Seriously, does anyone think that these smaller companies will be able to wait out the low oil and gas prices? How can they drill and then wait for prices to go up? There will probably be a lot of empty hotels in Cambridge. Does anyone think the prices will ever go back up?  Fortunately, I did not go out and buy a new pick up truck.

Views: 16844

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

US running out of room to store oil; price collapse next?

Associated Press 

NEW YORK (AP) — The U.S. has so much crude that it is running out of places to put it, and that could drive oil and gasoline prices even lower in the coming months.

For the past seven weeks, the United States has been producing and importing an average of 1 million more barrels of oil every day than it is consuming. That extra crude is flowing into storage tanks, especially at the country's main trading hub in Cushing, Oklahoma, pushing U.S. supplies to their highest point in at least 80 years, the Energy Department reported last week.

If this keeps up, storage tanks could approach their operational limits, known in the industry as "tank tops," by mid-April and send the price of crude — and probably gasoline, too — plummeting.

"The fact of the matter is we are running out of storage capacity in the U.S.," Ed Morse, head of commodities research at Citibank, said at a recent symposium at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

Morse has suggested oil could fall all the way to $20 a barrel from the current $50. At that rock-bottom price, oil companies, faced with mounting losses, would stop pumping oil until the glut eased. Gasoline prices would fall along with crude, though lower refinery production, because of seasonal factors and unexpected outages, could prevent a sharp decline.

The national average price of gasoline is $2.44 a gallon. That's $1.02 cheaper than last year at this time, but up 37 cents over the past month.

Other analysts agree that crude is poised to fall sharply — if not all the way to $20 — because it continues to flood into storage for a number of reasons:

— U.S. oil production continues to rise. Companies are cutting back on new drilling, but that won't reduce supplies until later this year.

— The new oil being produced is light, sweet crude, which is a type many U.S. refineries are not designed to process. Oil companies can't just get rid of it by sending it abroad, because crude exports are restricted by federal law.

— Foreign oil continues to flow into the U.S., both because of economic weakness in other countries and to feed refineries designed to process heavy, sour crude.

— This is the slowest time of year for gasoline demand, so refiners typically reduce or stop production to perform maintenance. As refiners process less crude, supplies build up.

— Oil investors are making money buying and storing oil because of the difference between the current price of oil and the price for delivery in far-off months. An investor can buy oil at $50 today and enter into a contract to sell it for $59 in December, locking in a profit even after paying for storage during those months.

The delivery point for most of the oil traded in the U.S. is Cushing, a city of about 8,000 people halfway between Oklahoma City and Tulsa at an intersection of several pipelines. The city is dotted with tanks that can, in theory, hold 85 million barrels of oil, according to the Energy Department, though some of those tanks are used for blending or feeding pipelines, not for storing oil.

The market data provider Genscape, which flies helicopters equipped with infrared cameras and other technology over Cushing twice a week to measure storage levels, estimates Cushing is two-thirds full.

Hillary Stevenson, who manages storage, pipeline and refinery monitoring for Genscape, says Cushing could be full by mid-April. Supplies are increasing at "the highest rate we have ever seen at Cushing," she says.

Full tanks — or super-low prices — are not a sure thing. New storage is under construction at Cushing, and there are large storage terminals near Houston, in St. James, Louisiana, and elsewhere around the country that will probably begin to take in more oil as prices fall far enough to cover the cost of transporting the oil.

Also, drillers are cutting back fast because oil prices have plummeted from $107 a barrel in June. And demand is showing signs of rising.

While the Energy Department reported another enormous rise in crude stocks last week, up 8.4 million barrels from the week earlier, it also reported that diesel and gasoline supplies fell more than expected. That leads some to conclude that demand for crude will soon pick up, easing the surplus somewhat.

But many analysts believe oil prices will fall through the spring, before summer drivers start to relieve the glut.

___

Jonathan Fahey can be reached at http://twitter.com/JonathanFahey .

Excerpts from  Eclipse Resources' (ECR) CEO Benjamin Hulburt on Q4 2014 Results - Earnings Call Transcript.

Complete transcript here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/2977716-eclipse-resources-ecr-ceo-b...

Going to slide 6, our operated production base at year-end consisted of 21 condensate wells, 7 dry gas wells and one Marcellus well, with 28 of the 29 wells turned to sales during 2014. During the fourth quarter we turned the Fritz, Hayes and Pora pad to sales all in the condensate band of our acreage. These pads include 11 wells with average lateral lengths of approximately 7100 feet. All of these wells are being produced on a restricted choke to preserve reservoir pressure. And although initial indications are positive, we experienced numerous midstream issues during the quarter associated with the delayed start-up of Blue Racer’s burn plant, operational issues at Natrium as well as pipeline related issues dealing with hydrates and excessive liquids.

All of which were exacerbated due to the extreme cold temperatures. As Ben mentioned, we are currently operating one rig in the Utica shale dry gas area. This rig is currently drilling on our three well Shroyer’s pad on reduced inter-lateral well spacing of 750 feet. This pad is approximately 6 miles south-west of our Shroyer pad which in the fourth quarter of 2014 included the top two producing gas wells in the state of Ohio according to state production data.

