Skip to content

Posts from the ‘Oil Stocks’ Category

Breaking my rule for Pan Orient

One of the rules that I try to follow is not to add to a stock that has fallen below my purchase price. I have been burnt a number of times by doing this.  I have ended up trapped in the position, and further averaging down only adds to the problem.

The rule, like all rules, is not of the steadfast sort, and so I do break it from time to time.  But when I break it, I do so tentatively, I think about the consequences, and make extra sure that my decision makes sense.

I broke the rule with Pan Orient on Tuesday.

I had a fairly small position in Pan Orient and had been waiting for something of a correction before I added to that position.  I didn’t expect the extent of the correction that occured, but after some reflection I decided to add to the stock.

The news that sent the stock down was this news release. What sent the market scurrying was twofold; news that the L44 block exploration was not finding economic oil, and probably more importantly the news that the L53 block was experiencing a relatively high water cut.

In particular, in the news release the company said that the L53-DST3 well had been producing at 540 bbl/d of oil with a 60% water before it was shut-in and cased to perform a sidetrack of a deeper zone.    In the February 27th news release the L53-DST3 well was producing at 1,200bbl/d of oil with no water cut.

This is potentially negative news, but its really anybody’s guess at this point just how negative it is.  Since the reservoir is high porosity / high permeability it could be water from coning.  It could also be that the perforated interval extended down below the oil/water contact or that it partially perforated a water zone.  There are also plenty of examples of fields that successfully produce at high water cuts for years.  The downside is that the watercut may be creeping into the oil zone and continue to increase with time until the well is uneconomic.  Only time will tell.

The market neglected to put any value on the good news from the release.  The L53-DST3 well tested a slightly lower sandstone zone (1,179m TVD versus 1,142 to 1,163m m TVD for the previous 2 zones) and that zone was flowing at 400 bbl/d.

In the L53-D2 well, Pan Orient tested the 5 zones that it had previously not tested but had referred to in the original news release of the L53-D2.  In that January news release the company said:

Pan Orient is pleased to announce that the L53-D2 exploration well is currently on 90 day production test flowing 27 API degree oil at a rate of 1,015 barrels per day through 17.8 meters of perforations between 1110.8 meters to 1154.7 meters measured depth (860 to 890 meters true vertical depth), within one of six conventional sandstone reservoir intervals interpreted as oil bearing based on oil shows while drilling and open hole log and pressure data analysis.

The news release on Tuesday told us that 5 untested zones have now all been tested and all 5 were found to be oil producing.  One zone tested at 929 bbl/d of oil while two others tested above 500 bbl/d.  These zones are in addition to the originally tested zone from the January news release that tested at 1,1015 bbl/d and produced 40,917 bbl in the first quarter, which if you assume it was flowing for the full 90 day period means that the well flowed at an average rate of 454 bbl/d for that period.

The bottom line for me is that Pan Orient is finding a lot of oil zones and even if a couple of them don’t work out to be as wonderful as say Coastal’s Bua Ban, they are still going to produce a lot of oil and book a lot of reserves from them.

At this point it comes down to valuation.

Thailand production averaged 2,725 BOPD in the month of March, of which 1,702 BOPD was produced from Concession L53 and a combined 1,023 BOPD from Concessions L44, L33 and SW1. Production in the first quarter of 2012 averaged 2,541 BOPD.  Based on the March production number and the basic shares outstanding of 56.7M, Pan Orient is valued at $52,000 per flowing barrel.

According to slide 5 of Pan Orient’s January 9th presentation, yearly cash flow at 2,500 bopd and at $100/bbl WTI should be around $60M, and at 3,000bopd it should be $68M.  Again, with 56.7M shares oustanding, that puts the valuation at around 2.5x cash flow.

The company has cash and working capital on hand of $58.5M according to their January 9th presentation.  So about $1 of the current shares price is attributable to cash.

Capital expenditures are expected to be $37M for the year so 2,000 bbl/d of cash flow more than covers capital expenditures.  With the cash on hand in addition to the cash flow Pan Orient has a CAPEX cover that is rarely seen in the oil and gas junior industry.

