Category Archives: Finance

If America is Going to Be Number One Oil Producer By 2020, Will Canada Be Number Two?

According to this recent Economist Article on Energy to Spare, America is on track to produce all the energy it needs at home. Considering that Americans burn three and a half times as much energy as the average Chinese person, and hasn’t been able to meet its energy needs in over half a century, this seems like a tall order. Especially since, demand has more than doubled since America was last able to satisfy its energy needs from domestic sources.

However, the International Energy Agency is forecasting that America could become the world’s largest oil producer by 2020, when it could be churning out 11.1 Million barrels a day, and be energy self-sufficient by 2035. Coupled with the fact that demand is waning due to increased fuel efficiency, the prediction is that rising production and falling demand will equal out in 2035.

It’s an interesting prediction, but so is the prediction about the Athabasca Oil Sands north of the American border. Right now, production is about 1.3M barrels per day, but estimates are that production can get to 5.1M barrels per day. As per this article in the Economist, on The Sands of Grime, Canada’s oil sands contain over 170 Billion Barrels of oil that can be recovered economically with today’s technology. With the third largest proven oil reserves in the world, it’s quite likely that production can ramp up to make Canada at least fourth in oil production by 2020, with third place a strong possibility. Right now, Venezuelan production for 2020 is estimated at 6.5M barrels per day and Saudi Arabia, at close to 10M barrels per day, expects it can get to 11 M barrels per day (Source). With the difference between Canadian production estimates and Venezuelan production estimates for 2020 less than 30%, it would only take a 15% increase in Canadian production and a 15% decrease in Venezuelan production for Canada to edge in third.

Unless Saudi Arabian reserves are less than estimated, or Canadian production ramps up exponentially beyond expectations, we probably won’t make number two, but number three is a strong possibility.

Is Your Supply Chain OCF? Part II

In Part I, we asked if your supply chain was OCF, and by OCF we meant Operating Cash Flow and not Obsessive Compulsive Finance, although you have to be the latter in order to achieve the former. We explained that, at least from a working capital management viewpoint, it is a better measure of financial health than other financial measures. We finished with a question – How Do You Impact It?

First, let’s look at one detailed formula:

  1. revenue as reported
  2. – (increase in) operating trade receivables
  3. – investment income
  4. – other income that is non cash and/or non sales related
  5. – costs of sales
  6. – all other expenses
  7. + (increase in) operating trade payables
  8. + non cash expense items
  9. + financing expenses

Based on this formula, supply chain can impact:

  • 1. Revenue as Reported
    by creating new value-added services, creating enhanced versions of a product that can be sold at a premium, etc.
  • 2. Receivables
    by creating agreements that allow for faster collection, by factoring, etc.
  • 5. Cost of Sales
    by reducing product and service costs, reducing inventory costs, reducing transport costs, etc.
  • 6. All Other Expenses
    by reducing indirect costs, SG&A overheads, etc.
  • 7. Payables
    by taking advantage of early payment discounting, by reducing amounts owed through reciprocal trade agreement, etc.
  • 9. Finance Expenses
    by taking advantage of market knowledge to obtain best rates, by selecting appropriate currencies (to hedge against), etc.

And the impact can be measured as follows:

Supply Chain Contribution to OCF / OCF

where Supply Chain Contribution is, technically (where all projections are without Supply Chain Contribution):

  • Actual Revenue – Projected Revenue +
  • Projected Receivables – Actual Receivables +
  • Projected Cost of Sales – Actual Cost of Sales +
  • Projected Other Expenses – Actual Other Expenses +
  • Actual Payables – Projected Payables** +
  • Projected Finance Expenses – Actual Finance Expenses

** while this is technically correct from a Finance view who want the organization to hold onto cash longer, from a Supply Chain view it’s usually stupid, as SI has argued for years, because your cost of capital is often lower than that of a supplier and the goal is to lower overall supply chain costs. In other words, the improvement in payables is probably coming at a cost of a greater improvement in cost of sales.

In other words, if Supply Chain Contribution to OCF was 400K and the OCF was 2M, then supply chain contributed 20% and that’s proof in the pudding that supply chain has value.

