UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
þ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE |
| ACT OF 1934 |
| |
| For the fiscal year ended: December 31, 2010 |
| |
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES |
| EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission file number 001-34216
TOREADOR RESOURCES CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware | 75-0991164 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
c/o Toreador Holding SAS
9 rue Scribe
75009 Paris, France
(Address of principal executive office)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: + 33 1 47 03 34 24
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
| |
Title of each Class: | Name of each exchange on which registered: |
COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $.15625 PER SHARE | NASDAQ Global Market Professional Segment NYSE Euronext Paris |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act: None
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (i) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (ii) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yesx 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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yeso 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 definition of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (check one):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer x |
| |
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 x
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity of the registrant held by non-affiliates, computed by reference to the closing sales price of such stock, as of June 30, 2010 was $133,045,049. (For purposes of determination of the aggregate market value, only directors, executive officers and 10% or greater stockholders have been deemed affiliates.)
As of March 11, 2011, there were 25,942,705 shares of common stock, par value $.15625 per share, outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrant's Proxy Statement for the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, expected to be filed on or before April 30, 2011, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
See the "Glossary of Selected Oil and Natural Gas Terms" at the end of Item 1 for the definition of certain terms in this annual report.
Toreador Resources Corporation (together with its direct and indirect subsidiaries, "Toreador," "we," "us," "our," or the "Company"), is an independent energy company engaged in the exploration and production of crude oil with interests in developed and undeveloped oil properties in the Paris Basin, France. We are currently focused on the development of our conventional fields and the exploitation of the prospective shale oil play within our Paris Basin acreage position.
We currently operate solely in the Paris Basin, which covers approximately 170,000 km2 of northeastern France, centered 50 to 100 km east and south of Paris. At December 31, 2010, we held interests in approximately 997,000 gross exploration acres (awarded and pending publication). According to Gaffney, Cline & Associates Ltd, an independent petroleum and geological engineering firm, or Gaffney Cline, as of December 31, 2010, our proved reserves were 5.5 MBbls, our proved plus probable reserves were 9.1 MBbls and our proved plus probable plus possible reserves were 13.9 MBbls. Our production for 2010 averaged approximately 885 bbl/d from two conventional oilfield areas in the Paris Basin — the Neocomian Complex and Charmottes fields. As of December 31, 2010, production from these oil fields represented a majority of our total revenue and substantially all of our sales and other operating revenue. We intend to maintain production from these mature assets using suitable enhanced oil recovery techniques. In addition to this production base, we have identified several additional conventional exploration targets, including the La Garenne field, which is the first of these targets, and for which we intend to formulate a development plan.
We are also currently focused on exploiting our shale oil acreage in the Paris Basin. On May 10, 2010, our subsidiary, Toreador Energy France (“TEF”) entered into an investment agreement (the “Hess Investment Agreement”) with Hess Oil France S.A.S. (“Hess”) relating to exploitation of our shale oil acreage in the Paris Basin. Our current priority is to execute with Hess as our strategic partner a proof of concept program by drilling, completing and testing six or more exploration wells.
We are a Delaware corporation that was incorporated in 1951. Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market under the trading symbol "TRGL" and on the Professional Segment of NYSE Euronext Paris under the trading symbol "TOR".
Our offices in the United States are located at 13760 Noel Road, Suite 1100, Dallas, TX, 75240-1383 (telephone number: (214) 559-3933). Our principal executive offices are located at c/o Toreador Holding SAS, 9 rue Scribe, 75009 Paris, France (telephone number: +33 1 47 03 34 24). Our website address is www.toreador.net.
Recent Developments
Dual Listing
On December 17, 2010, our common stock began trading on the Professional Segment of NYSE Euronext Paris (“Euronext”) under the trading symbol “TOR”. Our dual listing does not change our capital structure, share count or current NASDAQ listing and is intended to create additional liquidity for investors as well as provide greater access to our shares, which are denominated in Euros on Euronext, in Euro-zone markets and currencies.
Repurchase and Redemption of 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes
On October 1, 2010, we repurchased approximately $32.3 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes pursuant to the holders’ option, and, on November 24, 2010, redeemed the remaining $0.1 million aggregate principal amount outstanding. See “Liquidity - 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes due October 1, 2025.” Following such repurchase and redemption, our outstanding long-term debt consists of approximately $31.6 million aggregate principal amount of our 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes.
Proof of Concept Program
On October 12, 2010, TEF and Hess received approval from the French government for its first four well permit applications, as well as the necessary environmental permits. On November 20, 2010, Hess executed an agreement for the provision of drilling and related services for the initial six firm wells targeting the Liassic shale oil source rock system. The first of the four wells, which will be located on the Chateau Thierry Permit, is expected to be drilled vertically to a total depth of 3,000 meters. The primary geologic target of the well is the Liassic section, the top of which is expected to be encountered at an approximate depth of 2,300 meters. Conventional cores are expected to be taken throughout the Liassic section to evaluate reservoir and rock properties.
On February 4, 2011, France’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy announced its intention to conduct a study on the economic, social and environmental stakes relating to the development of shale gas and shale oil in France (the “France Shale Study”). On February 10, 2011, Toreador and Hess met with representatives of the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Energy to discuss the impact the France Shale Study might have on its unconventional oil exploration, particularly the proof of concept program. Following such discussion, Toreador concluded that they will voluntarily delay such drilling pending the results of the France Shale Study and any interim or subsequent political developments. In the interim, Toreador intends to cooperate with the French government in conducting the France Shale Study, including by providing scientific data and practical experiences regarding oil development, hosting delegations to observe oil operations in the Paris Basin and initiating baseline environmental studies with third-party environmental experts that would be available to the French government.
On March 2, 2011 an additional study on the impact of shale gas and shale oil was launched by the French National Assembly (the “National Assembly Study”), the conclusions of which are expected to be published in June 2011 (at the same time as the final report relating to the France Shale Study). On March 11, 2011, the Prime Minister of France announced that the moratorium on unconventional exploration has been extended to exploration permits and works authorizations until mid-June 2011 (originally mid-April), i.e. when the conclusions of the studies on the environmental impact of drilling techniques will have been rendered. The Company does not currently know the impact of such decision on its proof of concept program. The Company is currently evaluating its drilling program in light of these developments and will continue to monitor further developments and adjust its plans as necessary.
Concessions Renewal
The decrees relating to the renewal of the Châteaurenard concession and of the Saint-Firmin-des-Bois concession, which together account for 93% of our existing reserves, received final French government approvals on February 1, 2011, and were published in the Journal Officiel on February 3, 2011. The renewals extend the expiry date of both concessions to January 1, 2036.
The primary components of our strategy are:
Focus on France. All of our oil assets are currently located in France, having disposed of our interests in Turkey, Romania and Hungary in 2009. We believe we can leverage our substantial acreage position and our experience and industry relationships in France to grow the Company.
Capture, develop and accelerate conventional prospects. We have identified a number of conventional exploration targets, including the La Garenne field, which is the first of these targets, and for which we intend to formulate a development plan.
Target the prospective unconventional oil resource play. We intend to work with Hess on our proof of concept program and potential development of our Paris Basin shale oil acreage position.
Seize opportunities for external growth. We continue to evaluate and, where appropriate, intend to pursue acquisition opportunities on terms we consider favorable. In particular, we consider acquisitions of businesses or interests that will complement and allow us to expand our activities.
Continue to focus on operational costs. Since the beginning of 2009, we have improved operational efficiencies, and we continue to focus on maintaining efficient operations.
Maintain optimal capital structure. We intend to maintain a conservative capital structure over time.
Our Properties
Title to Oil Properties
Toreador does not hold title to any of its properties; we hold interests in permits or concessions granted by French governmental authorities granting us the right to explore and develop oil properties in France. We currently hold interests in approximately 780,000 gross exploration acres in the Paris Basin and have applications pending for approximately 217,000 additional gross acres. Our conventional exploration and production operations consist primarily of our existing producing fields. In addition to this production base, we have identified several additional conventional exploration targets, including the La Garenne field, which is the first of these targets, and for which we intend to formulate a development plan. Our unconventional exploration operations consist primarily of the potential exploration of the prospective shale oil play within our Paris Basin acreage position. We have ready access to existing infrastructure (pipelines) and end-markets (refineries) in the Paris Basin. The table below summarizes the acreage covered by the exploration permits and exploitation concessions we currently hold, or for which we have applied. For exploration permits, under the terms of the Hess Investment Agreement, TEF and Hess have designated an area of mutual interest within the Paris Basin (the “AMI”). If either party acquires or applies for a working interest in an exploration permit or exploitation concession within the AMI, such party would be required to offer to the other party 50% of such interest on the same terms and conditions. For a more detailed description of each permit, concession or application, see "Permits, Concessions and Pending Applications."
Permit Name | | Working Interest | | | Type | | Expiration Date | | Gross Acreage |
Charmottes | | | 100 | % | | Production | | October 24, 2013 | | 9,019 | |
Chateaurenard | | | 100 | % | | Production | | January 1, 2036 | | 11,268 | |
St. Firmin Des Bois | | | 100 | % | | Production | | January 1, 2036 | | 3,973 | |
| | | | | | | | Total Production | | 24,260 | |
Aufferville | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | June 16, 2010***** | | 33,095 | |
Rigny le Ferron | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | February 20, 2011** | | 82,748 | |
Joigny | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | February 20, 2011** | | 33,152 | |
Mairy | | | 25 | % | | Exploration | | August 15, 2011 | | 109,705 | |
Nogent sur Seine | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | August 8, 2012 | | 65,727 | |
Leudon en Brie | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | August 8, 2012 | | 26,740 | |
Nemours | | | 25 | % | | Exploration | | June 16, 2013 | | 46,992 | |
Courtenay | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | October 1, 2013 | | 76,276 | |
Chateau Thierry | | | 50 | % | | Exploration | | October 24, 2014 | | 192,468 | |
Champrose | | | 40 | % | | Exploration | | October 21, 2015 | | 113,396 | |
| | | | | | | | Total Exploration | | 780,299 | |
Coulommiers | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 45,900 | *** |
L'Ourcq | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 48,680 | *** |
Mary sur Marne | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 30,815 | *** |
Nangis | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 26,966 | *** |
Nanteuil | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 48,680 | *** |
Valence en Brie | | | — | | | Pending publication | | | | 16,015 | *** |
| | | | | | | | Total Pending | | 217,054 | |
Chevry / Ozoir | | | — | | | Application | | | | 97,606 | **** |
Coole | | | — | | | Application | | | | 207,818 | **** |
Fere-en-Tardenois | | | — | | | Application | | | | 64,885 | **** |
Leudon extension | | | — | | | Application | | | | 12,876 | **** |
Maisoncelles | | | — | | | Application | | | | 49,626 | **** |
Meaux | | | — | | | Application | | | | 155,175 | **** |
Plaisir | | | — | | | Application | | | | 32,667 | **** |
Rozay en Brie | | | — | | | Application | | | | 36,273 | **** |
Sezanne | | | — | | | Application | | | | 214,890 | **** |
| | | | | | | | Total Applications | | 871,816 | |
| TOTAL EXPLORATION (PERMITS AND APPLICATIONS) | | 1,869,168 | (°) |
Note: all numbers in the table are direct conversion from the surface estimates in square kilometers |
|
** Renewal application pending. |
*** No longer subject to competitive application but not yet formalized by publication in the Official Journal of the French Republic. |
**** The application award process may result in Toreador and Hess receiving less than a 100% working interest in the pending applications or only part of the acreage represented by an application. |
***** Renewal application filed. |
(°) Assuming successful applications. |
Conventional Exploration and Production
Producing Fields
Our production for 2010 was 323 mbbl, representing an average of approximately 885 bbl/d, from two areas for which we hold exploitation concessions: the Neocomian Complex and Charmottes fields (producing from the Dogger and Trias horizon). As of December 31, 2010, these fields represented 100% of our total proved reserves (5.5 MBbls).
All our production is currently sold to Total pursuant to an agreement signed with Elf Antar in 1996, as amended. Following an initial term expiring in 2002, the agreement automatically renews for one-year periods unless notice of termination is given at least six months in advance. The sale price is based on the monthly-average dated Brent price over the month of production, less a discount. In 2010, sales to Total, representing all of our oil production revenues, totalled $24.7 million.
La Garenne and Prospect Inventory
We began drilling on the La Garenne well on November 12, 2009. The well confirmed a five-meter reservoir within a 50-meter oil column in the target Dogger formation. Based on our continued evaluation of the well results, we believe the well confirms a porous and hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir with a localized low-permeability area at the crest of the structure. We completed production testing of the well in January 2010, and the results were inconclusive. The well flowed only limited quantities from one of its two horizons in the Dogger. We intend to formulate a development plan for La Garenne following a more detailed analysis. We expect that the vertical well we drilled will be used as a water disposal or an injection well in the development of this field.
We have identified several additional conventional prospects on our acreage.
Our ability to explore and develop these prospects may be subject to us obtaining additional funding.
Unconventional Exploration: Paris Basin Shale Oil
In addition to our conventional exploration and production, we are also currently focused on exploiting our shale oil acreage in the Paris Basis pursuant to the Hess Investment Agreement and pending the result of the France Shale Study and any interim or subsequent political developments. See “Recent Developments-Operations Update-Proof of Concept Program” above.
In accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement, Hess made a $15 million upfront payment (plus applicable VAT of $2.9 million) to TEF on June 10, 2010. In addition, subject to government approval, TEF has transferred 50% of its working interest in each permit to Hess. The Ministry of Industry, Energy, and Numeric Economy (Ministère de l’Industrie, de l'Energie, et de l’Énergie numérique) in France granted first-stage approval of these transfers on June 25, 2010. An application for the grant to Hess of title (together with TEF) to the permits has also been filed with the French government and is pending. Upon such approval, Hess would become title holder and have the right to become operator of record for those exploration permits.
Fiscal Terms and Infrastructure
Fiscal Terms
Toreador believes that the Paris Basin presents attractive and stable fiscal terms. Mineral rights in France belong to the French State, and production of hydrocarbons occurs under a concession regime. Holders of a concession or production license must pay the French tax authorities a royalty proportional to the value of the products extracted. This royalty is paid starting from production. The royalty regime distinguishes between “old production” and “new production” and is ring-fenced by production concession. Under the current French Mining Code, the royalty payable is progressive and depends on annual production levels, with royalty rates currently ranging between 0% (below 50,000 tonnes, i.e., 970 bbl/d) and 12% (above 300,000 tonnes, i.e., 5,820 bbl/d) for “new production”. “Old production” is subject to an 8% royalty (below 50,000 tonnes), increasing to 30% (above 300,000 tonnes, i.e., 5,820 bbl/d).
Local mining taxes, or RCDM (redevance communale et départementale des mines), are also payable to the applicable administrative French county and municipality on whose territory the oil is produced. This local tax is determined by multiplying production by a unit rate, which is set each year by the Ministry of the Environment and Energy. The local mining tax is payable in arrears (tax for the production of 2009 is payable in 2011), is ring-fenced by well, and the regime distinguishes between fields entered into production before and after January 1, 1992. For the year 2010 (payable in 2012), the level of tax has been set at €16.84 per ton of oil equivalent to approximately $3.00 per bbl based on an exchange rate of 0.769, for pre-1992 production and €5.36 per ton of oil produced for post-1992 production, equivalent to approximately $0.95 per bbl based on an exchange rate of 0.769. Both the royalties and local mining taxes described above generally apply only to onshore fields; there is a reduced rate for offshore fields located less than one nautical mile from the coast (Toreador does not currently hold any permits covering offshore fields). Each of the taxes is deductible when determining the profit subject to French corporate tax. We are not required to pay surface rental or fees.
Infrastructure
The Paris Basin is conveniently located to utilize existing French infrastructure. The Grandpuits refinery operated by Total is in the heart of the Paris Basin (approximately 30 miles south of the Chateau Thierry permit). Paris Basin crude oil production is currently approximately 11,000 bbl/d (as of December 31, 2010). Our current Paris Basin oil is trucked to the Grandpuits refinery operated by Total after being stored in on-site storage tanks. There is also a major pipeline operated by Lundin Petroleum from the Villeperdue field to the Grandpuits refinery, in which there is substantial free capacity.
Permits, Concessions and Pending Applications
Exploration Permits
We currently hold a 50% working interest in the following exploration permits: Rigny le Ferron, Chateau Thierry, Aufferville, Courtenay, Joigny, Nogent sur Seine, Leudon en Brie; a 25% working interest in the Nemours and Mairy exploration permits; and a 40% working interest in the Champrose exploration permit.
Under French mining law, an exploration permit (“permis exclusif de recherche”) gives the holder an exclusive right to explore and then produce hydrocarbons. Any area, offshore and onshore, which is not covered yet by such a permit may be subject to application at any time. An application for a permit, or a renewal of a permit, is awarded by ministerial order following an administrative consultation and a submission to the regulatory authorities. An exploration permit is initially granted for a period of up to five years and may be renewed twice for up to five years each time; however, except under exceptional circumstances, the area covered by the permit is reduced by half at the first renewal and by a quarter of the remaining area at the second renewal. The permit holder may designate the areas to remain after such reduction, and in any event, the area covered by a permit may not be reduced below 175 km2. The exploration permits have minimum financial requirements, and if such obligations are not met, the permits could be subject to forfeiture. The renewal of an exploration permit is generally granted, provided the holder has met all its obligations thereunder and has agreed to certain future financial commitments at least equal to the financial commitments made during the previous permit period, pro-rated by the duration of the renewal and the area remaining. In case the ministerial decision to renew an exploration permit has not been issued before the expiry date of the permit, the permit holder is entitled to keep on exploring within the perimeter authorized by the exploration permit until an express decision is issued by the minister in charge of energy.
Rigny le Ferron
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Rigny le Ferron permit, which covers approximately 82,748 acres. The existing seismic lines representing around 1,000 km2 were reprocessed and interpreted in 2008, following which several Dogger prospects were identified and mapped. Toreador began drilling on the La Garenne well on November 12, 2009. Toreador completed production testing of the well in January 2010, and the results were inconclusive. The well flowed only limited quantities from one of its two horizons in the Dogger. We intend to formulate a development plan for La Garenne following a more detailed analysis. The Rigny le Ferron permit expired in February 2011; however we filed a renewal application on this permit in August 2010, which is currently pending. Although no renewal decision has been issued before the expiry date of the Rigny le Ferron permit, under the current French Mining Code, such permit can still be operated until an express decision is issued by the minister with respect to its renewal.
Chateau Thierry
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Chateau Thierry permit, which covers approximately 192,468 acres. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Chateau Thierry permit expires in 2014.
Aufferville
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Aufferville permit, which covers approximately 33,095 acres. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Aufferville permit expired in June 2010; however we filed a renewal application on this permit in 2009.
