Diamondback Energy Inc (FANG) 2023 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Diamondback Energy First Quarter 2023 Earnings Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

美好的一天，謝謝你的支持。歡迎來到 Diamondback Energy 2023 年第一季度收益電話會議。 （操作員說明）請注意，今天的會議正在錄製中。

I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Adam Lawlis, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

我現在想將會議交給您今天的第一位發言人，投資者關係副總裁 Adam Lawlis。請繼續。

Thank you, Joa. Good morning, and welcome to Diamondback Energy's First Quarter 2023 Conference Call. During our call today, we will reference an updated investor presentation and stockholder letter, which can be found on Diamondback's website. Representing Diamondback today are Travis Stice, Chairman and CEO; Kaes Van't Hof, President and CFO; and Danny Wesson, COO.

謝謝你，喬亞。早上好，歡迎來到 Diamondback Energy 的 2023 年第一季度電話會議。在我們今天的電話會議中，我們將參考最新的投資者介紹和股東信函，可以在 Diamondback 的網站上找到。今天代表 Diamondback 的是董事長兼首席執行官 Travis Stice； Kaes Van't Hof，總裁兼首席財務官；和首席運營官 Danny Wesson。

During this conference call, the participants may make certain forward-looking statements relating to the company's financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and businesses.

在本次電話會議期間，與會者可能會就公司的財務狀況、經營業績、計劃、目標、未來業績和業務做出某些前瞻性陳述。

We caution you that actual results could differ materially from those that are indicated in these forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors. Information concerning these factors can be found in the company's filings with the SEC.

我們提醒您，由於各種因素，實際結果可能與這些前瞻性陳述中的結果存在重大差異。有關這些因素的信息可以在公司提交給美國證券交易委員會的文件中找到。

In addition, we will make reference to certain non-GAAP measures. The reconciliations with the appropriate GAAP measures can be found in our earnings release issued yesterday afternoon.

此外，我們將參考某些非 GAAP 指標。與適當的 GAAP 措施的調節可以在我們昨天下午發布的收益報告中找到。

I'll now turn the call over to Travis Stice.

我現在將電話轉給 Travis Stice。

Thank you, Adam, and Adam mentioned that we released a shareholder letter last night in conjunction with our press release. I hope you find that useful. We believe that it not only increases transparency directly to our shareholders, but also improves efficiency. So we'll move right into questions.

謝謝你，亞當，亞當提到我們昨晚在發布新聞稿的同時發布了一封股東信。我希望你覺得這很有用。我們相信，這不僅直接增加了對我們股東的透明度，而且還提高了效率。因此，我們將直接進入問題。

Operator, if you could open the line and begin with our first question.

接線員，如果你能打開線路並從我們的第一個問題開始。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of Neal Dingmann of Truist Securities.

（操作員說明）我們的第一個問題來自 Truist Securities 的 Neal Dingmann。

Thanks, Travis, for the new format. I think, I appreciate it. Travis, my first question is for you or Danny, on one of the topic (inaudible) that service cost. Specifically, are you able to quantify how your continued operational efficiencies have recently mitigated your cost? And just wondering how you all think about spot versus long-term contracts in the current environment?

謝謝 Travis 的新格式。我想，我很感激。特拉維斯，我的第一個問題是你或丹尼，關於服務成本的一個主題（聽不清）。具體來說，您是否能夠量化持續的運營效率最近如何降低成本？只是想知道在當前環境下你們如何看待現貨和長期合約？

I think, Neal, the read through to that question is kind of what the CapEx is going to look like in the back half of the year. And I think there's -- and I'll let Danny talk about the specific operational efficiencies we've seen year-to-date that's offset most of the inflationary pressures.

我認為，尼爾，通讀這個問題就是今年下半年資本支出的樣子。我認為有——我會讓丹尼談談我們今年迄今看到的具體運營效率，這抵消了大部分通脹壓力。

But when we talk about deflation, it's really -- that's from raw materials, it's diesel, it's sand, steel, particularly on steel because we're buying our steel needs multiple quarters in advance. So we know what that steel cost is. And it's already down for the future purposes $20, $25 a foot.

但是，當我們談論通貨緊縮時，它實際上是——來自原材料、柴油、沙子、鋼鐵，尤其是鋼鐵，因為我們提前多個季度購買鋼鐵需求。所以我們知道鋼鐵成本是多少。為了將來的目的，它已經降到每英尺 20、25 美元。

And then we've also got the rigs, we talked about dropping, we are going to drop a couple of rigs and that allows us to look at our entire rig fleet and the costs associated with those rigs and we see rig costs are coming down as well.

然後我們還有鑽井平台，我們談到了放棄，我們將放棄幾個鑽井平台，這使我們能夠查看我們的整個鑽井平台以及與這些鑽井平台相關的成本，我們看到鑽井平台成本正在下降以及。

And then lastly, it's -- while it's not necessarily a CapEx issue, we're seeing improved efficiencies as -- we've got the second e-fleet that started last week. And we've also got rid of our 2 spot frac crews and replace them with 1 simul-frac crew. So we're seeing $10 to $20 a foot efficiency gains there as well.

最後，它是——雖然這不一定是資本支出問題，但我們看到效率有所提高——我們已經有了上週開始的第二個電子艦隊。我們還解雇了 2 名現場壓裂人員，代之以 1 名同步壓裂人員。因此，我們也看到每英尺的效率提高了 10 到 20 美元。

So regardless, Neal, of what's going on with CapEx, our commitment has always been to be the low-cost leaders when it comes to prosecuting our development plan out here.

因此，無論 Neal，CapEx 發生了什麼，我們的承諾始終是在執行我們的發展計劃時成為低成本領導者。

And we've got now almost a decade of demonstrating that. So we anticipate -- so we're going to continue to do that, and that's what our shareholders should be comfortable in. Dan, do you have some additional color for near term?

我們現在已經有將近十年的時間證明了這一點。所以我們預計 - 所以我們將繼續這樣做，這就是我們的股東應該感到舒服的事情。丹，你近期有一些額外的顏色嗎？

No, I think Travis covered everything that we've kind of seen on the drilling services side, the consumable side on the drilling side that's leading us to see leading edge costs coming down.

不，我認為特拉維斯涵蓋了我們在鑽井服務方面看到的一切，鑽井方面的消耗品方面讓我們看到前沿成本下降。

And then on the completion side, just with the additional efficiencies from the additional e-fleets as well as the replacement simul-frac fleet replacing the 2 traditional zipper fleets that we took over as part of the 2 acquisitions at the end of the year.

然後在完工方面，僅通過額外的電子車隊以及替換的 simul-frac 車隊取代我們在年底作為 2 次收購的一部分接管的 2 個傳統拉鍊車隊來提高效率。

Great. And then my second question is for Kaes on shareholder return. Kaes specifically, it seems you all plan to stick to or you are sticking to that 75% free cash flow payout.

偉大的。然後我的第二個問題是 Kaes 關於股東回報的問題。具體來說，Kaes 似乎你們都計劃堅持，或者你們正在堅持 75% 的自由現金流支出。

Can you give me your opinion on maybe why not pay more like some peers and on the capital allocation part of the shareholder return, is that plan still just to see what your stock price is doing versus the mid-cycle? Or how do you determine that?

你能否就為什麼不像一些同行那樣支付更多以及股東回報的資本配置部分給我你的意見，該計劃是否仍然只是看看你的股價與週期中期相比的表現？或者你如何確定？

Yes, Neal, we always -- when we upped the shareholder return program to 75% of free cash going back to shareholders. We thought the mix of 75% equity and 25% to the balance sheet was a good mix. We still believe that's a good mix. I think when things are going well, like they have the last couple of years, 75% feels like a max number to go back to equity while continuing to improve the balance sheet.

是的，尼爾，我們總是——當我們將股東回報計劃提高到 75% 的自由現金返還給股東時。我們認為 75% 的股權和 25% 的資產負債表是一個很好的組合。我們仍然相信這是一個很好的組合。我認為當事情進展順利時，就像過去幾年一樣，75% 感覺是在繼續改善資產負債表的同時回歸股權的最大數字。

Really the test of this new business model and returns -- return of capital based business models when things go south in a potential downturn, that's, I think, the time when we should be allocating more capital to buying back shares, reducing the share count a lot more efficiently than it is even when things are going well at today.

真正是對這種新的商業模式和回報的考驗——當事情在潛在的低迷時期向南發展時，基於資本的商業模式的回報，我認為，那是我們應該分配更多資本回購股票、減少股票數量的時候即使今天一切順利，也比現在更有效率。

So we've kept a flexible return of capital program since the beginning. I think we like that. We want to keep that. And Q1 is an exact reason why we maintain that flexibility. We don't want to blow out the balance sheet to buy back stocks, but we also recognize that when your stock is down significantly in the quarter, variable dividend doesn't matter. And that's what we did in Q1 and allocated a lot more cash to the buyback.