We’ve completed the drilling of the first two wells on the Shroyer pad with an average spud to TD of just 19 days and are commencing the third well in the coming week. This average drilling time is superb when compared to our original estimation last year during our IPO process which called for drilling times in the dry gas area of approximately 30 days to drill a 6000 foot lateral. This pad is an exciting test for us as it will be our first dry gas spacing test. While historically we’ve drilled dry gas wells at a 1000-foot inter-lateral spacing, this pad is being drilled on 750 foot inter-lateral spacing.

To the extent, this reduced inter-lateral spacing proves to be economic, it could increase our estimated dry gas well locations by over 25% on our current acreage position.

Moving to slide 7, as of March 1, 2015 we had 6 gross operated wells drilling, five of which were being top [indiscernible], one well waiting on completion in 2015 and 25 or 19.3 net wells accounting for 765 gross stages currently delayed for completion. We also were participating at 41 non-operated wells in progress. From the map you can see that the deferred completion activity is largely concentrated in our condensate and rich gas type curve areas and our drilling activity is focused in our dry gas type curve area.

Neal Dingmann - SunTrust Robinson Humphrey

Second question, Ben for probably for you or Tom. I noticed now on, I think the wells that you now put up kind of to date versus the first quarter, I think the IP rate or the 24-hour peak rate was pretty similar. But I noticed on the new batch, you know the average has now improved on the 30-day average. So I guess my question is, is there you know anything different that you all are doing on you know chokes program or anything like that? Or it just happen to be where these wells are located?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Yeah Neal, there isn't from what we can tell any significant variance in what we think the long-term performance of the wells are in this last batch versus the ones we announced previously. The production rates that are reported in the earnings release have been affected by several midstream related issues that Tom alluded to, dealing to a large extent with the start-up of Blue Racer’s new cryogenic processing facilities called the burn plant, with some down times that we experienced at Blue Racer’s Natrium facilities.

And then the startup of our condensate stabilization facilities, which we are in the process of turning over to EnLink. So a variety of those circumstances impacted production at certain pads during different periods. We have an internal production target for these wells using our restricted choke methodology, and we managed the choke to attempt to hit those targets. So, but at this point, there isn't a large variance in what we think the ultimate EUR is in any of the wells. All appear to be in line with our type curves.

Holly Stewart - Howard Weil

Just a couple of questions here. Maybe first, I guess Ben it sounds like you're going to move forward until you reach an agreement with sort of that half CapEx number that you initially threw out there in one rig. So should we anticipate that rig just kind of moving forward in Monroe County drilling dry gas wells?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes, for the time being our plan involves keeping that rig in some of our deepest, highest pressured areas of the dry gas bands. However I’d like to point out, I mean one of the advantages of our asset base is over the course, a span of a county and a half, we can move our rig or rigs all the way from heavy condensate yield wells to some of the best dry gas wells in the country. And we’ve pads and title done in basically every one of those bands.

So our current plan is to keep that rig in the highest pressure dry gas areas where we still pretty attractive returns. However, if we see a liquids price improvement which could happen fairly rapidly, we would then react to moving that rig back toward the liquids area and the condensate areas where we’ve several units ready to go and actually even several of the pads that are built and constructed. So you will see us react to the commodity price as it moves throughout the year.

Holly Stewart - Howard Weil

But if you stay in that dry gas window, will that rig be in Monroe or Belmont?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Predominantly Monroe. We’ve a couple of units that are possible to drill into the Belmont area, but predominantly in the northeastern corner of Monroe County.

not a permanent situation.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Leo Mariani at RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.

Leo Mariani - RBC Capital Markets

Hey guys, obviously you spoke about being nimble with the rigs and you got a pretty good backlog of completions in the [conde] window. I am sure you are somewhat waiting for costs to fall here, but could you give us a sense that you know what type of you know oil price you would like to see before you start completing some of that backlog of wells or moving the rig? Is it 60 to 70, could you kind of give us any thoughts there?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Sure, Leo. And it's not just an oil price move because they do still produce gas and we also have to watch where the NGL realization is. But I would say simplistically as the WTI price gets closer to $65 to $70, that's where we would probably look to put more capital to work into that area.

Leo Mariani - RBC Capital Markets

Okay, that's helpful here and I guess obviously you know JV discussions sound like they are still in process. I mean can you layout any type of you know high level timeframe as to when you think something may get resolved? Is it sort of midyear? Is it kind of second half, just anything like that you can help us with?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Sure, I mean our objective is to complete these negotiations in the next 30 days. Now closing on transactions, joint-venture transactions and documentation can be quite complicated. So I wouldn’t close that quickly, but our objective is to complete the discussions and start drafting definite documents in the next 30 days. And at that point, we could probably update the market with some initial thoughts both on the JV structure as well as what we think our capital budget will ultimately be over the course of the year. So I would expect to be able to update the market in the next 2 to 3 months.

