(CHK) 2023 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good day, and welcome to the Chesapeake Energy's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2023 Results Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) Please note today's event is being recorded.

美好的一天，歡迎參加切薩皮克能源 2023 年第四季和全年業績電話會議。 （操作員說明）請注意今天的活動正在錄製中。

I'd now like to turn the conference over to Chris Ayres, Vice President, Investor Relations and Treasurer.

現在我想將會議交給投資者關係副總裁兼財務主管 Chris Ayres。

Thank you, Rocco. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our call today to discuss Chesapeake's fourth quarter and full year 2023 financial and operating results. Hopefully, you've had a chance to review our press release and the updated investor presentation that we posted to our website yesterday.

謝謝你，羅科。大家早安，感謝您今天加入我們的電話會議，討論切薩皮克第四季度和 2023 年全年的財務和營運業績。希望您有機會閱讀我們昨天在網站上發布的新聞稿和更新的投資者簡報。

During this morning's call, we will be making forward-looking statements, which consist of statements that cannot be confirmed by reference to existing information, including statements regarding our beliefs, goals, expectations, forecasts, projections and future performance and the assumptions underlying such statements.

在今天早上的電話會議中，我們將做出前瞻性陳述，其中包括無法透過參考現有資訊確認的陳述，包括有關我們的信念、目標、期望、預測、預測和未來績效的陳述以及此類陳述背後的假設。

Please note that there are a number of factors that will cause actual results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements including the factors identified and discussed in our press release and our other SEC filings. Please also recognize that as except required by law, we undertake no duty to update any forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on such statements.

請注意，有許多因素會導致實際結果與我們的前瞻性聲明有重大差異，包括我們的新聞稿和其他 SEC 文件中確定和討論的因素。另請注意，除法律要求外，我們不承擔更新任何前瞻性陳述的義務，且您不應過度依賴此類陳述。

We may also refer to some non-GAAP financial measures, which help facilitate comparisons across periods with peers. For any non-GAAP measure, we use a reconciliation to the nearest corresponding GAAP measure, which can be found on our website.

我們也可能會參考一些非公認會計準則財務指標，這有助於促進與同業的跨時期比較。對於任何非 GAAP 衡量標準，我們都會使用最接近的對應 GAAP 衡量標準的調整表，您可以在我們的網站上找到該衡量標準。

With me today on the call are Nick Dell'Osso, Mohit Singh and Josh Viets. Nick will give a brief overview of our results and then we'll open up the teleconference to Q&A. So with that, thank you again, and I'll now turn the conference over to Nick.

今天與我一起參加電話會議的有尼克·戴爾奧索 (Nick Dell'Osso)、莫希特·辛格 (Mohit Singh) 和喬什·維茨 (Josh Viets)。尼克將簡要概述我們的結果，然後我們將開始電話會議進行問答。因此，再次感謝大家，我現在將會議交給尼克。

Good morning, and thank you for joining our call. We continue to execute on our strategic pillars in 2023, proving we're a company built to deliver sustainable value to shareholders through cycles. The Marcellus team had another strong year with well costs improving 17% since Q1. We increased our footage drilled per day by 40% and drilled 9 of the 10 longest laterals in our history in the basin. In the Haynesville, we delivered strong production performance throughout the year, benefiting from improved gathering system hydraulics, while our drilling performance continues to outpace our peers in the most difficult drilling environment in the Lower 48.

早安，感謝您加入我們的通話。 2023 年，我們將繼續執行我們的策略支柱，證明我們是一家能夠在整個週期中為股東提供永續價值的公司。 Marcellus 團隊又迎來了強勁的一年，油井成本自第一季以來下降了 17%。我們每天鑽探進尺增加了 40%，並在盆地歷史上鑽探了 10 個最長支管中的 9 個。在海恩斯維爾，由於改進的集油系統液壓系統，我們全年實現了強勁的生產業績，同時我們的鑽井業績在 Lower 48 最困難的鑽井環境中繼續超越同行。

Importantly, we accomplished these operational milestones while improving our total recordable incident rate by 40% to an industry-leading 0.14 injury rate. Additional highlights for the year include: returning approximately $840 million to shareholders via dividends and buybacks; advancing our path to be LNG-ready by securing HOAs up to 3 million tonnes per annum linked to JKM and recently signing an LNG sales and purchase agreement with Delfin and Gunvor for long-term liquefaction offtake; completing our Eagle Ford exit for a total consideration of greater than $3.5 billion; and receiving credit upgrades from all 3 agencies and exiting the year with a cash balance of approximately $1.1 billion.

重要的是，我們實現了這些營運里程碑，同時將總可記錄事故率提高了 40%，達到業界領先的 0.14 傷害率。今年的其他亮點包括：透過股息和回購向股東返還約 8.4 億美元；透過確保與 JKM 相關的每年高達 300 萬噸的 HOA 以及最近與 Delfin 和 Gunvor 簽署長期液化承購的液化天然氣銷售和購買協議，推進我們的液化天然氣就緒之路；完成鷹福特退出，總代價超過 35 億美元；並獲得所有 3 個機構的信用升級，並以約 11 億美元的現金餘額結束這一年。

Turning our attention to 2024. We started the year by announcing our shareholder value-driven merger with Southwestern. Our combined company will accelerate America's energy reach by accessing more markets, effectively mitigating price volatility and ultimately increasing the revenue per unit of the product we sell. We are very encouraged about the growth and long-term demand for natural gas, the affordable, reliable, lower carbon energy the world needs.

將我們的注意力轉向 2024 年。新年伊始，我們宣布與西南航空進行以股東價值為導向的合併。我們合併後的公司將透過進入更多市場、有效緩解價格波動並最終增加我們銷售的產品的單位收入來加速美國的能源發展。我們對天然氣的成長和長期需求感到非常鼓舞，天然氣是世界所需的負擔得起、可靠、低碳的能源。

Today, the market is clearly oversupplied. In addition, we see capital supply cycles that can take 12 to 18 months to evolve while demand fluctuates quarterly. While we will benefit from a strong hedge position, we are responding accordingly with our 2024 capital and operational plan. First, we are reducing capital by nearly 20% and production approximately 15% from the preliminary outlook we provided last quarter. Under our revised capital program, we plan to limit our turn-in-line count to 30 to 40 wells with the majority having already occurred in January and February, drop 2 frac crews, leaving 1 frac crew in each basin and drop 2 rigs resulting in 4 rigs in the Haynesville beginning in March and 3 rigs in the Marcellus beginning midyear.

如今，市場明顯供過於求。此外，我們認為資本供應週期可能需要 12 至 18 個月的時間才能演變，而需求則按季度波動。雖然我們將受益於強大的對沖頭寸，但我們正在透過 2024 年資本和營運計畫做出相應的回應。首先，與我們上季度提供的初步展望相比，我們將資本減少近 20%，產量減少約 15%。根據我們修訂後的資本計劃，我們計劃將轉線數量限制在30 至40 口井，其中大部分已在1 月和2 月發生，減少2 名壓裂人員，每個盆地留下1 名壓裂人員，並減少2 台鑽機從 3 月開始，在 Haynesville 有 4 個鑽機，從年中開始在 Marcellus 有 3 個鑽機。

We believe limiting turn-in-lines and building DUCs is the prudent response to today's market. Doing so will shorten our cycle of supply to appropriately and effectively meet market demand. This results in shorter cycle capital-efficient decisions that will ultimately offer incremental capacity of up to 1 Bcf per day by the fourth quarter, ensuring we have ample supply to provide customers when demand recovers.

