• 6 hours PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 8 hours Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 10 hours Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 11 hours Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 12 hours Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 13 hours Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 14 hours Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 16 hours New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 17 hours Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 18 hours Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 1 day Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 1 day British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 1 day Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 1 day Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 2 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 2 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 2 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 2 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 2 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 2 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 2 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 2 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 3 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 3 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 3 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 3 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 4 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 4 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 4 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 4 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 4 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 4 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 4 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 4 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 4 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls
  • 4 days Gazprom Neft Unhappy With OPEC-Russia Production Cut Deal
  • 5 days Disputed Venezuelan Vote Could Lead To More Sanctions, Clashes
  • 5 days EU Urges U.S. Congress To Protect Iran Nuclear Deal
  • 5 days Oil Rig Explosion In Louisiana Leaves 7 Injured, 1 Still Missing
  • 5 days Aramco Says No Plans To Shelve IPO
Alt Text

What’s Stopping An Oil Price Rally?

Oil prices rallied in Q3…

Alt Text

Kobe Steel Scandal Could Rattle Nuclear Industry

The scandal at Japan’s Kobe…

Michael McDonald

Michael McDonald

Michael is an assistant professor of finance and a frequent consultant to companies regarding capital structure decisions and investments. He holds a PhD in finance…

More Info

Why Oil CEOs Are Overpaid

LNG Terminal

Imagine how workers would behave if they were paid not on the basis of their output or productivity, but simply on time spent at the office regardless of what they were doing with that time. It’s likely that many employees would choose to spend evenings at the office watching TV and eating dinner. Some might even choose to sleep at work. None of this would be helpful to their employers, but it would let the employee receive a bigger paycheck.

That situation, as absurd as it sounds, is essentially the way that many oil companies are still being run these days at least with respect to their CEOs. In the last decade, significant numbers of oil company CEOs have found their pay tied not to profits or a firm’s stock, but rather to production levels of the company. Unfortunately, despite the biggest oil bust in decades, many CEOs at large production companies are still paid based on production, not profits.

The problem with this approach is that at current oil prices, significant amounts of current production are not profitable. That’s not to say those wells never will be, but they aren’t now. By incentivizing current production rather than current profitability, or better yet, long-term profits, firms are destroying shareholder value. Instead the focus ought to be on incentivizing CEOs to cut costs and build the leanest and most profitable organizations possible. That might seem obvious, yet that’s not how many firms have set up their compensation structures. Related: Flower Power Takes On A New Meaning With Pollen Batteries

The CEOs of Continental (CLR), Devon (DVN), and Chesapeake (CHK), for instance, all derived a substantial portion of their 2015 bonuses based on production and reserves rather than profits.

According to the Wall Street Journal, 30 percent of DVN’s CEO bonus, 40 percent of CLR’s CEO bonus, and 34 percent of CHK’s CEO bonus were all tied to production. At Chesapeake, CEO Doug Lawler earned $1.56 million in pay for exceeding production and reserve targets for instance. That contributed to a 4.9 percent increase in CHK’s production compared to a 2 percent target. That increased production did not help shareholders though. Earnings collapsed during the year and all the while CHK’s share price imploded, falling 77 percent in 2015.

Chesapeake is far from the only firm that is taking this misguided and destructive approach towards its shareholders though. Incentive pay for CEOs at production companies helps to explain in large part why U.S. products have been slow to cut output even as prices have tanked. U.S. oil production has declined only 9 percent from record highs despite the fact that the vast majority of oil companies are now unprofitable and would be better off going into long term survival mode and emphasizing profitability rather than break-neck growth. Related: When Will Solar Overtake Oil?

To be fair, the problem is more complex than simple myopic CEO bonus structures. Wall Street analysts have historically tended to favor production companies with significant future growth prospects rather than current earnings. That in turn gave companies an incentive to look for growth in production and reserves rather than profits. Maximizing sales makes little sense in a pure valuation framework, but analysts at major Wall Street banks have been slow to realize this and update their models to account for the more difficult to measure cost of future production.

Similarly, most production firms are in large part dependent on banks for a critical mass of their financing these days. Banks have made loans largely on the basis on untapped reserves as collateral. This misses the key point that collateral trapped underground is only worth something if it can profitably be extracted.

On the whole then, it’s clear that firm’s aren’t alone in their misguided pursuit of production over profits.

By Michael McDonald of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • T. Lain on June 01 2016 said:
    Interesting article Mr. McDonald, however, I disagree with the basis of your article. Your basis assumes that Boards of Directors willingly reward their CEOs for meaningless parameters. Why would they do that? Are they misguided too? Many of them come from outside the oil and gas industry. Production growth, in and of itself, is not what their goal is. It is profitable production growth. No one could have predicted what oil and gas prices have done, so how could the CEOs know that production growth would be less important than say, debt restructuring, longer term hedges, cost reduction, etc. Hind-sight is always 20/20.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News