e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 1-12074
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
72-1235413 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
|
625 E. Kaliste Saloom Road
|
|
70508 |
Lafayette, Louisiana
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) |
|
|
Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (337) 237-0410
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
As of May 5, 2009, there were 39,945,866 shares of the registrants Common Stock, par value $.01
per share, outstanding.
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(In thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
(Note 1) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
130,201 |
|
|
$ |
68,137 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
113,085 |
|
|
|
151,641 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
24,904 |
|
|
|
136,072 |
|
Current income tax receivable |
|
|
3,775 |
|
|
|
31,183 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
15,901 |
|
|
|
35,675 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
1,084 |
|
|
|
1,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
288,950 |
|
|
|
424,121 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil and gas properties United States full cost method of accounting: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved, net of accumulated depreciation, depletion and
amortization of $4,165,931 and $3,766,676, respectively |
|
|
881,028 |
|
|
|
1,130,583 |
|
Unevaluated |
|
|
450,291 |
|
|
|
493,738 |
|
Building and land, net |
|
|
5,579 |
|
|
|
5,615 |
|
Fixed assets, net |
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
|
5,326 |
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
45,890 |
|
|
|
46,620 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
9,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,685,816 |
|
|
$ |
2,106,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable to vendors |
|
$ |
120,276 |
|
|
$ |
144,016 |
|
Undistributed oil and gas proceeds |
|
|
14,208 |
|
|
|
37,882 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
3,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
34,990 |
|
|
|
32,416 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
64,248 |
|
|
|
70,709 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
11,056 |
|
|
|
15,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
248,128 |
|
|
|
300,782 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
825,000 |
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
70,255 |
|
|
|
193,924 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
194,522 |
|
|
|
186,146 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
1,221 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
11,941 |
|
|
|
11,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,325,102 |
|
|
|
1,518,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stone Energy Corporation stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value; authorized 100,000,000 shares;
issued 39,415,691 and 39,430,637 shares, respectively |
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
394 |
|
Treasury stock (16,582 shares, respectively, at cost) |
|
|
(860 |
) |
|
|
(860 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
1,258,511 |
|
|
|
1,257,633 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(987,552 |
) |
|
|
(754,987 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
90,107 |
|
|
|
84,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stone Energy Corporation stockholders equity |
|
|
360,600 |
|
|
|
587,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
360,714 |
|
|
|
587,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,685,816 |
|
|
$ |
2,106,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this balance sheet.
1
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Operating revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil production |
|
$ |
60,202 |
|
|
$ |
122,707 |
|
Gas production |
|
|
69,277 |
|
|
|
80,526 |
|
Derivative income, net |
|
|
2,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenue |
|
|
132,401 |
|
|
|
203,233 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease operating expenses |
|
|
58,154 |
|
|
|
30,253 |
|
Production taxes |
|
|
1,040 |
|
|
|
1,400 |
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
60,618 |
|
|
|
63,387 |
|
Write-down of oil and gas properties |
|
|
340,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
8,377 |
|
|
|
4,368 |
|
Salaries, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
11,661 |
|
|
|
10,256 |
|
Incentive compensation expense |
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
1,018 |
|
Impairment of inventory |
|
|
5,923 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative expenses, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
486,076 |
|
|
|
110,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(353,675 |
) |
|
|
92,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income) expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
5,166 |
|
|
|
3,859 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
(4,914 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
(1,402 |
) |
|
|
(1,041 |
) |
Other expense |
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other (income) expenses |
|
|
4,056 |
|
|
|
(2,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(357,731 |
) |
|
|
94,388 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
13,950 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
(125,216 |
) |
|
|
18,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income taxes |
|
|
(125,193 |
) |
|
|
32,146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
(232,538 |
) |
|
|
62,242 |
|
Less: Net loss attributable to non-controlling interest |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Stone Energy Corporation |
|
$ |
(232,565 |
) |
|
$ |
62,242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share attributable to Stone Energy Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
(5.90 |
) |
|
$ |
2.24 |
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Stone Energy Corporation stockholders |
|
$ |
(5.90 |
) |
|
$ |
2.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average shares outstanding |
|
|
39,449 |
|
|
|
27,819 |
|
Average shares outstanding assuming dilution |
|
|
39,449 |
|
|
|
28,060 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
2
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands of dollars)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(232,538 |
) |
|
$ |
62,242 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided
by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
60,618 |
|
|
|
63,387 |
|
Write-down of oil and gas properties |
|
|
340,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of inventory |
|
|
5,923 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
8,377 |
|
|
|
4,368 |
|
Deferred income tax provision (benefit) |
|
|
(125,216 |
) |
|
|
18,196 |
|
Settlement of asset retirement obligations |
|
|
(6,462 |
) |
|
|
(18,647 |
) |
Non-cash stock compensation expense |
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
Excess tax benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(659 |
) |
Non-cash derivative (income) expense |
|
|
(653 |
) |
|
|
259 |
|
Other non-cash expenses |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
Proceeds from unwinding of derivative contracts |
|
|
112,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in current income taxes payable |
|
|
27,408 |
|
|
|
(43,550 |
) |
Decrease in accounts receivable |
|
|
38,556 |
|
|
|
32,909 |
|
Decrease in other current assets |
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Decrease in inventory |
|
|
13,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in accounts payable |
|
|
(2,399 |
) |
|
|
(200 |
) |
Decrease in other current liabilities |
|
|
(28,378 |
) |
|
|
(8,473 |
) |
Other |
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
215,111 |
|
|
|
112,314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in oil and gas properties |
|
|
(127,172 |
) |
|
|
(91,216 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of oil and gas properties, net of expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,485 |
|
Sale of fixed assets |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in fixed and other assets |
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(127,315 |
) |
|
|
(75,007 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of bank borrowings |
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
659 |
|
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
(347 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net proceeds from exercise of stock options and vesting of restricted stock |
|
|
(385 |
) |
|
|
3,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
(25,732 |
) |
|
|
4,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
62,064 |
|
|
|
41,907 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year |
|
|
68,137 |
|
|
|
475,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year |
|
$ |
130,201 |
|
|
$ |
517,033 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
3
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note 1 Interim Financial Statements
The condensed consolidated financial statements of Stone Energy Corporation (Stone) and its
subsidiaries as of March 31, 2009 and for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 are
unaudited and reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments), which are,
in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and
operating results for the interim periods. The condensed consolidated balance sheet at December
31, 2008 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date. The consolidated
financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and
notes thereto, together with managements discussion and analysis of financial condition and
results of operations, contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2008. The results of operations for the three-month period ended March 31, 2009 are not necessarily
indicative of future financial results.
Note 2 Earnings Per Share
Basic net income per share of common stock was calculated by dividing net income applicable to
common stock by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period.
Diluted net income per share of common stock was calculated by dividing net income applicable to
common stock by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period plus the
weighted-average number of dilutive stock options and restricted stock granted to outside directors
and employees. There were no dilutive shares for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 because we had a
net loss for the period. There were approximately 241,000 dilutive shares for the three months
ended March 31, 2008. Stock options that were considered antidilutive because the exercise price
of the option exceeded the average price of our common stock for the applicable period totaled
approximately 398,000 shares in the three months ended March 31, 2008.
During the three months ended March 31, 2009, approximately 85,000 shares of common stock were
issued upon the vesting of restricted stock by employees and nonemployee directors and 100,000
shares of common stock were repurchased under our stock repurchase program. During the three
months ended March 31, 2008, approximately 176,000 shares of common stock were issued upon the
exercise of stock options and vesting of restricted stock by employees and nonemployee directors
and the awarding of employee bonus stock pursuant to the 2004 Amended and Restated Stock Incentive
Plan.
Note 3 Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
Our hedging strategy is designed to protect our near and intermediate term cash flow from
future declines in oil and natural gas prices. This protection is essential to capital budget
planning which is sensitive to expenditures that must be committed to in advance such as rig
contracts and the purchase of tubular goods. We enter into hedging transactions to secure a
commodity price for a portion of future production that is acceptable at the time of the
transaction. These hedges are designated as cash flow hedges upon entering into the contract. We
do not enter into hedging transactions for trading purposes. We have no fair value hedges.
Under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 133, the nature of a derivative
instrument must be evaluated to determine if it qualifies for hedge accounting treatment. If the
instrument qualifies for hedge accounting treatment, it is recorded as either an asset or liability
measured at fair value and subsequent changes in the derivatives fair value are recognized in
equity through other comprehensive income (loss), net of related taxes, to the extent the hedge is
considered effective. Additionally, monthly settlements of effective hedges are reflected in
revenue from oil and gas production and cash flows from operations. Instruments not qualifying for
hedge accounting are recorded in the balance sheet at fair value and changes in fair value are
recognized in earnings through derivative expense (income). Typically, a small portion of our
derivative contracts are determined to be ineffective. This is because oil and natural gas price
changes in the markets in which we sell our products are not 100% correlative to changes in the
underlying price basis indicative in the derivative contract. Monthly settlements of ineffective
hedges are recognized in earnings through derivative expense (income) and cash flows from
operations.
In March 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 161,
Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities an amendment of FASB Statement
No. 133. SFAS No. 161 requires enhanced disclosures about an entitys derivative and hedging
activities. SFAS No. 161 became effective for us on January 1, 2009.
We have entered into zero-premium collars and fixed-price swaps with various counterparties
for a portion of our expected 2009, 2010 and 2011 oil and natural gas production from the Gulf
Coast Basin. The natural gas collar settlements are based on an average of New York Mercantile
Exchange (NYMEX) prices for the last three days of a respective month. The collar contracts
require payments to the counterparties if the average price is above the ceiling price or payment
from the counterparties if the average price is below the floor price. Some of our fixed-price gas
swap settlements are based on an average of NYMEX prices for the last three days of a respective
month and some are based on the NYMEX price for the last day of a
respective month. The fixed-price oil swap settlements are based upon an average of the NYMEX
closing price for West Texas Intermediate (WTI) during the entire calendar month. Swaps
typically provide for monthly payments by us if prices rise above
4
the swap price or to us if prices
fall below the swap price. Our outstanding collar is with BNP Paribas. Our outstanding
fixed-price swap contracts are with J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., The Toronto-Dominion Bank,
Barclays Bank PLC and The Bank of Nova Scotia.