Nemours
We hold a 25% working interest in the Nemours permit, which covers approximately 46,992 acres and is operated by Lundin Petroleum AB. We transferred 25% of our working interest in this permit to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Nemours permit expires in 2013.
Courtenay
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Courtenay permit, which covers approximately 76,276 acres located east of the Neocomian Complex. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Courtenay permit expires in 2013.
Joigny
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Joigny permit, which covers approximately 33,152 acres. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. Seismic interpretation is underway on the acreage to delineate prospects in the Portlandian limestone. The Joigny permit expired in February 2011; however, we filed a renewal application in August 2010 which is currently pending.
Malesherbes
The Malesherbes permit expired on March 30, 2010, and we did not request renewal of the permit.
Mairy
We currently hold a 25% working interest in, and operate, the Mairy permit, which covers approximately 109,705 acres. We transferred 25% of our working interest in this permit to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. In 2011, we intend to drill one well on the Mairy permit. The permit expires in August 2011; however, we filed a renewal application for this permit in February 2011, which is currently pending.
Nogent sur Seine
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Nogent sur Seine permit, which covers approximately 65,727 acres. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Nogent sur Seine permit expires in 2012.
Leudon en Brie
We hold a 50% working interest in, and operate, the Leudon en Brie permit, which covers approximately 26,740 acres. We transferred the remaining 50% working interest to Hess in accordance with the Hess Investment Agreement. The Leudon en Brie permit expires in 2012.
Champrose
Following first-stage approval by the government in December 2010 of a farm-in agreement with Poros SAS and Hess, we currently hold a 40% working interest in the Champrose permit, which covers approximately 113,396 acres. The Champrose permit expires in 2015.
Exploitation Concessions
We currently hold two exploitation concessions covering two producing oil fields in the Paris Basin: the Neocomian Complex and Charmottes fields (Dogger and Trias). As of December 31, 2010, production from these oil fields represented majority of our total revenue and substantially all of our sales and other operating revenue.
| | | At December 31, 2010 | |
Property | Permit Expiration Year | | Total Proved Reserves (Mbbl) | | | Post-Expiration Proved Reserves (Mbbl) | | | Percent of Proved Reserves Post- Expiration | |
Neocomian Fields | 2036 | | | 5,154 | | | | 1,500 | | | | 29.10 | % |
Charmottes Fields* | 2013 | | | 369 | | | | 22 | | | | 5.96 | % |
* Reserve estimate for Charmottes field is based on an assumed renewal of the concession in 2013.
Under French mining law, hydrocarbons may only be developed once a concession has been granted. During the exploration permit period, the permit holder has the exclusive right to obtain an exploitation concession. An exploitation concession is granted by decree, after a public enquiry, a local administrative consultation and a submission to the regulatory authorities. The decree sets forth the concession's perimeter and duration, which cannot exceed 50 years. To be awarded an exploitation concession, the applicant must, among other things, prove that it has the appropriate technical and financial capabilities to perform the operations and comply with safety and environmental regulations. An exploitation concession may be extended several times, each time for no longer than 25 years. An application for a renewal must be submitted two years before the expiration of the concession. The French government is not obligated to renew an exploitation concession, and such renewal would be subject to our satisfaction of technical and financial capability requirements.
Holders of a concession or production license must pay the French government a royalty proportional to the value of the products extracted. This royalty generally applies only to onshore fields and is backdated when the concession is granted but paid as from the day of the first sale of the products extracted. It is deductible from the French corporate tax. Local mining taxes are also payable by the holder, and are determined by multiplying production by a unit rate, which is set each year by the regulatory authorities. These taxes also generally apply only to onshore fields; there is a reduced rate for offshore fields located less than one nautical mile from the coast (we do not currently hold any permits covering offshore fields). Mining taxes are deductible when determining profit subject to French corporate tax.
We hold a 100% working interest in, and operate, the two concessions (Chateaurenard and St. Firmin Des Bois) covering the Neocomian Complex, which consist of a group of four smaller field units. As of December 31, 2010, the complex had 80 producing oil wells, and production was approximately 788 bbl/d. The Chateaurenard concession, which covers approximately 11,268 acres, and the St. Firmin Des Bois concession, which covers approximately 3,973 acres, were both renewed on February 1, 2011 and the renewal decrees published in the French Journal Officiel on February 3, 2011. The renewals extend the expiry date of both concessions to January 1, 2036.
We hold a 100% working interest in, and operate, the Charmottes concession, which consists of two oil fields at different horizons (Dogger and Trias). As of December 31, 2010, the fields had seven producing oil wells, and production was approximately 97 bbl/d. The Charmottes concession, which covers approximately 9,019 acres, expires in October 2013. We filed an application for renewal of the Charmottes concession in February 2011.
Applications Pending Official Publication
Below is a description of the exploration permits for which we have applied that are no longer subject to competition but for which official award is pending publication of the ministerial order.
Coulommiers
We have a pending application for the Coulommiers permit, which covers approximately 45,900 acres. This is an amended surface of the original Coulommiers application made in November 2009. We are currently awaiting publication of the ministerial order granting us the permit.
L'Ourcq
We filed an amended application in 2010 for the L'Ourcq permit, which covers approximately 48,680 acres. This permit is an amended surface of the original Fere-en-Tardenois application made in August 2009. We are currently awaiting publication of the ministerial order granting us the permit.
Mary sur Marne
We filed an application for the Mary sur Marne permit, which covers approximately 30,815 acres. This is an amended surface of the original Fere-en-Tardenois and Coulommiers applications. We are currently awaiting publication of the ministerial order granting us the permit.
Nangis
We filed an application in January 2009 for the Nangis permit, which covers approximately 26,966 acres. We are currently awaiting publication of the ministerial order granting us the permit.
Nanteuil
We filed an application for the Nanteuil permit, which covers approximately 48,680 acres. This permit is an amended surface of the original Fere-en-Tardenois application made in August 2009. We are currently awaiting publication of the decree granting us the permit.
Valence en Brie
We filed an application in January 2009 for the Valence en Brie permit, which covers approximately 16,015 acres. We are currently awaiting publication of the ministerial order granting us the permit.
Below is a description of the exploration permits for which we have applied and are awaiting the results of the application process. The application award process may result in Toreador and Hess getting less than a 100% working interest in the pending applications or only part of that application depending on competition for all or part of the acreage. If the minister in charge of mines has not issued a decision with respect to the outcome of the permit application (or extension) within two years following the date of application, the granting of such a permit is deemed to be refused.
Plaisir
We filed an application in September 2008 (revised in December 2008) for the Plaisir permit, which covers approximately 32,667 acres.
Fere-en-Tardenois
We filed an application in August 2009 for the Fere-en-Tardenois permit, which, following certain amendment applications reflecting revised surfaces, now covers approximately 64,885 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Rozay-en-Brie
We filed an application in June 2010 for the Rozay-en-Brie permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 36,273 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Meaux
We filed an application in June 2010 for the Meaux permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 155,175 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Chevry / Ozoir
In August 2010, we, together with Hess, entered into an agreement with Poros SAS to join their application for the Chevry/Ozoir permit, which they initially filed in December 2008, and which covers approximately 97,606 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Maisoncelles
We filed an application in August 2010 for the Maisoncelles permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 49,626 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Sézanne
We filed an application in August 2010 for the Sezanne permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 214,890 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Leudon extension
We filed an application in October 2010 for an extension to our existing Leudon permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 12,876 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Coole
We filed an application in November 2010 for the Coole permit, jointly with Hess, which covers approximately 207,818 acres. We are still waiting the result of the application award process.
Oil Reserves
Summary of Oil Reserves as of December 31, 2010 and 2009
The following table sets forth information about our estimated net proved reserves, probable reserves and possible reserves at December 31, 2010 and 2009 for our properties in France. Gaffney, Cline & Associates Ltd, an independent petroleum engineering firm in the United Kingdom ("GCA"), audited our proved developed reserves, proved undeveloped reserves, probable reserves, possible reserves and discounted present value (pretax) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. We prepared the estimate of standardized measure of proved reserves in accordance with FASB ASC 932, "Extractive Activities-Oil and Gas." No reserve reports have been provided to any governmental agencies.
| | December 31, |
| | 2010 | | 2009 |
| | (Mbbl) | | (Mbbl) |
Proved developed | | | 5,111 | | 5,383 |
Proved undeveloped | | | 412 | | 420 |
Total Proved | | | 5,523 | | 5,803 |
Probable | | | 3,562 | | 3,333 |
Possible | | | 4,816 | | 5,202 |
Our proved reserves at December 31, 2010 were 5.5 Mbbls. All of our proved reserves are located in the Paris Basin, France. The Neocomian Complex, one of our two producing assets, accounted for 93.32% of our proved reserves. The decrease of our proved reserves from 5.8 Mbbls in 2009 to 5.5 Mbbls in 2010 can be explained primarily a result of the production from these assets during 2010 (approximately 323 Mbbl) and was partially offset by an increase in oil prices used to calculate the reserves in 2009 and 2010 ($79.35 and $56.99, respectively).
Proved Reserves Disclosures
Recent SEC Rule-Making Activity. In December 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") announced that it had adopted amendments designed to modernize the oil and gas company reserves reporting requirements. The most significant amendments to the requirements include the following:
● | replacement of the year-end price with the average prices over 12 months to calculate reserve estimates; |
| |
● | inclusion of oil and gas extracted from non-traditional sources in reserve estimates; |
| |
● | permitted use of new technologies that meet the definition of "reliable" to determine oil and gas reserves and requirement to disclose which technologies the registrant used to determine reserves; |
| |
● | required disclosure of reserves by specific geographic area; |
| |
● | permitted disclosure of both probable and possible reserves, as defined, in addition to required disclosure of proved reserves; |
| |
● | requirement to include reports and related consents from third parties who prepare, audit, or perform a process review of the registrant's reserves estimates if the registrant discloses the involvement of third parties for such purposes. |
We adopted these rules effective December 31, 2009 which was the first time we requested GCA to provide us with a third-party opinion on our two producing assets, the Charmottes field and the Neocomian Complex (see "Third-Party Reserves Audit" below for further detail).
Probable and Possible Reserves
Probable reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than proved reserves but which, together with proved reserves, are as likely as not to be recovered. When deterministic methods are used, it is as likely as not that actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the sum of estimated proved plus probable reserves. When probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 50% probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or exceed the proved plus probable reserves estimates. Probable reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to proved reserves where data control or interpretations of available data are less certain, even if the interpreted reservoir continuity of structure or productivity does not meet the reasonable certainty criterion. Probable reserves may be assigned to areas that are structurally higher than the proved area if these areas are in communication with the proved reservoir. Probable reserves estimates also include potential incremental quantities associated with a greater percentage recovery of the hydrocarbons in place than assumed for proved reserves.
Possible reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than probable reserves. When deterministic methods are used, the total quantities ultimately recovered from a project have a low probability of exceeding proved plus probable plus possible reserves. When probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 10% probability that the total quantities ultimately recovered will equal or exceed the proved plus probable plus possible reserves estimates. Possible reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to probable reserves where data control and interpretations of available data are progressively less certain. Frequently, this will be in areas where geoscience and engineering data are unable to define clearly the area and vertical limits of commercial production from the reservoir by a defined project. Possible reserves also include incremental quantities associated with a greater percentage recovery of the hydrocarbons in place than the recovery quantities assumed for probable reserves.
Internal Controls Over Reserves Estimates
Our policies regarding internal controls over the recording of reserves estimates require reserves to be in compliance with the SEC definitions and guidance and prepared in accordance with generally accepted petroleum engineering principles. Responsibility for compliance in reserves bookings is delegated to a qualified petroleum engineer in our Paris office under the supervision of the Country Manager for France and our Chief Executive Officer. The petroleum engineer prepares all reserves estimates for our two producing assets. Data used in these integrated assessments include information obtained directly from the subsurface via wellbores such as well logs, reservoir cores, fluid samples, static and dynamic information, production test data and production history. Other types of data used include 2D seismic recently reprocessed and calibrated to available well control. The tools used to interpret the data included reservoir modeling and simulation, Decline Curve Analyses and data analysis packages. The preliminary reserves assessment was prepared by our petroleum engineer who left the employ of the company early in the fourth quarter of the year after a three-month handover. The final reserves analysis was updated and reviewed by our Engineering Manager who is a petroleum engineer and has had the opportunity to assess the work and concurs with the approach and the results obtained by his predecessor. Our Engineering Manager holds a degree in chemical engineering and has over 30 years of experience in various petroleum industry roles including several years of combined experience in reservoir engineering and reserves evaluation, all focussed mainly on the Western Canadian and Williston basins of North America and with minor exposure to other basins. He is a licenced Professional Engineer in the Province of Alberta, Canada which qualifications are recognized by La Commission des Titres d'Ingénieur of France and has been a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) for more than 25 years. We engage a third-party petroleum consulting firm (GCA) to audit all of our reserves. See "Third-Party Reserves Audit" below.
Third-Party Reserves Audit
The reserves audit for the year ending December 31, 2010 was performed by Gaffney, Cline & Associates ("GCA"), a leading international petroleum engineering consultancy.
GCA noted in its report that the concession that covers the Charmottes field expires in 2013. Under French law, exploitation concessions can generally be renewed for periods of up to 25 years. Although the French government has no obligation to renew the exploitation concessions, renewals have been generally granted as long as the operator demonstrates continued financial and technical capabilities to operate under such concessions. Renewal of the concessions covering the Neocomian Complex was granted on February 1, 2011, and effective as of January 1, 2011. The renewal decrees extended the validity period of the concessions covering the Neocomian Complex to January 1, 2036. Toreador applied for a renewal of the concession covering the Charmottes field in February 2011. GCA has assumed for purposes of its report that the renewal will be granted and that the economic terms of the concessions will not be altered on renewal.
GCA determined that our estimates of reserves conform to the guidelines of the SEC, including the criteria of "reasonable certainty," as it pertains to expectations about the recoverability of reserves in future years, under existing economic and operating conditions, consistent with the definition in the recently amended Rule 4-10(a) of Regulation S-X. GCA issued an unqualified audit opinion on our proved reserves at December 31, 2010, based upon its evaluation. The GCA opinion concluded that our estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves were, in aggregate, reasonable and have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted petroleum engineering and evaluation principles. GCA's report is attached to this Annual Report on Form 10-K as an exhibit.
The technical personnel at GCA responsible for overseeing the audit of our reserves estimate are Brian Rhodes and Chris Freeman. Mr. Rhodes holds a B.Sc (Hons) Geology, is a member of the Energy Institute, the Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain, the Society of Petroleum Engineers and the European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers, and has more than 33 years industry experience. Dr. Freeman has nearly 30 years of Industry experience, holds a B.Sc. (Hons) Physics from Lancaster University, a Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge, an MBA from Cass Business School in London, he has been a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) for over 25 years, and is a member of the Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain, and the Energy Institute.
Proved Undeveloped Reserves
As of December 31, 2010, our proved undeveloped reserves ("PUDs") totalled 369 Mbbl of crude oil, all of which were associated with the Neocomian fields. As of December 31, 2010, PUDs represented approximately 6.7% of our total proved reserves. We currently estimate that future development costs relating to the development of these PUDs are projected to be approximately $5 million in 2013. No activity was undertaken in 2010 to convert PUDs to proved developed reserves.
Productive Wells
The following table shows our gross and net interests in productive oil wells as of December 31, 2010 producing or capable of production.
| | Gross(1) | | Net(2) | | Total |
| | Oil | | Oil | | Total |
France | | | 133 | | 133 | | 133 | |
(1) "Gross" refers to wells in which we have a working interest.
(2) "Net" refers to the aggregate of our percentage working interest in gross wells before royalties, before or after payout, as appropriate.
Acreage
The following table shows the developed and undeveloped acreage attributable to our ownership as of December 31, 2010.
| | Developed Acreage | | Undeveloped Acreage | | Total Acreage |
| | Gross | | Net | | Gross | | Net | | Gross | | Net |
France | | | 24,260 | | 24,260 | | | 780,299 | | 339,636 | | | 804,559 | | 363,896 |
Undeveloped acreage includes only those acres on which wells have not been drilled or completed to permit the production of commercial quantities of oil and natural gas regardless of whether or not the acreage contains proved reserves.
Drilling and Other Exploratory and Development Activities
The following table shows our drilling activities on a gross and net basis for the years ended 2010, 2009 and 2008.
| | For The Year Ended December 31, |
| | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2008 |
| | Gross(1) | | Net(2) | | Gross(1) | | Net(2) | | Gross(1) | | Net(2) |
FRANCE | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exploratory: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Abandoned(3) | | | - | | - | | | 1 | | 1 | | | – | | – |
(1) "Gross" is the number of wells in which we have a working interest.
(2) "Net" is the aggregate obtained by multiplying each gross well by our after payout percentage working interest.
(3) "Abandoned" means wells that were dry when drilled and were abandoned without production casing being run.
Production, Production Prices and Costs
The following table summarizes our oil production, net of royalties, for the periods indicated for France. It also summarizes calculations of our total average unit sales prices and unit costs.
| | | | | | | | | |
| For The Year Ended December 31, | |
| 2010 | | 2009 | | 2008 | |
Production: | | | | | | | | | |
Oil (Bbls) | | | 323,073 | | | | 328,416 | | | | 365,361 | |
Daily average (Bbls/Day) | | | 885 | | | | 900 | | | | 1,001 | |
Unit prices: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Average oil price ($/Bbl) | | $ | 76.67 | | | $ | 57.17 | | | $ | 93.32 | |
Unit costs ($/BOE): | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Lease operating | | $ | 35.90 | | | $ | 25.57 | | | $ | 25.35 | |
Exploration and acquisition* | | | 0.64 | | | | - | | | | 0.39 | |
Depreciation, depletion and amortization | | | 13.59 | | | | 16.66 | | | | 12.83 | |
Dry hole costs | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | |
General and administrative | | | 46.98 | | | | 11.25 | | | | 3.54 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 97.10 | | | $ | 53.48 | | | $ | 42.11 | |
* Exploration and acquisition expense are net of personal, general and administrative cost of TEF as Operator and invoiced to Hess under the Hess Investment Agreement.
Office Leases
We occupy 23,297 square feet of office space at 13760 Noel Rd., Suite 1100, Dallas, Texas 75240. The lease for this space became effective on October 1, 2007 and is for seven years, and the average monthly rental is $33,050 per month for the term of the lease. In July 2009, we subleased approximately 18,525 square feet of our Dallas office due to the relocation of corporate headquarters to Paris, France. We received approximately $214,656 and $103,987 from the sublease in 2010 and 2009, respectively, which was recorded as a reduction in rent expense. We also lease 3,218 square feet of office space in Paris, France. The lease expires on December 1, 2011 and rent is $16,795 per month. Total net rental expense for 2010 was approximately $278,154.