因此，我們從一開始就保持了靈活的資本回報計劃。我想我們喜歡這樣。我們想保留這一點。 Q1 正是我們保持這種靈活性的確切原因。我們不想為了回購股票而耗盡資產負債表，但我們也認識到，當您的股票在本季度大幅下跌時，可變股息並不重要。這就是我們在第一季度所做的，並為回購分配了更多現金。

Our next question comes from the line of Neil Mehta of Goldman Sachs & Co.

我們的下一個問題來自高盛公司的 Neil Mehta。

Yes. Thanks for the new format. The first question was around gas price realizations. Obviously, they were soft in the quarter. There's some onetime dynamics, it felt like. But just curious on your views on how local gas pricing is going to play out here? And what protections you guys have built in place in order to mitigate pricing negativity?

是的。感謝新格式。第一個問題是關於天然氣價格的實現。顯然，他們在本季度表現疲軟。感覺上有一些一次性的動態。但只是想知道您對當地天然氣定價將如何發揮作用的看法？為了減輕定價的負面影響，你們建立了哪些保護措施？

Yes, Neil, good question. I think it's 2 things, right? There's certainly the unhedged realized gas prices for us that were weaker in the quarter relative to the expectations. Really, a lot of that comprised a $15 million true-up payment between contracts that moved from selling at the (inaudible) to taking on our taking kind rights downstream. So that's kind of an intercompany issue, but I recognize it did hit gas presence for the quarter.

是的，尼爾，問得好。我認為這是兩件事，對吧？相對於預期，我們本季度肯定有未對沖的已實現天然氣價格。真的，其中很多包括合同之間的 1500 萬美元調整付款，這些合同從在（聽不清）銷售轉移到在下游接受我們的權利。所以這是一個公司間的問題，但我認識到它確實影響了本季度的天然氣業務。

What we've done from a hedging perspective and from a physical perspective to protect against future gas price flow-outs in the basin, which we think there's going to be periodic points of weakness throughout this year and next.

我們從對沖的角度和物理角度所做的工作，以防止流域未來的天然氣價格外流，我們認為今年和明年會出現週期性的疲軟點。

We've had all of our Waha exposure in the basin, which is about 2/3 of our gas through the end of 2024. And then the other 1/3 of our gas gets a combination of Henry Hub and Houston Ship Channel prices.

到 2024 年底，我們所有的 Waha 業務都在該盆地進行，這大約是我們天然氣的 2/3。然後，我們另外 1/3 的天然氣將獲得 Henry Hub 和 Houston Ship Channel 價格的組合。

And then on the Henry Hub side, we have protected with wide collars with a $3 floor, about 2/3 of our gas this year in 2023 and probably 1/3 of it next year. So in general, I think we tried to give the Street some guidance on future unhedged gas realizations and the hedging piece has been a tailwind for us as gas prices weaken both at Henry Hub and in the basin.

然後在 Henry Hub 一側，我們用 3 美元底價的寬領保護，到 2023 年大約是我們今年天然氣的 2/3，明年可能是 1/3。因此，總的來說，我認為我們試圖就未來未對沖的天然氣實現向華爾街提供一些指導，隨著亨利中心和盆地的天然氣價格走軟，對沖對我們來說是一個順風。

And then just a follow up on some of the recent acquisitions that you've done here that you've had them in your portfolio now for a couple of months. Just any update on how they're executing early thoughts on productivity and efficiencies that you're able to realize out of the new assets?

然後只是跟進你最近在這裡完成的一些收購，你現在已經將它們放在你的投資組合中幾個月了。關於他們如何執行關於您能夠從新資產中實現的生產力和效率的早期想法的任何更新？

Yes, that's a great question as well. I would say, generally, (inaudible), we knew what we were getting. That asset is nearby all of our existing production in Martin County. So that's as advertised.

是的，這也是一個很好的問題。我會說，一般來說，（聽不清），我們知道我們得到了什麼。該資產靠近我們在馬丁縣的所有現有生產。所以這就像廣告一樣。

I think at the end of the day, when we look back at the FireBird acquisition in a few years, that's going to be one of the better value deals we got. We estimated there's almost 500 locations on that acquisition without even pushing the limit on upside locations.

我認為，歸根結底，當我們回顧幾年後對 FireBird 的收購時，這將是我們獲得的更有價值的交易之一。我們估計那次收購有近 500 個地點，甚至沒有突破上行地點的限制。

And there's been some well tests where we've codeveloped the Lower Spraberry and the Wolfcamp A on the southern part of the position that gives us confidence that some of those upside locations are going to become real locations that we're going to develop over time.

並且已經進行了一些試井，我們在該位置的南部共同開發了 Lower Spraberry 和 Wolfcamp A，這讓我們相信其中一些上部位置將成為我們將隨著時間的推移開發的真實位置.

Second to that, the ops team, they're going into a new area. We're already completing or drilling a 15,000-foot lateral and [sub 10] days on the new field. So everything is going well on both those deals. I would say, generally, over time, FireBird will prove to be one of the better deals we did because of the amount of acreage that came with it and the upside from a geologic perspective.

其次，運營團隊，他們正在進入一個新領域。我們已經在新油田完成或鑽探 15,000 英尺的橫向井 [sub 10] 天。因此，這兩項交易的一切進展順利。我會說，一般來說，隨著時間的推移，FireBird 將被證明是我們所做的更好的交易之一，因為它帶來的種植面積以及從地質角度來看的優勢。

Our next question comes from the line of Arun Jayaram of JPMorgan Securities LLC.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根大通證券有限責任公司的 Arun Jayaram。

We do appreciate the new format. So that was really helpful. My first question is on CapEx. Your first half CapEx guidance plus the 1Q actuals implies around $1.36 billion in spending or about 52% of the budget. You talked about having line of sight to some meaningful declines in service costs.

我們非常感謝新格式。所以這真的很有幫助。我的第一個問題是關於資本支出的。你上半年的資本支出指導加上第一季度的實際支出意味著大約 13.6 億美元的支出或大約 52% 的預算。你談到了對服務成本的一些有意義的下降的看法。

So I was wondering maybe Kaes, if you could describe your confidence on hitting, call it, the midpoint of the range of $2.6 billion for the full year? And how does your cash -- I know you account for CapEx on a cash basis versus accrual basis. How does that influence the timing of CapEx in a rising service price environment versus when it's falling?

所以我想知道，也許 Kaes，您能否描述一下您對實現目標的信心，稱之為全年 26 億美元範圍的中點？你的現金是如何計算的——我知道你是按收付實現制還是應計製計算資本支出的。在服務價格上漲的環境中與服務價格下降的情況下，這對資本支出的時機有何影響？

Yes. Good question, Arun. On the cash CapEx thing, the prime example was Q2 of 2020, while I don't want to relive that particular quarter, we reduced our rig count from 15 -- or 23 rigs down to 6, and we had to pay for that in the second quarter. So there's a big disconnect between accrued and cash CapEx. Now that's not the issue we faced here, right?

是的。好問題，阿倫。在現金資本支出方面，最好的例子是 2020 年第二季度，雖然我不想重溫那個特定的季度，但我們將鑽機數量從 15 台或 23 台減少到 6 台，我們不得不為此付出代價第二季。因此，應計資本支出和現金資本支出之間存在很大的脫節。這不是我們在這裡面臨的問題，對吧？

We're talking about things at the margin like a $50 million reduction in run rate CapEx, which is, in my mind, very achievable based on 3 things: lower activity, we're going to reduce our rig count by 2 rigs as expected at the end of this quarter through the back half of the year.

我們談論的是利潤率方面的事情，例如運行率資本支出減少 5000 萬美元，在我看來，基於 3 件事，這是非常可以實現的：活動減少，我們將按預期減少 2 台鑽機在本季度末到今年下半年。

Second, lower service costs and Travis broke those down into the drilling side, which is a significant reduction in raw materials and a smaller reduction in the service piece of the drilling side. And on the other side of that D,C&E line completions down because of efficiencies because of the high grading to 2 Zeus fleets with Halliburton and 2 simul-frac fleets.

其次，降低服務成本，特拉維斯將其分解為鑽井方面，即原材料的顯著減少和鑽井方面服務件的減少。而在 D、C&E 線的另一邊，由於效率高而導致 2 個 Zeus 艦隊與 Halliburton 和 2 個 simul-frac 艦隊的高等級。

And lastly, midstream infrastructure. We spent a lot of money on midstream, building out our Martin County water system that's nearing its end, so that the whole system is connected and infrastructure generally slows down in the back half of the year.

最後，中游基礎設施。我們在中游花了很多錢，建立了我們即將結束的馬丁縣供水系統，這樣整個系統就可以連接起來，基礎設施通常會在下半年放緩。

So that's the line of sight we have. We feel very confident that those things are coming our way based on what we can see in the accrued numbers that we pay for over the next 45 to 60 days on the cash side and CapEx.

