Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

GOA Exploration—A Masterclass in Missed Opportunities

Let’s talk about GOA exploration. Or rather, let’s talk about whatever this slow-motion implosion is pretending to be. Because calling it “exploration” at this point feels like calling a flat tire a transportation strategy.

The whole thing is a total fiasco. No clear goals, no coherent plan, and absolutely no accountability. It’s like watching a group of people try to build a rocket using IKEA instructions written in crayon. Every meeting feels like déjà vu—same confusion, different day.

Now let’s get to the real issue: leadership. The level of professionalism among the managers and team leads is so low it’s practically subterranean. We’re talking about folks who confuse noise with strategy, who think “mentoring” means forwarding a link to a webinar, and whose idea of technical excellence is copy-pasting last year’s slide deck. It’s not just unprofessional—it’s actively counterproductive.

And then came the layoffs. And guess what? The good people—the ones who actually knew what they were doing, who brought real value, who kept the wheels turning despite the chaos—they were the ones left standing. Not because they were protected, but because they were overlooked. Somehow, the folks who could’ve helped fix this mess are gone, while the ones steering it into the ditch are still calling the shots.

It’s frustrating to watch talent get wasted while dysfunction gets promoted. If GOA wants to be taken seriously, it needs a hard reset—starting with leadership that knows the difference between a basin and a buzzword.


by
| 6206 views | | 21 replies (last September 26) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1k5s4xwqa

21 replies (most recent on top)

@ws Check woodmac or any other independent valuation. Developed by a competent operator (llog) Buckskin has an irr around 50% or better, billions in npv. Tubular bells and others have a 0% to negative IRR.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @x4+1k5s4xwqa

@vp+1, you must work for the "highly profitable" Permian. You veered off course, buckskin and tiber are worse than the fields you did mention, so you made my point.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ws+1k5s4xwqa

@sg "not up to chevrons standards for profitability?" Like blind faith? Stampede? Tubular bells? Sh-t, JSM. Those are all terribly marginal projects or worse. You have drank the koolaid. The only reason we could not foresee a profitable development out of buckskin was because of terrible engineers facing no punishment for sandbagging every single component. You can't find a field good enough for these fu--ing profitability standards you think so highly of if we are the highest cost and slowest operator

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vp+1k5s4xwqa

@r3+1 You didn't read the end of my post. Chevron has high profitability expectations of its deepwater projects, neither field mentioned was going to make it, regardless of 'reserves' advertised. Profitable for someone else? Maybe for a little while, but not up to Chevron's standards.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @sg+1k5s4xwqa

@qd I think you misunderstood. The extensive studies are meaningless if they produced the wrong answer. If buckskin is a profitable development for its operator, why was exiting it wise? Or was it that CVX facilities and wells are gold plated trash sandbagged into oblivion? Good discoveries ki-led by fatty organizations run by fools drowning the cost structure?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @r3+1k5s4xwqa

@q0, without going into details, buckskin and tiber were well worth getting out of. Both exited during DWEP days, so you know they were well studied. One valuable lesson for GOABU, even if you make a discovery (hopefully someday they will), that doesn't mean it's going to be profitable.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qd+1k5s4xwqa

@pp buckskin is a great producer for its new operator, and bp is racing to build a tiber+ production facility..... Marginal discoveries or chickenshit Chevron mgmt

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @q0+1k5s4xwqa

Dry holes are better and cheaper for GOM. They had marginal discoveries and misspent Billions on appraisal that led nowhere and was eventually written off. How can such continuous poor decision making continue?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pp+1k5s4xwqa

19 or 20 dry holes since ballymore. You couldn’t drill that many consecutive dry holes even if you tried.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @n4+1k5s4xwqa

No commercial oil has been discovered since they ki-led off dwep. The point of only taking home run swings was lost on the last 7 years of managers there, guaranteeing failure.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jm+1k5s4xwqa

Its GOM.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @j5+1k5s4xwqa

What's really sad is that 15 years ago DWEP was a solid, admired exploration group (not surprising then that the last two GOA discoveries, Anchor and Ballymore, came out of the DWEP "factory"). Then, mysteriously, that exploration was turned over to GOMBU, who hadn't had a successful exploration well in several decades, and who excelled only at selling off properties. Like turning over the keys to an F1 racer to a teenager with a learner's permit. That explains no meaningful discoveries since Ballymore, no significant lease sale acquisitions, no strategy. GOABU strategy seems to be to drain Tahiti and (now) Anchor until they are dry. How the mighty have fallen.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @g8+1k5s4xwqa

Exploration leadership in GoM hasn't been great in years, but that's not the only problem. Many of the skilled oil finders have been retired for a while now, the last good ones retired in 2020. So there hasn't been good mentors in years to train new people, they have been simply drilling seismic highs in the last several years and in many cases not finding any sand to speak of.

Let's not forget about the ERT that has gave unrealistic POS, which has been proven in non GOM wells as well. Combine that when managers who promise the next Tahiti or JSM, then continue to not deliver it's no surprise that GOM exploration was removed from the BU.

Point being there's more than one problem. Mature basin, poor leadership that has an ever changing strategy, the lack of proven oil finders, pressure from CVX leadership to deliver.

CVX GoM just needs to be in harvest mode and come to terms with GoM exploration

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fq+1k5s4xwqa

GOA has been beyond terrible in leadership decision making for more than a decade and has destroyed value for the company. We need to exit the basin like our smarter peers.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dv+1k5s4xwqa

GOA never disappoints… just when you think the bar can’t go any lower, a new manager shows up with a shovel.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c3+1k5s4xwqa

Can we all just agree to stop burning $300M/yr and end GOA exploration? Thank you for listening to my TED talk.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c1+1k5s4xwqa

As an employee in another part of the company this post is disappointing for the reality it brings to my concern for the future of the company.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @br+1k5s4xwqa

With this. I would direct new college hire away from Chevron’s ability to mentor and train new talent. Our name is not as valued as our ability to develop talent and show exploration success. Go elsewhere to be an explorer because it’s not at Chevron

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bq+1k5s4xwqa

Exploration is a factory right?!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b8+1k5s4xwqa

Well there is a reason a COOP exploration well hasn't been drilled in years. CVX does drill one of its prospects it's going to be a failure. Even clear failures in n post drill ERT they will spin it in a positive way.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b5+1k5s4xwqa

I sincerely hope I never have to work with an Exploration Team driven by GOA Exploration’s mindset again.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ar+1k5s4xwqa

Post a reply

: