Jargon free volume on upstream fiscal design

Takings from upstream oil and gas projects, whether they are small scale or big ticket ones, ultimately determine their profitability – the stuff that shareholders, venture sponsors and governments alike have a keen interest in.

It is why oil and gas companies, both state or privately held, deploy an army of petroleum economists to offer conjecture or calculated projections on what the final fiscal share of such ventures might be.

In this complex arena, both budding petroleum economists and established ones could do with all the help they can get. Industry veterans Ken Kasriel and David Wood’s book Upstream Petroleum: Fiscal and Valuation Modeling in Excel (published by Wiley Finance) goes a long way towards doing just that, and quite comprehensively too.

In a volume of 370 pages, with eight detailed chapters split into sequential sub-sections, the authors offer one of the most detailed subjective discussions and guidance on fiscal modeling that is available on the wider market at the moment in the Oilholic's opinion.

The treatment of fiscal systems, understanding and ultimately tackling the complexities involved is solid, predicated on their own views and experience of understanding the tangible value of upstream projects before, during and when they ultimately come onstream, and what the takings would be.

Kasriel and Wood have also included five appendices and a CD-ROM (in the hardcover version) to take the educational experience further, and accompanying the main text of the title are over 400 pages of supplementary PDF files and some 120-plus Excel files, with an introduction to risk modeling.

What is particularly impressive is the authors’ painstaking effort in cutting through industry jargon, putting across their pointers in plain English for both entry-level professionals and experienced practitioners. Furthermore, the sequential format of the book makes it real easy for the latter lot to jump in to a section for quick reference or for a subject specific refresher. 

Generic treatment of taxation, royalties, bonuses, depreciation, profit sharing mechanics, incentives, ringfencing, and much more, including decommissioning finance, are all there and should withstand the passage of time as both authors have called their combined 48 years of experience in the industry into play, to conjure up a reasonably timeless discussion on various issues. 

Above everything else, Kasriel and Wood’s conversational style makes this book a very purposeful, handy guide on a subject that is vast. The Oilholic is happy to recommend it to fellow analysts, (aspiring, new and established) petroleum economists, policymakers, industry professionals, corporate sponsors and oil and gas project finance executives.

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. © Photo: Front Cover – Upstream Petroleum: Fiscal and Valuation Modeling in  Excel © Wiley Publishers, March, 2015.

Importance of Khazzan-Makarem gas field for BP

When the Oilholic paid a visit to Oman couple of years ago, natural gas was not atop the list of ‘crude’ industry intelligence gathering activities, one must admit. The Sultanate perhaps has the richest quality of all Middle Eastern crude oil varieties but there’s not a lot of it around, nor is Oman's reserves position anywhere near as strong as that of its neighbours.

Nonetheless, oil matters took up much of this blogger’s time and effort, including an excursion to the Musandam Peninsula, where Oman is in the process of having a decent crack at its first offshore exploration. The crucial subject of Omani natural gas largely slipped under the radar there and then, and largely up until now. 

That’s until this blogger recently met David Eyton, Group Head of Technology at BP, for a fascinating Forbes interview (click here) on how the oil major is using digital tools such as 4D seismic to reshape the way it operates both upstream and downstream, and the subject of Oman came up.

The country's Khazzan-Makarem gas field is in fact among the many places benefiting from BP’s research and development spend of around two-thirds of a billion dollars per annum towards digital enablement of surveying, and more. What’s at stake for BP, and for Oman, is Khazzan’s proven reserve base of 100 trillion cubic feet. Unlike Shell, its FTSE 100 peer, BP isn’t digging for oil in the Sultanate, making the gas field – which it discovered in 2000 – a signature play.

At its core is Block 61, operated by BP Oman and Oman Oil Company Exploration and Production in a 60:40 joint venture partnership. Eyton says some of BP’s patented digital tools, including 4D seismic, are being deployed to full strength with a drilling schedule of approximately 300 wells over a 15 year period to achieve a plateau production rate of 1.2 billion cubic feet of gas per day.

“Khazzan has massive potential. It’s not shale in the strictest sense, but pretty tight gas and mighty difficult to crack owing to the low porosity of the reservoir rock,” Eyton said.

Invariably, BP has brought the full works into play to realise Block 61’s potential, drilling horizontal wells and using hydraulic fracturing technologies. "Advanced seismic imaging has played a huge part in understanding where the best bits of the reservoir are, and how to unlock them. Ultimately, that’s enabling development to proceed at a far better pace."

Construction work on Khazzan has commenced and first gas is expected in late 2017. Implications of Block 61 yielding meaningful volumes, as expected, cannot be understated. For Oman, the projected 1.2 bcf in daily production volume would be equivalent to an increment of over 30% of its total daily gas supply.

