Excuses are easy to find and the industry is pretty turbulent, especially in today’s economy. I can understand that, but nobody can tell me it needed to be done in this manner. Were cut’s in this degree really necessary?
5 replies (most recent on top)
The visionaries don’t overspend like they did or this would have been predicted!
Those who stay can’t move!
It may be, but it shouldn't have to come to the CEO acting on behalf of the shareholders. The great CEOs are visionaries, and they make smart decisions that make money and the investment community is drawn to their success. It seems like the overwhelming majority of E&P CEOs these days have a remarkable lack of vision and are simply puppets for whatever investors care about this quarter (e.g. production? Permian? shale?). The Wall Street desire for more production has led to an astronomical destruction of capital in the shale sector.
i mean... that is his job. it his quite literally the only thing he is supposed to do as CEO of the company: act on behalf of the shareholders. by law it is required of him.
What is a 'Johnson'?
Scott is on the Johnson of the stock holders. Period.