All our production is currently sold to Total, the largest purchaser in the Paris Basin, pursuant to an agreement signed with Elf Antar in 1996, as amended. Following an initial term expiring in 2002, the agreement automatically renews for one-year periods unless notice of termination is given at least six months in advance. The sale price is based on the monthly-average dated Brent price over the month of production, less a discount. In 2010, sales to Total, representing all of our oil production net revenues (after French State royalty), totalled $24.0 million and represented 59% of our total revenue and other income. In 2009 and 2008, sales to Total represented all of our oil production revenues from France, totalled (after French State royalty) $19.2 million and $34.1 million, respectively, and represented 98% and 99%, respectively, of our total revenues and other income. This production is shipped by truck to the nearby Total Grandpuits refinery.
The oil industry is highly competitive. We encounter strong competition from other independent operators and from major oil companies in acquiring exploration permits and exploitation concessions, contracting for drilling equipment and securing trained personnel. Many of these competitors have financial and technical resources and staffs substantially larger than those available to us. As a result, our competitors may secure desirable permits and concessions, and they may pay more to evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of permits and concessions or prospects than our financial or personnel resources permit us to do.
We are also affected by competition for drilling rigs and the availability of tubular goods and certain other equipment. While the oil industry has experienced shortages of drilling rigs and equipment, pipe and personnel in the past, we are not presently experiencing any shortages and do not foresee any such shortages in the near future; however, we are unable to predict how long current market conditions will continue.
Competition for attractive oil permits and concessions and drilling rights is also strong, and we can give no assurance we will be able to compete satisfactorily in acquiring these permits and concessions. Since many major oil companies have publicly indicated their decision to focus on non-U.S. activities, we cannot ensure we will be successful in acquiring any such permits and concessions.
Government Regulation
Toreador currently operates solely in France. The oil industry is subject to extensive and continually changing regulations on environmental, drilling, production, transportation and sale matters, which can increase the cost of doing business, and consequently, may affect profitability. These laws and regulations may, among other things:
● | require acquisition of a permit before drilling commences; |
| |
● | set the methods of drilling and casing wells; |
| |
● | restrict the types, quantities and concentrations of various materials that can be released into the environment in connection with drilling and production activities; |
| |
● | require installation of expensive pollution control equipment; |
| |
● | require a special license for the transportation of hydrocarbons; |
| |
● | limit or prohibit construction or drilling activities in certain ecologically sensitive and other protected areas; and |
| |
● | require remedial measures to mitigate pollution from historical and ongoing operations. |
Failure to comply with these laws and regulations or to obtain or comply with permits may result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, imposition of remedial requirements and the imposition of injunctions to force future compliance. See also " — Fiscal Terms and Infrastructure."
Our activities are affected by political stability and government regulations relating to foreign investment and the oil industry. Changes in these regulations or shifts in political attitudes are beyond our control and may adversely affect our business. Our operations may be affected by government regulations with respect to restrictions on production, price controls, income taxes, expropriation of property, environmental legislation and mine safety. For more information, see "— Recent Developments — Proof of Concept Program."
Our current or future operations, including exploration and development activities on our acreage, require permits from various governmental authorities, and such operations are and will be governed by laws and regulations governing prospecting, development, production, taxes, labor standards, occupational health, waste disposal, toxic substances, land use, environmental protection and other matters. Compliance with these requirements may prove to be difficult and expensive. See "Risk Factors" for further information regarding government regulation.
The oil industry is subject to extensive and varying environmental regulations in each of the jurisdictions in which we have historically operated or in which we currently, or may in the future, operate. Environmental regulations establish standards respecting health, safety and environmental matters and place restrictions and prohibitions on emissions of various substances produced concurrently with oil and natural gas. These regulations can have an impact on the selection of drilling locations and facilities, potentially resulting in increased capital expenditures. In addition, environmental legislation may require those wells and production facilities to be abandoned and sites reclaimed to the satisfaction of local authorities.
Our operations are subject to various laws and regulations controlling the discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. Such laws and regulations not only expose us to liability for our own negligence, but also may expose us to liability for the conduct of others or for our actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time those actions were taken. We may incur significant costs as a result of environmental accidents, such as oil spills, natural gas leaks, ruptures, or discharges of hazardous materials into the environment, including clean-up costs and fines or penalties. Additionally, we may incur significant costs in order to comply with environmental laws and regulations and may be forced to pay fines or penalties if we do not comply. In addition, future climate change regulation, a subject of discussion in many jurisdictions currently, could require us to incur increased operating costs and could adversely affect the price or market demand for the oil that we produce. See "Risk Factors" for further information regarding environmental regulation.
We are committed to complying with environmental and operation legislation wherever we operate.
In order to carry out exploration and development of mineral interests or to place these into commercial production, we are required to obtain certain permits and concessions from governmental authorities. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to obtain all necessary permits and concessions that may be required. In addition, such permits and concessions are subject to change and there can be no assurances that any application to renew any existing permits or concessions will be approved. See " — Permits, Concessions and Pending Applications" for a description of our permits and concessions, and see "Risk Factors" for further information regarding renewal of such permits and concessions.
Currently, there are no restrictions on the repatriation of earnings or capital to foreign entities from France. However, there can be no assurance that any such restrictions on repatriation of earnings or capital from the aforementioned countries or any other country where we may invest will not be imposed in the future.
As of March 16, 2011, we employed 35 full-time employees. None of our employees are represented by unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. To date, we have not experienced any strikes or work stoppages due to labor problems, and we believe that we have good relations with our employees. As needed, we also utilize the services of independent consultants on a contract basis.
See Note 16 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for information about oil producing activities and operating segments.
Internet Address/Availability of Reports
Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), are made available free of charge on our website at http://www.toreador.net as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or otherwise furnish it to, the SEC and the Autorité des marches financiers (AMF) in France.
Glossary of Selected Oil and Natural Gas Terms
"2D" or "2D SEISMIC." An exploration method of sending energy waves or sound waves into the earth and recording the wave reflections to indicate the type, size, shape, and depth of subsurface rock formations. 2D seismic provides a two dimensional representation along the profile of the line as it was shot. 2D surveys are measured in kilometers or miles.
"3D" or "3D SEISMIC." An exploration method of sending energy waves or sound waves into the earth and recording the wave reflections to indicate the type, size, shape, and depth of subsurface rock formations. 3D seismic lines are shot very close together. This allows for the ability for computers to generate seismic profiles in any direction and form 3D surfaces. 3D surveys are measured in square kilometers or square miles.
"BBL." One stock tank barrel, or 42 U.S. gallons liquid volume, used herein in reference to crude oil or other liquid hydrocarbons.
"BBL/D." Bbl per day.
"BOE." Barrels of oil equivalent.
"DEVELOPED OIL AND GAS RESERVES." Reserves of any category that can be expected to be recovered (i) through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods or in which the cost of the required equipment is relatively minor compared to the cost of a new well and (ii) through installed extraction equipment and infrastructure operational at the time of the reserves estimate if the extraction is by means not involving a well.
"DEVELOPMENT WELL." A well drilled within the proved area of an oil or gas reservoir to the depth of a stratigraphic horizon known to be productive.
"DISCOUNTED PRESENT VALUE." The present value of proved reserves is an estimate of the discounted future net cash flows from each property at the specified date, or as otherwise indicated. Net cash flow is defined as net revenues, after deducting production and ad valorem taxes, less future capital costs and operating expenses, but before deducting federal income taxes. The future net cash flows have been discounted at an annual rate of 10% to determine their "present value." The present value is shown to indicate the effect of time on the value of the revenue stream and should not be construed as being the fair market value of the properties. In accordance with SEC rules, estimates have been made using constant oil and natural gas prices calculated based on unweighted arithmetic average of the first day of the month price during the 12-month period on the specified date and operating costs in effect at the specified date, or as otherwise indicated.
"DRY HOLE." A development or exploratory well found to be incapable of producing either oil or natural gas in sufficient quantities to justify completion as an oil or natural gas well.
"EXPLORATORY WELL." A well drilled to find a new field or to find a new reservoir in a field previously found to be productive of oil or gas in another reservoir.
"GROSS ACRES" or "GROSS WELLS." The total number of acres or wells, as the case may be, in which a working or any type of royalty interest is owned.
"KM." One kilometer.
"MBBL." One thousand bbl.
"MBBLS." One million bbl.
"MBOE." One thousand boe.
"NET ACRES." The sum of the fractional working or any type of royalty interests owned in gross acres.
"PERMIT." An area onshore or offshore that comprises a contiguous acreage, or leasehold, position on which an operator drills exploratory and/or development wells. Sometimes designated as a "lease" or "block."
"POSSIBLE RESERVES." Those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than probable reserves.
"PROBABLE RESERVES." Those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than proved reserves but which, together with proved reserves, are as likely as not to be recovered.
"PRODUCING WELL" or "PRODUCTIVE WELL." A well that is capable of producing oil or natural gas in economic quantities.
"PROVED RESERVES." The estimated quantities of oil and gas, which, by analysis of geoscience and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible — from a given date forward, from known reservoirs, and under existing economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations — prior to the time at which contracts providing the right to operate expire, unless evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably certain, regardless of whether deterministic or probabilistic methods are used for the estimation.
"ROYALTY INTEREST." An interest in an oil and natural gas property entitling the owner to a share of oil and natural gas production free of production costs.
"UNDEVELOPED ACREAGE." Lease acreage on which wells have not been drilled or completed to a point that would permit the production of commercial quantities of oil and natural gas regardless of whether such acreage contains proved reserves.
"UNDEVELOPED OIL AND GAS RESERVES." Reserves of any category that are expected to be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage, or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion.
"WORKING INTEREST." The operating interest (not necessarily as operator) that gives the owner the right to drill, produce and conduct operating activities on the property and a share of production, subject to all royalties, overriding royalties and other burdens, and to all exploration, development and operational costs including all risks in connection therewith.
Risks Related to Our Company
The results and impact of pending French governmental studies relating to the development of shale oil in France are uncertain. Future restrictions on shale oil in France would have a material adverse effect on our business.
On February 4, 2011, France’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy announced its intention to conduct a study on the economic, social and environmental stakes relating to the development of shale gas and shale oil in France (the “France Shale Study”). On February 10, 2011, Toreador and Hess met with representatives of the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Energy to discuss the impact the France Shale Study might have on its unconventional oil exploration, particularly the proof of concept program. Following such discussion, Toreador concluded that they will voluntarily delay such drilling pending the results of the France Shale Study and any interim or subsequent political developments. In the interim, Toreador intends to cooperate with the French government in conducting the France Shale Study, including by providing scientific data and practical experiences regarding oil development, hosting delegations to observe oil operations in the Paris Basin and initiating baseline environmental studies with third-party environmental experts that would be available to the French government.
On March 2, 2011 an additional study on the impact of shale gas and shale oil was launched by the French National Assembly (the “National Assembly Study”), the conclusions of which are expected to be published in June 2011 (at the same time as the final report relating to the France Shale Study). On March 11, 2011, the Prime Minister of France announced that the moratorium on unconventional exploration has been extended to exploration permits and works authorizations until mid-June 2011 (originally mid-April), i.e. when the conclusions of the studies on the environmental impact of drilling techniques will have been rendered. The Company does not currently know the impact of such decision on its proof of concept program. The Company is currently evaluating its drilling program in light of these developments and will continue to monitor further developments and adjust its plans as necessary.
We currently rely on funds from our strategic partner for execution of our proof of concept program.
Pursuant to the Hess Investment Agreement, in order for Hess to retain its working interests in the relevant exploration permits in connection with our proof of concept program, Hess is required to invest up to $120 million in fulfillment of a two-phase work program. If Hess does not spend $120 million in fulfillment of the work program and/or elects not to proceed to the second phase of the work program, Toreador would be entitled to receive back from Hess the portion of its working interest in each permit Toreador transferred to Hess in connection with the execution of the Hess Investment Agreement; however, Toreador would then be required to expend the capital required to fund such work program (or any other work program). If Hess does spend $120 million in fulfillment of the work program, Toreador would be required to fund its portion of subsequent exploration, appraisal and development activities in accordance with individual participation agreements governing the joint operations on each permit. As a result, Toreador may require additional capital to execute the proof of concept program or fund such subsequent work, as applicable, which it may not be able to obtain on favorable terms, if at all.
We may require additional capital in the future, which may not be available on favorable terms, if at all.
We may require additional capital in 2011 and beyond to, among other things, execute our business plan, which would entail substantial capital expenditures. Under French law, each of our exploration permits and exploitation concessions require that we commit to expenditures of a certain amount over the period of the applicable permit or concession. Though we consider these amounts discretionary, such expenditures would be required to renew such permits.
We currently have a limited amount of oil production in France, and the revenues from our current production are not expected to be sufficient to cover all of the costs that would be necessary to explore and develop all our existing permits. Accordingly, we will continue to rely, to the extent available, on existing working capital and additional funds obtained from external sources, including potential strategic partners, to cover these costs. If these resources are unavailable, we may be required to curtail our drilling, development and other activities.
The amount and timing of our future capital requirements will depend upon a number of factors, including:
● | drilling results and costs; |
● | |
| |
● | equipment costs and availability; |
| |
● | |
| |
● | |
| |
● | requirements and commitments under existing permits and concessions; |
| |
● | staffing levels and competitive conditions; |
| |
● | any purchases or dispositions of assets; and |
| |
● | other factors affecting our business at any given time. |
To the extent that our existing capital and borrowing capabilities are insufficient to meet these requirements and cover any losses, we will need to raise additional funds through debt or equity financings, including offerings of our common stock, securities convertible into our common stock or rights to acquire our common stock, or revise our business plan and/or curtail our growth. Any equity or debt financing or additional borrowings, if available at all, may be on terms that are not favorable to us. In addition, the New Convertible Senior Notes limit our ability to incur or increase our debt based on our proved plus probable reserves. Under the terms of the New Convertible Senior Notes, we may not maintain total consolidated net debt, or incur debt, in excess of the product of (x) $7.00 and (y) the number of barrels of our proved plus probable reserves, except for nonrecourse financing for projects or acquisitions, joint ventures or partnerships and certain other permitted debt. Any securities we issue in future financings may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to those of our common stock. If our need for capital arises because of significant losses, the occurrence of these losses may make it more difficult for us to raise the necessary capital. If we cannot raise funds on acceptable terms if and when needed, we may not be able to take advantage of future opportunities, grow our business or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated requirements.
Our ability to raise additional capital will depend on the results of our operations and the status of various capital and industry markets at the time we seek such capital. Our failure or inability to obtain any required additional financing on favorable terms could materially and adversely affect our growth, cash flow and earnings, including our ability to meet our capital expenditures budget.
In addition, if we issue additional equity securities, including upon conversion of our existing or any future convertible or similar securities, the value of currently outstanding common stock may be diluted and the trading price of our common stock may be adversely affected. See " — Risks Related to Our Common Stock — We may issue equity securities that may depress the trading price of our common stock and may dilute the interests of our existing stockholders."
We may not be able to maintain or renew our existing exploration permits or exploitation concessions or obtain new ones, which could reduce our proved reserves.
We do not hold title to our properties in France but hold exploration permits and exploitation concessions granted by the French government. Under French law, each exploration permit requires us to commit expenditures of a certain amount of exploration costs and is subject to renewal after the initial term of up to five years. Under French law, each exploitation concession requires a similar commitment of expenditure and is subject to renewal after an initial term of up to 50 years.
We currently hold three exploitation concessions covering two producing oil areas in the Paris Basin — the Neocomian Complex (Chateaurenard and St. Firmin Des Bois) and Charmottes fields (producing from the Dogger and Trias horizon). The production from these oil fields currently represents substantially all of our sales and other operating revenue. We obtained a renewal of the Chateaurenard and St. Firmin Des Bois concessions in February 2011, extending the expiry date of each to January 1, 2036 and we filed a renewal application for the Charmottes fields in February 2011. We have also filed renewal applications for exploration permits that expired in 2010 or 2011 (Auferville, Rigny le Ferron and Joigny) or will expire later in 2011 (Mairy). These renewal applications are currently pending with the French government. Although no renewal decision has been issued before the expiry of the Aufferville, Rigny le Ferron and Joigny permits, under current French Mining Code, such permits can still be operated until an express decision of the minister is issued with respect to their renewal. However, there is a doubt as to whether such exploration will still be possible after 15 months following the date of filing of the renewal application since the silence kept by the minister for more than 15 months following the date of filing of the renewal application may be construed as an implicit refusal to grant the renewal of an exploration permit.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to renew any of these permits or concessions when they expire, convert exploration permits into exploitation concessions or obtain additional permits or concessions in the future. If we do not satisfy the French government that we have financial and technical capacities necessary to operate under such permits or concessions, such permits or concessions may be withdrawn and/or not renewed. If we cannot renew some or all of these permits or concessions when they expire or convert exploration permits into exploitation concessions, we will not be able to include the proved reserves associated with the permit or concession and we will be unable to engage in production to recover reserves, which production currently represents substantially all of our revenue. Any such negative developments with respect to our permits would have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our business.
Our indebtedness and near-term debt obligations could materially adversely affect our financial health, limit our ability to finance capital expenditures and future acquisitions and prevent us from executing our business plan.
On December 31, 2010, we had approximately $31.6 million outstanding aggregate principal amount of our New Convertible Senior Notes recorded at a fair value of $34.4 million. Our level of indebtedness has, or could have, important consequences to investors, because:
● | a substantial portion of our cash flows from operations will have to be dedicated to interest and principal payments and may not be available for operations, working capital, capital expenditures, expansion, acquisitions or general corporate or other purposes; |
| |
● | it may impair our ability to obtain additional financing in the future for acquisitions, capital expenditures or general corporate purposes; |
| |
● | it may limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and industry; and |
| |
● | we may be substantially more leveraged than some of our competitors, which may place us at a relative competitive disadvantage and make us more vulnerable to downturns in our business, our industry or the economy in general. |
In addition, the terms of our New Convertible Senior Notes restrict, and the terms of any future indebtedness, including any future credit facility, may restrict, our ability to incur additional indebtedness because of debt or financial covenants we are, or may be, required to meet. Under the terms of the New Convertible Senior Notes, we may not maintain total consolidated net debt, or incur debt, in excess of the product of (x) $7.00 and (y) the number of barrels of our proved plus probable reserves, except for nonrecourse financing for projects or acquisitions, joint ventures or partnerships and certain other permitted debt. Thus, we may not be able to obtain sufficient capital to grow our business or implement our business strategy and may lose opportunities to acquire interests in oil properties or related businesses because of our inability to fund such growth.