Concurrently, BP would look back in satisfaction at a Middle Eastern foray on business terms few oil and gas markets, bar Oman, would offer in an age of resource nationalism. As for the technology being deployed, it is already a winner, according to Eyton. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.

To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.

To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: David Eyton, Group Head of Technology at BP © Graham Trott / BP

Crude take: $60 Brent price is (still) about right

Does the Iranian nuclear settlement make a $60 per barrel Brent price seem too optimistic as a median level for the current year - that's the question on most oil market observers' minds. Even before delving into City chatter, the Oilholic believes the answer to that question in a word is ‘no’.

For starters, the settlement which had been on the cards, has already been priced in to a certain extent despite an element of unpredictability. Secondly, as yours truly noted in a Forbes column - it will take better parts of 12 months for Iran to add anywhere near 400,000 barrels per day (bpd), and some 18 months to ramp up production to 500,000 bpd.

Following news of the agreement, Fitch Ratings noted that details of the condition of Iran's production infrastructure might well be sketchy, but with limited levels of investment, it is likely that only a portion of previous capacity can be brought back onstream without further material reinvestment. 

“We would expect to see some increases in production throughout the course of 2016 but that this would be much less than half of the full 1.4 million bpd that was lost,” said Alex Griffiths, Managing Director at the ratings agency.

“It will require significant investment and expertise - for which Iran is likely to want to partner with international oil companies. These projects typically take many months to agree, as oil companies and governments manoeuvre for the best terms, and often years to implement.”

Thirdly, it is also questionable whether Tehran actually wants to take the self-defeating step of ‘flooding’ the market even if it could. The 40 million or so barrels said to be held in storage by the country are likely to be released gradually to get the maximum value for Tehran’s holdings. Fourthly, the market is betting on an uptick in demand from Asia despite China's recent woes. The potential uptick wont send oil producers' pulses racing but would provide some pricing comfort to the upside.

Finally, IEA and others, while not forecasting a massive decline, are factoring in lower non-OPEC oil production over the fourth quarter of this year. Collectively, all of this is likely to provide support to the upside. The Oilholic’s forward projection is that Brent could flirt with $70 on the right side of Christmas, but the median for 2015 is now likely to come in somewhere between $60-$62.5. 

Yet many don’t agree, despite the oil price returning to largely where it was actually within the same session's trading itself on day of the Iran announcement. For instance, analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch still feel Iran could potentially raise production back up by 700,000 bpd over the next 12 months, adding downside pressure on forward oil prices of $5-$10 per barrel. 

On the other hand, analysts at Barclays don't quite view it that way and the Oilholic concurs. Like Fitch, the bank’s team neither see a huge short-term uptick in production volumes nor the oil price moving “markedly lower” from here as a result of the Iranian agreement.

“We believe that the market will begin to adjust, whether through higher demand, or lower non-OPEC supply in the next couple years but only once Iran’s contribution and timing are made clear. For now, OPEC is already producing well above the demand for its crude, and this makes it worse,” Barclays analysts wrote to their clients. 

“We do not expect the Saudis to do anything markedly different. Rather, they will take a wait and see approach.”

One thing is for sure, lower oil prices early on in the third quarter would have as detrimental an effect on the quarterly median, as early January prices did on the first quarter median (see above right, click to enlarge). End result is quite likely to ensure the year-end average would be in the lower $60s. That's all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

Assessing BP’s settlement with the US authorities

BP’s recent settlement with the US authorities does not end the company's legal woes related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, but it is a vital step in the direction of bringing financial closure to the accident.

When the oil major announced on July 2, that it had reached agreements in principle to settle all federal and state claims arising from the oil spill at a cost of up to $18.7 billion spread over 18 years, markets largely welcomed the move. On a day when the crude oil futures market was in reverse, BP’s share price rose by 4.69% by the close of trading in London, contrary to prevailing trading sentiment, as investors absorbed the welcome news. 

Above anything else, the agreement provides certainty about major aspects of BP's financial exposure in wake of the oil spill. As per the deal, BP’s US Upstream subsidiary – BP Exploration and Production (BPXP) – has executed agreements with the federal government and five Gulf Coast States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Under the said terms, BPXP will pay the US government a civil penalty of $5.5 billion over 15 years under the country’s Clean Water Act.

It will also pay $7.1 billion to the US and the five Gulf states over 15 years for natural resource damages (NRD), in addition to the $1 billion already committed for early restoration. BPXP will also set aside an additional $232 million to be added to the NRD interest payment at the end of the payment period to cover any further natural resource damages that are unknown at the time of the agreement.

A total of $4.9 billion will be paid over 18 years to settle economic and other claims made by the five Gulf Coast states, while up to $1 billion will be paid to resolve claims made by more than 400 local government entities. Finally, what many thought was going to be a prolonged tussle with US authorities might be coming to an end via payments, huge for some and not large enough for others, spread over a substantially long time frame.

