Petro Canada's accountability framework.

As was intimated in the top ten excuse list, the accountability of Petro Canada is broken. The self - serving management are only interested in what they can get away with and boosting the value of their options. The problem now becomes how do you deal with it? The problem as I see it is there has been a clear separation between operational decision making, which is done by the joint operating committee, and the accountability framework that is the bureaucracies only claim to justify their existence.

The accountability framework consists of reporting to the SEC, Tax, government and other accounting related areas. It is the sole domain of the bureaucracy. Where the hierarchy seeks and defines itself and the needs of the bureaucracy.

When I say that it is in conflict with the operational decision making framework of the joint operating committee, I mean the following. With respect to an oil and gas property, the methods and decision making processes are defined and codified in the operating agreements. (and at larger facilities the Construction, Ownership and Operatorship agreements.) If you want to participate, then you will incur the % allocation of any costs of that decision. If you don't want to participate, then the agreement deals with participants that elect not to participate by incurring penalties should they subsequently decide to return.

Further down the line the definition of who has voting control and what threshold of concurrence must be achieved to implement the decisions are contained in the standard operating procedures. If a joint operating committee is the benefactor of a significant find then the associated costs of gathering systems, batteries and gas plants may automatically fall within the decision making formula's. These agreements may also define a large area of land to be part of an "Area of Mutual Interest" and govern all the partners dealings on those lands that may be purchased by any party to the agreement.

My question here today is how is it that a CFO, and lets take the Petro Canada example, Mr. Harry Roberts of Petro Canada, can stand in front of Wall Street and say he will be raising the production profile of the firm by 10% in the next fiscal quarter. Based on the plans that are set in place by the joint operating committees, of which he is a member of, he can say it, however, the influence that he has in making these decisions is more or less, zero. He like any of his counterparts is literally speaking through his hat.

And as for the remainder of the management team, how can they assert that their management skills are attributable for the results that are being reported and budgeted. They have no influence! If they did not have an interest at the committee level, would the production have ceased? I think not. The sole domain of the management team are to report the results to the various regulatory and government bodies that they are required by law to report to. That's it. When it comes to oil and gas, they could be manufacturing widgets for all they know, and can influence.

In reality these organizational constructs are conflicted and obstruct the natural form of oil and gas, the joint operating committee. If SEC Chairman Christopher Cox can implement the regulatory framework of the SEC within XML tags, what will the bureaucracy then do. With the SEC's XML tags and tags that are developed through this software venture. The decisions of the joint operating committee will govern the various regulatory compliance frameworks and the reporting would fall out of the process naturally. So why have I such a difficult time in gaining concurrence? The hierarchy controls the budget for administrative operations, and therefore a sale to SAP occurs.

Now it has been pointed out to me many times that the reason that firms go to SAP for their systems is due to the "integrity" the application has with the investment community. And I agree that the investment community's perception is real. However, I would argue that just as the tax tail should not wag the dog, the compliance tail should not dictate the organizational construct. You do not need a bureaucracy to run a company in this day and age.

Technorati Tags: Petro-Canada, Innovation, Accountability

Petro Canada

Petro Canada has revised it's offer for Canada Southern Petroleum Ltd. to $165 million from $113 million. Does this mean that they are overpaying for this asset? Recall what they said about Canada Southern Petroleum's expectation of value, that it was too high.

Petro Canada's increased offer of 146% may be the result of the humiliation in knowing that their previous offer received only 61,587 tendered shares. Thankfully they did not call themselves explorers in the press release.

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Petro-Canada

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Petro Canada that is. Seems they have attracted some other bidders in their hostile offer for Canada Southern Petroleum Ltd. Greg Noval of Canadian Superior Energy is making a competing bid and it will be interesting to see if Petro Canada has the gumption to make a revised offer.

Recall that this process was so that Petro Canada was able to call themselves an explorer, however, I am afraid they may soon be better known for the company they keep.

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Petro-Canada, Innovation, Energy

Petro-Canada "earnings"

[Petro Canada]

Emphasis is placed on the quotation marks as I am concerned with the companies calculated amount of earnings. My concern is that they may be highly overstated. And secondly the tacit assignment that they were "Petro Canada's" earnings.

The need to represent these numbers as managements performance are the logical assumption, I think. When it costs this management team $94.57 per barrel to find oil, why would a company cost the reserves at $6.49? The answer to this question is in the financial statements.

If we divide the amount of depreciation that was recorded in 2005 by the total upstream assets we arrive at 6.31% of the total assets were depreciated by the company. Now if we divide the production by the reserves then we should have a ball park value similar to the depreciation recorded. However, we get 12.6%! Clearly twice as much production value was actually depleted vs. the actual amount that management removed from the books.