I just think this looks over done.  I wish now that I had waited another day to buy, as the stock trades at $2.50 whereas I added at $2.76.  But I didn’t want to wait too long.  The company will be releasing a reserves update on the L53 structure within a week or two and I think that could be a catalyst for the market realizing it has overdone the downside.

 

Selling: Coastal Energy, after the mistake of buying back

Two weeks ago I looked pretty smart when I sold 2/3 of my position in Coastal Energy at a little over $18.  Last week I looked shrewd when I bought back that position at $16.50.  This week I looked stupid as the stock tanked and I sold.

Its quite possible that I sold at what will prove to be the bottom in the stock.  That would be unfortunate.   But while the timing of my transaction may have sucked, I believe the spirit and intent was right on the ball.

I sold out of Coastal on Thursday after they announced their end of year results.  They had also announced disappointing results at Bua Ban South on the same day (actually the night before) but that had nothing to do with why I sold.  I sold because the year end results showed a disturbing decline in production offshore.  The company did not address this decline very clearly in the news release.

Here is what the company said:

“2012 has also begun extremely well. We have drilled and tied in a handful of additional wells at Bua Ban North which have further boosted production. These wells were tied in during the month of February and brought average offshore production for the entire first quarter up to 21,100 bbl/d. Our current offshore production is 22,500 bopd.  

The  company had previously announced a little over a month ago that they had 26,000 boe/d of production offshore.

The Company has two more wells to bring online at Bua Ban North. Current offshore production is averaging 26,000 bopd, bringing total company production to 28,000 boepd. The rig is now being mobilized to Bua Ban South and is expected to spud the first well there by the end of February.

Now I may have gotten worked up over nothing, and I know of a few players smarter than I that used the dip as a buying opportunity.  $15 is a reasonable price for the production that Coastal has, and there is the opportunity that they will find much more.

Nevertheless, it was what I didn’t hear as what I did hear that made me sell.  I have been in too many situations that followed this script.  And more often than not, the reason that the reasons aren’t stated is because they are something to worry about.

Is that the case here?  I have no idea.  Maybe its operational, mechanical, one-time, short term, or some other adjective that can be dismissed and forgotten.  But the company didn’t say that, when they could have said that, and instead they didn’t say much at all.  So I took the approach that I will ask questions later.

Coastal has been a great stock for me.  Even though I sold out for good after a 25% decline (from $20 to $15) I still pulled off almost a 4-bagger.  It was probably my history with the stock that kept me in it as long as I was.

So of course I wish I would have sold it 3 weeks ago.   But I have learned that decisions need to be made based on current circumstances.  If you do not do what you believe is right today because of a mistake you made in the past and if you hope instead for a return to those past conditions to correct the mistake, you will get killed more often then not.

When I couple the uncertainty of the news release with the opportunity I see to redeploy that capital somewhere else where I believe the opportunity is greater (see my recently finished post on Mortgage Servicing Rights and my post from last week’s portfolio update where I stepped through the breakouts of numerous regional banks), it seemed to me the right thing to do.   Perhaps in a couple more weeks it will look stupid for having sold it when I did.  Be that as it may, you can’t forsee the future, you only have the past as a guide.

So Long Reliable Energy

If there has been one thing the company has been reliable about, it has been underperforming its assets.   In its final denouement, it did not disappoint.

Reliable Energy (REL.to) was taken over by Crescent Point on Wednesday.  I was disappointed by the price they received (~36cents) as it was only about a 15% premium to where the stock traded at prior to the offer.  There was also no mention of REL’s current production in the press release, so its impossible to gauge whether the company is selling on the cheap because of an unsuccessful winter drilling campaign, or because they just wanted to give Crescent Point a gift.  At any rate, I sold my shares at 35 cents and am on to bigger and better things.

The one number that was provided in the release was the updated proved and probably reserves number.

Reliable Energy has proved plus probable reserves of 4.1 million barrels of oil equivalent as of Dec. 31, 2011, and the oil explorer has identified 36 net locations for drilling.

Based on those reserves, Reliable was bought up for $22 per bbl.  Based on the most recent production number of 1,000boe/d, the transaction took place at $95,000 per flowing boe.  All boe numbers are 95% light oil.

It could be worse, but I also think they could have done better.  They have an extensive land position, and there were some rumors that Crescent Point had hit a boomer well on offsetting land.