Is Your Supply Chain OCF? Part I

Is it? Well, if it’s any good, it’s probably Obsessive Compulsive about Finance, but that’s not what I’m referring to. By OCF, I’m referring to the Operating Cash Flow Metric that some are claiming is the right way to measure supply chain contributions to the organization, and, as such, the measure that should be used in place of EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest Taxes Depreciation and Amortization), ROI (Return On Investment), or ROIC (Return On Invested Capital).

Operating Cash Flow refers to the amount of cash a company generates from the revenues it brings in, excluding costs associated with long-term investment on capital items or investments in securities. The IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) defines operation cash flow as cash generated from operations less taxation and interest plus investment income received less dividends. The calculation of cash generated involves determining cash collected from customers and subtracting cash paid to suppliers.

The push for OCF contribution, specifically, the measure of how much additional cash was generated or how much cash payment was avoided, as a measure of supply chain success by a few pundits (including David Schneider) is due to the fact that it is a more accurate measure of how much cash a company has generated (or used) than traditional measures of profitability such as net income or EBIT. (Wikipedia)

The rationale is that other measures are (much) more easily manipulated. For example, a company with numerous fixed assets (factories, equipment, etc.) would have decreased net income due to depreciation, but since depreciation is a non-cash expense, the net income amount is not a true measure of the cash position of the company. In addition, since a company can choose to recognize receivables before the cash is received, traditional balance sheets and resulting EBIT(DA) are also not accurate measurements of the true cash picture. And since companies need cash to run (as pesky people want to be paid), cash flow is often the true measure of company vitality.

OCF allows a company to get a much better grip on its working capital than other measures, and since Supply Chain revolves around working capital, the metric makes sense. So how do you impact it?

Stay Tuned for Part II.

It’s About Time You Get a Grip on Risk!

Risk management is about more than just the disclosures the auditors make your accountants put in the fine print when you release your financial statements and annual reports. And it’s more than the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks followed by coordinated and economical application of resources to minimize, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of unfortunate events or to maximize the realization of opportunities. For example, from a supply management point of view, risk management is modus operandi for supply assurity when there is an average of 250 supply chain disruptions for public companies every month. (Source) And from a profit point of view, it’s value. Less money dealing with the financial and brand fallout from a disruption is more money spent on innovation to meet customer demand.

And, as per this recent Ernst & Young post over on the Harvard Business Review blogs, it’s money in the bank. Their recent research fund that companies in the top 20% of risk (management) maturity generated three times the level of EBITDA as those in the bottom 20%. Wow!

So why is this? I think it’s due to the fact that less than 40% of companies are actively managing (supply) risk to the level they should be. In 2008, a Marsh survey found that only 35% of organizations self-reported that supply chain risk management was moderately effective at their companies. In other words, 65% of companies did not have a risk management program that was at least moderately effective. In 2011, researchers at Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and Ghent University did a supply chain risk management study and found that 64% of the companies have no one responsible for managing supply chain risks! That’s essentially 0 improvement in the last three years! And while the initial introduction of a risk management program will require a significant investment of talent, it’s not that difficult, relatively speaking. As the post says, the critical factors are communication, openness, leadership, framework identification, formal methods, coordinated planning, standardized monitoring, and occasional (stress) testing of the different facets. With the right leadership and training, everyone will be able to do their part. And in the end, just like the Global 50 consumer products company highlighted, in the post, the organization will have

developed a governance structure that allows it think about risk proactively, and has aligned its risk profile and exposures more closely with its strategy. Its governance leadership group and supporting management clarified the company’s risk appetite, defined its risk universe, determined how to measure risk, and identified which technologies could best help the company manage its risks. Aligning risk to strategy, by identifying strategic risks and embedding risk management principles into business unit planning cycles, enabled the company to identify and document 80% of the risks that have an impact on performance. This alignment of risk awareness and management practices, from strategy to business operations, enabled the company to monitor risk developments more effectively. Managers could keep the organization within acceptable tolerance ranges, driving performance to plan.

So just do it. You’ll double your EBITDA in the process!

The (Board) Gamer’s Guide to Supply Management Part VI: Zombie Dice, Tsuro, and Get Bit!

