one in which the objective was to recognize value. Leading to the investment community essentially subsidizing the oil & gas consumer by funding the capital expenditure programs of producers with no expectation of any return on investment. The consumer paid for the royalty and operations. This has to change if the industry is going to approach the needs of society in the next 25 years. Undertaking the $20 - $40 trillion in capital investments that is alleged to be necessary with nothing but disgruntled investors will not be successful. Investors now realize producers are well capitalized in terms of their assets on the balance sheet. But they never made any real money.
The extraction of value from the oil & gas industry as a result of these accounting methods dictated by the SEC may be difficult to comprehend. It is believed by producers that having big asset values on the balance sheet of their firm is the ideal situation. With People, Ideas & Objects argument being counter to this, these capital costs should be recognized by moving them to the income statement as soon as possible. Which has large implications in terms of the value that is generated in the industry. Currently all of the costs of exploration and production are “stored” on the balance sheets of the producers. These costs have generally never been recognized on a timely basis and since this is a systemic, industry wide, multi-decade issue, this practice has created serious distortions in the oil & gas industry. By moving these costs from the balance sheet to the income statement you will either incur a loss, such as what the industry would have done. Or the commodity prices realized should have been adequate to cover all of the costs of exploration and production, returning the invested capital in the form of cash. Which industry hasn’t done and have therefore been desperately dependent on investor's to cover the annual cash shortfalls incurred from their overproduction of a commodity that follows the economic principle of a price maker and their phenomenal capacity to store capital on their balance sheets.
Initially, without fully recognizing the costs of exploration and production, the oil & gas production appears to be highly profitable. Which attracts more investment leading to more capital costs which then increases the productive capacity of the industry which “appears” to also increase its profitability. In reality none of the investment dollars are being returned to the business in the form of cash when these capital costs are not recognized in a timely manner. Therefore the investors and bankers are once again tasked to make up for the annual cash shortfall of the producers created when the commodity prices are unable to cover the all of the costs of exploration and production in the business. The business is still incurring these costs, however the accounting is reporting that these costs are ballooning assets that hold some mythical value for the producer bureaucrat. When in reality they should be recognized as capital costs being passed to the consumer in a capital intensive industry.
Doing this for four decades and the hollowing out of all measures of value from the industry will be complete. Producers have been reporting profits when in reality, if all of the costs were considered, oil & gas has been a lost cause, supported by investors for decades. Today’s residual infrastructure does not have the capital structure or financial base, or the performance capabilities, due to its chronic overproduction as a result of the chronic overinvestment systemically collapsing commodity prices. Then, add shale!
Through People, Ideas & Objects our user community and their service providers this accounting will change significantly when we implement the Preliminary Specification. With the decentralized production model enabling the price maker strategy for all oil & gas properties. Producers will be able to shut-in those properties that are unable to produce a profit in a low commodity price environment. During times of high prices they will be able to bring the previously shut-in production back on to meet consumers demand. Or alternatively they will be able to apply their innovations to increase their deliverability or reduce their costs and therefore return the property back to profitable production. The determination of what the costs of that property will include is the capital costs on an accelerated depletion schedule in comparison to what the bureaucrats have implemented. This will bring the costs per barrel much higher and into the territory of what it actually costs for exploration and production in North America. Requiring higher commodity prices for the producers to meet the criteria of profitably producing any property and therefore fulfilling the “swing producer” role in the market.
At some point in every industry this transition has to be made. In the beginning the build out of the industry has to be undertaken by the investment community. Then when the assets of the industry mature, it is time to earn the profits from what has been developed. Oil & gas is a mature industry. The bureaucrats continue to consider that it is other people's money that they need in order to fund their operations and “build balance sheets.” This is inconsistent with reality. Oil & gas is a primary industry that should be providing the investment community with a return on the invested capital from the annual profits earned. Instead the bureaucrats let the assets sit on the balance sheets for eternity and never let these costs flow to the income statement. This subsidizes the consumers of oil & gas by having the investors pay to park the capital costs on the balance sheets in some misguided business objective. Never allowing the capital costs of a capital intensive industry to pass to the consumer in the commodity price realized. The prices of the commodities never adjust to the real costs of the industry where the costs escalate with each incremental barrel of oil equivalent produced. This being the result of the greater difficulty in producing each incremental barrel.
Understanding the significant role and value that oil & gas has in society is not being considered. It is reasonable to ask what right do we have to squander these resources from future generations? We should act responsibly and ensure that we can account for the profitable production of these commodities everywhere and always but also ensure that we pass a viable and prosperous, greater oil & gas economic system on to the next generation. Both of these issues are raised as a result of the bureaucratic mismanagement. Who when asked to account for these actions will lie, which is a strong word so let me restate that. Mouth in harmony bold face lies. When did historical accounting costs ever go down? Only in oil & gas during times of declining commodity prices. Recall those times when producers who were profitable at $70 were suddenly able to be profitable at $55 oil prices, then at $40. Miraculous I know and a feature previously unknown about historical accounting. Bureaucrats have it covered with “recycle costs.” Which are nothing but the cost estimates they receive from what they can beat out of the service industry “if” they should happen to drill a well, or frac a well in the depressed commodity price environment. The discount is printed right there on the drilling firm's letterhead!
