Blueprint
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
☒ Annual report under
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31,
2017.
☐
Transition report under Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (No fee
required)
For the transition period from _______ to _______.
Commission file number 000-53473
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant in its charter)
Nevada
|
74-3237581
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
Organization)
|
|
5700 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 3600
Plano, Texas 75093
(Address of principal executive offices)
(214) 432-8002
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area
code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange
Act:
Common Stock ($0.001 Par Value)
(Title of Each Class)
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
(Name of each exchange on which registered)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned
issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
☐ No ☒
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes ☐ No ☒
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all
reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file
such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements
for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐
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).Yes
☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant
to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not
be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by
reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. ☐
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 definitions of “large
accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and
“smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer
|
☐
|
Accelerated filer
|
☒
|
Non-accelerated filer
|
☐
(Do not check if a smaller reporting
company)
|
Smaller reporting company
|
☐
|
Emerging growth company
|
☐
|
|
|
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the
registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period
for complying with any new or revised financial accounting
standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange
Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes
☐ No ☒
The aggregate market value of the common stock held by
non-affiliates of the registrant on June 30, 2017, the last
business day of the registrant’s most recently completed
second fiscal quarter, based on the closing price on that date of
$1.66 on the Nasdaq Stock Market, was approximately
$76,874,895.
At March 15, 2018, there were 63,640,034 shares of the
registrant’s common stock outstanding (the only class of
common stock).
EXPLANATORY NOTE
The Company meets the “accelerated filer” requirements
as of the end of its 2017 fiscal year pursuant to Rule 12b-2 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. However, pursuant to Rule 12b-2 and SEC Release No. 33-8876, the
Company (as a smaller reporting company transitioning to the larger
reporting company system based on its public float as of June 30,
2017) is not required to satisfy the larger reporting company
requirements until its first quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the
2018 fiscal year and thus remains eligible to use the scaled
disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies
under Item 10 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act of 1933 in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.
NOTE ABOUT FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements
within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995. These statements include, among other things, statements
regarding plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events or
performance and underlying assumptions and other statements, which
are other than statements of historical facts. Forward-looking
statements may appear throughout this report, including without
limitation, the following sections: Item 1 “Business,”
Item 1A “Risk Factors,” and Item 7
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.” Forward-looking
statements generally can be identified by words such as
“anticipates,” “believes,”
“estimates,” “expects,”
“intends,” “plans,” “predicts,”
“projects,” “will be,” “will
continue,” “will likely result,” and similar
expressions. These forward-looking statements are based on current
expectations and assumptions that are subject to risks and
uncertainties, which could cause our actual results to differ
materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements.
Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include,
but are not limited to, those discussed in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K, and in particular, the risks discussed under the caption
“Risk Factors” in Item 1A and those discussed in other
documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”). Important factors that in our view could cause
material adverse effects on our financial condition and results of
operations include, but are not limited to, risks associated with
the company's ability to obtain additional capital in the future to
fund planned expansion, the demand for oil and natural gas, general
economic factors, competition in the industry and other factors
that may cause actual results to be materially different from those
described herein as anticipated, believed, estimated or expected.
We undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the
results of any revision to any forward-looking statements, except
as required by law. Given these risks and uncertainties, readers
are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking
statements.
As used herein, the “Company,”
“Torchlight,” “we,” “our,” and
similar terms include Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its
subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
|
|
|
Page
|
Item 1.
|
Business
|
|
5
|
Item 1A.
|
Risk Factors
|
|
11
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved Staff Comments
|
|
18
|
Item 2.
|
Properties
|
|
18
|
Item 3.
|
Legal Proceedings
|
|
28
|
Item 4.
|
Mine Safety Disclosures
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART II
|
|
|
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder
Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
29
|
Item 6.
|
Selected Financial Data
|
|
30
|
Item 7.
|
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations
|
|
30
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
|
|
35
|
Item 8.
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
|
|
36
|
Item 9.
|
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
|
56
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls and Procedures
|
|
56
|
Item 9B.
|
Other Information
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
PART III
|
Item 10.
|
Directors, Executive Officer, and Corporate Governance
|
|
58
|
Item 11.
|
Executive Compensation
|
|
60
|
Item 12.
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
|
62
|
Item 13.
|
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
|
64
|
Item 14.
|
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
|
|
66
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
69
|
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Corporate History and Background
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. was incorporated in October, 2007
under the laws of the State of Nevada as Pole Perfect Studios, Inc.