Recall these reserves numbers are based on last week's hocus pocus of the reserve increases noted here. If we exclude the hocus pocus we end up with 14.18% of the reserves were produced. This management certainly is creative. But then again they probably have lots of time because they only found 2.4% of their reserve base in 2005. Nonetheless, the difference in earnings is only $1,006 million, reducing total reported earnings from $1,709 million down to $703 million.

Why would Canada's former national oil company overstate their earnings? Upon further investigation I think I found the answer. Drill down to the stock tables and you'll see that the management exercised 3.54 million shares at $18.00 per share, and awarded themselves another 4.19 million shares at $35.00. So for the year, based on Canadian tax rulings the management team will have taxes payable of $34.6 million. But wait, there's more, that is to say in exercising the value of these options based on Friday's stock prices of $53.00 the management will have earned $199,394,270.00 to pay those taxes, so they'll thankfully be ok to make the payment.

Back to the point about earnings. I have to ask if the total stock compensation for the management is (199 / 703) = 28.3% that would look bad, don't you think. Instead, if the stock option compensation was (199 / 1,709) = 11.6% it becomes less of an issue. I propose we accept these numbers as reasonable on the basis of the management team? Not. See you at the annual meeting on the 25th of April.

I can already here the argument that the company will make on this. "Everything is within reason of Generally Acceptable Accounting Principles". And I would agree with that statement. But when you write your own reserve reports and personal checks, you open yourself to criticism. As this may be acceptable to the accountants, as a shareholder, I am concerned in the long term of what the "managements" performance was?

Next entry, how Petro-Canada issues debt to buy stock back from the management.

"Almost" two down and two to go.

Management of the Piggies, our nickname for Encana, Canadian Natural Resources, Nexen and Petro Canada have had a really bad quarter. Since July of 2008 when they had $3.3 billion of "in the money" stock options, they've lost a bit.

First it was their options which quickly evaporated when the market meltdown started its Tsunami like roar. Now it seems to have turned more personal. First was Charlie Fisher to announce he is leaving Nexen as its CEO. Now the focus seems to be on Petro Canada.

Our local paper The Calgary Herald is reporting that the "Fort Hills" heavy oil project operator, Petro Canada is now "deferring development". But that's not the key point of the article. (If you listen carefully you can hear the ghosts of Arthur Anderson's staff using their shredders.) It seems some people who own Petro Canada are not particularly happy with the management, stating:

Part of the stock's downdraft Monday was due to oil prices falling to their lowest levels since January 2007, but another reason offered for the absence of market support was a lack of confidence in the company's management. The most-often asked question among the investment community of late-- behind closed doors, of course --has been around when the company's chief executive, Ron Brenneman, might be stepping aside.

So lets mark this one as a "half way" through the door. Careful guys don't let the door hit you on the way out. Leaving us with only Encana and Canadian Natural Resources. What's that saying about the bigger they are the harder they something or other. Lets predict that CNRL is the next to loose the top echelon of the firm. Remember, they thought strength in numbers would provide good cover when things got hot. But with 45 different individuals with Chief or President in their titles, it just might be best to get a forklift.

Technorati Tags: People's Pig Management Failure

Petro Canada Q2 Earnings.

Petro Canada have published their second quarter earnings report and I have to admit that I was wrong in terms of the position I was taking on this blog. My inability to convince the industry of the needs of this type of solution had lead me to being convinced that conflict was a means to the end. In retrospect my frustration got the better part of discretion and I pursued the theme to the extreme. There is nothing more to do than to apologize to Petro Canada in the same manner the analysis was raised. I trust they will forgive me.

technorati tags: Genesys, Petro-Canada, Earnings

Petro Canada, the garage sale continues?

I suspect a garage sale attitude may be on management's mind. Reviewing the 2005 Annual Report and first quarter of 2006, Petro Canada appears to me to have more then just an earnings problem, but also a severe cash problem. If they are selling an asset it would be for the cash and to boost the second quarters earnings.

The seriousness of the situation leads me to think that last years sale of Syria may have been "forced" to earn enough cash and earnings to continue the pretence. Selling the Syrian property would have otherwise never happened. Think of Skilling and Lay selling to make the profits as opposed to shuffling.

So lets keep our eyes and ears open for any large property sales out by our favorite company.

I can't seem to find any reason why the company is hemorrhaging so much cash. In the last 4 reported quarters they have increased their debt by $2,091 million. Most of this coming from long term debt to finance capital expenditures. Additional sources of cash have been through the discounting of accounts receivables, to the tune of $480 million.