BP’s chief executive Bob Dudley described the settlement as a “realistic outcome” which provides clarity and certainty for all parties. “For BP, this agreement will resolve the largest liabilities remaining from the tragic accident and enable the company to focus on safely delivering the energy the world needs.”

The impact of the settlement on the company’s balance sheet and cashflow will be “manageable” and allow it to continue to invest in and grow its business, said chief financial officer Brian Gilvary. As individual and business claims continue, BP said the expected impact of these agreements would be to increase the cumulative pre-tax charge associated with the spill by around $10 billion from $43.8 billion already allocated at the end of the first quarter.

While the settlement is still awaiting court approval, credit ratings agencies largely welcomed the move, alongside many City brokers whose notes to clients were seen by the Oilholic. Fitch Ratings said the deal will considerably strengthen BP’s credit profile, which had factored in “the potential for a larger settlement that took much longer to agree”.

Should the agreement be finalised on the same terms, it is likely to result in positive rating action from the agency. Fitch currently rates BP 'A' with a ‘Negative Outlook.’

Alex Griffiths, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings, said: “While BP had amassed ample liquidity to deal with most realistic scenarios, the scale and uncertain timing of the payment of outstanding fines and penalties remained a key driver of BP's financial profile in our modelling, and had the potential to place a large financial burden on the company amid an oil price slump.

“The certainty the deal provides, and the deferral of the payments over a long period, gives BP the opportunity to improve its balance sheet profile and navigate the current downturn.”

Meanwhile, Moody's has already changed to ‘positive’ from ‘negative’ the outlook on A2 long-term debt and Prime-1 commercial paper ratings of BP and its guaranteed subsidiaries. In wake of the settlement, the ratings agency also changed to ‘positive’ from ‘negative’, its outlook on the A3 and Baa1 Issuer Ratings of BP Finance and BP Corporation North America, respectively.

Tom Coleman, a Moody's Senior Vice President, said: “While the settlement is large, we view the scope and extended payout terms as important and positive developments for BP, allowing it to move forward with a lot more certainty around the size and cash flow burden of its legal liabilities.

“It will also help clarify a stronger core operating and credit profile for BP as it moves into a post-Macondo era.”

The end is not within sight just yet, but some semblance of it is likely to attract new investors. BP's second quarter results are due on July 28, and quite a few eyes, including this blogger’s, will be on the company for clues about the future direction. But that’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Support ships in the Gulf of Mexico © BP

‘Unfit’ Brent, OPEC’s health & market volatility

As the August Brent futures contract traded firmly below US$65 a barrel days after publication of the latest Saudi production data, London played host to the ninth round of the World National Oil Companies Congress.

In case you haven’t heard, the Saudis pumped 10.31 million barrels per day in May – the subject of many a chat at the event, atop of course why Algerian and Iranian officials, who usually turn up in numbers at such places (going by past experience), were conspicuous by their absence.

The congress threw up some interesting talking points. To enliven crude conversations, you can always count on Chris Cook (pictured above), former director of the International Petroleum Exchange (now ICE) and a research fellow at UCL, who told the Oilholic that Brent – deemed the global proxy benchmark by the wider market – has had its day and was unfit for purpose.

“I have been saying so since 2002. The number of crude oil cargoes from the North Sea has been diminishing steadily. On that basis alone, how can such a benchmark be representative of a global market?”

Cook would not speculate on what might or might not happen at the Iranian nuclear talks, but said the entry of additional Iranian crude into the global supply pool was inevitable. “With India and China at the ready to import Iranian crude, Europeans and Americans would have to come to some sort of accommodation with rest of the world’s take on the country's oil.”

In line with market conjecture among supply-side analysts, the industry veteran agreed it would be foolhardy to assume Iran might try to flood the oil market with its crude, a move that is likely to drive the oil price even lower in an already oversupplied market. Cook also declared that OPEC was on life support as it struggles to grapple with current market conditions.

With oil benchmarks stuck in the $50-75 range, Keisuke Sadamori, Director of Energy Markets & Security at the International Energy Agency, said a “firmer dollar” and current oversupply would make a short to medium term escape from the said price bracket pretty unlikely. (Here is one’s Sharecast report for reference). 

Earlier in the day, Andy Brogan, global oil and gas transactions leader at EY, noted that the industry would have to contend with volatility for a while. “There appears to be little confidence in a medium term bounce in the price of oil. With the industry in the midst of a profound change, IOCs have recently gone through a very rigorous review of their portfolio.”

Brogan opined that this would have implications for their partnerships with NOCs and fellow IOCs going forward. With the old tectonic plates shifting, IOCs wanting to conserve cash, NOCs craving a bout of further independence and the oil price stuck in a rut, that’s something worth pondering over. But that's all for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Chris Cook, former director of the International Petroleum Exchange and research fellow at UCL, speaking at World National Oil Companies Congress, London, UK, June 16, 2015 © Gaurav Sharma.

