雪佛龙的豪赌

    雪佛龙（Chevron）如果想提振日益缩水的利润，或许应该在控制支出方面下功夫。

    上周五，石油行业巨头雪佛龙公布了令人失望的收入报告，业绩远远低于分析师们的季度预测。这家公司认为原因在于糟糕的天气、货币兑换和不可预测的生产问题，然而，真正的罪魁祸首或许是它支出的大幅增加和随后的产量下降。

    虽然麻烦不断，雪佛龙却依然在钻探成本和政治风险更高的地区，继续疯狂地投资各种项目。增长固然重要，但在某些情况下，这种做法可能得不偿失。雪佛龙或许应该学学竞争对手埃克森的做法——削减开支，返还给投资者更多现金。

    雪佛龙与华尔街的沟通也并不顺利。雪佛龙是美国仅次于埃克森美孚（ExxonMobil）的“第二大”石油公司。然而，它却连续四个季度未能达到分析师的预期。最近的一次便是在周五。当天，公司公布，2014年第1季度的调整后每股净收益为2.36美元，比分析师的平均预期低了15美分。

    虽然雪佛龙第一季度依然有45亿美元的利润，但它510亿美元的季度收入同比减少了5%，尽管事实上第一季度的天然气与石油价格依旧坚挺，最高值甚至还高于去年同期的水平。

    为了避免因为没能达到预期而造成的投资者恐慌，各家公司往往会在公布收入之前降低预期。雪佛龙首席执行官约翰•沃森或许认为，他早就已经这么做过了。今年三月份，约翰•沃森将2017年的日产量指导从330万桶下调到了310万桶。

    上一季度，雪佛龙的勘探与生产成本从89亿美元增加到94亿美元。尽管如此，它整个季度的总产量却出现了大幅减少，甚至在降低产量指导之后，依然远远低于分析师的预期。它第一季度的净石油当量产量为每天260万桶，去年同期为每天265万桶。其中最明显的是雪佛龙国际油气产量的减少。据公司报告显示，雪佛龙第一季度国际油气生产的收入为34亿美元，比去年同期减少了14亿美元。

    沃森将产量减少归咎于各种原因，从哈萨克斯坦的问题（雪佛龙每8桶石油便有1桶产自哈萨克斯坦）到不利的货币兑换等，不一而足。认为这些情况只是一次性现象，产量会逐渐恢复正常，这种想法当然很好，但却掩盖了雪佛龙国际能源生产业务的风险。真实情况是，雪佛龙在与一些声名狼藉的地方打交道。这些地区的政府腐败专制，对国际合同精神没有一丝尊重。

    例如，在业绩发布会上，雪佛龙称计划今年在阿根廷的巴卡穆埃尔盆地钻探140口油井，成为阿根廷最大的外资能源公司。但如今的阿根廷已经不再是最适合做生意的国家，尤其是对于外国公司而言。毕竟，几年前，阿根廷刚刚将其YPF石油公司（YPF）重新国有化，把西班牙的雷普索尔公司（Repsol）一脚踢开。雷普索尔提出了至少100亿美元的损害赔偿。如果它能得到一小部分赔偿就已经算走运了。有人会说雪佛龙进入阿根廷充满风险，但看起来，这简直是不计后果的举动。

    然而，阿根廷还不是雪佛龙最近投下重注的唯一高风险国家。3月份，雪佛龙宣布获得了缅甸大块海域的勘探许可权，但半军事化的缅甸政府从来都与稳定和理性决策无缘。雪佛龙通过旗下的子公司优尼科（Unocal）已经在缅甸经营了一段时间，但这个地区的政治变化使得追加投资看起来并不明智。与阿根廷一样，缅甸政府一时兴起的决议随时都有可能发生变化，让雪佛龙陷入困境。

    对于各家能源公司而言，总有一两个国家让他们后悔涉足其中。由于石油项目往往需要多年时间才能有所进展，等到正式投入生产时，项目所在的国家可能早已物是人非，能源公司届时又要去应对截然不同的政客和环境。

    当然，能够确保石油公司绝对安全的国家也许只有美国和加拿大。但在不稳定的国家投资数十亿美元或许并不是明智的选择。埃克森在今年早些时候决定削减勘探和生产预算，因为它预测未来这方面没有太大机会。这是一个充满风险的举措，最终可能会对它自己造成伤害。而雪佛龙则选择了相反的道路，下重注勘探新石油——不论这些能源来自哪个国家。

    到目前为止，投资者并没有对这两种意见表明立场。自埃克森和雪佛龙在勘探与生产领域各行其是以来，两家公司的股价变化却仍然保持着一致。刚刚过去的一个季度显示，雪佛龙的支出远远超出了分析师们能够接受的程度。但雪佛龙似乎下定决心要走一条风险更高的路。这条路是不是最佳的选择？或许只有时间才能告诉我们答案。（财富中文网）

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    Chevron may need to rein in the spending if it ever hopes to pump up its sagging profits.