Leo Mariani - RBC Capital Markets

And I guess you also made some comments that you know part of the motivation in the JV maybe to take advantage of some opportunities and you know what are you guys seeing out there in terms of you know available acreage here?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

I probably don't want to go too much into that, no brain surgery here. But I mean it's our belief that given the downturn, there will be several opportunities to acquire acreage in our core focus area of Southeast Ohio, Northwest West Virginia, Southwest Pennsylvania. As far as what prices are obviously to the extent we do acquire acreage with the intent of doing it opportunistically at prices there are substantially below what acreage prices were a year ago.

If it doesn't materialize that asset prices have fallen, then we would not pursue that strategy. The whole intent of it is to really be opportunistic and add core assets while prices are down. If that theory doesn’t prove correct, then we will just continue to focus on our current assets rather than just buy assets, just to buy assets.

Leo Mariani - RBC Capital Markets

I guess just lastly, is there any update on any of the kind of you know leasehold issues you had around the Oxford acquisition?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

No, I guess as time goes on and given what’s happened in some of the courts of other cases, we feel more and more comfortable about it. But we haven't as a company had any updates on our own issue.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Subash Chandra with Guggenheim. Please proceed with your question.

Subash Chandra - Guggenheim Securities

If you can remind me, what is the leases expiring in 2015?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Off the top of my head, Subash the leases expiring in 2015 are under a 1000 acres and pretty much the same in 2016. We really don't have any acreage of any magnitude expiring until 2017. And acreage that does come up for expiration in 2017 would all have five-year extension rates after that.

Thomas Liberatore - Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

And additionally most of that acreage that would come up is in that dry gas area where we’re active currently.

Subash Chandra - Guggenheim Securities

Yeah, okay so not an issue at all. And I don't know your comfort to talk more on the fundraising or I should say the joint-venture or are you thinking about it at sort of the corporate level? Or are you thinking about asset carve-outs to where you know it’s an investment by that financial partner in a particular subset of your acreage? Or you think about it as a way to accelerate I guess the dry gas until commodity prices improve?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

I guess, I can say at this point it’s not corporate focus and our objective is to keep it as close to wellbore focused as possible.

Subash Chandra - Guggenheim Securities

Okay, could you comment whether then this would be you know the wet gas area or the [conde] area that you would seek to accelerate or revive?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

I really can't at this point. It most likely will follow our drilling plans, whether that's in the dry gas area or the condensate.

Ipsit Mohanty - GMP Securities

And I thought you said something like $65 or $70 oil to put rigs back in work in the condensate? I was wondering sort of what level of service cost reduction or commodity price will it take for you to at least complete the well, the condensate wells that you’ve a backlog currently?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Well when I said we would put, go back to work in the oil window or the condensate window at $65 or $70, I think what I said is that’s when we would start putting more capital to work, not necessarily that we would add rigs right away in that band. So $65 to $70 oil is probably where we would decide to start playing capital into there. And undoubtedly the first capital we spend will be on completing the wells that are deferred completions. So that would be the first step and I think if we see oil prices stay in that area for a period of time, that's when we would look to start bringing back additional rigs.

Ipsit Mohanty - GMP Securities

And so nothing dependent on service cost reductions of any?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

No, I would say we are in the process of locking down service cost reductions as long as we can. But to the extent we can for example if we locked in pumping services on our frac stages, they would be substantially lower than that we’ve seen historically. However they won’t be permanent. So as commodity prices go back up, I would expect to see service costs creep back up. So it's tough to make a multi-year decision based solely on that. It's a great benefit and it's very helpful while commodity prices are down. But certainly it’s a variable cost and you know we try to frame the business on a multi-year strategy. So it's not something that we can forecast forever.

Ipsit Mohanty - GMP Securities

And then I think the last call around you had talked about a greater comfort and the infrastructure around the wet gas and condensate areas versus dry gas because at that time, you had deemed it right to focus there. And now that you're switching to the dry gas, are you more comfortable with the infrastructure set up, the midstream set up around the areas you're drilling?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

I would say at this point, both our dry gas and our liquids area have substantially complete infrastructure. Most of our dry gas acreage is going into the Eureka Hunter system which is the trunk line of which is already all complete, runs through our acreage and has connected to Texas Eastern and REX and we built our own connection into the Dominion system. So in that area, a large part of our infrastructure is already in place. In the liquids area, most of the pipeline was there. The condensate stabilization facilities that we built, they are substantially already in operation or substantially complete.

Our gas is processed by Blue Racer, our operated gas, either at the Natrium II facility or at the burn plant. The burn plant did experience several delays and some challenges during its start up. However with those facilities now up and running, I would weight our risk to midstream relatively equally between the two areas, because it’s substantially complete in both the dry gas and the liquids area.

David Deckelbaum - KeyBanc Capital Markets

You know first I guess, you know a lot of people have asked a lot of questions about the JV. But I think, you made a point in the slide deck that do you see the primary goal of the JV to reaccelerate here and I guess does that -- you know how much acceleration is being considered? Is it getting back to the original plan such that you wouldn’t be cutting from three to one rig? Would you go back to three rigs with the right financing partner? Because then that would protect the liquidity that you have, how are you guys thinking about that in terms of acceleration?

