Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
Petro River Oil Corp. (the “
Company
”) is an independent energy company focused
on the exploration and development of conventional oil and gas
assets with low discovery and development costs, utilizing modern
technology. The Company is currently focused on moving forward with
drilling wells on several of its properties owned directly and
indirectly through its interest in Horizon Energy Partners, LLC
(“
Horizon
Energy
”), as well as
entering highly prospective plays with Horizon Energy and other
industry-leading partners. Diversification over a number of
projects, each with low initial capital expenditures and strong
risk reward characteristics, reduces risk and provides
cross-functional exposure to a number of attractive risk adjusted
opportunities.
The Company’s core holdings are in the Mid-Continent Region
in Oklahoma, including in Osage County and Kay County, Oklahoma.
Following the acquisition of Horizon I Investments, LLC
(“
Horizon
Investments
”) in December
2015, the Company has additional exposure to a portfolio of
domestic and international oil and gas assets consisting of highly
prospective conventional plays diversified across project type,
geographic location and risk profile, as well as access to a broad
network of industry leaders from Horizon Investment’s
interest in Horizon Energy. Horizon Energy is an oil and gas
exploration and development company owned and managed by former
senior oil and gas executives. It has a portfolio of domestic
and international assets. Each of the assets in the Horizon Energy
portfolio is characterized by low initial capital expenditure
requirements and strong risk reward
characteristics.
The Company’s prospects in Oklahoma are owned directly by the
Company and indirectly through Spyglass Energy Group, LLC
(“
Spyglass
”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Bandolier
Energy, LLC (“
Bandolier
”). As of January 31, 2018, Bandolier became
wholly-owned by the Company. Bandolier has a 75% working interest
in an 87,754-acre concession in Osage County, Oklahoma. The
remaining 25% working interest is held by the operator, Performance
Energy, LLC.
Effective September 24, 2018, the Company acquired a 66.67%
membership interest in LBE Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company (“
LBE
Partners
”), from ICO
Liquidating Trust, LLC, in exchange for 300,000 restricted shares
of the Company’s common stock. LBE Partners has varying
working interests in multiple oil and gas producing wells located
in Texas.
Recent Developments
Horizon Subscription Agreement
On February 25, 2019, the Company
executed a Subscription
Agreement, pursuant to which the Company
purchased 145.454 membership units in Horizon
Energy Acquisition, LLC
(“
Horizon Acquisition
”)
, representing an approximate 14.6% membership
interest in Horizon Acquisition,
for $400,000 (the
“
Acquisition of
Interest
”)
. Horizon
Acquisition is a company focused on oil and gas exploration
activities. As a result, the Company acquired an additional 5.63%
working interest in an international, offshore exploration project
in the North Sea, which is in addition to an 5.63% interest in the
same project indirectly held by the Company through its investments
in Horizon Energy.
In
connection with the Acquisition of Interest, the Company also
executed the Limited Liability Company Agreement for Horizon, which
provides the Company with the right to appoint one Manager to
Horizon Acquisition’s three-member Board of Managers. The
Company appointed Mr. Cohen, the Company’s Executive
Chairman, to the Board of Managers. Mr. Cohen purchased 36.363
membership units in Horizon Acquisition in a separate transaction,
representing an approximate 3.6% membership interest.
Creation of a New Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
On
January 31, 2019, the Company filed the Certificate of Designations
of Preferences and Rights of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
with the Secretary of State for the State of Delaware –
Division of Corporations, which it thereafter amended on March 13,
2019 (collectively, the “
Series A COD
”). The Series A COD
designates 500,000 shares of the Company’s preferred stock as
Series A Convertible Preferred, par value $0.00001 per share
(“
Series A
Preferred
”), each share with a stated value of $20.00
per share (the “
Stated
Value
”). Shares of Series A
Preferred
are not
entitled to dividends unless the Company elects to pay dividends to
holders of its common stock.
Shares of Series A
Preferred rank senior to the Company’s common stock and
Series B Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock.
Holders
of Series A Preferred have the right to vote, subject to a 9.999%
voting limitation (which does not apply to Scot Cohen), on an
as-converted basis with the holders of the Company’s common
stock on any matter presented to the Company’s stockholders
for their action or consideration; provided, however, that so
long as shares of Series A Preferred remain outstanding, the
Company may not, without first obtaining the affirmative consent of
a majority of the shares of Series A Preferred outstanding, voting
as a separate class, take the following actions: (i) alter or
change adversely the power, preferences and rights provided to the
holders of the Series A Preferred under the Series A COD, (ii)
authorize or create a class of stock that is senior to the Series A
Preferred, (iii) amend its Certificate of Incorporation so as to
adversely affect any rights of the holders of the Series A
Preferred, (iv) increase the number of authorized shares of Series
A Preferred, or (v) enter into any agreements with respect to the
foregoing.
Each
share of Series A Preferred has a liquidation preference equal to
the Stated Value plus all accrued and unpaid dividends. Each share
of Series A Preferred is convertible into that number of shares of
the Company’s common stock (“
Conversion Shares
”) equal to the
Stated Value, divided by $0.40 per share (the “
Conversion Price
”), which
conversion rate is subject to adjustment in accordance with the
terms of the Series A COD; provided, however, that holders of
the Series A Preferred may not convert their shares of Series A
Preferred in the event that such conversion would result in such
holder’s ownership exceeding 4.999% of the Company’s
outstanding common stock (the “
Ownership Limitation
”), which
Ownership Limitation may be increased up to 9.999% at the sole
election of the holder (the “
Maximum
Percentage
”); provided, however, that the
Ownership Limitation and Maximum Percentage do not apply to Mr.
Cohen. Holders of Series A Preferred may elect to convert shares of
Series C Preferred into Conversion Shares at any time.
Series A Financing
On
January 31, 2019 (the “
Closing Date
”), the Company sold
and issued an aggregate of 178,101 units of its securities, for an
aggregate purchase price of $3,562,015, to certain accredited
investors (the “
New
Investors
”) pursuant to a Securities Purchase
Agreement (“
SPA
”) and to certain debtholders
(the “
Debt
Holders
”) pursuant to Debt Conversion Agreements (the
“
Debt Conversion
Agreements
”) (the “
Offering
”). The sale of the units
resulted in net cash proceeds of approximately $2.7 million. The
units sold and issued in the Offering consisted of an aggregate of
(i) 178,101 shares of the Company’s newly created Series A
Preferred shares, convertible into 8,905,037 shares of the
Company’s common stock, and (ii) five-year warrants to
purchase 8,905,037 shares of Company’s common stock, at an
exercise price of $0.50 per share. Pursuant to the Debt Conversion
Agreements, the Debt Holders, consisting of Mr. Cohen and Fortis
Oil & Gas (“
Fortis
”), agreed to convert all
outstanding debt owed to the Debt Holders, amounting to $300,000
and $321,836, respectively, into units issued pursuant to the SPA.
In addition to the conversion of outstanding debt, the Company and
the Debt Holders also agreed to convert all accrued interest
totaling $18,853 and $62,523, respectively.
The
Offering resulted in net cash proceeds to the Company of
approximately $2.8 million, which net proceeds do not include the
amount of debt converted into units by the Debt Holders. The
Company currently intends to use the net proceeds to fund the
drilling of ten additional development and exploration wells in its
Osage County concession (the “
New Drilling Program
”), and a
large exploration venture in the North Sea, United Kingdom with
Horizon Energy Partners, LLC.
In
connection with the Offering, on January 31, 2019 Bandolier Energy,
LLC (“
Bandolier
”), a wholly owned
subsidiary of the Company, entered into Assignment of Net Profit
Interest agreements (the “
Assignment Agreements
”) with each
of the New Investors and Debt Holders, pursuant to which (i)
Bandolier assigned and transferred to the New Investors and Debt
Holders a 75% interest in profits, if any, derived from the ten new
wells the Company intends to drill pursuant to the New Drilling
Program, payments of which shall be made to the New Investors and
Debt Holders, pro rata, on a quarterly basis following the full
completion of the New Drilling Program, and (ii) in the event the
Company elects to drill additional wells on its Osage County
concession in the next two years, the New Investors and Debt
Holders shall have the right to participate in and fund the
drilling and production of the next ten wells on the same terms and
conditions set forth in the Assignment Agreements.
Senior Secured Debt Exchange
On
January 31, 2019, the Company entered into agreements (the
“
Secured Debt Conversion
Agreements
”) with Petro Exploration Funding, LLC and
Petro Exploration Funding II, LLC (together, the
“
Secured Debt
Holders
”), pursuant to which they agreed to convert
approximately $2.3 million and $2.8 million, respectively, of
outstanding senior secured debt (including accrued and unpaid
interest) (the “
Senior
Secured Debt
”) owed under the terms of their
respective Senior Secured Promissory Notes into 116,503 and 140,799
shares of the Company’s newly created Series A Preferred,
respectively (the “
Senior
Secured Debt Exchange
”). As a result of the Senior
Secured Debt Exchange, all indebtedness, liabilities and other
obligations arising under the respective Senior Secured Promissory
Notes were cancelled and deemed satisfied in full.
As
additional consideration for the conversion of the Senior Secured
Debt, the Company agreed to (i) reduce the exercise price of
warrants issued to the Secured Debt Holders on June 15, 2017 and
November 6, 2017 from $2.38 and $2.00, respectively, to $0.50 per
share of common stock issuable upon the exercise of such warrants,
and (ii) to extend the expiration date of such warrants to five
years from the Closing Date.
The
Company computed the fair value of the warrants directly preceding
the modification and compared the fair value to that of the
modified warrants with new terms. The fair value of the modified
warrants was lower than the fair value of the warrants preceding
the modification; therefore, no accounting treatment resulted from
the modification.
Acquisition of Membership Interest in LBE Partners,
LLC
On October 2, 2018, the Company, ICO
Liquidating Trust, LLC (“
ICO
”)
and LBE Partners, which owns various working interests in several
oil and gas wells located in the Hardin oil field in Liberty,
Texas, entered into a Membership Interest Purchase Agreement (the
“
LBE Purchase
Agreement
”),
effective September 24, 2018, pursuant to which the Company
purchased a 66.67% membership interest in LBE Partners from ICO in
exchange for 300,000 shares of the Company’s common stock
valued at $333,000 based on the market value of the stock on the
grant date. Both ICO and LBE Partners are managed by Scot Cohen,
the Company’s Executive
Chairman.