OPEC’s hunt for an ‘equitable’ oil price

The OPEC meeting is over, quota stays at 30 million barrels per day, and by the way – it was never a quota but rather a recommendation in Secretary General Abdalla El-Badri’s own words.

From now until December, when OPEC meets next, member nations would be contemplating what constitutes an equitable price (whether or not that’s achievable given the state of the market) and use that as a basis for deliberations next time around. Both benchmarks ended sharply lower on Friday relative to the previous week’s closing price after OPEC’s decision. Brent shed 3.51% on its May 29 closing price while the WTI lost 2.32%. OPEC’s daily basket price came in at US$59.67 a barrel, right before it reached its latest decision.

In fact, OPEC’s average monthly basket price tells its own story. A graph drawn by the Oilholic (see above left, click to enlarge) based on OPEC data, shows the price falling from an average of $107.89 in June 2014 to $62.24 in May; a decline of 42.31% in that time. It went down a cliff between June and January, before recovering to where we are at the moment.

This blogger firmly believes we are stuck here or hereabouts for a while, as probably do most oil producers (OPEC or non-OPEC). While most would want as high a price as possible, what would they deem as equitable? The figure varies, but when asked about the current price level, Saudi oil minister Ali Al-Naimi quipped: “You can see that I am not stressed, I am happy.”

Of course, the price threshold point ensuring Al-Naimi’s happiness would be a lot lower than regional rivals Iran or Iraq. The Iranians expressed a desire for $75, the uppermost and highly unlikely top range of the Oilholic’s short-term forecast.

Angola, Nigeria, Ecuador and Venezuela said $80 was their equitable price. One suspects, Venezuela – in the midst of an economic crisis – needs a three-figure price but cast its lot with those quoting the highest, even if its $20 short of what it is after.

When quizzed about the oil price, El-Badri said, “OPEC does not have a so-called oil price target; we leave that to the market.

“I agree that there are income disparities within OPEC. We have rich oil exporters and poor oil exporters; our decision in November [to hold production] as well as what we have decided today is in the interest of all members.”

The rich ones – Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Kuwait – met well before the OPEC seminar and the subsequent minister's summit, and agreed on keeping the production ceiling where it was at 30 million bpd.

OPEC's production actually came in at 30.93 million bpd in April, and could unofficially be anywhere between 31.5 to 32 million bpd depending on which recent industry survey you choose to rely on. It’s probably why El-Badri downgraded OPEC’s “quota” into a “members’ recommendation”. The Oilholic though couldn’t help noticing there was quiet satisfaction within OPEC about the market not getting materially worse between its meetings with little prospect of prices getting entrenched below $40.

One does not see it coming either. As we enter the latter half of the year, focus will shift towards global economic growth and how it supports demand for crude oil. OPEC noted the global economic recovery had stabilised, albeit with growth at moderate levels.

In the current year, global GDP growth is projected at 3.3%, and expected to be at a slightly higher level of 3.5% for 2016. As a consequence, OPEC expects world oil demand to increase in the second half of 2015 and in 2016, with growth driven by non-OECD countries.

Of course, the said growth levels wont see the oil price shoot up given more than adequate supplies, but will probably see 8 out of 12 OPEC members pretty content, whether they get what they say is their equitable price or not. That’s that from the 167th OPEC meet; time to head back to London town. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.

To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com 

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Graph: Monthly average OPEC Basket Price (June 2014 to May 2015) © Gaurav Sharma / Data Source: OPEC.

No change at OPEC, 30mbpd is the 'official' quota

It was over in a jiffy – that’s the best explanation one can come up with. So the OPEC ministers arrived at 10am CET, did their customary presser, opening note came in, sandwiches followed (nothing worse than keeping analysts and scribes hungry) and then time slot for the formal quota announcement kept getting revised from 1600CET to 1530CET to 1430CET. Before you knew it – in came Secretary General Abdalla Salem El-Badri at 1400CET to convey what everybody had already factored in, the ‘official quota’ stays at 30 million barrels per day (bpd).

Official quota in inverted commas because we all know OPEC is pumping way more than that. Surveys suggest that between the 12 member, the exporters’ collective led by Saudi Arabia is producing over 31.5 million bpd. Even OPEC’s official monthly report from April put production at 30.93 million bpd. With demand tepid and the oil price neither here not there, but better than January, where was the incentive to change, as one opined last month.

In fact, the Oilholic is getting quite used to filing an end of conference blog post from here titled “no change at OPEC” often followed by “in line with market expectation”. Quite like the 166th meeting, that number 167 followed the recent norm was hardly a surprise. Perhaps they'd had enough of each other at OPEC International Seminar which came before the meeting. 