The following table discloses the location and fair value amounts of derivative instruments
reported in our balance sheet at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments |
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Fair |
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Fair |
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Fair |
|
Description |
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
|
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments under SFAS
No. 133: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts |
|
Fair value of |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
hedging contracts |
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
|
hedging contracts |
|
$ |
136.1 |
|
|
|
hedging contracts |
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
hedging contracts |
|
$ |
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments under
SFAS No. 133: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
None |
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives |
|
|
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
136.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table discloses the effect of derivative instruments in the statement of
operations for the three months ended March 31, 2009 and 2008. During the three months ended March
31, 2009 and 2008, certain of our derivative contracts were determined to be partially ineffective
because of differences in the relationship between the fixed price in the derivative contract and
actual prices realized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Effect of Derivative Instruments on the Statement of Operations for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2009 and 2008 |
|
(in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Gain |
|
Amount of Gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain |
|
|
(Loss) Recognized in |
|
(Loss) Recognized in |
|
|
|
Amount of Gain |
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss) |
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
Income on Derivative |
|
Income on Derivative |
|
|
|
(Loss) Recognized |
|
|
Reclassified from |
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
(Ineffective Portion |
|
(Ineffective Portion |
|
Derivatives in SFAS No. |
|
in OCI on |
|
|
Accumulated OCI into |
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
and Amount Excluded |
|
and Amount |
|
133 Cash Flow Hedging |
|
Derivative |
|
|
Income |
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
from Effectiveness |
|
Excluded from |
|
Relationships |
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
(a) |
|
|
Testing) |
|
Effectiveness Testing) |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
$ |
5.2 |
|
|
$ |
(4.3 |
) |
|
Operating
revenue - oil/gas production |
|
$ |
35.2 |
|
|
$ |
(4.3 |
) |
|
Derivative
income (expense), net |
|
$ |
2.9 |
|
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5.2 |
|
|
$ |
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
35.2 |
|
|
$ |
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
2.9 |
|
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
For the three months ended March 31, 2009, effective hedging contracts increased oil
revenue by $12.6 million and increased gas revenue by $22.6 million. For the three months
ended March 31, 2008, effective hedging contracts reduced oil revenue by $5.2 million and
increased gas revenue by $0.9 million. |
At March 31, 2009, we had accumulated other comprehensive income of $90.1 million, net of tax,
which related to the fair value of our 2009, 2010 and 2011 collar and swap contracts. We believe
that approximately $129.8 million of the accumulated other comprehensive income will be
reclassified into earnings in the next twelve months.
5
On March 3, 2009, we unwound all of our crude oil hedges for the period from April 2009
through December 2009, resulting in proceeds of approximately $59 million. On March 6, 2009, we
unwound two of our natural gas hedges for the period from April 2009 through December 2009,
resulting in proceeds of approximately $54 million. These amounts (net of related deferred income
tax effect) have been included in accumulated other comprehensive income. As the original time
periods for these contracts expire, applicable amounts will be reclassified into earnings. We
re-hedged a portion of our 2009 volumes and hedged a portion of our 2010 and 2011 production. The
following tables illustrate our hedging positions for calendar years 2009, 2010 and 2011 as of May
5, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zero-Premium Collars |
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
|
Daily |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volume |
|
Floor |
|
Ceiling |
|
|
(MMBtus/d) |
|
Price |
|
Price |
2009 |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
$ |
8.00 |
|
|
$ |
14.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-Price Swaps |
|
|
Natural Gas |
|
Oil |
|
|
Daily |
|
|
|
|
|
Daily |
|
|
|
|
Volume |
|
Swap |
|
Volume |
|
Swap |
|
|
(MMBtus/d) |
|
Price |
|
(Bbls/d) |
|
Price |
2009 |
|
|
20,000 |
* |
|
$ |
5.00 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
* |
|
$ |
50.00 |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000 |
* |
|
|
50.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
6.97 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
63.00 |
|
2010 |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
6.50 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
64.05 |
|
2010 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
6.50 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
60.20 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
70.05 |
|
Note 4 Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consisted of the following at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
81/4% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2011 |
|
$ |
200.0 |
|
|
$ |
200.0 |
|
63/4% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2014 |
|
|
200.0 |
|
|
|
200.0 |
|
Bank debt |
|
|
400.0 |
|
|
|
425.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
$ |
800.0 |
|
|
$ |
825.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On August 28, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated revolving credit facility totaling
$700 million, maturing on July 1, 2011, with a syndicated bank group. In December 2008, the
borrowing base was set at $625 million. At March 31, 2009, we had $400 million in borrowings under
our bank credit facility, letters of credit totaling $46 million had been issued pursuant to the
facility, and the weighted average interest rate under the credit facility was approximately 2.5%.
On April 28, 2009, our bank credit facility was amended, and on April 29, 2009, the borrowing
base under the credit facility was reduced from $625 million to $425 million. At that time, we
repaid $44 million of our outstanding borrowings. As of May 5, 2009, we had $356 million in
borrowings under our bank credit facility and $69 million of letters of credit had been issued
pursuant to the facility. The amendment increases our borrowing base pricing grid by 75 basis
points in respect of London Interbank Offering Rate (Libor Rate) advances, by a range of 125 to
150 basis points in respect of base rates advances and by a range of 0 to 12.5 basis points in
respect of commitment fees under the credit agreement. The facility is guaranteed by all of our
material direct and indirect subsidiaries. The facility is guaranteed by Stone Energy Offshore,
L.L.C. (Stone Offshore), a wholly owned subsidiary of Stone that holds the assets acquired in the
Bois dArc transaction.
The borrowing base under the credit facility is redetermined semi-annually, typically in May
and November, by the lenders taking into consideration the estimated value of our oil and gas
properties and those of our direct and indirect material
subsidiaries in accordance with the lenders customary practices for oil and gas loans. In
addition, we and the lenders each have discretion at any time, but not more than two additional
times in any calendar year, to have the borrowing base redetermined. If a reduction in our
borrowing base were to fall below any outstanding balances under the credit facility plus any
outstanding letters of credit, our agreement with the banks allows us one of three options to cure
the borrowing base deficiency: (1) repay amounts
6
outstanding sufficient to cure the deficiency
within 10 days after our written election to do so; (2) add additional oil and gas properties
acceptable to the banks to the borrowing base and take such actions necessary to grant the banks a
mortgage in the properties within thirty days after our written election to do so or (3) arrange to
pay the deficiency in monthly installments over ninety days or some longer period acceptable to the
banks not to exceed six months.
The credit facility is collateralized by substantially all of Stones and Stone Offshores
assets. Stone and Stone Offshore are required to mortgage, and grant a security interest in, their
oil and gas reserves representing at least 80% of the discounted present value of the future net
cash flows from their oil and gas reserves reviewed in determining the borrowing base. At Stones
option, loans under the credit facility will bear interest at a rate based on the adjusted Libor
Rate plus an applicable margin, or a rate based on the prime rate or Federal funds rate plus an
applicable margin. The credit facility provides for optional and mandatory prepayments,
affirmative and negative covenants, and interest coverage ratio and leverage ratio maintenance
covenants.
Note 5 Comprehensive Income
The following table illustrates the components of comprehensive income for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(232.6 |
) |
|
$ |
62.2 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax effect: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment for fair value accounting of derivatives |
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
(227.4 |
) |
|
|
57.9 |
|
Comprehensive income attributable to non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Stone Energy Corporation |
|
$ |
(227.4 |
) |
|
$ |
57.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 6 Asset Retirement Obligations
The change in our asset retirement obligations during the three months ended March 31, 2009 is
set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Asset retirement obligations as of the beginning of the period, including current portion |
|
$ |
256.9 |
|
Liabilities settled |
|
|
(6.5 |
) |
Accretion expense |
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Asset retirement obligations as of the end of the period, including current portion |
|
$ |
258.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7 Impairments
Under the full cost method of accounting, we compare, at the end of each financial reporting
period, the present value of estimated future net cash flows from proved reserves (based on
period-end hedge adjusted commodity prices and excluding cash flows related to estimated
abandonment costs), to the net capitalized costs of proved oil and gas properties net of related
deferred taxes. We refer to this comparison as a ceiling test. If the net capitalized costs of
proved oil and gas properties exceed the estimated discounted future net cash flows from proved
reserves, we are required to write-down the value of our oil and gas properties to the value of the
discounted cash flows. At March 31, 2009, our ceiling test computation resulted in a write-down of
our oil and gas properties of $340.1 million based on a March 31, 2009 Henry Hub gas price of $3.63
per MMBtu and a West Texas Intermediate oil price of $44.92 per barrel. The benefit of hedges in
place at March 31, 2009 reduced the write-down by $85.0 million.
At March 31, 2009, we recorded a write-down of our tubular inventory in the amount of $5.9
million. This charge was the result of the market value of these tubulars falling below historical
cost.
7
Note 8 Fair Value Measurements
We adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements, on January 1, 2008.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally
accepted accounting principles and expands disclosure about fair value measurements. The net
effect of the implementation of SFAS No. 157 on our financial statements was immaterial.
The following tables present our assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a
recurring basis during the three months ended March 31, 2009 and are categorized using the fair
value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy has three levels based on the reliability of the inputs
used to determine the fair value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Active |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
Assets |
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Money market
funds |
|
$ |
57.8 |
|
|
$ |
57.8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Hedging contracts |
|
|
34.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
|
20.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
92.1 |
|
|
$ |
57.8 |
|
|
$ |
14.1 |
|
|
$ |
20.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Active |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
Liabilities |
|
Total |
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Hedging
contracts |
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below presents a reconciliation for assets and liabilities measured at fair value on
a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) during the three months ended
March 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hedging |
|
|
|
Contracts, net |
|
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Balance as of January 1, 2009 |
|
$ |
68.1 |
|
Total gains/(losses) (realized or unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Included in other comprehensive income |
|
|
24.1 |
|
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements |
|
|
(70.8 |
) |
Transfers in and out of Level 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of March 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
20.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of total gains/(losses) for the period
included in earnings attributable to the change in
unrealized gain/(losses) relating to derivatives still
held at March 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets
and Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115. SFAS No. 159 permits entities
to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. This
statement became effective for us on January 1, 2008. We did not elect the fair value option for
any of our existing financial instruments other than those mandated by other FASB standards and
accordingly the impact of the adoption of SFAS No. 159 on our financial statements was immaterial.
We have not determined whether or not we will elect this option for financial instruments we may
acquire in the future.
8
Note 9 Acquisitions and Divestitures
Acquisitions
On August 28, 2008, we completed the acquisition of Bois dArc Energy, Inc. (Bois dArc) in
a cash and stock transaction totaling approximately $1.7 billion. Bois dArc was an independent
exploration company engaged in the discovery and production of oil and natural gas in the Gulf of
Mexico. The primary factors considered by management in making the acquisition included the belief
that the merger would position the combined company as one of the largest independent Gulf of
Mexico-focused exploration and production companies, with a solid production base, a strong
portfolio for continued development of proved and probable reserves, and an extensive inventory of
exploration opportunities. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the agreement and plan of
merger, Stone paid total merger consideration of approximately $935 million in cash and issued
approximately 11.3 million common shares, valued at $63.52 per share. The per share value of the
Stone common shares issued was calculated as the average of Stones closing share price for the two
days prior to through the two days after the merger announcement date of April 30, 2008. The cash
component of the merger consideration was funded with approximately $510 million of cash on hand
and $425 million of borrowings from our amended and restated bank credit facility.