我們認為，限制換線和建造 DUC 是對當今市場的謹慎反應。這樣做可以縮短我們的供貨週期，並適當有效地滿足市場需求。這將導致更短週期的資本效率決策，最終將在第四季度之前每天提供高達 1 Bcf 的增量產能，確保我們在需求恢復時有充足的供應來為客戶提供服務。

Ultimately, our plan is designed to maintain productive capacity which positions us to quickly return to over 3 Bcf per day with minimal incremental capital investment. We will be prudent in our approach, bringing production back online efficiently as consumer demand warrants. Overall, our 2024 program demonstrates Chesapeake's continued focus on capital discipline, operational efficiency and free cash flow generation while building the capacity to consistently deliver for consumers and shareholders through all demand cycles.

最終，我們的計劃旨在維持生產能力，使我們能夠以最少的增量資本投資快速恢復到每天 3 Bcf 以上。我們將採取謹慎的態度，根據消費者的需求，有效地恢復生產。總體而言，我們的 2024 年計畫表明切薩皮克繼續專注於資本紀律、營運效率和自由現金流生成，同時建立在所有需求週期中持續為消費者和股東提供服務的能力。

Simply put, Chesapeake is built for the volatility we are experiencing today and our strategy is positioning the company to thrive as the market rebalances into 2025. We have the portfolio, balance sheet and demonstrated operational track record to continue driving capital efficiencies, maximizing returns and reducing risk. I look forward to updating you on our progress throughout the year. We're now pleased to address your questions.

簡而言之，切薩皮克是為了應對我們今天所經歷的波動而建立的，我們的策略是讓公司在市場重新平衡到2025 年時蓬勃發展。我們擁有投資組合、資產負債表和良好的營運記錄，可以繼續提高資本效率、最大化回報和降低風險。我期待著向您通報我們全年的進展。我們現在很高興回答您的問題。

(Operator Instructions) Today's first question comes from Josh Silverstein with UBS.

（操作員說明）今天的第一個問題來自 UBS 的 Josh Silverstein。

So I wanted to start just on the game plan that you guys have outlined here. What are the -- the 1 Bcf a day reduction in this plan, was this a function of the base declines that you have with the lower rig count? Or asked another way, what are the other kind of iterations you guys came up with for the -- this outlook?

所以我想從你們在這裡概述的遊戲計劃開始。該計劃中每天減少 1 Bcf，這是由於鑽機數量減少而造成的基礎下降嗎？或者換個方式問，你們針對這一前景提出了哪些其他類型的迭代？

It's a great question, Josh. So I want you to think about the production decline that we're seeing today as a function of the base decline because what we're really doing is we're just stopping turning in line wells that we have had in progress. And the reason we're doing that is that we see that the market is oversupplied right now. CapEx reductions that we and anybody else in the industry take on have an impact to production several months out as long as 12 months out. And we need to -- for our business, we believe the right answer is to reduce production today.

這是一個很好的問題，喬許。因此，我希望您將我們今天看到的產量下降視為基礎下降的函數，因為我們真正要做的是停止上交我們正在進行的管線井。我們這樣做的原因是我們看到市場目前供過於求。我們和業內其他任何人所採取的資本支出削減措施會對幾個月甚至 12 個月內的生產產生影響。對於我們的業務，我們認為正確的答案是減少目前的產量。

The market is oversupplied today. The value that you would receive for turning in wells today reflects the fact that the market is oversupplied. And so we think we should hold on to that productive capacity and then turn it in line when there is greater demand and when the market is not oversupplied. This allows us to be responsive quickly. And so that amount of production that we've quoted is really just to give you a sense of how much productive capacity we would build up to be responsive to the market as the demand is there by the end of this year.

今天市場供應過剩。今天上交油井所獲得的價值反映了市場供應過剩的事實。因此，我們認為我們應該保留這種生產能力，然後在需求增加且市場供應不過剩時調整其產能。這使我們能夠快速做出回應。因此，我們引用的產量實際上只是為了讓您了解我們將建立多少產能來響應市場，因為到今年年底會有需求。

We quoted it as 1 Bcf a day if all of those wells were turned in line in 1 quarter. Now that's probably not a very realistic answer. We would probably layer those in. We would assume that demand would come back in some measured fashion and therefore, we could return production in a measured fashion. But that would be the aggregate volume that would be sitting and ready to respond.

如果所有這些井在 1 個季度內都完成了生產，我們的報價為每天 1 Bcf。現在這可能不是一個非常現實的答案。我們可能會將這些分層。我們假設需求會以某種有節制的方式恢復，因此，我們可以以有節制的方式恢復生產。但這將是準備做出回應的總數。

Got it. And then just given the volatility in natural gas prices you've seen over the past couple of years, you think you'd want to operate with a backlog of wells going forward. This way you could respond to the changes in price environment, your balance sheet and interest rate can afford that. So I'm curious how you're thinking about operating going forward.

知道了。然後，考慮到過去幾年天然氣價格的波動，您認為未來會希望在油井積壓的情況下進行營運。這樣您就可以應對價格環境的變化，您的資產負債表和利率可以負擔。所以我很好奇你們如何考慮未來的營運。

It's another really good question. I think the fact that we feel comfortable pausing turn-in lines and slowing completions activity, slowing drilling activity to match that cadence should be considered as we would also be comfortable accelerating those cycle times in the future when needed. Really, all we're doing here is we're extending cycle times of past capital that's been deployed. We would have the flexibility to increase those cycle times in the future if market conditions warranted and deliver more production on a shorter period of time relative to the dollars that we're spending.

這是另一個非常好的問題。我認為，我們應該考慮暫停上交線、放慢完井活動、放慢鑽井活動以適應節奏，因為我們也願意在未來需要時加快這些週期時間。實際上，我們在這裡所做的就是延長過去已部署資本的周期時間。如果市場條件允許，我們可以靈活地在未來增加這些週期時間，並在相對於我們所花費的美元而言更短的時間內提供更多的產量。

So we like the flexibility in our business. And then at some point, if the market proved to continue to be undersupplied in the future, you could add capital and grow your productive capacity beyond where we sit today. But this change is really designed to maintain productive capacity in that neighborhood of 3.2 Bcf a day. You should consider maintenance capital of $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion around that level of production. All of that remains unchanged for the business that we're presenting to the market today. We're just allowing cycle times to expand out, allowing our base decline to reduce the oversupply that we see today, which would cause us to receive a very low price for our gas. And to hold on to that production for a time when the market needs it better and we can better deliver it where customers need the gas.

因此，我們喜歡業務的靈活性。然後在某個時候，如果事實證明未來市場繼續供應不足，您可以增加資本並提高您的生產能力，超越我們今天的水平。但這項變化實際上是為了維持每天 3.2 Bcf 附近的生產能力。您應該考慮圍繞該生產水準投入 15 億至 16 億美元的維護資本。對於我們今天向市場展示的業務來說，所有這些都保持不變。我們只是允許週期時間延長，讓我們的基礎下降來減少我們今天看到的供應過剩，這將導致我們的天然氣價格非常低。當市場更需要天然氣時，我們可以更好地在客戶需要天然氣的地方提供天然氣，從而保持生產。

Our next question today comes from Charles Meade with Johnson Rice.