The
Company recorded the purchase of LBE Partners using the acquisition
method of accounting as specified in
ASC 805
“
Business Combinations.
” This
method of accounting requires the acquirer to record the net assets
and liabilities acquired at the historical cost of LBE Partners
because the Company determined that this acquisition was a related
party transaction.
The following table summarizes fair values of the net assets
acquired and liabilities assumed and the allocation of the
aggregate value of the purchase consideration, and non-controlling
interest:
Purchase
consideration:
|
|
Common stock
issued
|
$
333,000
|
Total
Purchase Consideration
|
$
333,000
|
|
|
Purchase
price allocation:
|
|
Cash
|
$
138,686
|
Prepaid drilling
costs
|
55,116
|
Oil and gas assets
– net
|
2,425,482
|
Liabilities assumed
– accounts payable
|
(19,198
)
|
Liabilities assumed
– asset retirement obligation
|
(355,800
)
|
Non-controlling
interest
|
(748,021
)
|
Contributed
capital
|
(1,163,265
)
|
Net assets
acquired
|
$
333,000
|
The following table summarizes, on an unaudited pro forma basis,
the results of operations of the Company as though the acquisition
had occurred as of May 1, 2017 and May 1, 2018 (the beginning of
each fiscal year). The pro-forma amounts presented are not
necessarily indicative of either the actual operation results had
the acquisition transaction occurred as of May 1, 2017 and May
1, 2018.
|
For
the Year Ended
April
30, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
$
1,645,170
|
$
300,342
|
$
1,975,630
|
Net income
(loss)
|
(5,105,107
)
|
50,643
|
(5,054,464
)
|
Loss per share of
common share - basic and diluted
|
(0.48
)
|
|
$
(0.48
)
|
Weighted average
number of common shares outstanding - basic and
diluted
|
17,772,293
|
|
17,772,293
|
|
For the Year
Ended
April 30,
2018
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
$
723,409
|
$
351,936
|
$
1,075,345
|
Net income
(loss)
|
(20,337,681
)
|
8,709
|
(20,328,972
)
|
Loss per share of
common share - basic and diluted
|
(1.24
)
|
|
$
(1.21
)
|
Weighted average
number of common shares outstanding - basic and
diluted
|
16,546,093
|
|
16,846,093
|
At
April 30, 2019 the non–controlling interest in LBE was as
follows:
Non–controlling
interest at April 30, 2018
|
$
-
|
Acquisition of
non–controlling interest in LBE Partners
acquisition
|
748,021
|
Contributions from
non–controlling interest
|
300,000
|
Non–controlling
share of net loss
|
(396,859
)
|
Non–controlling
interest at April 30, 2019
|
$
651,162
|
MegaWest Exchange Transaction
On January 31, 2018, the Company entered into an Assignment and
Assumption of Membership Interest with
MegaWest Energy
Kansas Corp. (“
MegaWest
”)
(the “
Assignment
Agreement
”), whereby the
Company transferred its interest in MegaWest in exchange for a 50%
membership interest in
Bandolier Energy LLC
(“
Bandolier
”) (the
“Bandolier
Interest”
) then held by
MegaWest (the “
Exchange
Transaction
”), as a
result of the Bandolier Acquisition, as defined below. The Exchange
Transaction followed the receipt by the Company of a notice of
Redetermination, as defined below, of MegaWest’s assets,
including MegaWest’s interest in the Bandolier Interests
(together, “
MegaWest
Assets
”), conducted
by
Fortis Property Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company (“
Fortis
”)
.
The Redetermination was conducted pursuant to the Contribution
Agreement, pursuant to which the Board of MegaWest was entitled to
engage a qualified appraiser to determine the value of the MegaWest
Assets and Bandolier Interests, and upon the completion thereof
(a “
Redetermination
”),
in the event the MegaWest Assets were determined to be less than
$40.0 million, then a Shortfall, as defined in the
Contribution Agreement, exists. As a result, the Company would
be required to make cash contributions to MegaWest in an amount
equal to the amount of the Shortfall
(the “
Shortfall Capital
Contribution
”). The
Contribution Agreement further provided that, in the event that the
Company was unable to deliver to MegaWest the Shortfall Capital
Contribution required after the Redetermination, if any, MegaWest
would have the right to exercise certain remedies, including a
right to foreclose on the Company’s entire interest in
MegaWest. In the event of foreclosure, the Bandolier Interest
would revert back to the Company.
In lieu of engaging a qualified appraiser to quantify the Shortfall
Capital Contribution, and in lieu of requiring MegaWest to exercise
its remedies under the terms of the Contribution Agreement, the
Company and MegaWest entered into the Exchange Transaction. As
a result, the Company has no further rights or interest in
MegaWest, and MegaWest has no further rights or interest in any
assets associated with the Bandolier Interests. Pursuant to
the Contribution Agreement and Assignment Agreement, the Company
continues to be responsible for a reimbursement payment to MegaWest
in the amount of $259,313, together with interest accrued thereon
at an annual rate 10%, which will be due and payable one year after
the date of the Assignment Agreement and has been included as a
payable since January 31, 2018.
As a result of the Redetermination, the Company recorded a loss on
redetermination of $11,914,204 reflecting the write-off of the
related assets, liabilities and non-controlling interests of
Fortis’ interest in MegaWest as shown below:
Assets
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
119,722
|
Accounts
receivable - real estate - related party
|
1,146,885
|
Accrued
interest on notes receivable - related party
|
1,390,731
|
Interest
in Bandolier
|
259,313
|
Notes
receivable - related party, current portion
|
26,344,883
|
Total Assets
|
$
29,261,534
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
$
74,212
|
Deferred
tax liability
|
3,775,927
|
Total Liabilities
|
3,850,139
|
|
|
Non-controlling
interest
|
13,497,191
|
|
|
Loss
on redetermination
|
$
(11,914,204
)
|
At the time the parties entered into the Contribution Agreement,
management anticipated that the market price for crude oil would
return to prices reached prior to 2015, and that additional wells
would be drilled, resulting in greater revenue from the Bandolier
Interests. Subsequent to the execution of the Contribution
Agreement, only two wells had been drilled as of January 2018. That
fact, together with the relatively low price of crude oil and the
anticipated delays in drilling additional wells to demonstrate the
value of the Bandolier Interests contributed to Fortis’
election to terminate the Contribution Agreement at the end of its
term, as amended. Had the market price of oil supported the value
of developing the Bandolier oil and gas properties at that time,
under the terms of the Contribution Agreement, Fortis would have
been required to fund the planned drilling program.
2.
|
Going Concern and Management’s Plan
|
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared
on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of
assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of
business. The Company has incurred significant operating losses
since its inception. As of April 30, 2019, the Company had an
accumulated deficit of approximately $56.2 million, had working
capital of approximately $170,000, and had cash and cash
equivalents of approximately $1.2 million. As a result of the
utilization of cash in its operating activities, and the
development of its assets, the Company has incurred losses since it
commenced operations. The Company’s primary source of
operating funds since inception has been debt and equity
financings. In addition, the Company has a limited operating
history prior to its acquisition of Bandolier. These
matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s
ability to continue as a going concern for the twelve months
following the issuance of these financial statements.
The
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments
relating to the recoverability and classification of asset amounts
or the classification of liabilities that might be necessary should
the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.
Management
is focusing on specific target acquisitions and investments,
limiting operating expenses, and exploring farm-in and joint
venture opportunities for the Company’s oil and gas assets.
No assurances can be given that management will be successful. In
addition, Management intends to raise additional capital through
debt and equity instruments in order to execute its business,
operating and development plans. Management can provide no
assurances that the Company will be successful in its capital
raising efforts. In order to conserve capital, from time to time,
management may defer certain development activity.
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements are prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the
United States (“
U.S.
GAAP
”) and include the accounts of the Company and its
wholly owned subsidiaries. All material intercompany balances and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Non–controlling interest represents the minority equity
investment in the Company’s subsidiaries, plus the minority
investors’ share of the net operating results and other
components of equity relating to the non–controlling
interest.
These
consolidated financial statements include the Company and the
following subsidiaries:
Bandolier
Energy, LLC; Horizon I Investments, LLC; and MegaWest Energy USA
Corp. and MegaWest Energy USA Corp.’s wholly owned
subsidiaries:
MegaWest
Energy Texas Corp.
MegaWest
Energy Kentucky Corp.
MegaWest
Energy Missouri Corp.
As a
result of the acquisition of membership interest in the Osage
County Concession in November 2017, Bandolier is now a wholly-owned
subsidiary of the Company and the Company consolidates 100% of the
financial information of Bandolier. Bandolier operates the
Company’s Oklahoma oil and gas properties.
As a
result of the acquisition of a 66.67% membership interest in LBE
Partners effective on September 24, 2018, LBE Partners is now a
subsidiary of the Company, and the Company consolidates the
financial information of LBE Partners with a non-controlling
interest in the remaining 33.33% membership interest. LBE Partners
has varying working interest in multiple oil fields located in
Texas.
Also
contained in the consolidated financial statements for the periods
ended April 30, 2019 and 2018 is the financial information of
MegaWest, which prior to January 31, 2018 was 58.51% owned by the
Company. The consolidated financial statements for the year ended
April 30, 2018 include the results of operations of MegaWest;
however, the assets and liabilities were written off in the year
ended April 30, 2018.
4.
|
Significant Accounting Policies
|
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during
the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
The
Company’s financial statements are based on a number of
significant estimates, including oil and natural gas reserve
quantities which are the basis for the calculation of depreciation,
depletion and impairment of oil and natural gas properties, and
timing and costs associated with its asset retirement obligations,
as well as those related to the fair value of stock options, stock
warrants and stock issued for services. While we believe that
management’s estimates and assumptions used in preparation of
the financial statements are appropriate, actual results could
differ from those estimates.
(b)
|
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents:
|
Cash
and cash equivalents include all highly liquid monetary instruments
with original maturities of three months or less when purchased.
These investments are carried at cost, which approximates fair
value. Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company
to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash
deposits. The Company maintains its cash in institutions insured by
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“
FDIC
”). At times, the
Company’s cash and cash equivalent balances may be uninsured
or in amounts that exceed the FDIC insurance limits. The Company
has not experienced any loses on such accounts.
As of
April 30, 2019, approximately $752,000 exceed the FDIC insurance
limits.