Nevertheless what’s done is done.  Take your money and move on.

 

Adding to Pan Orient

I increased my position in Pan Orient on Friday.

The more I look at the story here the more I like it.  The following comment from Raymond James was posted on the Investors Village board:

…after speaking with management we believe the recent discovery could have significant resource upside potential (see page 2 for details), and lead to a step-change in the company’s current production profile. The discovery represents an important milestone for Pan Orient as it moves towards its goal of increasing production from more stable sandstone reservoirs (as opposed to the prolific but highly volatile volcanic reservoirs which until recently underpinned the company’s production base).

The one short term negative for the stock is that it is expected that there will be a 10MMbbl writedown of reserves from their legacy volcanics field in Thailand when the reserve report comes out.  The reserve report will come out some time in the next month or two.

Chen Lin was interviewed earlier this week and he had some comments about POE as well:

Pan Orient has a slightly different thesis than Mart Resources because there is some exploration/discovery risk. It is drilling wells, potentially very big wells, but I don’t know if the wells will be successful. With Mart, there is much more certainty. However, though there is risk for Pan Orient, it is a very experienced oil exploration company, and it’s been in Thailand for five years, drilling and fine tuning its technology.

I shared with my subscribers a report that estimates each of the three Pan Orient wells in Indonesia is worth about $3 of net asset value (NAV)/share if successful in the first half of 2012 and $2 for each of the other three wells in the second half of 2012. In addition, Pan Orient also has an oil sands property in Canada that it wants to sell. The company has $1/share cash on the balance sheet and cash flow over $1/share right now, and this is in addition to the oil sands property that it has for sale. Thailand is ramping up production and Indonesia has the big wildcat wells at work. So in terms of risk-reward, it’s an ideal situation. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the stock be a ten-bagger by the end of this year. The company could be a $1 billion (B) company. It was a $2 stock when I recommended it in my newsletter. Right now it’s $3 and change. With some success in drilling in Indonesia, I’m looking for a ten-bagger. Seldom do you have those in one year, so I have pretty high hopes on the stock

I think that Chen Lin can be a little over-enthusiastic at times; I mean we are still a number of good events away from being a 10 bagger. Nevertheless, the possibility certainly is there and the possibility of a 50% return, which is nothing to sneeze at, is, in my opinion, extremely high.

Trying to understand Equal Energy’s position in the Mississippian Lime

I’ve spent a few hours this week trying to get a better idea of just how pervasive the Mississippian lime and chat formations are in Oklahoma, and to a lessor extent in Kansas. My investigation was precipitated by some comments by Equal at the Enercom conference a couple of weeks ago.  I will talk more about those comments at the end of the post, but first I want to go through what I have learned about the Mississippian.

I found investigating the Mississippian to be a tough slog; the information is sparse, some of the companies are private, and most of the others are large multi-play companies like Chesapeake and Range, and so they don’t divulge the well by well granularity that I am looking for.

Nevertheless I think I’ve developed a decent picture of the extents of the play and the well results so far.  What I will try to do below is step through the companies with acreage in the Mississippian and where that acreage lies, trying at the same time to put together a picture of the field and how prospective Equal’s land might be in relation to others.

I’ve limited this discussion to the economics of the Mississippian play.  I looked at expanding to geology and how it might change across the extents but I just haven’t been able to find enough information to develop a coherent analysis.  For now we will have to look at where the wells are being drilled and how successful are the results and draw conclusions from that.

Sandridge: King of the Mississippian

Any discussion about the Mississippian has to start with Sandridge.  They are the largest land holder, the largest producer, and I’m pretty sure they were the first mover in terms of trying out the hz multifracs on the formation.

Sandridge provides a good map of where they have been drilling horizontal Mississippian wells so far. I have highlighted where Equal’s land sits in yellow.

You can see from the little red and blue dots that most of the activity in the Mississippian has been centered around Northern Oklahoma.  Equal’s land is right on trend, if only slightly south.

Sandridge (the red dots) has been drilling most of their wells to the north of Equal, but still in the same counties, Alfalfa and Grant.    Sandridge provided a close-up of Grant, Alfalfa and Garfield counties in a later slide.  Again I have tried to deliniate Equal’s land with respect to Sandridge.  Based on the graph, and Equal’s own presentation that maps out their land holdings, it is clear that Sandridge surrounds Equal with their land package.