Hold it, I think I might see where some of the money is going. There's a normal course issuer bid. In the last 4 quarters Petro Canada management have spent over $1 billion in share buy backs. Now to be fair I don't like share buy backs, particularly when the company has to go into debt to do them. It's dumb, very dumb. Instead of buy backs, companies should think special dividends if you have the money.

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Petro-Canada, Financial's

When were Petro Canada's options granted?

A story in today's Wall Street Journal asks if there is any correlation between the time that stock options are granted and their pricing. Steve Stecklow asks of Dr. Erik Lie (pronounced Lee) in "Options Study Becomes Required Reading"

"it's uncanny how good these executives must be at predicting what will happen with future stock prices"

After considering the situation, and writing his doctoral thesis, Dr. Lie raised a very interesting point regarding the use of stock options. He asked if the companies that were under his study to provide the dates of the stock option grants.

"Dr. Lie says he tried to contact a few companies to ask about the dates they granted options but he couldn't get past their secretaries, and gave up. His paper concludes, "Although I show aggregate evidence that retroactive timing occurs, it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove that such timing takes place in individual cases".

Now I think that Dr. Lie has valuable theories here. So in the interest of science and better accountability we should help Dr. Lie in his quest. Does Petro Canada back date stock option grants? Lets have a call in and determine if we can find out. Petro Canada's phone number is 403-296-7691 and ask for Gordon Ritchie, Senior Director, Investors relations.

Please report any findings to this blog through the comments field of this entry.

Technorati Tags: Accountability, Bureaucracy, Conflict, Genesys, Petro-Canada, Thesis

Another week, and another call to action.

This one from Oxford Analytica. And as there website reflects;

"Oxford Analytica is an international, independent consulting firm drawing on a network of over 1,000 senior faculty members at Oxford, and other major universities and research institutions around the world. Founded in 1975 by Dr. David R. Young, Oxford Analytica has built an international reputation for seasoned judgement on and analysis of the implications of national and international developments facing corporations, banks, governments and international institutions."

Seeing how they're derived from academia, and assert their independence as a key component of their offering. Oxford Analytica's conclusions and analysis would lead me to believe and trust in them more so then a Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) report. CERA reports which are funded and directed by the energy industry itself, tend to have a self defining and self promoting style of research and conclusions.

It is fair to assume Oxford Analytica's report entitled "Cash rich oil majors focus on frontiers" has little direct financial support or influence by the oil and gas producers. A bias that is evident in many of the alleged research reports from CERA. Research reports that tend to be more focused on the next quarterly outcome, and Dr. Daniel Yergin's strong opinions of how much oil there is, or isn't.

Oxford Analyticas explicit conclusion is stated as;

"Technological lead will prove critical in the efficient exploitation of frontier oil provinces. Upgrading portfolios means majors will divest assets that provide material opportunities for small and medium-sized independents."

Kind of resonates with the fact that the large producers are unable to keep up to the marketplace demands for energy. Or perform in an environment of speed, innovation, capability and adaptability. But then I am just as biased as CERA is in that the hypothesis that I developed in September 2003, and attempted to have funded by Petro Canada et al, that the Joint Operating Committee was the natural form of organization for the oil and gas industry, and that organizations were defined by their software capabilities, was handed to CERA to research as I was hustled to the street by Petro Canada's management. It's just too bad that CERA is not only biased, but also very slow in reaching the research conclusion that I did in May 2004, and, Oxford Analytica have been able to agree upon currently.

If you can sense a bitterness at the attempted theft of my intellectual property by the criminal minds of Petro Canada and CERA you would be incorrect for two reasons. One I ended up with the copyright by publishing the research conclusions to my hypothesis first (the underlying foundation of this blog) . Secondly, I have a right to be sued, as stated here before and documented by Dr. Thomas C. Schelling, a right that I cherish more each day and pray will happen soon.

Technorati Tags: Bureaucracy, Call-to-action, CERA, Conflict, Exploration, Oxford, Petro-Canada

Petro Canada is...

Fill in your own words here, my word is ridiculous. This is the only way that I can describe what the National Post reported in Saturday's edition. Petro Canada was considering partnering with Marathon Petroleum in a Syrian concession that Marathon was granted last week.

So, it's now Monday, the strategy of the 2005 annual report. In which the justification for selling Syrian assets at fire sale prices was.

"The sale of the mature Syrian producing assets aligns with the Company's strategy to increase the proportion of long-life and operated assets in its portfolio."

Is no longer valid.

I can only hope and pray that Petro Canada takes my recommendation to heart. My recommendation noted here was based on Dr. Thomas C. Schelling's "Strategy of Conflict" that I have the right to be sued.

So please I beg of you, sue me, because if you think it's been bad for the last couple of months, you haven't seen anything yet. So do it, and as they say "Lets get ready to rumble".

