A Future With Rube Goldberg

 We’re discussed the Rube Goldberg-like devices being crafted within each producer firm. While each device is unique, they share one critical flaw: none result in 'real' profitability, unlike the organizational method employed in the Preliminary Specification.

Moreover, it's apparent that these producer firms criticize People, Ideas & Objects for embarking on a project they deem too broad in scope and scale, labeling it as 'too ambitious.' However, this critique overlooks the fact that our project's scope mirrors the objectives their own convoluted systems aim to achieve. The scale we aspire to might be substantial, but when considering the combined financial resources of all producers in the development of a singular administrative and accounting system, it becomes competitive with their individual budgets.

Professor Paul Romer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize for his 'New Growth Theory,' introduced the concept of sharing non-rival goods and services. This theory underpins our belief that the sharing of administrative and accounting responsibilities is a secondary reason why producers are losing money due to its high overhead costs. Distributing these costs across the industry could significantly reduce each producer's burden. 

'New Growth Theory' forms one of the seven Organizational Constructs of the Preliminary Specification, offering incremental and unquantifiable value to our product users. This opportunity remains on the table until February 16, 2024.

Cultural Stasis

 For several decades, a pervasive cultural stasis has afflicted the oil & gas industry. In the 21st century, I struggle to identify any significant changes initiated by producer officers and directors. Particularly frustrating is that even the investor activism starting in 2015 resulted in minimal change, aside from the begrudging acknowledgment of minimal dividends—essentially the least effort required to fulfill their corporate responsibilities. Note here that I’ve only been able to impose these deadlines due to the personal risks officers and directors have exposed themselves to. 

The strategy of 'muddling through' remains persistent and ubiquitous. Resistance to this entrenched culture seems non-existent, except within the investor community and among advocates like People, Ideas & Objects. Initiative and innovation have been drained from those gainfully employed in the industry, deterred by the political hazards of proposing change and the potential career costs of doing so. This situation forces many to consider leaving the industry as their best opportunity for advancement. Without the efforts of People, Ideas & Objects, one wonders where the industry might stand, especially if the looming Friday deadline passes without action from the officers and directors.

To say the industry faces issues is an understatement. The officers and directors are entrenched in a classic defense, a turf war against disintermediation— a scenario not unique to our times, reminiscent of the post-WWI era.

Our deadline is Friday, February 16, 2024. Failure of producers to embrace the option we offer signifies an inability to assert control over their business operations. The Preliminary Specification represents a unique market solution capable of timely addressing these challenges. Despite documented losses exceeding $4 trillion in natural gas revenues since July 2007—a situation we had forewarned—the resistance to our solution, which necessitates industry disintermediation, remains steadfast.

Should producer officers and directors neglect our Friday deadline, such inaction will be interpreted as a deliberate acknowledgment of their failure. To label their behavior over the past 17 years as merely negligent would be overly generous. Friday will determine the accuracy of this interpretation. Ignoring our deadline equates to an admission of willful misconduct by the officers and directors. However, should they engage with our option and aim to meet our April 12, 2024, deadline, they have a chance to demonstrate a genuine commitment to resolving the industry's challenges. Therefore, it's reasonable to conclude:

 - Inaction by them equates to guilt.

The Week That Was

 What a week it’s been, with continuous record-breaking differentials in natural gas prices being achieved daily. The closing factor was astonishing! In an attempt to mitigate this embarrassing disparity, they might contemplate ways to reduce oil prices or perhaps distract investors with a press release or a financial report touting record earnings. Anything to make it not look so bad.

Unfortunately, the broader industry, which genuinely needs this revenue, is dismissed as merely greedy and lazy—a common accusation from officers and directors toward the service sector. And since investors have been receiving minimal returns for several quarters, they, supposedly, have no grounds for complaint. We are expected to admire these leaders as they metaphorically 'levitate' down the street, with reverence being optional, for now.

This situation epitomizes the dismantling of an industry, its resources, its people, and its future, orchestrated by those indifferent to anything beyond their immediate interests. Since August 2012, I have offered a solution, only to be met with personal ruin and to serve as their source of amusement. Nonetheless, I remain committed to this cause.

The sheer disregard and surreal nature of these actions are beyond comprehension. The most devastating realization is the bleak future of the oil and gas industry in North America, destined for nothing but a gradual decline.

A Few Questions

 People, Ideas & Objects have established deadlines for North American oil & gas producers to maintain their access to the developments of the Preliminary Specification. The first deadline is February 16, 2024, with details available in our blog post from Wednesday, January 17, 2024. This deadline provides the industry with the option to participate in our software developments by raising its budget by April 12, 2024, a time by which they can face their shareholders and state they have taken steps to resolve industry issues.