這就是我們的視線。我們非常有信心，根據我們在未來 45 至 60 天內在現金方面和資本支出方面支付的應計數字中可以看到的情況，這些事情正在以我們的方式出現。

Yes. And just again to -- Arun to reiterate my opening comment to the first question is that our commitment to our shareholders remain unchanged to be the low-cost leader in efficiency and in execution. And that's certainly been our track record, and that's what we anticipate going forward. But our commitment hasn't changed regardless of what CapEx does.

是的。再一次——阿倫重申我對第一個問題的開場評論是，我們對股東的承諾保持不變，即成為效率和執行方面的低成本領導者。這當然是我們的記錄，也是我們對未來的預期。但無論資本支出如何，我們的承諾都沒有改變。

Great. My follow-up, team, we've heard about some industry activity and leasing in the Midland Basin in deeper zones. Can you remind us how your leases are structured? Do you have rights to those zones currently?

偉大的。我的後續行動，團隊，我們聽說了米德蘭盆地更深區域的一些行業活動和租賃。你能提醒我們你的租約是如何構成的嗎？您目前對這些區域擁有權利嗎？

And perhaps this obviously could have some positive implications for VNOM. So I was wondering if you could maybe talk about how FANG's leases are structured and maybe positive implications for VNOM?

也許這顯然會對 VNOM 產生一些積極影響。所以我想知道您是否可以談談 FANG 的租約結構以及對 VNOM 的積極影響？

Yes. There's really no one size fits all to leases in the Midland Basin. I would say generally, we have most of our leases cover the Wolfcamp B, which is a deeper zone that's going to get a lot more attention over the coming years and some -- a lesser extent, we have the Barnett and Woodford covered.

是的。在米德蘭盆地，確實沒有適合所有人的租約。我想說的是，一般來說，我們的大部分租約都涵蓋了 Wolfcamp B，這是一個更深的區域，在未來幾年將受到更多關注，而在較小程度上，我們涵蓋了 Barnett 和 Woodford。

Now we've been exploring the Barnett and Woodford on the Western side of the Midland Basin for a very long time now with our Long Life play. It seems that the Barnett and Woodford play is going to extend more into the actual basin, and that's something that we're involved in, along with many other large peers testing that zone and looking at it for future development in the end of this decade and the next decade.

現在，我們已經在米德蘭盆地西側探索 Barnett 和 Woodford 很長一段時間了，我們的 Long Life 遊戲。看起來 Barnett 和 Woodford 油田將更多地延伸到實際盆地中，這是我們參與的事情，還有許多其他大型同行正在測試該區域並著眼於本十年末的未來發展以及下一個十年。

We'll say, generally, that's the benefit of owning a lot of minerals is that we have the other side of our business card that is going to have a front seat to leasing any of those deeper rights should they be unleased throughout the basin.

我們會說，一般來說，擁有大量礦產的好處是我們擁有名片的另一面，如果這些礦產在整個盆地未被出租，那麼我們將有一個前排座位來出租任何更深層次的權利。

Our next question comes from the line of Scott Gruber of Citigroup.

我們的下一個問題來自花旗集團的 Scott Gruber。

Turning back to service rates. The service companies have been talking about a bifurcated market here for both rigs and frac pumps and their characterization is that the highly efficient crews, the next-gen kit, especially nat gas fuel rigs and pumps will largely maintain pricing, while it's going to be the legacy equipment and/or lower quality crews where you'll see the more meaningful declines in rates.

回到服務費率。服務公司一直在談論這裡的鑽機和壓裂泵的分叉市場，他們的特點是高效的工作人員、下一代套件，尤其是天然氣燃料鑽機和泵將在很大程度上保持定價，同時它將是遺留設備和/或低素質的工作人員，您會在其中看到更有意義的費率下降。

Is that how you see the market developing here? Or do you see more broad-based reductions in pricing kind of across the spectrum.

您是這樣看待這裡的市場發展的嗎？或者你是否看到了更廣泛的價格下降。

Scott, I think that's partially true. Certainly, on the frac side, the higher quality equipment, the super-spec e-fleet, those have real contracts associated with them with less global room on pricing. So that's why we think generally, we make more money or save more money there on the efficiency side.

斯科特，我認為這是部分正確的。當然，在壓裂方面，更高質量的設備，超級規格的電子車隊，這些設備有與之相關的真實合同，全球定價空間較小。所以這就是為什麼我們一般認為，我們在效率方面賺更多的錢或節省更多的錢。

On the rig side, I think generally, the 10% of your market is going away in a quarter or 2, it's going to have an impact on pricing. There's just no doubt about that. So leading edge rates certainly are lower.

在鑽機方面，我認為一般來說，10% 的市場份額將在一兩個季度內消失，這將對定價產生影響。毫無疑問。所以前沿利率肯定更低。

I think we've also proven in the past to do more with less when it comes to equipment on the rig side, particularly in the Midland Basin, where it's a lot easier to drill in general than other places around the country.

我認為我們過去也已經證明，在鑽井設備方面，尤其是在米德蘭盆地，那裡的鑽井比全國其他地方容易得多。

Got it. And then just turning to operating costs. LOE came in at the low end of the range. We kept the full year and then you mentioned the fixed price contracts for power.

知道了。然後只是轉向運營成本。 LOE 處於該範圍的低端。我們保留了全年，然後你提到了電力的固定價格合同。

Just any color that you can provide on how operating costs should evolve over the course of the year, given the outlook for natural gas and power and other things, chemicals, et cetera, that go into operating costs?

考慮到天然氣和電力以及其他會影響運營成本的事物、化學品等的前景，您可以提供關於運營成本在一年中應該如何變化的任何顏色嗎？

Yes. Look, I think obviously, we had a very good start to the year on LOE. We still feel good about the midpoint of that range mainly because -- not because of power, but because of some of our activity is moving to areas where we have water dedicated to third parties, not ourselves. And so that has a little higher rate.

是的。看，我認為很明顯，我們今年在 LOE 上有一個很好的開端。我們仍然對該範圍的中點感覺良好，主要是因為 - 不是因為權力，而是因為我們的一些活動正在轉移到我們有專門供第三方而非我們自己使用的水的區域。因此，它的比率要高一些。

And so we expect LOE to trend up a little bit in Q2, Q3 as some of those big pads on third-party areas are developed. But generally, we received a benefit in terms of gas prices on the power side to lock in a lot of power.

因此，我們預計 LOE 在第二季度、第三季度會有所上升，因為第三方領域的一些大墊子已經開發完成。但總的來說，我們在電力方面獲得了天然氣價格方面的好處，可以鎖定大量電力。

And I would say generally, we've locked in about 75% of our expected power needs for the foreseeable future that should keep LOE generally lower for longer and less exposed to the price spikes that we saw last summer.

我一般會說，在可預見的未來，我們已經鎖定了大約 75% 的預期電力需求，這應該會使 LOE 在更長時間內普遍保持較低水平，並減少我們去年夏天看到的價格飆升的風險。

Our next question comes from the line of David Deckelbaum of Cowen.

我們的下一個問題來自 Cowen 的 David Deckelbaum。

Just longer term from an efficiency gains perspective, you all made some headway and you highlighted the benefits of using e-fleets and moving that second e-fleet this year.

從提高效率的角度來看，從長遠來看，你們都取得了一些進展，你們強調了使用電子車隊和今年移動第二個電子車隊的好處。

How do you think about as we progress into '24 and '25, the mix between simul-frac fleet and e-fleets, if we assume sort of this flattish rig count? Or is the [2:2] mix the expectation for longer-term development?

當我們進入 24 和 25 年時，如果我們假設這種扁平的鑽機數量，您如何看待 simul-frac 車隊和電子車隊之間的混合？或者說[2:2]混合是為了更長遠的發展？

Yes, David, that's a good question. I think our plan right now looking out into '24, '25 is probably to stick with the kind of 50-50 mix. We would basically have to underwrite the e-fleets and sign up for a longer-term commitment with them which is a little harder to do 100% of your capacity committed for a long-term commitment.

是的，大衛，這是個好問題。我認為我們現在的計劃是展望 24 和 25 年，可能會堅持使用 50-50 的組合。我們基本上必須承保電子艦隊並與他們簽訂長期承諾，這有點難以做到 100% 的長期承諾。

But the additional simul-frac fleet as more e-fleets come to market and are available in a, I guess, spot basis, we would certainly migrate to more e-fleets that we'd have some flexibility around utilization.

但是，隨著越來越多的電子車隊進入市場並且可以現貨供應，我們肯定會遷移到更多的電子車隊，這樣我們在使用方面會有一些靈活性。

Got it. And then my second question just around asset sales. You already did around $773 million or so to date, you point out that you've exceeded your target.