Our ability to comply with restrictions and covenants, including those in our New Convertible Senior Notes or in any future credit facility, is uncertain and will be affected by the level of our proved plus probable reserves, the levels of cash flow from our operations, and events or circumstances beyond our control. Our failure to comply with any of the restrictions and covenants could result in a default, which could permit the lender to accelerate repayments and foreclose on the collateral securing the indebtedness.
We have incurred net losses in recent years, and there can be no assurance we will be profitable in the future.
Our future financial results are uncertain. We incurred net losses of approximately $9.5 million, $25.4 million and $108.6 million in the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our strategy includes conducting efficient operations and maintaining an optimal capital structure; however, there can be no assurance that our strategy will be effective or that we will be profitable in the future.
Our financial success depends on our ability to replace our reserves in the future.
Our future success as an oil producer depends upon our ability to find, develop and acquire additional oil reserves that are profitable. Oil reserves are depleting assets, and production of oil from properties declines as reserves are depleted with the rate of decline depending on reservoir characteristics. If we are unable to conduct successful exploration or development activities or acquire properties containing proved reserves, our proved reserves generally will decline as the reserves are produced, and our level of production, revenues and cash flows will be adversely affected. Replacing our reserves through exploration or development activities or acquisitions will require significant capital, which may not be available to us.
This risk may be compounded by the fact that as of December 31, 2010, 6.7% of our total estimated proved reserves were classified as undeveloped, which, by their nature, are less certain and will require significant capital expenditures and successful drilling operations.
Since we do not hold title to our properties but rather hold exploration permits and exploitation concessions granted to us by the French government, the SEC may require that a portion of reported proved reserves associated with these permits not be included in our proved reserves.
Rather than holding title to our properties, we hold exploration permits and exploitation concessions that have been granted to us by the French government for a specific time period. We must apply to have these permits renewed and extended in order to continue our exploration and development rights. Although we have historically reported our proved reserves assuming that the permits will be extended in due course, the SEC may take the view that our ability to renew and extend our permits past their current expiration dates is not sufficiently certain for us to include the reserves that may be produced post-expiration in our total proved reserves. Although we have previously been able to provide support to the SEC regarding the likelihood of extension, no assurance can be given that the SEC will allow us to continue to include these additional reserves in our proved reserves.
The loss of the current single purchaser of our oil production could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
For the year ended December 31, 2010, Total accounted for all of our revenues from oil production in France. Our contract with Total was signed in 1996 (then with Elf Antar) and automatically renews for one-year periods unless notice of termination is given at least six months in advance. If Total determines not to renew this contract, ceases purchasing our oil on terms that are favorable to us or fails to pay us and we are unable to contract with another purchaser, it would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, future cash flows and the results of operations. This customer concentration may also increase our overall exposure to credit risk.
Hedging activities may require us to make significant payments that are not offset by sales of production and may prevent us from benefiting from increases in oil prices.
We currently, and may in the future, enter into various hedging transactions for a portion of our production in an attempt to reduce our exposure to the volatility of oil prices. In a typical hedge transaction, we will have the right to receive from the counterparty to the hedge the excess of the fixed price specified in the hedge over a floating price based on a market index, multiplied by the quantity hedged. If the floating price exceeds the fixed price, we will be required to pay the counterparty this difference multiplied by the quantity hedged. In such case, we will be required to pay the difference regardless of whether we have sufficient production to cover the quantities specified in the hedge. Significant reductions in production at times when the floating price exceeds the fixed price could require us to make payments under the hedge agreements even though such payments are not offset by sales of production. Hedging also could prevent us from receiving the full advantage of increases in oil prices above the fixed amount specified in the hedge.
We depend on our senior management team and other key personnel. Accordingly, the loss of any of these individuals could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and future growth.
Our success is largely dependent on the skills, experience and efforts of our senior management and other key personnel. Although we have entered into employment agreements with our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we can give no assurance that either of these individuals will remain with us. The loss of the services of either of these individuals or other employees with critical skills needed to operate our business could have a negative effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations and future growth. Our ability to manage our growth, if any, will require us to continue to train, motivate and manage our employees and to attract, motivate and retain additional qualified personnel.
Competition for these types of personnel is intense in our industry, and we may not be successful in attracting, assimilating and retaining the personnel required to grow and operate our business profitably.
It may not be possible to serve process on our directors and officers or enforce judgments against them or us.
Many of our directors and executive officers live outside of the United States. Most of the assets of certain of our directors and executive officers and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United States. As a result, it may not be possible to serve process on such persons in the United States or to enforce judgments obtained in U.S. courts against them based on the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States.
Our operations are in France and we have previously operated in other international jurisdictions and we are subject to political, economic and legal risks and other uncertainties.
Our operations are in France and we have previously operated in other international jurisdictions, including through joint venture arrangements with parties in various international jurisdictions. We are, and have been, subject to the following risks and uncertainties that can affect our international operations adversely:
● | the risk of expropriation, nationalization, war, revolution, border disputes, renegotiation or modification of existing contracts, and import, export and transportation regulations and tariffs; |
| |
● | taxation policies, including royalty and tax increases and retroactive tax claims; |
| |
● | exchange controls, currency fluctuations and other uncertainties arising out of non-U.S. government sovereignty over international operations; |
| |
● | laws and policies of the United States affecting foreign trade, taxation and investment; |
| |
● | the possibility of being subjected to the exclusive jurisdiction of non-U.S. courts in connection with legal disputes and the possible inability to subject non-U.S. persons to the jurisdiction of courts in the United States; and |
| |
● | the possibility of restrictions on repatriation of earnings or capital from foreign countries. |
Further, our non-U.S. operations and international business relationships are subject to laws and regulations that may restrict activities involving restricted countries, organizations, entities and persons that have been identified as unlawful actors or that are subject to U.S. economic sanctions. If we are not in compliance with any such applicable laws and regulations or U.S. economic sanctions, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties and other remedial measures.
All of our revenues are currently attributable to our properties in the Paris Basin in France. Any disruption in production, development or our ability to produce and sell oil in France would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or reduce future revenues.
All of our sales revenues are currently attributable to our properties in the Paris Basin in France. We depend on third parties in France for the transportation and refining of our oil production. Any disruption in production, development or our ability to produce and sell oil in France would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or reduce future revenues. If production of oil in the Paris Basin were disrupted or curtailed, or in the case of labor or other disruptions affecting French refineries, transportation or other infrastructure, our cash flows and revenues would be significantly reduced.
Our operations are subject to currency fluctuation risks.
We currently have operations involving the U.S. dollar and Euro, and we are subject to fluctuations in the value of the U.S. dollar as compared to the Euro. While our oil sales are calculated on a U.S. dollar basis, our expenditures are in Euro and we are exposed to the risk that the values of our French assets will decrease and that the amounts of our French liabilities will increase. These currency fluctuations, including the recent fluctuations, may adversely affect our results of operations. We do not currently hedge our exposure to currency fluctuations.
Failure to maintain effective internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our operations and our stock price
We are subject to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which requires an annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and a report by our independent auditors addressing our internal controls and management's assessment. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and prevent fraud and other errors in our reporting and recordkeeping.
If, as a result of deficiencies in our financial or other internal controls, including significant deficiencies, we have not or cannot provide reliable financial reports or internal recordkeeping or compliance procedures, our business decision or compliance process may be adversely affected, our business and operating results could be harmed, we may be subject to legal penalties or other claims, investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information and the price of our stock could decrease. For a discussion of our internal control over financial reporting, see Item 9A, "Controls and Procedures."
In connection with the sales of our assets in Turkey, we granted certain significant indemnities to the purchasers of those assets.
In 2005, two separate incidents occurred offshore Turkey in the Black Sea, which resulted in the sinking of the Fallen Structures, as defined below, and the loss of three natural gas wells. We have not been requested, or ordered by any governmental or regulatory body, to remove the Fallen Structures. Therefore, we believe it is unlikely that we will receive such a request or order, and no liability has been recorded. In connection with the 2009 sales of our assets in Turkey we agreed to indemnify each purchaser against and in respect of any claims, liabilities and losses arising from the Fallen Structures. We have also indemnified a third-party vendor for any claims made related to these incidents. We are unable to estimate the potential liability associated with the Fallen Structures. We have also granted certain other indemnities to the purchasers of our assets in Turkey and to the purchaser of our assets in Hungary in connection with the 2009 sales. Though certain of these indemnities are subject to limitations, including limitations on the time period during which claims may be asserted and the amounts for which we are liable, there can be no assurance that we will not incur future liabilities to the purchasers in connection with these transactions or that the amount of such liabilities will not be material or will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
We face certain litigation risks, and unfavorable results of legal proceedings could have a material adverse effect on us.
We are party to certain lawsuits. Regardless of the merits of any claim, litigation can be lengthy, time-consuming, expensive, and disruptive to normal business operations and may divert management's time and resources, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including our cash flow. The results of complex legal proceedings are difficult to predict. Should we fail to prevail in these matters, or should any of these matters be resolved against us, we may be faced with significant monetary damages, which also could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, including our cash flow.
Acquisition prospects may be difficult to assess and may pose additional risks to our operations.
We continue to evaluate and, where appropriate, intend to pursue acquisition opportunities on terms we consider favorable. In particular, we consider acquisitions of businesses or interests that will complement and allow us to expand our exploration activities; however, currently, we have no binding commitments related to any acquisitions.
Future acquisitions could pose numerous additional risks to our operations and financial results, including:
● | problems integrating the purchased operations, personnel or technologies; |
| |
● | unanticipated costs; |
| |
● | diversion of resources and management attention from our core business; |
| |
● | entry into regions or markets in which we have limited or no prior experience; and |
| |
● | potential loss of key employees, particularly those of any acquired organization. |
Risks Related to Our Industry
A decline in oil prices will have an adverse impact on our operations, and oil prices have been extremely volatile in recent years.
Our future revenues, cash flows and profitability are substantially dependent upon prevailing prices for oil. In recent years, oil prices and, therefore, the level of drilling, exploration, development and production, have been extremely volatile. Any significant or extended decline in oil prices will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could impair access to future sources of capital. Lower prices may make it uneconomical for us to increase or even continue current production levels of oil.
Volatility in the oil industry results from numerous factors, over which we have no control, including:
● | the level of oil prices, expectations about future oil prices and the ability of international cartels to set and maintain production levels and prices; |
| |
● | the cost of exploring for, producing and transporting oil; |
| |
● | the domestic and foreign supply and demand of oil; |
| |
● | domestic and foreign governmental regulation; |
| |
● | the level and price of foreign oil transportation; |
| |
● | available pipeline and other oil transportation capacity; |
| |
● | weather and other natural conditions; |
| |
● | international political, military, regulatory and economic conditions, particularly in oil-producing regions; |
● | the level of consumer demand; |
| |
● | the price and availability of alternative fuels; |
| |
● | the effect of worldwide energy conservation measures; and |
| |
● | the ability of oil companies to raise capital. |
Significant declines in oil prices may:
● | impair our financial condition, liquidity, ability to finance planned capital expenditures and results of operations; |
| |
● | reduce the amount of oil we can produce economically; |
| |
● | cause us to delay or postpone some of our capital projects; |
| |
● | reduce our revenues, operating income and cash flow; |
| |
● | reduce the carrying value of our oil properties; and |
| |
● | limit our access to sources of capital. |
Oil prices rose to unprecedented levels during 2008. In September 2008, with the onset of the deterioration of the credit and equity markets, oil prices declined by more than 70% by the end of 2008. Oil prices recovered slowly throughout 2009 and 2010 and have recently now increased significantly in connection with the recent political instability in the Middle East. Such volatile oil prices caused us to remain cautious in our capital expenditure program for 2010 and continue to influence how we will operate on a go-forward basis. Our internally generated cash flow and cash on hand historically have not been sufficient to fund all of our expenditures, and we have in the past relied on the sales of non-core assets to provide us with additional capital. Though average oil prices increased by approximately 30% from the twelve months ended December 31, 2009 to twelve months ended December 31, 2010, oil prices are, and we expect will continue to be, volatile. The results of our operations are highly dependent upon the prices received from our oil production, which are dependent on numerous factors beyond our control. Accordingly, significant changes to oil prices are likely to have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operation, cash flows and revenue.
Competition in the oil industry is intense, and many of our competitors have greater financial, technological and other resources than we do.
We operate in the highly competitive areas of oil exploration, development, production, and acquisition activities. The oil industry is characterized by rapid and significant technological advancements and introductions of new products and services using new technologies. We face intense competition from independent, technology-driven companies as well as from both major and other independent oil companies in each of the following areas:
● | seeking to acquire desirable exploration permits or exploitation concessions; |
| |
● | marketing our oil production; |
| |
● | integrating new technologies; and |
| |
● | seeking to acquire the equipment and expertise necessary to develop and operate our acreage. |
Many of our competitors have financial, technological and other resources substantially greater than ours, and some of them are fully integrated oil companies. These companies may be able to pay more for development prospects and productive oil acreage and may be able to define, evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of permits or concessions than our financial or human resources permit. Further, these companies may enjoy technological advantages over us and may be able to implement new technologies more rapidly than we can. Our ability to develop and exploit our oil acreage and to acquire additional acreage in the future will depend upon our ability to successfully conduct operations, implement advanced technologies, evaluate and select suitable acreage and consummate transactions in this highly competitive environment.
The unavailability or high cost of drilling rigs, equipment, supplies, insurance, personnel and oil field services could adversely affect our ability to execute our exploration and development plans on a timely basis and within our budget.
Our industry is cyclical and, from time to time, there could be a shortage of drilling rigs, equipment, supplies, insurance, qualified personnel or oil field services. During these periods, the costs and delivery times of rigs, equipment and supplies are substantially greater. In addition, the demand for, and wages of, qualified drilling rig crews rise as the number of active rigs in service increases. When oil prices are high, the demand for oilfield services rises and the cost of these services increases.
We are subject to complex laws and regulations that could adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of conducting our operations.
Our operations are subject to complex and stringent laws and regulations, including the French Mining Code. In order to conduct our operations in compliance with these laws and regulations, we must obtain and maintain numerous permits, concessions approvals and certificates from various governmental authorities. We may incur substantial costs in order to maintain compliance with these existing laws and regulations. In addition, our costs of compliance may increase if existing laws and regulations are revised or reinterpreted, or if new laws and regulations become applicable to our operations. For example, France’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy announced in February 2011 their intention to conduct a study on the economic, social and environmental stakes relating to the development of shale oil in France. A preliminary report is expected mid-April 2011 and a final report by the end of June 2011. We do not know what impact this study might have on our unconventional oil exploration. We are monitoring developments and assisting the French government in this study by providing technical and scientific information on the Paris Basin shale oil resource.
We may be unable to obtain all necessary permits, concessions approvals and certificates, or renewals thereof, for proposed projects. Alternatively, we may have to incur substantial expenditures to obtain, maintain or renew authorizations to conduct existing projects. If a project is unable to function as planned due to changing requirements or public opposition, we may suffer expensive delays, extended periods of non-operation or significant loss of value in a project. All such costs may have a negative effect on our business and results of operations.
Our business exposes us to liability and extensive environmental regulation.
Our operations are subject to various laws and regulations controlling the discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. Such laws and regulations not only expose us to liability for our own negligence, but also may expose us to liability for the conduct of others or for our actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time those actions were taken. We may incur significant costs as a result of environmental accidents, such as oil spills, ruptures, or discharges of hazardous materials into the environment, including clean-up costs and fines or penalties. Additionally, we may incur significant costs in order to comply with environmental laws and regulations and may be forced to pay fines or penalties if we do not comply.
For example, in 2005, two separate incidents occurred offshore Turkey in the Black Sea, which resulted in the sinking of two caissons, or the Fallen Structures, and the loss of three natural gas wells. We have not been requested or ordered by any governmental or regulatory body to remove the Fallen Structures. Therefore, we believe that the likelihood of receiving such a request or order is remote, and no liability has been recorded. In connection with the 2009 sales of our assets in Turkey, we agreed to indemnify each purchaser against and in respect of any claims, liabilities and losses arising from the Fallen Structures. We have also indemnified a third-party vendor for any claims made related to these incidents. See " — Risks Related to Our Company — In connection with the recent sales of our assets in Turkey, we granted certain significant indemnities to the purchasers of those assets."
In addition, future climate change regulation, a subject of discussion in many jurisdictions currently, could require us to incur increased operating costs and could adversely affect the price or market demand for the oil that we produce.
Terrorist activities may adversely affect our business.
Terrorist activities, including events similar to those of September 11, 2001, or armed conflict involving the United States or France in which we may hold interests, may adversely affect our business activities and financial condition. If events of this nature occur and persist, the resulting political and social instability could adversely affect prevailing oil prices and cause a reduction in our revenues. In addition, oil production facilities, transportation systems and storage facilities could be direct targets of terrorist attacks, and our operations could be adversely impacted if infrastructure integral to our operations is destroyed or damaged. Costs associated with insurance and other security measures may increase as a result of these threats, and some insurance coverage may become more difficult to obtain, if available at all.
We face numerous risks in finding commercially productive oil reservoirs, including delays in our drilling operations as a result of factors that are beyond our control and that may not be covered by insurance.
Our drilling will involve numerous risks, including the risk that no commercially productive oil reservoirs will be encountered. We may incur significant expenditures for the identification and acquisition of properties and for the drilling and completion of wells. The cost of drilling, completing and operating wells is often uncertain, and drilling operations may be curtailed, delayed or canceled as a result of a variety of factors, including:
● | unexpected drilling conditions; |
| |
● | fire, explosions and blowouts; |
| |
● | pressure or irregularities in formations; |
| |
● | environmental accidents such as oil spills, ruptures or discharges of toxic gases, brine or well fluids into the environment (including groundwater contamination); |
| |
● | equipment failures or accidents; |
| |
● | weather conditions; and |
| |
● | shortages or delays in the delivery of equipment. |
Any of these events could adversely affect our ability to conduct our operations or cause substantial losses, including:
● | injury or loss of life; |
| |
● | severe damage to or destruction of property, natural resources and equipment; |
| |
● | pollution or other environmental damage; |
| |
● | clean-up responsibilities; |
| |
● | regulatory investigation; |
| |
● | penalties and suspension of operations; and |
| |
● | attorneys' fees and other expenses incurred in the prosecution or defense of litigation. |
As is customary in our industry, we maintain insurance against some, but not all, of these risks. We cannot assure investors that our insurance will be adequate to cover these losses or liabilities. We do not carry business interruption insurance. Losses and liabilities arising from uninsured or underinsured events may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operations. We carry well control insurance for our drilling operations. Our coverage includes blowout protection and liability protection on our wells.
