OCI Request for Proposal, Part XI
Recommendation
The Issue
The world has begun to understand and appreciate oil & gas's value. With 10 - 25 thousand man hours of equivalent labor in each barrel. Our global consumption level is 28 to 71 times the population's physical capabilities. To replace that in this century would be ambitious. What we can do, what we must do, and what we should have been doing all along is not waste one drop of these resources. This is done by ensuring they’re produced profitably, everywhere and always. Which ensures that we’re responsibly using these oil & gas resources and leaving future generations with proof that we did. This is done by passing on a viable, financially strong industry to manage that resource and an abundant, affordable and reliable resource itself?
Why would we produce oil & gas unprofitably?
What we know today is that none of the North American oil & gas produced in the past four decades has generated one cent in profitability at any time. It was a process of taking investor money to “build balance sheets” and “put cash in the ground.” Words spoken throughout the industry as if they had actual meaning. A misguided and deluded group of officers and directors that have been self-dealing for so long they know no difference. They have failed comprehensively in their role of generating profits for their shareholders. Now their organizations are likely to fail to meet consumers' long-term energy demands. Officers and directors who when faced with the challenge of making shale formations, or any part of their business, commercial decided to walk away. They pursued the green pastures of "clean" and unaccountable energy. August 2023 shows what was discussed at People, Ideas & Objects for decades is now the state of affairs. During the first half of 2023 the service industry's rig fleet lost 90 rigs. Natural gas volumes continue to grow despite depressed natural gas market prices. Producers will use "strict capital discipline" to resolve the issue. As has been repeatedly stated over the past decades. The only method of production discipline that will resolve natural gas and oil price issues is the decentralized production model of the Preliminary Specification. Which turns producer overhead from fixed to variable. Enabling the Joint Operating Committees to shut-in any unprofitable production and incur a null operation. Allowing the producer to realize maximized profitability when only profitable properties are produced.
These are not People, Ideas & Objects issues and we certainly did everything we could to mitigate these disasters we’re about to experience. They are not our responsibility as we chose to address the issue and were ostracized and vilified for it. Which if the officers and directors of the producers take note, did not deter us from doing our jobs. If someone suggests that People, Ideas & Objects et al Preliminary Specification is only “vaporware” they’d be correct. They’d also state the obvious fact that officers and directors have killed off a viable threat to their existence. An existence that has proven to be wholly unproductive and damaging to all concerned, and most particularly society in general. Our battle with these bureaucrats since the May 2004 publication of the Preliminary Research Report has been shameful. In light of the consequences for industry from this inaction, I repeat, not a single penny has been received from them towards the development of any aspect of this work. We've only received abuse like repeated beatings with baseball bats in the alley behind the dumpster. And now, with the desperate issues Industry faces, with no preparation or capacity to deal with them, what we’re seeing is what we’ve always seen “muddle through.” After eight years of their investors' refusal to continue being the “mark,” all we see in response from the officers and directors to their investors is that they’ll “muddle through.” Not one change in any method of their management.
People, Ideas & Objects recognizes the high upfront cost and makeup of our development and implementation budget. Our budget is based on 5,000 man years of effort. The issue we’re resolving is comprehensive and we’ve discussed both the necessity of the Preliminary Specification and its cost. Officers and directors' concern about these high costs is moot when the value wasted since its publication in August 2012 is tragic. These costs may have been considered opportunity costs, however the fact that these costs have now been incurred annually for decades and led to such evident destruction proves they were anything but opportunity costs. Saving a few pennies by not funding the Preliminary Specification is compared to the trillions of dollars of value they've destroyed since its 2012 publication.
Management of risk in business is a skill and it takes industry knowledge and understanding to mitigate it. Officers and directors of the producer firms are alleged to be motivated by such objectives yet have done little to deal with the associated risk of the oil & gas business. As far as hedging oil & gas commodities is concerned, our sample of producers represents approximately one third of Canadian and American production profiles. Reported hedging losses of $34.2 billion during a five-quarter period starting with the December 31, 2021 quarter. Therefore we can assume this would represent over $100 billion in losses for the broader population of producers. Such is the skill of officers and directors of producer firms. The arguments regarding our budget are specious and self-serving in light of the consequences experienced today and the time constraints officers and directors have imposed on themselves.