知道了。然後是關於資產出售的第二個問題。到目前為止，你已經做了大約 7.73 億美元左右，你指出你已經超出了你的目標。

You guys also highlight the remaining 5 or so outstanding investments that you're articulating on the slide deck in the back, mostly on the midstream side, might be a source to funds going forward. Could you place like -- is there a high probability that we'll see another asset sale this year?

你們還強調了您在後面的幻燈片上闡述的其餘 5 項左右的未完成投資，主要是在中游方面，可能是未來資金的來源。你能不能說——我們今年很可能會看到另一次資產出售？

Yes. I would place a pretty high probability on that, David. We wouldn't have increased our target from $500 million to $1 billion of noncore divestitures if we didn't have a pretty good line of sight.

是的。大衛，我認為這很有可能。如果我們沒有很好的視線，我們就不會將我們的目標從 5 億美元增加到 10 億美元的非核心資產剝離。

I can't guarantee it's going to happen today, but certainly, there's a few things in the works, either on the JV side or some of the small operated midstream assets that could be up for sale. So and we still feel very comfortable with that billion dollar target, I would just say it's tailored more towards midstream versus upstream.

我不能保證它今天會發生，但可以肯定的是，有一些事情正在進行中，無論是在合資企業方面，還是在一些可能被出售的小型中游資產上。因此，我們仍然對這個十億美元的目標感到非常滿意，我只想說它更適合中游而不是上游。

Our next question comes from the line of Roger Read of Wells Fargo Securities.

我們的下一個問題來自 Wells Fargo Securities 的 Roger Read。

Rod, you're on mute if you're on the line.

羅德，如果你在線，你就處於靜音狀態。

Joa, let's move to the next question, please.

Joa，讓我們轉到下一個問題。

Our next question comes from the line of Kevin MacCurdy of Pickering Energy Partners.

我們的下一個問題來自 Pickering Energy Partners 的 Kevin MacCurdy。

With the 1Q release, you've kind of given the pictures to figure out what the 4Q '22 or '23 CapEx and activity is. As we look into potential 2024 maintenance CapEx program, is the 4Q activity kind of a good activity and CapEx, is a good starting point? Or would you need to add any activity to keep production flat next year?

隨著第一季度的發布，你已經給出了一些圖片來弄清楚 22 年或 23 年第四季度的資本支出和活動是什麼。當我們研究潛在的 2024 年維護資本支出計劃時，第 4 季度的活動是否是一項很好的活動，資本支出是否是一個很好的起點？或者您是否需要增加任何活動以保持明年的產量持平？

That's a good question, Kevin. I'm not totally ready to commit to 2024 today. But I would say, if we had to commit today, running some sort of plan with 4 simul-frac crews is probably the most efficient and capital-efficient plan we can put together. Now whether that spits out slight growth to flat production is to be determined.

這是個好問題，凱文。我今天還沒有完全準備好迎接 2024 年。但我想說，如果我們今天必須做出承諾，那麼與 4 個 simul-frac 工作人員一起運行某種計劃可能是我們可以製定的最有效和資本效率最高的計劃。現在，這是否會導致扁平材產量略有增長還有待確定。

But I think generally running this capital-efficient plan without changing activity levels too much and letting growth be the output has been I think, rewarded over the last couple of years with this new business model, and that's kind of where we're circling things going forward.

但我認為，通常在不改變活動水平的情況下運行這個資本效率計劃，讓增長成為產出，我認為，在過去幾年裡，這種新的商業模式得到了回報，這就是我們正在盤旋的地方向前走。

Our next question comes from the line of Derrick Whitfield of Stifel.

我們的下一個問題來自 Stifel 的 Derrick Whitfield。

Congrats on a strong start to the year.

祝賀今年開局良好。

Thank you, Derrick.

謝謝你，德里克。

Building on an earlier question on Waha price weakness. Could you perhaps elaborate on the degree of tightness you're projecting with in-basin fundamentals?

基於先前關於娃哈哈價格疲軟的問題。您能否詳細說明您預測的流域內基本面的緊張程度？

Yes, Derrick, good question. I think generally, we're going to see very -- a lot of volatility and some pockets of extreme weakness. Obviously, there's a few expansions coming on, 3 expansions in the back half of this year and the beginning of next year, ahead of a large flat coming on at the end of 2024.

是的，德里克，問得好。我認為總的來說，我們會看到非常多的波動和一些極度疲軟的情況。顯然，有一些擴張即將到來，今年下半年和明年年初有 3 次擴張，然後是 2024 年底的大型公寓。

I just think there -- the issue to date had been masked in the field as processing capacity in the field was short. Now that, that processing capacity is coming on, the tune of Bcf day -- Bcf a day or more that's going to push the problem downstream to the downstream residue pipes.

我只是認為 - 由於現場處理能力不足，迄今為止的問題在現場被掩蓋了。現在，處理能力正在提高，Bcf 天的調子——Bcf 一天或更長時間，這將把問題推到下游的下游殘渣管道上。

So I think it's coming, it's going to be pretty weak for periods and then pressure will be relieved a little bit when these expansions come on. But generally, our take is, let's remove our risk to that pricing weakness by hedging everything through 2024 and getting more physical molecules for the Gulf Coast.

所以我認為它即將到來，它會在一段時間內非常疲軟，然後當這些擴張開始時，壓力會有所緩解。但總的來說，我們的看法是，讓我們通過對沖到 2024 年的一切並為墨西哥灣沿岸獲得更多物理分子來消除定價疲軟的風險。

Ideally, we'd like to have control of all of our molecules to the Gulf Coast, but most of our contracts we inherited from deals that we bought [have] not come with taking kind rights, and we've worked to improve that over time and control more of our molecules further downstream.

理想情況下，我們希望控制我們在墨西哥灣沿岸的所有分子，但我們從購買的交易中繼承的大部分合同都沒有獲得實物權利，我們一直在努力改進這一點時間並控制更多下游的分子。

Great. And then as my follow-up, I wanted to touch on well productivity, which has been a positive development for you guys. Referencing Slide 14, could you speak to your expectations for 2023 well productivity relative to 2022?

偉大的。然後作為我的後續行動，我想談談井的生產力，這對你們來說是一個積極的發展。參考幻燈片 14，您能否談談您對 2023 年相對於 2022 年的油井產能的預期？

And how does that project over the next couple of years as you think about the integration of Lario and FireBird acquisitions?

在您考慮 Lario 和 FireBird 收購的整合時，該項目在未來幾年內如何？

Yes. Good question. I think we said multiple times to investors, flat to 2022 is probably the base case, and if we do a little better. That's one for the good guys. I think we're on pace for that, particularly in the Midland Basin, where we've had a really strong start to the year.

是的。好問題。我想我們多次對投資者說，持平到 2022 年可能是基本情況，如果我們做得更好的話。那是給好人的。我認為我們正在為此而努力，特別是在米德蘭盆地，我們今年開局非常強勁。

And I would just say FireBird and Lario only enhance that ability to do that for longer. At the end of the day, as we've said before, the shale cost curve is going up. It's our job to make sure we have the inventory duration and the cost structure to be at the low end of that shale cost curve, which we've done well for the last 10 years, and we expect to do well for the next 10 years.

我只想說 FireBird 和 Lario 只會增強這種能力，使它能持續更長時間。正如我們之前所說，在一天結束時，頁岩成本曲線正在上升。我們的工作是確保我們的庫存持續時間和成本結構處於頁岩成本曲線的低端，我們在過去 10 年做得很好，我們預計在未來 10 年也會做得很好.

Yes, Derrick, I think just to reiterate that point that I've made a couple of times now about Diamondback's commitment to our shareholders about maintaining the lead and efficiency and cost execution. It's exactly what Kaes just said.

是的，Derrick，我想重申我已經多次提到 Diamondback 對股東保持領先地位、效率和成本執行的承諾。這正是凱斯剛才所說的。

Our next question comes from the line of Scott Hanold of RBC Capital Markets.

我們的下一個問題來自 RBC Capital Markets 的 Scott Hanold。

Could you all provide a little bit of color on the cadence of activity moving forward? I mean you all talk about having some larger pads going forward.

你們能否提供一些有關活動前進節奏的顏色？我的意思是你們都在談論未來有一些更大的墊子。

And you all have had a very smooth production trajectory. Does some of these large pads, will that create some lumpiness? Or is there some timing considerations we need to think about as we see those being developed?

你們都有一個非常順利的生產軌跡。這些大墊子中的一些會產生一些腫塊嗎？或者，當我們看到正在開發的那些時，我們是否需要考慮一些時間因素？

Yes. Good question, Scott. I would say internally, it certainly does. This business is not easy to grow consistently and hit numbers consistently. But externally, we think we're going to grow fairly smoothly organically through the back half of the year.