Receivables
that management has the intent and ability to hold for the
foreseeable future are reported in the balance sheet at outstanding
principal adjusted for any charge-offs and the allowance for
doubtful accounts. Losses from uncollectible receivables are
accrued when both of the following conditions are met: (a)
information available before the financial statements are issued or
are available to be issued indicates that it is probable that an
asset has been impaired at the date of the financial statements,
and (b) the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. These
conditions may be considered in relation to individual receivables
or in relation to groups of similar types of receivables. If the
conditions are met, an accrual shall be made even though the
particular receivables that are uncollectible may not be
identifiable. The Company reviews each receivable individually for
collectability and performs on-going credit evaluations of its
customers and adjusts credit limits based upon payment history and
the customer’s current credit worthiness, as determined by
the review of their current credit information, and determines the
allowance for doubtful accounts based on historical write-off
experience, customer specific facts and general economic conditions
that may affect a client’s ability to pay. Bad debt expense
is included in general and administrative expenses, if
any.
Credit
losses for receivables (uncollectible receivables), which may be
for all or part of a particular receivable, shall be deducted from
the allowance. The related receivable balance shall be charged off
in the period in which the receivables are deemed uncollectible.
Recoveries of receivables previously charged off shall be recorded
when received. The Company charges off its account receivables
against the allowance after all means of collection have been
exhausted and the potential for recovery is considered
remote.
The
allowance for doubtful accounts at April 30, 2019 and 2018 was
$0.
(d)
|
|
Oil and
Gas Operations:
|
Oil and Gas Properties
: The Company uses the full-cost
method of accounting for its exploration and development
activities. Under this method of accounting, the costs of both
successful and unsuccessful exploration and development activities
are capitalized as oil and gas property and equipment. Proceeds
from the sale or disposition of oil and gas properties are
accounted for as a reduction to capitalized costs unless the gain
or loss would significantly alter the relationship between
capitalized costs and proved reserves of oil and natural gas
attributable to a country, in which case a gain or loss would be
recognized in the consolidated statements of operations. All of the
Company’s oil and gas properties are located within the
continental United States, its sole cost center.
Oil and
gas properties may include costs that are excluded from costs being
depleted. Oil and gas costs excluded represent investments in
unproved properties and major development projects in which the
Company owns a direct interest. These unproved property costs
include non-producing leasehold, geological and geophysical costs
associated with leasehold or drilling interests and in process
exploration drilling costs. All costs excluded are reviewed at
least annually to determine if impairment has
occurred.
Long-lived
assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the historical cost carrying value of
an asset may no longer be appropriate. As of April 30, 2019 and
2018, management engaged a third party to perform an independent
study of the oil and gas assets. The Company recorded total
impairment of $984,774 and $1,733,932 to the consolidated
statements of operations for the years ended April 30, 2019 and
2018, respectively.
Proved Oil and Gas Reserves
: Proved oil and gas reserves are
the estimated quantities of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas
liquids which geological and engineering data demonstrate with
reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known
reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions. All of
the Company’s oil and gas properties with proved reserves
were impaired to the salvage value prior to the Company’s
acquisition of its interest in Bandolier. The price used to
establish economic viability is the average price during the
12-month period preceding the end of the entity’s fiscal year
and calculated as the un-weighted arithmetic average of the
first-day-of-the-month price for each month within such 12-month
period.
Depletion, Depreciation and Amortization:
Depletion,
depreciation and amortization is provided using the
unit-of-production method based upon estimates of proved oil and
gas reserves with oil and gas production being converted to a
common unit of measure based upon their relative energy content.
Investments in unproved properties and major development projects
are not amortized until proved reserves associated with the
projects can be determined or until impairment occurs. If the
results of an assessment indicate that the properties are impaired,
the amount of the impairment is deducted from the capitalized costs
to be amortized. Once the assessment of unproved properties is
complete and when major development projects are evaluated, the
costs previously excluded from amortization are transferred to the
full cost pool and amortization begins. The amortizable base
includes estimated future development costs and, where significant,
dismantlement, restoration and abandonment costs, net of estimated
salvage value.
In
arriving at rates under the unit-of-production method, the
quantities of recoverable oil and natural gas reserves are
established based on estimates made by the Company’s
geologists and engineers, which require significant judgment, as
does the projection of future production volumes and levels of
future costs, including future development costs. In addition,
considerable judgment is necessary in determining when unproved
properties become impaired and in determining the existence of
proved reserves once a well has been drilled. All of these
judgments may have significant impact on the calculation of
depletion expenses. There have been no material changes in the
methodology used by the Company in calculating depletion,
depreciation and amortization of oil and gas properties under the
full cost method during the years ended April 30, 2019 and
2018.
(e)
|
|
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets:
|
The
Company assesses the recoverability of its long-lived assets when
there are indications that the assets might be impaired. When
evaluating assets for potential impairment, the Company compares
the carrying value of the asset to its estimated undiscounted
future cash flows. If an asset’s carrying value exceeds
such estimated cash flows (undiscounted and with interest charges),
the Company records an impairment charge for the
difference.
(f)
|
|
Asset
Retirement Obligations:
|
The
Company recognizes a liability for the estimated fair value of site
restoration and abandonment costs when the obligations are legally
incurred and the fair value can be reasonably estimated. The fair
value of the obligations is based on the estimated cash flow
required to settle the obligations discounted using the
Company’s credit adjusted risk-free interest rate. The
obligation is recorded as a liability with a corresponding increase
in the carrying amount of the oil and gas assets. The capitalized
amount will be depleted on a unit-of-production method. The
liability is increased each period, or accretes, due to the passage
of time and a corresponding amount is recorded in the consolidated
statements of operations.
Revisions
to the estimated fair value would result in an adjustment to the
liability and the capitalized amount in oil and gas
assets.
(g)
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments:
|
The
Company follows paragraph 825-10-50-10 of the FASB Accounting
Standards Codification for disclosures about fair value of its
financial instruments and paragraph 820-10-35-37 of the FASB
Accounting Standards Codification (“
Paragraph 820-10-35-37
”) to
measure the fair value of its financial instruments. Paragraph
820-10-35-37 establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
U.S. GAAP and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. To
increase consistency and comparability in fair value measurements
and related disclosures, Paragraph 820-10-35-37 establishes a fair
value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques
used to measure fair value into three (3) broad levels. The fair
value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices
(unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The three (3)
levels of fair value hierarchy defined by Paragraph 820-10-35-37
are described below:
Level 1
Quoted market prices available in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting
date.
Level
2 Pricing inputs other than quoted
prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either
directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting
date.
Level 3
Pricing inputs that are generally observable
inputs and not corroborated by market data.
Financial
assets are considered Level 3 when their fair values are determined
using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar
techniques and at least one significant model assumption or input
is unobservable.
The
fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices
(unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. If the inputs used
to measure the financial assets and liabilities fall within more
than one level described above, the categorization is based on the
lowest level input that is significant to the fair value
measurement of the instrument.
The
carrying amount of the Company’s financial assets and
liabilities, such as cash, prepaid expenses, and accounts payable
and accrued liabilities approximate their fair value because of the
short maturity of those instruments.
Transactions
involving related parties cannot be presumed to be carried out on
an arm’s-length basis, as the requisite conditions of
competitive, free-market dealings may not exist. Representations
about transactions with related parties, if made, shall not imply
that the related party transactions were consummated on terms
equivalent to those that prevail in arm’s-length transactions
unless such representations can be substantiated.
The
Company applies the accounting standards for distinguishing
liabilities from equity under U.S. GAAP when determining the
classification and measurement of its preferred stock. Preferred
shares subject to mandatory redemption are classified as liability
instruments and are measured at fair value. Conditionally
redeemable preferred shares (including preferred shares that
feature redemption rights that are either within the control of the
holder or subject to redemption upon the occurrence of uncertain
events not solely within the Company’s control) are
classified as temporary equity. At all other times, preferred
shares are classified as permanent equity.
(i)
|
Derivative
Liabilities:
|
The
Company evaluates its options, warrants, convertible notes, or
other contracts, if any, to determine if those contracts or
embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives to be
separately accounted for in accordance with paragraph 815-10-05-4
and Section 815-40-25 of the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification. The result of this accounting treatment is that the
fair value of the embedded derivative is marked-to-market each
balance sheet date and recorded as either an asset or a liability.
The change in fair value is recorded in the consolidated statement
of operations as other income or expense. Upon conversion, exercise
or cancellation of a derivative instrument, the instrument is
marked to fair value at the date of conversion, exercise or
cancellation and then the related fair value is reclassified to
equity.
In
circumstances where the embedded conversion option in a convertible
instrument is required to be bifurcated and there are also other
embedded derivative instruments in the convertible instrument that
are required to be bifurcated, the bifurcated derivative
instruments are accounted for as a single, compound derivative
instrument.
The
classification of derivative instruments, including whether such
instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is
re-assessed at the end of each reporting period. Equity instruments
that are initially classified as equity that become subject to
reclassification are reclassified to liability at the fair value of
the instrument on the reclassification date. Derivative instrument
liabilities will be classified in the balance sheet as current or
non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the
derivative instrument is expected within 12 months of the balance
sheet date.
The
Company adopted Section 815-40-15 of the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification (“
Section
815-40-15
”)
to determine whether an
instrument (or an embedded feature) is indexed to the
Company’s own stock. Section 815-40-15 provides
that an entity should use a two-step approach to evaluate whether
an equity-linked financial instrument (or embedded feature) is
indexed to its own stock, including evaluating the
instrument’s contingent exercise and settlement
provisions.
The
Company utilizes a binomial option pricing model to compute the
fair value of the derivative liability and to mark to market the
fair value of the derivative at each balance sheet date. The
Company records the change in the fair value of the derivative as
other income or expense in the consolidated statements of
operations.
The
Company had derivative liabilities of $4,191,754 and $0 as of April
30, 2019 and 2018, respectively.
Income Tax Provision
The
Company utilizes the asset and liability method in accounting for
income taxes. Under this method, deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized for operating loss and tax credit
carry-forwards and for the future tax consequences attributable to
differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of
existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax
rates expected to apply to taxable income in the year in which
those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or
settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a
change in tax rates is recognized in the results of operations in
the period that includes the enactment date. A valuation allowance
is recorded to reduce the carrying amounts of deferred tax assets
unless it is more likely than not that the value of such assets
will be realized.