The acquisition was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting for business
combinations. The acquisition was preliminarily recorded in Stones consolidated financial
statements on August 28, 2008, the date the acquisition closed. The preliminary purchase price
allocation was adjusted in the fourth quarter of 2008 as a result of further analysis of the assets
acquired, principally proved and unevaluated oil and gas properties, and liabilities assumed,
principally asset retirement obligations and deferred taxes, which resulted in an adjustment to the
preliminary allocation to goodwill. The adjustments were the result of additional analysis of
proved, probable and possible reserves at the time of the acquisition. The following table
represents the allocation of the total purchase price of Bois dArc to the acquired assets and
liabilities of Bois dArc.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of Bois dArcs net assets: |
|
(in millions) |
|
Net working capital, including cash of $15.3 |
|
$ |
27.9 |
|
Proved oil and gas properties |
|
|
1,339.1 |
|
Unevaluated oil and gas properties |
|
|
422.2 |
|
Fixed and other assets |
|
|
0.3 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
466.0 |
|
Deferred tax liability |
|
|
(467.9 |
) |
Dismantlement reserve |
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
(127.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of net assets |
|
$ |
1,656.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
The following table represents the breakdown of the consideration paid for Bois dArcs net
assets.
|
|
|
|
|
Consideration paid for Bois dArcs net assets: |
|
(in millions) |
|
Cash consideration paid |
|
$ |
935.4 |
|
Stone common stock issued |
|
|
717.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate purchase consideration issued to Bois dArc
stockholders |
|
|
1,653.3 |
|
Plus: |
|
|
|
|
Direct merger costs (1) |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price |
|
$ |
1,656.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Direct merger costs include legal and accounting fees, printing
fees, investment banking expenses and other merger-related costs. |
The allocation of the purchase price included $466 million of asset valuation attributable to
goodwill. Goodwill was determined in accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations, and
represents the amount by which the total purchase price exceeds the aggregate fair values of the
assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the merger, other than goodwill. Goodwill was not
deductible for tax purposes. U.S. generally accepted accounting principles require that we test
goodwill for impairment at least annually. We tested goodwill created in the Bois dArc
acquisition for impairment on December 31, 2008. A substantial reduction in commodity prices and
the existence of a full cost ceiling test write-down in the fourth quarter of 2008 were indications
of potential impairment. The reporting unit for the impairment test was Stone Energy Corporation
and its consolidated subsidiaries. The fair value of the reporting unit was determined using
average quoted market prices for Stone common stock for the two market days prior to through the
two market days after December 31, 2008. A control premium of 25% was applied to the market
capitalization. The control premium was based on a history of control premiums paid for
the acquisition of entities in similar industries. The resulting fair value of the reporting unit
was $504 million below the reporting units carrying value. Additional analysis indicated no
implied value of the recorded goodwill, resulting in the impairment of the entire amount of
goodwill of $466 million at December 31, 2008.
9
The following summary pro forma combined statement of operations data of Stone for the three
months ended March 31, 2008 has been prepared to give effect to the merger as if it had occurred on
January 1, 2008. The pro forma financial information is not necessarily indicative of the results
that might have occurred had the transaction taken place on January 1, 2008 and is not intended to
be a projection of future results. Future results may vary significantly from the results
reflected in the following pro forma financial information because of normal production declines,
changes in commodity prices, future acquisitions and divestitures, future development and
exploration activities, and other factors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2008 |
|
|
(in millions, except |
|
|
per share amounts) |
Revenues |
|
$ |
316.5 |
|
Income from operations |
|
|
109.4 |
|
Net income |
|
|
72.1 |
|
Basic earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.84 |
|
Diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.83 |
|
Divestitures
In the first quarter of 2008, we completed the divesture of a small package of Gulf of Mexico
properties which totaled 17.4 Bcfe of reserves at December 31, 2007 for a cash consideration of
approximately $14.1 million after closing adjustments. The properties that were sold had estimated
asset retirement obligations of $32.9 million. These properties were mature, high cost properties
with minimal exploitation or exploration opportunities. The sale of these oil and gas properties
was accounted for as an adjustment of capitalized costs with no gain or loss recognized.
Note 10 Commitments and Contingencies
We have been served with several petitions filed by the Louisiana Department of Revenue
(LDR) in Louisiana state court claiming additional franchise taxes due of approximately $9.0
million plus accrued interest of approximately $4.2 million. These assessments all relate to the
LDRs assertion that sales of crude oil and natural gas from properties located on the Outer
Continental Shelf, which are transported through the state of Louisiana, should be sourced to the
state of Louisiana for purposes of computing the Louisiana franchise tax apportionment ratio. The
claims relate to franchise tax years from 1999 through 2006. The Company disagrees with these
contentions and intends to vigorously defend itself against these claims. The franchise tax years
2007 and 2008 remain subject to examination.
In 2005, Stone received an inquiry from the Philadelphia Stock Exchange investigating matters
including trading prior to Stones October 6, 2005 announcement regarding the revision of Stones
proved reserves. Stone cooperated fully with this inquiry. Stone has not received any further
inquiries from the Philadelphia Exchange since the original request for information.
A consolidated putative class action is pending in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Louisiana (the Federal Court) against Stone, David Welch, Kenneth Beer, D.
Peter Canty and James Prince purporting to allege violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with El Paso Fireman & Policemans Pension Fund designated as Lead
Plaintiff (Securities Action). The consolidated complaint alleges a putative class period to
commence on May 2, 2001 and to end on March 10, 2006 and contends that, during the putative class
period, defendants, among other things, misstated or failed to disclose (i) that Stone had
materially overstated Stones financial results by overvaluing its oil reserves through improper
and aggressive reserve methodologies; (ii) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and
was therefore unable to ascertain its true financial condition; and (iii) that as a result of the
foregoing, the values of the Companys proved reserves, assets and future net cash flows were
materially overstated at all relevant times.
On October 1, 2007, the Federal Court ordered that (i) the claims asserted against defendants
Kenneth Beer and James Prince pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and (ii) claims asserted on behalf of putative class members who
sold their Company shares prior to October 6, 2005 be dismissed. The remaining claims are still
pending.
On or about May 12, 2008, Lead Plaintiff filed a motion to certify the Securities Action as a
class action (Class Certification Motion). Defendants filed their opposition to the Class
Certification Motion on June 27, 2008. Defendants also filed a Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings and a related Motion to Amend Answer to the Consolidated Class Action Complaint on or
about June 11, 2008. The trial date and deadlines previously set by the parties agreed Joint Plan
of Work and
Proposed Scheduling Order were vacated by the Court on December 1, 2008. In a memorandum
ruling filed on February 27, 2009, the Court has held that the Lead Plaintiff in this action did
not have capacity to sue or be sued. On April 13, 2009, the City of Knoxville Employees Pension
System filed a motion to be appointed as Lead Plaintiff, which Defendants are opposing.
10
In addition, pending in the Federal Court and in the 15th Judicial District Court,
Parish of Lafayette, Louisiana (the State Court) are actions purportedly alleging claims
derivatively on behalf of Stone. The operative complaints in these derivative actions name Stone as
a nominal defendant and David Welch, Kenneth Beer, D. Peter Canty, James Prince, James Stone, John
Laborde, Peter Barker, George Christmas, Richard Pattarozzi, David Voelker, Raymond Gary, B.J.
Duplantis and Robert Bernhard as defendants. The State Court action purports to allege claims of
breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets
against all defendants, and claims of unjust enrichment and insider selling against certain
individual defendants. The Federal Court derivative action purports to assert claims against all
defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate
assets and unjust enrichment and claims against certain individual defendants for breach of
fiduciary duty and violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Federal Court action has been
stayed since December 21, 2006.
On July 18, 2008, each of Stone, Stone Energy Offshore, L.L.C. (Merger Sub), Bois dArc
Energy, Inc. (Bois dArc) and Comstock Resources (Comstock) was served with a summons and
complaint in which Bois dArc, its directors and certain of its officers, as well as Comstock,
Stone and Merger Sub, were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit seeking
certification in the District Court of Clark County, Nevada. This lawsuit sought to enjoin the
named defendants from proceeding with the proposed merger, sought to have the merger agreement
rescinded, and sought an award of monetary damages. Plaintiffs complaint was dismissed without
prejudice on December 24, 2008.
The foregoing pending actions are at an early stage, and we cannot currently predict the
manner and timing of the resolution of these matters and are unable to estimate a range of possible
losses or any minimum loss from such matters.
Stones Certificate of Incorporation and/or its Restated Bylaws provide, to the extent
permissible under the law of the State of Delaware (Stones state of incorporation), for
indemnification of and advancement of defense costs to Stones current and former directors and
officers for potential liabilities related to their service to Stone. Stone has purchased directors
and officers insurance policies that, under certain circumstances, may provide coverage to Stone
and/or its officers and directors for certain losses resulting from securities-related civil
liabilities and/or the satisfaction of indemnification and advancement obligations owed to
directors and officers. These insurance policies may not cover all costs and liabilities incurred
by Stone and its current and former officers and directors in these regulatory and civil
proceedings.