The producing wells in which we have an interest occasionally experience reduced or terminated production. These curtailments can result from mechanical failures, contract terms, pipeline and processing plant interruptions, market conditions and weather conditions. These curtailments can last from a few days to many months and may significantly reduce our revenues.
In addition, any use by us of 3D seismic and other advanced technology to explore for oil requires greater predrilling expenditures than traditional drilling methodologies. While we use advanced technology in our operations, this technology does not allow us to know conclusively, prior to drilling a well, that oil is present or economically producible.
In addition, as a "successful efforts" company, we account for unsuccessful exploration efforts, i.e., the drilling of "dry holes," as an expense of operations that impacts our earnings. Significant expensed exploration charges in any period would materially adversely affect our earnings for that period and could cause our earnings to be volatile from period to period.
Reserve estimates depend on many assumptions that may turn out to be inaccurate.
The process of estimating oil reserves is complex. It requires interpretations of available technical data and various assumptions, including assumptions relating to economic factors. Any material inaccuracies in our reserve estimates or underlying assumptions could materially affect the quantities and present values of our reserves. In order to prepare these estimates, we must project production rates and timing of development expenditures. We must also analyze available geological, geophysical, production and engineering data, and the extent, quality and reliability of this data can vary. The process also requires economic assumptions relating to matters such as oil prices, drilling and operating expenses, capital expenditures, taxes and availability of funds.
Actual future production, oil prices, revenues, taxes, development expenditures, operating expenses and quantities of recoverable oil reserves most likely will vary from our estimates. Any significant variance could materially affect the estimated quantities and pre-tax net present value of reserves incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement. In addition, we may adjust estimates of proved reserves to reflect production history, results of exploration and development, prevailing oil prices and other factors, many of which are beyond our control.
You should not assume that the present value of our proved reserves is the current market value of our estimated oil reserves.
You should not assume that the pre-tax net present value of our proved reserves is the current market value of our estimated oil reserves. In accordance with the revised SEC requirements, we base the pre-tax net present value of future net cash flows from our proved reserves on 12-month average prices and costs on the date of the estimate. Actual future prices, costs, and the volume of produced reserves may differ materially from those used in the pre-tax net present value estimate and may be affected by factors such as:
● | supply of and demand for oil; |
| |
● | actual prices we receive for oil; |
| |
● | our actual operating costs; |
| |
● | the amount and timing of our capital expenditures; |
| |
● | the amount and timing of actual production; and |
| |
● | changes in governmental regulations or taxation. |
The timing of both our production and our incurrence of expenses in connection with the development and production of our properties will affect the timing of actual future net cash flows from proved reserves, and thus their actual present value. In addition, the 10% discount factor we use when calculating discounted future net cash flow, which is required by the SEC, may not be the most appropriate discount factor based on interest rates in effect from time to time and risks associated with us or the oil industry in general.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
Our stock's public trading price has been volatile, which may depress the trading price of our common stock.
Our stock price is subject to significant volatility. We operate in a price-sensitive industry, and there is often significant volatility in the market price of common stock irrespective of company performance. As a result, our high and low intra-day stock prices for 2010 were $16.20 and $5.35, respectively. Fluctuations in the price of our common stock may be exacerbated by conditions in the energy and oil industries or conditions in the financial markets generally.
Our common stock is quoted on The NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol "TRGL" and as of December 17, 2010 under the symbol "TOR" on the Professional Segment of NYSE Euronext in Paris. However, daily trading volumes for our common stock are, and may continue to be, relatively small compared to many other publicly traded securities. It may be difficult for investors to sell their shares of common stock in the public market at any given time at prevailing prices, and the price of our common stock may, therefore, be volatile.
Numerous factors, including many over which we have no control, may have a significant impact on the market price of our common stock, including, among other things:
● | current events affecting the political, economic and social situation in the United States and France; |
| |
● | trends in our industry and the markets in which we operate; |
| |
● | changes in financial estimates and recommendations by securities analysts; |
| |
● | acquisitions and financings by us or our competitors; |
| |
● | quarterly variations in operating results; |
| |
● | litigation or governmental action involving or affecting us; |
| |
● | volatility in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the Euro; |
| |
● | the operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors may consider to be comparable; and |
| |
● | purchases or sales of blocks of our securities. |
In addition, the stock market in recent years has experienced extreme price and trading volume fluctuations that often have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance. In addition, sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that those sales may occur, could cause the market price of our common stock to decline. Furthermore, stockholders may initiate securities class action lawsuits if the market price of our stock drops significantly, which may cause us to incur substantial costs and could divert the time and attention of our management. These factors, among others, could significantly depress the price of our common stock.
We do not intend to pay cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.
We currently intend to continue our policy of retaining earnings to finance the growth of our business. As a result, we do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms of any future credit facility may restrict our ability to pay dividends on our common stock.
We may issue equity securities, including upon conversion of existing securities, that may depress the trading price of our common stock and may dilute the interests of our existing stockholders.
Sales or issuances of common stock or securities convertible into our common stock or the issuance of securities senior to our common stock may depress the trading price of our common stock. We may not have the ability to issue new common stock or securities convertible into common stock due to the decline in the equity market and our share price.
Any issuance of equity securities, including the issuance of shares upon conversion of our New Convertible Senior Notes, could dilute the interests of our existing stockholders and could substantially decrease the trading price of our common stock and the New Convertible Senior Notes. The terms of the New Convertible Senior Notes provide that the conversion rate be adjusted for certain securities offerings conducted prior to October 1, 2010 if 120% of the offering price in such offering is less than the then current conversion price. Thus, because we sold shares in the February 2010 offering at $8.50 per share, the conversion price of the New Convertible Senior Notes was adjusted to approximately $10.20 per share, representing 120% of the public offering price of the offering. Such adjustment will result in further dilution to our stockholders, if and when such notes are converted. The conversion price of the New Convertible Senior Notes will not be further adjusted under such provision in the indenture because the proceeds from the offering were in excess of $20 million. Under the terms of the indenture, we will not be required to issue shares of common stock upon conversion of the aggregate principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes that would exceed 19.9% of our outstanding shares of common stock or otherwise require shareholder approval.
We may issue common stock or securities convertible into our common stock in the future for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and business strategy, to adjust our ratio of debt to equity, to satisfy our obligations upon the exercise of outstanding warrants or options or the conversion of debentures, or for other reasons.
We have an effective shelf registration from which additional shares of our common stock and other securities can be issued. We may not be able to sell shares of our common stock or other securities at a price per share that is equal to or greater than the price per share paid by our current shareholders. If the price per share at which we sell additional shares of our common stock or related securities in future transactions is less than the price per share at which we have sold shares in the past, shareholders will suffer a dilution in their investment.
Provisions in the indenture for the New Convertible Senior Notes and our charter and Delaware law could discourage an acquisition of us by a third party, even if the acquisition would be favorable to holders of our common stock.
If a "change in control" (as defined in the indenture for the New Convertible Senior Notes) occurs, holders of notes will have the right, at their option, to require us to repurchase all or a portion of their notes. In the event of certain "fundamental changes" (as defined in the indenture for the New Convertible Senior Notes), we also may be required to increase the conversion rate applicable to the notes surrendered for conversion upon the fundamental change. In addition, the indenture for the New Convertible Senior Notes prohibits us from engaging in certain mergers or acquisitions unless, among other things, the surviving entity assumes our obligations under the notes.
Our charter authorizes our Board of Directors to set the terms of preferred stock, and our bylaws limit stockholder proposals at meetings of stockholders. In addition, Delaware law contains provisions that impose restrictions on business combinations with interested parties. Because of these provisions of our charter and bylaws and of Delaware law, persons considering unsolicited tender offers or other unilateral takeover proposals may be more likely to negotiate with our Board of Directors rather than pursue non-negotiated takeover attempts. As a result, these provisions may make it more difficult for our stockholders to benefit from transactions that are opposed by an incumbent Board of Directors.
The personal liability of our directors for monetary damages for breach of their fiduciary duty of care is limited by the Delaware General Corporation Law and by our certificate of incorporation.
The Delaware General Corporation Law allows corporations to limit available relief for the breach of directors' duty of care to equitable remedies such as injunction or rescission. Our certificate of incorporation limits the liability of our directors to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.
Specifically, our directors will not be personally liable for monetary damages for any breach of their fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability:
● | for any breach of their duty of loyalty to the company or our stockholders; |
| |
● | for acts or omissions not in good faith or that involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; |
| |
● | under provisions relating to unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock repurchases or redemptions; and |
| |
● | for any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit. |
This limitation may have the effect of reducing the likelihood of derivative litigation against directors, and may discourage or deter stockholders or management from bringing a lawsuit against directors for breach of their duty of care, even though such an action, if successful, might otherwise have benefited our stockholders.
We have the ability to issue "blank check" preferred stock, which, if issued, could affect the rights of holders of our common stock.
Our charter authorizes our Board of Directors, subject to the rules of The NASDAQ Global Market, to issue up to four million shares of preferred stock and to set the terms of the preferred stock without seeking stockholder approval. The terms of such preferred stock may adversely impact the dividend and liquidation rights of holders of our common stock.
Netherby
On October 16, 2003, we entered into an agreement (the "Netherby Agreement") with Phillip Hunnisett and Roy Barker ("Hunnisett and Barker"), pursuant to which Hunnisett and Barker agreed to post the collateral required by the Turkish government for Madison Oil Turkey Inc. (a Liberian company later reincorporated in the Cayman Islands as Toreador Turkey) (“Madison Oil”) to retain its 36.75% interest in relation to eight offshore exploration SASB licenses in exchange for a 1.5% gross overriding royalty interest (the "Overriding Royalty") on the net value to Madison Oil of all future production, if any, deriving from Madison Oil's interest in such SASB licenses. Since March 2009, we have corresponded with Hunnisett and Barker regarding a dispute over the amount of the compensation payable by us to Hunnisett and Barker under the Netherby Agreement as a result of Toreador Turkey's sale of a 26.75% interest in the SASB licenses to Petrol Ofisi in March 2009 (the "Netherby Payment Amount"). Hunnisett and Barker have contended that the Netherby Payment Amount could be up to $10.4 million; however, we do not believe that Hunnisett and Barker are entitled to such amount.
On September 30, 2009, we completed the sale of Toreador Turkey, including with it Toreador Turkey's remaining 10% interest in the SASB license, to Tiway Oil A/S ("Tiway"). In connection with this sale, we agreed to indemnify Tiway against and in respect of any and all claims, liabilities, and losses arising from the Overriding Royalty. We are treating the said indemnity as extending to Tiway Turkey Ltd (previously Tiway Turkey Ltd) as well.
On September 6, 2010, English High Court proceedings were commenced by Hunnisett and Barker, as well as Netherby Investments Limited against Tiway Turkey Limited (previously Toreador Turkey Limited) and Toreador. The proceedings were served on Toreador on October 20, 2010. Tiway Turkey Limited was served with the proceedings on or around December 8, 2010. In the said proceedings, Hunnisett and Barker now argue that an agreement was reached between the parties in around November 2008 regarding the Netherby Payment Amount in the sum of $7.2 million. In addition they argue that on a proper construction of the Netherby Agreement, they are entitled to continuing Overriding Royalty including on the 26.75% interest in the SASB licenses that was sold to Petrol Ofisi in March 2009 and/or to a capitalized sum of "not less than" $7.2 million. In addition or in the alternative, Hunnisett and Barker raise a wholly new claim for rectification of the Netherby Agreement on the basis they claim it does not reflect the true agreement of the parties. They seek rectification of the Netherby Agreement so that upon a sale such as the sale of the 26.75% interest in the SASB licenses that was sold to Petrol Ofisi in March 2009, the Netherby Agreement parties are required to first agree a capitalized sum to be paid to Hunnisett and Barker. Hunnisett and Barker also seek costs and interest.
On January 31, 2011, the Company and Tiway Turkey Limited filed a joint defense denying the majority of the claims asserted by Hunnisett and Barker. In its defense, the Company and Tiway Turkey Limited only admit a payment is due to Hunnisett and Barker in sum of $574,696 together with accrued interest as compensation properly due under the Netherby Agreement. Toreador and Tiway Turkey Limited deny that any other payment is due to Hunnisett and Barker and/or Netherby Investments Limited, whether in relation to (i) The alleged amount of $7.2 million supposedly agreed upon in November 2008 ("the Buy-Back Agreement") as being payable in respect of the Netherby Payment Amount; and (ii) The Overriding Royalty payments Hunnisett and Barker assert is due to them following the sale of the 26.75% SASB interest to Petrol Ofisi and/or the sum of no less than $7.2 million which Hunnisett and Barker assert is the capitalized monies due to them following the sale of the 26.75% interest to Petrol Ofisi. Furthermore, the Company and Tiway Turkey Limited deny Hunnisett and Barker's claim for rectification of the Netherby Agreement.
As of December 31, 2010, we had accrued approximately $644,000 (i.e. $574,696 plus accrued interest) as a contingent liability for these claims, with the expense of legal cost of $254,356 and $222,280 of Overriding Royalty payment included in discontinued operations. We also accrued $248,000 (recorded under long-term accrued liabilities) as a provision for the 1.5% Overriding Royalty the Company will have to pay on the net value to Hunnisett and Barker of all future production, if any, deriving from Madison Oil's interest in such SASB licenses.
Scowcroft
On June 17, 2009, The Scowcroft Group, Inc. ("Scowcroft") filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against us. The complaint alleged that we breached a contract (the "Scowcroft Contract") between Scowcroft and us relating to the sale of our interests in the SASB and that Scowcroft was entitled to a success fee thereunder as a result of the sale of our interests in the SASB to Petrol Ofisi in March 2009. The complaint also alleged unjust enrichment/quantum meruit and fraud. Scowcroft sought damages in the amount of $2 million plus interest, costs and expenses. On April 30, 2010, Toreador and Scowcroft executed a settlement agreement (the "Settlement Agreement"), pursuant to which Toreador agreed to pay Scowcroft $495,000 and, subject to receipt of such payment, Scowcroft agreed to take actions to dismiss the suit and the parties agreed to a mutual release with respect to claims relating to the Scowcroft Contract. On April 30, 2010, Toreador made the settlement payment and the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal of the action. As of December 31, 2010, $657,000 has been expensed in discontinued operations consequently, consisting of the settlement amount and associated legal costs.
Petrol Ofisi
On January 25, 2010, we received a claim notice from Tiway under the Share Purchase Agreement, dated September 30, 2009, among us, Tiway Oil AS and Tiway relating to the sale of Toreador Turkey Ltd. (the “SPA”) in respect of a third-party claim asserted by Petrol Ofisi against Toreador Turkey Ltd. in the amount of TRY 7.6 million ($5.1 million), for which Tiway alleges we are liable for an estimated TRY 2.1 million ($1.4 million). A hearing on this matter was held on July 20, 2010, and the Court has appointed three experts to evaluate the case. A hearing was held on November 2, 2010 and the Court adjourned pending the issuance of the experts’ report. The next hearing is scheduled for April 5, 2011. The Company believes that the risk associated with this matter is remote and no amount has been recorded in connection therewith.
TPAO
On October 6, 2010, Toreador received a claim notice from Tiway under the SPA in respect of an arbitration initiated by Türkiye Petrolleri A.O. (“TPAO”) against Tiway relating to alleged damages and losses suffered in connection with the Akçakoca-Çayağzi Pipeline Construction Project in 2005. Tiway asserts in the letter that the total relief sought is $2,993,038. We do not believe the arbitration initiated by TPAO is justified, nor we believe Tiway is entitled to indemnification for such claim under the SPA. We understand the arbitration is currently scheduled for October 2011. The Company believes that the risk associated with this matter is remote and no amount has been recorded in connection therewith.
From time to time, we are named as a defendant in other legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business. In our opinion, the final judgment or settlement, if any, which may be awarded with any suit or claim would not have a material adverse effect on our financial position.
Item 4. Reserved
Reserved
Common Stock
Our shares of common stock, par value $.15625 per share, are traded on the Nasdaq Global Market under the trading symbol "TRGL" and on the Professional Segment of NYSE Euronext in Paris under the trading symbol "TOR" since December 17, 2010. The following table sets forth the high and low sale prices per share for the common stock for each quarterly period during the past two fiscal years as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market based upon quotations that reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
| | | | | | |
| | High | | | Low | |
2010 | | | | | | |
Fourth quarter | | $ | 16.20 | | | $ | 11.75 | |
Third quarter | | | 11.18 | | | | 5.71 | |
Second quarter | | | 9.68 | | | | 5.35 | |
First quarter | | | 13.05 | | | | 7.42 | |
2009 | | | | | | | | |
Fourth quarter | | $ | 11.58 | | | $ | 7.60 | |
Third quarter | | | 10.79 | | | | 4.50 | |
Second quarter | | | 7.26 | | | | 2.39 | |
First quarter | | | 4.74 | | | | 1.96 | |
As of March 11, 2011, there were 25,942,705 shares of common stock outstanding and held of record by approximately 351 holders (inclusive of those brokerage firms, clearing houses, banks and other nominee holders, holding common stock for clients, with each such nominee being considered as one holder).
Dividends on the common stock may be declared and paid out of funds legally available when and as determined by our board of directors. Our board of directors plans to continue its policy of holding and investing corporate funds on a conservative basis, retaining earnings to finance the growth of its business. We did not declare or pay any cash dividends on our common stock in 2009 or 2010, and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.
During 2010 and 2009, there were no equity securities issued pursuant to transactions exempt from the registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, that were not disclosed previously in Current Reports on Form 8-K or Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q.
For the three months ended December 31, 2010, we did not repurchase any shares of our common stock. See "Liquidity and Capital Resources — 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2025" for a discussion of repurchases of our 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes.
Below is a line graph comparing the 5-year cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock with the Nasdaq Market Index and the Hemscott Group Index (Independent Oil & Gas Companies):
COMPARISON 5-YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL
RETURN
AMONG TOREADOR RESOURCES CORP.,
NASDAQ MARKET INDEX AND HEMSCOTT GROUP INDEX
ASSUMES $100 INVESTED IN JANUARY 1, 2006 ASSUMES DIVIDEND REINVESTED FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2010
The following selected financial information (which is not covered by the report of an independent registered public accounting firm) is summarized from our results of operations for the five-year period ended December 31, 2010 as well as selected consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included herewith.
On June 14, 2007, the Board of Directors authorized management to sell all our oil and natural gas properties in the United States. The sale of these properties completed the divestiture of the Company's non-core U.S. assets and allowed Toreador to focus exclusively on its non-U.S. operations. The sale was closed on September 1, 2007 for $19.1 million, which resulted in a pre-tax gain of $9.2 million.