Valuing the Mississippian

During the Investor/Analyst Day on February 27th, Sandridge stepped through the valuation of the Mississippian.  Sandridge puts a value of $4,236 per acre on their Mississippian land.

The acreage value is implied from the joint ventures that Sandridge has completed with Repsol, Antinum, etc.  The resource NAV is more subjective; it is an estimate of the eventual NAV of the land once it has been fully developed and is producing oil.

Sandridge has been showing improved success as they drill more wells.  This is exactly what I would expect.  It happened in the Bakken, it has happened in Equal’s own area in the Lochend, it has happened at Swan Hills with the Beaverhill Lake.  As operators experiment and figure out what works and what doesn’t results improve. Below is an illustration of how the Sandridge 30 day average has improved over time, taken from their Credit Suisse presentation.

Sandridge put the following economics on the Mississippian in their Analyst Day Presentation.

I thought it would be an interesting exercise to see how these economics compared to other players in the Mississippian.   Below I have compiled a comparison of all the players with public data available regarding their Mississippian productivity estimates.

In the case of Range Resource, the company doesn’t provide a NPV estimate but did provide an ROI during one of their conference calls, so I have included that.

These estimates bring up the question of where some of these other companies are operating with respect to Equal.  Osage Exploration has a decent map of the Oklahoma acreage that can help deliniate that.  Its a bit cluttered but it helps to point out where some of the other companies have been drilling.  Again the area where Equal Energy owns acreage is highlighted in yellow.

Range Resources and Nemaha Ridge

If you look at the upper right of the graph you will see a purple arrow labeled Nemaha Ridge that is pointing to a yellow line going north to south.  Range Resources has built up a land position along this ridge, east of Equal’s land.

Range Resources had some interesting comments about the Mississippian on their Q3 and Q4 conference call (taken from SeekingAlpha).   First, here is what Range says about their acreage around Nemaha Ridge:

We are on the ridge. So you have that whole area that’s been defined and there’s different mats out there. So there’s — you can go west of the ridge, on the ridge or east of the ridge. It’s interesting — and I saw somebody put a map out to just look at historical vertical wells out there. If you look at where the best historical, vertical oil wells are, that’s where range’s acreage is. Somebody asked me offline, why do your wells — it’s early on and granted, can we hold it up? And as we drill, we will continue to see those results, but why are your wells look so good for the — why you’re getting the 485,000 barrels for 2,000 foot lateral, while other people are drilling 4,000 foot laterals and their reserves are in the same range? And if you look at the historical vertical wells or where the best wells are, that’s where are our acreage is in and around. So it’s necessarily east of the ridge or west of the ridge. It can be on the ridge or there’s — just like in all of these plays, where your acreage is really matter.

Next, here is what Range said about recoveries along Nemaha Ridge:

Particularly if you look at the oil plays, specifically like the Mississippian, we put out recovery factors of 4% to 9% of the oil in place. Do I expect ultimately it’ll be that? No, I would say it probably will be higher.

They also had the following to say about EUR:

I think in any of these places it’s really important on where you are. There’s always a core area and non-core areas. There’s better areas and poor areas. I would say looking at the results of our Mississippian wells even though it’s early, there’s only 8 wells, but the average results of 485,000 barrels per well… [up on nemaha ridge] you have a chat component to your production… The chat — when you get off structure, you tend to lose chat or you don’t have nearly as much. The porosity in the chat is 30% to 40%. The porosity in the carbonate is 3% to 5%.

When asked by one of the analysts during the Q4 conference call about the variability of results being seen in some areas of the play, Range had this to say:

I think in any of these places it’s really important on where you are. There’s always a core area and non-core areas. There’s better areas and poor areas. I would say looking at the results of our Mississippian wells even though it’s early, there’s only 8 wells, but the average results of 485,000 barrels per well is really great. It’s outstanding. So I feel comfortable that we’re in a good position. And we think really what drives that is the fact that where our acreage is located.

Chesapeake: Alfalfa and Woods Counties

Chesapeake owns a large parcel of land in the Mississippian. The company is not as forthcoming as Sandridge and the smaller players about where the acreage is or what their results have been. I don’t think this has any nefarious intent; they are simply a big company involved in many plays and they don’t have the space in their presentations to deliniate each play in detail.