The alternative is to continue their obstinacy, which has cost their shareholders the benefit of the $4.03 trillion in unrealized natural gas revenues since July 2007. We can assume the same for oil, though there is no tangible means to determine the amounts, other than to avoid selling at negative prices. We believe these are the types of appropriate questions officers and directors should answer:

• When will the fundamental breakdown in natural gas pricing from 6 to 1, to 40 to 1 be addressed?
• Why was this acceptable?
• Does overproduction of oil generate these same questions?
• With a solution to chronic and systemic overproduction, unprofitable production, or lack of production discipline. Which the Preliminary Specification addresses and has been available since August 2012, why were no steps taken?
• Why has there been a failure to respond to the withdrawal of new funds by investors since 2015?
• Why was there no participation by producers' officers and directors in the market development of LNG into global markets? Was it due to:
• The comfort and satisfaction of reported profits from hedging commodities?
• Their belief that markets can clear any amount of oil & gas produced, even at negative $40 for oil?
• Distractions from other unrelated activities?
• Why was shale declared uncommercial, and would it have been if revenues were appropriately managed and the $4 trillion captured?
• What was the plan behind the clean energy initiative? How were these investments justified using oil & gas revenues?
• What is the vision and plan to address the future? Is consolidation expected to help focus the organization in today’s business environment?
• What other steps are being taken?

As detailed in our Notice series of blog posts beginning in October 2023, People, Ideas & Objects raised the natural gas issue and quantified its magnitude at approximately $4 trillion of actual losses. This is when we saw that none of the producers were participating in the export of LNG on a 'free on board' or 'net back pricing' basis, which are fundamental and basic business concepts.

Based on my understanding of the law, if the officers and directors take steps now to mitigate damages for shareholders, it could indemnify them to some extent, and their Officers and Directors Liability Insurance may not be canceled. I reiterate that I am unaware of their guilt or ability to resolve much of their personal risk, and whether the development of the Preliminary Specification will absolve them of their risks. At this point, issues have matured well beyond materiality, and the options available to the producers' officers and directors are limited to one.

Common sense may continue to not influence their actions. However on February 19, 2024 or possibly April 15 2024, assuming officers and directors ignore our deadlines. What legal dynamics come into play then?

#profit #OilandGas #AGM #Oracle #OracleCloudERP #LNG #officers #directors #boards

@APA_Corp @arcresources @bp_plc @CanadianNatural @cenovus  @Chesapeake  @Chevron  @conocophillips  @CPG_Corp  @DevonEnergy  @Diamondback_EP  @exxonmobil @EQTCorp @HessCorporation  @ovintiv  @PXDtweets  @Shell  @Suncor  @SWN_R2  @TourmalineOil  @Venture_Global  @WeAreOxy

Not That Issue

 People, Ideas & Objects have been discussing how natural gas producers missed an opportunity to rehabilitate prices through the expanded global LNG markets. July 2007 marked the start of the shale phenomenon, which began to significantly alter the natural gas price structure from a 6 to 1 ratio to the heating price of oil, soaring as high as 40 to 1 in 2023. We have documented a loss of over $4 trillion in incremental revenues as a result. Our argument, often misinterpreted by producers, was not about securing LNG contracts to capitalize on 'free on board' or 'netback pricing' opportunities in global markets. Rather, we argued that the expansion of the LNG market presented an opportunity for price rehabilitation. The current focus on LNG contracts is a distraction, one that producers have been precluded from participating in due to their inability to manage their business effectively.

The core issue, which applies to both oil & gas, is the producers' persistent failure to maintain any form of production discipline. Their understanding of markets is flawed, perceiving them as magical entities capable of absorbing any volume of production, even when oil prices plummet to negative $37.63. Relying on a 'muddle through' strategy, they hope to survive on either new investor cash or the cash flows generated by a capital-intensive industry.

A recent YouTube video reveals further misdirection. President Biden announced a policy to halt the approval of new LNG facilities, potentially rendering the contracts announced by producers in the last two months ineffective. People, Ideas & Objects have argued in recent weeks that focusing on contracts offers no relief to producers without production discipline. However, if the Preliminary Specification were operational and production discipline were instilled in the market, followed by the development of the LNG market, the prices realized would align more closely with their costs. This sequence of events was within reach when natural gas prices began to decline in July 2007, but it may have been too much to expect from producer officers and directors.