11
Note 11 Guarantor Financial Statements
Stone Offshore is an unconditional guarantor (the Guarantor Subsidiary) of our 81/4% Senior
Subordinated Notes due 2011 and 63/4% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2014. Our remaining subsidiaries
(the Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries) have not provided guarantees. The following presents condensed
consolidating financial information as of March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 and for the three
months ended March 31, 2009 on an issuer (parent company), guarantor subsidiary, non-guarantor
subsidiaries, and consolidated basis. Elimination entries presented are necessary to combine the
entities. There were no subsidiary guarantees of any of our debt for the three-month period ended
March 31, 2008.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET (UNAUDITED)
MARCH 31, 2009
(In thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiary |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
129,400 |
|
|
$ |
419 |
|
|
$ |
382 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
130,201 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
109,302 |
|
|
|
4,288 |
|
|
|
(505 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,085 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
24,904 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,904 |
|
Current income tax receivable |
|
|
1,960 |
|
|
|
1,815 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,775 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
14,128 |
|
|
|
1,773 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,901 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
280,739 |
|
|
|
8,334 |
|
|
|
(123 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
288,950 |
|
Oil and gas properties United States |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved, net |
|
|
2,891 |
|
|
|
876,613 |
|
|
|
1,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
881,028 |
|
Unevaluated |
|
|
253,257 |
|
|
|
197,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450,291 |
|
Building and land, net |
|
|
5,579 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,579 |
|
Fixed assets, net |
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,702 |
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
45,890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,890 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
9,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,376 |
|
Investment in subsidiary |
|
|
568,989 |
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(570,464 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,171,423 |
|
|
$ |
1,083,456 |
|
|
$ |
1,401 |
|
|
$ |
(570,464 |
) |
|
$ |
1,685,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable to vendors |
|
$ |
53,521 |
|
|
$ |
66,755 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
120,276 |
|
Undistributed oil and gas proceeds |
|
|
13,801 |
|
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,208 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
3,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,350 |
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
34,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,990 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
44,223 |
|
|
|
20,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
64,248 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
10,829 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,056 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
160,714 |
|
|
|
87,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
248,128 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
800,000 |
|
Deferred taxes * |
|
|
(169,629 |
) |
|
|
188,612 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,272 |
|
|
|
70,255 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
49,405 |
|
|
|
144,856 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
194,522 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
11,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
852,687 |
|
|
|
420,882 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
51,272 |
|
|
|
1,325,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394 |
|
Treasury stock |
|
|
(860 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(860 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
1,258,511 |
|
|
|
2,016,486 |
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
(2,017,961 |
) |
|
|
1,258,511 |
|
Retained earnings (deficit) |
|
|
(1,029,416 |
) |
|
|
(1,353,912 |
) |
|
|
(449 |
) |
|
|
1,396,225 |
|
|
|
(987,552 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
90,107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90,107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,736 |
|
|
|
662,574 |
|
|
|
1,026 |
|
|
|
(621,736 |
) |
|
|
360,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
318,736 |
|
|
|
662,574 |
|
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
|
(621,736 |
) |
|
|
360,714 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders
equity |
|
$ |
1,171,423 |
|
|
$ |
1,083,456 |
|
|
$ |
1,401 |
|
|
$ |
(570,464 |
) |
|
$ |
1,685,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Deferred income taxes have been allocated to guarantor subsidiary where related oil and gas
properties reside. |
12
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET (UNAUDITED)
DECEMBER 31, 2008
(In thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiary |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
67,122 |
|
|
$ |
818 |
|
|
$ |
197 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
68,137 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
119,918 |
|
|
|
32,080 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
151,641 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
136,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,072 |
|
Current income tax receivable |
|
|
29,480 |
|
|
|
1,703 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,183 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
32,965 |
|
|
|
2,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,675 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
1,356 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
386,913 |
|
|
|
37,368 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
424,121 |
|
Oil and gas properties United States |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved, net |
|
|
654,048 |
|
|
|
474,953 |
|
|
|
1,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,130,583 |
|
Unevaluated |
|
|
218,297 |
|
|
|
275,441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
493,738 |
|
Building and land, net |
|
|
5,615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,615 |
|
Fixed assets, net |
|
|
5,068 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,326 |
|
Other assets, net |
|
|
46,620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,620 |
|
Investment in subsidiary |
|
|
199,932 |
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(201,407 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,516,493 |
|
|
$ |
789,495 |
|
|
$ |
1,878 |
|
|
$ |
(201,863 |
) |
|
$ |
2,106,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable to vendors |
|
$ |
82,129 |
|
|
$ |
61,582 |
|
|
$ |
761 |
|
|
$ |
(456 |
) |
|
$ |
144,016 |
|
Undistributed oil and gas proceeds |
|
|
37,517 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,882 |
|
Deferred taxes |
|
|
32,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,416 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
45,634 |
|
|
|
25,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,709 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
13,861 |
|
|
|
1,898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
211,557 |
|
|
|
88,920 |
|
|
|
761 |
|
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
300,782 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
825,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
825,000 |
|
Deferred taxes * |
|
|
25,315 |
|
|
|
117,338 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,271 |
|
|
|
193,924 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
133,109 |
|
|
|
52,787 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
186,146 |
|
Fair value of hedging contracts |
|
|
1,221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,221 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
11,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,207,953 |
|
|
|
259,045 |
|
|
|
1,011 |
|
|
|
50,815 |
|
|
|
1,518,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394 |
|
Treasury stock |
|
|
(860 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(860 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
1,257,633 |
|
|
|
1,647,428 |
|
|
|
1,474 |
|
|
|
(1,648,902 |
) |
|
|
1,257,633 |
|
Retained earnings (deficit) |
|
|
(1,033,539 |
) |
|
|
(1,116,978 |
) |
|
|
(694 |
) |
|
|
1,396,224 |
|
|
|
(754,987 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
84,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308,540 |
|
|
|
530,450 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
(252,678 |
) |
|
|
587,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
308,540 |
|
|
|
530,450 |
|
|
|
867 |
|
|
|
(252,678 |
) |
|
|
587,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,516,493 |
|
|
$ |
789,495 |
|
|
$ |
1,878 |
|
|
$ |
(201,863 |
) |
|
$ |
2,106,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Deferred income taxes have been allocated to guarantor subsidiary where related oil and gas
properties reside. |
13
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2009
(In thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiary |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Operating revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil production |
|
$ |
22,988 |
|
|
$ |
37,214 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
60,202 |
|
Gas production |
|
|
27,707 |
|
|
|
41,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,277 |
|
Derivative income, net |
|
|
2,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenue |
|
|
53,617 |
|
|
|
78,784 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease operating expenses |
|
|
11,228 |
|
|
|
46,926 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,154 |
|
Production taxes |
|
|
902 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,040 |
|
Depreciation, depletion, amortization |
|
|
11,174 |
|
|
|
49,385 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,618 |
|
Write-down of oil and gas properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
340,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
340,083 |
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
2,565 |
|
|
|
5,801 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,377 |
|
Salaries, general and administrative |
|
|
11,482 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,661 |
|
Incentive compensation expense |
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
220 |
|
Impairment of inventory |
|
|
5,514 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,923 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
43,085 |
|
|
|
442,921 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
486,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
10,532 |
|
|
|
(364,137 |
) |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(353,675 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income) expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
5,143 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,166 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
Other (income) expense, net |
|
|
(854 |
) |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
(343 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(974 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other (income) expenses |
|
|
4,154 |
|
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
(343 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,056 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes |
|
|
6,378 |
|
|
|
(364,382 |
) |
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(357,731 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
2,232 |
|
|
|
(127,448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,216 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income taxes |
|
|
2,255 |
|
|
|
(127,448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,193 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,123 |
|
|
|
(236,934 |
) |
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(232,538 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Net loss attributable to
non-controlling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
4,123 |
|
|
$ |
(236,934 |
) |
|
$ |
246 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(232,565 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2009
(In thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiary |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
4,123 |
|
|
$ |
(236,934 |
) |
|
$ |
273 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(232,538 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to
net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation, depletion and amortization |
|
|
11,174 |
|
|
|
49,385 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,618 |
|
Write-down of oil and gas properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
340,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
340,083 |
|
Impairment of inventory |
|
|
5,514 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,923 |
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
2,565 |
|
|
|
5,801 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,377 |
|
Deferred income tax provision (benefit) |
|
|
2,232 |
|
|
|
(127,448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,216 |
) |
Settlement of asset retirement obligations |
|
|
(1,411 |
) |
|
|
(5,051 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,462 |
) |
Non-cash stock compensation expense |
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,966 |
|
Non-cash derivative income |
|
|
(653 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(653 |
) |
Other non-cash expenses |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
606 |
|
Proceeds from unwinding of derivative contracts |
|
|
112,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
112,822 |
|
Increase (decrease) in current income taxes
payable |
|
|
27,519 |
|
|
|
(111 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,408 |
|
(Increase) decrease in accounts receivable |
|
|
10,616 |
|
|
|
27,793 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
(455 |
) |
|
|
38,556 |
|
Decrease in other current assets |
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
313 |
|
Decrease in inventory |
|
|
13,323 |
|
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,851 |
|
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable |
|
|
(9,863 |
) |
|
|
8,224 |
|
|
|
(760 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,399 |
) |
Decrease in other current liabilities |
|
|
(26,749 |
) |
|
|
(1,629 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,378 |
) |
Other |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating
activities |
|
|
154,090 |
|
|
|
61,291 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
(455 |
) |
|
|
215,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in oil and gas properties |
|
|
(65,902 |
) |
|
|
(61,725 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
(127,172 |
) |
Sale of fixed assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Investment in fixed and other assets |
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing
activities |
|
|
(66,080 |
) |
|
|
(61,690 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
(127,315 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of bank borrowings |
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
(347 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(347 |
) |
Net proceeds from exercise of stock options
and vesting of restricted stock |
|
|
(385 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(385 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(25,732 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,732 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash
equivalents |
|
|
62,278 |
|
|
|
(399 |
) |
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,064 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
|
|
67,122 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
$ |
129,400 |
|
|
$ |
419 |
|
|
$ |
382 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
130,201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
TO THE STOCKHOLDERS OF
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION:
We have reviewed the condensed consolidated balance sheet of Stone Energy Corporation as of March
31, 2009, and the related condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three-month
periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008, and the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows for
the three-month periods ended March 31, 2009 and 2008. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management.
We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying
analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the objective of which is the expression of an
opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such
an opinion.
Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the
condensed consolidated financial statements referred to above for them to be in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of Stone Energy Corporation as of
December 31, 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, cash flows, changes in
stockholders equity and comprehensive income for the year then ended (not presented herein) and in
our report dated February 26, 2009, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated
financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed
consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2008, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in
relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.
New Orleans, Louisiana
May 5, 2009
16
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This Form 10-Q and the information referenced herein contain statements that constitute
forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The words plan, expect, project,
estimate, assume, believe, anticipate, intend, budget, forecast, predict and other
similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements appear
in a number of places and include statements regarding our plans, beliefs or current expectations,
including the plans, beliefs and expectations of our officers and directors. We use the terms
Stone, Stone Energy, Company, we, us and our to refer to Stone Energy Corporation.
When considering any forward-looking statement, you should keep in mind the risk factors that
could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking
statement. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in
the forward-looking statements herein include the timing and extent of changes in commodity prices
for oil and gas, operating risks, liquidity risks and other risk factors as described in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K in Part I, Item 1, Business Forward-Looking Statements, and Item 1A, Risk
Factors, and in this report under Part II, Item 1A, Risk Factors. Furthermore, the assumptions
that support our forward-looking statements are based upon information that is currently available
and is subject to change. We specifically disclaim all responsibility to publicly update any
information contained in a forward-looking statement or any forward-looking statement in its
entirety and therefore disclaim any resulting liability for potentially related damages. All
forward-looking statements attributable to Stone Energy Corporation are expressly qualified in
their entirety by this cautionary statement.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A)
contained in this Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the MD&A contained in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Overview
Stone Energy Corporation is an independent oil and gas company engaged in the acquisition,
exploration, exploitation, development and operation of oil and gas properties located primarily in
the Gulf of Mexico. On August 28, 2008, we completed the acquisition of Bois dArc Energy, Inc.
(Bois dArc) in a cash and stock transaction totaling approximately $1.7 billion. Bois dArc was
an independent exploration company engaged in the discovery and production of oil and natural gas
in the Gulf of Mexico. We are also active in the Appalachia region. Prior to November 30, 2008,
we participated in an exploratory joint venture in Bohai Bay, China. Our business strategy is to
increase reserves, production and cash flow through the acquisition, exploitation and development
of mature properties in the Gulf Coast Basin and exploring opportunities in the deep water
environment of the Gulf of Mexico, Appalachia and other potential areas. Throughout this document,
reference to our Gulf Coast Basin properties includes our onshore, shelf, deep shelf and deep
water properties.
Credit Facility Borrowing Base Redetermination In connection with the acquisition of Bois
dArc on August 28, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated revolving credit facility of $700
million, maturing on July 1, 2011, with a syndicated bank group. The facility had a borrowing base
of $625 million at December 31, 2008. On April 28, 2009, the credit facility was amended, and on
April 29, 2009, our borrowing base was reduced to $425 million. See Bank Credit Facility below for
additional information regarding the amended and restated credit facility.