是的。好問題，斯科特。我會在內部說，它確實如此。這項業務不容易持續增長並持續達到數字。但在外部，我們認為我們將在今年下半年實現相當平穩的有機增長。

In general, our target is to turn about 85 wells to sales a quarter, some quarters are going to be a little higher, some a little lower based on timing. But in general, that's our job, right? It's -- there's a lot going on beneath the surface, and that's what makes the Diamondback operations team the best in the business.

總的來說，我們的目標是每季度將約 85 口井轉為銷售，根據時間安排，有些季度會高一些，有些會低一些。但總的來說，那是我們的工作，對吧？它是——在表面之下發生了很多事情，這就是讓響尾蛇運營團隊成為業內最佳的原因。

Great. And then if we could talk about M&A a little bit. And it looks like some of the private to private equity companies are dropping rigs in the Permian.

偉大的。然後，如果我們能談談併購的話。看起來一些私人對私募股權公司正在放棄二疊紀的鑽井平台。

And obviously, there have been some sales and talks of more sales coming up. Like what are you all seeing on the private side in terms of activity? And what's your interest level in looking at some of these additional M&A opportunities?

顯然，已經有一些銷售和更多銷售的談判即將到來。就活動而言，你們在私人方面都看到了什麼？您對這些額外的併購機會有何興趣？

We've commented a couple of times about the increase in activity through 2022 was largely driven by independents and the challenge there is depth of inventory, right? And the secondary challenge is how much can it increase further beyond their max cadence that they achieved last year. And I think both of those are playing out now. The max cadence may be softening, as you see by rigs getting laid down. And certainly, the inventory depth is getting accelerated with this rapid pace of bringing wells to production.

我們已經多次評論到 2022 年活動的增加主要是由獨立人士推動的，而挑戰是庫存深度，對吧？第二個挑戰是，除了他們去年達到的最大節奏之外，還能增加多少。我認為這兩者現在都在發揮作用。最大節奏可能會變軟，正如您看到的鑽機放下一樣。當然，隨著油井投產的速度加快，庫存深度也在加快。

So I think from an M&A perspective, it's going to be an interesting time over the next couple of years as these entities, the small ones, private, try to figure out a way to monetize. And I think you've also got -- while the catalyst is unclear, you've also got some small cap public companies that are going to need to figure out some form of exit strategy to be -- continue to be relevant in the future.

所以我認為從併購的角度來看，未來幾年將是一個有趣的時期，因為這些實體，小的，私有的，試圖找出一種貨幣化的方法。而且我認為你還有 - 雖然催化劑尚不清楚，但你也有一些小型上市公司需要找出某種形式的退出策略 - 在未來繼續發揮作用.

And then there's always the large private unicorns that's still flowing around out there as well, too. So I really think the next couple of years are going to be interesting in the M&A landscape.

然後總是有大型私人獨角獸也在四處流動。所以我真的認為未來幾年併購領域將會很有趣。

Yes. So do you believe though that some of these private equities that have burned through a lot of their acreage, does that make -- does the inventory factor make it less interesting to you all? Or is there a case to be made if you can buy PDPs cheap enough and kind of manage them down there in interest?

是的。所以你是否相信，雖然其中一些已經燒掉了很多土地的私人股本，但這是否會讓 - 庫存因素是否讓你們所有人都不那麼感興趣？或者，如果您能以足夠便宜的價格購買 PDP 並有興趣地在那裡管理它們，是否有理由這樣做？

Well, Scott, when you do M&A, and if you do it correctly, you want to extend inventory life, you want to make sure that you are free cash flow or cash flow accretive and you don't want to impact your balance sheet.

好吧，斯科特，當你進行併購時，如果你做對了，你想延長庫存壽命，你想確保你有自由現金流或現金流增值，你不想影響你的資產負債表。

So just doing PDP type acquisitions doesn't necessarily fit into that calculus but it's -- I think that's what you're going to end up seeing with some of these exit strategies or just kind of straight PDP divestitures.

因此，僅進行 PDP 類型的收購不一定適合該計算，但它是——我認為這就是您最終會看到的一些退出策略或直接的 PDP 資產剝離。

Our next question comes from Jeoffrey Lambujon of TPH.

我們的下一個問題來自 TPH 的 Jeoffrey Lambujon。

And my first one is just on commentary and the supplemental release that talked about the trend continuing this year in terms of the large high NRI pads coming on in the Northern Midland Basin.

我的第一個只是評論和補充版本，討論了今年米德蘭盆地北部出現的大型高 NRI 墊的趨勢。

Is there any additional color you can give there in terms of how the mix of the total program going to that type of acreage where you might have much less surrounding development compares to that same mix or waiting to that type of acreage last year and just how to think about that mix over the near term?

關於整個項目的混合如何進入那種類型的土地，與去年相同的混合或等待那種類型的土地相比，你周圍的開發可能少得多，你是否可以提供任何額外的顏色，以及如何在短期內考慮這種組合？

Yes, it's a good question, Jeff. I would say the mix of undeveloped DSUs is probably similar to 2 years past. Now the quality of the location of those undeveloped DSUs is probably a little bit higher this year than in 2022 even. So it was kind of related to our comment on productivity.

是的，傑夫，這是個好問題。我想說未開發的 DSU 的組合可能與 2 年前相似。現在，那些未開發的 DSU 的位置質量今年可能甚至比 2022 年還要高一點。所以這有點與我們對生產力的評論有關。

There's certainly a line of sight to very high productivity this year from development in the middle of Martin County and some of that, we have up to a 6% or 7% NRI on large pads at the Viper level. And so because we report consolidated financials, that is a benefit to the total enterprise, where the high NRI development is going to drive organic production growth at the entity.

從馬丁縣中部的開發來看，今年肯定會有非常高的生產率，其中一些，我們在 Viper 級別的大型墊上有高達 6% 或 7% 的 NRI。因此，因為我們報告合併財務，這對整個企業都有好處，高 NRI 發展將推動實體的有機生產增長。

Great. I appreciate that. And then on the services side, I certainly appreciate the detail just around where you see potential improvements and the timing around that throughout the year.

偉大的。我很感激。然後在服務方面，我當然很欣賞圍繞您看到潛在改進的細節以及全年的時間安排。

I was just hoping you could speak maybe high level to how your contracts are set up, I guess, across the services spectrum just to give a sense for how some of these improvements will layer in for Diamondback specifically over the course of the next couple of quarters?

我只是希望你能高層次地談談你的合同是如何建立的，我想，在整個服務範圍內，只是為了讓你了解其中的一些改進將如何在接下來的幾個過程中具體地應用於 Diamondback宿舍？

Yes. I'd say on the rig side, everything is kind of a rolling 3- to 6-month contracts. So we see -- we can see that our Q2 average day rate is down from Q1 today. And so that's going to continue to come our way on the rig side.

是的。我會說在鑽機方面，一切都是 3 到 6 個月的滾動合同。所以我們看到 - 我們可以看到我們的第二季度平均日費率低於今天的第一季度。因此，這將繼續在鑽井平台方面取得進展。

On the frac side, our 2 e-fleets on the simul-frac e-fleets are pretty locked up on pricing. I would say we saw some weakness in the spot frac pricing in Q1 versus Q4.

在 frac 方面，我們在 simul-frac e-fleets 上的 2 個 e-fleets 在定價上非常鎖定。我會說我們看到第一季度與第四季度的現貨壓裂定價有些疲軟。

And as we move those other 2 fleets to simul-frac fleets, I think the more benefit will be on the efficiency side than the price per horsepower side. But generally, a simul-frac fleet saves up $20 or $30 a foot regardless of the price of actual horsepower.

當我們將其他 2 個船隊轉移到 simul-frac 船隊時，我認為效率方面的好處將多於每馬力價格方面的好處。但一般來說，無論實際馬力的價格如何，模擬壓裂車隊每英尺可節省 20 或 30 美元。

Jeff, in addition to that, we talked earlier about purchasing steel multiple quarters in advance. So we're seeing the steel that we're purchasing for our 3Q, 4Q, 1Q costs already coming down. And so while it's not necessarily a service cost deflation, it is a cost deflation that could be as much as $20 or $25 a foot additionally.

傑夫，除此之外，我們之前還談到過提前多個季度採購鋼材。因此，我們看到我們為 3Q、4Q、1Q 採購的鋼材成本已經下降。因此，雖然這不一定是服務成本下降，但它是一種成本下降，可能高達每英尺 20 美元或 25 美元。

Our next question comes from the line of John Freeman of Raymond James.

我們的下一個問題來自雷蒙德詹姆斯的約翰弗里曼。

You all had -- in fourth quarter, when you all are running ahead of schedule and you moved some of those POPs from the fourth quarter into the first quarter, and just given all the commentary on the big efficiency gains on the final fracs as you now go to towards 4 with [final] fracability, if we end up in a similar spot where you have efficiency gains later this year, is it likely that you all -- and again, it's a first-class problem.