For the remainder of 2024, at the very least, we anticipate no additional LNG facilities will be approved. This could inadvertently aid North American producers in focusing on the issue of production discipline.

#Innovation #profit #OilandGas #AGM #Oracle #OracleCloudERP #LNG #officers #directors #boards

@APA_Corp @arcresources @bp_plc @CanadianNatural @cenovus  @Chesapeake  @Chevron  @conocophillips  @CPG_Corp  @DevonEnergy  @Diamondback_EP  @exxonmobil @EQTCorp @HessCorporation  @ovintiv  @PXDtweets  @Shell  @Suncor  @SWN_R2  @TourmalineOil  @Venture_Global  @WeAreOxy

Consequences of a Deadline Passed

 As of February 19, 2024, our deadline ( https://bit.ly/director-notice ) may have passed without any action taken by the producers' officers and directors to address their overproduction issues. These issues have led to a loss of over $4 trillion in natural gas revenues since July 2007. Does this inaction transition from negligence to willful misconduct, thereby opening the door to accusations of deliberate wrongdoing?

I am not a lawyer and I am not offering legal advice. I seek to provide a solution to what I believe are existential issues to the oil & gas industry.

In the context of oil and gas, particularly as discussed on platforms like 'Innovation in Oil and Gas' and 'The Preliminary Specification', understanding the distinction between negligence and willful misconduct is crucial. Negligence refers to the failure to take proper care in doing something, which in this case would be the management's inability to address overproduction. Willful misconduct, on the other hand, implies a conscious or intentional failure to perform a duty or a reckless disregard of the consequences of actions taken or not taken.

The transition from negligence to willful misconduct hinges on demonstrating a deliberate or recklessly indifferent attitude towards the necessity to manage production in line with economic and environmental sustainability. Such a transition is not just a matter of passing time but requires evidence that the officers and directors were aware of the consequences of their inaction and chose to proceed or fail to act despite this knowledge.

In the specific domain of oil and gas, where strategic decisions have profound implications not just economically but also environmentally, the principles outlined in 'The Preliminary Specification' emphasize the importance of proactive and responsible management. Highlighting the $4 trillion loss in natural gas revenues underscores the significant impact of such decisions and reinforces the argument for accountability at the executive level.

#profit #OilandGas #AGM #Oracle #OracleCloudERP #LNG #officers #directors #boards

@APA_Corp @arcresources @bp_plc @CanadianNatural @cenovus  @Chesapeake  @Chevron  @conocophillips  @CPG_Corp  @DevonEnergy  @Diamondback_EP  @exxonmobil @EQTCorp @HessCorporation  @ovintiv  @PXDtweets  @Shell  @Suncor  @SWN_R2  @TourmalineOil  @Venture_Global  @WeAreOxy

Change in Communications Strategy

 We are transitioning back to our blog to expand the reach of our campaign about the industry option and its expiration on February 16, 2024. Initially, we anticipated that our audience on X would engage more rapidly with this crucial information. However, it has become clear that our communication is not reaching our blog audience as effectively as we hoped. To bridge this gap, we will publish on the blog and then distribute it on X through IFTTT. This allows us to simultaneously engage both our blog and X audiences, ensuring comprehensive coverage and maximizing our campaign's impact.

Our Value Proposition: New Growth Theory

 People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification will take the administrative and accounting resources of North American producers and reorganize them for independent, individual service providers. This has allowed them to focus on one process and turn producers' overhead costs variable, based on profitable production. In turn none of the producer's costs are fixed in the Preliminary Specification. Creating at least six substantial value propositions that are tangible and clearly evident. Which include:

• Maximize producer profitability by not diluting corporate profits through the production of unprofitable properties.
• Save the producers petroleum reserves for when they can be produced profitably.
• Reserves would no longer need to recapture additional costs of previous losses as future profits.
• Reserves are seen as a cost-free means of inventory and storage.
• Removing marginal production from markets ensures commodity prices dictate market activities. 
• While shut-in producers can focus their innovative efforts on increasing production, reserves, and cutting costs to return their properties to profitability.

Secondly and perhaps more importantly in terms of building value for the greater North American oil & gas economy. Specialization and the division of labor which has proven to be the primary method of building all of the tangible value for western civilization since 1776. Is one of the service providers competitive advantages. Based on these principles, we have reorganized administrative and accounting resources to build value to ensure profitable operations, everywhere and always. The ability to further enhance the industries productivity through specialization and the division of labor will add unknown, unquantified and unqualified means to do so. We will facilitate this through our permanent software development capability, our user community, and their service provider organizations implementing these principles.