Unwinding of 2009 Hedge Positions In March of 2009, we unwound all of our crude oil hedges
for the period from April 2009 through December 2009 and two of our natural gas hedges for the
period from April 2009 through December 2009, resulting in proceeds of approximately $113 million.
These contracts were unwound to provide a source of liquidity to assist with funding capital expenditures, which are heavily
weighted toward the first two quarters of the year.
Declining Commodity Prices During the first quarter of 2009, we continued to experience
declines in oil and natural gas prices which resulted in a ceiling test write-down of $340.1
million.
17
Critical Accounting Policies
Our Annual Report on Form 10-K describes the accounting policies that we believe are critical
to the reporting of our financial position and operating results and that require managements most
difficult, subjective or complex judgments. Our most significant estimates are:
|
|
|
remaining proved oil and gas reserves volumes and the timing of their production; |
|
|
|
|
estimated costs to develop and produce proved oil and gas reserves; |
|
|
|
|
accruals of exploration costs, development costs, operating costs and production
revenue; |
|
|
|
|
timing and future costs to abandon our oil and gas properties; |
|
|
|
|
the effectiveness and estimated fair value of derivative positions; |
|
|
|
|
classification of unevaluated property costs; |
|
|
|
|
capitalized general and administrative costs and interest; |
|
|
|
|
insurance recoveries related to hurricanes; |
|
|
|
|
estimates of fair value in business combinations; |
|
|
|
|
current income taxes; and |
|
|
|
|
contingencies. |
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be read together with the discussion contained in
our Annual Report on Form 10-K regarding these critical accounting policies.
Other Factors Affecting Our Business and Financial Results
In addition to the matters discussed above, our business, financial condition and results of
operations are affected by a number of other factors. This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be
read in conjunction with the discussion in our Annual Report on Form 10-K regarding these other
risk factors.
Known Trends and Uncertainties
Credit Crisis Beginning in the second half of 2008 and continuing into 2009, world financial
markets experienced a severe reduction in the availability of credit. It is difficult to predict
the impact of this condition on us in future quarters. Possible negative impacts could include
additional decreases in the borrowing base under our credit facility,
limitations on our ability to access the debt and equity capital markets and complete asset sales,
a need to repay borrowings
sooner than expected, an increased counterparty credit risk on our derivatives contracts and under
our bank credit facility and the requirement by contractual counterparties of us to post collateral
guaranteeing performance. During April of 2009, we posted $22.9 million of letters of credit to satisfy
contractual parties.
Declining Commodity Prices We have experienced a significant decline in oil and natural gas
prices in the last several months. This resulted in a ceiling test write-down of our oil and gas
properties in the fourth quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009. It has also caused a
reduction in our planned capital expenditures budget for 2009. Should these restrained pricing
conditions persist it could severely impact future cash flows, result in further decreases in our
borrowing base under our credit facility, constrain capital budgets beyond 2009 and result in
additional ceiling test write-downs.
Bank Credit Facility Borrowing Base Redetermination On April 29, 2009, our borrowing base
under our bank credit facility was reduced from $625 million to $425 million. As of May 5, 2009,
we had $356 million of outstanding borrowings under the facility and $69 million in letters of
credit had been issued pursuant to the facility. This leaves no availability under the facility.
Stones cash position at May 5, 2009 is $69.3 million. If the lower commodity price environment
were to persist (see discussions above), we could experience a further reduction in the borrowing
base under our bank credit facility. If our borrowing base is reduced below any outstanding
balances under our bank credit facility plus any outstanding letters of credit, our bank credit
facility allows us one of three options to cure the borrowing base deficiency: (1) repay amounts
outstanding sufficient to cure the deficiency within 10 days after our written election to do so;
(2) add additional oil and gas properties acceptable to the banks to the borrowing base and take
such actions necessary to grant the banks a mortgage in the properties within thirty days after our
written election to do so or (3) arrange to pay the deficiency in monthly installments over ninety
days or some longer period acceptable to the banks not to exceed six months.
Gulf Coast Basin Reserve Replacement We have faced challenges in replacing production in the
Gulf Coast Basin at a reasonable unit cost. Our recent acquisition of Bois dArc as well as our
successful participation in offshore lease sales has provided us with an improved inventory of
quality drilling projects. However, a constrained capital budget caused by falling commodity
prices will make it difficult to replace reserves in 2009.
Louisiana Franchise Taxes We have been involved in litigation with the state of Louisiana
over the proper computation of franchise taxes allocable to the state. This litigation relates to
the states position that sales of crude oil and natural gas from properties located on the Outer
Continental Shelf, which are transported through the state of Louisiana, should be sourced to
Louisiana for purposes of computing franchise taxes. We disagree with the states position.
However, if the states position were to be upheld, we could incur additional expense for alleged
underpaid franchise taxes in prior years and higher franchise tax
18
expense in future years. See
Item 1. Legal Proceedings. As of March 31, 2009, the state of Louisiana had asserted claims of
additional franchise taxes in the amount of $9.0 million plus accrued interest of $4.2 million.
There are two open franchise tax years which the state has not yet audited.
Hurricanes Since the majority of our production originates in the Gulf of Mexico, we are
particularly vulnerable to the effects of hurricanes on production. In the first quarter of 2009
and in the second half of 2008, we experienced deferrals of production due to Hurricanes Gustav and
Ike of approximately 6.3 Bcfe and 18.1 Bcfe, respectively. In 2007, 2006 and 2005, we experienced
deferrals of production due to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita of approximately 3.6 Bcfe, 15.6 Bcfe and
16.4 Bcfe, respectively. Additionally, affordable insurance coverage for property damage to our
facilities for hurricanes is becoming more difficult to obtain. We have already narrowed our
insurance coverage to selected properties and expect rates to rise to reflect underwriters losses
incurred from the recent hurricanes.
Regulatory Inquiries and Stockholder Lawsuits We have been named as a defendant in certain
regulatory inquiries and stockholder lawsuits resulting from our reserve restatement. The ultimate
resolution of these matters and their impact on us is uncertain. See Item 1. Legal Proceedings.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As described above in Known Trends and Uncertainties, the significant decline in oil and
natural gas prices has materially adversely affected our cash flow from operations and liquidity.
We have experienced a material reduction in the borrowing base under our bank credit facility. We
expect to have limited availability for borrowings under the facility in the short term. Absent an
improvement in commodity prices or the addition of material reserves, we could experience a further
reduction in the borrowing base by November 2009 at the time of the next scheduled redetermination.
Our capital expenditure budget has been set at $300 million, which we intend to finance with cash
flow from operations. If we do not have sufficient cash flow from operations or availability under
our bank credit facility, we may be forced to reduce our capital expenditures. Although the Board
has authorized a capital expenditure budget of $300 million, management has targeted a lesser
amount of $250 million given the lower commodity price environment and the focus on liquidity. The
remaining $50 million will remain as discretionary and uncommitted. We are considering
alternatives for increasing our liquidity, which alternatives may include asset sales, issuances of
equity or debt securities, renegotiating our credit facility and other transactions. There is no
assurance that we will be able to consummate any of these alternative financing transactions on
terms acceptable to us or at all. To the extent that 2009 cash flow from operations exceeds our
estimated 2009 capital expenditures, we may pay down a portion of our existing debt, expand our
capital budget, repurchase shares on common stock, or invest in the money markets.
Cash Flow and Working Capital. Net cash flow provided by operating activities totaled $215.1
million during the three months ended March 31, 2009 compared to $112.3 million in the comparable
period in 2008. Net cash flow provided by operating activities during the three months ended March 31, 2009 includes
$112.8 million of proceeds from the unwinding of derivative contracts.
Net cash flow used in investing activities totaled $127.3 million during the quarter ended
March 31, 2009, which primarily represents our investment in oil and natural gas properties. Net
cash flow used in investing activities totaled $75.0 million during the quarter ended March 31,
2008, which primarily represents our investment in oil and natural gas properties offset by
proceeds from the sale of oil and natural gas properties.
Net cash flow used in financing activities totaled $25.7 million for the quarter ended March
31, 2009, which primarily represents repayments of borrowings under our bank credit facility. Net
cash flow provided by financing activities totaled $4.6 million for the quarter ended March 31,
2008, which primarily represents proceeds from the exercise of stock options and vesting of
restricted stock.
We had working capital at March 31, 2009 of $40.8 million.
Capital Expenditures. First quarter 2009 additions to oil and gas property costs of $106.3
million included $4.6 million of capitalized salaries, general and administrative expenses
(inclusive of incentive compensation) and $6.3 million of capitalized interest. First quarter 2008
additions to oil and gas property costs of $99.3 million included $21.7 million of lease
acquisition costs, $5.1 million of capitalized salaries, general and administrative expenses
(inclusive of incentive compensation) and $4.0 million of capitalized interest. These investments
were financed by cash flow from operating activities.
Bank Credit Facility. On August 28, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated revolving
credit facility totaling $700 million, maturing on July 1, 2011, with a syndicated bank group. At
December 31, 2008, the facility had a borrowing base of $625 million. At March 31, 2009, we had
$400 million of outstanding borrowings under our bank credit facility, letters of credit totaling
$46 million had been issued under the facility, and the weighted average interest rate was 2.5%.
On April 28, 2009, the credit facility was amended, and on April 29, 2009, the borrowing base was
reduced to $425 million. At that time, we
19
repaid $44 million of outstanding borrowings under the
bank credit facility. As of May 5, 2009, we had $356 million of outstanding borrowings under the
credit facility and $69 million of letters of credit had been issued pursuant to the facility. This
leaves no availability under the facility. The facility is guaranteed by all of our material
direct and indirect subsidiaries. The facility is guaranteed by Stone Energy Offshore, L.L.C.
(Stone Offshore), a wholly owned subsidiary of Stone that holds the assets acquired in the Bois
dArc transaction.
The borrowing base under the credit facility is redetermined semi-annually, in May and
November, by the lenders taking into consideration the estimated value of our oil and gas
properties and those of our direct and indirect material subsidiaries in accordance with the
lenders customary practices for oil and gas loans. In addition, we and the lenders each have
discretion at any time, but not more than two additional times in any calendar year, to have the
borrowing base redetermined. If the lower commodity price environment were to persist (see
discussions above), we could experience a further reduction in the borrowing base under our bank
credit facility.
The credit facility is collateralized by substantially all of Stones and Stone Offshores
assets. Stone and Stone Offshore are required to mortgage, and grant a security interest in, their
oil and gas reserves representing at least 80% of the discounted present value of the future net
cash flows from their oil and gas reserves reviewed in determining the borrowing base. At Stones
option, loans under the credit facility will bear interest at a rate based on the adjusted London
Interbank Offering Rate plus an applicable margin, or a rate based on the prime rate or Federal
funds rate plus an applicable margin. The credit facility provides for optional and mandatory
prepayments, affirmative and negative covenants, and interest coverage ratio and leverage ratio
maintenance covenants. Stone has been and remains in compliance with all of the financial covenants
under the credit facility and the next borrowing base redetermination is expected by November 1,
2009.
