Most dissent centred on the thorny matter of oil reserves, and the even more important reserve replacement ratio (RRR).
Reuters said Shell reserves were "stable" in 2007. Bloomberg said they were "stagnant".
Some readers might imagine that the two words mean the same thing. Wrong.
Stable means steady or constant, or both.
Stagnant means sluggish, inactive or moribund. Or all three.
That's quite some difference, and goes to the heart of the original question: is Shell (and the other oil majors) standing still, or going backward?
The Slug argues that, despite all the spin doctoring from the bloated public relations departments of the majors, the big end of the oil sector is in deep doodoo.
There's nothing new in this thought, it's just that the mounting evidence is in the category of an elephant in the corner of the room. Everyone can see it, but no one dares speak about it.
For the record, Shell reported net reserves of 11.92 billion barrels of oil equivalent at the end of 2007. A year earlier the number was 11.94 billion barrels.
Significantly, the latest number incorporates the loss caused by the forced divestment of the company's stake in Russia's Sakhalin 2 oil and gas venture - creating "weasel" room for Shell to argue that it lifted reserves by discovery, and only slipped a fraction because of government action.
From The Slug's perspective that's part of the question about whether big oil is standing still or going backwards because the action of governments around the world is becoming ever more important as national oil companies (NOCs) seize the best in-ground assets for themselves and the commercial producers are fed the left-overs.
In other words, the cause of the stagnancy (or stability, depending on your "spin") is irrelevant. The simple fact is that Big Oil has effectively become a "no-growth" industry, and no growth in any industry is not healthy.
For the record, as far as Slugcatcher can see, the reserve replacement numbers for most of the majors showed little change between 2007 and 2006.
Shell, ExxonMobil and BP were all in the same "stability" boat while two of the majors showed an alarming decline. Total of France saw its RRP fall by 6%, and Chevron dropped by 7%.
It is not stretching a point to say that the latest batch of RRR numbers are the best measure yet of deep-seated malaise in big oil. Whatever the excuse, it is painfully obvious that failure to add reserves is the worst possible outcome for any producer of a natural resource.
No reserve increase effectively means no future production increase, and that reinforces the industry's no-growth status.
Overlay this grim RRR outlook with what seems to be a peak in the oil price, and increasing activity by the NOCs, and the seeds appear to be in the ground for something big to happen in the next few years.
Possibilities include some of the NOCs buying some of the majors in order to integrate reserves with skills. Or for the majors to acknowledge their no-growth status in oil and to start looking around for industries into which they can diversify - such as coal and/or uranium mining, arguing that it's all energy supply, and growth is an imperative.
The Slug knows we've travelled the diversification road before, and failed. But, over the next few years, if big oil remains no growth, then its owners, the big institutional funds of Europe and North America, will demand that something be done to reverse this declining trend.