We have adopted an incremental method of building value on top of these two methods through Professor Paul M. Romer’s “New Growth Theory” of non-rival costs. In a December 1, 2001 Reason article he summarized his theory as “People, Ideas & Things.” I adopted this principle and named this initiative People, Ideas & Objects as we are object-based software developers. We’ve applied “New Growth Theory” and non-rival costs throughout the Preliminary Specification and elevated it to an Organizational Construct. Standing on the shoulders of giants and especially Adam Smith’s Specialization and Division of Labor. Professor Romer has elevated business thinking in this direction and it is the next frontier in building value for organizations through the mitigation of costs in substantial yet unquantifiable ways to enhance the performance of those that use these methods. 

Professor Romer’s theory is the basis of how cloud computing has brought value to our economy. Users can share the costs of the heavy capital investment in technology, the capacity, capabilities, resources, maintenance and support costs on a variable basis, based on usage. Conversely our user community’s service providers can enhance their service offering through specialization and division of labor that would otherwise be unavailable to individual organizations. We have extended this thinking to include not only Oracle Cloud ERP but also our Cloud Administration and Accounting for Oil & Gas Software and Service to the managed shared and shareable resource. Eliminating the need for each producer to build, resource and maintain the necessary non-competitive Information Technology, accounting and administrative infrastructure they need as dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil & gas producers. Providing a standard, objective and value driven service that shares the sole objective of ensuring oil & gas producers achieve the most profitable means of oil & gas production, everywhere and always.  

The capture and implementation of Professor Romer’s theories is one of the seven Organizational Constructs of the Preliminary Specification. All seven are focused on building value for producers and providing tangible means to do so. Establishing a culture based on preservation, performance and profitability to replace the failed “muddle through.” In this configuration, they are available through the Preliminary Specification, our user community, and their service provider organizations. They’ll be established with permanent software development capabilities and a user community that will iterate on these principles to bring further value over time. 

Professor Paul M. Romer

Published in October 1990 “Endogenous Technological Change” became the foundation of “New Growth Theory” in economics that has developed and provides value throughout the economy through its application. In a Reason Magazine interview Professor Romer explained many of the points.

Growth in this model is driven by technological change that arises from intentional investment decisions made by profit-maximizing agents. The distinguishing feature of the technology as an input is that it is neither a conventional good nor a public good; it is a non-rival, partially excludable good. Because of the nonconvexity introduced by a nonrival good, price-taking competition cannot be supported. Instead, the equilibrium is one with monopolistic competition. The main conclusions are that the stock of human capital determines the rate of growth, that too little human capital is devoted to research in equilibrium, that integration into world markets will increase growth rates, and that having a large population is not sufficient to generate growth. S71.

Professor Romer won, or maybe best described as shared, the 2018 Nobel Prize in economics for these principles. They are an incremental value-add to the traditional specialization and division of labor that has carried that weight exclusively until now. It is this principle of sharing non-rival costs that will mitigate what we believe to be the secondary reason for the systemic lack of profitability in oil & gas. High overhead costs are currently at the corporate level. We have shifted those to charge the actual, factual overhead costs incurred by service providers' billings directly to the individual Joint Operating Committee. There they become a cost of the property's product that is captured in the profitable commodities sale price. Through the sale, these funds are recaptured and returned to the company, which are used for overhead costs for the following months. Currently producers capitalize their overhead and therefore sell their product below cost and are not recovering the cash spent on monthly overhead expenses. As they indeed state, they are “putting cash in the ground.” Having to source new cash to finance their overhead expenses each month.

By sharing the administrative and accounting infrastructure, turning these costs variable based on profitable production, applying specialization and the division of labor and returning the cash consumed by monthly overheads to the administrative and accounting areas. As is done through the development of People, Ideas & Objects user communities and their service providers. And delivering to industry our Cloud Administration & Accounting for Oil & Gas Software and Service. People, Ideas & Objects are adding real value to North American producers in terms of resolving what can be described as their largest impediments to profitability. Chronic overproduction, or unprofitable production as we describe it and high overhead costs. Which leads to their unique characteristic and phenomenon of “putting cash in the ground” and “building balance sheets.”   

Oracle CloudWorld 2022 & 2023 Conference

It was during this conference that it became apparent that Oracle was pursuing the incremental value adding process that Professor Romer defined in his paper “Endogenous Technological Change.” Augmenting their generic business processes with service providers such as banks and logistics companies with fully optimized and integrated services with Oracle Cloud ERP, just as People, Ideas & Objects are approaching the unique oil & gas attributes. We all have an extensive software development workload ahead. I see at least 20 years of work in this area. Incrementally and iteratively building value upon prior innovations in the service industry, earth science and engineering, the Preliminary Specifications development and Oracle Cloud ERP. 

