????雪佛龍（Chevron）如果想提振日益縮水的利潤，或許應該在控制支出方面下功夫。

????上周五，石油行業巨頭雪佛龍公布了令人失望的收入報告，業績遠遠低于分析師們的季度預測。這家公司認為原因在于糟糕的天氣、貨幣兌換和不可預測的生產問題，然而，真正的罪魁禍首或許是它支出的大幅增加和隨后的產量下降。

????雖然麻煩不斷，雪佛龍卻依然在鉆探成本和政治風險更高的地區，繼續瘋狂地投資各種項目。增長固然重要，但在某些情況下，這種做法可能得不償失。雪佛龍或許應該學學競爭對手埃克森的做法——削減開支，返還給投資者更多現金。

????雪佛龍與華爾街的溝通也并不順利。雪佛龍是美國僅次于埃克森美孚（ExxonMobil）的“第二大”石油公司。然而，它卻連續四個季度未能達到分析師的預期。最近的一次便是在周五。當天，公司公布，2014年第1季度的調整后每股凈收益為2.36美元，比分析師的平均預期低了15美分。

????雖然雪佛龍第一季度依然有45億美元的利潤，但它510億美元的季度收入同比減少了5%，盡管事實上第一季度的天然氣與石油價格依舊堅挺，最高值甚至還高于去年同期的水平。

????為了避免因為沒能達到預期而造成的投資者恐慌，各家公司往往會在公布收入之前降低預期。雪佛龍首席執行官約翰?沃森或許認為，他早就已經這么做過了。今年三月份，約翰?沃森將2017年的日產量指導從330萬桶下調到了310萬桶。

????上一季度，雪佛龍的勘探與生產成本從89億美元增加到94億美元。盡管如此，它整個季度的總產量卻出現了大幅減少，甚至在降低產量指導之后，依然遠遠低于分析師的預期。它第一季度的凈石油當量產量為每天260萬桶，去年同期為每天265萬桶。其中最明顯的是雪佛龍國際油氣產量的減少。據公司報告顯示，雪佛龍第一季度國際油氣生產的收入為34億美元，比去年同期減少了14億美元。

????沃森將產量減少歸咎于各種原因，從哈薩克斯坦的問題（雪佛龍每8桶石油便有1桶產自哈薩克斯坦）到不利的貨幣兌換等，不一而足。認為這些情況只是一次性現象，產量會逐漸恢復正常，這種想法當然很好，但卻掩蓋了雪佛龍國際能源生產業務的風險。真實情況是，雪佛龍在與一些聲名狼藉的地方打交道。這些地區的政府腐敗專制，對國際合同精神沒有一絲尊重。

????例如，在業績發布會上，雪佛龍稱計劃今年在阿根廷的巴卡穆埃爾盆地鉆探140口油井，成為阿根廷最大的外資能源公司。但如今的阿根廷已經不再是最適合做生意的國家，尤其是對于外國公司而言。畢竟，幾年前，阿根廷剛剛將其YPF石油公司（YPF）重新國有化，把西班牙的雷普索爾公司（Repsol）一腳踢開。雷普索爾提出了至少100億美元的損害賠償。如果它能得到一小部分賠償就已經算走運了。有人會說雪佛龍進入阿根廷充滿風險，但看起來，這簡直是不計后果的舉動。

????然而，阿根廷還不是雪佛龍最近投下重注的唯一高風險國家。3月份，雪佛龍宣布獲得了緬甸大塊海域的勘探許可權，但半軍事化的緬甸政府從來都與穩定和理性決策無緣。雪佛龍通過旗下的子公司優尼科（Unocal）已經在緬甸經營了一段時間，但這個地區的政治變化使得追加投資看起來并不明智。與阿根廷一樣，緬甸政府一時興起的決議隨時都有可能發生變化，讓雪佛龍陷入困境。

????對于各家能源公司而言，總有一兩個國家讓他們后悔涉足其中。由于石油項目往往需要多年時間才能有所進展，等到正式投入生產時，項目所在的國家可能早已物是人非，能源公司屆時又要去應對截然不同的政客和環境。

????當然，能夠確保石油公司絕對安全的國家也許只有美國和加拿大。但在不穩定的國家投資數十億美元或許并不是明智的選擇。埃克森在今年早些時候決定削減勘探和生產預算，因為它預測未來這方面沒有太大機會。這是一個充滿風險的舉措，最終可能會對它自己造成傷害。而雪佛龍則選擇了相反的道路，下重注勘探新石油——不論這些能源來自哪個國家。

????到目前為止，投資者并沒有對這兩種意見表明立場。自埃克森和雪佛龍在勘探與生產領域各行其是以來，兩家公司的股價變化卻仍然保持著一致。剛剛過去的一個季度顯示，雪佛龍的支出遠遠超出了分析師們能夠接受的程度。但雪佛龍似乎下定決心要走一條風險更高的路。這條路是不是最佳的選擇？或許只有時間才能告訴我們答案。（財富中文網）

????譯者：劉進龍/汪皓

????Chevron may need to rein in the spending if it ever hopes to pump up its sagging profits.