Share Repurchase Program. On September 24, 2007, our Board of Directors authorized a share
repurchase program for an aggregate amount of up to $100 million. The shares may be repurchased
from time to time in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions. The repurchase
program is subject to business and market conditions, and may be suspended or discontinued at any
time. Through March 31, 2009, 300,000 shares had been repurchased under this program at a total
cost of $7.1 million.
Contractual Obligations and Other Commitments
We are contingently liable to surety insurance companies relative to bonds issued on our
behalf to the United States Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service (MMS), federal
and state agencies and certain third parties from which we purchased oil and gas working interests.
At March 31, 2009, we were contingently liable in the aggregate amount of $63.6 million, a
reduction from our contingent liability at December 31, 2008 of $84.4 million. This
redetermination was accomplished by the posting of additional letters of credit. The bonds
represent guarantees by the surety insurance companies that we will operate in accordance with
applicable rules and regulations and perform certain plugging and abandonment obligations as
specified by applicable working interest purchase and sale agreements.
Results of Operations
The following tables set forth certain information with respect to our oil and gas operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Variance |
|
|
% Change |
|
Production: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil (MBbls) |
|
|
1,294 |
|
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
Natural gas (MMcf) |
|
|
9,659 |
|
|
|
9,133 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Oil and natural gas (MMcfe) |
|
|
17,423 |
|
|
|
16,825 |
|
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
Revenue data (in thousands) (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil revenue |
|
$ |
60,202 |
|
|
$ |
122,707 |
|
|
$ |
(62,505 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
%) |
Natural gas revenue |
|
|
69,277 |
|
|
|
80,526 |
|
|
|
(11,249 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total oil and natural gas revenue |
|
$ |
129,479 |
|
|
$ |
203,233 |
|
|
$ |
(73,754 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
%) |
Average prices (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil (per Bbl) |
|
$ |
46.52 |
|
|
$ |
95.72 |
|
|
$ |
(49.20 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
%) |
Natural gas (per Mcf) |
|
|
7.17 |
|
|
|
8.82 |
|
|
|
(1.65 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
%) |
Oil and natural gas (per Mcfe) |
|
|
7.43 |
|
|
|
12.08 |
|
|
|
(4.65 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
%) |
Expenses (per Mcfe): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease operating expenses |
|
$ |
3.34 |
|
|
$ |
1.80 |
|
|
$ |
1.54 |
|
|
|
86 |
% |
Salaries, general and administrative expenses (b) |
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.61 |
|
|
|
0.06 |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
DD&A expense on oil and gas properties |
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.73 |
|
|
|
(0.33 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
%) |
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes the cash settlement of effective hedging contracts. |
|
(b) |
|
Exclusive of incentive compensation expense. |
20
During the first quarter of 2009, we reported a net loss totaling $232.6 million, or $5.90 per
share, compared to net income for the first quarter of 2008 of $62.2 million, or $2.22 per share.
All per share amounts are on a diluted basis. On August 28, 2008, we completed the acquisition of
Bois dArc. The revenues and expenses associated with Bois dArc have been included in Stones
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements since August 28, 2008.
We follow the full cost method of accounting for oil and gas properties. At the end of the
first quarter of 2009, we recognized a ceiling test write-down of our oil and gas properties
totaling $340.1 million ($221.1 million after taxes). The write-down did not impact our cash flow
from operations but did reduce net income and stockholders equity.
The variance in quarterly results was due to the following components:
Production. During the first quarter of 2009, total production volumes increased 4% to 17.4
Bcfe compared to 16.8 Bcfe produced during the first quarter of 2008. Oil production during the
first quarter of 2009 totaled approximately 1,294,000 barrels compared to 1,282,000 barrels
produced during the first quarter of 2008, while natural gas production totaled 9.7 Bcf during the
first quarter of 2009 compared to 9.1 Bcf produced during the first quarter of 2008. Production
rates were negatively impacted during the first quarter of 2009 by Gulf Coast shut-ins due to
Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, amounting to volumes of approximately 6.3 Bcfe (70 MMcfe per day).
Without the effects of hurricane production deferrals, production volumes increased approximately
6.9 Bcfe for the first quarter of 2009 compared to the comparable 2008 quarter. Production
associated with the Bois dArc acquisition totaled approximately 6.5 Bcfe for the first quarter of
2009.
Prices. Prices realized during the first quarter of 2009 averaged $46.52 per Bbl of oil and
$7.17 per Mcf of natural gas, or 38% lower, on an Mcfe basis, than first quarter 2008 average
realized prices of $95.72 per Bbl of oil and $8.82 per Mcf of natural gas. All unit pricing
amounts include the cash settlement of effective hedging contracts.
We enter into various hedging contracts in order to reduce our exposure to the possibility of
declining oil and gas prices. Our effective hedging transactions increased our average realized
natural gas price by $2.34 per Mcf and increased our average realized oil price by $9.76 per Bbl in
the first quarter of 2009. During the first quarter of 2008, our effective hedging transactions
increased our average realized natural gas price by $0.09 per Mcf and decreased our average
realized oil price by $4.06 per Bbl.
Income. Oil and natural gas revenue decreased 36% to $129.5 million in the first quarter of
2009 from $203.2 million during the first quarter of 2008. The decrease is attributable to a 38%
decrease in average realized prices on a gas equivalent basis. Slightly offsetting this decrease
is oil and natural gas revenue related to the properties acquired from Bois dArc totaling $35.9
million in the first quarter of 2009.
Interest income decreased during the first quarter of 2009 to $0.1 million from $4.9 million
during the first quarter of 2008. The decrease in interest income is the result of a decrease in
our cash balances during the periods after the acquisition of Bois dArc.
Derivative Income/Expense. During the first quarters of 2009 and 2008, certain of our
derivative contracts were determined to be partially ineffective because of differences in the
relationship between the fixed price in the derivative contract and actual prices realized. Net
derivative income for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, totaled $2.9 million, consisting of $2.3
million of cash settlements on the ineffective derivative contracts and $0.6 million of changes in
the fair market value of the ineffective portion of derivative contracts. Net derivative expense
for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, totaled $0.3 million, representing changes in the fair market
value of the ineffective portion of derivatives.
Expenses. Lease operating expenses during the first quarter of 2009 totaled $58.2 million
compared to $30.3 million for the first quarter of 2008. The increase in lease operating expenses
is primarily the result of $23.9 million of lease operating expenses associated with the properties
acquired from Bois dArc and $13.0 million of repairs in excess of estimated insurance recoveries
related to damage from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. On a unit of production basis, first quarter
2009 lease operating expenses were $3.34 per Mcfe as compared to $1.80 per Mcfe for the comparable
period of 2008, primarily a result of the production disruption from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike and
the related repair work.
Depreciation, depletion and amortization (DD&A) on oil and gas properties for the first
quarter of 2009 totaled $59.2 million, or $3.40 per Mcfe, compared to $62.7 million, or $3.73 per
Mcfe, for the first quarter of 2008. The decrease from 2008 is primarily due to the 2008 year-end
ceiling test write-down, which reduced the carrying value of the full cost pool for our oil and gas
properties.
Accretion expense for the first quarter of 2009 was $8.4 million compared to $4.4 million for
the comparable period of 2008. Due to falling commodity prices and hurricanes, the timing on a
substantial portion of our asset retirement obligations was revised in the fourth quarter of 2008
leading to a redetermination of the present value of these obligations. In this redetermination,
our credit adjusted risk free interest rate was increased to account for current credit conditions,
resulting in a material increase in accretion expense in the first quarter of 2009.
21
Salaries, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses (exclusive of incentive compensation)
for the first quarter of 2009 were $11.7 million compared to $10.3 million in the first quarter of
2008. The increase in SG&A is primarily due to an increase in salaries and wage expense resulting
from the Bois dArc acquisition and salary adjustments.
The impairment of inventory for the first quarter of 2009 totaling $5.9 million relates to the
write-down of our tubular inventory. This charge was the result of the market value of these
tubulars falling below historical cost.
Interest expense for the first quarter of 2009 totaled $5.2 million, net of $6.3 million of
capitalized interest, compared to interest expense of $3.9 million, net of $4.0 million of
capitalized interest, during the first quarter of 2008. The increase is primarily the result of
interest expense associated with $400 million of borrowings under our bank credit facility at March
31, 2009.
We estimate that we have incurred approximately $23,000 of current federal income tax expense
for the three months ended March 31, 2009. We have a $3.8 million current income tax receivable at
March 31, 2009 as a result of current year estimated tax payments exceeding our current estimated
federal income tax liability. Our previous estimate of current taxes was adjusted downward
primarily as a result of production deferrals associated with the hurricanes as well as a decline
in commodity prices.
Recent Accounting Developments
None.
Defined Terms
Oil and condensate are stated in barrels (Bbls) or thousand barrels (MBbls). Natural gas
is stated herein in billion cubic feet (Bcf), million cubic feet (MMcf) or thousand cubic feet
(Mcf). Oil and condensate are converted to natural gas at a ratio of one barrel of liquids per
six Mcf of gas. Bcfe, MMcfe, and Mcfe represent one billion cubic feet, one million cubic feet and
one thousand cubic feet of gas equivalent, respectively. MMBtu represents one million British
Thermal Units and BBtu represents one billion British Thermal Units. An active property is an oil
and gas property with existing production. A primary term lease is an oil and gas property with no
existing production, in which we have a specific time frame to establish production without losing
the rights to explore the property. Liquidity is defined as the ability to obtain cash quickly
either through the conversion of assets or incurrence of liabilities.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Commodity Price Risk
Our major market risk exposure continues to be the pricing applicable to our oil and natural
gas production. Our revenues, profitability and future rate of growth depend substantially upon
the market prices of oil and natural gas, which fluctuate widely. Oil and natural gas price
declines and volatility could adversely affect our revenues, cash flows and profitability. Price
volatility is expected to continue. In order to manage our exposure to oil and natural gas price
declines, we occasionally enter into oil and natural gas price hedging arrangements to secure a
price for a portion of our expected future production.
Our hedging policy provides that not more than 50% of our estimated production quantities can
be hedged without the consent of the board of directors. We believe our current hedging positions
have hedged approximately 16% of our estimated 2009 production, 34% of our estimated 2010
production, and 3% of our estimated 2011 production. See Item 1. Financial Statements Note 3
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities for a detailed discussion of hedges in place to
manage our exposure to oil and natural gas price declines.
Since the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, there
have been no material changes in reported market risk as it relates to commodity prices.
Interest Rate Risk
We had long-term debt outstanding of $800 million at March 31, 2009, of which $400 million, or
50%, bears interest at fixed rates. The $400 million of fixed-rate debt is comprised of $200
million of 81/4% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2011 and $200 million of 63/4% Senior Subordinated Notes
due 2014. At March 31, 2009, the remaining $400 million of our outstanding long-term debt bears
interest at a floating rate and consists of borrowings outstanding under our bank credit facility.