Technorati Tags: Bureaucracy, Exploration, Genesys, Petro-Canada, Conflict

Petro Canada believes

[Petro Canada]

Annual report season, timing is just right. Petro Canada believes and that in a nutshell, according to the annual report, is its strategy.

Start off reading this annual report with a strong pot of coffee. Your going to need it.

The first item that comes across as a major misrepresentation to the shareholders is on page 7. The diagram "Upstream Production Forecast" shows that the "Range of Potential Outcomes" may provide no production increases to 2008, yet the text states that production will increase in the range of "8 to 11% average annual growth rate." The other graph on page 7 "Proved and Probable Reserves" is representing that acquisitions are responsible for the "195%" alleged increase in "P2" reserves.

But wait, there's clarification of what this means.

"The reserves replacement ratio is calculated by dividing the year-over-year net change in reserves, before deducting production, by the annual production over the same time period. The reserves replacement ratio is a general indicator of the Company's reserves growth. It is only one of a number of metrics which can be used to analyze a company's upstream business."

It's good we received that piece of data. What it says is that for every barrel of oil produced, 1.95 barrels were "replaced". I think we'll all have to take the word of the company on that one since there is no independent review of the reserves. I wonder why its the only metric of "a number of metrics" provided?

The annual report is also heavy in terms of identifying the associated risks of being in business. Two things that strike me as odd is the hostile environment that Petro Canada operates in comparison to its competitors. Second that it will not be the fault of the company if anything bad happens.

So much effort that is associated with identifying risks, a little more substance on the strategy, objectivity, reserves calculations and financial performance outside of the commodity price increases would probably work to mitigate much of the criticism.

Top 10 management excuses from Petro Canada.

Since I have predicted that the second quarter of 2006 will not be a very good quarter. I thought I'd come up with some excuses for the management of Petro Canada to use for their poor performance.

• Number 10, My Porsche was delivered this past quarter.
• Number 9, It really is just about us.
• Number 8, Production was down, it's the oil business.
• Number 7, You won't believe the costs to do business these days.
• Number 6, Just be thankful oil isn't trading at $18.
• Number 5, Precisely, what do you expect?
• Number 4, Selling Syria may have been a mistake, the clerk responsible has been fired.
• Number 3, Employee costs were so high!
• Number 2, We were trying very hard to buy Canada Southern Petroleum so we could become an explorer.
• and the Number 1 reason we lost money this quarter,
  
• We got ours, too bad about yours.

Technorati Tags: Accountability, Bureaucracy, Leadership, Petro-Canada

Petro Canada news management.

I am sorry to report that Petro Canada have pulled their press release about the acquisition of Business Inteligence Software. Fortunately the press release can still be sourced through Google Finance.

Technorati Tags: Bureaucracy, Genesys, Petro-Canada

Competition vs. coopetition.

A very good friend noted the nature of the oil and gas business is not one for the sharing of intelectual property. Competition is the predominate culture of the industry. When anyone talks about culture and change we know that in any organization the two traditionally have not mixed. How cultural change occurs is usually by extreme forces that compel the culture to be dealt with. So how are these ideas of Brown and Hagels "Creation Net" able to function in the competitive culture of the oil and gas industry. Please don't hesitate to comment. This issue needs a vigourous debate to get to the ultimate solution. Here are a few thoughts of mine.

Here in Calgary we are on a two week supply of concrete. Monstrous trucks used to mine coal and heavy oil are having difficulty in sourcing the volume of rubber necessary to meet their tire wear demands. Caterpillar is selling most of its production into Asia which is creating shortages of adequate industrial equipment. And please don't even ask for a Waukesha Engine. This is not an environment that competition can prosper in. Just as President Ronald Reagan revolutionized economics with policies that define and support what globalization is, new economic forces are beginning to grow and redefine the supply / demand trajectories. These new economic forces, in my opinion, are not linear, but logarithmic and possibly even exponential to yesterday's performance.

Company's that want to participate in this new economic reality have to address their sphere of influence and increase their capacity through the "Creation Nets" that Hagel and Brown define. Their three key components for effective creation nets were defined as;

Uncertain demand for goods and services.
When your customers are down the block, servicing their demands was relatively easy. Today your customers are global and their demands unknown and unpredictable. Your ability to secure methods to control production, demand management and inventories are tools that are unable to deal with the real issues in this very near future.

A need for the participation of many different specialists if creation and innovation are to occur.
Expanding your sphere of influence to include groups that would have previously been considered your competition provides two benefits.

• Increase the volume and quality of brains towards the problems at hand, facilitating and spreading innovation.
• Allocate the finite resources to optimize the most efficient production on a global basis.