The most impressive example provided during the 2022 Oracle conference was the expense reporting features with J.P. Morgan Chase. If the user uses their credit card for business, they can choose the type of expense charged to be classified into an account within their employer's system. Oracle Cloud ERP would evaluate the charge based on the company's policies and determine its eligibility. If eligible it would be processed and payment made to the employee or the credit card company. Eliminating the massive number of hours and costs incurred in expense reporting by organizations during the year in their current systems. This is reduced to a few milliseconds of processing time. While the cost to the organization to use Oracle Cloud ERP is incidental in terms of the time spent on Oracle Cloud Infrastructure. In addition, the engineering costs to develop the specific system, these software engineering costs are amortized across the global population of Oracle Cloud ERP customers using the feature. To a lesser extent People, Ideas & Objects provide this level of service to North American producers for their unique oil & gas attributes. The lesser extent is due to the smaller population of oil & gas users for which this development and implementation, and its costs, will be targeted. As such, North American producers have the opportunity to realize both Oracle and People, Ideas & Objects innovations concurrently and at substantially reduced costs. These are due to Professor Paul Romer's theories. 

Increasing the value that oil & gas producers gain from the use of Oracle Cloud ERP and incorporating it in our value proposition. Their 2023 CloudWorld Conference built upon the innovations they introduced in 2022. Generative Artificial Intelligence is now generally available throughout the Oracle Cloud ERP suite of applications. This takes these automations and their incremental capabilities to a more substantial level with tools that users were unaware of that will be able to generate incremental revenue from. If we consider just the producers Research & Capabilities and Knowledge & Learning modules, how they will be enhanced through Generative AI this is the method People, Ideas & Objects feel that the scope and scale of the issues and opportunities that oil & gas are presented with can be approached. 

If we consider the timeframe, the technology and the state of the industry. The scope and scale of the repair becomes untenable in the hands of those Keystone Cops who seem to have few original ideas and then go about proving them wrong in the public market. My example would be the recent discussion of production discipline where it was uniformly interpreted to mean they needed to sign new LNG export contracts. Indicating that traveling in unison ensures no company is singled out for their accountability in the matter. 

When it comes to resolving these issues we therefore have three options. 

• The first is to continue to repeatedly travel down each and every blind bunny trail in unison. Only to discover the bandit the Keystone Cops are searching for is now at the bank.
• Have each individual producer deal with the details of the development of their own Intellectual Property. Then undertake the scope and scale of software development that is commensurate with People, Ideas & Objects Preliminary Specification at each producer location. 
• Or share in the cost of development and focus on our user community to deal with the specific issues and opportunities as their distinct competitive advantage. Where they’ll have the understanding and resources, including access to the Intellectual Property and developers to make changes to the software code.

Seeing the broad scope of this challenge and the approach of “muddle through” makes sense to the officers and directors. 

Professor Romer’s "Endogenous Technical Change" leverages specialization and the division of labor in material ways. It is revolutionary and applied throughout the Preliminary Specification to the benefit of the oil & gas producer and greater oil & gas economy. To choose otherwise in this highly technical and complex society. Where the speed and pace of business has proven to be far beyond the capabilities of the officers and directors. Where the scope and scale of the issues are existential in their magnitude, such as what the industry has been faced with over the past few decades. To misunderstand the business, the direction, the vision and strategy of what to do, when and where to do it. As displayed by the officers and directors in 2024. Leaves one asking how is it that consolidation will do anything but accelerate the demise of the oil & gas industry in North America?

X Hits the Spot

I'm attempting to reignite the passion I once found on Twitter, now on X. Back in 2018, I faced a shadow ban for expressing skepticism about clean energy, which, unbeknownst to me at the time, severely limited my visibility. This type of ban makes your tweets invisible to your followers, essentially silencing your voice without you knowing.

However, the real challenge isn't just the invisibility. It's the aftermath—when the algorithm interprets the lack of engagement as disinterest, making it increasingly difficult to reach an audience. Despite having over 480 engaged and high-quality followers in the oil & gas sector, my activity and reach took a significant hit. Now, with 309 still-valuable followers, the vibrancy and interaction I once enjoyed have dwindled. Despite my efforts, regaining my former algorithmic favor seems an uphill battle.