今天我們的下一個問題來自查爾斯·米德和約翰遜·賴斯。

I want to actually continue along that kind of line of questioning. And you've already given us a lot of insight here, but this is -- this -- what you're laying out here is a new approach from what we've seen or at least from what I've seen over the last several years in the industry, not just building DUCs but also building TILs. And I'm wondering if you could elaborate a bit on -- recognize that this is a little bit terra incognita, but elaborate a bit on how you're thinking of the sequence of spending money on DUCs versus bringing TILs online. And I can think of at least a couple of different ways it might go.

我實際上想繼續這樣的提問。你已經在這裡給了我們很多見解，但是這是——這——你在這裡提出的是一種新方法，來自我們所看到的，或者至少是我過去所看到的在該行業工作了數年，不僅建構了DUC，也建構了TIL。我想知道您是否可以詳細說明一下——認識到這有點未知，但請詳細說明您如何看待在 DUC 上花錢與將 TIL 上線的順序。我至少可以想到幾種不同的方式。

I don't expect you'll give us a price at which you act, but maybe you'll surprise me on that. But I could imagine one scenario where you would just -- when you got to the price you wanted you would just bring your TILs online and then you backfill with the DUCs. But I could also imagine the scenario where you guys are still running a completion crew and you don't want to bring wells online and so you actually work down that DUC inventory ahead of time. So, can you just elaborate a bit on how you're dealing with these kind of novel pieces that you now have on the board?

我不指望你會給我們一個行動的價格，但也許你會讓我感到驚訝。但我可以想像一個場景，當您達到您想要的價格時，您只需將 TIL 放到網上，然後用 DUC 回填。但我也可以想像這樣一種情況：你們仍在運行完井人員，並且不想將油井上線，因此實際上提前減少了 DUC 庫存。那麼，你能詳細說明一下你是如何處理現在板上的這些新穎作品的嗎？

I'll start and Josh may have something to add here. But the way we're thinking about this, Charles, is we will be paying very close attention to the underlying fundamentals, the underlying supply and demand situation in the market. And we'll try to bring gas online when we see that there is demand that needs the gas. Today, we are filling storage or not drawing from storage at the levels consistent with the past, which is setting us up to have pretty full storage going into the next storage season next fall. And so we can see very clearly that the market has more supply today than there is demand on an annualized basis. And so we think we should hold back our supply to better meet that demand in the future.

我先開始，喬希可能會有一些要補充的內容。但查爾斯，我們思考這個問題的方式是，我們將非常密切地關注潛在的基本面、市場的潛在供需狀況。當我們看到有需要天然氣的需求時，我們將嘗試將天然氣上線。今天，我們正在以與過去一致的水平填充庫存或不從庫存中提取庫存，這將使我們在明年秋天的下一個庫存季節擁有相當滿的庫存。因此，我們可以非常清楚地看到，按年計算，當今市場的供應量多於需求量。因此，我們認為我們應該控制供應，以更好地滿足未來的需求。

We know that demand will grow in the future. We have confidence in that, and we believe we should be more efficient with the capital we have spent, the wells that we have in cycle and the wells that we will continue to have in cycle. And so this really is about making sure that we are continuing a business from a capital perspective that is efficient at drilling wells, is efficient at delivering productive capacity, but that we can then have the flexibility to hold that production for the times that it's better needed.

我們知道未來需求將會成長。我們對此充滿信心，我們相信我們應該更有效地利用我們已花費的資本、我們已循環使用的油井以及我們將繼續使用的油井。因此，這實際上是為了確保我們從資本的角度繼續開展業務，高效地鑽探井，高效地提供生產能力，但我們可以靈活地在更好的時候保持生產。需要。

I want to reiterate that we are pretty optimistic about the future for gas markets, and this allows us to better deliver production when it's needed, where it's needed into those markets as demand is present and ready for it.

我想重申，我們對天然氣市場的未來非常樂觀，這使我們能夠在需要時更好地交付生產，並在需求存在並準備好時將其輸送到這些市場。

Yes, Charles, this is Josh. I think just the other thing I would comment on is we're going to be very prudent around how we activate production and the optionality that we like about the deferred TILs is that it gives us an immediate response when we see that structural change in the gas markets. And so we would anticipate that we would start to activate the TILs and then we would likely soon after begin starting to activate some of the DUCs. But one thing to keep in mind is that any production associated with those deferred completions is effectively going to lag by a quarter. And so we do see that is effectively starting to backfill the TILs that we're starting to activate in the prior quarter. So we really like the cadence that is set up by this. And again, we think it offers quite a bit of flexibility for us going forward.

是的，查爾斯，這是喬許。我想我要評論的另一件事是，我們將非常謹慎地對待如何激活生產，而我們喜歡延遲TIL 的選擇性是，當我們看到生產中的結構性變化時，它會給我們立即做出反應。天然氣市場。因此，我們預計我們將開始啟動 TIL，然後我們可能很快就會開始啟動一些 DUC。但需要記住的一件事是，與這些推遲完工相關的任何生產實際上都會滯後四分之一。因此，我們確實看到，這實際上開始回填我們在上一季開始啟動的 TIL。所以我們真的很喜歡由此建立的節奏。再說一遍，我們認為它為我們的前進提供了相當大的靈活性。

Got it. That's great detail. And then my follow-up, the -- it looks like to us like on a pro forma basis like a 20% decline '24 versus '23. And that's a little bit higher than I would have guessed. And Nick, you may have given part of the answer already with the majority of your TILs for the year already having happened. But I'm wondering, is there also some -- perhaps some kind of elective production restriction in there maybe through deferred midstream projects? Or is there anything else that is contributing to that decline beyond just the pause in TILs?

知道了。這是非常詳細的。然後我的後續行動——在我們看來，從預期的角度來看，24 年與 23 年相比下降了 20%。這比我的猜測高一點。 Nick，您可能已經給出了部分答案，而您今年的大部分 TIL 已經發生。但我想知道，是否還有一些——也許是某種選擇性的生產限制，可能是透過推遲的中游項目？或者，除了 TIL 的暫停之外，還有其他因素導致了這種下降嗎？

No, Charles. This is Josh again. Really, the decline is being set up by the deferred TILs. You have a material amount of production that we're simply choosing not to enter into the system. And so that is ultimately what's leading to the decline. And so what you see on a year-over-year basis or if you want to think about it from Q4 to Q4 is effectively the underlying base decline of the assets that we operate today.

不，查爾斯。這又是喬希。事實上，遞延 TIL 造成了下降。您有一定的生產量，我們只是選擇不輸入系統。這就是最終導致衰退的原因。因此，您所看到的同比情況，或者如果您想考慮第四季度到第四季度的情況，實際上是我們今天運營的資產的潛在基礎下降。

And our next question comes from Matt Portillo with TPH.

我們的下一個問題來自 TPH 的 Matt Portillo。

Maybe, Nick, just starting out at a high level, I just wanted to come back to the philosophical view on the capital allocation cut here. Looking at your hedge book that you have in place, it looks like your breakeven could have been justified on maintenance capital at a very low gas price in 2024, and you've obviously taken a very decisive step here to help correct the market from an oversupply perspective. Just curious how the team arrived at that decision, and how this may kind of play out in regards to your views on return on capital and how you might think about adding back to the market in '25 and '26 as it relates to production.

也許，尼克，剛從高層次開始，我只是想回到這裡關於資本配置削減的哲學觀點。看看您現有的對沖帳簿，看起來您的損益平衡點在 2024 年以非常低的汽油價格維持的資本上是合理的，而且您顯然已經採取了非常決定性的一步來幫助糾正市場從供應過剩的觀點。只是好奇團隊是如何做出這個決定的，以及這可能會如何影響您對資本回報率的看法，以及您可能會如何考慮在 25 和 26 年重新回到與生產相關的市場。

All great questions. Let me start by saying we don't view this change as something that we are attempting to "fix the market." We view this as what we think is prudent to manage our assets, our ability to generate cash flow for our shareholders. And that's really how we think about this. One company is not positioned to "fix the market," and so we're really thinking just about what makes sense for our company and our shareholders each day.