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Sure I think the answer is that regardless of whether we have a JV partner or not, we are still going to judge our decisions on when to drill more of our acreage based on what we think the returns of the wells are. And the point of the JV is potentially to bring in a capital that's lower than our own cost of capital and provide leverage and greater well returns. So to the extent that's true, it would allow us to accelerate and achieve greater returns.

However if commodity prices are still very low, we are still not going to go out and add a bunch of rigs and drill up and produce our depleting asset base. That doesn't seem like the best decision over the long term, regardless of whose capital you're using to do it. The point of the JV is to continue at this pace while using less of our own capital, keeping our own dry powder as large and as long as possible. And to accelerate when we see commodity prices that dictate us to accelerate, regardless of whether that's JV capital or not.

The structures that we are discussing with JV partners certainly allow for that acceleration and I think both parties would welcome that. But we are really focused on what's the best long-term strategy for the company. We continue to believe we have one of the best acreage positions and one of the best plays in the country. And it continues to be our belief that it doesn't make a lot of sense to sell all your oil and gas and accelerate in a time when prices are very low, unless you believe those prices are going to say that low for a long time which in our opinion they aren’t going to. So hopefully that answers your question.

David Deckelbaum - KeyBanc Capital Markets

Yeah, I guess there’s a lot of moving pieces. But it sounds like we will have some answers in the next couple of months. Matt, I think you responded to a previous question that you could see the mix being 65% gas in 2015. Does that contemplate that you guys just complete the current conde wells that are in process for completion? And then you know how many dry gas completions are added on top of that?

Matthew DeNezza - Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

It basically assumes, we don't complete the wet gas or condensate wells that are currently being deferred. And it assumes we basically complete an inventory of you know wells that are ready to go based on that dry gas activity from the one rig. So off the top of my head that's probably on the order of 12 wells over the course of the year.

David Deckelbaum - KeyBanc Capital Markets

And do you know what the average lateral length you intend to drill on those dry gas wells are?

Thomas Liberatore - Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

I think our average for the year is in the 7300 foot range.

Benjamin Hulburt - Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Yeah right around 7000 feet, David.

David Deckelbaum - KeyBanc Capital Markets

And the last one that I have is just more on geology, Tom maybe. You know you observed meaningful differences between the Harrison condensate acreage versus you know sort of the East Guernsey area? It seems like the well performance at least from the last batch of you know the Mizer Farms wells relative to some of the recent completions that seems you know fairly consistent?

Thomas Liberatore - Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

I think on the geological standpoint, you know our analysis in high-grading acreage is that moving north into Harrison County, about halfway through the county we believe you're still in the core area. And our Mizer Farms bed is really right on the line, where we think you leave the core area. They are materially different than what we’ve seen in Eastern Guernsey. I’d say the one thing that changed from our initial expectations were our thermo maturity bands which we have updated and we will update in the next presentation we put out.

We shifted slightly, I would say to the east making Mizer County area or the Harrison County Mizer pads slightly more liquids rich than we originally estimated. But other than that, we haven't seen a material difference between the Mizer pad in the Eastern Guernsey County. It would be our expectation that going any farther north, then that Mizer pad we would start to see a drop off in the performance.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2976346-eclipse-resources-more-down...

Eclipse Resources - More Downside Ahead, Despite Fresh Capital Raise
Mar. 5, 2015 10:56 AM ET | About: Eclipse Resources (ECR)
Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a short position in ECR over the next 72 hours. (More...)
Summary

Eclipse Resources reports big losses in the fourth quarter already.
Given that oil and gas prices have only slumped further, losses will only increase at current levels.
The massive equity issue and cut in capital budget expenditures provide some relief in the short term.
Despite a recent equity issuance, leverage could become a concern later in the cycle amidst a high cash burn rate.
Given the still large equity valuation in relation to the proven reserves, I remain extremely cautious and even bearish on the shares.

Investors in Eclipse Resources (NYSE:ECR) continue to be burnt as the company continues to lose a great deal of cash. While a recent equity raise has alleviated some leverage concerns, cash will continue to flow out of the door at the current trajectory.

Given these observations, very high break-even costs and the fact that the reserve base is relatively small I continue to be very cautious and have a negative stance on the shares.

Fourth Quarter Highlights

Eclipse Resources produced 123,800 Mcfe per day for the final quarter, as production increased by more than tenfold compared to the year before. In terms of oil-equivalent production this comes down to roughly 20,600 barrels per day. Nearly 75% of this production takes place in the form of natural gas wit NGL and gas making up the remainder.

Production revenues for the quarter came in at $50.4 million excluding a $19.7 million hedge gain. The trouble is that the company reported total costs of $101 million for the quarter including a $30.2 million impairment charge. Regular production costs came in at around $71 million resulting in a $20 million operating loss already, at a time when oil and gas prices held up relatively well.

This resulted in operating losses on top of which the company had to pay $13 million in interest expenses, for a net loss based on adjusted metrics of $33 million. Depreciation charges totaled some $37 million resulting in EBITDA of just $4 million.

