China's Offshore Oilman
Cnooc Chairman Fu Chengyu
Regrets Withdrawal of Bid
For Unocal but Learned Lesson
Last year, Cnooc Ltd. made headlines around the world by bidding $18.5 billion for California-based Unocal Corp. and then, after encountering a critical storm in the U.S. Congress, abruptly withdrawing the offer. A lower bid from Chevron Corp. won the auction.
The Chinese company, which is the Hong Kong listed unit of state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp, was stung. None felt the defeat more keenly than Chairman Fu Chengyu, who joined other company executives at retreats to figure out what went wrong and what to do next -- rare gatherings in China's business world but not that surprising for Cnooc, the nation's third-largest oil company in terms of output. Since it was founded in 1982 to lead the development of China's offshore oil and gas fields, Cnooc (pronounced SEA-nook) has forged links with foreign companies, including Chevron, that have helped it absorb a Western management style sharply different from China's other state-owned oil giants.
Mr. Fu, who has been with the company since its founding, is largely credited with building its reputation as one of the most open and progressive companies in China.
Chairman since 2003, he speaks accented but fluent English, which he picked up when studying at the University of Southern California in 1986. The 55-year-old executive played basketball in his undergraduate days.
In one of his first interviews since the Unocal deal, Mr. Fu discussed the price of oil, acquisitions (Cnooc recently spent $2.7 billion for a stake in a Nigerian oil field) and the lessons imparted by the Unocal fiasco. Excerpts:
WSJ: Some politicians and pundits in America charged that the Unocal bid was an effort by China's government to lock in more energy supplies at the expense of U.S. energy security and expressed worries that China is becoming a threat to America's prosperity. What would you tell them?
Mr. Fu: When people talk about the China threat, they are actually looking at things from a different angle from us. To me, because I'm living in China, I think this is a good opportunity for the world. If I'm outside of China, what I should look and think is "I cannot stop China's growth. I cannot stop the continuation of their economic growth. Like it or not, I cannot stop it. What I should do is try to get benefit from their growth."
WSJ: Why do you think American politicians and the public were shocked by your bid for Unocal at the time?
Mr. Fu: This word is right: shock. But not just because of the size of the deal. In the U.S. and in the world capital markets, that kind of money is a common thing, it's not a big surprise. But there was shock because such a volume came from a Chinese company. Nobody thought a Chinese company could do this at that time.
WSJ: What lessons have you learned from your company's failed attempt?
Mr Fu: We learned we need to be more prudent in terms of public relations and political lobbying when dealing with such a big deal. Now that we understand American politics better, if such thing were to happen again, perhaps the important part is not to go for the deal. Perhaps, the first things you need to go for are public relations and political lobbying. And then if those work out, you turn to talk about the deal.
WSJ: What do you think went wrong with the bid?
Mr. Fu: Before we made the deal, I thought it would be good for the U.S. There would be no laying off of employees, no reduction of oil supply to the market. And on the other hand, we were looking to hire more local employees and secure more jobs and spend more money in the local market for the exploration and production and try to invest more to increase the supply to the market. All that could have helped to lower the pump price.
But this was not very well communicated. I think if in the future there's another opportunity, I may not pursue it until I'm confident that the American people and American politicians are happy about this. If they are not happy, I will not do anything there. This is very important, like it or not, but you have to make them feel confident.
WSJ: Do you think oil prices are too high?
Mr. Fu: From the supply-and-demand point of view, the price is a lot higher than it should be. However, this is because there are other factors. Geopolitical risks are causing most of those high oil prices, and hedge funds are trying to better use those opportunities. Those are major factors driving the price.
WSJ: Do you think oil prices will fall soon?
Mr. Fu: They will not crash in the short term. Geopolitical risks will continue. The Iraq issue, Iran, problems in the Middle East -- those will not go away in the short term. If there are any other incidents, prices could go even higher.
WSJ: What steps are you taking to make sure that Americans are more comfortable with Cnooc in the future?
Mr. Fu: Cnooc is a responsible corporate, global citizen. But not everyone outside China knows this. For example, in Indonesia when the tsunami occurred, our subunits there donated $120,000 -- the highest from the local companies. This is unique for a Chinese company.
Hurricane Katrina happened just after our failure in the acquisition of Unocal. Within just one day, Saturday, three days after when we heard the announcement of hurricane, we called for donations. The company matched employee donations. In one day we collected $200,000.
WSJ: Would you ever consider another bid for a U.S. company?
Mr. Fu: I never exclude the U.S. market from our company. But as I mentioned, I will not do any deal, unless Americans think this is good for them.
WSJ: What would you want to get across to the American audience?
Mr Fu: Cnooc is a company with global responsibilities. In terms of responsibilities and management system, it's not much different from any international oil company.
WSJ: I have to challenge you on that. Your biggest stakeholder is the state.
Mr. Fu: Whatever the percentage, they are all shareholders. As long as I can deliver good value to shareholders they are happy.
WSJ: But the government is the largest shareholder.
Mr. Fu: When I say the government is a shareholder, it's not just because they are largest, also because they are not interfering with our daily operations. They are not important in decision making on how we run this company. Our management is the same as any other company in the market.