你們都有——在第四季度，當你們都提前運行時，你們將其中一些持久性有機污染物從第四季度轉移到第一季度，並且剛剛給出了所有關於最後壓裂效率大幅提高的評論，因為你們現在以[最終] fracability 向 4 邁進，如果我們最終在今年晚些時候你有效率提升的類似地點，你是否很可能 - 再一次，這是一個一流的問題。

But would you similarly make a decision like last year where you would sort of, I don't know, pump the brakes isn't the right word, but maybe slowdown in touch so that the budget is intact? Or do you just sort of plow ahead with the efficiency gains and just bring more wells online?

但是你會不會像去年一樣做出類似的決定，我不知道，踩剎車不是正確的詞，但也許會放慢聯繫，以便預算完好無損？還是您只是努力提高效率，讓更多油井上線？

No. Listen, I think we're highly incentivized to hit the budget. I think highly incentivized to increase free cash flow, which is part of the new business model, which has used growth for returns, and that's been the mentality.

不，聽著，我認為我們非常有動力去達到預算。我認為增加自由現金流的積極性很高，這是新商業模式的一部分，它利用增長來獲得回報，這就是心態。

It's been a working mentality, a mentality that has worked for the last couple of years. So it would be a first-class problem. We're still early in the year, but generally, that would be the plan now. I think the only nuance to that is we would like to keep rigs running and building DUCs, particularly if rig costs are a little bit lower than they are today.

這是一種工作心態，一種在過去幾年一直有效的心態。所以這將是一個一流的問題。我們還處於今年年初，但總的來說，這就是現在的計劃。我認為唯一的細微差別是我們希望保持鑽機運行並建造 DUC，特別是如果鑽機成本比現在低一點。

That's great. And then I really appreciate all the detail and color you've given on the service cost front. So does it sound like -- obviously, things are coming down from the peak levels of 1Q, but is it -- are you all basically indicating that you are on track to potentially have lower total completed well costs by year-end '23 versus year-end '22.

那太棒了。然後我非常感謝您在服務成本方面提供的所有細節和顏色。所以這聽起來是否 - 顯然，事情正在從 1Q 的峰值水平下降，但它是 - 你們是否基本上都表明你們有望在 23 年底之前降低總完井成本年終'22。

Like when you factor in what you're seeing on the cost side, but maybe more importantly, the efficiency gains from the simul-fracs?

就像當您考慮在成本方面看到的情況時，但也許更重要的是，從同步壓裂中獲得的效率收益？

Yes. I would say, yes, that's a fair answer. I mean particularly, listen, steel is the biggest driver. I'm not -- we're not forecasting a total capitulation in service costs here. But when steel went up for 9 quarters in a row to over $110 a foot, we see in Q3, our steel costs are going to be closer to $90 a foot.

是的。我會說，是的，這是一個公平的答案。我的意思是，聽著，鋼鐵是最大的驅動力。我不是——我們並沒有預測這裡的服務成本會完全下降。但是，當鋼鐵連續 9 個季度上漲至每英尺 110 美元以上時，我們在第三季度看到，我們的鋼鐵成本將接近每英尺 90 美元。

So I mean that in itself makes up for a significant percentage of the savings. So I would say, yes, Q4 2023 well costs below Q4 2022 because generally, Q4 '22 and Q1 '23 were the highest.

所以我的意思是，這本身就佔了很大一部分節省。所以我會說，是的，2023 年第四季度的成本遠低於 2022 年第四季度，因為一般來說，22 年第四季度和 23 年第一季度是最高的。

And John, listen, just to reemphasize, we run the business to maximize efficiency as well. And so Kaes made the point that whether it's on the rig side or the completion side, we're about efficiency because we think that, that's the greatest driver of shareholder value in a business where you don't control the price of the product that you produce.

約翰，聽著，再次強調，我們經營業務也是為了最大限度地提高效率。因此，Kaes 指出，無論是在鑽機方面還是在完井方面，我們都關注效率，因為我們認為，在您無法控制產品價格的企業中，這是股東價值的最大驅動力你生產。

Our next question comes from the line of Tim Rezvan of KeyBanc Capital Markets.

我們的下一個問題來自 KeyBanc Capital Markets 的 Tim Rezvan。

I wanted to circle back to David's questions previously on asset sales. I'm sure you won't give a good answer on the Bloomberg story about Pecos County. But I think it highlights the number of levers that you can pull to get to $1 billion or more on asset sales.

我想回到大衛之前關於資產出售的問題。我相信您不會就彭博社關於佩科斯縣的報導給出一個好的答案。但我認為它突出了你可以利用多少槓桿來實現 10 億美元或更多的資產出售。

So trying to understand, Kaes, what do you think a good kind of target debt level is? Do you think about it in terms of leverage or an absolute debt metric as you compare yourselves to the large-cap peers? And I guess why wouldn't you go bigger than that $1 billion given you're not allocating a lot of capital to the Delaware right now?

因此，Kaes，請嘗試了解您認為良好的目標債務水平是多少？當您將自己與大型同行進行比較時，您是從槓桿還是絕對債務指標來考慮的？而且我猜你為什麼不增加超過 10 億美元的資金，因為你現在沒有向特拉華州分配大量資金？

Yes, Tim, that's a good question. I'm not going to go bigger because we want to beat the number, first of all. But second to that, listen, the Delaware Basin overall still produces a lot of barrels and a lot of cash flow for us. And that's important to the credit ratings. It's important to our free cash flow forecast and all of the above.

是的，蒂姆，這是個好問題。我不會做大，因為我們首先要擊敗這個數字。但其次，聽著，特拉華盆地總體上仍然為我們生產大量的石油和大量的現金流。這對信用評級很重要。這對我們的自由現金流預測和上述所有方面都很重要。

So I think we have sold a few small things in the Delaware on the acreage side. And the recurring theme of what we sold is that someone paid for upside. So we're not going to sell PDP cheap just to sell PDP.

所以我認為我們在特拉華州的種植面積方面出售了一些小東西。我們出售的產品反復出現的主題是有人為上漲買單。所以我們不會為了賣PDP而低價賣PDP。

At the end of the day, someone has to pay for upside and pay for a faster pace of development than we were expecting. And that, I think, has been a common theme in the Delaware deals as well as the deal in Glasscock County, not only they pay for PDP, but they paid for some PUDs that didn't compete for us in the next 10 years plan.

歸根結底，總得有人為上行付出代價，為比我們預期更快的發展速度付出代價。而且，我認為，這一直是特拉華州交易以及 Glasscock 縣交易的共同主題，他們不僅為 PDP 付費，而且還為一些在未來 10 年計劃中不會與我們競爭的 PUD 付費.

So if that happens, then we'll look at -- do what's right for our shareholders and look at divesting more in the Delaware Basin. But generally, that production and cash flow has a lot of value to us today.

因此，如果發生這種情況，那麼我們將考慮 - 為我們的股東做正確的事情，並考慮在特拉華盆地剝離更多資產。但總的來說，這種生產和現金流對今天的我們來說具有很大的價值。

Okay. And then just getting back to that number in an ideal world, how do you think about what the right debt number is, whether either in debt or in leverage terms for (inaudible)?

好的。然後回到理想世界中的那個數字，你如何看待正確的債務數字是多少，無論是債務還是槓桿條款（聽不清）？

Sorry, I apologize, I forgot to reply to that part of the question. I think we think about debt in terms of -- 2 ways to think about it, right. Not only absolute debt and the leverage ratio but also duration. And I think we obviously want less debt over time, but we feel comfortable with the amount of duration we have between now and our next maturity, which is 2026.

對不起，我很抱歉，我忘了回答那部分問題。我認為我們考慮債務的方式是——兩種思考方式，對吧。不僅是絕對債務和槓桿率，還有久期。而且我認為我們顯然希望隨著時間的推移減少債務，但我們對從現在到下一個到期日（即 2026 年）之間的期限感到滿意。

So I'd like to take that out so that Travis won't bother me about it until 2029. And -- but when we have excess free cash flow, we're going to use it to reduce absolute debt. I think in a perfect world, a turn of leverage at a $55 or $50 oil price would be, in my mind, an ideal debt level with no debt due for multiple years before your next maturity.

所以我想把它拿出來，這樣特拉維斯在 2029 年之前不會打擾我。而且 - 但當我們有多餘的自由現金流時，我們將用它來減少絕對債務。我認為在一個完美的世界中，在我看來，在 55 美元或 50 美元的油價下槓桿率的轉變將是一個理想的債務水平，在你的下一個到期之前多年沒有到期的債務。

Our next question comes from the line of Charles Meade of Johnson Rice.

我們的下一個問題來自約翰遜賴斯的查爾斯米德。

Travis, this may be for you. Yes, I like the new format as well, but the -- I was also thinking about the shareholder letter. And Travis, in your prepared comments, I think you said you were hoping this format would be more efficient to pick up on a big thing for you this morning.