(“PPS”).
On November 23, 2010, we entered into and closed a Share Exchange
Agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”) between the major
shareholders of PPS and the shareholders of Torchlight Energy, Inc.
(“TEI”). As a result of the transactions effected by
the Exchange Agreement, at closing TEI became our wholly-owned
subsidiary, and the business of TEI became our sole business. TEI
is an energy company, incorporated under the laws of the State of
Nevada in June, 2010. We are engaged in the acquisition,
exploration, exploitation, and/or development of oil and natural
gas properties in the United States. We operate our business
through TEI and four other wholly-owned subsidiaries, Torchlight
Energy Operating, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, Hudspeth
Oil Corporation, a Texas corporation, Torchlight Hazel LLC, a Texas
limited liability company, and Warwink Properties LLC, a Texas
limited liability company.
Business Overview
Our business model is to focus on drilling and working interest
programs within the United States, primarily in basins or areas
with known geology such as the Permian Basin in West Texas. We have
interests in four oil and gas projects, which projects are
described in more detail below in the section titled “Current
Projects.” We anticipate being involved in other oil and gas
projects moving forward, pending adequate funding. We anticipate
acquiring exploration and development projects both as a
non-operating working interest partner, participating in drilling
activities primarily on a basis proportionate to the working
interest, and acquiring properties we can operate. We intend to
spread the risk associated with drilling programs by entering into
a variety of programs in different fields with differing
economics.
The core strategy of the Company is pursuing the ongoing
development of its assets in the Permian basin consisting of the
Orogrande and the Hazel Projects. These West Texas properties
demonstrate significant value potential and future production
capabilities based upon the analysis of scientific data already
gathered in the day by day development activity. Therefore, the
Board has determined to focus its efforts and capital on these two
projects to maximize shareholder value for the long
run.
Key Business Attributes
Experienced People. We build on
the expertise and experiences of our management team, including
John Brda and Roger Wurtele. We will also receive guidance from
outside advisors as well as our Board of Directors and will align
with high quality exploration and technical
partners.
Project Focus. We are focusing
primarily on exploitation projects by pursuing resources in areas
where commercial production has already been established but where
opportunity for additional and nearby development is indicated. We
may pursue high risk exploration prospects which may appear less
favored than low risk exploration. We will, however, consider these
high risk-high reward exploration prospects in connection with
exploitation opportunities in a project that would reduce the
overall project economic risk. We will consider such high risk-high
reward prospects on their individual merits.
Lower Cost Structure. We will
attempt to maintain the lowest possible cost structure, enabling
the greatest margins and providing opportunities for investment
that would not be feasible for higher cost
competitors.
Limit Capital Risks. Limited
capital exposure is planned initially to add value to a project and
determine its economic viability. Projects are staged and have
options before additional capital is invested. We will limit our
exposure in any one project by participating at reduced working
interest levels, thereby being able to diversify with limited
capital. Management has experience in successfully managing risks
of projects, finance, and value.
Project Focus
Generally, we will focus on exploitation projects (primarily for
oil, although gas projects will be considered if the economics are
favorable). Projects are first identified, evaluated, and followed
by the engagement of third party operating or financial partners.
Subject to overall availability of capital, our interest in large
capital projects will be limited. Each opportunity will be
investigated on a standalone basis for both technical and financial
merit.
We will be actively seeking quality new investment opportunities to
sustain our growth, and we believe we will have access to many new
projects. The sources of these opportunities will vary but all will
be evaluated with the same criteria of technical and economic
factors. It is expected that projects will come from the many small
producers who find themselves under-funded or over-extended and
therefore vulnerable to price volatility. The financial ability to
respond quickly to opportunities will ensure a continuous stream of
projects and will enable us to negotiate from a stronger position
to enhance value.
ITEM 1. BUSINESS -
continued
With emphasis on acquisitions and development strategies, the types
of projects in which we will be involved vary from increased
production due to simple re-engineering of existing wellbores to
step-out drilling, drilling horizontally, and extensions of known
fields. Recompletion of existing wellbores in new zones,
development of deeper zones and detailing of structure, and
stratigraphic traps with three-dimensional seismic and utilization
of new technologies will all be part of our anticipated program.
Our preferred type of projects are in-fills to existing production
with nearly immediate cash flow and/or adjacent or on trend to
existing production. We will prefer projects with moderate to low
risk, unrecognized upside potential, and geographic
diversity.
