Opinion: Earnings comparisons are fair game

Opinion: Earnings comparisons are fair game

Stockholders got billions that should’ve been retained to cover ferries , schools and dividends.

  • By Ray Matcalfe
  • Thursday, July 2, 2020 12:09pm
  • Opinion

In a My Turn published June 8 in the Juneau Empire, I was accused by Roger Marks of misleading Alaskans in my My Turn comparing BP’s contracts with other oil-owning countries where BP produces their oil for cost plus $2 per barrel profit, while our Legislature lets Alaska’s Big Three producers take a $26 per barrel profit after deducting all their costs.

In an earlier My Turn, Marks accused me of misleading Alaskans, by comparing ConocoPhillips’ highest net profit per barrel outside of Alaska of $11 per barrel to the $26 net profit they made in Alaska last year.

It seems Marks wants to deny Alaskans’ any kind of a reference point to determine how profits from oil are normally divided between those who produce it and those who own it.

But on examination, neither of your arguments meet the smell test.

Marks argues that our producers took big risks in Alaska and deserve to be rewarded for the risks they took in Alaska, and claims they took no risks in Iraq. You argue that all BP did was sign a risk-free “Technical Services Contract” agreeing to take over an operating field, when in fact, the opposite is true.

BP sprouted its wings in 1908 in Iraq, working with Iraqi companies and risking the kinds of failures that often come with exploration. BP’s risks led to the discovery of three giant Prudhoe-sized oilfields in Iraq.

BP graduated from a fledgling exploration company to become an integrated wellhead to gas pump company marketing Iraq’s oil.

In 1974, fed-up with BP taking the lion’s share of the wealth generated from Iraq’s oil, Iraq confiscated everything BP had built and gave them the boot.

Thirty-five years later, BP got back into two of the three Iraqi fields they discovered and developed them by offering to resume production services at the market rate of cost plus $2 per barrel.

Nothing unique about $2 contracts; BP already had similar contracts in Iran, Abu Dhabi, and Kuwait, and so does Exxon, Shell, ENI, and several other companies Alaskans are familiar with.

BP bought into Prudhoe Bay in 1978 when the pipeline was finished, and all the risk was in the rearview mirror. BP bought 53% of Standard Oil of Ohio, Alaska’s largest producer, just after they had announced that their profits were up 149% from 1977 and they, SOHIO, were expecting profits to rise even higher in 1979.

BP bought into a no-risk cash flow that would choke a horse and spent the next 42 years sucking the easy oil out of Prudhoe Bay while doing little to no exploration to replace Prudhoe’s oil when Prudhoe runs dry. While high-grading Alaska’s biggest treasure for cash, BP went from the 13th largest oil company on the planet to third largest by buying up energy companies with obscenely excessive Alaskan profits that so many easily bought Alaskan legislators made possible.

Now, about the claim that it was unfair to compare ConocoPhillips’ $26 net profit per barrel made in Alaska in 2019 to their next highest net profit outside of Alaska in 2019. Conoco’s next highest production profit of $11 per barrel came from a fracking operation that produces a lot of gas with its oil, and because that $11 figure was derived from the combined sale of oil and gas which is measured in its BTU equivalent to oil, but sells for less than oil, I agree, it does bring down the average.

However, two things about the rationale don’t meet the smell test. One, they drilled wishing for pure oil and hit gas. Making the most of a less than desirable situation, they are marketing their oil and getting what they can for the gas. Not the kind of problem they are having in Alaska. Two, $11 is still their highest per barrel net outside of Alaska, — with or without gas, — and even you, “an Oil Economist,” can’t point to a single 2019 production operation outside of Alaska where ConocoPhillips or anyone else who produces crude oil, made half as much as the Big Three made on each barrel of Alaskan oil.

But, as any economist knows, the bottom line to all this minutia boils down to return on investment. How many dollars do you have to spend to get your dollars back plus a few more? Surely you can’t object to that comparison.