Under the changes from People, Ideas & Objects methodology the makeup of a producer's balance sheet will change. From having a dominant position in terms of fixed assets, low and zero cash balances with negative working capital positions. To have high values of liquid investments, positive cash and working capital with much smaller amounts of property, plant and equipment. They will be financially much healthier. They will be able to dividend out large portions of their earnings back to the investment community. Pay down debt. Fund their own capital expenditure programs. And maybe best of all they’ll be more dynamic with the financial flexibility to act in the most profitable manner. All as a result of finally realizing the real cost of oil & gas exploration and production!
It will be the recognition of depletion of the capital expenditures in the 2 1/2 to 3 years that will dictate North America's oil & gas prices. Properties that carry the higher overall costs of exploration and production per barrel, due to their large balances of capital, will be depleting these balances to each barrel of oil equivalent produced. If we are realizing all of the properties capital costs in the first 2 ½ to 3 years of production from the property. Under People, Ideas & Objects price maker strategy it will be these properties that have to meet the criteria of being profitable and determined if they are produced or shut-in first in a low commodity price environment. Those properties that have exhausted their capital cost balances will be able to produce large profits no matter what the oil & gas price is in the marketplace. This brings about a fundamentally different capital discipline when capital is being deployed that must meet this profitability requirement immediately in order to produce. And a new appreciation as to where the value lies in the firm. Instead of where the asset balance is the largest, it will become which properties are the best performers and how to make that the case in each of the other properties of the producer. However, it will generally be the work done from a capital nature of the past three years that dictates what the actual costs of production are. And it will be that higher threshold that the oil & gas prices will have to reach to bring on the past three years production, or the one incremental barrel. In an industry that has the elasticity of supply and demand characteristics that the oil & gas commodities have, (it is a price maker commodity) it will be the higher prices that the industry will need to realize in the People, Ideas & Objects accounting methodology and decentralized production model. Or producers will diminish their corporate profitability with production from unprofitable properties.
The SEC and public accounting firms detail the methods that capital assets are written down today. They define what the limit of reasonableness is in terms of what is Generally Acceptable Accounting Practices. Their position is to define the limit and ensure that the producer firm does not breach the limit of their independently evaluated reserves valuation. However, the bureaucracy has taken this limit as the standard in terms of what “should be” or even as a target of what they should use as the valuation for capital assets. This, I believe, is unreasonable when producers have culturally taken the limit to the extent of the SEC’s allowable at each and every producer firm and done so each and every fiscal year. Bloated balance sheets provide no value to anyone. Many producers have had asset values that exceeded the lifetime possible revenue streams of the organization which invokes the dreaded SEC Ceiling Test. We note it would be the most competitive producer who would have exhausted their property, plant and equipment account, zero being the limit that the SEC demands on the low end. It will be People, Ideas & Objects service providers, the sub-industry that we are creating to replace the producer firms administrative and accounting resource to offer North American producers a Cloud Administration & Accounting software and service. They will use a much more aggressive 2 ½ to 3 year method of realizing the capital assets for the purposes of pricing calculations. If the producers choose to follow that in terms of financial reporting that will be their choice. It is in this way oil & gas prices will reflect the real cost of the commodity. Producers will be able to “make” the necessary prices to recover their costs through our decentralized production model. And the investors can freely invest in the oil & gas producer knowing that the money they invest will be returned to them with the bonus of an annual profit. Assuming they’re able to explore and produce effectively and competitively from an engineering and geotechnical point of view.
Just as earnings and assets are overstated in oil & gas we believe the same is the case for cash flow. Analysis of the capital expenditures of the producer firm sees that not all of the capital expenditures are dedicated to increasing the firm's production profile. The reality of oil & gas is the ever present decline curve, particularly in shale. Should we look more critically at the capital expenditures of a producer and determine which dollars were spent in maintaining the production profile, and those dollars that were spent in expanding the production profile?
This goes to the heart of the issue of capitalizing everything under the sun. If capital expenditures are to maintain the production profile why would they not be considered operating costs? If they were, they would reduce operating cash flows substantially in the current period and more accurately capture the activities and value that the firm is engaged in. This would immediately revalue the company's market capitalization in today’s environment. These reduced cash flows would better relate to the state of the industry and producers would have to realize increases in revenues from price increases to better evaluate their firm on a cash flow basis. The motivation of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable producer under the Preliminary Specification would therefore be to ensure they were realizing the full value for their petroleum reserves. As opposed to the past four decades which has become a matter of increasing producer value by spending and capitalizing the costs excessively. We need to evaluate the producers on a more equitable means of cash flow and no longer on the basis of these boosted management numbers. In a capital market such as what North American producers compete in, let's see them compete.