According to their comments on the Q4 conference call, most of their drilling has been centered around Alfalfa and Woods county, which would mean just to the west of Equal.  This agrees with the Osage map above, which highlights an area in blue around Alfalfa county as being primarily CHK and SD.

Chesapeake has participated in about 70 wells in the Mississippian so far.  Of interest, in their fourth quarter conference call the company said that the Mississippian would be seeing 22 rigs this year, second only to the Eagleford.

We do expect our operated rig count will stay relatively level for the year at an average of approximately 161 rigs for the year. This is including 33 rigs in the Eagle Ford Shale; 22 in the Miss Lime play; 20 in the Cleveland and Tonkawa plays; 14 in the Utica Shale play; 13 in the Granite Wash plays; and 10 in the Permian Basin.

Devon and Osage Exploration: To the southeast

Devon Energy (DVN) has 210,000 net acres of exposure to the Mississippian oil play in Oklahoma and Kansas.  Devon bought land to the south east of where Equal owns land. Devon and Osage own land in very similar location.

Apparently, Devon Energy drilled twelve to fifteen vertical wells in the Mississippian oil play in 2011. Because they are a big company involved in multiple plays (much like Chesapeake) finding individual well data is difficult, even more difficult then Chesapeake. However the company did report during its Q4 conference call that it had drilled its first succesful horizontal well (again from SeekingAlpha):

We drilled our first vertical well in the second quarter of last year to gather data and have since drilled our first horizontal Mississippian producer, yielding very encouraging results. The Matthews 1H was brought online in the fourth quarter and achieved a 24-hour sustained IP rate of 960 barrels of oil equivalent per day, of which greater than 80% was oil. Through the first 30 days of production, the well averaged 590 barrels of oil equivalent a day.

Devon doesn’t describe where its land is.  In one of the companies presentations they point to land holdings in SE Oklahoma but mainly with the intent on drilling gassy Woodford shale wells.  There is no other mention by Devon of any Oklahoma acreage.  Luckily, Osage Exploration again provides an excellent map of where both they and Devon have a significant land base.

An extremely interesting point with respect to this map is that Equals Hunton lands are right in the middle of Logan and Lincoln counties, which are just to the south of the red and green blocks in the Osage map above.

Osage drilled one well at the end of December in Logan county and spudded another in mid-January.  There are no results yet, which would normally be somewhat discouraging, except that the stock price of Osage has gone rather ballistic over the last two months (up from 45 cents to 70 cents).  That and the the anecdotal Devon well leaves me wondering if Equal has more Mississippian acreage than they at first suspect?

Red Fork Energy: A Detailed Well Result

Red Fork energy is an Australian company that has been mentioned a number of times on the InvestorsHub Junior Energy Board.  According to a recent news release, they control 60,000 acres centered around the Nemaha Ridge (Payne, Kay and Pawnee counties) but extending as far west as Grant and Noble counties.  According to their presentation (which is from March 2011 btw) they expected to drill 11 wells in 2011.  I think that number ended up being more like two.  nevertheless, I stepped through the company news releases (here) to see how that drilling went.  They provided a rather detailed account of the company’s first well, releasing updates on almost a two-three week basis.

The company’s first well, in Pawnee county, was estimated by Schlumberger to contain OOIP of 58.4mmbo per section.  At a 5% recovery this would give 290,000bbl of oil per section, and presumably at 4 wells per section a little over 70,000bbl per well.  The company said they expected 3-5 Mcf of associated gas per barrel so that would put an overall hydrocarbon EUR of around 500,000boe per section or 125,000boe per well assuming 4 wells per section.  So pretty so-so numbers.

They fracked the well with 12 stages and provided information on the following 24 hour flow test:

The well produce 240 barrels of 28 degree API gravity oil, 240 Mcf of 1,300BTU gas, and 1,600 barrels of water by pumping via ESP and intermittant flow through the casing.

Don’t get too scared off by the water number.  I have read numbers as high as 3,000bbl/d of water from some wells.  It sounds like a lot, and is a lot, but it is being managed by Sandridge and others and isn’t indicative of any sort of watering out.