Rapidly changing performance requirements in the marketplace.
As I suspect, starting with the second quarter of 2006 Petro Canada's financial performance will shock everyone. How could a firm in this energy environment do the things that they have done, to have caused so much destruction? The evaluation criteria for success and failure will need to be redefined. That Petro Canada and Enron have both reported "earnings" has nothing to do with reality, or the future.

Conclusion:
If we don't align ourselves to solve these problems and address these cultural issues, then we are destined to suffer unnecessarily. The hierarchy and bureaucracy are in complete control. They are the most self serving and destructive forces in this new business environment. They exist to serve the powerful few and must be stopped.

In my plurality thesis I have defined that the software is either a constraint or facilitator to organizational performance. The culture of the oil and gas industry is derived from the joint operating committee. Its key value creators, the engineers and earth scientists are born of a sharing and collaborative academic culture. I don't want to change the culture of the industry, I want to realign it to where it belongs.

However, after a century of big business models. Models that enabled substantial organizational performance, those models have failed. Its now time to say goodbye to the bureaucratic culture and re-align the oil and gas industry to its more natural cultural influences of the joint operating committee and scientific roots. To meet the customers energy needs for the long term requires we build the software to support these "Creation Nets".

Unfortunately the financial resources necessary to build these applications are firmly held in the tight fist of the bureaucracy, so lets start cooperating.

Technorati Tags: Adaptability, Bureaucracy, Creation-Nets, Genesys, Hagel-Brown, Intelectual-Property, Petro-Canada, Plurality, Thesis

A summary for the press.

[Marketing]

I recently submitted a comprehensive summary of this blogs activity to the Calgary Herald and wanted to highlight what the point is / was. Firstly I would like to think that this blog provides a strong opportunity for anyone interested in innovation in oil and gas to actively participate in building the future. A Herald article would be very valuable for this blog and those readers.

Another point is that I wanted to show that the major oil and gas companies are now jeopardizing the future of the industry and the people that rely on it. This is quantified and qualified in the example I have made of Petro Canada. In summary this shows the following:

• Inability to find economic replacement reserves.
• Fudging the replacement reserves with;
• longer amortization on heavy oil assets
• restating as economic, formerly uneconomic reserves based on today's prices.
• Employing questionable independent and objective review of all reserves.
  
• Have participated in "lottery" style compensation of its managers.
  
• I'm all for rewards for performance, but have to ask where is the performance?
• Skewed earnings by not recognizing the costs of those reserves.

These managers have handsomely rewarded themselves for what can only be described as comprehensive failures. Covering up the problems with rosy numbers that don't correlate with the truth. This failure extends beyond the control of management to all those that were party to releasing the financial statements. So here are some questions.

• Mr. Brennaman did exercise 180,000 shares in 2005, but how many of the 4+ million shares options did he receive? For that matter what was the distribution of those share options?
• What are the actual reserves based on an independent review? Why did the company find only 26 million barrels of oil after spending over $2.4 billion? (Independent implies they did not receive share options.)
  
• What are the actual costs of the depletion, depreciation and amortization? If Petro Canada drew down 12% of its reserves, why recognize only 6% of property plant and equipment as the costs of those reserves?

The old hierarchical way isn't working, and that is clear to me. The only manner in which the industry can continue is through participation here and reorganization to new organizational models. These are more or less my words in 2004, and those that are now being echoed by Harvard, McKinsey and Strategy & Business. The justification to proceed and reorganize is there.

To continue will be the managers vain attempt to maintain the hierarchy and their stock options. These organizations will continue to function as they always have until the failure is admitted by them in bankruptcy court. I only hope that there is time as this system will need several years of development.

It is my hope that the Calgary Herald takes the opportunity to ask these questions of Petro Canada's management before their annual meeting on April 25, 2006. If so we will see the beginnings of the replacement to the hierarchical organizations.

Exploration vs. Exploitation the subtle differences.

What is the difference and why can't exploitationist make money as explorationists. There is a critical difference in comparing a firm that makes money exploiting oil and gas reserves and another firm that explores for reserves.

A funny thing happened when the oil and gas prices declined overall in the 1980's. Companies learned that to make money at $20 per barrel. The ability to exploit what was known within their properties was the key to their success. Larger firms were able to enhance their fields production through in-fill drilling and testing of what was known to exist. The time and the manner of making money in the manner of an exploitationist has expired.

The ability to earn profits at $20 required that an oil and gas company lay off the majority of their engineering and geological staff. They were not required in a world where it was determined that the drilling locations were between the two existing wells and the same depth as the others. This has been the successful oil and gas companies forte for the past 20 years or more. Accountants, businessmen, lawyers and "managers" began occupying the CEO's seat and these firms were run on risk profiles that projected windfall profits by controlling costs at $20 oil prices.

