Pertamina's management

Pertamina's management

I would like to comment on the article Caltex's view on
Pertamina 'faulty' (Thursday, Aug. 14) by R.O. Hutapea.

I think Mr. Hutapea did a good job presenting facts about
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) expertise that Pertamina acquired
and about the history of LNG in Indonesia.

But in my opinion, there are other factors to consider when
evaluating the management of oil fields by Pertamina instead of
Caltex. The two main factors are management and the application
of technology.

Around the world, in general, I think government
owned/operated companies are less efficient than private
companies.

Although Pertamina has some experts in EOR technology, can it
properly apply and manage the technology and associated
activities as well as realize production at a cost equal to or
lower than Caltex?

Caltex is owned by two major oil companies (Chevron and
Texaco) who are well-known for their efficiency, human resources
development and bottom-line results.

In what kind of company would investors prefer to place their
money? Through which company will the best results for Indonesia
be realized?

In regards to LNG, I agree fully with Mr. Hutapea. If it had
not been for the vision of Mr. Ibnu Sutowo (Pertamina) or had
Pertamina only listened to the production sharing contractors,
the LNG business in Indonesia would not have been developed.
Pertamina's wise decision, at that time, made Indonesia the
world's largest LNG exporter.

We must weigh up several factors when deciding which is the
best course -- on a case by case basis.

I hope the correct decision will be made for the benefit of
Indonesia and its people.

Name and address

known to the editor