????The oil giant reported sour earnings on Friday, missing analyst quarterly estimates by a wide margin. While the company blamed the miss on bad weather, currency exchange, and unforeseeable production problems, it was the massive upsurge in spending and subsequent decline in production that appeared to be the real culprit.

????Despite its troubles in the field, Chevron (CVX) continues to spend like mad on projects in questionable regions of the world where it faces high drilling costs and expropriation risk. While growth is important, it may not be worth it in certain cases. Chevron may be better served by following rival Exxon's lead and cutting spending and returning more of its cash to investors.

????Chevron has had a tough time communicating with Wall Street. The company, America's "second" oil giant, behind ExxonMobil (XOM), managed to miss analysts' estimates for the past four quarters in a row. The latest miss occurred on Friday, when the company reported adjusted net income of $2.36 a share for the first quarter of 2014, missing estimates by an average of 15 cents a share.

????While the company still made a profit of some $4.5 billion for the quarter, its quarterly revenue of $51 billion was 5% lower than it was a year earlier, all despite the fact that natural gas and oil prices remained strong in the quarter, maintaining even higher highs than it did during the same period last year.

????Companies usually lower expectations in advance of earnings to avoid the sort of investor panic that follows a miss. John Watson, Chevron's chief executive, probably thought he did just that in March when he lowered the company's production guidance numbers through 2017 from 3.3 million to 3.1 million barrels a day.

????Despite boosting exploration and production costs in the last quarter to $9.4 billion from $8.9 billion, the oil giant actually reported a decrease in production volumes across the board for the quarter, far worse than analysts had anticipated, even with the lowered production guidance. The company's net oil-equivalent production was 2.6 million barrels per day in the first quarter, down from 2.65 million barrels per day from the same time last year. The most glaring decrease in production volumes came from Chevron's international portfolio, where the company reported earnings of $3.4 billion for the quarter, a whopping $1.4 billion decrease from the first quarter of 2013.

????Watson blamed the decreased production volume on a variety of issues, ranging from problems in Kazakhstan, the source of one out of every eight barrels of oil it pumps out of the ground, to unfavorable currency exchange. It would be nice to think that these were just one-off events and that production will proceed normally from now on, but that would be denying the risk profile of Chevron's international energy portfolio. The truth is, Chevron is mixed up in some pretty shady places where corrupt and dictatorial governments have little to no respect for international contract law.

????For example, Chevron said on its earnings call that it was planning on drilling 140 wells in Argentina's Vaca Muerta basin this year, making it the lead foreign energy company in the country. Now, Argentina isn't the friendliest of countries to do business in -- especially if you're a foreign company. After all, it was just a couple of years ago that Argentina re-nationalized its energy company YPF, kicking Spain's Repsol out of the country. Repsol is claiming at least $10 billion worth of damages. It will be lucky if it gets a fraction of that. Some would say Chevron's involvement in Argentina is risky, but it seems pretty reckless.

????But Argentina isn't the only high-risk country Chevron has double-downed on recently. In March, the company said it had amassed a large acreage position off the coast of Myanmar, whose quasi-military-led government isn't known for its stability and rational decision-making. While Chevron, through its Unocal subsidiary, has been in the country for a while, political changes in the region make further investment appear unwise. Like Argentina, the whims of the government could shift at any moment, leaving the energy giant in the lurch.

????To be sure, every energy company does business with one or two countries they wish they'd never set foot in. Since oil projects take years to get off the ground, by the time production starts rolling, a company could be dealing with an entirely different set of political actors and circumstances than when they first negotiated their entry.

????At the end of the day, the only countries where an oil company is totally safe are probably the United States and Canada. But spending billions in countries that are unstable may not be the smartest use of investor cash. Exxon decided earlier this year that it would cut its exploration and production budget because it saw a dearth of opportunities on the horizon. That was a risky move, one that might end up hurting the oil giant. But Chevron has taken the opposite path, doubling down on the search for new oil -- no matter where it leads them.

????So far, investors haven't decided which view is correct. Exxon and Chevron's stock prices have moved in lockstep with each other since the two diverged on the exploration and production front. This latest quarter shows that Chevron is spending way more than analysts are comfortable with. But Chevron seems committed to taking the riskier path. Only time will tell if it is the best one.