所有的問題都很好。首先我要說的是，我們並不認為這項變化是我們試圖「修復市場」的事情。我們認為這是謹慎管理我們的資產以及為股東產生現金流的能力的做法。這就是我們的想法。一家公司無法“修復市場”，因此我們每天都在思考什麼對我們的公司和股東有意義。

From a hedge perspective, we always separate hedges from the decision to deploy capital. Hedges are really about how you've deployed capital historically. They're financial protection, they're available to you for paper gains and losses. And there's no need to mentally tie hedges to the production that we deliver to market each and every day.

從對沖的角度來看，我們總是將對沖與資本配置決策分開。對沖實際上是關於你歷史上如何配置資本的。它們是財務保護，您可以使用它們來計算帳面收益和損失。而且沒有必要在精神上將對沖與我們每天交付市場的產品聯繫起來。

So said in another way, because you have hedges should not divorce you from paying attention to supply-demand fundamentals that are in front of you and impacting the price you receive for your physical product that you sell every day. And so the decision that we've made today is 100% about having a productive capacity that we have spent money on throughout 2023, looking at the market today, recognizing that the market is pretty clearly telling us that it doesn't need our gas today and knowing that we have the flexibility to hold off on delivering that gas to the market until such time that there is higher demand. So we're happy to do that.

換句話說，因為你有對沖，所以你不應該忽視你面前的供需基本面，並影響你每天銷售的實體產品的價格。因此，我們今天做出的決定 100% 是為了擁有我們在 2023 年全年投入資金的生產能力，看看今天的市場，認識到市場非常清楚地告訴我們，它不需要我們的天然氣今天，我們知道我們可以靈活地推遲向市場供應天然氣，直到需求增加為止。所以我們很高興這樣做。

We did run a lot of different scenarios and thought about different changes to the capital program. We certainly thought about reducing the capital program in a more significant manner than we are here today. And what that really results in is bigger changes to 2025 production. And we don't believe that's prudent given the fundamentals that we see today. We expect there to still be a step change in demand in 2025 as incremental LNG capacity comes online, as the market continues to grow for natural gas domestically.

我們確實運行了很多不同的場景，並考慮了資本計劃的不同變化。我們當然考慮過以比今天更重要的方式減少資本計劃。這真正導致的是 2025 年生產發生更大的變化。鑑於我們今天看到的基本面，我們認為這並不謹慎。我們預計，隨著液化天然氣產能的增加以及國內天然氣市場的持續成長，2025 年需求仍將出現階梯變化。

We also think the supply dynamics would be better by 2025. Remember that there's a lot of capital cut across the industry last summer. And the results of those capital changes just haven't shown up yet. That's why I referenced in my opening comments that we see the cycle of capital and supply being as long as 12 to 18 months. Think about the fact that this past fall is when we really saw maximum supply to the market. We're really still seeing it today. And the CapEx increases associated with that supply response started in the fall of -- well, really in the summer of 2022 and carried through the beginning of 2023, with the big reductions in capital not occurring until the summer of 2023.

我們也認為，到 2025 年，供應動態將會更好。請記住，去年夏天整個產業進行了大量資本削減。而這些資本變化的結果還沒有顯現出來。這就是為什麼我在開場白中提到，我們認為資本和供應的周期長達 12 至 18 個月。想想去年秋天我們真正看到市場供應最大化的事實。今天我們仍然看到它。與供應響應相關的資本支出增加始於 2022 年秋季，實際上是在 2022 年夏季，一直持續到 2023 年初，而資本的大幅削減直到 2023 年夏季才會發生。

So the lag time of CapEx decisions is very long. And what we're really attempting to do is be responsive to the market conditions that we see in front of us today, knowing that a capital decision has a much longer time to take effect. So stopping turning in line wells has an immediate impact on the economics that we see for our resource.

因此資本支出決策的延遲時間非常長。我們真正想做的是對我們今天看到的市場狀況做出反應，因為我們知道資本決策需要更長的時間才能生效。因此，停止轉入管線井會對我們的資源經濟效益產生直接影響。

Great. And then maybe as a follow-up question for Josh. Just curious how we should be thinking about the outlook for 2025. I know it's still long ways off. But trying to think through how long it might take you to get back to more of a maintenance program as it relates to your rigs and your frac fleets. And then effectively, it's still fair to think about the timing being from about 6 months from when a rig hits the ground to when we should be expecting production to turn-in-line. I know you've got, obviously, the deferred TILs. But just thinking about kind of the base program, how that might progress over the next 12 to 18 months and what we need to see maybe fundamentally to start to pick back up towards the maintenance level on the base program.

偉大的。然後也許可以作為喬希的後續問題。只是好奇我們應該如何思考 2025 年的前景。我知道這還有很長的路要走。但請嘗試考慮您可能需要多長時間才能恢復更多的維護計劃，因為它與您的鑽孔機和壓裂車隊相關。實際上，從鑽孔機落地到我們預計投產的時間大約是 6 個月，這仍然是公平的。我知道您顯然已經有了延期的 TIL。但只要考慮一下基本計劃的類型，在未來 12 到 18 個月內可能會如何進展，以及我們可能需要看到什麼，才能從根本上開始恢復基本計劃的維護水平。

Yes, sure. Thanks, Matt. First of all, I mean, we clearly are looking for structural shifts in the demand side of the equation for us to be thinking about getting back up to some maintenance level of activity. But I think the way, again, that we would likely start to phase in activity is starting to activate our deferred TILs first. We then begin to activate our incremental frac crews, which would take us to a total of 4 frac crews across our business today.

是的，當然。謝謝，馬特。首先，我的意思是，我們顯然正在尋找等式需求方面的結構性轉變，以便我們考慮恢復到某種維持活動水準。但我再次認為，我們可能開始分階段開展活動的方式是先開始啟動我們的延期 TIL。然後，我們開始啟動增量壓裂人員，這將使我們今天的業務中共有 4 名壓裂人員。

And then -- and the way we would think about any additional rig additions, so again, as we go down from 5 to 4 rigs in the Haynesville and then from 4 to 3 in the Marcellus is as we start to deplete the deferred completion inventory down to something that we would consider to be a more working -- normal working level, we would then start to bring those rigs back. And you're absolutely right, as far as kind of a typical cycle time, you are looking at roughly 6 months from the time you add a rig to actually start seeing any meaningful production impact from those rigs.

然後，我們考慮增加任何額外鑽機的方式，所以，當我們從海恩斯維爾的5 台鑽機減少到4 台，然後在馬塞勒斯從4 台減少到3 台時，我們就開始耗盡延遲完工庫存降到我們認為更有效的正常工作水平，然後我們將開始恢復這些鑽孔機。您絕對是正確的，就典型的周期時間而言，從添加鑽機到真正開始看到這些鑽機對生產產生任何有意義的影響，您大約需要 6 個月的時間。

And our next question comes from Nitin Kumar with Mizuho.

我們的下一個問題來自 Mizuho 的 Nitin Kumar。

I guess I want to start off, Nick, and just as you came up with this framework, to us, it looks like you're maintaining the balance between the Appalachia and the Haynesville, both of them are declining roughly about the same percentages and the mix stays the same. Would it not have -- why that sort of allocation across the 2 assets? Would it have been maybe better to reduce the Haynesville a little bit faster? Just any color around that.