In the fourth quarter of 2008 and during the first quarter of 2009, Toreador farmed out or sold all of its working interests in Romania to three different companies and closed its office; thus, we no longer have any operational involvement in Romania. This resulted in a gain of $5.8 million, which was recorded in the first quarter of 2009.
On March 3, 2009 we completed the sale of a 26.75% interest in the South Akcakoca Sub-Basin (SASB) project associated licenses located in the Black Sea offshore Turkey, to Petrol Ofisi for $55 million. In accordance with the revised assignment announced on February 3, 2009, $50 million of the proceeds was paid by Petrol Ofisi on March 3, 2009, and the remaining $5 million was paid on September 1, 2009. There was no gain or loss resulting from this sale.
On September 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Share Purchase Agreement (the "Share Purchase Agreement") with Tiway Oil BV, a company organized under the laws of the Netherlands ("Tiway"), and Tiway Oil AS, a company organized under the laws of Norway, pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell 100% of the outstanding shares of Toreador Turkey Ltd. ("Toreador Turkey") to Tiway for total consideration consisting of: (1) a cash payment of $10.5 million to be paid at closing, (2) exploration success payments dependent upon certain future commercial discoveries as provided in the Share Purchase Agreement, up to a maximum aggregate consideration of $40 million, and (3) future quarterly 10% pre-tax net profit interest payments if a field goes into production that was discovered by an exploration well drilled within four years of closing on certain of the licenses then still held by Tiway. The sale of Toreador Turkey was completed on October 7, 2009 and resulted in a gain of $1.8 million.
On September 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Quota Purchase Agreement (the "Quota Purchase Agreement") with RAG (Rohöl-Aufsuchungs Aktiengesellschaft), a corporation organized under the laws of Austria ("RAG"), pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell 100% of its equity interests in Toreador Hungary Limited ("Toreador Hungary") to RAG for total consideration consisting of (1) a cash payment of US$5.4 million (€3.7 million) paid at closing, (2) US$435,000 (€300,000), which was held back subject to a post-closing adjustment and was paid to us on November 5, 2009 and (3) a contingent payment of US$2.9 million (€2 million) to be paid upon post-transaction completion of agreements relating to certain assets of Toreador Hungary. The sale of Toreador Hungary was completed on September 30, 2009 and resulted in a loss of $4.1 million.
The results of operations of assets in the United States, Turkey, Hungary and Romania for 2006 to 2009 have been presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
On May 10, 2010, Toreador Energy France S.C.S. (“TEF.”), a company organized under the laws of France and an indirect subsidiary of the Company, entered into an Hess Investment Agreement (the “Hess Investment Agreement”) with Hess Oil France S.A.S.(“Hess”), a company organized under the laws of France and a wholly owned subsidiary of Hess Corporation, a Delaware corporation, pursuant to which (x) Hess becomes a 50% holder of TEF.’s working interests in its awarded and pending exploration permits in the Paris Basin, France (the “Permits”) subject to fulfillment of Work Program (as described in (y) (2) hereafter) and (y) (1) Hess must make a $15 million upfront payment to TEF, (2) Hess will have the right to invest up to $120 million in fulfillment of a two-phase work program (the “Work Program”) and (3) TEF would be entitled to receive up to a maximum of $130 million of success fees based on reserves and upon the achievement of an oil production threshold, each as described more fully below.
Pursuant to the Hess Investment Agreement, TEF has transferred 50% of its working interest in each Permit to Hess (collectively, the “Transfer Working Interests”) and, on June 10, 2010, Hess paid TEF $15 million plus VAT, i.e., an aggregate amount of $17.9 million (such payment having been recorded as other income for the year ended December 31, 2010 as this revenue is not subject to any further obligation or performance by the Company nor is it dependent upon any approval).
Under the terms of the Hess Investment Agreement, TEF is entitled to invoice Hess for all personal general and administrative costs associated with its activities as operator of the Permits and such amounts are recorded as “Other operating income”.
| | For The Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | | | 2006 | |
| | (Amounts in thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Operating Results: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Revenues | | $ | 40,764 | | | $ | 19,236 | | | $ | 34,150 | | | $ | 25,907 | | | $ | 27,294 | |
Operating costs and expenses | | | (33,496 | ) | | | (35,415 | ) | | | (32,586 | ) | | | (29,473 | ) | | | (20,552 | ) |
Operating income (loss) | | | 7,268 | | | | (16,179 | ) | | | 1,564 | | | | (3,566 | ) | | | 6,742 | |
Other income (expense) | | | (9,888 | ) | | | 397 | | | | (3,082 | ) | | | (2,384 | ) | | | 3,373 | |
Income (loss) from continuing operations, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
before income tax | | | (2,620 | ) | | | (15,782 | ) | | | (1,518 | ) | | | (5,950 | ) | | | 10,115 | |
Income tax benefit (provision) | | | (6,130 | ) | | | 450 | | | | (5,502 | ) | | | 1,402 | | | | (3,236 | ) |
Income (loss) from continuing operations, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
net of tax | | | (8,750 | ) | | | (15,332 | ) | | | (7,020 | ) | | | (4,548 | ) | | | 6,879 | |
Income (loss) from | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
discontinued operations, net of | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
tax | | | (740 | ) | | | (10,080 | ) | | | (101,585 | ) | | | (69,873 | ) | | | (4,301 | ) |
Dividends on preferred shares | | | - | | | | — | | | | — | | | | (162 | ) | | | (162 | ) |
Income (loss) available to | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
common shares | | $ | (9,490 | ) | | $ | (25,412 | ) | | $ | (108,605 | ) | | $ | (74,583 | ) | | $ | 2,416 | |
Basic income (loss) available to | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
common shares per share | | $ | (0.35 | ) | | $ | (1.24 | ) | | $ | (5.48 | ) | | $ | (4.07 | ) | | $ | 0.16 | |
Diluted income (loss) available | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
to common shares per share | | $ | (0.35 | ) | | $ | (1.24 | ) | | $ | (5.48 | ) | | $ | (4.07 | ) | | $ | 0.15 | |
Weighted average shares | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
outstanding | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic | | | 25,153 | | | | 20,564 | | | | 19,831 | | | | 18,358 | | | | 15,527 | |
Diluted | | | 25,165 | | | | 20,564 | | | | 19,831 | | | | 18,358 | | | | 15,884 | |
Balance Sheet Data: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Working capital | | $ | 9,326 | | | $ | (30,193 | ) | | $ | 73,286 | | | $ | 203,591 | | | $ | 188,029 | |
Oil and natural gas properties, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
net | | | 65,778 | | | | 74,621 | | | | 72,753 | | | | 80,983 | | | | 71,663 | |
Oil and natural gas properties held for sale, | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
net | | | — | | | | — | | | | 91,959 | | | | 190,968 | | | | 179,352 | |
Total assets | | | 100,299 | | | | 97,155 | | | | 207,156 | | | | 323,111 | | | | 317,204 | |
Debt, including current portion | | | 34,394 | | | | 54,616 | | | | 110,275 | | | | 116,250 | | | | 112,800 | |
Stockholders' equity | | | 24,068 | | | | 6,137 | | | | 52,560 | | | | 163,825 | | | | 147,151 | |
Cash Flow Data: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net cash provided by (used in) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
operating activities | | $ | 10,535 | | | $ | (7,345 | ) | | $ | 16,766 | | | $ | (12,434 | ) | | $ | 122 | |
Capital expenditures for oil and | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
natural gas property and | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
equipment, including | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
acquisitions | | | 1,503 | | | | 3,386 | | | | (770 | ) | | | 3,824 | | | | 5,883 | |
Capital expenditures for oil and | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
natural gas property and | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
equipment held for sale | | | — | | | | 4,528 | | | | 11,472 | | | | 86,820 | | | | 99,282 | |
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Certain of the matters discussed under the captions "Business and Properties," "Legal Proceedings," "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations," and elsewhere in this annual report may constitute "forward-looking" statements for purposes of the Securities Act of 1933, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and, as such, may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words "anticipates," "estimates," "plans," "believes," "continues," "expects," "projections," "forecasts," "intends," "may," "might," "could," "should," and similar expressions are intended to be among the statements that identify forward-looking statements. Various factors that could cause the actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from our expectations are disclosed in this report ("Cautionary Statements"), including, without limitation, those statements made in conjunction with the forward-looking statements included under the captions identified above and otherwise herein. All written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified in their entirety by the Cautionary Statements. Certain prior-year amounts have been reclassified and adjusted to present the operations of Turkey, Hungary and Romania as discontinued operations.
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
We are an independent energy company engaged in the exploration and production of crude oil with interests in developed and undeveloped oil properties in the Paris Basin, France. We are currently focused on the development of our conventional fields and the exploitation of the prospective shale oil play within our Paris Basin acreage position.
We currently operate solely in the Paris Basin, which covers approximately 170,000 km2 of northeastern France, centered 50 to 100 km east and south of Paris. At December 31, 2010 we held interests in approximately 997,000 gross exploration acres (awarded and pending publication). According to Gaffney, Cline & Associates Ltd, an independent petroleum and geological engineering firm, or Gaffney Cline, as of December 31, 2010, our proved reserves were 5.5 Mbbls, our proved plus probable reserves were 9.1 MBbls and our proved plus probable plus possible reserves were 13.9 Mbbls. Our production for 2010 averaged approximately 885 bbl/d from two conventional oilfield areas in the Paris Basin — the Neocomian Complex and Charmottes fields. As of December 31, 2010, production from these oil fields represented a majority of our total revenue and substantially all of our sales and other operating revenue. We intend to maintain production from these mature assets using suitable enhanced oil recovery techniques. In addition to this production base, we have identified several additional conventional exploration targets, including the La Garenne field, which is the first of these targets, and for which we intend to formulate a development plan.
We are also currently focused on exploiting our shale oil acreage in the Paris Basin by executing with our strategic partner, Hess, a proof of concept program by drilling, completing and testing pilot wells.
Recent Developments
Dual Listing
On December 17, 2010, our common stock began trading on the Professional Segment of NYSE Euronext Paris (“Euronext”) under the trading symbol “TOR”. Our dual listing does not change our capital structure, share count or current NASDAQ listing and is intended to create additional liquidity for investors as well as provide greater access to our shares, which are denominated in Euros on Euronext, in Euro-zone markets and currencies.
Repurchase and Redemption of 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes
On October 1, 2010, we repurchased approximately $32.3 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes pursuant to the holders’ option, and, on November 24, 2010, redeemed the remaining $0.1 million aggregate principal amount outstanding. See “Liquidity-5.00% Convertible Senior Notes Due October 1, 2025.” Following such repurchase and redemption, our outstanding long-term debt consists of approximately $31.6 million aggregate principal amount of our 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes recorded at a fair value of $34.4 million.
Proof of Concept Program
On October 12, 2010, TEF and Hess received approval from the French government for its first four well permit applications, as well as the necessary environmental permits. On November 20, 2010, Hess executed an agreement for the provision of drilling and related services for the initial six firm wells targeting the Liassic shale oil source rock system. The first of the four wells, which will be located on the Chateau Thierry Permit, is expected to be drilled vertically to a total depth of 3,000 meters. The primary geologic target of the well is the Liassic section, the top of which is expected to be encountered at an approximate depth of 2,300 meters. Conventional cores are expected to be taken throughout the Liassic section to evaluate reservoir and rock properties.
On February 4, 2011, France’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy announced its intention to conduct a study on the economic, social and environmental stakes relating to the development of shale gas and shale oil in France (the “France Shale Study”). On February 10, 2011, Toreador and Hess met with representatives of the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Energy to discuss the impact the France Shale Study might have on its unconventional oil exploration, particularly the proof of concept program. Following such discussion, Toreador concluded that they will voluntarily delay such drilling pending the results of the France Shale Study and any interim or subsequent political developments. In the interim, Toreador intends to cooperate with the French government in conducting the France Shale Study, including by providing scientific data and practical experiences regarding oil development, hosting delegations to observe oil operations in the Paris Basin and initiating baseline environmental studies with third-party environmental experts that would be available to the French government.
On March 2, 2011 an additional study on the impact of shale gas and shale oil was launched by the French National Assembly (the “National Assembly Study”), the conclusions of which are expected to be published in June 2011 (at the same time as the final report relating to the France Shale Study). On March 11, 2011, the Prime Minister of France announced that the moratorium on unconventional exploration has been extended to exploration permits and works authorizations until mid-June 2011 (originally mid-April), i.e. when the conclusions of the studies on the environmental impact of drilling techniques will have been rendered. The Company does not currently know the impact of such decision on its proof of concept program. The Company is currently evaluating its drilling program in light of these developments and will continue to monitor further developments and adjust its plans as necessary.
Concessions Renewal
The decrees relating to the renewal of the Châteaurenard concession and of the Saint-Firmin-des-Bois concession, which together account for 93% of our existing reserves, received final French government approvals on February 1, 2011, and were published in the Journal Officiel of the French Republic on February 3, 2011. The renewals extend the expiry date of both concessions to January 1, 2036.
Financial Summary
For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010:
● | Revenue and other operating income from continuing operations were $40.8 million. |
| |
● | Operating costs from continuing operations were $33.5 million. |
| |
● | Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes, was $0.7 million. |
| |
● | Net loss available to common shares was $9.5 million. |
| |
● | Production was 323 MBOE. |
At December 31, 2010, we had:
● | Cash and cash equivalents of $21.6 million. |
| |
● | A current ratio (current assets/current liabilities) of 1.47 to 1. |
| |
● | A debt to equity ratio of 3.17 to 1. |
Following the repurchase of $32,256,000 aggregate principal amount of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010 and the redemption of the remaining $129,000 principal amount outstanding of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on November 24, 2010, our long-term debt currently consists solely of the 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes in an aggregate principal nominal amount of $31,631,000 recorded at a fair value of $34,394,000.
Critical Accounting Policies
The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon the consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 2 - Significant Accounting Policies” to our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010. We have identified below policies that are of particular importance to the portrayal of our financial position and results of operations and which require the application of significant judgment by management. We analyze our estimates on a periodic basis and base our estimates on experience and various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates using different assumptions or conditions. We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements:
Successful Efforts Method of Accounting
We account for our oil and natural gas exploration and development activities utilizing the successful efforts method of accounting. Under this method, costs of productive exploratory wells, development dry holes and productive wells and undeveloped leases are capitalized. Oil and natural gas lease acquisition costs are also capitalized. Exploration costs, including personnel costs, certain geological and geophysical expenses and delay rentals for oil and natural gas leases, are charged to expense as incurred. Exploratory drilling costs are initially capitalized, but such costs are charged to expense if and when the well is determined not to have found reserves in commercial quantities. In most cases, a gain or loss is recognized for sales of producing properties.
As of December 31, 2010, we had $0.2 million of costs associated with exploratory costs that had been capitalized for a period of one year or less.
As of December 31, 2010, we had $2.9 million of costs associated with exploratory costs that have been capitalized for a period of greater than one year.
The application of the successful efforts method of accounting requires management's judgment to determine the proper designation of wells as either developmental or exploratory, which will ultimately determine the proper accounting treatment of the costs incurred. The results from a drilling operation can take considerable time to analyze, and the determination that commercial reserves have been discovered requires both judgment and application of industry experience. Wells may be completed that are assumed to be productive and actually deliver oil and natural gas in quantities insufficient to be economic, which may result in the abandonment of the wells at a later date. On occasion, wells are drilled which have targeted geologic structures that are both developmental and exploratory in nature, and in such instances an allocation of costs is required to properly account for the results. Delineation seismic costs incurred to select development locations within a productive oil and natural gas field are typically treated as development costs and capitalized, but often these seismic programs extend beyond the proved reserve areas and therefore management must estimate the portion of seismic costs to expense as exploratory. The evaluation of oil and natural gas leasehold acquisition costs requires management's judgment to estimate the fair value of exploratory costs related to drilling activity in a given area. Drilling activities in an area by other companies may also effectively condemn leasehold positions.
The successful efforts method of accounting can have a significant impact on the operational results reported when we enter a new exploratory area in hopes of finding oil and natural gas reserves. The initial exploratory wells may be unsuccessful and the associated costs will be expensed as dry hole costs. Seismic costs can be substantial which will result in additional exploration expenses when incurred.
Reserves Estimate
Proved reserves are estimated quantities of oil and gas, which, by analysis of geoscience and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible - from a given date forward recoverable in future years from known reservoirs, and under existing economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations - prior to the time at which contracts providing the right to operate expire, unless evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably certain. Proved developed reserves are reserves that can be expected to be recovered through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods or in which the cost of the required equipment is relatively minor compared to the cost of a new well and through installed extraction equipment and infrastructure operational at the time of the reserves estimate if the extraction is by means not involving a well. Proved undeveloped reserves are reserves that are expected to be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion. Proved undeveloped reserves on undrilled acreage are limited (i) to those directly offsetting development spacing areas that are reasonably certain of production when drilled, unless evidence using reliable technology exists that establishes reasonable certainty of economic producibility at greater distances and (ii) to other undrilled locations if a development plan has been adopted indicating that they are scheduled to be drilled within five years, unless the specific circumstances justify a longer time.
Probable reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than proved reserves but which, together with proved reserves, are as likely as not to be recovered. When deterministic methods are used, it is as likely as not that actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the sum of estimated proved plus probable reserves. When probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 50% probability that the actual quantities recovered will equal or exceed the proved plus probable reserves estimates. Probable reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to proved reserves where data control or interpretations of available data are less certain, even if the interpreted reservoir continuity of structure or productivity does not meet the reasonable certainty criterion. Probable reserves may be assigned to areas that are structurally higher than the proved area if these areas are in communication with the proved reservoir. Probable reserves estimates also include potential incremental quantities associated with a greater percentage recovery of the hydrocarbons in place than assumed for proved reserves.
Possible reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than probable reserves. When deterministic methods are used, the total quantities ultimately recovered from a project have a low probability of exceeding proved plus probable plus possible reserves. When probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 10% probability that the total quantities ultimately recovered will equal or exceed the proved plus probable plus possible reserves estimates. Possible reserves may be assigned to areas of a reservoir adjacent to probable reserves where data control and interpretations of available data are progressively less certain. Frequently, this will be in areas where geoscience and engineering data are unable to define clearly the area and vertical limits of commercial production from the reservoir by a defined project. Possible reserves also include incremental quantities associated with a greater percentage recovery of the hydrocarbons in place than the recovery quantities assumed for probable reserves.
We emphasize that the volume of reserves are estimates that, by their nature are subject to revision. The estimates are made using geological and reservoir data, as well as production performance data. These estimates are reviewed annually and revised, either upward or downward, as warranted by additional performance data. These reserve revisions result primarily from improved or a decline in performance from a variety of sources such as an addition to or a reduction in recoveries below or above previously established lowest known hydrocarbon levels, improved or a decline in drainage from natural drive mechanisms, and the realization of improved or declined drainage areas. If the estimates of proved reserves were to decline, the rate at which we record depletion expense would increase.