WSJ: So, who does make the final investment decisions at Cnooc?
Mr. Fu: The final approval is by our board, not by the government.
WSJ: How is Cnooc different from other major state-owned oil companies and enterprises?
Mr. Fu: We get no financial support from the state. We, the company and the board, are responsible for all the decisions we took, for all the financial results or consequences -- not the government.
WSJ: Did you get any cheap loans from the state or other funding?
Mr. Fu: The government did not finance even one cent. All the money we used would be from commercial loans, most of them from our U.S. companies, issuance of new shares and partially from our parent company.
WSJ: How did that background make your company behave differently than its peers?
Mr. Fu: In the 1980s, many of the other companies in China spent government money. When they spend government money, it causes different behavior. How different? If you spend less money or you do not overrun your budget this year, you will get less money next year. So, everybody tried to spend more, whether or not it's economically sound. But when you are not spending government money, you are careful about investment.
This explains why our organization is so small in Chinese terms. [Cnooc has about 2,500 employees.] We can grow very large to 200,000-300,000 employees, but we kept small. Any money we had, we had to earn by ourselves. That helps us keep a lean organization.
WSJ: Given that, where are you current interests in acquisitions?
Mr. Fu: Our M&A team is reviewing opportunities every day, but there are not many good opportunities, especially with high oil prices. Our strategy is always to focus first on offshore China...And we look at surrounding areas of East Asia, including Australia. Africa is another area for the long-term focus.
中海油反思竞购加州联合石油失败之教训
去年，中国海洋石油（中国）有限公司(Cnooc Ltd., 简称：中海石油)出价185亿美元竞购美国加州联合石油公司(Unocal Corp.)一事轰动了全世界，在受到美国国会的激烈反对后，中海石油断然撤出了竞购。后来雪佛龙公司(Chevron Corp.)以低于中海石油的出价收购了加州联合石油公司。
中海石油是中国海洋石油总公司(China National Offshore Oil Corp.)在香港上市的子公司，它被此次竞购失利深深刺痛了。该公司董事长傅成玉的失败感无人能及，他和公司其他高层管理人士私下里开始分析究竟是哪个环节出现了问题，下一步该怎么做──这类研讨会在中国企业界是不常见的，但对这家中国第三大石油公司而言，举办这类活动却并不那么出人意料。中国海洋石油总公司成立于1982年，其任务是牵头进行中国海上油气田的开发，自那以来该公司已经与包括雪佛龙在内的一系列外国公司建立了联系，这些公司帮助中海石油吸收了迥异于中国其他国有石油巨头的西方管理模式。中海石油能被誉为当今中国最具开放和进取精神的公司之一，作为创业元老的傅成玉居功至伟。
他自2003年起开始担任中海石油的董事长，拜上世纪八十年代在美国南加州大学(University of Southern California)的求学经历所赐，他说著一口有口音但却流利的英语。这位今年55岁的企业老总上大学时喜欢打篮球。
傅成玉最近接受了《华尔街日报》(WSJ)的采访，我们是他在竞购加州联合石油公司的事件结束后首批接待的媒体，采访的话题涉及油价、收购（中海石油最近斥资27亿美元收购了尼日利亚一座油田的部分股份，这是中国历史上最大规模的海外收购案之一）以及从竞购加州联合石油公司的失败中吸取的教训。以下为这次访谈的部分内容：