我想我想開始，尼克，正如你提出這個框架一樣，對我們來說，看起來你正在維持阿巴拉契亞和海恩斯維爾之間的平衡，兩者的下降百分比大致相同，混合保持不變。難道不會──為什麼要在兩種資產之間進行這種分配？如果能更快減少海恩斯維爾的速度會更好嗎？周圍的任何顏色都可以。

Well, just keep in mind that pricing is different in both of the assets. And so certainly, today when the market is oversupplied, you're receiving quite a low value for gas in the Marcellus storage is quite full in the northeast. And so we do see it prudent to reduce turn-in-lines in both basins to what is something pretty close to 0 for the rest of the year. Good news is we can change that quickly if the market changes and shows us that the gas is needed, and we can change that by region. If there is a shortfall or improved market in the northeast, we can change that separate and apart from the Haynesville. So we maintain full flexibility, but we just see pretty similar market conditions in both places right now.

好吧，請記住，這兩種資產的定價是不同的。因此，當然，今天市場供應過剩，東北部馬塞勒斯儲氣庫已滿，您收到的天然氣價值相當低。因此，我們確實認為，在今年剩餘時間裡，將兩個盆地的換線數量減少到接近 0 是明智之舉。好消息是，如果市場發生變化並向我們表明需要天然氣，我們可以迅速改變這一點，並且我們可以按地區進行變更。如果東北部市場出現短缺或改善，我們可以與海恩斯維爾分開，單獨改變這種情況。因此，我們保持充分的靈活性，但我們現在看到兩個地方的市場狀況非常相似。

Got it. And then for my follow-up, you mentioned that one company cannot "fix the market," but you're about to become much bigger somewhere in the second quarter. The size of this deferred TIL inventory that you're holding, I know you can't comment on Southwestern's plans, but is this the right size for just Chesapeake? Or do you think this could be the right size for a combined company down the road?

知道了。然後，在我的後續行動中，您提到一家公司無法“修復市場”，但您將在第二季的某個時候變得更大。您持有的遞延 TIL 庫存的規模，我知道您無法對西南航空的計劃發表評論，但這對於切薩皮克來說是否合適？或者您認為這對於未來合併後的公司來說是否合適？

We're just thinking about Chesapeake here.

我們只是在這裡考慮切薩皮克。

And our next question comes from Bert Donnes with Truist Securities.

我們的下一個問題來自 Truist Securities 的伯特·多尼斯 (Bert Donnes)。

I just wanted to follow up and clarify one of your previous comments. Is there a limit to the amount of DUCs you would build if we see a prolonged down cycle? Maybe the 1 Bcf is kind of the limit maybe like that amount as your saved up ammo? Or would you start dropping rigs immediately in ''25 if we saw sustained down cycle?

我只是想跟進並澄清您之前的評論之一。如果我們看到長期的下行週期，您將建立的 DUC 數量是否有限制？也許 1 Bcf 是極限，也許就像你省下的彈藥一樣？或者，如果我們看到持續的下行週期，您會在 25 年立即開始放棄鑽孔機嗎？

Yes, Bert, Josh here. That was part of our rationale for why we wanted to start taking rigs out now. You get to a certain point with DUC inventory where it simply starts to look and feel like inefficient use of capital. And so that's why we'll be dropping a rig next month in the Haynesville and then another rig in the Marcellus in July. So that is absolutely a consideration for us as we think about the allocation of capital to rigs and frac crews.

是的，伯特、喬許在這裡。這就是我們現在想開始拆除鑽孔機的部分原因。 DUC 庫存達到一定程度後，看起來和感覺起來都像是資本利用效率低下。這就是為什麼我們下個月將在海恩斯維爾扔掉一台鑽機，然後在七月在馬塞勒斯扔掉另一台鑽機。因此，當我們考慮向鑽井平台和壓裂人員分配資金時，這絕對是我們的一個考慮因素。

And sorry, is the -- was it a DUC limit? Or was the amount of production the limit? It just seemed like a nice clean number at 1 Bcf. So I didn't know if that was kind of the solver for it or whether it was how many -- the way your rig frac crew would play out.

抱歉，這是 DUC 限制嗎？還是產量已經達到極限了？ 1 Bcf 時，這似乎是一個不錯的乾淨數字。所以我不知道這是否是一種解算器，或者是否有多少——你的鑽機壓裂人員將採取的方式。

Yes. I mean we clearly looked at both, but we really just tried to balance what we thought was a meaningful amount of production that we could activate with an efficient use of capital going forward. So there was simply a balance that we tried to strike between the two.

是的。我的意思是，我們清楚地考慮了兩者，但我們實際上只是試圖平衡我們認為有意義的生產量，我們可以透過有效利用未來的資本來啟動這些生產量。所以我們只是試著在兩者之間取得平衡。

Makes sense. And then I'll shift gears to stop hammering that point. I'm just trying to understand the buyback activity in 4Q. Was that cut short due to the merger announcement? Or would there have been kind of a similar amount even if you didn't enter a blackout period? And maybe if you could reconcile that against the cash, free cash flow being technically negative in 4Q, yet you still had some activity.

說得通。然後我會改變立場，停止敲擊這一點。我只是想了解第四季的回購活動。是因為合併公告而縮短的嗎？或者即使您沒有進入封鎖期，也會有類似的金額嗎？也許如果你能將其與現金進行協調，從技術上講，第四季度自由現金流為負，但你仍然有一些活動。

Yes. Look, we were really comfortable executing our buyback throughout 2024. Obviously, once we got deep into the merger discussions, that activity had to pause. We are not able to restart that activity while we have a pending transaction like the merger out there. So we're -- in the future, we'll be back to buying back stock when we can and look forward to that day. But I'd just remind you that inclusive of buybacks and dividends in 2023, we had an 8% return to equity, pretty robust, and we felt good about that number. And I guess it's a fair statement to say that if we weren't engaged in those discussions, we probably would have continued to buy some stock through the end of the year.

是的。看，我們在 2024 年執行回購真的很輕鬆。顯然，一旦我們深入討論合併，活動就必須暫停。當我們有像合併這樣的待處理交易時，我們無法重新啟動該活動。因此，未來，我們將在可能的情況下重新回購股票，並期待那一天的到來。但我想提醒大家的是，包括 2023 年的回購和股息在內，我們的股本回報率為 8%，相當強勁，我們對這個數字感到滿意。我想這是一個公平的說法，如果我們不參與這些討論，我們可能會在年底繼續買一些股票。

And our next question comes from Doug Leggate with Bank of America.

我們的下一個問題來自美國銀行的 Doug Leggate。

Note to self, don't forget to hit Star 1. Sorry, about the late attendance. Nick, the markets just opened. The gas stocks are all up, gas prices are up 17%. I just want to say strong message and taking leadership like this on how to navigate this is something I think the rest of the industry could pay attention to. So well done on that.

提醒自己，不要忘記點擊 1 星。抱歉，遲到了。尼克，市場剛開市。天然氣庫存全部上漲，天然氣價格上漲 17%。我只想傳達強烈的訊息，並就如何應對這一問題發揮領導作用，我認為行業其他公司可以關注這一點。在這方面做得很好。

My question is 2 things kind of related. First, you are still spending $1.3 billion this year. But the way I look at it is -- or the way you look at it, I should say, you're putting in place by the end of the year, 1 Bcf a day of spare capacity with a 30% decline. If I simplistically add those 2 numbers together, your -- the exit rate, call it, 2.2 plus 1 Bcf, you're pretty much back to your maintenance kind of level, but you're doing it -- or production, but you're doing it with a substantially lower capital number 1.3 versus what you tell us is 1.5 to 1.6. What am I missing?