Pro Forma Impact

Eclipse realized average natural gas prices of $3.37 per Mcf for the fourth quarter, excluding hedge gains. Ever since prices for natural gas have fallen to $.275 per Mcf based on benchmark pricing. Eclipse appears to be selling its gas at a discount compared to benchmark prices in the fourth quarter, implying that realizations could fall even further.

Applying a 30% discount to the current revenue base and revenues come in at just $35 million per quarter. Based on operating costs of $70 million and taking into account interest expenses, the company might be losing up to $50 million per quarter. EBITDA is actually seen negative based on these assumptions.

Note that this simplistic analysis is based on fourth quarter production levels, and while production might increase and interest payments might drop following a recent equity raise, the earnings picture remains far from rosy in my eyes.

Valuation, Balance Sheet And Reserves

Eclipse ended the quarter with just $67.5 million in cash and equivalents while the company had $414.0 million in debt outstanding. The $346 million net debt load is very large for the firm in relative terms. This follows the fact that the company is posting steep losses and negative EBITDA, while production remains relatively small.

To combat this situation, Eclipse has issued 62.5 million shares in January. The net proceeds of $434 million translate in to a modest net cash position of roughly $90 million based on the pro-forma results. Following this equity raise Eclipse has some 222 million shares outstanding which at $7 per share value equity in the business at $1.55 billion, or at around $1.45 billion excluding the modest net cash holdings.

Proven reserves came in at 356 billion cubic feet at the end of the quarter with a ¨PV-10¨ valuation estimate of just $510 million. This is just tiny compared to the current valuation.

2015 Plans, More Cash Outflows Foreseen

In 2014, Eclipse spend an unprecedented $809 million in capital expenditures, a huge amount for a company with such a size. For 2015 the company anticipates to cut this amount by roughly in half, supported by the cash being raised recently.

In the January presentation, Eclipse guided for production of 250,000-285,000 MMcfe per day, roughly twice the current revenue rate. On top of that the company guided for liquids production of 40% of total production, up from 25% at the current times.

This could result in the value of production increasing by roughly 3 times, although prices will fall of course big time versus the fourth quarter. It should be noted that this 2015 production guidance was based on anticipated capital expenditures of $640 million. By now the company has cut the size of the plan to some $400 million by now. Given the current deprecation charges which runs at $37 million per quarter, or $150 million per year, Eclipse will still see net investment cash outflows of potentially $200 million this year.

Add to that the fact that losses come in around $200 million per annum based on the current prices. While production will grow, it is unlikely that this will limit losses in a big way. Combined with the investment net cash outflows, I can still see Eclipse losing $400 million in cash this year.

Concluding Remarks

Eclipse is a total no go area for me. The reasons are quite simple. Unlike the vast majority of its competitors, Eclipse already posted large losses in the fourth quarter, at a time when many competitors were still posting profits. Worse, EBITDA was essentially flat in the fourth quarter which is quite disappointment.

The only bright spot is the fact that the company net holds cash at the moment following a colossal equity raise in January, alleviating bankruptcy concerns. The only trouble is cash continues to flow out at an aggressive pace as the company will run up a net debt load throughout the year at the current times.

Based on these observations and the fact that the enterprise valuation is roughly 3 times the present value of reserves, I remain extremely cautious. As a matter of fact depending on the cost of borrowing, I might initiate a short position in the stock.

here in Louisville oh I see 5 complete drilling rigs stacked up in 77 energy yard next to the new chk building. not a pleasant site.

6 now  all nomak rigs  [77 energy]

Chesapeake Energy Corporation Updates Its 2015 Operating Plan in Response to Low Commodity Price Environment

Mon March 23, 2015 4:30 PM|Business Wire  | About: CHK
   

OKLAHOMA CITY--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Chesapeake Energy Corporation (CHK) today announced it has reduced its 2015 capital budget (including capitalized interest of $500 million) to $3.5 $4.0 billion for 2015, which is a $500 million reduction from its previous guidance of $4.0 $4.5 billion. Chesapeake plans to operate 25 35 rigs in 2015, which represents a decrease of approximately 55% from an average of 64 rigs in 2014. The company intends to spud and connect to sales approximately 520 and 650 gross operated wells, respectively, in 2015 (a decrease from 1,175 and 1,150 wells in 2014). As a result, the company is lowering its targeted 2015 production to 231 236 million barrels of oil equivalent, or average daily production of 635 645 thousand barrels of oil equivalent, which represents 1 3% production growth over the prior year after adjusting for 2014 asset sales.

Doug Lawler, Chesapeakes Chief Executive Officer, said, We entered 2015 with a strong liquidity position and we intend to manage it prudently. In response to continued weak commodity prices, we are further reducing capital expenditures and associated drilling activity. As a result, we now forecast ending 2015 with approximately $6 billion in combined cash and borrowing capacity under our credit facility. With this budget revision we anticipate being free cash flow neutral by the end of 2015.

A summary of Chesapeakes updated guidance for 2015 is provided in the Outlook dated March 23, 2015, which is attached to this release as Schedule A.

