The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.
(Questions from industry analysts are provided in full, but answers are omitted - download the transcript to see the full question-and-answer session)
Question: Joshua Ian Silverstein - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division - Analyst
: On the TCO, you had mentioned that in 2025, you expect the cash flow to be about $1 billion lower, around $4 billion versus $5
billion previously. Is that just due to the project delays? Or is there higher cost estimates now in that, so it would be lower distributions
from there? Or is there something else that's driving that?
Question: Paul Cheng - Scotiabank Global Banking and Markets, Research Division - Analyst
: Can I go back to TCO? It's a little bit of the late stage for the cost increase and everything. I guess, the question is that, I mean, what
have we learned from this process to ensure that your future project execution will become better and not facing the entire problem
there?
I mean, it has been a challenging project all along, I think, to a number of different reasons. But quite frankly, that is a bit disappointing
at this very last stage for the bit of the slip in the schedule and also the cost increase.
Question: John Macalister Royall - JPMorgan Chase & Co, Research Division - Analyst
: So I have a follow-up on the Permian ex PDC. You were down 2% in 3Q, including the non-op piece, and really helpful color there
from Mike on Biraj's question. But just -- it does leave a pretty big jump to hit guidance in 4Q, around 10%, if I calculate it right. So
are you sticking with that 770,000 guide for the legacy piece? And if not, is there a good way to think about 4Q production in general?
|
