Hearing Meg isn't happy with how much was being spent on pet projects, funneled from profitable GOA to the underperforming UK or the lacking of an allocation model and determining if any of these business units care actually afford their space. Without the HR cover we'll see if that leadership makes it through this upcoming RIF.
8 replies (most recent on top)
I would agree to the competence today, but in future you can develop cheaper resources just as well.
@t1 much cheaper than the Americans and much more competent then those other regions you mentioned
London listed company. Uk runs significant global operations not just North Sea.
North Sea loss is for sure a blow, and will see lots leave the BP Org
We could limp along at lower profitability in the NS if there were some future prospects.
Now that NS has no future why develop/maintain a large UK workforce? What is the unique talent proposition there? Brazilians, Indonesians, Indians and Americans that’s the future of BP.
@kc You do realise there are other reasons to sell a business other than profit. And there is a difference between sufficient profit and any profit.
Any idea on lifting costs in the NS?I know them telling me what I'm missing...
The reality is the bonds MA took out to pay the dividend are a millstone and we are selling off parts of the business to pay down those. That does not mean the business is unprofitable.
@b4 the UK is not profitable. Have you heard the North Sea is for sale??????
The UK folks are woke and don’t eat beef.
@b4 Trump's zero sum attitude is tainting the entire region
No-one would be happy with the previous strategy. Her views are what any sane person would think. There seems to be a strange obsession on these boards about pitting GoA vs the UK. The UK is still profitable. What's the beef?