They follows that up with a news release on December 22nd and another on January 20th clarified that the well was producing at 300boe/d with about 80% of that being 38 degree API oil.

A second offsetting well (called Abunda 1-21H) is just finishing drilling in Pawnee.  The company is also in the process of drilling two wells in Noble County (McMurtry 1-22H and Blair 1-24H).

Equal Downplays the Mississippian

If you take in all the information from above and try to sort out some conclusions from it, I think its reasonable to say that the Mississippian is slowly being derisked, and it looks like its a productive and economic play.  Yet Equal seems to be really downplaying the potential.  If you listen to the presentation that Don Klapko gave at the recent Enercom conference it really focused on the negatives, in particular the risk of a 50 boe/d duster.

The slide in question is slide 12 from the presentation:

The essence of the slide is that Equal has gone through all the public data and  determined that the economics are just not up to par with the other plays the company has, at least when considered against the risks.

At the conference Don Klapko had the following to say about the Mississippian:

Our vision here is to liberate the value.  What we’ve done is taken all the public available data and mashed it together.  We are seeing is aout $3.5M capital expenditure, about 300,000 boe that kicks out at 25% rate of return… now I bet you guys are hearing a 75% rate of return on the mississippian play, well some wells will do that but you can also invest $3.5M and get a 50 boe/d well.

Now clearly part of the reason he is playing down the Mississippian is because of the need to justify the farmout.  Why would you farm it out if it was the the highest ROR?  So that makes sense.  The point is that the EUR estimates from other company’s are quite different than what Equal is estimating.

So I don’t know what to say.  I’m not sure where Equal’s public data is coming from and maybe they have access to more data than I have access to.  I can only go by what I have access to and the fairly rigorous analysis of what I have available to me does not paint the picture of a marginal play.   Its still early of course, but so far the results look pretty good, and appear to be improving as the engineers get a better handle on unlocking the play.

Below is a snapshot from another Sandridge presentation, providing estimates of 30 day production rates for the latest wells drilled in the Mississippian.

While there is indeed the odd 50 boe/d duster, there are far more 1,000boe/d + boomers.  Particularly of late.  5 of the last 12 wells have seen 30 day IP’s of over 800 boe/d.

There are differences between regions, so that is a risk.  Perhaps Equal knows, or suspects, that the land they own is lower quality.  But at the conference Equal called the actitivy around their area a “hot-bed” which doesn’t sound like they are on any fringe.  I can only speculate on the quality based on what is being drilled around them, and if you look at where Sandridge is drilling, it appears to be very near the heart of the play.

Nevertheless I do understand how quickly geology can change from section to section.   Structures can end suddenly, or thin out quickly.

Either Sandridge, Chesapeake, and Range (as well as the juniors) are hugely overestimating the resource or Equal is hugely underestimating it.   There’s no other way to take it.  The 3 former companies have all publically stated EUR’s that are 30-40% higher than Equal’s estimate.

Anyways it’s all conjecture until these wells produce a little longer and we get to see the real declines.  The bottomline, based on the information I have access to, is that the land itself should be worth at least $4,000 per acre.  That is based on other transactions.  The entire land base, 15,200 acres (I still can’t figure out if they lost the other 4,000 acres to lease expiration or what happened to it), should be worth $60M at this price.  A 50/50 JV should bring $30M to the company.

Unfortunately I suspect they are getting less than that.  At the Enercom conference Klapko said “this land tends to fetch huge dollars, up to $3,000 per acre”.  So I suspect that Equal is getting closer to this number, which would put a 50/50 JV at $22.5M net to Equal.

I suspect that this might be the reason they talked down the Mississippian at the conference.  Its too bad; I think they could do better.

A last word on Oklahoma Oil and Gas Information.

There is a wealth of information on oil and gas wells available at the website of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission.  They have a GIS database of well information, including monthly production volumes, for wells in Oklahoma.  Unfortunately finding existing Mississippian wells is nearly impossible.  Even when I got to the North of Alfalfa county, where there should be lots of wells drilled by Sandridge, I can’t find any of them.  If any one can point to me why this is (are these wells confidential or on some similar status?) or what I am doing wrong to not be able to see the wells, I would appreciate it.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 34 other followers