BP’s 2007 Prospectus clocks in at over 600 pages, and there is very little fluff within those pages.
Are there typos, omissions and proof-reading/editing gaffes as in past years? Yes, though they seem to have dwindled in # and severity.
I too wish they would delay the book a few days and really go over it with a fine-tooth comb, but given the voluminous data presented, and the public clamoring for an early publication date, I guess something has to give.
For those critical of the paper quality (and I was one such person), please note that I e-mailed the editor at the publishing house, and was told that given the # of pages, some consideration for the paper weight had to be made, lest the book become a literal paperweight. The tannish color of the paper comes along with the lighter paper weight.
(If you’ve ever seen the annual editions of the Sports Encyclopedia: Baseball, which run well over 800 pages, you’ll recognize the paper weight and color. So it seems to be an industry standard for certain encyclopedic page-size tomes over X pages).
As for the actual content, well its everything you’ve come to expect from BP …. the wit, the confidence and skill in their projections, the candor to admit when they’ve blown a projection, the team essays which nail the critical aspects of why the team ended 2006 as they did, and what 2007 may hold for them. The essays in the back of the book are as thought-provoking as as diverse as ever.
Count me in as a continuing fan of BP and their annual.