With Elon Musk at the helm, Twitter has transformed. It's now a platform ripe for lively discussions and open exchanges, offering a valuable opportunity for meaningful dialogue. My persistence started to pay off in January 2024, when I welcomed my first non-spam follower since the ban—a small yet hopeful sign of reconnection.

I'm eager to broaden the conversation and engage with a wider audience. If you're interested in the intricacies of oil & gas ERP systems or the broader energy sector, I invite you to join the dialogue. Let's revitalize the discussion together at https://www.twitter.com/piobiz

Our Value Proposition, Intellectual Property

 There are two undeniable truths that producers state in unison.

• They’re profitable.
• They’re innovative.

It takes significant imagination to comprehend the points being made here. I believe the meaning is implied in “muddle through,” if they state it then it must be true. People, Ideas & Objects find these statements particularly offensive and part of the motivation as to why we’ve been developing our solution. However, these have taken on a more deliberate and devious meaning these past few years. First we were treated to their summary statement that Shale would never be commercial. Then secondly, clean energy was the industry's future. Bringing forward somewhat of an admission that they could not make a profit. Falling back on their cultural propensity to abandon what was “the next great thing” instead of attempting to commercialize the asset or make it perform. That would have required innovation in order to do so. 

I’ll add to these allegations that from a business perspective these officers and directors have absolutely no understanding of what it is they’re doing. When they continue to do the same thing over and over, possibly expecting different results, at least others hold that expectation of them. The most aggravating aspect of the proven $4.03 trillion dollar loss of revenues from the collapse of natural gas prices. Is their segue into clean energy due to Shale being “uncommercial.” When your shareholders are dissatisfied with your performance for almost a decade, and you did nothing to mitigate that revenue loss. When others were offering solutions to eliminate that loss, and you did nothing. It provides further evidence of officers and directors willful misconduct.

To the issue of this blog post and how Intellectual Property becomes an Organizational Construct in the Preliminary Specification. The 21st century business value is mostly derived from business models supported by software. That software is supported and ownership is determined by Intellectual Property. There are other forms of Intellectual Property involved in oil & gas since it is a science based industry. Much as anywhere you look in North American oil & gas, anytime you look behind the door, there are issues hiding in plain sight.

Oil & gas producers have maintained a poor man’s strategy in terms of how they access IP from vendors, their secondary and tertiary industries. They don’t recognize any claim and certainly will not attribute any value to IP, and as a result have not paid any monetary compensation for the hard work that has gone into any research and development. Outside of research and development in terms of geo-technical innovations and IP, producers are not responsible for any of the innovations that they’ve claimed in the past decades. All of their benefits have been gained as a result of the hard work of individuals, mostly, in the service industry. Once they do discover a product or service that generates significant value to the oil & gas producer. Their trouble begins. 

First it is not accepted until the vendor is willing to have the product or service reverse engineered to better understand the actions taking place. No commercial acceptance of this will occur until such time as the service industry representative capitulates on the point of reverse engineering. Then surreptitiously the product innovations are clearly discussed with the innovators competitors in order to sponsor competition of the type that will price their products with no inherent costs of the research & development. Forcing the innovator to compete based on price. Rendering further Intellectual Property development and innovation moot. 

People, Ideas & Objects finds this style of “innovation” particularly vile. The Preliminary Specification establishes a solid foundation for which the Intellectual Property of individuals within the greater oil & gas economy becomes available to those original authors, innovators and entrepreneurs. This is provided through the Resource Marketplace, Research & Capabilities and Knowledge & Learning modules that were published in final form in August 2012. The interaction between these three modules is comprehensive and beyond this discussion. I recommend a full review in order to appreciate the implementation of our solution. 

Another key point is the tearing down of the basis of Intellectual Property (IP). An industry such as oil & gas is based on earth science and engineering needs. To expand the industry's capabilities in science and innovation we will need to overcome many difficult problems. And as we progress, the volume of ideas needed will be an order of magnitude greater than what is required today. These problems cannot be solved in an environment where there is no upside for individuals to solve them. Addressing the motivation to solve these problems and enabling people to earn the rights to their Intellectual Property through the People, Ideas & Objects application modules is the first step in making the necessary industry-wide changes. This will, in turn, turn the oil & gas industry into a more dynamic, innovative business.