The
Company may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax
position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position
will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based
on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits
recognized in the financial statements from such a position should
be measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than
fifty percent (50%) likelihood of being realized upon ultimate
settlement.
The
estimated future tax effects of temporary differences between the
tax basis of assets and liabilities are reported in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets, as well as tax credit
carry-backs and carry-forwards. The Company periodically reviews
the recoverability of deferred tax assets recorded on its
consolidated balance sheets and provides valuation allowances as
management deems necessary.
Management
makes judgments as to the interpretation of the tax laws that might
be challenged upon an audit and cause changes to previous estimates
of tax liability. In addition, the Company operates within multiple
taxing jurisdictions and is subject to audit in these
jurisdictions. In management’s opinion, adequate provisions
for income taxes have been made for all years. If actual taxable
income by tax jurisdiction varies from estimates, additional
allowances or reversals of reserves may be necessary.
Uncertain Tax Positions
The
Company evaluates uncertain tax positions to recognize a tax
benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely
than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by
the taxing authorities based on the technical merits of the
position. Those tax positions failing to qualify for initial
recognition are recognized in the first interim period in which
they meet the more likely than not standard or are resolved through
negotiation or litigation with the taxing authority, or upon
expiration of the statute of limitations. De-recognition of a tax
position that was previously recognized occurs when an entity
subsequently determines that a tax position no longer meets the
more likely than not threshold of being sustained.
At April 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company had $0 and $0,
respectively, of liabilities for uncertain tax positions.
Interpretation of taxation rules relating to net operating loss
utilization in real estate transactions give rise to uncertain
positions. In connection with the uncertain tax position, there was
no interest or penalties recorded as the position is expected but
the tax returns are not yet due.
The
Company is subject to ongoing tax exposures, examinations and
assessments in various jurisdictions. Accordingly, the Company may
incur additional tax expense based upon the outcomes of such
matters. In addition, when applicable, the Company will adjust tax
expense to reflect the Company’s ongoing assessments of such
matters, which require judgment and can materially increase or
decrease its effective rate as well as impact operating
results.
The
number of years with open tax audits varies depending on the tax
jurisdiction. The Company’s major taxing jurisdictions
include the United States (including applicable
states).
ASU
2014-09, “
Revenue from
Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)
,” supersedes the
revenue recognition requirements and industry-specific guidance
under
Revenue Recognition (Topic
605)
. Topic 606 requires an entity to recognize revenue when
it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount
that reflects the consideration the entity expects to be entitled
to in exchange for those goods or services. The Company adopted
Topic 606 on May 1, 2018, using the modified retrospective method
applied to contracts that were not completed as of January 1, 2018.
Under the modified retrospective method, prior period financial
positions and results will not be adjusted. The cumulative effect
adjustment recognized in the opening balances included no
significant changes as a result of this adoption. Although the
Company does not expect 2018 net earnings to be materially impacted
by revenue recognition timing changes, Topic 606 requires certain
changes to the presentation of revenue and related expense
beginning May 1, 2018. Refer to Note 12 –
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
for additional information.
The
Company’s revenue is comprised of revenue from exploration
and production activities as well as royalty revenue related to a
royalty interest agreement executed in February 2018. The
Company’s oil is sold primarily to marketers, gatherers, and
refiners. Natural gas is sold primarily to interstate and
intrastate natural-gas pipelines, direct end-users, industrial
users, local distribution companies, and natural-gas marketers.
NGLs are sold primarily to direct end-users, refiners, and
marketers. Payment is generally received from the customer in the
month following delivery.
Contracts
with customers have varying terms, including spot sales or
month-to-month contracts, contracts with a finite term, and
life-of-field contracts where all production from a well or group
of wells is sold to one or more customers. The Company recognizes
sales revenue for oil, natural gas, and NGLs based on the amount of
each product sold to a customer when control transfers to the
customer. Generally, control transfers at the time of delivery to
the customer at a pipeline interconnect, the tailgate of a
processing facility, or as a tanker lifting is completed. Revenue
is measured based on the contract price, which may be index-based
or fixed, and may include adjustments for market differentials and
downstream costs incurred by the customer, including gathering,
transportation, and fuel costs.
Revenue
is recognized for the sale of the Company’s net share of
production volumes. Sales on behalf of other working interest
owners and royalty interest owners are not recognized as
revenue.
(l)
|
|
Stock-Based
Compensation:
|
Generally,
all forms of stock-based compensation, including stock option
grants, warrants, and restricted stock grants are measured at their
fair value utilizing an option pricing model on the award’s
grant date, based on the estimated number of awards that are
ultimately expected to vest.
Under
fair value recognition provisions, the Company recognizes
equity–based compensation net of an estimated forfeiture rate
and recognizes compensation cost only for those shares expected to
vest over the requisite service period of the award.
The
fair value of an option award is estimated on the date of grant
using the Black–Scholes option valuation model. The
Black–Scholes option valuation model requires the development
of assumptions that are input into the model. These assumptions are
the expected stock volatility, the risk–free interest rate,
the option’s expected life, the dividend yield on the
underlying stock and the expected forfeiture rate. Expected
volatility is calculated based on the historical volatility of the
Company’s common stock over the expected option life and
other appropriate factors. Risk–free interest rates are
calculated based on continuously compounded risk–free rates
for the appropriate term. The dividend yield is assumed to be zero,
as the Company has never paid or declared any cash dividends on its
common stock and does not intend to pay dividends on the common
stock in the foreseeable future. The expected forfeiture rate is
estimated based on historical experience.
Determining
the appropriate fair value model and calculating the fair value of
equity–based payment awards requires the input of the
subjective assumptions described above. The assumptions used in
calculating the fair value of equity–based payment awards
represent management’s best estimates, which involve inherent
uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment.
As a result, if factors change and the Company uses different
assumptions, the equity–based compensation expense could be
materially different in the future. In addition, the Company is
required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and recognize
expense only for those shares expected to vest. If the actual
forfeiture rate is materially different from the Company’s
estimate, the equity–based compensation expense could be
significantly different from what the Company has recorded in the
current period.
The
Company determines the fair value of the stock–based payments
to non-employees as either the fair value of the consideration
received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued,
whichever is more reliably measurable. If the fair value of
the equity instruments issued is used, it is measured using the
stock price and other measurement assumptions as of the earlier of
either (1) the date at which a commitment for performance by the
counterparty to earn the equity instruments is reached, or (2) the
date at which the counterparty’s performance is
complete.
The
expense resulting from stock-based compensation is recorded as
general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statement
of operations, depending on the nature of the services
provided.
Basic
net income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing net loss
attributable to stockholders by the weighted-average number of
shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted net
income (loss) per common share is determined using the
weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the
period, adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock
equivalents. For the years ended April 30, 2019 and 2018,
potentially dilutive securities were not included in the
calculation of diluted net loss per share because to do so would be
anti-dilutive.
The
Company had the following common stock equivalents at April 30,
2019 and 2018:
|
|
|
Series A Preferred
Shares
|
21,770,150
|
-
|
Stock
options
|
2,607,385
|
2,555,385
|
Stock purchase
warrants
|
11,128,706
|
2,223,669
|
Total
|
35,506,241
|
4,779,054
|
(n)
|
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements:
|
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02,
“Leases (Topic 842),”
which
will require recognition on the balance sheet for the rights and
obligations created by leases with terms greater than twelve
months. The new standard is effective for fiscal years and interim
periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2018, with
early adoption permitted. The Company plans to adopt this guidance
at the beginning of its first quarter of fiscal 2020 and plans to
utilize the transition option which does not require application of
the guidance to comparative periods in the year of adoption. While
the Company continues to evaluate this standard and the effect on
related disclosures, the primary effect of adoption will be
recording right-of-use assets and corresponding lease obligations
for current operating leases. The adoption is expected to have an
impact on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets, but not
on the consolidated statements of income or cash flows. However,
the ultimate impact of adopting ASU 2016-02 will depend on the
Company’s lease portfolio as of the adoption date.
Additionally, the Company is in the process of reviewing current
accounting policies, changes to business processes, systems and
controls to support adoption of the new standard.
In September
2016
,
the FASB issued
ASU 2016-13,
Financial
Instruments - Credit Losses
. ASU 2016-13 was
issued to provide more decision-useful information about the
expected credit losses on financial instruments and changes the
loss impairment methodology. ASU 2016-13 is effective for
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019 using
a modified retrospective adoption method. A prospective transition
approach is required for debt securities for which an
other-than-temporary impairment had been recognized before the
effective date. The Company is currently assessing the impact this
accounting standard will have on its financial statements and
related disclosures.
In June
2018, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No.
2018-07,
Compensation –
Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee
Share-Based Payment Accounting
. Under the new standard,
companies will no longer be required to value non-employee awards
differently from employee awards. Companies will value all equity
classified awards at their grant-date under ASC 718 and forgo
revaluing the award after the grant date. ASU 2018-07 is effective
for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018,
including interim reporting periods within that reporting period.
Early adoption is permitted, but no earlier than the
Company’s adoption date of Topic 606,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
(as described above under “Revenue Recognition”). The
Company does not believe the new standard will have a significant
impact on its consolidated financial statements.
In
August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-13,
“Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820):
Disclosure Framework—Changes to the Disclosure Requirements
for Fair Value Measurement”.
This update is to improve
the effectiveness of disclosures in the notes to the financial
statements by facilitating clear communication of the information
required by U.S. GAAP that is most important to users of each
entity’s financial statements. The amendments in this update
apply to all entities that are required, under existing U.S. GAAP,
to make disclosures about recurring or nonrecurring fair value
measurements. The amendments in this update are effective for all
entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and
interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company is currently
evaluating this guidance and the impact of this update on its
consolidated financial statements.
The
Company does not expect the adoption of any recently issued
accounting pronouncements to have a significant impact on its
financial position, results of operations, or cash
flows.
The
Company has evaluated all transactions through the date the
consolidated financial statements were issued for subsequent event
disclosure consideration.