我的問題是有兩件事相關。首先，今年你仍然花了13億美元。但我看待它的方式是——或者你看待它的方式，我應該說，你將在今年年底前落實每天 1 Bcf 的閒置產能，並下降 30%。如果我簡單地將這兩個數字加在一起，你的退出率，稱之為 2.2 加 1 Bcf，你幾乎回到了維護級別，但你正在這樣做，或者生產，但你我們使用的資本數字1.3遠低於您告訴我們的資本數字1.5 到1.6。我缺什麼？

Yes, Doug, I mean I think the key element to that is in order to then to sustain that, I mean, and again, assuming all of the production comes on in the fourth quarter and you're back at that 3.2 to 3 level, we need to get back on a pretty normal cadence of maintenance activity, which includes completing, say, 15 to 20 wells a month and then ultimately getting back to having 5 and 4 rigs between the Haynesville and Marcellus. So the key there is we can add the production back, and then we need to be deploying the capital at a maintenance level in order to support that going forward.

是的，道格，我的意思是，我認為關鍵因素是為了維持這一點，我的意思是，假設所有的生產都在第四季度進行，並且你回到了 3.2 到 3 的水平，我們需要恢復正常的維護活動節奏，其中包括每月完成15 到20 口井，然後最終恢復到Haynesville 和Marcellus 之間擁有5 到4 個鑽機。因此，關鍵是我們可以恢復生產，然後我們需要在維護層面部署資本，以支持未來的發展。

Okay. So we shouldn't think that there's an implicit reset in sustaining capital now that Eagle Ford is gone?

好的。因此，既然伊格爾福特消失了，我們不應該認為維持資本有隱性重置嗎？

No, no, we don't see that.

不，不，我們沒有看到這一點。

Okay. All right. Okay. That's helpful.

好的。好的。好的。這很有幫助。

I would add, Doug, we did say in our opening comments that we're continuing to see some good capital efficiencies across the assets. We had record wells drilled in both the Marcellus and Haynesville. We continue to focus on capital efficiencies across our assets. And generally, we find that these times when you reduce activity or when you make real progress. And so we're looking forward to 2024 being another very strong year from a capital efficiency standpoint, continuing to improve our pace of drilling, our cost per stage of completions and our overall effectiveness at bringing wells online for the maximum productivity for that given location at the lowest possible cost.

我想補充一點，道格，我們在開場評論中確實說過，我們繼續看到資產的一些良好的資本效率。我們在馬塞勒斯和海恩斯維爾都鑽探了創紀錄的井。我們繼續關注我們資產的資本效率。一般來說，我們發現當你減少活動或取得真正進步時。因此，從資本效率的角度來看，我們期待 2024 年又是非常強勁的一年，繼續提高我們的鑽井速度、每階段完井成本以及我們在使油井上線以實現特定地點最大生產力方面的整體效率以盡可能低的成本。

Okay. Very clear, Nick. And obviously, I know you don't want to talk about Southwestern, but presumably, this would be the strategy for the combined company. Fair point.

好的。非常清楚，尼克。顯然，我知道您不想談論西南航空，但想必這將是合併後公司的策略。有道理。

Well, I mean, again, when we think about the decisions we're making for capital allocation for this year, it has nothing to do with our merger. This is just simply looking at the productive capacity we have today, the market conditions we see in front of us, making the best decisions we can make for our shareholders.

嗯，我的意思是，當我們考慮今年的資本配置決策時，它與我們的合併無關。這只是簡單地考慮我們今天擁有的生產能力，我們所看到的市場狀況，為我們的股東做出我們可以做出的最佳決策。

Now the concept that a company with a very strong balance sheet and a large production base can basically use the turn-in-line cadence available to us much the way that we would use storage if there was more storage available in the market is a strategy that I think could be deployed in the future, and we would look forward to considering those opportunities. But our hope is that by the time you get to 2025, you have a step change in demand. We see growing demand for gas. We will be in a position to continue to deliver the most efficient, lowest cost gas we can to the market as quickly as we possibly can to a market that needs it. We think that's the more likely future for us.

現在，一個擁有非常強大的資產負債表和大型生產基地的公司基本上可以使用我們可用的上線節奏，就像我們在市場上有更多可用存儲時使用存儲一樣，這是一種策略我認為將來可以部署，我們期待考慮這些機會。但我們希望，到 2025 年，需求會發生巨大變化。我們看到天然氣需求不斷增加。我們將能夠繼續盡可能快速地向有需要的市場提供最高效率、成本最低的天然氣。我們認為這對我們來說是更有可能的未來。

Very clear. My follow-up is a quick one. Again, to the extent you can speak to this, Nick. You haven't had an FTC request, a second FTC request, I should say. You're still talking notionally about second quarter close. If we look at everything else going on in the market, one would assume that you're probably going to get a second FTC request. My question is, does that have any impact on integration planning? Or does that go ahead anyway?

非常清楚。我的後續行動很快。尼克，再說一遍，就你能談到的範圍而言。我應該說，你還沒有收到聯邦貿易委員會的請求，第二次聯邦貿易委員會的請求。您仍然在名義上談論第二季的收盤情況。如果我們看看市場上發生的所有其他事情，人們會認為您可能會收到第二次聯邦貿易委員會請求。我的問題是，這對整合規劃有什麼影響嗎？或者無論如何都會繼續進行嗎？

No. We're well into the weeds of integration planning at this point. We have a tremendous amount to work on, very busy. We have teams that have been set up and working through how to think about a pro forma organizational structure, all the business processes, all the IT systems, all of the things that you plan for. We will be ready for a quick close. We can continue to work on things from an integration standpoint. If it takes longer, we won't let that distract us or bother us in any way. We're well into the work required for a successful integration.

不。我們現在已經進入了整合規劃的混亂階段。我們有大量的工作要做，非常忙碌。我們已經組建了團隊，正在研究如何考慮備考組織結構、所有業務流程、所有 IT 系統以及您計劃的所有事情。我們將準備好快速結束。我們可以繼續從整合的角度開展工作。如果需要更長的時間，我們不會讓它分散我們的注意力或以任何方式打擾我們。我們正在積極進行成功整合所需的工作。

And our next question today comes from Paul Diamond with Citi.

今天我們的下一個問題來自花旗銀行的保羅·戴蒙德（Paul Diamond）。

Just a quick one on the kind of more the operational side of those deferred TILs. How should we think about any potential movement just on the type curves, whether it's increased pressure bleed or maybe increased saturation. Do you guys anticipate those type curves looking any different from just normally completed wells and normally timed wells?

只是簡單介紹一下這些延期 TIL 的營運方面。我們應該如何考慮類型曲線上的任何潛在運動，無論是增加的壓力排放還是增加的飽和度。你們預期這些類型曲線與正常完井和正常定時井有什麼不同嗎？

No, we don't. We've been operating these assets for well over a decade. And so we have a lot of experience being in a situation where we had to defer completions and, in this case, defer TILs. And actually, through the years, we've seen some benefits to this where we simply see the water and dive into the reservoir. And so as we start to reactivate the production, we see similar gas productivity, less water production which, of course, is beneficial from an operating cost standpoint. So no, we do not anticipate any change to type curves.