With the state of the industry as it is, its IP is in disarray, and the capabilities and capacities derived from it are deteriorating as we speak. Making this an IP gold rush in the industry, in order to save it. Producers' difficulty is that none of this is published and publishing is how copyrights are earned. Let me pass on one more pertinent fact that I have learned since I’ve been so reliant on copyright. Patents and trademarks are defensive in nature in that they protect your IP. Copyright is offensive and allows expansion of one's Intellectual Property. Building on the shoulders of giants. Copyright does not secure rights to an idea. It only provides you with monopoly rights to expression of that idea. In other words, it must also be pursued and maintained in the same manner that I do here at People, Ideas & Objects. Until the Resource Marketplace and other modules of the Preliminary Specification are built I see this IP of earth science and engineering as unclaimed property. Therefore the first thing we must do for the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable producers in the oil & gas industry is change their competitive advantages. They'll now read: 

Coordination of the earth sciences & engineering markets' capabilities & capacities, as well as their land & asset base. 

One of the most promising forms of IP today is software and algorithms, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. What if these were also the foundation of a producer firm as competitive advantages? This would generate revenues for producers and the people who developed them in the form of service revenues, license fees and royalties etc. Helping to establish the new and innovative oil & gas industry. Supporting that second source of revenue of the producer we’ve established through our Work Order system.

Business changes quickly. Intel's dominance in the chip market is now a constraint that causes them to lag in that market in consequential ways. As the dominant processor manufacturer, its processor architecture has been deemed redundant for future purposes. Business value is no longer in processor manufacture, it's in design. Contract manufacturing is a commodity business where others find profits and opportunities in that area where Intel does not compete. Design is now valued. Read the summary of Ampere Computing’s Leadership Team that now has one of the most powerful processors available in commercial volumes. Oracle has declared they’re moving their cloud offering to Ampere processors, which Oracle’s Cloud is offering today, and People, Ideas & Objects will run the Preliminary Specification exclusively on Ampere which will provide better cost / performance than Intel based cloud computing can offer. 

This is the changing business world and these are the revised business rules. It comes down to one word, the individual. If you don’t see what the Intel rebels did when they established Ampere. Your most promising opportunities may remain with the established organizations. Individuals in technology, oil & gas and everywhere are facilitated by that remarkable innovation, the door. 

The Internet demands one thing which is difficult to achieve. Software to organize. To organize society today, with its global reach, cannot be done spontaneously. There is no serendipity when individual A meets individual B 2,000 miles away on the Internet. This is done through software providing them with the means to conduct their business. Software defines and supports an organization. Without People, Ideas & Objects none of this oil & gas vision will come about by sitting and waiting for the phone to ring. At least it doesn’t appear to have happened.

The question also needs to be asked: why does Apple innovate consistently? Although their products are more costly, they bring incremental value to their customers through the innovation they provide. They too rely on Intellectual Property as the basis of their value. They consider themselves a software company that sells hardware to bring about customer value. Software defines and supports organizations. 

It’s no longer enough to just own the oil & gas asset. You must also have access to the software that makes the oil & gas asset profitable. We now believe as a result of the Oracle CloudWorld 2022 & 2023 conferences that all firms in all industries will have distinct competitive advantages by using Oracle Cloud ERP. These benefits should be seen as incremental to People,Ideas & Objects et al. 

The importance of IP in the oil & gas industry organizes innovation. The most productive innovation is when it’s organized under a structure that allows the market to focus on its development. The North American marketplace established IP centuries ago and we have reaped its benefits. The United States included copyright in its Constitution. Copyright must be published to earn it. Exposing it to the market where it can be built upon and enhanced by others. It reduces the “me-too” phenomenon that producers have created in the past to generate price competition in the service industry and elsewhere. Ensuring everyone was rendered “blind sleepwalking agents of whomever would feed them.” Is this how an innovative industry is going to be built, with producers sitting on top of a primary industry and using its revenues to endow their favors with the rewards of a penny or two here and there? Will the oil & gas issues we are faced with going to be resolved on this basis?

The proposed organizational structure of the oil & gas industry, including People, Ideas & Objects, will be built with innovation as a core Organizational Construct. Additionally, it will be grounded in the law of the land, which will define the permissible scope of innovation. Since the law does not permit copyright violation, adherence will ensure the absence of violators. A self-policing mechanism will reduce the costs associated with unnecessary and endlessly repeated duplication of innovation in the industry. This approach provides incentives for those with original ideas, thereby fostering the motivation necessary for the challenging work ahead. Knowing their work will now be trusted and respected. To do so not just today, but always and everywhere. 