For the year ended December 31, 2010, notwithstanding the 2010 total production of approximately 323,000 Bbl, our proved and probable reserves remain essentially flat for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 as compared to the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. This stability can be correlated to a better long-term performance of our main producing asset, the Neocomian Complex, and a higher oil price; our reserves at December 31, 2010 were priced at $79.35 per Bbl, as compared to $56.99 at December 31, 2009.
Impairment of Oil Properties
We review our proved oil properties for impairment on an annual basis or whenever events and circumstances indicate a potential decline in the recoverability of their carrying value. We estimate the expected future cash flows from our proved oil properties and compare these future cash flows to the carrying value of the oil properties to determine if the carrying value is recoverable. If the carrying value exceeds the estimated undiscounted future cash flows, we will adjust the carrying value of the oil properties to its fair value in the current period. The factors used to determine fair value include, but are not limited to, estimates of reserves, future commodity prices, future production estimates, anticipated capital expenditures, and a discount rate commensurate with the risk associated with realizing the expected cash flows projected. Unproved properties are reviewed quarterly to determine if there has been impairment of the carrying value, with any such impairment charged to expense in the period. Given the complexities associated with oil reserves estimate and the history of price volatility in the oil market, events may arise that will require us to record an impairment of our oil properties and there can be no assurance that such impairments will not be required in the future nor that they will not be material.
We recorded no impairment for continuing operations in the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008.
Future Development and Abandonment Costs
Future development costs include costs to be incurred to obtain access to proved reserves, including drilling costs and the installation of production equipment. Future abandonment costs include costs to dismantle and relocate or dispose of our production equipment, gathering systems, wells and related structures and restoration costs of land. We develop estimates of these costs for each of our properties based upon the type of production structure, depth of water, reservoir characteristics, depth of the reservoir, market demand for equipment, currently available procedures and consultations with construction and engineering consultants. Because these costs typically extend many years into the future, estimating these future costs is difficult and requires management to make estimates and judgments that are subject to future revisions based upon numerous factors, including changing technology, the ultimate settlement amount, inflation factors, credit adjusted discount rates, timing of settlement and changes in the political, legal, environmental and regulatory environment. We review our assumptions and estimates of future abandonment costs on an annual basis. The accounting for future abandonment costs changed on January 1, 2003, with the adoption of FASB ASC 410 "Asset Retirement and Environmental Obligations". ASC 410 requires that the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation be recorded in the period in which it is incurred and the corresponding cost be capitalized by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. If the liability is settled for an amount other than the recorded amount, a gain or loss is recognized. In 2005, two separate incidents occurred offshore Turkey in the Black Sea, which resulted in the sinking of the Fallen Structures and the loss of three natural gas wells. We have not been requested, or ordered by any governmental or regulatory body, to remove the Fallen Structures. Therefore, we believe it is unlikely that we will receive such a request or order, and no liability has been recorded.
Holding all other factors constant, if our estimate of future abandonment costs is revised upward, earnings would decrease due to higher depreciation, depletion and amortization expense. Likewise, if these estimates were revised downward, earnings would increase due to lower depreciation, depletion and amortization expense.
Income Taxes
For financial reporting purposes, we generally provide taxes at the rate applicable for the appropriate tax jurisdiction. Because our present intention is to reinvest the unremitted earnings in our foreign operations, we do not provide U.S. income taxes on unremitted earnings of foreign subsidiaries. Management periodically assesses the need to utilize these unremitted earnings to finance our foreign operations. This assessment is based on cash flow projections that are the result of estimates of future production, commodity prices and expenditures by tax jurisdiction for our operations. Such estimates are inherently imprecise since many assumptions utilized in the cash flow projections are subject to revision in the future.
Management also periodically assesses, by tax jurisdiction, the probability of recovery of recorded deferred tax assets based on its assessment of future earnings estimates. Such estimates are inherently imprecise since many assumptions utilized in the assessments are subject to revision in the future.
Derivatives
We periodically utilize derivatives instruments such as futures and swaps for purposes of hedging our exposure to fluctuations in the price of crude oil sales. In accordance with FASB ASC 815, "Derivatives and Hedging," we have elected not to designate the derivative financial instruments to which we are a party as hedges, and accordingly, we record such contracts at fair value as an asset or a liability and recognize changes in such fair value in current earnings as they occur. We determine the fair value of futures and swap contracts based on the difference between their fixed contract price and the underlying market price at the determination date. The realized and unrealized gains and losses on derivatives are recorded as a derivative fair value gain or loss in the income statement.
Foreign Currency Translation
The functional currency for France is the Euro. Translation gains and losses resulting from transactions in Euros are included in other comprehensive income for the current period. We periodically review the operations of our entities to ensure the functional currency of each entity is the currency of the primary economic environment in which we operate.
Bad debt allowance
An allowance for doubtful accounts is calculated on a customer by customer basis per management's review of the collectability
New Accounting Pronouncements
On December 31, 2008 the SEC issued the final rule, "Modernization of Oil and Gas Reporting" (the "Final Reporting Rule"). The Final Reporting Rule adopts revisions to the SEC's oil and gas reporting disclosure requirements and is effective for annual reports on Forms 10-K for years ending on or after December 31, 2009. The revisions are intended to provide investors with a more meaningful and comprehensive understanding of oil and gas reserves to help investors evaluate their investments in oil and gas companies. The amendments are also designed to modernize the oil and gas disclosure requirements to align them with current practices and changes in technology. Revised requirements in the Final Reporting Rule include, but are not limited to:
● | Oil and gas reserves must be reported using the un-weighted arithmetic average of the first day of the month price for each month within a 12 month period, rather than year-end prices; |
● | Companies will be allowed to report, on an optional basis, probable and possible reserves; |
● | Non-traditional reserves, such as oil and gas extracted from coal and shales, will be included in the definition of "oil and gas producing activities;" |
● | Companies will be permitted to use new technologies to determine proved reserves, as long as those technologies have been demonstrated empirically to lead to reliable conclusions with respect to reserve volumes; |
● | Companies will be required to disclose, in narrative form, additional details on their proved undeveloped reserves ("PUDs"), including the total quantity of PUDs at year end, and any material changes to PUDs that occurred during the year, investments and progress made to convert PUDs to developed oil and gas reserves and an explanation of the reasons why material concentrations of PUDs in individual fields or countries have remained undeveloped for five years or more after disclosure as PUDs; and |
● | Companies will be required to report the qualifications and measures taken to assure the independence and objectivity of any business entity or employee primarily responsible for preparing or auditing reserves estimate. |
We have adopted the disclosure requirements beginning with the year ended December 31, 2009.
In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued guidance that clarifies and requires new disclosures about fair value measurements. The clarifications and requirement to disclose the amounts and reasons for significant transfers between Level 1 and Level 2, as well as significant transfers in and out of Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, were adopted by the Company in the first quarter of 2010. The new guidance also requires that purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements be presented gross in the Level 3 reconciliation and that requirement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010 and for interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted. Adoption of the guidance which only amends the disclosures requirements did not have significant impact on our financial statements.
In February 2010, the FASB issued 2010-09, Amendments to Certain Recognition and Disclosure Requirements ("ASU 2010-09"). ASU 2010-09 amends Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 855, Subsequent Events, by removing the requirement for an SEC filer to disclose the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated. Management's responsibility to evaluate subsequent events through the date of issuance remains unchanged. The Company adopted amendments to the codification resulting from ASU 2010-09 on February 24, 2010. As ASU 2010-09 relates specifically to disclosures, the adoption of this standard had no impact on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On July 21, 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-20, Disclosure about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses ("ASU 2010-20"). ASU 2010-20 amends existing disclosure guidance to require entities to provide extensive new disclosures in their financial statements about their financing receivables, including credit risk exposures and the allowance for credit losses. ASU 2010-20 is effective for fiscal and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2010. The adoption of this standard had no impact on our disclosure requirements.
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts (“ASU 2010-28”). ASU 2010-28 modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. This eliminates an entity’s ability to assert that a reporting unit is not required to perform Step 2 because the carrying amount of the reporting unit is zero or negative despite the existence of qualitative factors that indicate the goodwill is more likely than not impaired. ASU 2010-28 is effective for fiscal and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company does not believe that the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations (“ASU 2010-29”). ASU 2010-29 specifies that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. ASU 2010-29 is effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The Company does not believe that the adoption of this standard will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
This section should be read in conjunction with “Note 7 - Long Term Debt” in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this filing.
Liquidity
The Company's liquidity depends on cash flow from operations and existing cash resources. As of December 31, 2010, we had cash and cash equivalents of $21.6 million, a current ratio of approximately 1.47 to 1 and a debt to equity ratio of 3.17 to 1. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, we had an operating income of $7.3 million. We had sales and operating revenue of $40.8 million. We had no other capital expenditures apart from technical studies of La Garenne for $218,000. The Company does not currently have a credit facility and intends to rely on its cash balance to meet its immediate cash requirements.
Our cash flow from operations is highly dependent upon the prices received from our oil production, which are dependent on numerous factors beyond our control. Accordingly, significant changes to oil prices are likely to have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operation, cash flows and revenue. Oil prices have been very volatile over the fiscal year of 2010, and we expect, will continue to be, volatile in the fiscal year 2011. In order to reduce our exposure to crude oil price fluctuations, on November 2, 2010, we have entered into a collar contract for approximately 15,208 Bbls per month for the months of January 2011 through December 2011 for which the floor price is $78.00 per Bbl, and the ceiling price is $91.00 per Bbl. See “Note 13 – Derivatives” for further information.
On February 1, 2010, we consummated an exchange transaction (the "Convertible Notes Exchange"). In the Convertible Notes Exchange, in exchange for (a) $22,231,000 principal amount of our outstanding 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes (the "Old Notes") and (b) $9.4 million cash, we issued $31,631,000 aggregate principal amount of our 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2025 (the "New Convertible Senior Notes") and paid accrued and unpaid interest on the Old Notes.
On February 12, 2010, we completed a registered underwritten public offering of 3,450,000 shares of common stock, including 450,000 shares of common stock acquired by the underwriters from us to cover over-allotment options. The net proceeds to Toreador from the offering were approximately $26.8 million, after deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and estimated offering expenses. We used the net proceeds, together with cash on hand, to satisfy payment obligations arising from the holders' exercise of their right on October 1, 2010 to require the Company to repurchase its 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes. Following the repurchase of $32,256,000 aggregate principal amount of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010 and the redemption of the remaining $129,000 principal amount outstanding of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on November 24, 2010, our long-term debt currently consists solely of the 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes.
We currently have no mandatory capital expenditures in 2011; however, we intend to formulate a development plan for the La Garenne field. In addition, under French law, each of our exploration permits and exploitation concessions require that we commit to expenditures of a certain amount over the period of the applicable permit or concession. Though we consider these amounts discretionary, such expenditures would be required to renew such permits.
We believe we will have sufficient cash flow from operations and cash on hand to meet all of our 2011 obligations.
5.00% CONVERTIBLE SENIOR NOTES DUE OCTOBER 1, 2025
On September 27, 2005, we issued $75 million of Convertible Senior Notes due October 1, 2025 (the "5.00% Convertible Senior Notes") to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"). The Company also granted the initial purchasers the option to purchase an additional $11.25 million aggregate principal amount of 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes to cover over-allotments. The over-allotment option was exercised on September 30, 2005. The total principal amount of 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes issued was $86.25 million and total net proceeds were approximately $82.2 million. We incurred approximately $4.1 million of costs associated with the issuance of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes; these costs have been recorded in other assets on the balance sheet and have been amortized to interest expense over the term of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes (i.e., from issuance to the earliest date on which holders may require the Company to repurchase all or a portion of their 5.00% Convertible Notes, in this case October 1, 2010).
The net proceeds were used for general corporate purposes, including funding a portion of the Company's 2005 and 2006 exploration and development activities.
The 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes bore interest at a rate of 5.00% per annum.
During 2008, the Company repurchased $6 million, face value, of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on the open market for $5.3 million. In 2009, the Company repurchased $25.7 million face value of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on the open market for $21.3 million, resulting in a gain on the early extinguishment of debt of $3.4 million after writing off deferred loan costs of approximately $1 million. On February 1, 2010, Toreador consummated an exchange transaction (the "Convertible Notes Exchange"). In the Convertible Notes Exchange, in exchange for (a) $22,231,000 principal amount of our outstanding 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes (the “Old Notes”) and (b) $9.4 million cash, we issued $31,631,000 aggregate principal amount of our 8.00%/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes (the New Convertible Senior Notes) and paid accrued and unpaid interest on the Old Notes.
As the debt instruments exchanged in the Convertible Notes Exchange have substantially different terms, the Company recognized the exchange of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes as extinguishment of debt. As a result, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, the Company recognized a loss of $4.3 million including write off of loan original fee of $822,000 for the debt extinguishment. The New Convertible Senior Notes are recorded at a fair value of $35,065,000 on the date of exchange. The accretion expense on the Convertible Notes Exchange, which was determined using fair market value of the New Convertible Senior Notes, will be amortized to income over their term. The accretion impact (positive) of $593,417 was recorded for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010.
Following the repurchase of $32,256,000 aggregate principal amount of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010 and the redemption of the remaining $129,000 principal amount outstanding of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on November 24, 2010, our long-term debt currently solely consists of the 8.00/7.00% Convertible Senior Notes in $31.6 million principal aggregate amount.
8.00%/7.00% CONVERTIBLE SENIOR NOTES DUE OCTOBER 1, 2025
On February 1, 2010, Toreador consummated the Convertible Notes Exchange. In the Convertible Notes Exchange, in exchange for (a) the Old Notes and (b) $9.4 million cash, we issued $31,631,000 aggregate principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes and paid accrued and unpaid interest on the Old Notes. We incurred approximately $1.9 million of costs associated with the issuance of the New Convertible Senior Notes; these costs have been recorded in other assets on the balance sheets and are being amortized to interest expense over the term of the New Convertible Senior Notes (i.e from issuance to the earliest date on which holders may require the Company to repurchase all or a portion of their New Convertible Senior Notes, in this case October 1, 2013).
The New Convertible Senior Notes are senior unsecured obligations of the Company, ranking equal in right of payment with future unsubordinated indebtedness. The New Convertible Senior Notes will mature on October 1, 2025 and paid annual cash interest at 8.00% from February 1, 2010 until January 31, 2011 and at 7.00% per annum thereafter. Interest on the New Convertible Senior Notes is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, beginning on August 1, 2010.
The New Convertible Senior Notes were convertible prior to February 1, 2011 only if an event of default occurred and was continuing under the terms of the indenture, upon a change of control (as defined in the indenture) and to the extent the Company elected to redeem the New Convertible Senior Notes in a Provisional Redemption (as defined below). The New Convertible Senior Notes are convertible at any time on or after February 1, 2011 and before the close of business on October 1, 2025.
The New Convertible Senior Notes are convertible into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion rate of 72.9927 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of New Convertible Senior Notes (which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of $13.70 per share), subject to adjustment upon certain events. Under the terms of the indenture governing the New Convertible Senior Notes, if on or before October 1, 2010, we sold shares of our common stock in an equity offering or an equity-linked offering (other than for compensation), for cash consideration per share such that 120% of the issuance price was less than the conversion price of the New Convertible Senior Notes then in effect, the conversion price was to be reduced to an amount equal to 120% of such offering price. As a result of our February 2010 public offering, the conversion rate of the New Convertible Senior Notes adjusted to 98.0392 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of New Convertible Senior Notes (which is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $10.20 per share). Pursuant to the indenture, the conversion price of the New Convertible Senior Notes will not be further adjusted under such provision because the proceeds from the public offering were in excess of $20 million.
The New Convertible Senior Notes may be redeemed in whole or in part at the Company's option prior to October 1, 2013, in cash at a redemption price equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes redeemed, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but excluding, the redemption date plus a make-whole payment, if the closing sale price of the Company's common stock has exceeded 200% of the conversion price then in effect for at least twenty (20) trading days in any consecutive thirty (30)-trading day period ending on the trading day prior to the date of mailing of the relevant notice of redemption (a "Provisional Redemption"). The New Convertible Senior Notes may be redeemed in whole or in part at the Company's option on or after October 1, 2013 for cash at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes redeemed, plus any accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the redemption date. In addition, upon the occurrence of certain fundamental changes, or on each of October 1, 2013, October 1, 2015 and October 1, 2020, a holder may require the Company to repurchase all or a portion of the New Convertible Senior Notes in cash for 100% of the principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes to be purchased, plus any accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the purchase date.
Pursuant to the indenture, the Company and its subsidiaries may not incur debt other than Permitted Indebtedness. "Permitted Indebtedness" includes (i) the New Convertible Senior Notes; (ii) indebtedness incurred by the Company or its subsidiaries not to exceed the sum of (i) the product of (x) $7.00 and (y) the number of barrels of proved plus probable reserves and (ii) cash equivalents less the aggregate principal amount of the New Convertible Senior Notes outstanding less the aggregate principal amount of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes less any Refinancing Debt; (iv) indebtedness that is nonrecourse to the Company or any of its subsidiaries used to finance projects or acquisitions, joint ventures or partnerships, including acquired indebtedness ("Nonrecourse Debt"); and (iv) certain other customary categories of permitted debt. In addition, the Company may not permit its total consolidated net debt as of any date to exceed the product of (x) $7.00 and (y) the number of barrels of proved plus probable reserves other than for Nonrecourse Debt. The proved plus probable reserves underlying any Nonrecourse Debt for which debt has been incurred as permitted debt pursuant to clause (iii) above will be excluded from the proved plus probable reserves calculation for the purposes of the above debt covenants.
CHANGE IN AMORTIZATION OF ISSUE PREMIUM AND DEBT ISSUANCE COSTS
The Company reviews the estimated lives of its assets and liabilities and related amortization period on an ongoing basis. This review indicated in 2010 that the estimated amortization period of the Company’s issue premium and debt issuance costs were deemed to be shorter than the previously assigned amortization period. As a result, effective July 1, 2010, the Company changed its estimates for the amortization period of its issue premium and debt issuance costs to reflect the first put option date of the related callable debt. This change in estimate resulted from a change in the pattern of recognition of those expenses resulting from the repurchase option for the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010.