Business Processes
We believe there are three principal business processes that we
must follow to enable our operations to be profitable. Each major
business process offers the opportunity for a distinct partner or
alliance as we grow. These processes are:
●
|
Investment Evaluation and Review;
|
●
|
Operations and Field Activities; and
|
●
|
Administrative and Finance Management.
|
Investment Evaluation and Review. This process is the key ingredient to our
success. Recognition of quality investment opportunities is the
fuel that drives our engine. Broadly, this process includes the
following activities: prospect acquisition, regional and local
geological and geophysical evaluations, data processing, economic
analysis, lease acquisition and negotiations, permitting, and field
supervision. We expect these evaluation processes to be managed by
our management team. Expert or specific technical support will be
outsourced as needed. Only if a project is taken to development,
and only then, will additional staff be hired. New personnel will
have very specific responsibilities. We anticipate attractive
investment opportunities to be presented from outside companies and
from the large informal community of geoscientists and engineers.
Building a network of advisors is key to the pipeline of high
quality opportunities.
Operations and Field Activities. This process begins following management
approval of an investment. Well site supervision, construction,
drilling, logging, product marketing, and transportation are
examples of some activities. We will prefer to be the operator, but
when operations are not possible, we will farm-out sufficient
interests to third parties that will be responsible for these
operating activities. We provide personnel to monitor these
activities and associated costs.
Administrative and Finance Management. This process coordinates our initial structuring
and capitalization, general operations and accounting, reporting,
audit, banking and cash management, regulatory agencies reporting
and interaction, timely and accurate payment of royalties, taxes,
leases rentals, vendor accounts and performance management that
includes budgeting and maintenance of financial controls, and
interface with legal counsel and tax and other financial and
business advisors.
Current Projects
As of December 31, 2017 the Company had interests in four oil and
gas projects:, the Orogrande Project in Hudspeth County, Texas, and
the Hazel Project in Sterling, Tom Green, and Irion Counties,
Texas, the Winkler Project in Winkler County, Texas, and the Hunton
wells in partnership with Husky Ventures in Central Oklahoma
..
Orogrande Project, West Texas
On August 7, 2014, we entered into a Purchase Agreement with
Hudspeth Oil Corporation (“Hudspeth”), McCabe Petroleum
Corporation (“MPC”), and Greg McCabe. Mr. McCabe was
the sole owner of both Hudspeth and MPC. Under the terms and
conditions of the Purchase Agreement, at closing, we purchased 100%
of the capital stock of Hudspeth which holds certain oil and gas
assets, including a 100% working interest in 172,000 mostly
contiguous acres in the Orogrande Basin in West Texas. As of
December 31, 2017, leases covering 133,000 acres remain in effect.
This acreage is in the primary term under five-year leases that
carry additional five-year extension provisions. As consideration,
at closing we issued 868,750 shares of our common stock to Mr.
McCabe and paid a total of $100,000 in geologic origination fees to
third parties. Additionally, Mr. McCabe has, at his option, a 10%
working interest back-in after payout and a reversionary interest
if drilling obligations are not met, all under the terms and
conditions of a participation and development agreement. All
drilling obligations through December 31, 2017 have been
met.
On September 23, 2015, our subsidiary, Hudspeth Oil Corporation
(“HOC”), entered into a Farmout Agreement by and
between HOC, Pandora Energy, LP (“Pandora”), Founders
Oil & Gas, LLC (“Founders”), McCabe Petroleum
Corporation and Greg McCabe (McCabe Petroleum Corporation and Greg
McCabe are parties to the Farmout Agreement for limited purposes)
for the entire Orogrande Project in Hudspeth County, Texas. The
Farmout Agreement provided for Founders to earn from HOC and
Pandora (collectively, the “Farmor”) an undivided 50%
of the leasehold interest in the Orogrande Project by
Founder’s spending a minimum of $45 million on actual
drilling operations on the Orogrande Project in the following two
years.
Under a joint operating agreement (on A.A.P.L. Form 610 –
1989 Model Form Operating Agreement with COPAS 2005 Accounting
Procedures) (“JOA”) also entered into on September 23,
2015, Founders is designated as operator of the
leases.
ITEM 1.
BUSINESS -
continued
On
March 22, 2017, the Company, along with Founders, their operating
partner, signed a Drilling and Development Unit (DDU) Agreement
with University Lands on its Orogrande Basin Project. The agreement
has an effective date of January 1, 2017 and required a payment
from both Torchlight and Founders of $335,323 as part of the
extension fee. Torchlight's portion of the fee was paid by Founders
in April 2017 and will be deducted from the required spud fee
payable to Torchlight at commencement of the next well
drilled.