特拉維斯，這可能適合你。是的，我也喜歡新格式，但是——我也在考慮股東信。特拉維斯，在你準備好的評論中，我想你說過你希望今天早上這種形式能更有效地為你處理一件大事。

But I was wondering also, does this -- the iteration on your communication style, I mean, does this also reflect an element of maybe dissatisfaction with how either your story is being understood or the traction that you're getting or that you maybe feel like (inaudible) getting that you're not? And if that is true or if that's the case that there's some element of it, what do you think the market might be missing?

但我也想知道，這是否 - 你的溝通方式的迭代，我的意思是，這是否也反映了對你的故事被理解的方式或你獲得的牽引力或你可能感受到的方式的不滿就像（聽不清）得到你不是？如果這是真的，或者如果確實存在某些因素，您認為市場可能缺少什麼？

No, we didn't put this letter in place trying to fix the communication issue. We've got an incredible transparency communication format that we have with our shareholders. We just thought that based on a decade of doing these earnings calls and the lack of attention really paid in the prepared remarks, felt like we could remove that.

不，我們沒有寫這封信來試圖解決溝通問題。我們與股東之間的溝通方式非常透明。我們只是認為，基於十年來進行這些收益電話會議以及在準備好的評論中真正缺乏關注，我們覺得我們可以刪除它。

And we also know that other industries are well ahead of the oil and gas sector by not doing prepared remarks. The other thing is that we could communicate more in this shareholder letter than what we traditionally would put in a truncated CEO quote in the earnings release.

而且我們還知道，其他行業通過不做準備好的言論而遠遠領先於石油和天然氣行業。另一件事是，我們可以在這封股東信中傳達更多信息，而不是我們傳統上在收益發布中截短的 CEO 引述。

And then we didn't have to have anybody spending Sunday night preparing our transcript either as well, too. So I mean, from a staff perspective, you know it's a lot more efficient there. So no, we did this because we think it's a better way to communicate, not that we need to improve the message or the understanding in our stock price.

然後我們也不必讓任何人在周日晚上準備我們的成績單。所以我的意思是，從員工的角度來看，你知道那裡的效率要高得多。所以不，我們這樣做是因為我們認為這是一種更好的溝通方式，而不是我們需要改善信息或對股價的理解。

I think it also allows us to talk directly to our shareholders, right? Because a lot of the times, the sell side is in control of the narrative and this allows us to -- so a little bit of the story behind the numbers directly to our shareholders.

我認為這也讓我們能夠直接與股東對話，對吧？因為很多時候，賣方控制著敘述，這讓我們能夠——所以一些數字背後的故事直接告訴我們的股東。

Insight into your thinking. I appreciate that. And Kaes, I want to go back to the question on the buybacks. I know this has been addressed at least in one other earlier question.

洞察你的想法。我很感激。 Kaes，我想回到關於回購的問題。我知道至少在另一個較早的問題中已經解決了這個問題。

But all other things being equal, and I know -- I recognize they never are, but all other things being equal, is the shift to buybacks that we saw in 1Q, does that kind of signal a durable shift? Or if not a durable shift, a durable change in the preference towards the buybacks?

但是所有其他事情都是一樣的，我知道 - 我知道他們從來沒有，但所有其他事情都是一樣的，我們在第一季度看到的回購的轉變是否預示著持久的轉變？或者，如果不是持久的轉變，回購偏好的持久變化？

Listen, I think our preference has always been to buy back shares. Now what we wanted was a governor on what fundamentally are we buying back shares for? Are we buying back oil in the market cheaper than we can buy it in the ground? And that's our NAV versus looking at a deal like Lario or FireBird.

聽著，我認為我們的偏好一直是回購股票。現在我們想要的是一位州長，說明我們回購股票的根本目的是什麼？我們在市場上買回的石油是否比我們在地下買的便宜？這就是我們的資產淨值與 Lario 或 FireBird 等交易的對比。

So at the end of the day, we're still going to run our NAV at a conservative mid-cycle deck, which is $60 oil. And the market has presented us opportunities to buy back shares every quarter since we started this buyback program.

所以在一天結束時，我們仍將在一個保守的中期週期甲板上運行我們的資產淨值，即 60 美元的油價。自我們啟動回購計劃以來，市場為我們提供了每個季度回購股票的機會。

So at the end of the day, again, our preference is buybacks, but we have a little bit of a governor on what share price we are going to be aggressive on and Q1 was the perfect example of that.

因此，歸根結底，我們的偏好再次是回購，但我們對我們要激進的股價有一點控制權，第一季度就是一個很好的例子。

And Charles, we've tried to be mindful of sins of the past, our industry has been known for, which is oil price goes high, free cash flow goes up and share repurchases are done not countercyclically like we're trying to do so. But in cycle with higher oil prices and that hasn't created a lot of value.

查爾斯，我們一直在努力銘記過去的罪過，我們的行業一直以油價上漲、自由現金流上升和股票回購沒有像我們試圖這樣做的那樣逆週期進行而聞名.但在油價上漲的周期中，並沒有創造很多價值。

So we may not always be perfect in that calculus, but [as] Kaes pointed out, whether it's the banking crisis here recently or other forms of volatility, we've had an opportunity to purchase $2 billion worth of shares back at roughly $120 a share.

因此，我們在計算方面可能並不總是完美的，但 [正如] Kaes 指出的那樣，無論是最近這裡的銀行業危機還是其他形式的波動，我們都有機會以大約 120 美元的價格回購價值 20 億美元的股票分享。

So we feel like we're following through on our commitment of not only being flexible in our return program, but also being mindful of the method and the timing at which you repurchase shares.

因此，我們覺得我們正在履行我們的承諾，不僅要在我們的回報計劃中保持靈活性，而且還要注意回購股票的方法和時間。

Our next question comes from the line of Roger Read of Wells Fargo Securities.

我們的下一個問題來自 Wells Fargo Securities 的 Roger Read。

Let's dig into the service cost deflation, I guess, we could call it at this point. We haven't so used to using inflation. Can you talk to us a little bit as you think about well costs being lower in the fourth quarter, how much of that is efficiencies and how much of that is just a decline in the cost of doing something being drilling rigs or whatever? 50-50, 60-40, 80-20, something like that as well. I was curious.

讓我們深入研究服務成本通縮，我想，我們現在可以稱之為。我們還不太習慣使用通貨膨脹。當您考慮第四季度油井成本降低時，您能和我們談談嗎，其中有多少是效率，有多少只是鑽井平台或其他東西的成本下降？ 50-50、60-40、80-20 之類的。我很好奇。

I would say it's a 1/4 efficiencies and 75% actual costs. Now of the 75%, I would say 2/3 of that is due to raw materials and the other 1/3 is due to the actual service piece of the equation.

我會說這是 1/4 的效率和 75% 的實際成本。在這 75% 中，我想說其中 2/3 歸因於原材料，另外 1/3 歸因於等式的實際服務部分。

Okay. Yes, that's helpful. And then the other follow-up question I had was, is there any sort of rule of thumb approach you use as you switch to e-fleets?

好的。是的，這很有幫助。然後我遇到的另一個後續問題是，當您轉向電子車隊時，您是否使用任何經驗法則？

Or as you went from the zipper frac to the simul-frac in terms of how do you want to think about it, stages per day, cost per stage, something like that? Again, just trying to understand some of these changes as they get applied all across the entire complex.

或者當你從拉鍊壓裂到模擬壓裂時，你想如何考慮它，每天的階段，每階段的成本，諸如此類？同樣，只是試圖了解其中的一些變化，因為它們在整個綜合體中得到應用。

I'll give you the cost estimates, and Danny can give you the efficiencies. I said, generally, a simul-frac fleet is $20 to $30 a foot cheaper than a conventional fleet and an e-fleet is $20 to $30 a foot cheaper than a simul-frac fleet.

我會給你成本估算，丹尼可以給你效率。我說過，一般來說，模擬壓裂車隊每英尺比傳統車隊便宜 20 到 30 美元，而電子車隊每英尺比模擬壓裂車隊便宜 20 到 30 美元。

Yes. I mean in e-fleet we're utilizing our simul-frac fleets. They're just powered with electric power that we generate on location or that we pull off the grid. So really, the savings on the e-fleet comes from the fuel consumption piece and just being more efficient on location.

是的。我的意思是在電子艦隊中，我們正在利用我們的模擬壓裂艦隊。它們僅由我們在現場產生的電力或我們脫離電網的電力提供動力。所以真的，電子車隊的節省來自於燃料消耗部分，只是在位置上更有效率。

We do think we see a little bit of disparity between the kind of lateral footage completed per day by the e-fleet versus the diesel simul-frac fleets, but we don't have a just a ton of data yet to quantify that, but we are hopeful that over time, the e-fleets will kind of widen the gap of execution efficiency just because of the lower maintenance and R&M stuff that's required on location.