The selection of the Preliminary Specification may be seen as the producers' first step in reclaiming their integrity in the eyes of their investors. There would be incremental value beyond our defined value proposition in doing so. As the value differential in terms of the cash flow multiple vs. the market capitalization of our sample of 18 producers representing 11.52 million boe / day is $220.2 billion, which is potentially triple the number for the North American producers. It may be that the capital market predicts a decline in oil & gas producer firms. However, is the fact that this differential is consistent across many quarters more valid? Producers are among the most active traders on these firms' markets. In fiscal year 2022 $35.7 billion in share buybacks were conducted by our sample of producers. Without these share buybacks how understated are these differentials? To assume that producers will act on management issues reflects my naive optimism. The reality is officers and directors will “muddle through.”
What if the following scenario occurred? Producer officers and directors ceased to be subject to commodity price swings and learned to build value everywhere and always. This was done through the implementation of the Preliminary Specification.
- How much of that $220.2 billion for our sample of producers and $660.6 billion for the industry valuation differential would be reclaimed in the current fiscal year by proceeding with People, Ideas & Objects et al?
- Elimination of the need to hedge commodities occurs when profitability everywhere and always is being earned and the cyclical nature of the industry is worked out.
- How much larger would that valuation differential grow when and if producers select SAP?
- If officers and directors choose SAP does that prove People, Ideas & Objects allegations of a deliberate and destructive lack of performance and accountability?
- For those major producers who’ve used SAP, in some cases for decades, reflect that they’re part of the problem?
- These are clearly not concerns of producer firms based on their history. Will these ever become concerns of producers, officers and directors?
My argument is this: the development budget of the Preliminary Specification is a slight after taste in terms of the annual scale of revenue and profit losses, hedging and market valuation losses that officers and directors feel are acceptable. We certainly don’t hear any concern about these issues. We have a highly advanced society today that has many complex and difficult issues and opportunities. When points of view such as the Preliminary Specification are offered in 2012 should they not be looked at objectively and evaluated on the basis of their potential to mitigate risk in the long run? Or maybe even before then, such as our Preliminary Research Report in May 2004. We have a similar situation captured in a Winston Churchill quote that addresses the point.
Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong - these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history
Therefore the issue is the officers and directors of the producer firms who have personally benefited at the expense of all others associated with oil & gas. Officers and directors were responsible for ensuring none of this happened, had the authority to deal with it and the resources to correct it. They recently wandered into unrelated industries and businesses only to find oil & gas revenues weren't as available as they assumed. Unable to provide a viable solution to their difficulties. It was stated that shale would never be commercially viable. In order to rebuild the industry from the disaster producer officers and directors created. Oil & gas revenues will be needed by investors, employees, and the service industry. To add insult to injury, the one action they will take after eight years of not listening to their investors is they'll implement SAP instead of People, Ideas & Objects to ensure they won’t have to be held accountable for this damage and destruction, and no one will find any of the skeletons they’ve hidden in their closets.
Accounting for the Damage & Destruction
There is no doubt that many in oil & gas don't fully appreciate what I'm discussing when I talk about damage and destruction. Officers and directors do and they’ve clearly understood since the publication in May 2004 of our Preliminary Research Report. They’ve always seen it as a threat and know they would not personally benefit from its disintermediation and high accountability levels. We can all agree that the “endless repetition of history” is what we’ve been faced with for centuries in so many situations. As a society, we no longer accept those viable scapegoats. Today people are waking up to the folly of green energy and the imminent environmental Armageddon's entry into its seventh decade. Oil & gas is nothing like oxygen to the body. It’s analogous to blood that allows everything to function.
Here is People, Ideas & Objects' recommendation for North American producers. Select the Preliminary Specification as the industry standard ERP system. Bold, audacious and justified on the following basis. Today producers may feel they’re sailing on for a good run and do not have to concern themselves with the past. What is evident in their financial statements is that there are legacy damages and difficulties ahead. The greatest problem I can see is the lack of trust, faith and integrity the capital market holds for producer firms. Cash flows are poor compared to the capitalization accumulated in property, plant and equipment. They barely support the “lofty” valuations producers feel they earned through their obstinate “muddle through” strategy. Comparing today’s performance to the past four decades doesn’t impress. It is important to note, however, that even these valuations aren't believed, and North American producers trade at half those prices. This performance needs to be put in the context of the past two decades' environment. Interest rates have never demanded competition among management. Yet, Treasurys would have been a far better investment over the same period.