At March 31, 2009, the weighted average interest rate under our bank credit facility was
approximately 2.5% per annum. We currently have no interest rate hedge positions in place to
reduce our exposure to changes in interest rates.
22
On April 28, 2009, our bank credit facility was amended, and on April 29, 2009, the borrowing
base under the credit facility was reduced from $625 million to $425 million. In connection with
this redetermination, our borrowing base pricing grid was increased by 75 basis points in respect
of Libor rate advances, by a range of 125 to 150 basis points in respect of base rate advances and
by a range of 0 to 12.5 basis points in respect of commitment fees payable under the credit
facility.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We have established disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information
relating to Stone Energy Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries (collectively Stone) is
made known to the officers who certify Stones financial reports and the Board of Directors. There
are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any system of disclosure controls and procedures,
including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls and
procedures. Accordingly, even effective disclosure controls and procedures can only provide
reasonable assurance of achieving their control objectives.
Our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer, with the participation of other
members of our senior management, reviewed and evaluated the effectiveness of Stones disclosure
controls and procedures as of the end of the quarterly period ended March 31, 2009. Based on this
evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer believe:
|
|
|
Stones disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by Stone in the reports it files or submits
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms; and |
|
|
|
|
Stones disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by Stone in the reports that it files or
submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 was accumulated and communicated
to Stones management, including Stones chief executive officer and chief financial
officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. |
Changes in Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
There has not been any change in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the quarter ended March 31, 2009 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
On December 30, 2004, Stone was served with two petitions (civil action numbers 2004-6227 and
2004-6228) filed by the Louisiana Department of Revenue (LDR) in the 15th Judicial District Court
(Parish of Lafayette, Louisiana) claiming additional franchise taxes due. In one case, the LDR is
seeking additional franchise taxes from Stone in the amount of $640,000, plus accrued interest of
$352,000 (calculated through December 15, 2004), for the franchise tax year 2001. In the other
case, the LDR is seeking additional franchise taxes from Stone (as successor to Basin Exploration,
Inc.) in the amount of $274,000, plus accrued interest of $159,000 (calculated through December 15,
2004), for the franchise tax years 1999, 2000 and 2001. On December 29, 2005, the LDR filed another
petition in the 15th Judicial District Court claiming additional franchise taxes due for
the taxable years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003 in the amount of $2.6 million plus accrued
interest calculated through December 15, 2005 in the amount of $1.2 million. Also, on January 2,
2008, Stone was served with a petition (civil action number 2007-6754) claiming $1.5 million of
additional franchise taxes due for the 2004 franchise tax year, plus accrued interest of $800,000
calculated through November 30, 2007. Further, on January 7, 2009, Stone was served with a
petition (civil action number 2008-7193) claiming additional franchise taxes due for the taxable
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2006 in the amount of $4.0 million plus accrued interest
calculated through October 21, 2008 in the amount of $1.7 million. These assessments all relate to
the LDRs assertion that sales of crude oil and natural gas from properties located on the Outer
Continental Shelf, which are transported through the State of Louisiana, should be sourced to the
State of Louisiana for purposes of computing the Louisiana franchise tax apportionment ratio. The
Company disagrees with these contentions and intends to vigorously defend itself against these
claims. The franchise tax years 2007 and 2008 remain subject to examination.
In 2005, Stone received an inquiry from the Philadelphia Stock Exchange investigating matters
including trading prior to Stones October 6, 2005 announcement regarding the revision of Stones
proved reserves. Stone cooperated fully with this inquiry. Stone has not received any further
inquiries from the Philadelphia Exchange since the original request for information.
On or around November 30, 2005, George Porch filed a putative class action in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (the Federal Court) against Stone,
David Welch, Kenneth Beer, D. Peter Canty and James Prince
23
purporting to allege violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Three similar complaints were
filed soon thereafter. All complaints had asserted a putative class period commencing on June 17,
2005 and ending on October 6, 2005. All complaints contended that, during the putative class
period, defendants, among other things, misstated or failed to disclose (i) that Stone had
materially overstated Stones financial results by overvaluing its oil reserves through improper
and aggressive reserve methodologies; (ii) that Stone lacked adequate internal controls and was
therefore unable to ascertain its true financial condition; and (iii) that as a result of the
foregoing, the values of Stones proved reserves, assets and future net cash flows were materially
overstated at all relevant times. On March 17, 2006, these purported class actions were
consolidated, with El Paso Fireman & Policemans Pension Fund designated as Lead Plaintiff
(Securities Action). Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated class action complaint on or about June
14, 2006. The consolidated complaint alleges claims similar to those described above and expands
the putative class period to commence on May 2, 2001 and to end on March 10, 2006. On September 13,
2006, Stone and the individual defendants filed motions seeking dismissal of that action.
On August 17, 2007, a Federal Magistrate Judge issued a report and recommendation (the
Report) recommending that the Federal Court grant in part and deny in part the Motions to
Dismiss. The Report recommended that (i) the claims asserted against defendants Kenneth Beer and
James Prince pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder and (ii) claims asserted on behalf of putative class members who sold their Company
shares prior to October 6, 2005 be dismissed and that the Motions to Dismiss be denied with respect
to the other claims against Stone and the individual defendants.
On October 1, 2007, the Federal Court issued an Order directing that judgment on the Motions
to Dismiss be entered in accordance with the recommendations of the Report. On October 23, 2007,
Stone and the individual defendants filed a motion seeking permission to appeal the denial of the
Motions to Dismiss to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which motion was denied. The discovery
process began, and the parties exchanged initial disclosures, document requests, and
interrogatories and also began producing documents. On or about May 12, 2008, Lead Plaintiff filed
a motion to certify the Securities Action as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure (Class Certification Motion). Defendants filed their opposition to the Class
Certification Motion on June 27, 2008. Defendants also filed a Motion for Judgment on the
Pleadings and a related Motion to Amend Answer to the Consolidated Class Action Complaint on or
about June 11, 2008. The trial date and deadlines previously set by the parties agreed Joint Plan
of Work and Proposed Scheduling Order were vacated by the Court on December 1, 2008. In a
memorandum ruling filed on February 27, 2009, the Court has held that the Lead Plaintiff in this
action did not have capacity to sue or be sued. On April 13, 2009, the City of Knoxville
Employees Pension System filed a motion to be appointed as Lead Plaintiff, which Defendants are
opposing.
In addition, on or about December 16, 2005, Robert Farer and Priscilla Fisk filed respective
complaints in the Federal Court purportedly alleging claims derivatively on behalf of Stone.
Similar complaints were filed thereafter in the Federal Court by Joint Pension Fund, Local No. 164,
I.B.E.W., and in the 15th Judicial District Court, Parish of Lafayette, Louisiana (the
State Court) by Gregory Sakhno. Stone was named as a nominal defendant and David Welch, Kenneth
Beer, D. Peter Canty, James Prince, James Stone, John Laborde, Peter Barker, George Christmas,
Richard Pattarozzi, David Voelker, Raymond Gary, B.J. Duplantis and Robert Bernhard were named as
defendants in these actions. The State Court action purportedly alleged claims of breach of
fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets against all
defendants, and claims of unjust enrichment and insider selling against certain individual
defendants. The Federal Court derivative actions asserted purported claims against all defendants
for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets and
unjust enrichment and claims against certain individual defendants for breach of fiduciary duty and
violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
On March 30, 2006, the Federal Court entered an order naming Robert Farer, Priscilla Fisk and
Joint Pension Fund, Local No. 164, I.B.E.W. as co-lead plaintiffs in the Federal Court derivative
action. On December 21, 2006, the Federal Court stayed the Federal Court derivative action at least
until resolution of the then-pending motion to dismiss the Securities Action after which time a
hearing was to be conducted by the Federal Court to determine the propriety of maintaining that
stay. As of the date hereof, the Federal Court has yet to consider any potential modification of
the stay.
On July 18, 2008, each of Stone, Stone Energy Offshore, L.L.C. (Merger Sub), Bois dArc
Energy, Inc. (Bois dArc) and Comstock Resources (Comstock) was served with a summons and
complaint in which Bois dArc, its directors
and certain of its officers, as well as Comstock, Stone and Merger Sub, were named as
defendants in a putative class action lawsuit seeking certification in the District Court of Clark
County, Nevada, entitled Packard v. Allison, et al., Case No. A567393. This lawsuit was brought by
Gail Packard, a purported Bois dArc stockholder, on behalf of a putative class of Bois dArc
stockholders and, among other things, sought to enjoin the named defendants from proceeding with
the proposed acquisition of Bois dArc by Stone, sought to have the merger agreement rescinded, and
sought an award of monetary damages. Plaintiff asserted that the decisions by Bois dArcs
directors and Comstock to approve the proposed merger constituted breaches of their respective
fiduciary duties because, plaintiff alleged, they did not engage in a fair process to ensure the
highest possible purchase price for Bois dArcs stockholders, did not properly value Bois dArc,
did not disclose material facts regarding the proposed merger, and did not protect against
conflicts of interest arising from the participation agreement to be entered into between Stone and
former executives of Bois dArc, parachute gross-up payments, and the change in control and
severance arrangements. The complaint was subsequently amended to substitute Thomas Packard as
plaintiff in lieu of Gail Packard, and the amended complaint eliminated Stone and Merger Sub as
defendants. On August 21, 2008, the court denied plaintiffs motions for a preliminary
24
injunction
and for expedited discovery, noting that a likelihood of plaintiffs success on the merits is
questionable. Each of the remaining defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint.
Plaintiffs complaint was dismissed without prejudice on December 24, 2008.
Stones Certificate of Incorporation and/or its Restated Bylaws provide, to the extent
permissible under the law of the State of Delaware (Stones state of incorporation), for
indemnification of and advancement of defense costs to Stones current and former directors and
officers for potential liabilities related to their service to Stone. Stone has purchased directors
and officers insurance policies that, under certain circumstances, may provide coverage to Stone
and/or its officers and directors for certain losses resulting from securities-related civil
liabilities and/or the satisfaction of indemnification and advancement obligations owed to
directors and officers. These insurance policies may not cover all costs and liabilities incurred
by Stone and its current and former officers and directors in these regulatory and civil
proceedings.
The foregoing pending actions are at an early stage and subject to substantial uncertainties
concerning the outcome of material factual and legal issues relating to the litigation and the
regulatory proceedings. Accordingly, based on the current status of the litigation and inquiries,
we cannot currently predict the manner and timing of the resolution of these matters and are unable
to estimate a range of possible losses or any minimum loss from such matters. Furthermore, to the
extent that our insurance policies are ultimately available to cover any costs and/or liabilities
resulting from these actions, they may not be sufficient to cover all costs and liabilities
incurred by us and our current and former officers and directors in these regulatory and civil
proceedings.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The following risk factors update the Risk Factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008. Except as set forth below, there have been no material
changes to the risks described in Part I, Item 1A, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2008.