In an opinion piece written June 17, by Andrew Jensen, Managing editor of the Alaska Journal of Commerce, Jensen came to Conoco’s defense and said “Because ConocoPhillips is required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to break out its Alaska operations in its quarterly and annual tax filings, we know that in 2019 the company made profits of $1.5 billion in Alaska while spending $1.5 billion on capital investments on the North Slope.” —— I don’t think Jensen had his thinking cap on that day because If Conoco spent $1.5 billion and still had an additional $1.5 billion profit to take home, that calculates to a 100% return on investment.

In comparison, the highest worldwide quarterly earnings Exxon reported in the year of 2019 was their first quarter when they reported an 8.55% return on investment, according to macrotrends.net. For every one hundred dollars invested, Exxon got one hundred eight dollars and fifty-five cents back.

BP’s highest earnings from worldwide operations was also their first quarter. They got 6.21% or $106.21 back for every $100 invested.

ConocoPhillips’ highest 2019 quarterly earnings outside of Alaska was for their third quarter when they reported worldwide earnings of 17.31%. For every $100 they put in, they got $117.31 back.

Except for in Alaska, thanks to two very well paid State Senators who were simultaneously on ConocoPhillips payroll, for every $100 ConocoPhillips, BP, and Exxon invested in Alaska, every one of them got $200 back. Year after year, ConocoPhillips, Exxon, and BP stockholders got billions that should have been retained to cover today’s ferry system, schools, and dividends.

Ray Metcalfe rough-necked and drilled on the North Slope in the early 1970s. He was in the Legislature in the 1970s and 1980s. He chaired the House State Affairs Committee and co-authored the legislation establishing the investment strategy for Alaska’s Permanent Fund. Metcalfe has built several residential subdivisions in Anchorage and he has owned Metcalfe Commercial Real Estate, Inc. since 1976. Columns, My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire. Have something to say? Here’s how to submit a My Turn or letter.

More in Opinion

Web
Have something to say?

Here’s how to add your voice to the conversation.

After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, many Louisiana homes were rebuilt with the living space on the second story, with garage space below, to try to protect the home from future flooding. (Infrogmation of New Orleans via Wikimedia, CC BY-SA)
Misperceptions stand in way of disaster survivors wanting to rebuild safer, more sustainable homes

As Florida and the Southeast begin recovering from 2024’s destructive hurricanes, many… Continue reading

The F/V Liberty, captained by Trenton Clark, fishes the Pacific near Metlakatla on Aug. 20, 2024. (Ash Adams/The New York Times)
My Turn: Charting a course toward seafood independence for Alaska’s vulnerable food systems

As a commercial fisherman based in Sitka and the executive director of… Continue reading

People watch a broadcast of Former President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, delivering a speech at Times Square in New York, on Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2024. (Graham Dickie/The New York Times)
Opinion: The Democratic Party’s failure of imagination

Aside from not being a lifelong Republican like Peter Wehner, the sentiment… Continue reading

A steady procession of vehicles and students arrives at Juneau-Douglas High School: Yadaa.at Kalé before the start of the new school year on Thursday, Aug. 15, 2024. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Let’s consider tightening cell phones restrictions in Juneau schools

A recent uptick in student fights on and off campus has Juneau… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter: Alaskans are smart, can see the advantages of RCV and open primaries

The League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan organization that neither endorses… Continue reading

(Laurie Craig / Juneau Empire file photo)
10 reasons to put country above party labels in election

Like many of you I grew up during an era when people… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letters: Vote no on ballot measure 2 for the future of Alaska

The idea that ranked choice voting (RCV) is confusing is a red… Continue reading

A map shows state-by-state results of aggregate polls for U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump (red) and Kamala Harris (blue), with states too close to call in grey, as of Oct. 29. (Wikimedia Commons map)
Opinion: The silent Republican Party betrayal

On Monday night, Donald Trump reported that two Pennsylvania counties had received… Continue reading

(Clarise Larson / Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: Election presents stark contrasts

This election, both at the state and federal level, presents a choice… Continue reading

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter: Supporting ranked choice voting is the honest choice

Some folks are really up in arms about the increased freedom afforded… Continue reading

Tongass National Forest. (U.S. Forest Service photo)
My Turn: Why I oppose privatization of the Tongass rainforest

Sen. Lisa Murkowski has been trying to privatize the Tongass for years.… Continue reading