WSJ：在竞购加州联合石油公司的过程中，美国的许多政客和预言家声称，中海石油此举是中国政府牺牲美国的能源安全来锁定更多能源供应的行动，他们担心中国正在对美国的繁荣构成威胁，你想对这些人说什么？
傅成玉：当人们谈到中国威胁论的时候，他们实际上是在以一个与我们不同的角度看待问题。至于我本人，由于生活在中国，我认为对世界而言这是一个好机会。如果我身处中国之外，我的看法和想法应该是“我无法阻止中国的成长。我无法阻止中国经济继续增长。不管是否喜欢，我都无法阻止它。我应该做的是努力从中国的增长中获益。”
WSJ：你为什么认为美国的政客和公众当时被你们竞购加州联合石油公司的举动震惊了？
傅成玉：这个词用得对：震惊。但这却并非仅仅因为这一交易的规模。在美国以及世界资本市场上，这类规模的收购只是寻常事，不会令人大感意外。人们感到震惊是因为出这笔钱的是一家中国公司。当时没人认为一家中国公司能够做这件事。
WSJ：你从中海石油这一失败的尝试中获得了什么教训？
傅成玉：我们学到的教训是，做如此大一笔交易时，在公共关系和政治游说方面应该更加谨慎。如果此类事情再度发生，由于我们现在对美国政治有了更好的了解，或许我们眼中的重点就不是这一交易本身了。或许你首先需要做的是公共关系和政治游说工作。在这些方面的问题解决了以后，你再来谈交易本身。
WSJ：你认为这一竞购在哪些方面出问题了？
傅成玉：在我们涉足这一交易之前，我认为它是对美国有利的。该交易不会导致解雇员工，不会导致美国市场的油气供应量下降。另一方面，我们还打算在美国雇佣更多的人，保住更多的就业岗位并在美国市场投入更多的资金用于勘探和生产，还试图投入更多资金以增加美国市场的油气供应。所有这些都有助于降低美国市场的汽油零售价格。
但这些想法没有得到顺畅的沟通。我想，如果今后再出现一次这样的机会，在我确信美国人民和美国政治家对此感到满意之前，我可能是不会进一步推动此事的。如果他们不高兴，我将不会在美国采取任何行动。这一点非常重要，不管你乐意与否，你都必须使他们感到安心才行。
WSJ：你认为油价过高吗？
傅成玉：从供需角度看，油价比其合理的水平高了许多。不过，油价高涨是另有原因的。地缘政治风险是导致油价居高不下的主要原因，而对冲基金则在努力利用这些机会。这些才是推动油价上涨的主要因素。
WSJ：你认为油价会很快回落吗？
傅成玉：油价短期内不会大幅下降。地缘政治风险将继续存在。伊拉克问题、伊朗问题、中东问题──这些短期内都不会消失。如果再发生其他事件，油价甚至会进一步走高。
WSJ：你正在采取哪些措施以确保美国人今后对中海石油能更放心？
傅成玉：中海石油是一个负责任的公司和世界公民。但并不是中国以外的所有人都了解这一点。例如，当印尼发生海啸时，我们在那里的子公司捐献了12万美元，这在当地公司中是最高的。这在中国企业中也是绝无仅有的。
卡特里娜飓风发生在我们收购加州联合石油公司失败后不久。在听到灾害消息的第四天，我们就在公司内举行了募捐活动，虽然是周六，但公司员工仅这一天的捐款额就达到了20万美元。
WSJ：你会考虑再度竞购一家美国公司吗？
傅成玉：我从未将美国市场排除在我们公司的视野之外。但就像我说过的，我不会做任何交易，除非美国人民认为这对他们有利。
WSJ：你想让美国人听到些什么呢？
傅成玉：中海石油是一家具有全球责任感的公司。谈到责任感和管理体系，它与任何一家跨国石油企业没有什么太大的不同。
WSJ：在这一点上我们不敢苟同。你们最大的股东是国家。
傅成玉：不管持股比例有多大，他们都是股东。只要我能够创造良好的股东价值，他们都会高兴。
WSJ：但政府是最大的股东。
傅成玉：当我说政府是股东时，并不仅仅因为它是最大的股东，还因为它并不干涉我们的日常运营。在我们的经营管理决策方面政府的作用并不重要。我们的管理与市场上的任何其他公司都是一样的。
WSJ：那么，在中海石油是谁作出最后的投资决策呢？
傅成玉：拥有最后批准权的是公司董事会，而非政府。
WSJ：中海石油与其他大型国有石油公司和国有企业有何不同？
傅成玉：我们没有从政府获得财政支持。是公司和董事会而非政府对我们做出的所有决定负责，对公司的所有财务结果或后果负责。
WSJ：你们从政府或其他融资渠道得到过廉价贷款吗？
傅成玉：政府没给过我们一分钱。我们所有的资金都来自商业贷款（其中多数来自我们在美国的公司）、发行新股以及母公司的拨款。
WSJ：你能描述一下当你们公司于1982年成立时它是如何不同于其他国有公司吗？
傅成玉：我们的母公司成立伊始，它就不从政府获得任何财政支持。我们有的只是政策支持。首先，我们是中国唯一一家有权与外国公司合作进行海上油气勘探的公司。其次，政府允许我们的母公司在上世纪八十年代初开立了外汇帐户。当时这还是相当少见的。第三，我们获准以国际市场价格出售原油。政府还决定不会将任何政府资金用于我们的资本投资。我们被允许向银行借钱，但我们必须连本带息向银行偿还贷款。这使得中海石油非常不同于其他国有公司。
WSJ：这一背景如何使你们公司在行事方式上不同于其他国有企业？
傅成玉：上世纪八十年代初，中国许多其他公司都花政府的钱。当你花政府的钱时，你就会有不同的行为方式。如何不同？如果你今年花钱较少，或者你今年的预算没有超支，你明年从政府得到的资金就会少于今年。所以大家都在努力多花钱，不管花钱项目是否具有经济可行性。但当你不是花政府的钱时，你在投资方面就会小心从事。
这可以解释为什么我们公司的规模以中国标准来衡量是如此之小。（中海石油有约2,500名员工。我们能够将员工人数大幅增加至20万至30万人，但我们刻意将员工人数保持在低水平。我们的每一分钱都靠自己挣，这帮助我们保持了精干的组织机构。）
WSJ：有鉴于此，你们目前的收购兴趣在哪里？
傅成玉：我们的并购团队每天都在评估各种机会，但好的并购机会并不多，特别是在油价高涨的情况下。我们的策略是一贯将关注重点放在中国的海上油气资源方面……我们还在关注包括澳大利亚在内的东亚周边地区。非洲是另一个我们长期关注的地区。
Shai Oster