    The oil giant reported sour earnings on Friday, missing analyst quarterly estimates by a wide margin. While the company blamed the miss on bad weather, currency exchange, and unforeseeable production problems, it was the massive upsurge in spending and subsequent decline in production that appeared to be the real culprit.

    Despite its troubles in the field, Chevron (CVX) continues to spend like mad on projects in questionable regions of the world where it faces high drilling costs and expropriation risk. While growth is important, it may not be worth it in certain cases. Chevron may be better served by following rival Exxon's lead and cutting spending and returning more of its cash to investors.

    Chevron has had a tough time communicating with Wall Street. The company, America's "second" oil giant, behind ExxonMobil (XOM), managed to miss analysts' estimates for the past four quarters in a row. The latest miss occurred on Friday, when the company reported adjusted net income of $2.36 a share for the first quarter of 2014, missing estimates by an average of 15 cents a share.

    While the company still made a profit of some $4.5 billion for the quarter, its quarterly revenue of $51 billion was 5% lower than it was a year earlier, all despite the fact that natural gas and oil prices remained strong in the quarter, maintaining even higher highs than it did during the same period last year.

    Companies usually lower expectations in advance of earnings to avoid the sort of investor panic that follows a miss. John Watson, Chevron's chief executive, probably thought he did just that in March when he lowered the company's production guidance numbers through 2017 from 3.3 million to 3.1 million barrels a day.

    Despite boosting exploration and production costs in the last quarter to $9.4 billion from $8.9 billion, the oil giant actually reported a decrease in production volumes across the board for the quarter, far worse than analysts had anticipated, even with the lowered production guidance. The company's net oil-equivalent production was 2.6 million barrels per day in the first quarter, down from 2.65 million barrels per day from the same time last year. The most glaring decrease in production volumes came from Chevron's international portfolio, where the company reported earnings of $3.4 billion for the quarter, a whopping $1.4 billion decrease from the first quarter of 2013.

    Watson blamed the decreased production volume on a variety of issues, ranging from problems in Kazakhstan, the source of one out of every eight barrels of oil it pumps out of the ground, to unfavorable currency exchange. It would be nice to think that these were just one-off events and that production will proceed normally from now on, but that would be denying the risk profile of Chevron's international energy portfolio. The truth is, Chevron is mixed up in some pretty shady places where corrupt and dictatorial governments have little to no respect for international contract law.

    For example, Chevron said on its earnings call that it was planning on drilling 140 wells in Argentina's Vaca Muerta basin this year, making it the lead foreign energy company in the country. Now, Argentina isn't the friendliest of countries to do business in -- especially if you're a foreign company. After all, it was just a couple of years ago that Argentina re-nationalized its energy company YPF, kicking Spain's Repsol out of the country. Repsol is claiming at least $10 billion worth of damages. It will be lucky if it gets a fraction of that. Some would say Chevron's involvement in Argentina is risky, but it seems pretty reckless.

    But Argentina isn't the only high-risk country Chevron has double-downed on recently. In March, the company said it had amassed a large acreage position off the coast of Myanmar, whose quasi-military-led government isn't known for its stability and rational decision-making. While Chevron, through its Unocal subsidiary, has been in the country for a while, political changes in the region make further investment appear unwise. Like Argentina, the whims of the government could shift at any moment, leaving the energy giant in the lurch.

    To be sure, every energy company does business with one or two countries they wish they'd never set foot in. Since oil projects take years to get off the ground, by the time production starts rolling, a company could be dealing with an entirely different set of political actors and circumstances than when they first negotiated their entry.

    At the end of the day, the only countries where an oil company is totally safe are probably the United States and Canada. But spending billions in countries that are unstable may not be the smartest use of investor cash. Exxon decided earlier this year that it would cut its exploration and production budget because it saw a dearth of opportunities on the horizon. That was a risky move, one that might end up hurting the oil giant. But Chevron has taken the opposite path, doubling down on the search for new oil -- no matter where it leads them.

    So far, investors haven't decided which view is correct. Exxon and Chevron's stock prices have moved in lockstep with each other since the two diverged on the exploration and production front. This latest quarter shows that Chevron is spending way more than analysts are comfortable with. But Chevron seems committed to taking the riskier path. Only time will tell if it is the best one.