As we can see everything in oil & gas accounting has been and is skewed to overvaluation. Assets, cash flow and earnings all are affected by the policies that are in place within the industry. This industry “norm” has enabled producers to believe that they are productive, contributing members of society when in fact they have been a financial disaster. It is only after four decades of this accounting treatment that the evidence of the level of destruction now being experienced is apparent to all. Essentially the value that is contained within the entire industry's infrastructure, that is the entire producing infrastructure in North America, isn’t worth anything as it is a cash flow drain with catastrophic losses. Producers are operationally consuming value. The only measure in which to turn the industry around from this point is to increase the revenues of the producers to record commodity price levels for a sustained period and maintain “real” profitable operations everywhere and always. These revenues would then be able to remediate the destruction that occurred and finance the rebuilding efforts throughout the greater oil & gas economy. Investors and bankers have invested in good faith, now own an industry that is a drain on their resources, and have indeed subsidized the consumer for their energy needs for these past four decades. The amount of this consumer's subsidy is accurately reflected by the balance in the property, plant and equipment account on the producer's balance sheets. The future capital demands of the industry are well beyond what the capital markets are willing to undertake. The only solution is to operate the oil & gas producers as a profitable business from the real perspective such as the Preliminary Specification, our user community and service providers. Bureaucrats have proven they don’t understand business and are unwilling to learn but most importantly unwilling to listen. Opting out of any reasonable continuation of their administration.
Oil & gas is a capital intensive business. The way it has been run into the ground is the capital was raised, spent and sits for generations on the firm's balance sheet for an eternity. Turning the capital over repeatedly into cash for reinvestment is never considered. It has always been believed that you just raise more money each and every year. Spend that, and then add it to the pile of assets that are depleted over the decades if not centuries which those petroleum reserves remain. Producers have to begin to turn these financial resources over in a much quicker fashion in order to compete within the North American capital markets. By doing the above, recognizing that most of their capital expenditures maintain their production profile, having those capital expenditures recorded as operations will return that capital back into cash within the current fiscal period. That is with the one big qualifier. If the firm is run like a profitable business and not an engineering exercise. It employs the price maker strategy of the Preliminary Specification and realizes the prices that make the producer a truly profitable operation.
Now that we’ve established our accounting for capital costs methodology is different from the status quo. I want to reiterate the value proposition we have in providing the oil & gas producer with the most profitable means of oil & gas operations everywhere and always. Through the decentralized production model, and the accounting methods we’ve discussed here we’re able to generate $5.7 trillion in additional profits over what the bureaucracy would provide in the next 25 years. By accounting for the capital costs of the industry in the price of the commodity we are reusing the cash resources of the industry to fuel the capital expenditures that will be used by the industry. Providing a return on investment back to the investors. If the expectation is that the industry will be spending $20 to $40 trillion in the next 25 years. People, Ideas & Objects et al are providing, at a minimum, $25.7 to $45.7 trillion more value to the greater oil & gas economy than what the current bureaucracy has traditionally provided.
I’ve mentioned in a prior section of this Preamble that basic cash management was and continues to be an issue in the methods used by producers. What’s happening in the process of capitalizing most of the producers' costs other than operations and royalties is the cash is being consumed in the process. This generates the need to have continual outside financial support where investors and bankers were called upon to reload the bureaucrats spending machine. Money only went out. As the overhead and the excessive capital costs we’ve detailed above are incurred and held as property, plant and equipment for decades, the basic overhead costs of the operation are not covered by what would traditionally be considered in business to be a “cash float.” Paying the costs of high levels of overhead and subsequently large percentages of these are capitalized, drains cash. The amount of depletion over the course of the past four decades of this accounting treatment became the method by which producer bureaucrats were able to “profitably” fit their costs within what they believed to be a price taker commodity. As time has passed (beginning in the early 1990s) the drop in value of the producers capital structure did not generate the financial resources to pay for these monthly overhead costs of office rent, salaries, etc and therefore the cash was never being replenished on a monthly basis from the prices charged to the consumers. If producers were to price all of their overhead costs directly within the commodity price such as what we do under the Preliminary Specifications price maker strategy, these commodity prices will recognize the full cost of exploration and production and therefore be adequate to reestablish that cash float in a time frame no longer than within the quarter. Eliminating producers' overall demand for outside capital on a chronic emergency basis.
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 & gas industry with the most profitable means of oil & gas operations, everywhere and always. Setting the foundation for profitable North American energy independence, everywhere and always. 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. 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. Please join our community on Twitter @piobiz. Anyone can contact me at 713-965-6720 in Houston or 587-735-2302 in Calgary, or email me here.