But as one’s good friend Jason Schenker, President of Prestige Economics, says “Oil has always been a story of demand”; El-Badri & co. saw tepid demand and responded leaving production as it was.

OPEC is indeed forecasting world oil demand to increase in the second half of 2015 and in 2016, with growth driven by non-OECD countries. But nothing quite like what it was in 2014.

There was one rather intriguing development, for according to El-Badri it seems we’ve all got it wrong. The so-called, OPEC production quota, it turns out isn’t a quota at all. "It is not a quota as such, but rather a recommendation given to members which we expect them to take," said the longstanding Secretary General.

He also said OPEC in fact had no target price, when asked if the Iranians' opinion that US$75 per barrel would be adequate was a view he shared.

“OPEC does not have a so-called oil price target. I agree that there are income disparities within OPEC. We have rich oil exporters and poor oil exporters; our decision in November [to hold production] as well as what we have decided today is in the interest of all members.”

On the supply side, non-OPEC growth in 2015 is expected to be just below 700,000 barrels per day, which is only around one-third of the growth witnessed in 2014. That's all from Vienna for the moment folks. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. OPEC Secretariat, Helferstorferstrasse 17, Vienna, Austria © Gaurav Sharma

OPEC's 167th meet: The crude story so far

The Oilholic is back in Vienna, camped up here in the Austrian capital for OPEC’s latest deliberations with an extended round of market chatter in the shape of the organisation’s once-in-two years International Seminar (which concluded on Thursday) ahead of the minister’s summit.

Not all 12 OPEC members are having sleepless nights. The mood in some camps is pretty placid, and not at all dark as some would have you believe. Two days of the international seminar have been fascinating. The sixth in the series saw a procession of CEOs come and go, but Ryan Lance, CEO of ConocoPhillips, delivered a blinder of a speech telling his hosts – shale was here to stay. 

Representing the buyers’ club, Indian Petroleum Minister Dharmendra Pradhan bluntly called for a revision of terms and conditions on which his country, a major client of OPEC exporters, imports oil. Both comments stood out for the Oilholic in terms of robustness. Here’s one take in a column for Forbes.

There were plenty of spot reports for Sharecast to share around too. In wake of the oil price decline, several CEOs – including CEO of Royal Dutch Shell Ben van Beurden, Total CEO Patrick Pouyanne, Eni Claudio Descalzi and Chevron chairman & CEO John Watson - called for a rethink in industry strategy (click here for report). 

Emerging market demand or non-OECD demand remained a recurring theme for OPEC as well as wider industry commentators with member ministers and Big Oil bosses queuing up to point out Asia is where most of their crude product’s demand will come from. 

Even before the ministers have convened there is palpable sense here in Vienna, that OPEC would not move to alter its production quota of 30 million barrels per day (bpd), given that it’s already ‘officially’ pumping 930,000 bpd more than that, with unofficial estimates putting it some 1.5 million barrels above.

There’s always the element of surprise, but that element seems to be missing here, especially on crude matters. Finally, the Oilholic leaves you with a view of OPEC Gala Dinner on Wednesday night (see above right) where one met a lot of old friends and made yet newer ones. This post is just to get the ball rolling, more from Vienna, very, very shortly. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo 1: OPEC's 6th International Seminar, Hofburg Palace, Vienna © OPEC Seminar Gala Dinner, Vienna City Hall, Austria, June 2015.

US oil production decline much less than feared

As the latest visit to Houston, Texas nears its conclusion, the Oilholic walked wistfully past a petrol station in the Lone Star state. What European motorists wouldn’t give for US$2.49 (£1.61) per US gallon (3.79 litres) to fill up their cars. That was the price was this morning (see left)!

Ditching wistfulness and moving on to price of the crude stuff, the latest energy outlook report from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) sees Brent averaging $61 per barrel in 2015, with WTI averaging around $55. The EIA also expects a decline in crude oil production stateside from June onwards through to September.

However, there is little anecdotal evidence here on the ground in Houston to suggest the Eagle Ford is slowing down if activity elsewhere is. Furthermore, feedback from selected attendees at two events here – Baker & McKenzie’s 2015 Oil & Gas Institute 2015 and the Mergermarket Energy Forum – alongside most experts this blogger has spoken to since arrival, point to the said production decline being much less than feared.

On average, most opined that we’d be looking at a decline of between 35,000 to 45,000 barrels per day (bpd) this year. It would imply that US production would still stay within a very respectable 9.1 to 9.3 million bpd range with much of the drop coming from North Dakota. As if with eerie timing, American Eagle’s filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, following its inability to service debt on plays in North Dakota (and Montana), provided a near instant case in point.

Overall picture is less clear for 2016. If the oil price stays where it is, we could see a US production decline in the region of 60,000 to 100,000 bpd. EIA has estimated the decline might well be towards the upper end of the range. 