Based on this early redemption, the Company has decided that for a debt instrument that is puttable by the holder prior to the debt’s stated maturity date, it is preferable to amortize the related issuance costs and purchase premium over a period no longer than through the first put option date. For the same reason, the Company has elected to amortize under the effective interest rate method (“EIR”) the cost associated with the New Convertible Senior Notes. The issue premium on the Convertible Notes Exchange and the costs associated with the issuance of its convertible senior notes will now be amortized over the term of the first puttable dates of these callable debts. In all prior periods, the issue premium and the debt issuance costs were amortized over the terms of the debt issuance (i.e., October 1, 2025 for both the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes and the New Convertible Senior Notes). The effect of this change in estimate was to increase the interest expense by $1,153,805, increase the accretion impact (positive) by $190,194 (or increase net loss for $963,611 and decrease basic and diluted earnings per share by $0.04 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010). The unamortized debt issuance costs included in other assets amounted to $1.6 million and $2.0 million as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Dividends
Dividends on our common stock may be declared and paid out of funds legally available when and as determined by our Board of Directors. Our policy is to hold and invest corporate funds on a conservative basis, and, thus, we do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.
Contractual Obligations
The following table sets forth our contractual obligations in thousands at December 31, 2010 for the periods shown:
| | Total | | Less Than One Year | | One to Three Years | | Four to Five Years | | More Than Five Years |
Long-term debt | | $ | 34,394 | | $ | - | | $ | 34,394 | | $ | - | | $ | - |
Asset retirement | | | | | | | | | | |
obligation | | 6,866 | | - | | 253 | | 2,118 | | 4,495 |
Lease commitments | | 3,045 | | 707 | | | 1,628 | | | 710 | | - |
Total contractual | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
obligations | | $ | 44,305 | | $ | 707 | | $ | 36,275 | | $ | 2,828 | | $ | 4,495 |
Contractual obligations for long-term debt above does not include amounts for interest payments.
Results of Operations
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2010 and 2009
Results of Continuing Operations
In 2009, the Company disposed of its interest in Turkey, Hungary and Romania. The results of operations for these operations were reclassified as discontinued operations for all periods presented and are discussed separately under the heading "Results of discontinued operations".
| For The Year Ended December 31, | |
| 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | |
Production: | | | | | | | Average Price: | | | | | | |
Oil (Mbbl): | | | | | | | Oil ($/Bbl): | | | | | | |
France | | $ | 323 | | | $ | 328 | | France | | $ | 76.67 | | | $ | 57.17 | |
Revenue and other operating income
Sales and other operating revenue
Sales and other operating revenue for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 were $24 million, as compared to sales and other operating revenue of $19.2 million for the comparable period in 2009. This increase is primarily due to the global increase in oil prices. The increase in the average realized price for oil from $57.17 in 2009 to $76.67 in 2010 resulted in an increase of revenue of $6.3 million. Production remained relatively stable, decreasing from 328 MBbl in 2009 to 323 MBbl in 2010.
The above table compares both volumes and prices received for oil for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. Oil prices are and probably will continue to be extremely volatile and a significant change would have a material impact on our revenue.
Other operating income
Other operating income for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was $16.8 million as compared to zero for the comparable period in 2009, which represented (i) the $15 million upfront payment received from Hess on June 10, 2010 under the Hess Investment Agreement and (ii) $1,769,697 invoiced to Hess under the terms of the Hess Investment Agreement for all personal general and administrative costs associated with its activities as operator of the exploration permits in the Paris Basin.
Lease operating
Lease operating expense was $11.6 million, or $35.90 per BOE produced, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $8.4 million, or $25.60 per BOE produced, for the comparable period in 2009.
This increase is mainly due to the classification of certain costs associated with particular properties as lease operating expenses in 2010 including (i) $1,090,000 relating to certain taxes associated with oil production and (ii) approximately $7 million relating to costs associated with production sites and additional Paris headquarter expenses (which in the year ended December 31, 2009 were classified as general and administrative expenses, but following the strategic partnership with Hess are now mainly incurred in connection with our existing oil production and conventional reservoirs development and therefore have been classified as lease operating expenses). Lease operating expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 also includes inventory turnover variation for an amount of $142,000.
Exploration expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was $2.0 million, as compared to $138,000 for the comparable period in 2009. This increase is due primarily to expenses associated with geological and technical studies the Company conducted and commissioned in connection with the the shale oil development project.
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, depreciation, depletion and amortization expense was $4.4 million, or $13.59 per BOE produced, as compared to $5.3 million, or $17.57 per BOE produced for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is primarily due to the higher proved reserves assigned to our French assets at December 31, 2009 due to increased oil prices (as depreciation, depletion and amortization is calculated for the first three quarters of the year based on the reserves assigned to our French assets at the end of the preceding year).
Accretion on discounted assets and liabilities
Accretion expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was $89,000 (positive) as compared to $507,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. The accretion expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 is composed of $ 504,000 as asset retirement obligation expense and $ 593,000 of accretion impact (positive) related to the fair value of the New Convertible Senior Notes.
Impairment of oil and natural gas properties
We had no impairment charged in 2010 or 2009 for continuing operations.
General and administrative
General and administrative expense (including stock compensation) was $15.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $20.4 million for the comparable period of 2009.
Excluding stock compensation, general and administrative expense was $11.9 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, compared with $16.8 million for the comparable period of 2009. This decrease is primarily due to certain exceptional costs incurred in 2009, such as $1.5 million incurred due to resignation of former officers, $545,000 for legal and consulting costs associated with subsidiary sales and approximately $4 million of costs associated with the Dallas office/relocation of headquarters, which was partially offset by costs incurred in 2010 in connection with the Company’s processes to identify a strategic partner and achieve its dual listing.
Stock compensation expense
Stock compensation expense was $ 3.2 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 in connection with the grant of 287,750 of the Company’s shares at a weighted average price of $10.32 per share, compared with $ 3.6 million for the comparable period of 2009 in connection with the grant of 1,304,387 of the Company’s shares at a weighted average price of $6.40 per share.
(Loss) Gain on oil derivative contracts
Loss on oil derivative contracts was $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared to a loss of $ 0.9 million for 2009.
The realized loss in 2010 represents the recognized gain (on the 2010 hedging contract) and the unrealized loss (on the 2011 hedging contract) as shown in the table below on the commodity derivative contracts with Vitol S.A. Presented in the table below is a summary of the contracts entered into:
Type | Period | | Barrels | | | Floor | | | Ceiling | | | Gain | |
Collar | January 1 — December 31, 2010 | | | 182,500 | | | $ | 68 | | | $ | 81 | | | $ | 886 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Type | Period | | Barrels | | | Floor | | | Ceiling | | | (Loss) | |
Collar | January 1 — December 31, 2011 | | | 182,500 | | | $ | 78 | | | $ | 91 | | | $ | (1,330 | ) |
Foreign currency exchange gain (loss)
We recorded a loss on foreign currency exchange of $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared with a gain of $0.2 million for the comparable period of 2009. This decrease is mainly due to the fact that Toreador Energy France booked a loss on foreign currency exchange in its statutory accounts in Euro over the year ended December 31, 2010 due to the receipt on June 10, 2010 of the $15 million upfront payment from Hess under the Hess Investment Agreement combined with the weakening of the U.S. dollar compared to the Euro over the same period (this loss having been recorded in the financial statements of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2010 in accordance with FAS 52 “Foreign Currency Translation”).
Gain (Loss) on the early extinguishment of debt
As the debt instruments exchanged in the Convertible Notes Exchange have substantially different terms, the Company recognized the exchange of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes as extinguishment of debt. As a result, for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, the Company recognized a loss of $4.3 million including write off of loan original fee of $822,000 for the debt extinguishment. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we repurchased $25.7 million principal amount of the Notes on the open market and through privately negotiated transactions for $21.3 million plus accrued interest and prepaid loan fees resulting in a gain of $3.3 million on the early extinguishment of debt.
In accordance with the terms, procedures and conditions outlined in the indenture and the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes, each holder of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes had an option to require the Company to purchase all or a portion of its 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010. Pursuant to the exercise of this option, the Company repurchased $32,256,000 principal amount of the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes on October 1, 2010. Interest on the repurchased 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes accrued up to, but not including, October 1, 2010 was been paid to record holders of 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes as of September 15, 2010. The repurchase on October 1, 2010 resulted in a loss of $1.1 million after writing off all deferred debt issuance costs pertaining to the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes.
Interest expense, net of interest capitalization
Interest expense was $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $3.4 million for the comparable period of 2009. The increase is mainly due to the additional interest payments relating to the New Convertible Senior Notes issued in February 2010, which was offset by decreased interest payments relating to the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes, of which $22.2 million of the aggregate principal amount outstanding were exchanged for a portion of the New Convertible Senior Notes in the Convertible Notes Exchange. Interest expense for the New Convertible Senior Notes was $2,242,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 as compared to zero for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. Interest expense for the 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes was $1,308,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 as compared to $3,346,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. Amortization of loan fees of $1,524,969 was recorded for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 compared to $158,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009, due to the change in estimate of the lives of the issue premium and debt issuance costs associated to 5.00% Convertible Senior Notes and to the 8.00%/7.00% New Convertible Senior Notes (See Note 7 – “Change in depreciable lives of issue premium and debt issuance costs”).
Income tax (benefit) provision
For the year ended December 31, 2010 we reported an income tax provision of $6.1 million compared to a benefit of $0.5 million for the same period of 2009. The increase in income tax is primarily due to a higher French taxable income as a result of higher oil prices and the initial payment made by Hess under the Hess Investment Agreement.
Other comprehensive income (loss)
The most significant element of comprehensive income, other than net income, is foreign currency translation. As of December 31, 2010, we had accumulated an unrealized loss of $2.5 million. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we had an unrealized gain of $4.6 million.
The functional currency of our operations in France is the Euro, and the exchange rate used to translate the financial position of the French operations at December 31, 2010 and 2009 is shown below:
| | | | | | |
| December 31, | |
| | 2010 | | | 2009 | |
US Dollars | | € | 0.7484 | | | € | 0.6942 | |
Results of Discontinued Operations
We had no sales and other operating revenue from discontinued operations for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 due to the sale of all our discontinued operations in 2009. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, we recorded $1,034,000 as general and administrative expense associated with the payment of $657,000 made to Scowcroft under the Settlement Agreement on April 30, 2010 and associated legal costs, $254,354 for legal costs associated to the Netherby dispute and Overriding Interest payment, and $104,000 of additional tax associated with Toreador Hungary Limited activities in 2009. We thus recorded a loss of $739,000 from discontinued operations for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010.
In the fourth quarter of 2008 and during the first quarter of 2009, Toreador farmed out or sold all of its working interests in Romania to three different companies and closed its office; thus, we no longer have any operational involvement in Romania. This resulted in a gain of $5.8 million, which was recorded in the first quarter of 2009.
On March 3, 2009, we completed the sale of a 26.75% interest in the South Akcakoca Sub-Basin (SASB) project associated licenses located in the Black Sea offshore Turkey, to Petrol Ofisi for $55 million. In accordance with the revised assignment announced on February 3, 2009, $50 million of the proceeds was paid by Petrol Ofisi on March 3, 2009, and the remaining $5 million was paid on September 1, 2009. There was no gain or loss resulting from this sale.
On September 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Share Purchase Agreement (the "Share Purchase Agreement") with Tiway Oil BV, a company organized under the laws of the Netherlands ("Tiway"), and Tiway Oil AS, a company organized under the laws of Norway, pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell 100% of the outstanding shares of Toreador Turkey Ltd. to Tiway for total consideration consisting of: (1) a cash payment of $10.5 million to be paid at closing, (2) exploration success payments dependent upon certain future commercial discoveries as provided in the Share Purchase Agreement, up to a maximum aggregate consideration of $40 million, and (3) future quarterly 10% pre-tax net profit interest payments if a field goes into production that was discovered by an exploration well drilled within four years of closing on certain of the licenses then still held by Tiway. The sale of Toreador Turkey Ltd. was completed on October 7, 2009 and resulted in a gain of $1.8 million for the twelve months ending December 31, 2009.
On September 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Quota Purchase Agreement (the "Quota Purchase Agreement") with RAG (Rohöl Aufsuchungs Aktiengesellschaft), a corporation organized under the laws of Austria ("RAG"), pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell 100% of its equity interests in Toreador Hungary Limited to RAG for total consideration consisting of (1) a cash payment of $5.4 million (€ 3.7 million) paid at closing, (2) $435,000 (€ 300,000), which was held back subject to a post-closing adjustment and was paid to us on November 5, 2009 and (3) a contingent payment of $2.9 million (€2 million) to be paid upon post-transaction completion of agreements relating to certain assets of Toreador Hungary. The sale of Toreador Hungary was completed on September 30, 2009 and resulted in a loss of $4.1 million.
The results of operations of assets in Romania, Turkey and Hungary have been presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations (see “Note15 – Discontinued Operations”). Results for these assets reported as discontinued operations were as follows:
| For The Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2010 | | | 2009 | |
| (In thousands) | |
Revenues: | | | | | | |
Oil and natural gas sales | | $ | 107 | | | $ | 4,545 | |
Costs and expenses: | | | | | | | | |
Lease operating | | | - | | | | 886 | |
Exploration expense | | | - | | | | 868 | |
Impairment of oil and natural gas properties | | | - | | | | 10,725 | |
Depreciation, depletion and amortization | | | - | | | | 157 | |
Dry hole costs | | | - | | | | 1,318 | |
General and administrative | | | 1,070 | | | | 3,424 | |
(Gain) loss on sale of properties | | | - | | | | (3,583 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total costs and expenses | | | 1,070 | | | | 13,795 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Operating loss | | | (963 | ) | | | (9,250 | ) |
Other income (expense): | | | | | | | | |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | | - | | | | (4,881 | ) |
Foreign currency exchange | | | 258 | | | | 3,822 | |
Interest and other income | | | 66 | | | | 414 | |
Interest and other expense | | | - | | | | (185 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Loss before taxes | | | (639 | ) | | | (10,080 | ) |
Income tax provision | | | (101 | ) | | | - | |
| | | | | | | | |
Loss from discontinued operations | | $ | (740 | ) | | $ | (10,080 | ) |
| | For The Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2010 | | 2009 | | | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Production: | | | | | | Average Price: | | | | | |
Oil (Mbbl): | | | | | | Oil ($/Bbl): | | | | | |
Turkey | | | — | | 39 | Turkey | | | — | | 49.78 |
Romania | | | — | | — | Romania | | | — | | — |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | — | | 39 | Total average oil price | | | — | | 49.78 |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Gas (MMcf): | | | | | | Gas ($/Mcf): | | | | | |
Turkey | | | — | | 301 | Turkey | | | — | | 8.64 |
Romania | | | — | | — | Romania | | | — | | — |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | — | | 301 | Total average gas price | | | — | | 8.64 |
| | | | | | | | | | |
MBOE: | | | | | | $/ BOE: | | | | | |
Turkey | | | — | | 89 | Turkey | | | — | | 50.94 |
Romania | | | — | | — | Romania | | | — | | — |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | — | | 89 | Total average price per BOE | | | — | | 50.94 |
Revenue and other operating income
Sales and other operating revenue
Sales and other operating revenue for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 were $71,000 resulting from Romania royalty interest (Fauresti) as compared to $4.5 million for the comparable period in 2009. This decrease is due to the sale all of our discontinued assets in 2009.
Total costs and expenses
Lease operating expense was zero for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $886,000, for the comparable period in 2009. This decrease is due to the sale of all our discontinued assets in 2009.
Exploration expense for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was $0 as compared to $868,000 for the comparable period in 2009. This decrease is primarily due to the sale of our 26.75% interest in the SASB to Petrol Ofisi in March 2010, followed by the sale of Toreador Turkey to Tiway in October 2009 and the disposal of our Romanian operations in January 2009.
Dry hole and abandonment
Dry hole and abandonment cost for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 was zero as compared to $1.3 million in 2009. In 2009 we drilled the Durusu#1, in offshore Turkey, which was a dry hole.
Depreciation depletion and amortization
For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, depreciation, depletion and amortization expense was zero as compared to $157,000 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009. This decrease is due to the sale of all our discontinued assets in 2009.
Impairment of oil and natural gas properties and intangible assets
Impairment charged in 2010 was zero as compared to $10.7 million in 2009. The 2009 impairment was a result of 1) the Company's decision not to proceed with the Kiha pipeline in Hungary for $5.4 million and 2) the decline in the fair market value of the South Akcakoca Sub-basin assets in Turkey for $5.3 million.
For further information, see “Note 15 – Discontinued Operations”
General and administrative
For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, we recorded $943,000 as general and administrative expense compared to $3.4 million for the same period last year. These expenses were associated with the payment made to Scowcroft under the Settlement Agreement on April 30, 2010 and associated legal costs, $182,000 for legal costs associated to the Netherby dispute and Overriding Interest payment, and $104,000 of additional tax associated with Toreador Hungary Limited activities in 2009.
Gain/loss on sale of assets
For the year ended December 31, 2010, we did not have a sale of assets as compared with a gain of $3.6 million for the comparable period of 2009. The table below shows the gain/(loss) by country:
| | For The Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2010 | | | 2009 | |
| (In thousands) | |
Turkey | | $ | — | | | $ | 1,811 | |
Romania | | | — | | | | 5,846 | |
Hungary | | | — | | | | (4,074 | ) |
United States | | | — | | | | — | |
| | | | | | | | |
Gain (loss) on sale of assets | | $ | — | | | $ | 3,583 | |
The gains are primarily attributable to the reclassification of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, recorded on the balance sheet, to gain/(loss) on sale.
Loss on early extinguishment of debt
We did not record any loss for early extinguishment of debt for for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to a loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $4.9 million for the same period in 2009, which was due to early repayment of the International Finance Corporation revolving credit facility with the proceeds of the Petrol Ofisi sale for an outstanding balance of $36.4 million (including $5.9 million of additional compensation and $500,000 for accrued interest and fees).
Foreign currency exchange
We did not record a gain on foreign currency exchange for for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared with a $3.8 million gain for the comparable period of 2009. This decrease is due to the sale of all of our discontinued assets in 2009.
Interest and other income
Interest and other income was $66,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared with $414,000 in the comparable period of 2009. This decrease is due to the sale of all our discontinued assets in 2009.
Interest expense, net of interest capitalization
Interest expense was zero for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared to $185,000 for the comparable period of 2009. This decrease is due to the sale all of our discontinued assets over 2009.
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
Results of Continuing Operations
| | For the Years Ended December 31, | |
| | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | |
Production: | | | | | | | Average Price: | | | | | | |
Oil (Mbbl): | | | | | | | Oil ($/Bbl): | | | | | | |
France | | | 328 | | | | 365 | | France | | $ | 57.17 | | | $ | 93.32 | |
See Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a description of our accounting policies followed relative to derivative financial instruments and for specific information regarding the terms of our derivative financial instruments that are sensitive to changes in crude oil commodity prices.