The
following table summarizes the oil and gas assets by
project:
Cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, May 1,
2017
|
$
1,232,192
|
$
-
|
$
761,444
|
$
100,000
|
$
2,093,636
|
Additions
|
3,665,851
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3,665,851
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
(146,141
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(146,141
)
|
Impairment of oil
and gas assets
|
(972,488
)
|
-
|
(761,444
)
|
-
|
(1,733,932
)
|
Balance, April 30,
2018
|
3,779,414
|
-
|
-
|
100,000
|
3,879,414
|
Additions
|
1,307,720
|
2,431,419
|
-
|
-
|
3,739,139
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
(380,873
)
|
(283,974
)
|
-
|
-
|
(664,847
)
|
Impairment of oil
and gas assets
|
-
|
(984,774
)
|
-
|
-
|
(984,774
)
|
Balance, April 30,
2019
|
$
4,706,261
|
$
1,162,671
|
$
-
|
$
100,000
|
$
5,968,932
|
(1)
|
Other property consists primarily of four, used steam generators
and related equipment that will be assigned to future projects. As
of April 30, 2019 and 2018, management concluded that impairment
was not necessary as all other assets were carried at salvage
value.
|
Kern and Kay County Projects.
On February 14, 2018, the
Company entered into a Purchase and Exchange Agreement with Red
Fork Resources (“
Red
Fork
”), pursuant to which (i) the Company agreed to
convey to Mountain View Resources, LLC, an affiliate of Red Fork,
100% of its 13.7% working interest in and to an area of mutual
interest (“
AMI
”) in the Mountain View
Project in Kern County, California, and (ii) Red Fork agreed to
convey to the Company 64.7% of its 85% working interest in and to
an AMI situated in Kay County, Oklahoma (the “
Red Fork
Exchange
”). The fair value of the
assets acquired was $108,333 as of the effective date of the
agreement. Following the Red Fork Exchange, the Company and Red
Fork each retained a 2% overriding royalty interest in the projects
that they respectively conveyed. Under the terms of the Purchase
and Exchange Agreement, all revenue and costs, expense, obligations
and liabilities earned or incurred prior to January 1, 2018 (the
“
Effective
Date
”) shall be borne by the original owners of such
working interests, and all of such revenue and costs, expense,
obligations and liabilities that occur subsequent to the effective
date shall be borne by the new owners of such working
interests.
The
acquisition of the additional concessions in Kay County, Oklahoma
added additional prospect locations adjacent to the Company’s
106,000-acre concession in Osage County, Oklahoma. The similarity
of the prospects in Kay and Kern County allows for the leverage of
assets, infrastructure and technical expertise.
Acquisition of Interest in Larne
Basin.
On January
19, 2016, Petro River UK Limited, (“
Petro UK
”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the
Company, entered into a Farmout Agreement to acquire a 9% interest
in Petroleum License PL 1/10 and P2123 (the
“
Larne
Licenses
”) located in the
Larne Basin in Northern Ireland (the “
Larne
Transaction
”). The
two Larne Licenses, one onshore and one offshore, together
encompass approximately 130,000 acres covering the large majority
of the prospective Larne Basin. The other parties to the
Farmout Agreement are Southwestern Resources Ltd, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Horizon Energy, which acquired a 16% interest, and
Brigantes Energy Limited, which retained a 10% interest. Third
parties own the remaining 65% interest.
Under the terms of the Farmout Agreement, Petro UK deposited
approximately $735,000 into an escrow agreement
(“
Escrow
Agreement
”), which amount
represented Petro UK’s obligation to fund the total projected
cost to drill the first well under the terms of the Farmout
Agreement.
The
total deposited amount to fund the cost to drill the first well is
approximately $6,159,452, based on an exchange rate of 1.0 British
Pound for 1.44 U.S. Dollars. Petro UK was and will continue to be
responsible for its pro-rata costs of additional wells drilled
under the Farmout Agreement. Drilling of the first well was
completed in June 2016 and was unsuccessful. The initial costs
incurred by the Company were reclassified from prepaid oil and gas
development costs to oil and gas assets not being amortized on the
consolidated balance sheets.
Oklahoma Properties.
During the year ended April 30, 2019,
the Company recorded additions related to development costs
incurred of approximately $1.3 million for proven oil and gas
assets.
Texas Properties.
Effective on September 24, 2018, the
Company acquired a 66.67% membership interest in LBE Partners from
ICO in exchange for 300,000 restricted shares of the
Company’s common stock. LBE Partners has varying working
interest in multiple oil and gas producing wells located in Texas.
The Company recorded additions of approximately $2,430,000 for oil
and gas assets related to this acquisition.
Impairment of Oil & Gas Properties.
As of April 30, 2019,
the Company assessed its oil and gas assets for impairment and
recognized a charge of $984,774 related to its Texas oil and gas
properties. As of April 30, 2018, the Company assessed its oil and
gas assets for impairment and recognized a charge of $1,733,932
related to its Oklahoma and Larne Basin oil and gas
properties.
6.
|
Asset Retirement Obligations
|
The
total future asset retirement obligations were estimated based on
the Company’s ownership interest in all wells and facilities,
the estimated legal obligations required to retire, dismantle,
abandon and reclaim the wells and facilities and the estimated
timing of such payments. The Company estimated the present value of
its asset retirement obligations at both April 30, 2019 and 2018
based on a future undiscounted liability of $1,118,249 and
$728,091, respectively. These costs are expected to be incurred
within 1 to 42 years. A credit-adjusted risk-free discount rate of
10% and an inflation rate range of 1.5% to 2.66% were used to
calculate the present value.
Changes
to the asset retirement obligations were as follows:
|
Year
Ended
April
30,
2019
|
Year
Ended
April
30,
2018
|
Balance, beginning
of period
|
$
660,139
|
$
558,696
|
Additions
|
355,800
|
29,325
|
Change in
estimates
|
15,695
|
61,633
|
Disposals
|
-
|
-
|
Accretion
|
17,557
|
10,485
|
|
1,049,191
|
660,139
|
Less: Current
portion for cash flows expected to be incurred within one
year
|
(720,442
)
|
(413,794
)
|
Long-term portion,
end of period
|
$
328,749
|
$
246,345
|
During
the year ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company recorded
accretion expense of $17,557 and $10,485,
respectively.
Expected
timing of asset retirement obligations:
Year Ending April
30,
|
|
2019
|
$
720,442
|
2020
|
-
|
2021
|
-
|
2022
|
-
|
2023
|
-
|
Thereafter
|
397,807
|
Subtotal
|
1,118,249
|
Effect of
discount
|
(69,058
)
|
Total
|
$
1,049,191
|
7.
|
Related Party Transactions
|
Series A Financing
On
January 31, 2019, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase
Agreement with Scot Cohen,
the Company’s Executive
Chairman
, pursuant to which Mr. Cohen purchased $737,616 of
units in connection with the Series A Financing (the
“
Cohen
Investment
”). In addition, Mr. Cohen also converted
$300,000 and $18,583 of debt and accrued interest, respectively,
owed under the Cohen Loan Agreement, as set forth below, into units
pursuant to a Debt Conversion Agreement (the “
Cohen Debt Conversion
”). As a
result of the Cohen Investment and the Cohen Debt Conversion, the
Company issued Mr. Cohen an aggregate of 51,881 shares of Series A
Preferred and warrants to purchase 2,594,040 shares of the
Company’s common stock. For more information regarding this
transaction, see Note 1.
Acquisition of Membership Interest in LBE Partners
On October 2, 2018, the Company, ICO and LBE Partners entered into
the LBE Assignment Agreement and the LBE Purchase Agreement,
pursuant to which, effective September 24, 2018, the Company
purchased a 66.67% membership interest in LBE Partners from ICO in
exchange for 300,000 restricted shares of the Company’s
common stock to ICO. Both ICO and LBE Partners are managed by Mr.
Cohen.
For more information regarding this transaction,
see Note 1.
Related Party Loan
On June
18, 2018, Bandolier entered into a loan agreement with Scot Cohen
(the “
Cohen Loan
Agreement
”), pursuant to which Mr. Cohen loaned the
Company $300,000 at a 10% annual interest rate, due on September
30, 2018. The purpose of the Cohen Loan Agreement was to provide
the Company with short-term financing in connection with the
Company’s drilling program in Osage County, Oklahoma. On
December 17, 2018, the maturity date of the loan was extended from
September 30, 2018 to March 31, 2019. On January 31, 2019, the
Company and Mr. Cohen entered into a Debt Conversion Agreement,
pursuant to which Mr. Cohen agreed to convert all outstanding debt
and accrued interest owed under the Cohen Loan Agreement into
units, consisting of an aggregate of 15,000 shares of Series A
Preferred and warrants to purchase 750,000 shares of Company common
stock, sold and issued in the Series A Financing. As a result, the
Cohen Loan Agreement was terminated and deemed satisfied in full.
For more information regarding the debt conversion, see Note 1.
Upon conversion of the note, the Company recorded a total loss on
debt extinguishment totaling $94,388, consisting of $35,920 from
Mr. Cohen’s loan and $58,468 from Fortis Oil &
Gas.
June 2017 $2.0 Million Secured Note Financing
Scot
Cohen owns or controls 31.25% of Funding Corp., the former holder
of the senior secured promissory note in the principal amount of
$2.0 million (the “
June 2017
Secured Note
”) issued by the Company on June 13, 2017.
The June 2017 Secured Note accrued interest at a rate of 10% per
annum and was scheduled to mature on June 30, 2020. The June 2017
Secured Note is presented as “Note payable – related
party, net of debt discount” on the consolidated balance
sheets.
On May
17, 2018, the parties executed an extension of the due date of the
first interest payment from June 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018.
As consideration for the interest payment extension, the Company
agreed to pay Funding Corp. an additional 10% of the interest due
June 1, 2018 on December 31, 2018. The Company accrued an
additional $19,160 of interest expense related to this extension.
On December 17, 2018, the parties executed a second extension of
the due date of the first interest payment from December 31, 2018
to March 31, 2019.
On
January 31, 2019, the Company and Funding Corp. entered into a
Secured Debt Conversion Agreement, pursuant to which Funding Corp.
agreed to convert the outstanding balance due under the June 2017
Secured Note, amounting to approximately $2.3 million, into 116,503
shares of Series A Preferred. As a result of the Secured Debt
Exchange, all indebtedness, liabilities and other obligations
arising under the June 2017 Secured Note were cancelled and deemed
satisfied in full.