Chesapeake Energy Corporation is the second-largest producer of natural gas and the 11th largest producer of oil and natural gas liquids in the U.S. Headquartered in Oklahoma City, the company's operations are focused on discovering and developing its large and geographically diverse resource base of unconventional oil and natural gas assets onshore in the U.S. The company also owns marketing and natural gas gathering and compression businesses. Further information is available at www.chk.com where Chesapeake routinely posts announcements, updates, events, investor information, presentations and news releases.

This news release and the accompanying Outlook include "forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are statements other than statements of historical fact. These statements include our current expectations or forecasts of future capital expenditures and capitalized interest, drilling activity and well connections, production and production growth, realized hedging effects and differentials, operating costs, cash and credit facility associated liquidity, marketing, gathering and compression net margin, net income attributable to noncontrolling interests, book tax rate, business strategy and objectives for future operations, and the assumptions on which such forward-looking statements are based. Although we believe the expectations and forecasts reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we can give no assurance they will prove to have been correct. They can be affected by inaccurate or changed assumptions or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties.

Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from expected results include those described under "Risk Factors in Item 1A of our annual report on Form 10-K and any updates to those factors set forth in Chesapeake's subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Current Reports on Form 8-K (available at http://www.chk.com/investors/sec-filings). These risk factors include: the volatility of oil, natural gas and NGL prices; write-downs of our oil and natural gas carrying values due to declines in prices; the availability of operating cash flow and other funds to finance reserve replacement costs; our ability to replace reserves and sustain production; uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of oil, natural gas and NGL reserves and projecting future rates of production and the amount and timing of development expenditures; our ability to achieve profitable or targeted results in drilling and well operations; leasehold terms expiring before production can be established; commodity derivative activities resulting in lower prices realized on oil, natural gas and NGL sales; the need to secure derivative liabilities and the inability of counterparties to satisfy their obligations; adverse developments or losses from pending or future litigation and regulatory proceedings, including royalty claims; the limitations our level of indebtedness may have on our financial flexibility; charges incurred in response to market conditions and in connection with actions to reduce financial leverage and complexity; drilling and operating risks and resulting liabilities; effects of environmental protection laws and regulation on our business; legislative and regulatory initiatives further regulating hydraulic fracturing; our need to secure adequate supplies of water for our drilling operations and to dispose of or recycle the water used; federal and state tax proposals affecting our industry; potential OTC derivatives regulation limiting our ability to hedge against commodity price fluctuations; impacts of potential legislative and regulatory actions addressing climate change; competition in the oil and gas exploration and production industry; a deterioration in general economic, business or industry conditions; negative public perceptions of us or our industry; limited control over properties we do not operate; pipeline and gathering system capacity constraints and transportation interruptions; cyber attacks adversely impacting our operations; and interruption in operations at our headquarters due to a catastrophic event.

In addition, disclosures concerning the estimated contribution of derivative contracts to our future results of operations are based upon market information as of a specific date. These market prices are subject to significant volatility. Our production forecasts are also dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rates from existing wells and the outcome of future drilling activity. Expected asset sales may not be completed in the time frame anticipated or at all. We caution you not to place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this news release, and we undertake no obligation to update any of the information provided in this release or the accompanying Outlook, except as required by applicable law.

SCHEDULE "A
MANAGEMENTS OUTLOOK AS OF MARCH 23, 2015

Chesapeake periodically provides management guidance on certain factors that affect the companys future financial performance.

Welcome to the great unwinding.  

Not to mention the possibilities of accidents due to cutting cost.

Summary

  • Chesapeake’s production guidance was revised down.
  • The company also cut its capital expenditure.
  • Following these changes, the company still expects to reach cash flow neutral by the end of the year.

Chesapeake Energy (NYSE:CHK) revised its capital expenditure, operating rigs, and projected output for 2015 lower. The company stated that this cutback is due to the weak oil and gas markets. These revisions, according to the company's CEO, should bring Chesapeake Energy to cash flow neutral by the end of this year. Despite these revisions, Carl Icahn increased his stake in this stock to nearly 11%. Moreover, the company still gets an averagerecommendation of "hold" among analysts. Let's review the changes the company announced.

In a recent company update, Chesapeake Energy announced a reduction in its capex by $500 million to an average of $3.25 billion.

Source: Data taken from Chesapeake Energy's website.

Considering the current climate in the oil and gas market, it makes sense to cut back on expenses and reduce operations until the oil market heats up again. This could also free up more cash to keep its operations running, thus avoiding the need to sell more assets to finance its operations. As of the end last year, the company had over $4.1 billion in cash and plans to end this year with $2 billion in cash. This cash, along with the $4 billion revolving loan facility, will keep its liquidity at $6 billion by the end of 2015.

Chesapeake Energy's decision to scale back its capital expenditure is something that many other oil and gas producers, such as AnadarkoPetroleum (NYSE:APC) and Devon Energy (NYSE:DVN), have been doing over the past several months. The company also revised its production lower by roughly 1.5%, as indicated in the table below.

Source: Data taken from Chesapeake Energy's website.