The continuing financial crisis may impact our business and financial condition. We may not be
able to obtain funding in the capital markets on terms we find acceptable, or obtain funding under
our current bank credit facility because of the deterioration of the capital and credit markets and
our borrowing base.
The current credit crisis and related turmoil in the global financial systems have had an
impact on our business and our financial condition, and we may face challenges if economic and
financial market conditions do not improve. Historically, we have used our cash flow from
operations and borrowings under our bank credit facility to fund our capital expenditures and have
relied on the capital markets and asset monetization transactions to provide us with additional
capital for large or exceptional transactions. A continuation of the economic crisis could further
reduce the demand for oil and natural gas and continue to put downward pressure on the prices for
oil and natural gas, which have declined significantly since reaching historic highs in July 2008.
These price declines have negatively impacted our revenues and cash flows. In 2009, we expect to
finance our capital expenditures with cash flow from operations.
We have an existing bank credit facility with lender commitments totaling $700 million. The
borrowing base under the credit facility was reduced from $625 million to $425 million on April 29,
2009, leaving no availability under the facility. The borrowing base is determined by the lenders periodically and is based on the estimated
value of our oil and gas properties using pricing models determined by the lenders at such time.
Our bank credit facility is redetermined semi-annually. In the future, we may not be able to
access adequate funding under our bank credit facility as a result of (i) a decrease in our
borrowing base due to the outcome of a borrowing base redetermination, or (ii) an unwillingness or
inability on the part of our lending counterparties to meet their funding obligations. A
continuation of the declines in commodity prices could result in a determination to further lower
the borrowing base in the future and, in such case, we could be required to repay any indebtedness
in excess of the borrowing
base. The turmoil in the financial markets has adversely impacted the stability and solvency
of a number of large global financial institutions.
The current credit crisis makes it difficult to obtain funding in the public and private
capital markets. In particular, the cost of raising money in the debt and equity capital markets
has increased substantially while the availability of funds from those markets generally has
diminished significantly. Also, as a result of concerns about the general stability of financial
markets and the solvency of specific counterparties, the cost of obtaining money from the credit
markets has increased as many lenders and institutional investors have increased interest rates,
imposed tighter lending standards, refused to refinance existing debt at maturity at all or on
terms similar to existing debt or at all, and reduced and, in some cases, ceased to provide any new
funding.
The credit crisis also has impacted the level of activity in the oil and gas property sales
market. The lack of available credit and access to capital has limited and will likely continue to
limit the parties interested in any proposed asset transactions and will likely reduce the values
we could realize in those transactions.
The distressed economic conditions also may adversely affect the collectability of our trade
receivables. For example, our accounts receivable are primarily from purchasers of our oil and
natural gas production and other exploration and production companies which own working interests
in the properties that we operate. This industry concentration could adversely impact our overall
credit risk, because our customers and working interest owners may be similarly affected by changes
in economic and
25
financial market conditions, commodity prices, and other conditions. Further, the
credit crisis and turmoil in the
financial markets could cause our commodity derivative instruments
to be ineffective in the event a counterparty were to be unable to perform its obligations or seek
bankruptcy protection.
Due to these factors, we cannot be certain that funding, if needed, will be available to the
extent required and, on acceptable terms. If we are unable to access funding when needed on
acceptable terms, we may not be able to fully implement our business plans, complete new property
acquisitions to replace our reserves, take advantage of business opportunities, respond to
competitive pressures, or refinance our debt obligations as they come due, any of which could have
a material adverse effect on our operations and financial results.
Our debt level and the covenants in the current and any future agreements governing our debt
could negatively impact our financial condition, results of operations and business prospects.
At May 5, 2009, the principal amount of our outstanding debt was $756 million, including $356
million outstanding under our bank credit facility. The terms of the current agreements governing
our debt impose significant restrictions on our ability to take a number of actions that we may
otherwise desire to take, including:
|
|
|
incurring additional debt; |
|
|
|
|
paying dividends on stock, redeeming stock or redeeming subordinated debt; |
|
|
|
|
making investments; |
|
|
|
|
creating liens on our assets; |
|
|
|
|
selling assets; |
|
|
|
|
guaranteeing other indebtedness; |
|
|
|
|
entering into agreements that restrict dividends from our subsidiary to us; |
|
|
|
|
merging, consolidating or transferring all or substantially all of our assets; and |
|
|
|
|
entering into transactions with affiliates. |
Our level of indebtedness, and the covenants contained in current and future agreements
governing our debt, could have important consequences on our operations, including:
|
|
|
making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations under the indentures or
other debt and increasing the risk that we may default on our debt obligations; |
|
|
|
|
requiring us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operating
activities to required payments on debt, thereby reducing the availability of cash flow
for working capital, capital expenditures and other general business activities; |
|
|
|
|
limiting our ability to obtain additional financing in the future for working
capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general business activities; |
|
|
|
|
limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and
the industry in which we operate; |
|
|
|
|
detracting from our ability to successfully withstand a downturn in our business or
the economy generally; |
|
|
|
|
placing us at a competitive disadvantage against other less leveraged competitors;
and |
|
|
|
|
making us vulnerable to increases in interest rates, because debt under our credit
facility is at variable rates. |
We may be required to repay all or a portion of our debt on an accelerated basis in certain
circumstances. If we fail to comply with the covenants and other restrictions in the agreements
governing our debt, it could lead to an event of default and the acceleration of our repayment of
outstanding debt. Our ability to comply with these covenants and other restrictions may be affected
by events beyond our control, including prevailing economic and financial conditions. Our
borrowing base under our bank credit facility, which is redetermined semi-annually, is based on an
amount established by the bank group after its evaluation of our proved oil and gas reserve values.
On April 29, 2009, our borrowing base was reduced from $625 million to $425 million, leaving no availability under the
facility. Due to
current credit conditions and lower commodity prices, we could experience further reductions of our
borrowing base. Upon a redetermination, if borrowings in excess of the revised borrowing capacity
were outstanding, we could be forced to repay a portion of our bank debt.
We may not have sufficient funds to make such repayments. If we are unable to repay our debt
out of cash on hand, we could attempt to refinance such debt, sell assets or repay such debt with
the proceeds from an equity offering. We cannot assure you that we will be able to generate
sufficient cash flow from operating activities to pay the interest on our debt or that future
borrowings, equity financings or proceeds from the sale of assets will be available to pay or
refinance such debt. The terms of our debt, including our credit facility and our indentures, may
also prohibit us from taking such actions. Factors that will affect our ability to raise cash
through an offering of our capital stock, a refinancing of our debt or a sale of assets include
financial market conditions and our market value and operating performance at the time of such
offering or other financing. We cannot assure you that any such offering, refinancing or sale of
assets can be successfully completed.
26
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
On September 24, 2007, our Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program for an
aggregate amount of up to $100 million. The shares may be repurchased from time to time in the
open market or through privately negotiated transactions. The repurchase program is subject to
business and market conditions, and may be suspended or discontinued at any time. Additionally,
shares were withheld from certain employees to pay taxes associated with the employees vesting of
restricted stock. The following table sets forth information regarding our repurchases or
acquisitions of common stock during the first quarter of 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares (or Units) |
|
|
Maximum Number (or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as Part |
|
|
Approximate Dollar Value) |
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
Average Price |
|
|
of Publicly |
|
|
of Shares (or Units) that May |
|
|
|
Shares (or Units) |
|
|
Paid per Share |
|
|
Announced Plans or |
|
|
Yet be Purchased Under the |
|
Period |
|
Purchased |
|
|
(or Unit) |
|
|
Programs |
|
|
Plans or Programs |
|
Share Repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Program: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 2009 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
4.10 |
(b) |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
March 2009 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
2.84 |
(b) |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.47 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
92,928,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 2009 |
|
|
29,871 |
(a) |
|
|
10.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 2009 |
|
|
8,580 |
(a) |
|
|
8.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,451 |
|
|
|
10.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
138,451 |
|
|
$ |
5.31 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Amounts include shares withheld from employees upon the vesting of restricted stock in order
to satisfy the required tax withholding obligations. |
|
(b) |
|
Amounts represent the weighted average price paid per share and include a per share
commission for all repurchases. |
27
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
*10.1
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Robert A. Bernhard dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.2
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
George R. Christmas dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.3
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and B.
J. Duplantis dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.4
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Peter D. Kinnear dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.5
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and John
P. Laborde dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.6
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Richard A. Pattarozzi dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.7
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Donald E. Powell dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.8
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and Kay
G. Priestly dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.9
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
David R. Voelker dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.10
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Kenneth H. Beer dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.11
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Andrew L. Gates, III dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.12
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Eldon J. Louviere dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.13
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and J.
Kent Pierret dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.14
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Richard L. Smith dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.15
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
David H. Welch dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.16
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Jerome F. Wenzel Jr. dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.17
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation and
Florence M. Ziegler dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Amendment No.1, dated as of April 28, 2009, to the Second Amended
and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of August 28, 2008, among
Stone Energy Corporation, Stone Energy Offshore, L.L.C. and the
financial institutions named therein (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K, filed
April 30, 2009 (File No. 001-12074)). |
|
|
|
*15.1
|
|
Letter from Ernst & Young LLP dated May 5, 2009, regarding
unaudited interim financial information. |
|
|
|
*31.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer of Stone Energy
Corporation as required by Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
*31.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer of Stone Energy
Corporation as required by Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
*#32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of Stone Energy Corporation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
# |
|
Not considered to be filed for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. |
28
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STONE ENERGY CORPORATION |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: May 7, 2009
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ J. Kent Pierret |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Kent Pierret |
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, |
|
|
|
|
Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer |
|
|
|
|
(On behalf of the Registrant and as |
|
|
|
|
Chief Accounting Officer) |
29
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
*10.1
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Robert A. Bernhard dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.2
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and George R. Christmas dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.3
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and B. J. Duplantis dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.4
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Peter D. Kinnear dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.5
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and John P. Laborde dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.6
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Richard A. Pattarozzi dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.7
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Donald E. Powell dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.8
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Kay G. Priestly dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.9
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and David R. Voelker dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.10
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Kenneth H. Beer dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.11
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Andrew L. Gates, III dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.12
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Eldon J. Louviere dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.13
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and J. Kent Pierret dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.14
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Richard L. Smith dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.15
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and David H. Welch dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.16
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Jerome F. Wenzel Jr. dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
*10.17
|
|
Indemnification Agreement between Stone Energy Corporation
and Florence M. Ziegler dated as of March 23, 2009. |
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Amendment No.1, dated as of April 28, 2009, to the
Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated
as of August 28, 2008, among Stone Energy Corporation,
Stone Energy Offshore, L.L.C. and the financial
institutions named therein (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrants Current Report on Form
8-K, filed April 30, 2009 (File No. 001-12074)). |
|
|
|
*15.1
|
|
Letter from Ernst & Young LLP dated May 5, 2009, regarding
unaudited interim financial information. |
|
|
|
*31.1
|
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer of Stone
Energy Corporation as required by Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
*31.2
|
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer of Stone
Energy Corporation as required by Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
*#32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Stone Energy Corporation pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
# |
|
Not considered to be filed for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. |
30