It comes after analysts at Goldman Sachs labelled the recent oil prices “rally” as being a bit ahead of itself. Or to quote their May 11 email to clients in verbatim: “While low prices precipitated the market rebalancing, we view the recent rally as premature.

“The oil market focus has dramatically shifted over the past month, from fearing a breach of US crude oil storage capacity to reflecting a well under way oil market rebalancing. We view this shift in sentiment and positioning as excessive relative to still weak fundamentals.”

The Oilholic has repeatedly said over the past six weeks that both benchmarks are likely to stay within the $50-75 barrel range, as the decline in the number of operational oil rigs stateside was not high enough (yet) to trigger persistently lower US production. EIA data and feedback here in Houston supports such conjecture.

Meanwhile, the front page of the Financial Times loudly, but bleakly, declared on Tuesday that “more than $100 billion of projects” were on ice with Canada hit the hardest. According to the newspaper’s research, Shell, BP, Statoil and ConocoPhillips have all led moves to curtail capital spending on 26 major projects in 13 countries.

Speaking of ConocoPhillips, its CEO Ryan Lance has joined an ever increasing chorus stateside of oil industry bosses calling on the US government to lift its 40-year plus ban on crude exports. 

At a conference in Asia, Lance told Bloomberg that the Houston-based oil and gas producer had sufficient production capacity stateside to cater the global market and ensure stable domestic supply. Right, so there’s no danger to Houstonians paying $2.49 per gallon to fill up their cars then?

To be fair, the ConocoPhillips boss is not alone in calling for a lifting of the ban. Since last July, the Oilholic has counted at least 27 independents, many mid-tier US-listed oil and gas producers including Hess Corp and Continental Resources, and almost all of the majors voicing a similar opinion.

They can say what they like; there won’t be any movement on this front until there is a new occupant in the White House. That’s all from Houston on this visit folks, its time for the big flying bus home. Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Price display board at a Shell Petrol Station in Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, May 2015.

Talking Russia, China, shale 'debt' & more in Texas

The Oilholic finds himself in Houston, Texas for Baker & McKenzie’s 2015 Oil & Gas Institute. When yours truly was last in Texas back in February, the mood was rather sombre as leading oil futures benchmarks were still on a downward slide.

That was then, what we have now is stagnancy in the US$50-75 per barrel price range which probably encompasses both the WTI and Brent. We are not getting away from the said range anytime soon as one noted in a column for Forbes last Friday before flying out here.

Given the nature of such discourse, some delegates here at the Institute agreed and others disagreed with the Oilholic’s take on the short-term direction of the oil markets, especially as a lot is going on in this ‘crude’ world that such industry events are particularly sound in bringing to the fore.

The 2015 instalment of this particular Baker & McKenzie event had a great array of speakers and delegates – from Shell to Citigroup, Cameron International to Chevron. The legal eagles, the macroeconomists, the internationalists, the sector specialists, the industry veterans, and of course the opinionated, who never sit on the fence on matters shaping the direction of the market, were all there in good numbers.

(L to R) Louis J. Davis, Greg McNab, Natalie Regoli, James Donnell and David Hackett of Baker & McKenzie discuss the North American Market in wake of the oil price decline

The situation in Russia propped up fairly early on in proceedings. Alexey Frolov, a legal expert from Baker & McKenzie’s Moscow office, was keen to point out that it was not just the sanctions that were hurting Russia’s oil & gas industry; related macroeconomics of the day was sapping confidence away as well.

But Frolov also pointed to a degree of resilience within Russian confines, and a more flexible domestic taxation regime which was helping sustain high production levels unseen since the collapse of the Soviet Union. It does remain unclear though how long Russia can keep this up.

Meanwhile, Cameron International’s Vice President and Deputy General Counsel Brad Eastman flagged up something rather interesting. “We see Chinese companies continue to back rig building projects, even if they are being mothballed elsewhere in the world given the current market conditions. Chinese companies wish to continue their march in to the rig-building industry.”

Here’s China indulging in something that is really bold, some say unusual. So even if no one is exactly queuing up to buy or lease those Chinese rigs, it is another example that China operates on a whole different level to rest of the natural resources players and participants.

As for US shale, people say there is distressed debt out there and the end might be supposedly nigh for some small players. Well hear this – based on the Oilholic’s direct research here in Texas of looking into 37 independent US players, sometimes known as mom n’ pop oil & gas firms, and another 11 mid-sized companies; a dollar of their debt would fetch between 83 cents to 92 cents if hypothetically sold by their creditors.

That’s hardly distressed debt even at the lower end of the range. On hearing the Oilholic’s findings, Louis J. Davis, Chair of Baker & McKenzie’s North America Oil & Gas Practice, said: “An 8 to 17 cents discount does not constitute as distressed. Rewind the clock back to 2008-09 and you’d be looking at 35 to 40 cents to the dollar on unprofitable plays – that’s distress. This is not.”