These copyrighted publications enable understanding of how things are done. Building upon that understanding with additional innovations elsewhere. Intellectual Property thus offers a robust legal framework that promotes innovation and eliminates costly redundancies and duplicated efforts. It educates and motivates us to do the difficult and challenging work we agree is the foundation of the industry. This applies across the greater oil & gas economic structure and includes the secondary and tertiary industries. The 21st century will be known for leveraging Intellectual Property, or intelligence. Much as the last century was about the leverage of mechanical effort. Avoiding this reality or attempting to opt out would be foolish in the extreme.

What motivates people to develop these 'ideas'? Is it not a blend of self-interest and the aspiration to contribute value to the industry? Officers and directors have been well compensated and the industry has been destroyed. A further contrast is the fact that they've not been motivated by discovering ways to generate value. Intellectual Property is therefore not only an Organizational Construct that can control the innovation process throughout the industry. The participants are motivated to build value through incremental profitability, cost reduction, improved production deliverability or reserve expansion. It is the law, and most importantly, it has been proven. The reason the United States dominates the global economy in terms of performance is because their Intellectual Property laws provide the motivational and organizational principles of how their economy and society operate. It assumes people are intelligent beings, not serfs like officers and directors assume. It is productive, constructive, focused on generating value and benefits society. As a science and technology business, oil & gas is second only to the space industry in terms of complexity. Under their business model, what have these officers and directors been doing?

The next 25 years will be comprehensively difficult for the greater oil & gas economy. By far the most challenging time period in its history. How will industry resolve these challenges? Are we structured appropriately to meet these demands? Who today is motivated to undertake the difficult task of approaching the multitude of issues and what will be their motivation?

Intellectual Property in Oil & Gas Today.

I believe the business model of producer firms is based on having a pool of knowledge readily available at no cost. They require this access whenever and wherever needed, aligning with their interests. Therefore they couldn’t have anything published in this environment as it would be counter to their interests in terms of availability and access to this pool of Intellectual Property. And therefore nothing has been documented in the industry from the point of view of earth science and engineering science and technology. They are leaving themselves fully exposed to any author who publishes IP at this time.

Two other aspects of Intellectual Property are first, safe harbor provisions. Why don’t producers just turn around and sue the copyright holders? This would be an unfortunate world where “big” ruled the earth and we serfs would be the drones who were forced to comply with their every command. The safe harbor provision states that you cannot sue the copyright holder. Secondly, the division of tacit and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge cannot be captured or written down. Only explicit knowledge can. Therefore it is up to people to take the explicit knowledge they have, earn the copyright, and apply their tacit knowledge to generate their value as a service. Intellectual Property services are as critical as the IP itself. Just as People, Ideas & Objects have our user community heading up their service providers which will deliver our software and their tacit knowledge as services to the producer firms. As a consequence, the tacit and explicit knowledge underlying the Preliminary Specification can be delivered effectively and efficiently. 

These efforts of ours to use the Joint Operating Committee as the key organizational construct of the dynamic, innovative, accountable and profitable oil & gas producer began in August of 2003 with a research proposal to industry. People, Ideas & Objects subsequently conducted that research ourselves which was completed with the August 2012 publication of the Preliminary Specification. A decade of rigorous research reflected and absorbed throughout this blog and elsewhere. And now that the obvious need in the market for this ERP system has come about, Boards should be aware that the time taken by People, Ideas & Objects to conduct this research, to effectively deal with these issues and resolve them has offset what would be the industry's largest cost of all. The time needed to generate a sustainable, viable, and workable business model. We enable them to yield untold value creation in the short term and not have to undertake the minimum ten years of research themselves. Our user community, research, and Intellectual Property make up our three strategic competitive advantages. Anyone offering similar aspects to the Preliminary Specification in their ERP software would violate our Intellectual Property and we would expect, as law abiding citizens, the oil & gas producers would adhere to these principles of law, recognize that and refuse to use any software that violates our IP. Any violators might be discovered through our recently announced Whistleblower Program. Therefore producers would have to invest the decade of research and avoid any aspect of the Preliminary Specification within their solution. 

It is People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service providers that channel these Organizational Constructs towards innovation, productivity and profitability through software. Software defines and supports an organization. The only solution as it stands today, from a creative destruction and disintermediation point of view, is People, Ideas & Objects, our user community and their service provider organizations' implementation of the Preliminary Specification. The natural forces of disintermediation and creative destruction are obstructed through the diversion of industry revenues away from the development of initiatives such as the Preliminary Specification. And therefore are directly promoting the status quo behaviors that are and have been proven to be disastrous. This has been the motivation behind the officers and directors lack of action. Avoidance of their disintermediation in order to maintain their creative personal compensation continues.