RE:Performance LevelThanks Namsoc and Honeypot
Namsoc your schedule showing the production performance whether by quarter or by year has a generally downward slopping curve, obviously not the kind of performance any of us want to see. I believe you are using 350,000 BOPD as the production capacity but has been discussed before I thought there was capacity built for 375,000 BOPD. If you use 375,000 as the denominator in calculating % of productive capacity the results look worse. I am not trying to look at operations in a poor light but rather to get a fix on where we are. The past is the past however I think we should get much better visibility into what the oil production targets are going forward not simply words saying we are targeting gradual improvement, to vague.
Honepot,
Your call to action is important in that as shareholders we need to make management aware of our concerns. I would not be surprised to see institutional activist investors get more involved. Compensation comparables are difficult for COS as it is the only company I am aware of that has a joint venture piece of a single asset being managed by both Syncrude and Imperial. It seems to me the role COS has is operational oversight and financial and regulatory direct responsibilities, including IR. Those roles while important are far less challenging than more broadly diversified companies have.
So hopefully the board of directors considers all this, which I suspect they do, in coming up with compensation plans. The problem I beleive is our confidence in the board to ensure we have the right people in the right positions being appropriately compensated. The easiest thing to do in this scenario is to simply vote against.
All of this I hope is a short term problem brought on by a rather long and disappointing production profile. When it gets resolved, which I beleive it wil, then I suspect it will be far easier for us to be supportive.