An explorationist determines where and how reserves are found on the basis of scientific theory. These theories are usually formulated over several years and take the geologist decades and sometimes lifetimes to prove their hypothesis. In a nutshell these are the very rare geologists that are generally credited with some major discovery. In Canada we have people like Arnie Nielson who discovered the Pembina field and eventually went on to run Mobil Canada, Dr. Hriskivich who found Rainbow pinnacle reefs and Ram River for Acquitaine, or smiling Jack Gallagher of Dome fame. This list is fairly long and all were handsomely rewarded for their discoveries. It is believed in the geological profession that only 3% of all geologists find any oil or gas in their career.

The explorationist was treated as a pariah and run out of the companies in the low cost environment of the 1980's. In many instances these "explorationists" sought refuge in smaller firms eking out marginal earnings competing in $20 oil. Or as consultants for relatively mundane tasks, compared to their training as rabid scientists.

The firm that made money exploiting in the 1990's at $20 per barrel in general terms can no longer make money at$75. Doesn't make sense I know, but using our marketing example of Petro Canada, I'll explain my point. After running the explorationists out of the firm in the 1980's the mindset became business as usual. The ability to find exploitable reserves was augmented by the abilities of the service companies that developed new "Horizontal Drilling", "Top Drives", "Coiled Tubing" and other innovations that provided value for the exploitationist. These technologies could be amortized over vast inventories of known reserves and profitably make money. It is fair to assume that the $20 oil, the world over, is gone for ever.

The service companies innovations that I mentioned also lead to the more rapid depletion of the reserves that were available. What used to produce for ever at 10 barrels a day is replaced by the horizontal well that produces 100 barrels per day for 6 years. Many of these exploited fields are now close to the end of their productive lives.

Here we are in 2006 with the following scenario.

1. The easy oil and gas reserves are gone.
   
2. The remaining reserves are being exploited too quickly for the markets needs. Creating a false sense of security as to the overall productive capacity of the world petroleum marketplace.
   
3. And all the geologists that could find oil and gas are twenty years older and generally have forgotten what the industry knew in the 1980's. Now in their pre-retirement years they have no desire to pick up the craft again.

So we leave the burden to the current population of recent university graduates that "may" be able to think like an explorationist and find some oil and gas reserves. I recommend we employ the shot gun approach of hiring as many as we can and setting them to their task.

In my opinion there has never been a more serious problem that the world has faced as the energy problem we have today. We are producing faster then we are replacing reserves, we have lost the ability to find new fields and do not have the intellectual talent to meet the needs of the marketplace in the next 10 years. How this gets resolved is with a lot of pain and $25 / gallon gasoline.

Companies such as Petro Canada are unable to operate in these environments and I think they have even given up trying. As I indicated here, here, and here they have systemically failed in every criteria of a successful oil and gas firm. Their inability to tell the truth covers the facts as I had revealed them. The accountants and lawyers are able to smooth over the issues and present a reasonable facsimile of an annual report. It will be interesting to see how the firm performs in the next 3 years, as it may be within that time frame that the firm runs aground permanently.

And this little piggy...

Up next in the shocking level of stock option compensation, is Nexen. Their 2007 based compensation was $175 million "in the money" and $465 million "in the money" stock options issued and outstanding. For a total "in the money" compensation of $640 million. The total of the four oil and gas companies is now $3.36 billion. You tell me if you think its excessive.

Company	Stock-Options	Market Cap
Canadian Natural Resources	$1.53 billion	$50.6 billion
Petro-Canada	$492 million	$24.5 billion
Encana	$698.2 million	$62.8 billion
Nexen	$640.0 million	$19.3 billion
Total Producers	$3.36 billion	$157.2 billion
Apple	$873 million	$151.9 billion

I have stated here that these companies had the opportunity to address these problems almost five years ago. What has happened since then is an inability of these firms to make their targets in terms of production volumes. This has occurred on an almost systemic basis with each company reporting that there are material cost overruns and scheduling problems. More or less these companies can't keep up to the demand for energy. Can't keep up because they are too bureaucratic.

But there's more. Over the course of time we have seen the problem escalate in the world. That wasn't of any concern of these companies. Indeed we have seen the slackening of their pace and a deadening of their sense of urgency. Confident in their abilities to control their environment from any serious criticism of their performance. They became bold in their actions and believed they were entitled to these stock options. Stock options that became valuable from increases in earnings from higher prices. High prices that masked the declines in reserves and production. After all it was working. They are now that much closer to their retirement, a retirement that will be far more comfortable. This was their special reward for gracing the oil and gas industry with their presence. Don't do anything and be richly rewarded.

The consequence of their greed is reflected in this article from ASPO USA:

The CIA reports that there are 266 “nations, dependent areas, and other entities” on the world today. During the last few weeks at least 90 of these are reported to be having continuing serious or very serious energy shortages. The number of countries with energy problems may be much higher as the CIA also reports that 94 of the world’s nations are islands many of which are so small they are rarely heard from but are almost certain to be suffering from $140 oil.

When I proposed this idea in September 2003 and subsequently published the research results in May 2004. These two dates were not the only times I marketed to these companies. I have contacted those within the industry, and particularly the four pigs I've already mentioned, (Petro Canada, Encana, Canadian Natural Resources, and Nexen) on an annual and semi-annual basis. The last time being December 11, 2007. I always received the same response of "not at this time". Well of course not, they hadn't retired, and who wants to work hard?

Well the time has now past by any reasonable measure. And the management have proven that they are not capable of acting in any constructive way, other then for themselves. Therefore I appeal to the investor class to take action and fund these software developments. Create the necessary alternative organization for you, the investors, to able to manage your assets.

Do we have to wait until their are riots in Europe, Canada and the U.S. before someone dispatches these people to the pig sty? Is $4 gas enough? I don't think so, we have a lot of pain heading our way due to these selfish people. What more do we need to realize that the same old muddling along just isn't going to work. Join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Management Failure

June Business Report

Marketing

Petro Canada continues to provide ample material for analysis and comment, and we are anxiously awaiting the companies second quarter results. The results of this marketing are beginning to provide the exposure that we seek, particularly locally.

In the Technorati service we are still jumping around a fair amount, however this last month we have seen our ranking down to the low 500,000's. Not bad for a six month blog, and considering the total number of ranked blogs has jumped to almost 42 million.

Content

We set out to see what kind of pace we can attain in terms of the frequency of blog postings. With the stated May objective of writing one article per day, I am now putting this in place for the long term. The discipline to write one story per day is a rather torrid pace for one individual. But it has an indirect effect of increasing and focusing the quality and value of the entire process. Therefore I want to try and establish a new guideline for July, that being of 8 posts per week, and, one per day as new minimums in posting.

My Favorite entries.
My favorite entries for the past month are:

• The completion of the summary series on partnership accounting.
• The completion of the summary of Genesys' technical vision.
• The ongoing series on Petro Canada
• Is the joint operating committee revolutionary

Technical Architecture

No changes to the overall technical architecture were made in June 2006. GlassFish continues to soar in terms of its acceptance and value to the community. Discussion with BEA Systems were brief and uneventful. The cut off point between GlassFish and a business oriented functionality is unanswered at this point. The more I research this area, and the more we define the unique areas of using the joint operating committee, the more I believe that we may be best off developing these ourselves.

Budget

Revenue to the end of June: $0.00

July 1, 2006 budget items. (All costs are in U.S. dollars and include the 33% premium for the development copyright fee.)

1. Project management and development = $300,000
2. Sun Grid The first thing we need is a home for the code. The grid provides everything we need in this instance, and the Grid that I selected was Sun's. At $1 per processor hour, a very affordable way to secure the resources we need. I think that our first years requirements would be amply satisfied with 10,000 hours of processing for the remainder of 2006 calendar year. Total requirement = $13,300
3. Ingres Open Source database and part time DBA, Total requirements = $57,000, Collabnet, I would like to have a generous budget for this critical tool. Provides the code management, community process, project and issue management. Budget includes tools, appropriate setup and consulting services. Total requirements = $34,000
4. General and Administrative, first 6 months of operation Total requirements = $60,000
5. Membership in W3C Total requirements = $9,000
6. Total Capital and Operating budget, 2006... $484,000

Notes

• Sponsors, producers, and user contributions and donations are accepted.
• Please recall that this community is and will be supported by the producers. Based on an annual $ assessment per barrel of oil. For 2006 the assessment was fixed at $1 per boe per day per year.
• A company such as Encana in Canada would therefore be expected to support the community to the tune of $700,000 for the 2006 calendar year.
• These Monthly Business Report budgets are being proposed on a pay as you go basis for 2006 to support the community and ensure the community develops in the manner that is expected.
• Your donations are greatly appreciated, no donations mean no development work is being done.

Technorati Tags: Business-Report, Genesys

Aprils Business Report

Marketing
As reported last month, March was our first month of actively marketing the Genesys project. A target selection process was undertaken, with specific marketing deliverables and objectives being defined. We selected our target, Petro Canada, and began the slow process of revealing that bureaucracies capabilities. Unfortunately we did not receive the response we were expecting. Petro Canada's first quarter provides further evidence of the problems with the hierarchy in oil and gas and we will continue on with our marketing program.