This revised production guidance is based on a 2.5% cut in oil yield and a 1.4% reduction in natural gas output. The outlook for natural gas liquids wasn't changed. Chesapeake Energy has revised its guidance in the past and could keep doing so as the year progresses. After all, back in 2014 the company revised output guidance five times. After accounting for the recent revised guidance, the company expects its production to drop by 9%; most of this fall is in its NGL operations.

Source: Data taken from Chesapeake Energy's website.

This outlook, however, doesn't account for the assets the company sold and plans to sell this year, such as its Cleveland Tonkawa assets. After taking into account the fewer assets the company has, its output will actually be 2% higher than last year. In the previous guidance, this estimate was a 4% gain year over year.

The company also provided new guidance about the number of rigs it will operate this year. In its last quarterly earnings report, Chesapeake Energy showed its plans to scale back its total number of operating rigs to 35-45. Back in 2014, the number of operating rigs was 64. Most of this decline will be in its Eagle Ford and Utica assets. But in a recent guidance update, the number of operating rigs was slashed again to 25-35. This time, Eagle Ford, Haynesville and Mississippian Lime assets took the biggest hits. Based on these cuts, Chesapeake Energy expects to reduce the average well cost from $6.1 million to $5.5 million.

Final Note

The company's recent steps are likely to maintain its stability, free up some cash, and improve its profitability. The downside of holding back production and expansion doesn't seem, at face value, to outweigh the importance of staying afloat in the current market conditions. Considering that the market expects the price of oil to pick up in the second half of the year, the company will have to weather this weak commodity climate for a few more months. (For more, please see "Is Chesapeake on the right path?")

Summary

  • The CEO of Schlumberger does not believe the drop in oil prices is due to global overcapacity.
  • Intnernational oil companies have had to "spend more to get less.".
  • OPEC spare capacity has been dwindling over the last quarter.

Every year, Schlumberger (NYSE:SLB), one of the two biggest oil service companies by market cap, presents at the Howard Weil Energy Conference. While about a dozen companies present at these conferences, the Schlumberger presentation has been particularly valuable every year because it gives excellent big picture insight on the industry as a whole.

Unsurprisingly, this year, Paul Kibsgaard, the CEO of Schlumberger, dedicated a good bit of his presentation to crude oil prices and global capacity. Kibsgaard does not believe the drop in prices is due to global overcapacity, but instead is simply a battle for market share. At first glance that might not seem like a very meaningful statement, but I believe it is. What Kibsgaard is saying is that crude oil supply remains as constrained as it did a year ago, but that OPEC, and particularly Saudi Arabia, is using its spare capacity to "test" geographies and methods of crude oil production. This suggests that the drop in crude oil prices will not be long-lived. This article will analyze that forecast, and I will give some of my own thoughts on the matter.

International Production Challenged

Chart courtesy of Schlumberger Investor Relations.

Between 2011 and 2014, demand for oil rose by, on average, a million barrels per day. International Production was pretty flat, but growth in North American production grew about the same volume. When one considers that available crude oil storage capacity in the US is at a multi-decade low, one could come to the conclusion that North American oil producers are the victims of their own success. But Kibsgaard suggests otherwise.

The drop in oil prices is therefore not primarily driven by global overcapacity, but is instead a result of the ongoing market share battle. This can be seen by the half-a-million barrels per day reduction in OPEC spare capacity in recent quarters, (...). The same volume of half-a-million barrels per day can also be seen in the build-up rate of global OECD stocks. The stock build-up is taking place all over North America. (...)

That is an interesting view, and Kibsgaard backs this up with the following data:

(click to enlarge)

Courtesy of Schlumberger Investor Relations.

Kibsgaard uses this data to back up his assertion. Over the last quarter, OPEC spare capacity has been drawn down from 4 million barrels per day to about 3.5 million barrels per day -- a fairly substantial drop in a short time. Perhaps more importantly, OPEC spare capacity as a percentage of global demand as low as it has been since the Arab Spring events of 2011.

If indeed OPEC is drawing down on its spare capacity to retain market share, then this price downturn could be fairly limited in duration. How limited? Well, if spare capacity continues dwindling at 500,000 bopd per quarter, then OPEC will run out of excess capacity in seven quarters. Of course, one quarter does not make a trend, and I can't emphasize that enough. Still, OPEC does seem to be drawing down on its spare capacity and I believe Schlumberger's industry insight has been actionable in the past.

Other Constraints

Despite the big drop in oil prices, Kibsgaard sees the same supply and demand dynamics at work as before. While North America has grown production impressively, the picture internationally is quite different. In most of the world, E&P companies must spend more to get less. Nowhere is that constraint more obvious than it is in the integrated, multinational E&Ps. The big integrated names serve as a microcosm to international oil production because these names spend a very big portion of capital expenditure on either offshore production or more remote, non-OECD locations.

(click to enlarge)

Courtesy of Seadrill Investor Relations, Howard Weil Conferece.