Quite simply, creditors and investors are keeping the faith. But to curb the Oilholic’s enthusiasm, alas Davis added the words “for now”.

“You have to remember that many players [both large and small] would be coming off their existing oil price hedges by the end of the current calendar year. That’s when we’ll really know who’s in trouble or not.

“However, blanket assumptions that US shale, and by extension some independents are dead in the water, is a load of nonsense. Usual caveats apply to the Bakken players, but nothing I know from clients large or small in the Eagle Ford suggest otherwise,” Davis concluded.

As with events of this nature, the Oilholic of course wears several hats – most notably for Sharecast / Digital Look and Forbes. Hence, it’s worth flagging up other interesting slants and exclusive soundbites mined for these publications by this blogger.

The subject of oil & gas mergers and acquisitions in the current climate dominated the Institute’s morning session, as one wrote on Forbes earlier today. How to deal with the prospect of Iran’s possible return to the crude oil market also came up. Click here for one’s Sharecast report; treading carefully was the verdict of experts and industry players alike.

Separately, a Pemex official described in some detail how UK-listed oil and gas companies were sizing up potential opportunities in Mexico. Lastly, yours truly also had the pleasure of interviewing Anne Ka Tse Hung, a Tokyo-based partner at Baker & McKenzie, for Sharecast on the subject of the LNG industry facing a buyers’ market.

Hung noted that the market in Asia had completely turned on its head for Japanese utilities, from the panic buying of natural gas at a premium in wake of the Fukushima tragedy in 2011, to currently asking exporters to bid for supply contracts as competition intensifies and prices fall. That’s all for the moment from Houston folks! Keep reading, keep it 'crude'!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: A panel session at the Baker & McKenzie 2015 Oil & Gas Institute, Houston, Texas, USA © Gaurav Sharma, May 2015.

UK election result's impact on British Energy Inc

By all accounts, result of the UK General Election on May 7 was simply stunning. Pollsters got it horribly wrong, Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative Party returned with a majority against all expectations, Scottish National Party bagged 56 out of 59 parliamentary seats in the ‘oil hub’ of Scotland - all the ingredients to excite politically minded scribes and the general public alike. The Oilholic began his experience at Ellwood Atfield’s splendid election night bash in Westminster (photo above left) ushering in news of the first exit poll predicting the Conservatives were going to be the largest party with 316 members of parliament.

As events unfolded into early hours of the morning and late afternoon the next day, Cameron’s Conservatives returned with 331 MPs and a slim majority putting to bed all talk of a hung parliament. This blogger was up when Labour heavyweights Ed Balls, Douglas Alexander, Jim Murphy and Liberal Democrats ministers Vince Cable, Ed Davey, Lynne Featherstone and Danny Alexander all lost their seats.

Resignation of the hapless Labour leader Ed Miliband who managed to deliver his party’s worst election result since 1983 followed, along with that of Nick Clegg, now former deputy prime minister and Liberal Democrat leader. Cameron soon walked back into Downing Street after meeting the Queen and telling her he’d now form a majority Conservative government.

Having enjoyed the drama of election night well into sunrise the next day, it’s worth pondering what the result means for the UK’s energy industry in general and the oil and gas business in particular. Afterall, the Oilholic did fret about the direction of the market in his pre-election column for Forbes.

For starters, Ed Miliband’s barmy energy price freeze isn’t going to happen. A daft idea, daftly presented to maximum populist effect just didn’t work and is now in the dustbin of political history. This blogger expects ratings agencies to ease up both on UK-listed energy utilities Centrica, the owner of British Gas, and SSE, another service provider as well as the sector in general. 

Unsurprisingly, both stocks jumped as the entire London market welcomed the result on May 8 morning with the FTSE 100 momentarily returning back above 7,000 points. Nonetheless, Cameron’s government faces a very serious challenge of planning investment towards creaking energy infrastructure – from nuclear to renewables – ensuring the lights are kept on. By some estimates, the required capital expenditure could be as high as £330 billion by 2030.

Switching to the mainstream oil and gas business, both the Conservative victory in the UK and an SNP landslide in Scotland are broadly positive for various reasons. As this blogger has noted before, Chancellor George Osborne’s taxation policies turned positive for the industry towards the end of the last parliament, as the oil price decline began to bite North Sea players. 

Collective measures put into effect back in March imply that the UK’s total tax levy would fall from 60% to 50%, giving a much needed breather to those prospecting in the North Sea. Any further stimulus measures for the better are unlikely to be disrupted by the SNP, even if they do have a broader agenda of roughing up other government programmes both North and South of the Scottish border.

This is broadly good for the industry, as it goes through a challenging period and grapples with the restructuring in Aberdeen triggered by companies as large as BP and as small as independent operations services providers. 

