So looking at revenue per employee Swn is still trailing peers badly.. Any thought of further cuts ?
Swn $976k per employee
Chk $2.4 million per
Devon $1.68 million per
Cabot $2.43 million
It would take a 20% cut to get in range -- assuming constant revenue or constant v. Peers
Thoughts ?
This is not a valid metric. SWN has less contractors in house and more vertical integration than most so its not apples to apples. I am not saying it is good or bad, just that not a good comparison.
For those few who remember Harold Korell -- its just a totally different company. He actually understood the nuts and bolts of oil and gas and what it took to get results. Not the process oriented culture that developed... Currently the idea is that if we do a process efficiently we will be successful. Rather that are we working on the right things ( the original formula meaning) . I see no way of returning -- we are just a utility cloaked in Millennial loving trappings ... Don't blame anyone, just how things go sometime
Where's Harold when we need him?
Helpful in some ways --the new ventures would obviously be the "worst" -- but to not totally fair, since they should create future value ... It's hard to see how they get back to significant "growth" with the debt they have ; even though a good job of pushing out to 2020. I think they will have to convert that to equity eventually -- obviously dilutive ; but only path to long term improvement .. IMO
I would like to see what the breakdown is per area of operation?
Right -- it's more an indicator than objective ... One would assume with a 40 % staff reduction that you would improve these numbers dramatically ... Those remaining would be stunningly motivated to generate revenue and profit :)
Interesting.
I don't think it would be the objective to cut employees to meet peers revenue/employee, but rather utilizing the employees necessary to conduct business to raise the revenue/employee to meet or exceed peers.
Make sense?