As we see above, the integrated E&Ps have had to spend more in order to get less as the years progressed. In the long run, either supply will become constrained again or the multinationals will become a lot less relevant in the future than they are now. Given the steep decline in U.S. rig counts, I believe that we will see the former, not the latter.

Conclusion

It will be interesting to see what happens to OPEC spare capacity in the first quarter of 2015. Schlumberger believes that the current oversupply is largely the result of a market share fight, which suggests that the company doesn't believe these low oil prices should last long.

As I mentioned before, one quarter does not equal a trend. While I'd like to believe that OPEC's spare capacity is dwindling, I'd also like to see another quarter of data. If OPEC spare capacity continues to decline at a good rate, I would take that as a bullish sign for oil prices.

Eclipse Resources Announces Revised Capital Budget, Production Guidance and Joint Venture Process Update

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:52 am EDT

Dateline:

STATE COLLEGE, Pa.

Public Company Information:

NYSE:
ECR

STATE COLLEGE, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Eclipse Resources Corporation (“Eclipse Resources” or “Company”) (NYSE:ECR) today provided an update to its 2015 Capital Budget, its first quarter 2015 estimated production and additional guidance on its operations in 2015. Highlights of the announcement included:

  • Eclipse Resources estimates that first quarter 2015 production averaged approximately 160 MMcfe per day, a 316% increase relative to the first quarter of 2014 and a 29% sequential increase over fourth quarter 2014 production
  • For the full year 2015, Eclipse Resources expects production to be between 180 MMcfe per day and 190 MMcfe per day representing production growth at the midpoint of this range of 154% over 2014 average daily production
  • Eclipse Resources’ Board of Directors has approved a capital budget of $352 million for 2015
  • Following discussions with various financial partners, Eclipse Resources has made the decision not to pursue a drilling joint venture at this time

Joint Venture Process:

Over the course of the last three months, Eclipse Resources has entered into discussions with several parties to explore the possibility of entering into a drilling joint venture on Eclipse’s current acreage position. After completing a thorough review and analysis of the potential options available and receiving numerous proposals, Eclipse Resources does not intend to enter into such an arrangement at this time.

Commenting on the joint venture process undertaken by the Company, Benjamin Hulburt, Chairman and CEO said, “While there was significant interest in forming such a venture from numerous parties, we have concluded that the more accretive course of action is not to enter into a drilling joint venture at this time. Given Eclipse Resource’s strong liquidity position following the completion of the $434 million private placement coupled with the currently undrawn $125 million revolver, we have decided to continue to develop our strong asset base ourselves until commodity prices recover.”

Operational Update:

Eclipse Resources also announced today its initial production estimate for the first quarter 2015 of approximately 160 MMcfe per day. This production represents a 29% increase over the fourth quarter 2014 and a 316% increase over the first quarter of 2014. The production mix during the first quarter was approximately 67% natural gas, 18% natural gas liquids and 15% oil. During the first quarter of 2015, Eclipse Resources turned 11 gross operated and 9 gross non-operated wells into sales for a total of 20 gross wells (13 net wells) to sales. Of these 20 gross wells, 13 wells are in the condensate type curve areas, 3 are in the dry gas type curve areas and 4 are in the rich gas type curve areas.

2015 Capital Budget and Guidance:

Eclipse Resources announced today that its Board of Directors has approved a revised capital budget of $352 million for 2015, representing a 45% reduction from its initial capital budget for the year, and a 57% decrease from 2014. The Company expects to spud approximately 19 net operated wells, and 2 net non-operated wells. The company expects to place 29 net wells (18 net operated wells and 11 net non-operated) wells into sales during the year.

For the full year 2015, Eclipse Resources expects total production to be between 180 MMcfe per day and 190 MMcfe per day. The midpoint of this guidance represents an approximately 154% increase over 2014.

         

First Quarter 2015

Second Quarter 2015

Full Year 2015

Production (MMcfe/d) ~160 170- 180 180 - 190
% Natural Gas 66% - 68% 62% - 64% 67% - 70%
% NGL 17% - 19% 18% - 20% 15% - 19%
% Oil 14% - 16% 17% - 19% 13% - 16%
Natural Gas Price Differential from NYMEX / Mcf(a)(b) $(0.60)-$(0.70) $(0.75)-$(0.85) $(0.70)-$(0.80)
Oil Price Differential from NYMEX WTI / Bbl(a) $(12.00) - $(14.00) $(12.00) - $(15.00) $(11.00) - $(15.00)
NGL Price as a % of WTI(a) 40% - 42% 37% - 42% 37% - 42%
Operating Expense / Mcfe((c) $1.30 - $1.40 $1.40 - $1.48 $1.35 - $1.45
Cash General & Administrative(d) $13 - $14 million $13.5 - $14.5 million $55 - $58 million
Capital Expenditures(e) $352 million
 

(a) Excludes impact of hedges
(b) Includes the cost of utilized firm transportation capacity
(c) Excludes DD&A, exploration and general and administrative expenses
(d) Excludes costs associated with rig terminations which will be booked as expenses in general & administrative
(e) Includes routine lease acquisition and land related expenses. Excludes land and producing asset acquisitions

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service