In
connection with the issuance of the June 2017 Secured Note, the
Company issued to Funding Corp. warrants to purchase 840,336 shares
of the Company’s common stock (the “
June 2017 Warrant
”). Upon
issuance of the June 2017 Secured Note, the Company valued the June
2017 Warrant using the Black-Scholes Option Pricing model and
accounted for it using the relative fair value of $952,056 as debt
discount on the consolidated balance sheet. On January 31,
2019, as additional consideration for the conversion of the amounts
due under the June 2017 Secured Note, the Company agreed to (i)
reduce the exercise price of the June 2017 Warrant from $2.38 per
share to $0.50 per share, and (ii) to extend the expiration date of
the June 2017 Warrant to January 31, 2024.
The Company computed the fair value of the
warrants directly preceding the modification and compared the fair
value to that of the modified warrants with new terms. The fair
value of the modified warrants was lower than the fair value of the
warrants preceding the modification; therefore, no accounting
treatment resulted from the modification.
As
additional consideration for the purchase of the June 2017 Secured
Note, the Company issued to Funding Corp. an overriding royalty
interest equal to 2% in all production from the Company’s
interest in the Company’s concessions located in Osage
County, Oklahoma, originally held by Spyglass, valued at $250,000,
which was recorded as contributed capital, since no repayment was
required, and debt discount on the consolidated balance
sheet.
The
debt discount is amortized over the earlier of (i) the term of the
debt or (ii) conversion of the debt, using the effective interest
method. The amortization of debt discount is included as a
component of interest expense in the consolidated statements of
operations. There was unamortized debt discount of $0 as of April
30, 2019. During the years ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the
Company recorded amortization of debt discount totaling $994,190
and $207,867, respectively.
As of
April 30, 2019 and 2018, the outstanding balance, net of debt
discount, was $0 and $1,005,812, respectively, and accrued interest
on the June 2017 Secured Note due to related party was $0 and
$174,065, respectively. As a result of the Secured Debt
Exchange, the June 2017 Secured Note was terminated as of January
31, 2019.
November 2017 $2.5 Million Secured Note Financing
Scot
Cohen owns or controls 41.20% of Funding Corp. II, the former
holder of the senior secured promissory note in the principal
amount of $2.5 million (the “
November 2017 Secured Note
”)
issued by the Company on November 6, 2017. The November 2017
Secured Note accrued interest at a rate of 10% per annum and was
scheduled to mature on June 30, 2020. The November 2017 Secured
Note is presented as “Note payable – related party, net
of debt discount” on the consolidated balance
sheets.
On May
17, 2018, the parties executed an extension of the due date of the
first interest payment from June 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018.
As consideration for the interest payment extension, the Company
agreed to pay Funding Corp. II an additional 10% of the interest
due on June 1, 2018 on December 31, 2018. The Company accrued
an additional $14,247 of interest expense related to this
extension. On December 17, 2018, the parties executed a second
extension of the due date of the first interest payment from
December 31, 2018 to March 31, 2019.
On
January 31, 2019, the Company and Funding Corp. II entered into a
Secured Debt Conversion Agreement, pursuant to which Funding Corp.
II agreed to convert the outstanding balance due under the November
2017 Secured Note, amounting to approximately $2.8 million, into
140,799 shares of Series A Preferred stock. As a result of the
Secured Debt Exchange, all indebtedness, liabilities and other
obligations arising under the November 2017 Secured Note were
cancelled and deemed satisfied in full.
In
connection with the issuance of the November 2017 Secured Note, the
Company issued to Funding Corp. II warrants to purchase 1.25
million shares of the Company’s common stock (the
“
November 2017
Warrant
”). Upon issuance of the November 2017 Note,
the Company valued the November 2017 Warrant using the
Black-Scholes Option Pricing model and accounted for it using the
relative fair value of $1,051,171 as debt discount on the
consolidated balance sheet. In relation to the financing, Scot
Cohen paid $250,000 for an overriding royalty interest from Funding
Corp. (as discussed below), which was recorded as additional debt
discount on the consolidated balance sheet. On January 31, 2019, as
additional consideration for the conversion of the amounts due
under the November 2017 Secured Note, the Company agreed to (i)
reduce the exercise price of the November 2017 Warrant from $2.00
per share to $0.50 per share, and (ii) extend the expiration date
of the November 2017 Warrant to January 31, 2024.
The Company computed the fair value of the
warrants directly preceding the modification and compared the fair
value to that of the modified warrants with new terms. The fair
value of the modified warrants was lower than the fair value of the
warrants preceding the modification; therefore, no accounting
treatment resulted from the modification.
As
additional consideration for the purchase of the November 2017
Secured Note, the Company issued to Funding Corp. II an overriding
royalty interest equal to 2% in all production from the
Company’s interest in the Company’s concessions located
in Osage County, Oklahoma, originally held by Spyglass (the
“
Existing
Osage County Override
”) then
transferred to Funding Corp. as inducement for the June 2017
Secured Note. The Existing Osage County Override was then acquired
by the Company from Mr. Cohen. As noted above, the override was
accounted for as a debt discount and amortized over the term of the
debt.
In connection with
the January 2019 debt restructuring, Funding II assigned the 2%
overriding interest to the Company.
The
debt discount is amortized over the earlier of (i) the term of the
debt or (ii) conversion of the debt, using the effective interest
method. The amortization of debt discount is included as a
component of interest expense in the consolidated statements of
operations. There was unamortized debt discount of $0 as of April
30, 2019. During the years ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the
Company recorded amortization of debt discount totaling $1,145,061
and $156,110, respectively.
As of
April 30, 2019 and 2018, the outstanding balance, net of debt
discount, was $0 and $1,354,938, respectively, and accrued interest
on the November 2017 Secured Note due to related party was $0 and
$120,548, respectively. As a result of the Secured Debt Exchange,
the November 2017 Secured Note was terminated as of January 31,
2019.
8.
|
Derivative Liabilities
|
As
discussed above in Note 1, on January 31, 2019, the Company sold
and issued an aggregate of 178,101 units, for an aggregate purchase
price of $3,562,015, to certain accredited investors and to certain
debtholders. The units sold and issued in the Offering included
five-year warrants to purchase 8,905,037 shares of Company common
stock, at an exercise price of $0.50 per share.
The
Company identified certain features embedded in the warrants
requiring the Company to classify the warrants as a derivative
liability; specifically, the warrants contain a fundamental
transaction provision that permits their settlement in cash at fair
value of the remaining unexercised portion of this Warrant at the
option of the holder upon the occurrence of a change in
control.
The
fair value of the derivative feature of the warrants on the date of
issuance and balance sheet date were calculated using a binomial
option model valued with the following weighted average
assumptions:
|
|
|
Risk-free interest
rate
|
|
|
Expected life of
grants
|
|
|
Expected volatility
of underlying stock
|
|
|
Dividends
|
0%
|
0%
|
As of
April 30, 2019, the derivative liability of the warrants was
$4,191,754. In addition, for the year ended April 30, 2019, the
Company recorded $525,352 as additional interest expense on the
statement of operations for the portion of the fair value of the
warrant that exceeded face value of the Series A Preferred shares
sold. The Company also recorded $41,410 as the change in the value
of the derivative liabilities.
On
January 31, 2019, the Company filed the Series A COD with the
Secretary of State with the State of Delaware, designating 500,000
shares of the Company’s preferred stock as Series A
Preferred. On January 31, 2019, the Company sold and issued 178,101
shares of Series A Preferred to the New Investors and the Debt
Holders in connection with the Series A Financing. In addition, the
Company issued an aggregate of 257,302 shares of Series A Preferred
to Funding Corp. and Funding Corp. II in connection with the Senior
Secured Debt Exchange. See Note 1 for additional information
regarding the Series A Financing and the Senior Secured Debt
Exchange.
In May
2018, the Company granted a total of 260,000 shares of restricted
common stock to Scot Cohen and Steven Brunner in exchange for a
reduction in cash compensation with a fair value of approximately
$325,000, based on the market price of the Company’s common
stock on the grant date. The shares vest monthly in equal
installments over a 12-month period. During the year ended April
30, 2019, the Company recorded stock-based compensation of $297,916
related to these grants.
As
discussed in Note 1, on October 2, 2018, pursuant to the LBE
Purchase Agreement, the Company issued 300,000 shares of restricted
common stock to ICO in exchange for a 66.67% interest in LBE
Partners.
As discussed in Note 13, on October 4, 2018, the Company settled
the dispute with its former landlord in exchange for the issuance
of 68,807 shares of Company common stock,
satisfying the
$75,000 liability related to the lease.
During the year ended April 30, 2018, the Company issued
15,145 shares of common stock related to a cashless exercise of
35,000 options.
Stock Options
As of
April 30, 2019, the Company has one equity incentive plan. The
number of shares reserved for issuance in aggregate under the plan
is limited to 120 million shares. The exercise price, term and
vesting schedule of stock options granted are set by the Board of
Directors at the time of grant. Stock options granted under the
plan may be exercised on a cashless basis, if such exercise is
approved by the Board. In a cashless exercise, the employee
receives a lesser amount of shares in lieu of paying the exercise
price based on the quoted market price of the shares on the trading
day immediately preceding the exercise date.
During the year ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company computed
the fair value of the option utilizing a Black-Scholes
option-pricing model using the following assumptions:
|
|
|
Risk-free interest
rate
|
|
|
Expected life of
grants
|
|
|
Expected volatility
of underlying stock
|
|
|
Dividends
|
0%
|
0%
|
The
expected stock price volatility for the Company’s stock
options was estimated using the historical volatilities of the
Company’s common stock. Risk free interest rates were
obtained from U.S. Treasury rates for the applicable
periods.
The following table summarizes the option activity for the years
ended April 30, 2019 and 2018:
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Prices
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
– April 30, 2017
|
2,599,682
|
$
2.13
|
Granted
|
25,703
|
1.40
|
Exercised
|
(35,000
)
|
1.38
|
Forfeited/Cancelled
|
(35,000
)
|
1.38
|
Outstanding
– April 30, 2018
|
2,555,385
|
2.14
|
Granted
|
52,000
|
1.45
|
Outstanding
– April 30, 2019
|
2,607,385
|
$
2.13
|
Exercisable
– April 30, 2019
|
2,566,619
|
$
2.14
|
The
following table summarizes information about the options
outstanding and exercisable at April 30, 2019:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Avg.