The handful of producers that can perform at the level of their cash flow multiples should participate in the development of the Preliminary Specification. Those that are not performing will be desperate for revenue and put their entire production profile on the market. As proven thousands of times before, this will continue despite the implications for commodity prices. It might be wise to remember the negative $40 prices of April 2020 for which no single producer was responsible. The Preliminary Specification recognizes that the Joint Operating Committee and the integration of producers within the partnership will enhance collaboration and innovation. Having partners in their Joint Operating Committees operational on the same standard, objective basis through the Preliminary Specification will be beneficial.
Investors of these producer firms need to know that the only acceptable solution for them is People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service provider organizations. Operational through our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas software and service which includes Oracle Cloud ERP. Selection of SAP or any other ERP system should not be an option. This needs to be communicated in the same manner that the prior request for a Tier 1 ERP system was made. Otherwise there is much to lose for all concerned.
We’re kidding ourselves to think officers and directors will act contrary to their “muddle through” behavior. It has become a culturally systemic method of operation. There is no easier way to understand this than to assess the situation in terms of where the industries stand today. All of these points are the result of decades of mistreatment and abuse of their power, authority, accountability and responsibility. This is for personal financial gain. The cumulative symptoms and attributes that have led to the damage and destruction People, Ideas & Objects rant about include…
- Never selling the attributes of oil & gas that consumers gain from the use of their products. Losing the political agenda to environmentalists and woke politicians.
- Becoming wholly dependent on outside capital to support all business operations. Oil & gas has lost the ability to maintain commercial operations.
- Overreported capitalization due to “building balance sheets” and “putting cash in the ground” enabled producers to leverage their positions excessively during two decades of low interest rates. Creating a future crisis due to extreme levels of debt during a period of normalizing interest rates.
- Financial theory presumes that during times of low interest rates firms will invest in capital to increase productivity. During periods of high interest rates employment is the lower cost alternative to productivity. Productivity in oil & gas over the past two decades has been questioned.
- Creating organizations incapable of profitability, understanding of how or what to do to earn it. Culturally sealing the inability to determine profitable operations were ever necessary and assuming they were not.
- Never taking responsibility or accountability for anything. Blaming, excusing and creating viable scapegoats of others whose fault they’ve fallen victim to. Enforcing a culture of “muddle along” and inaction.
- Liquidating the value of the industry to the point where it has a negative net present value. Current operations demand that capital be consumed in day to day activities.
- Deprecating producers' organizational structure, operational capacities and capabilities. Cannibalizing the service industry as their last source of capital financing by extending a/c payable to 18 months. Fundamentally destroying the greater oil & gas economy.
- Capital structures of producers and the service industry are unsupported by debt or equity providers. Zero remedial efforts taken to address these concerns. Approaching one full decade of inaction and uncaring since investors began their withdrawal from industry. Continuing cash flow from a capital intensive industry sustains their personal aggrandizement, therefore what’s at issue?
- Losing the mid to long term capacity to meet the consumers market demands for energy. The most powerful economy will consume the most energy. Creating a distinct threat to the most powerful economy ever developed. Therefore what’s at issue?
- Incapable of standing up to teenage wanna-be environmentalists. Asserting the value add of the oil & gas products in the lives of the consumer. Turtling at any and all points of conflict. Leaving it to pipeline companies and others to fight their battles, while they pay the grift to the environmentalists not to protest producers.
- Employing their cultural propensity to abandon prior efforts which include their latest and greatest effort, shale, which they’ve now declared would never be commercial. Instead of remediating these assets they moved on to the next latest and greatest thing. Notice the slight of hand?