Finally, turning attention to the new energy minister Amber Rudd, a Conservative MP for Hastings, who has been appointed as the successor to Ed Davey; the choice is a great one. Obviously, her credentials are solid or she wouldn’t be here. Gauging the response of the wider industry, most have welcomed the appointment.

Rudd is seen as conscientious and hard working minister. Even Greenpeace sent out a release welcoming her to the job, hoping that she’d bring the same energy to implementing the Climate Change Act, as she did to fight the corner of fisheries in her last government remit.

With a challenging portfolio, Rudd has her work cut out and we wish her well, especially as she sets about the arduous task of attracting investment to the sector. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’!

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: Ellwood Atfield election night party, May 7, 2015 © Gaurav Sharma

Streamlining ‘crude’ corporations in tough times

In tougher times, operational efficiencies - often brought about by digital streamlining - do matter and the oil and gas business is most certainly going through a rough patch. Yet, despite living in an increasingly digital world, most in the business view IT through a prism of functionality rather than one of enablement and efficiencies. 

Afterall, when you think of the energy business in general and big oil in particular, it is all about physical assets, drilling and generating not servers and computers. Sometimes, a change of circumstances provides the necessary jolt and that circumstance has been the oil price decline. 

As every oil and gas and oilfield services company, large or small, listed or independent is scrambling around to save costs; suddenly many are meaningfully warming up to the premise of IT services management [or ITSM] - a concept that has been around for a while, but has not tickled the fancy of big oil to the same extent as big banking or big pharma.

With IT driven processes streamlining and merging functions ranging from human resource management to data management, organising emergency response to a centralised incident logging platform - the idea is has savings at its core. The Oilholic went exploring its potential at the recently concluded Knowledge 15 Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada; an event put together by ServiceNow (NYSE:NOW), one of the market leaders in the sphere. 

 

The company has been notching up the concept with each passing year. From giving the corporate world its Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering to Software as a service (SaaS), to IT and infrastructure as service, ServiceNow simply defines what it brings to the solutions table these days as “Everything as a Service”.

Banners proudly proclaiming the strategy were all around the Mandalay Bay Convention Centre; venue of the event (see photo above). Everything is indeed in play - name a process optimisation slant, and a solution could be conjured up, as ServiceNow CEO Frank Slootman told this blogger in an exclusive Forbes interview.

And while the oil and gas sector remains behind the curve, attitudes are changing according to Slootman. Most in big oil are keenly observing how alternative energy and utilities companies are adopting ITSM to improve procedures and save costs, as the Oilholic noted in another Forbes article. 

Furthermore, KPMG’s IT advisory partner Phil Crozier opines that a wave of mergers and acquisitions within the sector could further the drive. “Hypothetically speaking, let’s look at Shell’s bid for BG Group. The person who is in-charge of IT operations in that sort of a setting does not get told how to bring two organisations together, merely a percentage of some sorts – say 20% – to take off the cost base.

“Now, the only way you can efficiently achieve those sorts of savings would be via process efficiencies and simplification in the approach taken by the two firms. That’s where digital process optimisation comes in.”

That drive is gathering momentum. The Oilholic found several energy sector executives around the convention floor eagerly exploring ITSM avenues. ServiceNow already counts the likes of Valero, Statoil, GDF Suez, GE Energy and several others among its growing client portfolio in the sector.

However, there is still a long way to go before ServiceNow or its bitter rival BMC can put the sector at par with ITSM adoption at big pharma, big finance or big tech. Anecdotal evidence suggests 2015-16 could see many big oil sceptics recognise the potential, even if under financial duress.

Of course, for the moment, you’ll just have to take the Oilholic’s word for it. One found it very difficult to get sector executives to talk about their potential plans on record. The topic is a sensitive one and outsourcing – which forms a component of all this – has been a political hot potato for better parts of a decade.

Here at Knowledge 15, some delegates even claimed to have reduced their headline back-office costs by as much as 50% over a period of 5 to 8 years. The potential for savings and efficiencies is almost, always accompanied by a reduction in headcount. As for the oil and gas sector, forget the back office - currently its shedding employees back, front and centre.

While it’s hard to be dispassionate about job losses, this is about something deeper. To quote one energy sector executive: “A dollar saved elsewhere in the organisation via effective ITSM solutions deployment for procedural matters, could be spent in upstream operations which is what every oil and gas exploration company is really about.”

IT driven streamlining seems to be finally bringing about that belated realisation for some. That’s all for the moment folks! Keep reading, keep it ‘crude’! 

To follow The Oilholic on Twitter click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Google+ click here.
To follow The Oilholic on Forbes click here.
To email: gaurav.sharma@oilholicssynonymous.com

© Gaurav Sharma 2015. Photo: ServiceNow’s ‘Everything as a service’ banner at Knowledge 15, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA © Gaurav Sharma, April 2015.