Technical Architecture
We have subscribed to Google Analytics and are able to map out the response to the blog entries. This a comprehensive tool that provides significant advantages for our marketing plans.

• Revenue to the end of April: $0.00
  

May 1, 2006 budget items. (All costs are in U.S. dollars and include the 33% premium for the development copyright fee.)

• Sun Grid The first thing we need is a home for the code. The grid provides everything we need in this instance, and the Grid that I selected was Sun's. At $1 per processor hour, a very affordable way to secure the resources we need. I think that our first years requirements would be amply satisfied with 10,000 hours of processing for the remainder of 2006 calendar year. Total requirement = $13,300
• Ingres Open Source database and part time DBA, Total requirements = $57,500.
• Collabnet. I would like to have a generous budget for this critical tool. Provides the code management, community process, project management and issue management. Budget includes tools, appropriate setup and consulting services. Total requirements = $34,500
• General and Administrative, first 6 months of operation Total requirements = $69,000
• Membership in W3C Total requirements = $9,500
• Project management and development = $300,000
  
• Total Capital and Operating budget, 2006... $484,000
  

Notes:

• Sponsors, producers, and user contributions are accepted.
  
• Please recall that this community is and will be supported by the producers. Based on an annual $ assessment per barrel of oil. For 2006 the assessment was fixed at $1 per boe per day per year.
  
• A company such as Encana in Canada would therefore be expected to support the community to the tune of $700,000 for the 2006 calendar year.
  
• These Monthly Business Report budgets are being proposed on a pay as you go basis for 2006 to support the community and ensure the community develops in the manner that is expected.
  
• Your donations are greatly appreciated, no donations means minimal work is being done.

Business-ReportMarketingJava

March Business Report

[business report]

Marketing
As reported last month, March was our first month of actively marketing the Genesys project. A target selection process was undertaken, with specific marketing deliverables and objectives being defined. We selected our target, Petro Canada, and began the slow process of revealing that bureaucracies capabilities. With three months of budgeted time remaining we should be able to complete our overall marketing objectives.

For the month of April specific tasks will include participation at Petro Canada's Annual General Meeting on the 25th. This will be one of the many highlights for the month of April. Other activities will be reported on as they occur and within the specific months business report.

Technical Architecture
I am extremely pleased to report that Genesys was accepted as a project in the incubator of java.net. This accelerates our developments by allowing us to join the community and access the resources of the Collabnet software and the large population of independent Java developers.

Licensing has also been finalized for the development of the code. Using the Sun Community Source License as the base, we have published the Genesys Community Source License and created a business model that will motivate the community of developers to join. I believe these were significant developments in the project. Recruiting of specific developers will begin when the funds have been secured.

There has been an increase in the amount of donations being sought. First we are half way through the first six months of 2006, and even though we have not been able to secure any funding, we are ahead of schedule. Secondly we have increased the budget to accommodate the securing of the code development as a paid project. The business model proposed sees the payment of the code by Genesys from the individual developers whom are contracted to write the technology. This will ensure that their are no residual intellectual property issues.

• Revenue to the end of March: $0.00
  

April 1, 2006 budget items. (All costs are in U.S. dollars and include the 33% premium for the development copyright fee.)

• Sun Grid The first thing we need is a home for the code. The grid provides everything we need in this instance, and the Grid that I selected was Sun's. At $1 per processor hour, a very affordable way to secure the resources we need. I think that our first years requirements would be amply satisfied with 10,000 hours of processing for the remainder of 2006 calendar year. Total requirement = $13,300
• Ingres Open Source database and part time DBA, Total requirements = $57,500.
• Collabnet. I would like to have a generous budget for this critical tool. Provides the code management, community process, project management and issue management. Budget includes tools, appropriate setup and consulting services. Total requirements = $34,500
• General and Administrative, first 6 months of operation Total requirements = $69,000
• Membership in W3C Total requirements = $9,500
• Project management and development = $300,000
  
• Total Capital and Operating budget, 2006... $484,000
  

Notes:

• Sponsors, producers, and user contributions are accepted.
  
• Please recall that this community is and will be supported by the producers. Based on an annual $ assessment per barrel of oil. For 2006 the assessment was fixed at $1 per boe per day per year.
  
• A company such as Encana in Canada would therefore be expected to support the community to the tune of $700,000 for the 2006 calendar year.
  
• These Monthly Business Report budgets are being proposed on a pay as you go basis for 2006 to support the community and ensure the community develops in the manner that is expected.
  
• Your donations are greatly appreciated, no donations means minimal work is being done.