Impersonator wrote:Legends Return wrote:Impersonator,
We meet again. You know who this is. Thanks for your note; very helpful and I look forward to making my return with Legends '05.
I see you're with Fugro these days - what is your view on the Brent strip and the go forward strategy for the entity? With increasing rig counts in the US (in particular within the Marcellus and Permian basins), do you see a similar value uplift and capital efficiencies for the OFS's based in Europe? What are the beta's trading at for European OFS's these days? Keen to have your thoughts on the effectiveness of 3D and 4D seismic surveys in a basin like the NS where IOC's and pure-plays are operating at best on cash-breakeven basis.
Many thanks,
Legends '04
Well hello there,
I can't say I recall too well but yes a vague recollection perhaps. I remember some bans
. How did you find me at Fugro ha! I think the OFS service companies have their work cutout for them given where crude is trading. There is still a lot of capex overhang but generally speaking the effectiveness of the 4d seismic surveys does help us to locate more unproven/proven reserves and improve mining ratios. I'm more working on the software side for implementation of geospatial data into vectors for the 3d seismic studies that our FPSO and dredges do. Our IOC clients have surprisingly been resilient through oil price declines.
How is life treating you?
toodleoo,
Impersonator
Indeed - assumed certain players disliked our brand of high-octane, explosive Tennis. Will be great to reignite a couple of rivalries on such a seamless game engine like Super Tennis. I would consider you a rival, but you were that atypical 2nd round routine Wimbledon win
.
I think it's pretty obvious that any entity in the O&G service chain has their work cut out for them given the current strip - its like saying Djarvik is a substandard tennis player; everyone knows that. I was referencing European-focused OFS names as it relates to capacity absorption - in the US and Canada, high-spec land rigs, pressure pumping, and frac sand have all seen solid price recovery to date through the early stages of the up-cycle. The pace and trajectory of equipment reactivations will remain a focus and no doubt is far weaker for a company like Fugro and the European space; land revitalization remains a key issue as well. What's your definition of capex overhang for Fugro? I see it completely the opposite - Fugro have exercised capital discipline on their b/s and implemented significant cost controls since the beginning of the crisis; an indicative range of only EUR75-100 mm y-o-y. Not sure what your vague statement on seismic surveys has to do with continued execution risk/underperformance in the North Sea market for Fugro - if anything creative solutions around decommissioning liabilities is something which should remain a key consideration for revenue growth. The greatest 'overhang' (to use it properly) to Fugro's share price are 1) operational issues across core business segments, 2) unsuccessful monetization of non-core business segments, 3) working capital and ND/EBITDA targets are not achieved and 4) oil stays low for longer than expected. I was hoping for greater technical sparring on your end, but its a very interesting company nonetheless and wish the wider team nothing but the best.
Our IOC clients have surprisingly been resilient through oil price declines
Did you get that from Pengrowth's Corporate Presentation? Again - I was talking about your IOC clients in the North Sea, where they have struggled over the last three years.
and as for Djarvik, I think we're on the same page regarding him owning a rather large bark, one that outdid his bite. For what its worth he was never popular with the board here, nor with the players, but he kept things in check. 
its locked now)