I’m enraptured to continue this one-of-a-kind summer series that will help you whether you are just interested in finding out about this new and exciting career opportunity, or ready to take your Supply Management career to the next level. Not only is it significantly more fun than counting grains of sand for an hourglass, but when you can grasp a lot of the basic concepts by playing the right mix of strategic (and sometimes tactical) board games with your friends, it’s three blasts squared.

I know we still have to tackle the economic games, like Puerto Rico and Dominion, but we’re gong to continue to make use of the fact that, thanks to the unequaled generosity of Wil Wheaton (@wilw) and Geek & Sundry, we have yet another marvelous TableTop episode where Wil introduces us to yet another great game — or, in this case, three great games. Until the tap runs dry, we are going to collect every precious drop of water that Wil is directing our way.

Wil gives us a very succinct introduction to each of the three games covered in TableTop Episode 3, starting with

Zombie Dice

is a press-your-luck dice game. We are all zombies trying to fill our undead bellies with delicious, delicious brains. On every turn, we will draw three dice from the cup. Each die represents a human survivor or, as we call them, lunch. We roll the dice. We then keep all of the brains and all of the shots to the face. Now we have a choice to make. We can stop, and score the brains, or we can press our luck. There’s one special die. It’s this guy, he’s the runner. If we choose to roll again, we have to include him in the three dice total because we haven’t caught him yet. You keep rolling until you are shot in the face three times or you choose to stop and score all of the brains in front of you. The first player to score thirteen or more brains wins.

Zombie Dice is a great game because it helps you understand the Wall Street mentality which, inevitably, leads to financial market meltdowns when left unchecked — just like the subprime mortgage crisis, the dot-com bubble, the speculative currency crises in Asia, Mexico, and Europe in the 1990s, the savings and loans crisis, the oil crisis, the crash of 1929, the shanghai rubber stock market crisis, the rail road panic of 1893, the gurney crisis, the danish state bankruptcy, the south sea bubble and the mississippi bubble, and the tulip mania. While financial market meltdowns are not a new phenomenon, thanks to the internet and the interconnectedness of the global financial markets, they are occurring more and more and will continue to do so as long as the unlimited risk mentality of Wall Street goes unchecked.

It’s critical that you understand this mentality, and the risks associated with it, because the more you try to limit your risk by playing the currency markets, the hedge funds, or even asset-based investments (like gold), the more types of risk you are actually opening yourself up to. If you don’t know what you’re doing, you’ll end up rolling red die after red die, which triples your chance of getting shot in the face.

In addition, what makes Zombie Dice truly great is that it also teaches us about the unpredictability of risk. You never know when you are going to get shot in the face with a supply disruption due to a natural disaster, a civil disturbance, or a quickly enacted political trade barrier, or how much damage it’s going to do. Supply Management is full of risk, and every time you place an overseas order, you could be rolling the dice.

Tsuro

is a path finding, tile laying game. We are flying dragons. On every turn, we will play a tile on the board. Every dragon touching that tile has to follow the path it makes to completion. … If you fly off the board, you are eliminated. If you crash into another dragon, you are eliminated.

This is a cool game because it forces you to think strategically, which is important in markets where demand exceeds supply and you have to outmaneuver your competition to insure that you always get what you need, and keep your organization on the board. It teaches you that you not only need to think about what you need, but if you are in a market where demand exceeds supply, what your competition needs so that you can lock up supply first.

Get Bit

is a bluffing game, designed by my friend Dave Chalker. We are all robots out for a leisurely swim in shark-infested waters. Each turn, to figure out which one of us is swimming the fastest, we will play a card from our hand, numbered one through five. The fastest number goes to the front of the line, and the slowest number will go to the back of the line. The robot who is closer to the shark gets bit. We each have four limbs. So if you are bitten four times, you become Anchor Bot 9000 and spend the rest of your days on the bottom of the sea.

This is a good companion game to Tsuro because, like Tsuro, it forces you to think strategically, but has the added advantage that it demonstrates what happens if your competition mirrors your movements — you both stand still while the other competitors in the market swim past you. You not only have to outmaneuver your competition in this space, you have to prevent them from blocking you.