slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
U.S. Property Underwriters Presentation February 1, 2007 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
U.S. Property Underwriters Presentation February 1, 2007

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 20

U.S. Property Underwriters Presentation February 1, 2007 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 106 Views
  • Uploaded on

U.S. Property Underwriters Presentation February 1, 2007. CAUTIONARY STATEMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE “SAFE HARBOR” PROVISIONS OF THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

U.S. Property Underwriters Presentation February 1, 2007


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide2

CAUTIONARY STATEMENTFOR THE PURPOSES OF THE “SAFE HARBOR” PROVISIONSOF THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995

Forward Looking Statements - The following presentation includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which are intended to be covered by the safe harbors created thereby. You can identify our forward-looking statements by words such as “anticipates,” “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “believes,” “estimates,” and similar expressions. Forward-looking statements relating to ConocoPhillips’ operations are based on management’s expectations, estimates and projections about ConocoPhillips and the petroleum industry in general on the date these presentations were given. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Further, certain forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecast in such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially include, but are not limited to, crude oil and natural gas prices; refining and marketing margins; potential failure to achieve, and potential delays in achieving expected reserves or production levels from existing and future oil and gas development projects due to operating hazards, drilling risks, and the inherent uncertainties in interpreting engineering data relating to underground accumulations of oil and gas; unsuccessful exploratory drilling activities; lack of exploration success; potential disruption or unexpected technical difficulties in developing new products and manufacturing processes; potential failure of new products to achieve acceptance in the market; unexpected cost increases or technical difficulties in constructing or modifying company manufacturing or refining facilities; unexpected difficulties in manufacturing, transporting or refining synthetic crude oil; international monetary conditions and exchange controls; potential liability for remedial actions under existing or future environmental regulations; potential liability resulting from pending or future litigation; general domestic and international economic and political conditions, as well as changes in tax and other laws applicable to ConocoPhillips’ business. Other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements include other economic, business, competitive and/or regulatory factors affecting ConocoPhillips’ business generally as set forth in ConocoPhillips’ filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including our Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005, as updated by our subsequent periodic and current reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K, respectively. ConocoPhillips is under no obligation (and expressly disclaims any such obligation) to update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures - This presentation includes certain non-GAAP financial measures, as indicated. Such non-GAAP measures are intended to supplement, not substitute for, comparable GAAP measures. Investors are urged to consider closely the comparable GAAP measure and the reconciliation to that measure provided in the Appendix or on our website at www.conocophillips.com. This presentation (Slide 32) contains an illustrative example calculating a measure, "EBITDA," that is not calculated in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The example demonstrates a scenario for just one of the many that were evaluated in the evaluation process, and is an estimate of how costs, and resulting margins, could possibly perform at a given West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil price. The example estimates the various costs (field operating, natural gas, diluent, transportation) at a $50 WTI example, and then estimates the resulting EBITDA margin that would result from this scenario. EBITDA consists of earnings before interest expense, income tax expense, and depreciation, depletion and amortization. EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to any measure of operating results as promulgated under GAAP, nor should it be considered as an indicator of overall financial performance. We have included this non-GAAP financial measure because, in management's opinion, it most closely portrays a cash margin, which management believes will be an important measure in an analysis of cash flow consideration for the proposed joint ventures. Since the use of EBITDA is in the context of an illustrative example, a reconciliation to the most comparable GAAP measure (cash flow from operations) is not possible, as the GAAP components excluded from EBITDA were not estimated for purposes of such example. In this presentation, peer group “non-core earnings impacts” include publicly-disclosed gains and losses on asset dispositions, asset impairments, changes in litigation accruals, write-offs, uninsured losses, and restructuring charges, in each case, to the extent such items are in excess of >$249 million as well as all cumulative effect of accounting changes and discontinued operations, regardless of amount.

Prohibited Terms - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proved reserves that a company has demonstrated by actual production or conclusive formation tests to be economically and legally producible under existing economic and operating conditions. We may use certain terms in this presentation such as “oil/gas resources,” “Syncrude,” “probable resources,” “inventory,” and/or “Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) proved reserves” that the SEC’s guidelines strictly prohibit us from including in filings with the SEC. U.S. investors are urged to consider closely the oil and gas disclosures in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 as updated by our subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

current environment
Current Environment
  • High crude oil prices
    • Strong demand growth around the world
    • Limited excess production capacity
    • Instability and supply disruptions in major oil-producing countries
    • Higher industry costs
  • Tightness in the global refining system
access to oil gas reserves is a greater constraint than geology bboe
Access to Oil & Gas Reserves is a Greater Constraint Than Geology(BBOE)

NOC reserves(equity access)

Reserves held by Russian companies

Full IOC accessreserves

270 / 12%

157 / 7%

360 / 16%

1,462 / 65%

IOC = international oil company

NOC = national oil company

NOC Reserves (no equity access)

Reserve figures are conventional Billion BOE, 2005 (2249 BBOE)

Source: PFC Energy

rising costs of reserve replacement
Rising Costs of Reserve Replacement

Marginal cost is defined as

the average of the highest

75

cost (or bottom quartile)

producers

  • Higher F&D costs
  • Wider transportation & quality
  • differentials
  • Higher government take

60

45

Dollars per Barrel

30

15

0

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Source: Goldman Sachs

challenging environment
Challenging Environment
  • Limited resource access
  • Intense competition
  • Industry cost inflation
  • Increased government take
  • Increased political risk
  • Energy cost impact to consumers

We are responding to these challenges

corporate strategy
Corporate Strategy
  • Build on international scale and integration
  • Grow E&P portfolio
  • Grow R&M position
  • Use Commercial expertise to create valuefrom integration and asset position
  • Move to AA credit rating
  • Manage cost and project execution
  • Utilize strengths in people, technology, and financial resources