Life
Remaining
(years)
|
|
Weighted Average Exercise Price
|
$
1.30
|
12,000
|
0.04
|
12,000
|
$
0.01
|
$
1.38
|
1,795,958
|
7.34
|
1,775,192
|
$
0.95
|
$
1.40
|
25,703
|
8.64
|
25,703
|
$
0.01
|
$
1.50
|
40,000
|
9.25
|
20,000
|
$
0.01
|
$
1.98
|
5,000
|
7.27
|
5,000
|
$
0.00
|
$
2.00
|
457,402
|
6.17
|
457,402
|
$
0.36
|
$
2.87
|
65,334
|
5.81
|
65,334
|
$
0.07
|
$
3.00
|
51,001
|
6.66
|
51,001
|
$
0.06
|
$
3.39
|
12,000
|
6.89
|
12,000
|
$
0.02
|
$
6.00
|
10,000
|
5.74
|
10,000
|
$
0.02
|
|
132,987
|
4.52
|
132,987
|
$
0.63
|
|
2,607,385
|
|
2,566,619
|
|
Aggregate Intrinsic Value
|
$
-
|
|
$
-
|
|
During
the years ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the Company expensed an
aggregate $199,752 and $906,591 to general and administrative
expenses for stock-based compensation pursuant to employment and
consulting agreements.
As of
April 30, 2019, the Company has $33,089 in unrecognized stock-based
compensation expense which will be amortized over a weighted
average exercise period of 6.97 years.
Warrants
As
discussed above, on January 31, 2019, the Company sold and issued
an aggregate of 178,101 units to certain accredited investors and
to certain debtholders. The units sold and issued in the Offering
included five-year warrants to purchase 8,905,037 shares of Company
common stock, at an exercise price of $0.50 per share. The relative
fair value of the warrants were estimated to be $4,209,148 using
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
The
relative fair values of $952,056 for the 840,336 June 2017 Warrants
granted in conjunction with the June 2017 Secured Note Financing
and $1,051,171 for the 1.25 million November 2017 Warrants granted
in connection with the November 2017 Secured Note Financing (as
discussed in Note 7) were estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
The assumptions used for the warrants granted during the years
ended April 30, 2019 and 2018 were as follows:
|
|
|
Exercise
price
|
$
0.50
|
$
1.75 to 2.38
|
Risk-free interest
rate
|
|
|
Expected volatility
of underlying stock
|
|
|
Expected life of
grants
|
|
|
Dividends
|
0%
|
0%
|
The following table summarizes the warrant activity for the years
ended April 30, 2019 and 2018:
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average Life
Remaining
|
Outstanding
and exercisable – April 30, 2017
|
133,333
|
$
50.00
|
2.83
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Granted/Expired
|
2,090,336
|
2.15
|
2.57
|
Outstanding
and exercisable – April 30, 2018
|
2,223,669
|
5.02
|
2.57
|
Forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Granted/Expired
|
8,905,037
|
0.50
|
3.81
|
Outstanding
and exercisable – April 30, 2019
|
11,128,706
|
$
1.09
|
4.71
|
The
aggregate intrinsic value of the outstanding warrants was
$659,772.
10.
|
Non-Controlling Interests
|
For the
years ended April 30, 2019 and 2018, the changes in the
Company’s non–controlling interest was as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Non–controlling
interests at May 1, 2017
|
$
(699,873
)
|
$
13,310,343
|
$
-
|
$
12,610,470
|
Contribution of
real estate by non-controlling interest holders
|
785,298
|
(13,497,191
)
|
-
|
(12,711,893
)
|
Non–controlling
interest share of income (losses)
|
(85,425
)
|
186,848
|
-
|
101,423
|
Non–controlling
interests at April 30, 2018
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Contribution by
non-controlling interest holders
|
-
|
-
|
1,048,021
|
1,048,021
|
Non–controlling
interest share of income (losses)
|
-
|
-
|
(396,859
)
|
(396,859
)
|
Non–controlling
interests at April 30, 2019
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
651,162
|
$
651,162
|
As discussed above, as a result of the MegaWest Transaction and the
Membership Interest Assignment, the non-controlling interests in
Bandolier and Fortis’ interest in MegaWest were written down
to $0.
As of April 30, 2019, the Company had
approximately $30.8 million of net operating loss carryovers
(“
NOLs
”). The Federal NOLs generated
will not expire due to NOLs having an indefinite life as enacted in
the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The U.S. net operating
loss carryovers are subject to limitation under Internal Revenue
Code Section 382 should there be a greater than 50% ownership
change as determined under the regulations. Management has
determined that a change in ownership occurred as a result of the
Share Exchange on April 23, 2013. Therefore, the net operating loss
carryovers are subject to an annual limitation of approximately
$156,000. The Company impaired the NOLs at the time of the change
of ownership. Further the Company was limited in the recognition of
a pre-acquisition loss deduction due to a net built in loss in 2015
at the time of the ownership change.
The
income tax expense (benefit) consists of the
following:
|
For
the Year Ended
April
30,
2019
|
For
the Year Ended
April
30,
2018
|
Foreign
|
|
|
Current
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
Deferred
|
-
|
-
|
U.S.
Federal
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Deferred
|
(1,128,877
)
|
(4,217,889
)
|
|
|
|
U.S. State &
Local
|
|
|
Current
|
-
|
-
|
Deferred
|
(160,836
)
|
(478,113
)
|
|
|
|
Change in valuation
allowance
|
1,289,713
|
5,029,205
|
Income tax
provision (benefit)
|
$
-
|
$
333,203
|
In
assessing the realization of deferred tax assets, management
considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or
all of the deferred tax assets will be realized. The ultimate
realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation
of future taxable income during the periods in which those
temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the
scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future
taxable income and tax planning strategies in making this
assessment. Based on this assessment management has established a
full valuation allowance against all of the deferred tax assets for
every period, since it is more likely than not that all of the
deferred tax assets will not be realized.
The
Company’s deferred tax assets (liabilities) consisted of the
effects of temporary differences attributable to the
following:
|
|
|
U.S. net operating
loss carryovers
|
$
9,220,074
|
$
8,449,933
|
Depreciation
|
2,316,141
|
2,156,408
|
Impairment of oil and gas assets
|
5,087,832
|
4,851,566
|
Accretion of asset
retirement obligation
|
143,716
|
139,545
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
2,359,308
|
2,239,907
|
Total deferred tax
assets
|
19,127,071
|
17,837,358
|
Valuation
allowance
|
(19,127,071
)
|
(17,837,358
)
|
Deferred tax asset,
net of valuation allowance
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
|
|
|
Tax liability
– MegaWest
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
Total deferred tax
liability
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
The
expected tax expense (benefit) based on the statutory rate is
reconciled with actual tax expense benefit as follows:
|
For
the Year Ended
April
30, 2019
|
For
the Year Ended
April
30, 2018
|
U.S. federal
statutory rate
|
(21.00
)%
|
(27.50
)%
|
State income tax,
net of federal benefit
|
(2.99
)%
|
(3.12
)%
|
Change in
rate
|
0.00
%
|
(1.20
)%
|
Other permanent
differences
|
0.55
%
|
8.94
%
|
Change in valuation
allowance
|
23.44
%
|
24.50
%
|
Income tax
provision (benefit)
|
0.00
%
|
1.62
%
|
12.
|
Revenue from Contracts with Customers
|
Change in Accounting Policy.
The Company adopted ASU
2014-09, “
Revenue from
Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)
,” on May 1, 2018,
using the modified retrospective method applied to contracts that
were not completed as of May 1, 2018. Refer to Note 4
–
Significant Accounting
Policies
for additional information.
Exploration and Production.
There were no significant
changes to the timing or valuation of revenue recognized for sales
of production from exploration and production
activities.
Disaggregation of Revenue from Contracts with Customers.
The
following table disaggregates revenue by significant product type
for the year ended April 30, 2019 and 2018:
|
For the Year
Ended
April 30,
2019
|
For the Year
Ended
April 30,
2018
|
Oil
sales
|
$
1,576,432
|
$
713,109
|
Natural gas
sales
|
45,645
|
10,300
|
Royalty
revenue
|
23,093
|
-
|
Total revenue from
customers
|
$
1,645,170
|
$
723,409
|
There
were no significant contract liabilities or transaction price
allocations to any remaining performance obligations as of April
30, 2019 and 2018.
13.
|
Contingency and Contractual Obligations
|
Pending Litigation
(a) In January 2010, the Company experienced a flood in its Calgary
office premises as a result of a broken water pipe. There was
significant damage to the premises, rendering them unusable until
the landlord had completed remediation. Pursuant to the lease
contract, the Company asserted that rent should be abated during
the remediation process and accordingly, the Company did not pay
any rent after December 2009. During the remediation process, the
Company engaged an independent environmental testing company to
test for air quality and for the existence of other potentially
hazardous conditions. The testing revealed the existence of
potentially hazardous mold and the consultant provided specific
written instructions for the effective remediation of the premises.
During the remediation process, the landlord did not follow the
consultant’s instructions and correct the potentially
hazardous mold situation, and subsequently in June 2010 gave notice
and declared the premises to be ready for occupancy. The Company
re-engaged the consultant to re-test the premises and the testing
results again revealed the presence of potentially hazardous mold.
The Company determined that the premises were not fit for
re-occupancy and considered the landlord to be in default of the
lease. The Landlord subsequently terminated the lease.
On January 30, 2014, the landlord filed a Statement of Claim
against the Company for rental arrears in the amount aggregating
CAD $759,000 (approximately USD $564,000 as of April 30, 2019). The
Company filed a defense and on October 20, 2014, it filed a summary
judgment application stating that the landlord’s claim is
barred, as it was commenced outside the 2-year statute of
limitation period under the Alberta Limitations Act. The landlord
subsequently filed a cross-application to amend its Statement of
Claim to add a claim for loss of prospective rent in an amount of
CAD $665,000 (approximately USD $494,000 as of April 30, 2018). The
applications were heard on June 25, 2015
and the court
allowed both the Company’s summary judgment application and
the landlord’s amendment application. Both of these orders
were appealed though two levels of the Alberta courts and the
appeals were dismissed at both levels. The net effect is that the
landlord's claim for loss of prospective rent is to proceed.
On October
4, 2018, the Company and the landlord entered into a settlement
agreement under which all actions by the landlord and the Company
were dismissed for a payment by the Company to the landlord of
68,807 shares of common stock.