- Sauntering off the field in the direction of the unaccountable clean energy businesses where they’ll continue to prosper personally and never have to concern themselves again with being successful. Using the oil & gas revenues to support these activities through contrived boardroom battles. Listening to the “investors” concerns for the environment is the only issue of the investors they’ve ever responded to. Realizing their mistake they've returned to their post as if nothing ever happened.
- Therefore, the producers leadership has walked off the stage with the oil & gas revenues in tow to the land of unaccountability where their only accountability will be "they’re saving the planet!”
- After all of this, what are producers offering oil & gas investors? A history, a legacy, a culture of failure, greed and “muddle through.” A theft of their revenues they invested to build. An inability to understand their primary role is to earn profits. A point they not only disagreed with, they laughed when I suggested it and have no clue about how to earn it. Culturally incapable of doing so.
- Seeking to seal this culture permanently in an implementation of SAP that emulates current management methods.
In all of this there has been no response from oil & gas producers. From our initial Preliminary Research Report in May 2004, until the investors' strike began in 2015, nothing has been done. Producers and directors need to acknowledge that it is within their domain to deal with issues. Profitability is an issue. The solution is in front of them in the form of our Preliminary Specification. There will be no one helping them from now on. Adopting the Preliminary Specification, profitability would provide all the money they need to do as they please in the business. Do they need $800 billion to build LNG facilities in Canada? Make that money. The means are on the table. If they want to do anything in North American oil & gas, the only thing stopping them is their own obstinance. Build a profitable business and the world will be their oyster. I’ll explain it explicitly. Make oil & gas profitable if officers and directors want green dreams. And do so with accountability everywhere and always.
But no, they’ll outlast investors who officers and directors believe will return begging to get in. I mentioned that oil & gas ERP systems were abandoned by our investor class in the 1990s. This was due to our inability to perform financially because we could not convince producers to manage their business properly back then. Unaccountability was and is their business, or am I redundant here? If we assume that the Preliminary Specification et al is the appropriate solution. If we assume that the value proposition is as it's stated, it would be reasonable to believe that ERP investors would smash down my door. Two things stop this. 1) I won’t accept their money because I am unaware of how I can make money in this business without the producer buy-in that this RFP solicits. 2) ERP investors are not here. They know what the situation is and based on their 1990s experience, they left. Nothing has changed and they remain where they are.
Producers need to understand that they’ll never attract investors or banks until they change their firms' performance trajectory. There are no signs of that, only their obstinate and stubborn “muddle through” strategy that destroyed everything and continues to do so.
These are the issues People, Ideas & Objects addressed in our Preliminary Research Report in May 2004. And became the basis of our research that led to the Preliminary Specifications publication in August 2012. An interesting quotation from Mark P. Mills of the Manhattan Institute applies directly to oil & gas history.
Brookfield’s CEO said that the strategy follows the same deal-making common in other capital-intensive industries. Companies will happily take any supplemental money, but the market opportunity, not the subsidies, underpins such big investment gambles. The key, to use the famous truism from Walter Wriston (the former, storied CEO of Citibank), is that “capital will always go where it’s welcome and stay where it’s well treated. Capital is not just money. It’s also talent and ideas.”
Put this into the context of developments in North American oil & gas. Culturally, producer officers and directors believed investors became organizational subsidies. Not the means to pursue the market opportunity.
To deal with this today requires only one solution and that is People, Ideas & Objects et al. This is defined in this RFP response. What this also proves is common knowledge that “organizations don’t change, people do.” The resistance to change that we’ve experienced, and that of the producers' investors, has originated in one area of each and every North American producer, officers and directors. Our final attempt to deal with them was sending an offer to the officers and directors in July 2021 which they ignored. This Response to a Request for a Proposal is highly derivative of the proposal sent to them. This proposal is not directed at them and therefore, no harm no foul, my abuse is inert.
We are directing this RFP Response at those investors who have seen enough to know the situation today is not being addressed effectively. People, Ideas & Objects don’t need to tear things down to start over. That’s already been done. We need to rebuild the industry in the vision of the Preliminary Specification. In order to accomplish that, investors must direct producers' officers and directors to fund the Preliminary Specification. What will happen to North American oil & gas if this doesn’t happen? It involves a short-to-mid-term semi-permanent status quo. Or as long as SAP is around.