Creating Shareholder Value

financial strategy
Financial Strategy
  • Fund Growth Program
    • Portfolio optimization
  • Move to AA credit rating
    • Debt reduction
    • Equity improvement
    • Target debt/capital ratioof 15-20%
  • Annual dividend increases
  • Share repurchases
slide9

Investing in Growth

Sunrise

Caldita

ANS Gas

Mackenzie Delta

Suban II

Bayu-Undan

Kerisi / Hiu

Brass LNG

Qatargas 3 LNG

Plataforma-Deltana

North Belut

Suban III

Corocoro I

Bohai Phase II

Yuzhno Khylchuyu

Libya

Kashagan II

Kashagan Sat’s

Corocoro II & III

West Qurna

Malikai

Su Tu Trang

Kebabangan

Libya

Kashagan I

Su Tu Vang

Gumusut

Ketapang

Libya

West Sak

Ekofisk Growth

Surmont

Syncrude III

Alaska WNS Sat’s

Britannia Sat’s

Alvheim

Statfjord Late Life

Rivers Field

Deep Bossier

Hejre

Tommeliten Alpha

Eldfisk Upside

Alaska Sat’s

Woodford Shale

North America BD

Syncrude IV & V

Surmont II & III

Clair II

Thornbury

Canada Oil Sands

2006 - 2008

2008 - 2011

2011+

major r m growth projects
Major R&M Growth Projects

Purchased 260 MBD German refinery in 2006, additional investments to increase advantaged crude processing

EnCana JV; investment to expand heavy oil processing to 550MBD with total capacity increasing to 600MBD by 2015

Proposed development of a 400MBD export refinery in Yanbu, targeted production date is 2011

Potential development of 500MBD refinery in Fujairah; JV with International Petroleum Investment Company of Abu Dhabi

  • Wilhelmshaven Refinery
  • Wood River and Borger Refineries
  • Saudi Aramco Refinery
  • UAE Refinery
strong north american presence
Strong North American Presence
  • #1 in gas production & a leading gas marketer
  • #2 U.S Refiner
  • Engaged in several LNG and re-gasification projects
  • Strong positions in Alaskan North Slope gas and Mackenzie Delta gas
  • Strong Canadian Oilsands position
burlington resources acquisition
Burlington Resources Acquisition
  • Created leading North American gas position
    • High-quality, long-lived, low-risk gas reserves
    • Significant unconventional resource plays
    • Enhanced production growth / N.A. gas supply
      • Near-term conventional / unconventional
      • Long-term LNG and Arctic gas
  • Enhanced business mix
    • Increases E&P, OECD, and North American gas
  • Significant free cash flow
  • Synergies of $500 MM
  • Access to technical capabilities
slide13

North America2005 Gas Production

Note: Production figures are based on YE 2005 Filings.

COP volumes do not include fuel gas production.

CVX pro forma for UCL.

13

north american heavy oil partnership

ChristinaLake

FosterCreek

WoodRiver

Borger

EnCana and ConocoPhillips are creating a long-term

integrated North American heavy oil business

North American Heavy Oil Partnership
  • Venture comprised of two 50/50 Partnerships:

Upstream Partnership

    • EnCana’s Foster Creek and Christina Lake projects

Downstream Partnership

    • ConocoPhillips’ Wood River and Borger refineries
  • Partnerships of equivalent value
  • Effective date: January 2, 2007
canadian oilsands largest na resource

Canadian Oilsands Relative Land Positions

(Net Sections)

Global Crude Oil Supply Resources (Bbbls)

Canadian Oilsands – Largest NA Resource

347.2

262.7

190.1

132.5

115.0

99.0

COP and ECA are

both post-transaction

positions

97.8

72.3

39.1

35.3

29.4

17.1

14.8

11.2

9.7

4.5

Notes: COP includes addition of 50% of ECA Foster Creek & Christina Lake acreage; and ECA is reduced by same amount;

Includes only land associated with the Athabasca Oil Sands Deposit.

Source: Alberta Energy and Utilities Board; and Company reports.

Source: International Energy Agency; Energy Information; OPEC; BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2005

illustrative integrated margin
Illustrative Integrated Margin

EBITDA margin ($/bbl)*

Increasing Diff.

IncreasesDownstream Margin

Downstream

Downstream

Varying Differential

Downstream

Decreasing Diff.

IncreasesUpstream Margin

Upstream

Upstream

Upstream

Participation in both Partnerships provides more certainty in overall margin

*Note: Based on information after all project completions; 2006 $ terms; EBITDA Margin defined as: Revenues – Opex – Gas cost/Feedstock cost – Transport.

total company cash flow 2006
Total Company Cash Flow2006

$MM

Cash & Other

895

Asset Sales

545

Net BR acquisition

1,134

Dividends & Share Repurchases

3,202

1/1/06 Cash

2,214

Debt

Reduction

5,059

Capex, Loans & Investments

16,253

CFOA

21,516

Total

25,409

Uses of Cash

Sources of Cash

Sources of Cash includes the net of cash paid to Burlington Resources shareholders, cash acquired and debt issued associated with the Burlington Resources Acquisition. The Debt Reduction in Uses of Cash is from March 31, 2006.

cash use comparison

Full Year 2006

Cash Use Comparison

* COP reflects actual results. Peer data estimated by annualizing 9 month actual results.

debt ratio
Debt Ratio

Balance Sheet Debt $B

Debt-to-Capital Ratio %

Equity* $B

* Includes minority interests

summary
Summary
  • Tight supply & demand balance for crude & refined products.
  • Challenging Environment
    • Limited resource access
    • Intense competition
    • Industry cost inflation
    • Increased political risk and government take
  • ConocoPhillips is aggressively investing in new energy

supplies for the United States.