不，我們不。我們經營這些資產已有十多年了。因此，我們在不得不推遲完工的情況下擁有豐富的經驗，在本例中，我們需要推遲 TIL。事實上，多年來，我們已經看到了這樣做的一些好處，我們只需看到水並潛入水庫即可。因此，當我們開始重新啟動生產時，我們看到相似的天然氣生產率，更少的水產量，這當然從營運成本的角度來看是有利的。因此，我們預計類型曲線不會發生任何變化。

Understood. And just kind of circling back on one of the comments from the prepared remarks. You just talked about a 70% well cost improvement in Marcellus. Just wanted to see how you were thinking about the progression of that, whether there's more meat on the bone or I guess how much -- what your guys' internal target is for how much more you can improve things out there?

明白了。只是回顧一下準備好的評論中的其中一條評論。您剛剛談到 Marcellus 的油井成本改善了 70%。只是想看看你們是如何看待這件事的進展的，是否有更多的肉在骨頭上，或者我猜有多少——你們的內部目標是什麼，你們可以在多大程度上改進外面的事情？

Yes, sure, Paul. I mean, the teams have done an unbelievable job this year really across the whole company, capturing efficiencies. We quoted there a 40% improvement in our footage per day. On top of that, starting in the fourth quarter, we are starting to see some deflationary elements start to show up in the cost with the biggest mover being on the OCTG side, which has come off for us around 40%. So we do think there's some tailwind coming into the year.

是的，當然，保羅。我的意思是，今年整個公司的團隊都做了令人難以置信的工作，提高了效率。我們稱每天的鏡頭品質提高了 40%。最重要的是，從第四季開始，我們開始看到一些通貨緊縮因素開始出現在成本中，其中最大的推動因素是油井管方面，我們的成本下降了 40% 左右。因此，我們確實認為今年將會出現一些順風車。

We guided at the end of last year to around a 5% to 7% deflation from kind of year-over-year levels. We still feel pretty good about that right now. We're anticipating the Marcellus to be around 10% year-over-year cost improvements, which is a combination of deflation, extended laterals, which were going to be up about 15% or so and just execution efficiencies that we see showing up in the system. And my expectation is we continue to get better as well. And we start to see costs beyond that 10% that I've quoted here.

去年年底，我們預計通貨緊縮率將較去年同期下降 5% 至 7% 左右。我們現在對此仍然感覺很好。我們預計 Marcellus 的成本將年增 10% 左右，這是通貨緊縮、擴展橫向成本的結合，成本將提高約 15% 左右，以及我們看到的執行效率系統。我的期望是我們也能繼續變得更好。我們開始看到成本超出了我在此引用的 10%。

Our next question comes from Michael Scialla at Stephens.

我們的下一個問題來自史蒂芬斯的邁克爾·夏拉（Michael Scialla）。

Nick, you mentioned you probably wouldn't bring back the 1 Bcf per day in any given quarter. But if you do get the step change in demand that you're anticipating, how quickly could you bring that 1 Bcf per day online? Does it take a full quarter? Or is it something less than that? And are there any infill constraints or anything that you need to be thinking about there?

Nick，您提到您可能不會在任何特定季度每天帶回 1 Bcf。但是，如果您確實實現了預期的需求逐步變化，那麼每天需要多快的時間才能將 1 Bcf 帶到網上？需要整整一個季​​度嗎？還是比這更小的東西？是否有任何填充限製或您需要考慮的事情？

Yes. Mike, this is Josh. There's going to be some operational considerations as we start to reactivate the production. It's just simply logistics planning around, managing gas, coming into gas gathering systems and water. And so -- we think that over the course of weeks, if not months or a quarter, it's over a matter of weeks, so say, month, we think we can start to reactivate that production. But I'd just remind you -- we're obviously going to be monitoring the markets in each of the basins. They are very different. They have different market dynamics. And so it could be that we start to phase in TILs in one area and not the other with that may be lagging behind. And so I think there's just a number of considerations, but the teams are well prepared to manage this type of activity and anxious to see what they do with it.

是的。麥克，這是喬許。當我們開始重新啟動生產時，將會有一些營運上的考量。這只是簡單的物流規劃，管理天然氣，進入天然氣收集系統和水。因此，我們認為，在幾週的時間內，如果不是幾個月或一個季度，也可能是幾週，也就是說，一個月，我們認為我們可以開始重新啟動生產。但我只是提醒您 - 我們顯然將監控每個流域的市場。他們非常不同。他們有不同的市場動態。因此，我們可能會開始在一個領域逐步採用 TIL，而另一個領域可能會落後。因此，我認為有很多考慮因素，但團隊已經做好了管理此類活動的充分準備，並且渴望了解他們如何利用它。

Understood. And just a follow-up to that. With the reduction in volumes you have, are there any commitments with momentum or any other pipelines that will come into play that you need to keep an eye on?

明白了。這只是後續行動。隨著數量的減少，是否有任何有動力的承諾或任何其他管道將發揮作用，您需要密切關注？

Mike, this is Mohit. So the way you should think about momentum pipeline, the volumes that we have committed there, which is 700 million a day is essentially volumes that we would read out from existing pipelines. So this is not a volume that we are growing into. And that's just altering the flow path and moving volumes around on the pipeline network. So it doesn't really constrain us or put any restrictions on us with regards to how we grow it. So you shouldn't really worry about that constraint.

麥克，這是莫希特。因此，您應該考慮動量管道的方式，我們在那裡承諾的數量，即每天 7 億，本質上是我們從現有管道中讀出的數量。所以這不是我們正在成長的體積。這只是改變流動路徑並移動管道網路上的體積。因此，它並沒有真正限制我們或對我們如何種植它施加任何限制。所以你不應該真正擔心這個限制。

And our next question comes from Ati Modak with Goldman Sachs.

我們的下一個問題來自高盛的阿蒂·莫達克。

Just curious if you can provide any color on how you are thinking about the deleveraging plan, given where the strip is and what that means for free cash flow this year. I know you have cash on the balance sheet. But is there a minimum cash you would like to retain through the year as you go paying down debt?

只是好奇您能否提供任何關於您如何考慮去槓桿化計劃的信息，考慮到地帶的位置以及這對今年的自由現金流意味著什麼。我知道你的資產負債表上有現金。但是，當您償還債務時，您希望在這一年中保留最低現金嗎？

Yes. Ati, this is Nick. I'll start and then Mohit may have more to add here. I just would reiterate that as a stand-alone company, we don't have a debt reduction target. And so as we think about our 2024 plan, we're very, very comfortable with all of the decisions we're making and the very strong balance sheet we have, frankly, with and without these decisions being made.

是的。阿蒂，這是尼克。我先開始，然後莫希特可能會在這裡補充更多內容。我只是想重申，作為一家獨立公司，我們沒有債務削減目標。因此，當我們思考 2024 年計畫時，坦白說，無論做出或不做出這些決定，我們都對我們正在做出的所有決定以及我們擁有的非常強大的資產負債表感到非常非常滿意。

That said, pro forma for the close we will be very focused on debt reduction. One of the reasons we find ourselves in the position we're in today, which is to be able to be a very efficient consolidator in a merger context with Southwestern to be able to have the capital flexibility we're showing with how we're directing our production cadence this year, all relates to having a very strong balance sheet. It will be a top priority of this company to maintain a strong balance sheet through these cycles, and we see that being absolutely front and center for our strategy and something we expect to deliver on regardless of the market conditions.