(b) In September 2013, the Company was notified by the Railroad
Commission of Texas (the “
Railroad
Commission
”) that the
Company was not in compliance with regulations promulgated by the
Railroad Commission. The Company was therefore deemed to have lost
its corporate privileges within the State of Texas and as a result,
all wells within the state would have to be plugged. The Railroad
Commission therefore collected $25,000 from the Company, which was
originally deposited with the Railroad Commission, to cover a
portion of the estimated costs of $88,960 to plug the wells. In
addition to the above, the Railroad Commission also reserved its
right to separately seek any remedies against the Company resulting
from its noncompliance.
(c) On August 11, 2014, Martha Donelson and John Friend amended
their complaint in an existing lawsuit by filing a class action
complaint styled:
Martha Donelson and John
Friend, et al. v. United States of America, Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs and Devon Energy Production, LP,
et al.,
Case No.
14-CV-316-JHP-TLW, United States District Court for the Northern
District of Oklahoma (the “
Proceeding
”). The plaintiffs added as defendants
twenty-seven (27) specifically named operators, including
Spyglass, as well as all Osage County lessees and operators
who have obtained a concession agreement, lease or drilling permit
approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs
(“
BIA
”) in
Osage County allegedly in violation of National Environmental
Policy Act (“
NEPA
”). Plaintiffs seek a declaratory
judgment that the BIA improperly approved oil and gas leases,
concession agreements and drilling permits prior to August 12,
2014, without satisfying the BIA’s obligations under federal
regulations or NEPA, and seek a determination that such oil and gas
leases, concession agreements and drilling permits are
void
ab initio
. Plaintiffs are seeking damages against the
defendants for alleged nuisance, trespass, negligence and unjust
enrichment. The potential consequences of such complaint could
jeopardize the corresponding
leases.
On
October 7, 2014, Spyglass, along with other defendants, filed a
Motion to Dismiss the August 11, 2014 Amended Complaint on various
procedural and legal grounds. Following the significant briefing,
the Court, on March 31, 2016, granted the Motion to Dismiss as to
all defendants and entered a judgment in favor of the defendants
against the plaintiffs. On April 14, 2016, Spyglass with the other
defendants, filed a Motion seeking its attorneys’ fees and
costs. The motion remains pending. On April 28, 2016, the
Plaintiffs filed three motions: a Motion to Amend or Alter the
Judgment; a Motion to Amend the Complaint; and a Motion to Vacate
Order. On November 23, 2016, the Court denied all three of
Plaintiffs’ motions. On December 6, 2016, the Plaintiffs
filed a Notice of Appeal to the Tenth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
That
appeal is pending as of the filing date of these financial
statements. There is no specific timeline by which the Court of
Appeals must render a ruling. Spyglass intends to continue to
vigorously defend its interest in this matte
r.
(d) MegaWest Energy Missouri Corp. (“
MegaWest
Missouri
”), a wholly
owned subsidiary of the Company, is involved in two cases related
to oil leases in West Central, Missouri. The first case
(
James Long
and Jodeane Long v. MegaWest Energy Missouri and Petro River Oil
Corp.
, case number
13B4-CV00019)
is a case for unlawful
detainer, pursuant to which the plaintiffs contend that MegaWest
Missouri oil and gas lease has expired and MegaWest Missouri is
unlawfully possessing the plaintiffs’ real property by
asserting that the leases remain in effect. The case was
originally filed in Vernon County, Missouri on September 20,
2013. MegaWest Missouri filed an Answer and Counterclaims on
November 26, 2013 and the plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss the
counterclaims. MegaWest Missouri filed a motion for Change of Judge
and Change of Venue and the case was transferred to Barton County,
Missouri
.
In
September 2015, the parties reached a full and final settlement of
the claims and allegations related to the lease
agreements.
[add any subsequent events in prior to filing]
15.
|
Supplemental Information on Oil and Gas Operations
(Unaudited)
|
The
Company retains qualified independent reserves evaluators to
evaluate the Company’s proved oil reserves. For the year
ended April 30, 2019, the reports by Cawley, Gillespie &
Associate, Inc. (“
CGA
”) covered the percentage
interest of the Company’s proved oil reserves. For the year
ended April 30, 2018, the reports by Cawley, Gillespie &
Associate, Inc. (“
CGA
”) covered 75% of the
Company’s proved oil reserves.
Proved
oil and natural gas reserves, as defined within the SEC Rule
4-10(a)(22) of Regulation S-X, are those quantities of oil and gas,
which, by analysis of geoscience and engineering data can be
estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible
from a given date forward from known reservoirs, and under existing
economic conditions, operating methods and government regulations
prior to the time of which contracts providing the right to operate
expire, unless evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably
certain, regardless of whether determinable or probabilistic
methods are used for the estimation. The project to extract the
hydrocarbons must have commenced or the operator must be reasonably
certain that it will commence the project within a reasonable time.
Developed oil and natural gas reserves are reserves that can be
expected to be recovered from existing wells with existing
equipment and operating methods or in which the cost of the
required equipment is relatively minor compared to the cost of a
new well; and through installed extraction equipment and
infrastructure operational at the time of the reserves estimate is
the extraction is by means not involving a well. Estimates of the
Company’s oil reserves are subject to uncertainty and will
change as additional information regarding producing fields and
technology becomes available and as future economic and operating
conditions change.
The
following tables summarize the Company’s proved developed and
undeveloped reserves within the United States, net of royalties, as
of April 30, 2019 and 2018:
Oil
(MBbls)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
reserves as at May 1
|
496
|
167
|
Extensions,
acquisitions and discoveries
|
-
|
-
|
Purchase
of minerals
|
69
|
-
|
Production
|
(30
)
|
(12
)
|
Revisions
of prior estimates
|
(168
)
|
341
|
Total
Proved reserves as at April 30
|
368
|
496
|
Oil
(MBbls)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
developed producing
|
196
|
214
|
Non-producing
|
28
|
30
|
Proved
undeveloped
|
144
|
252
|
Total
Proved reserves as at April 30
|
368
|
496
|
Gas
(MCFs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved reserves as
at May 1
|
511
|
279
|
Extensions,
acquisitions and discoveries
|
-
|
-
|
Dispositions
|
-
|
-
|
Production
|
(22
)
|
(6
)
|
Revisions of prior
estimates
|
186
|
238
|
Total Proved
reserves as at April 30
|
675
|
511
|
Gas
(MCFs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved developed
producing
|
334
|
137
|
Non-producing
|
28
|
25
|
Proved
undeveloped
|
313
|
349
|
Total Proved
reserves as at April 30
|
675
|
511
|
Capitalized Costs
Related to Oil and Gas Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
properties
|
$
17,328,196
|
$
12,729,430
|
Unproved
properties
|
100,000
|
100,000
|
|
17,428,196
|
12,829,430
|
Less: accumulated
depletion and impairment
|
(11,459,264
)
|
(8,950,016
)
|
|
$
5,968,932
|
$
3,879,414
|
Costs Incurred in
Oil and Gas Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development
(1)
|
$
1,313,657
|
$
3,665,851
|
Exploration
|
-
|
-
|
Acquisition
|
2,425,482
|
|
|
$
3,739,139
|
$
3,665,851
|
(1)
The above
development oil and gas costs includes the oil and gas assets
totaling $2,425,482 acquired through the LBE Partners
acquisition.
The
following standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows
from proved oil reserves has been computed using the average
first-day-of-the-month price during the previous 12-month period,
costs as at the balance sheet date and year-end statutory income
tax rates. A discount factor of 10% has been applied in determining
the standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows. The
Company does not believe that the standardized measure of
discounted future net cash flows will be representative of actual
future net cash flows and should not be considered to represent the
fair value of the oil properties. Actual net cash flows will differ
from the presented estimated future net cash flows due to several
factors including:
|
●
|
Future
production will include production not only from proved properties,
but may also include production from probable and possible
reserves;
|
|
●
|
Future
production of oil and natural gas from proved properties may differ
from reserves estimated;
|
|
●
|
Future
production rates may vary from those estimated;
|
|
●
|
Future
rather than average first-day-of-the-month prices during the
previous 12-month period and costs as at the balance sheet date
will apply;
|
|
●
|
Economic
factors such as changes to interest rates, income tax rates,
regulatory and fiscal environments and operating conditions cannot
be determined with certainty;
|
|
●
|
Future
estimated income taxes do not take into account the effects of
future exploration expenditures; and
|
|
●
|
Future
development and asset retirement obligations may differ from those
estimated.
|
Future
net revenues, development, production and restoration costs have
been based upon the estimates referred to above. The following
tables summarize the Company’s future net cash flows relating
to proved oil reserves based on the standardized measure as
prescribed in FASB ASC Topic 932 - “
Extractive Activities - Oil and
Gas
”:
Future cash flows
relating to proved reserves:
|
|
|
Future cash
inflows
|
$
24,636,000
|
$
30,259,000
|
Future operating
costs
|
(8,923,000
)
|
(8,239,000
)
|
Future development
costs
|
(1,351,000
)
|
(1,759,000
)
|
Future income
taxes
|
(1,749,000
)
|
(2,147,000
)
|
Future net cash
flows
|
12,613,000
|
18,114,000
|
10% discount
factor
|
(5,684,000
)
|
(8,133,000
)
|
Standardized
measure
|
$
6,929,000
|
$
9,981,000
|
Summary of Changes in Standardized Measure of Discounted Future Net
Cash Flows
The
following table summarizes the principal sources of changes in
standardized measure of discounted future estimated net cash flows
at 10% per annum for the years ended April 30, 2019 and
2018:
|
|
|
Standardized
measure, beginning of year
|
$
9,981,000
|
$
2,024,000
|
Sales
of oil produced, net of production costs
|
2,534,000
|
3,070,000
|
Net
changes in sales and transfer prices and in production costs and
production costs related to future production
|
(946,000
)
|
(3,091,000
)
|
Previously
estimated development costs incurred during the period
|
-
|
-
|
Changes
in future development costs
|
(408,000
)
|
1,144,000
|
Revisions
of previous quantity estimates due to prices and
performance
|
(671,000
)
|
5,216,000
|
Accretion
of discount
|
69,000
|
100,000
|
Discoveries,
net future production and development costs associated with these
extensions and discoveries
|
-
|
-
|
Purchases
and sales of minerals in place
|
2,839,000
|
-
|
Timing
and other
|
(6,469,000
)
|
1,518,000
|
Standardized
measure, end of year
|
$
6,929,000
|
$
9,981,000
|