我們確實認為我們看到電子艦隊每天完成的橫向鏡頭與柴油機 simul-frac 艦隊之間存在一些差異，但我們還沒有大量數據來量化這一點，但是我們希望，隨著時間的推移，電子車隊會擴大執行效率的差距，因為現場所需的維護和 R&M 內容較少。

Danny, the difference between zipper and simul-frac in terms of footage per day. Do you have a...

Danny，zipper 和 simul-frac 在每天鏡頭方面的區別。你有沒有...

Yes. I mean -- so we kind of say simul-frac fleet, depending on the jobs can do about twice as much lateral footage per day as a traditional zipper fleet.

是的。我的意思是 - 所以我們有點說 simul-frac 車隊，這取決於工作每天可以做的橫向進尺量是傳統拉鍊車隊的兩倍。

Yes. So very, very large differences. One, just a little clarification on your comments very beginning about locking in some of your electricity costs, being able to predict your LOEs a little better during the summer.

是的。所以非常非常大的差異。第一，稍微澄清一下您一開始就鎖定部分電費的評論，以便能夠在夏季更好地預測您的 LOE。

Is there any interruptible risk with those contracts? I mean I'm not talking outages, which would affect everybody, but just to get the lower cost or fixed cost, you have to accept the risk of being turned off?

這些合同是否存在任何可中斷的風險？我的意思是我不是在談論停電，這會影響到每個人，但只是為了獲得更低的成本或固定成本，你必須接受被關閉的風險？

No. It's just a hedge in the market. So it's just a financial hedge, not a physical trade.

不，這只是市場上的一種對沖。所以這只是一種金融對沖，而不是實物交易。

Our next question comes from the line of Leo Mariani of ROTH MKM.

我們的下一個問題來自 ROTH MKM 的 Leo Mariani。

I just wanted to follow up quickly on LOE. I just wanted to clarify one of your earlier comments, it sounds like you guys are expecting LOE per barrel decline here in 2Q and 3Q versus where you were in 1Q. Just wanted to make sure I sort of proved that right?

我只是想快速跟進 LOE。我只是想澄清你之前的一個評論，聽起來你們預計第二季度和第三季度的每桶 LOE 會比第一季度有所下降。只是想確保我在某種程度上證明了這一點是正確的？

No, we expect it to go up to the midpoint of guidance from $5 to midpoint of $5 to $5.50. So going up slightly due to third-party water handling.

不，我們預計它會上升到指導的中點，從 5 美元到 5 美元到 5.50 美元的中點。由於第三方水處理，因此略有上升。

Okay. And you're viewing that is somewhat temporary just based on where the rigs are going to be sort of be drilling location-wise here in the middle part of the year?

好的。你認為這只是暫時的，只是基於鑽井平台將在今年年中在這裡進行鑽探的位置？

Yes, just dependent upon where the completions are. If the completions are on a third-party dedicated piece of acreage. The cost is higher than it would have been on a prior Rattler dedicated piece of acreage.

是的，只是取決於完成的位置。如果完工是在第三方專用的一塊土地上進行的。成本高於之前 Rattler 專用土地的成本。

Right. Okay. And then just on cash taxes. Looking at first quarter, you guys kind of came in below the guidance. So far, I guess, quarter-to-date here in 2Q, commodity prices are kind of flat to down. You guys are expecting cash taxes to kind of increase here in 2Q per the guidance.

正確的。好的。然後只是現金稅。看看第一季度，你們有點低於指導。到目前為止，我猜，從二季度至今，大宗商品價格持平到下跌。你們預計現金稅會根據指導意見在第二季度有所增加。

Just wanted to kind of get a little bit more color in terms of how the year plays out? I mean do you generally see cash taxes increasing throughout the year? And maybe that just has to do with NOLs that are completely disappearing in your other tax shield that disappears. But -- any other color kind of around that cadence of cash taxes as the year progresses?

只是想在今年的表現方面獲得更多色彩？我的意思是，您通常會看到現金稅全年都在增加嗎？也許這只與 NOLs 有關，NOLs 在你的另一個消失的稅盾中完全消失。但是——隨著時間的推移，現金稅的節奏還有其他顏色嗎？

Yes. I think the only real added benefit that Q1 had versus Q2, even if commodity prices were flat is that we closed Lario in the quarter and got to write-off some of that, the hard assets that came with that right away.

是的。我認為，與第二季度相比，第一季度唯一真正的額外好處是，即使商品價格持平，我們在本季度關閉了 Lario，並立即註銷了其中的一部分，即隨之而來的硬資產。

All right. So it sounds like it's just M&A driven on the tax shield side and now maybe 2Q is more of a normal representative rate going forward?

好的。所以聽起來這只是在稅收保護方面推動的併購，現在也許 2Q 更像是一個正常的代表性利率？

That's fair.

這還算公平。

Our final question comes from Paul Cheng of Scotiabank.

我們的最後一個問題來自豐業銀行的 Paul Cheng。

I just want to add my appreciation with the new format, and I think that's great. Two questions, please. First, you've been increasing your overall foot activity in the Midland over the last several years.

我只想對新格式表示讚賞，我認為這很棒。請教兩個問題。首先，在過去的幾年裡，您一直在增加在米德蘭的整體足部活動。

So now it's 85%, 15% between the two. Should we assume this is going to be pretty steady and stable for the next several years or that you may start to doing more Delaware, say, maybe sometime over the next 1 or 2 years?

所以現在是 85%，兩者之間是 15%。我們是否應該假設這在接下來的幾年裡會非常穩定，或者你可能會開始做更多的特拉華州，比如說，也許在未來 1 或 2 年的某個時候？

I think over the next few years, the 85%, 15% is a very fair yearly estimate. Obviously, some quarters will be higher than others. We want to continue to complete multi-well pads in the Delaware. So you have a quarter like Q1 of 2023, which was higher Delaware when Q4 was 0 wells in the Delaware. But on an annual basis, 85%, 15% feels like the right lateral footage mix.

我認為在接下來的幾年裡，85%、15% 是一個非常公平的年度估計。顯然，某些季度會高於其他季度。我們希望繼續在特拉華州完成多孔墊。所以你有一個像 2023 年第一季度那樣的季度，當第四季度特拉華州有 0 口井時，特拉華州更高。但按年計算，85%、15% 感覺像是正確的橫向鏡頭組合。

Okay. And the second question is that you talked about the budget, you feel very comfortable about the midpoint for the full year. Just curious that in that budget, how much is the cost saving or that the -- you're talking about the line of sight of the cost is coming down.

好的。第二個問題是你談到了預算，你對全年的中點感到非常滿意。只是好奇在那個預算中，節省了多少成本，或者——你說的是成本正在下降的視線。

How much of them is already or regionally building into that budget? Or that in other words, we've had a reasonable probability, we're actually going to be below the midpoint of your budget (inaudible).

其中有多少已經或區域性地納入該預算？或者換句話說，我們有一個合理的可能性，我們實際上會低於你們預算的中點（聽不清）。

I don't know if I'm ready to commit to that today, Paul. We certainly have some work to do, but we have very good line of sight from an activity and a cost perspective that we've seen the peak in well costs and a little bit of a tailwind from the activity of 2 rigs coming down. Now I think that will happen a little bit in Q3 and more in Q4, but it's still early.

保羅，我不知道我今天是否準備好做出承諾。我們當然有一些工作要做，但從活動和成本的角度來看，我們有很好的視線，我們已經看到了油井成本的峰值，以及 2 個鑽井平台活動下降帶來的一點順風。現在我認為這會在第三季度發生一點點，在第四季度發生更多，但現在還為時過早。

Okay. Can you share with us that, I mean, how much of the saving you reach generally [in] billion? Or how much is the deflation in the second half that you have built in into your budget?

好的。你能和我們分享一下，我的意思是，你通常可以節省多少 [in] 億？或者您在預算中計入的下半年通貨緊縮是多少？

I would say if we saw more service cost deflation that would be upside to what we've modeled here. Service not raw materials.

我會說，如果我們看到更多的服務成本通貨緊縮，那將有利於我們在此建模的情況。服務不是原材料。

This concludes our Q&A session. I would now like to turn it over to Travis Stice, CEO, for closing remarks.

我們的問答環節到此結束。我現在想將其轉交給首席執行官特拉維斯·斯蒂斯 (Travis Stice) 作閉幕詞。

Thank you for joining us this morning. I think another benefit of this new format is to allow more questions based on the amount of questions we had this morning. So if you have any additional follow-up that you need, just reach out to us using the numbers that we provided earlier. Thanks again for joining. Have a great day.

感謝您今天早上加入我們。我認為這種新格式的另一個好處是允許根據我們今天早上提出的問題數量提出更多問題。因此，如果您需要任何其他跟進，請使用我們之前提供的電話號碼與我們聯繫。再次感謝您的加入。祝你有美好的一天。