也就是說，預計截至收盤時，我們將非常關注債務削減。我們發現自己處於今天的地位的原因之一是能夠在與西南航空的合併中成為非常高效的整合者，從而能夠擁有我們所展示的資本靈活性指導我們今年的生產節奏，一切都與擁有非常強勁的資產負債表有關。在這些週期中保持強勁的資產負債表將是該公司的首要任務，我們認為這絕對是我們策略的前沿和中心，也是我們希望無論市場狀況如何都能實現的目標。

Ati, this is Mohit. The only thing I would add to that is coupled with a very strong hedge book and $1.1 billion of cash that we have on hand. It's a pretty strong balance sheet. So from a leverage point of view, we feel pretty comfortable. And then when you start looking at the maturity profile of the debt that we have also, so there's no near-term maturities which are coming up. So as a stand-alone company, we are pretty comfortable with where we are. And as Nick said, once we are post close with Southwestern, then we'll have a slightly different approach.

阿蒂，這是莫希特。我唯一要補充的是，我們擁有非常強大的對沖帳簿和手頭上 11 億美元的現金。這是一個相當強勁的資產負債表。所以從槓桿的角度來看，我們覺得很舒服。然後，當你開始查看我們所擁有的債務的到期情況時，你會發現沒有近期到期的情況。因此，作為一家獨立的公司，我們對自己的現狀感到非常滿意。正如尼克所說，一旦我們與西南航空關係密切，我們就會採取略有不同的方法。

Got it. That makes sense. And then with the activity and production guidance you've given, how should we think about the cadence of production through the rest of the year? It sounds like it could be a steady quarterly reduction, but any color you can provide there if it's going to be a step change or steady. And then also help us understand what the cadence is between the Appalachia and the Haynesville assets.

知道了。這就說得通了。然後根據您給予的活動和生產指導，我們應該如何考慮今年剩餘時間的生產節奏？聽起來這可能是一個穩定的季度減少，但如果它是一個階躍變化或穩定的話，你可以在那裡提供任何顏色。然後也幫助我們了解阿巴拉契亞和海恩斯維爾資產之間的節奏。

Yes. Maybe just kind of address the second question first. Really, at this point, that's just undetermined. Again, there's different market dynamics between each areas. Each of the assets have different cost structures that's going to guide that ultimate decision on how we restart drilling wells or activating completions. As far as the production cadence, again, we stated that we'll have 30 to 40 turn-in-lines for the year. We've already turned in line 25 of those. And so as a result, we are anticipating quarter-over-quarter decline. And as we look at kind of Q4 of '23 to Q4 of '24, we see that equating at a corporate level to just under 30% with Haynesville being slightly above that and Marcellus being slightly under 30%. So it will be a pretty steady decline.

是的。也許先解決第二個問題。事實上，目前這還不確定。同樣，每個領域之間都有不同的市場動態。每項資產都有不同的成本結構，這將指導我們如何重新啟動鑽井或啟動完井的最終決策。至於生產節奏，我們再次表示，今年將有 30 到 40 條上交線。我們已經交出了其中的第 25 行。因此，我們預計季度將環比下降。當我們觀察23 年第4 季到24 年第4 季時，我們發現公司層面的比例略低於30%，而海恩斯維爾略高於此水平，馬塞勒斯略低於30% 。所以這將是一個相當穩定的下降。

And our final question today comes from Phillips Johnston with Capital One.

今天我們的最後一個問題來自第一資本的菲利普斯約翰斯頓。

I appreciate your comments. You can't really speak for Southwestern. Just wondering from a housekeeping perspective, when you guys plan to provide pro forma guidance that includes the impact of the deal. Is that a -- is the timing there probably around when it closes?

我很欣賞你的評論。你不能真正代表西南航空。只是從內務管理的角度想知道，你們什麼時候會計劃提供包括交易影響在內的備考指導。那是——大概是關閉的時間嗎？

I think that's a good safe assumption, Phillips.

我認為這是一個很好的安全假設，菲利普斯。

Okay. And then, Nick, I'd be curious to hear your high-level thoughts just on the administrations all on the LNG front and what you think that might mean for the long-term gas market?

好的。然後，尼克，我很想聽聽您對液化天然氣方面政府的高層想法，以及您認為這對長期天然氣市場意味著什麼？

We are still really optimistic on the long-term gas market. And that's just based on the underlying view that natural gas is the most efficient answer to energy supply challenges around the world. The supply challenges come from shortages or limited access to energy broadly, they come from climate concerns, they come from political instability concerns. And natural gas is really the best answer, especially natural gas in the U.S. is the best answer to all of those challenges.

我們對長期天然氣市場仍然非常樂觀。這只是基於這樣一個基本觀點：天然氣是應對全球能源供應挑戰的最有效答案。供應挑戰來自能源短缺或廣泛的能源取得機會有限，來自氣候問題，來自政治不穩定問題。天然氣確實是最好的答案，尤其是美國的天然氣是應對所有這些挑戰的最佳答案。

As a result, we think that the administration will ultimately find a very strong answer as they review the need for permitting approvals here. We expect that, that will be seen positively as we see it and we expect this will move on in due time. I think it's unfortunate. I think it's not good for those parts of the economy that need incremental energy and need it as quickly as they can get it. This pause will slow things down a little, which is unfortunate and not great for those that are seeking incremental gas, but we have confidence that the merits of LNG export from the U.S. will be seen by all and that approvals will be taken back up again in the future.

因此，我們認為政府在審查此處許可批准的必要性時最終會找到一個非常強有力的答案。我們預計，正如我們所看到的那樣，這將得到積極的看待，我們預計這將在適當的時候取得進展。我認為這很不幸。我認為這對於經濟中那些需要增量能源並且需要盡快獲得能源的部分來說並不好。這次暫停會稍微放慢速度，這對於那些尋求增量天然氣的人來說是不幸的，也不是好事，但我們相信，美國液化天然氣出口的優點將被所有人看到，並且批准將再次恢復將來。

And this concludes our question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the conference back over to the management team for any closing remarks.

我們的問答環節到此結束。我想將會議轉回給管理團隊進行總結發言。

Okay. Thanks, Rocco. Really appreciate everybody's time today. We know that our approach for 2024 is a little bit different than we've been able to do in the past as a company and that we think we've seen from others. We think it very much addresses the challenge that is seen in the market today, which is a near-term oversupply and a long-term very structurally positive natural gas market. We're excited about the position we're in. We look forward to the ultimate aligning of supply and demand in the market and a recovery for natural gas broadly associated with that alignment. And we think we're really well positioned for that. So look forward to continuing to discuss this with all of you. We'll be out on the road at a number of different conferences and events in the next week to 2 weeks and look forward to engaging throughout the year. Thanks very much for your time again today, and we'll talk soon.

好的。謝謝，羅科。真的很感謝大家今天抽出時間。我們知道，我們為 2024 年採取的方法與我們過去作為一家公司所能採取的方法略有不同，並且我們認為我們從其他公司看到了這一點。我們認為它在很大程度上解決了當今市場面臨的挑戰，即近期供應過剩和長期結構性非常積極的天然氣市場。我們對目前的處境感到興奮。我們期待市場供需的最終調整，以及與這種調整廣泛相關的天然氣的復甦。我們認為我們已經做好了充分準備。所以期待與大家繼續討論這個問題。我們將在接下來的一周到兩週內參加許多不同的會議和活動，並期待全年參與。非常感謝您今天再次抽出時間，我們很快就會再談。

Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. We thank you all for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect your lines, and have a wonderful day.

謝謝。今天的電話會議到此結束。我們感謝大家參加今天的演講。您現在可以斷開線路，度過美好的一天。