The DDU
agreement allows for all 192 existing leases covering the 133,000
net acres leased from University Lands to be combined into one
lease for development purposes. The time to drill on the unit is
extended through April of 2023 on the first extension. The
agreement also grants exclusive right to continue through April of
2028 if compliance with the agreement is met and extension fee
associated with the additional time paid. The Company's drilling
obligations begin with one well in the first year, and increase to
five wells per year by year 2023. The drilling obligation set is a
minimum requirement and may be exceeded if acceleration is desired.
The DDU agreement replaces all prior agreements and will govern
future drilling obligations on the lease.
The Orogrande Rich A-11 test well that was drilled by Torchlight in
second quarter, 2015 was evaluated and numerous scientific tests
were performed to provide key data for the field development
thesis. Future utility of this well may be conversion to a salt
water disposal well in the course of further development of the
Orogrande acreage.
The second test well, the University Founders B-19 #1, was spudded
on April 24, 2016 and drilled in second quarter, 2016. The well
successfully pumped down completion fluid in the third quarter of
2016 and indications of hydrocarbons were seen at the surface on
this second Orogrande Project test well. Future utility of this
well may be conversion to a salt water disposal well in the course
of further development of the Orogrande acreage.
During the fourth quarter, 2017, the Company took back operational
control from Founders Oil and Gas on the Orogrande Basin Project.
Torchlight was joined by Wolfbone Investments, LLC, ("Wolfbone"), a
company owned by Greg McCabe, Torchlight's Chairman. The two
entities have entered into an Assignment of Farmout Agreement with
Founders and will share the remaining commitments under the prior
agreement with Founders. All original provisions of Torchlight's
carried interest will remain in place including reimbursement to
the Company on each wellbore. Founders will remain a 9.5% Working
Interest owner in the project under the agreement for the $9.5
million it has spent to date and be carried until the remaining
$40.5 million is spent by Wolfbone and Torchlight, with each
contributing 50% of that capital spend, under the existing
agreement. Torchlight's interest in the Project thereby increased
by 20.25% Working Interest to a total of 67.75% and Wolfbone now
owns 20.25%.
Founders will operate a newly drilled well called the University
Founders #A25 with supervision from Torchlight and its Partners.
The University Founders #A25 was spudded on the
27th
of November and satisfies the
obligation under the University Lands D&D Agreement. Once the
#A25 is completed Torchlight will assume full operational control
including managing drilling plans and timing for all future wells
drilled in the Project.
Hazel Project in the Midland Basin in West Texas
Effective April 1, 2016, Torchlight Energy Inc. acquired from
McCabe Petroleum Corporation, a 66.66% working interest in
approximately 12,000 acres in the Midland Basin in exchange for
1,500,000 warrants to purchase our common stock with an exercise
price of $1.00 for five years and a back-in after payout of a 25%
working interest to the seller.
Initial development of the first well on the property, the Flying B
Ranch #1, began July 10, 2016 and development continued through
September 30, 2016. This well is classified as a test well in the
development pursuit of the Hazel Project. It is anticipated that
this wellbore will be utilized as a salt water disposal well in
support of future development.
In
October, 2016, the holders of the Company's Series C Preferred
shares (which were issued in July, 2016) elected to convert into a
33.33% Working Interest in the Company's Hazel Project, reducing
Torchlight's ownership from 66.66% to a 33.33% Working
Interest.
On
December 27, 2016, drilling activities commenced on the second
Hazel Project well, the Flying B Ranch #2. The well is a vertical
test similar to the Company's first Hazel Project well, the Flying
B Ranch #1. Recompletion in an alternative geological formation for
this well was performed during the three months ended September 30,
2017 however the results were uneconomic for continuing production.
It is anticipated that this wellbore
will be utilized as a salt water disposal well in support of future
development.
The
Company commenced planning to drill a horizontal well in the
Project in June, 2017 in compliance with the continuous drilling
obligation. The well, the Flying B Ranch #3, was spudded on June
10, 2017. The well was completed and began production in late
September, 2017.
ITEM 1.
BUSINESS -
continued
Acquisition of Additional Interests in Hazel Project
On
January 30, 2017, we and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Acquisition Corporation, a Texas corporation (“TAC”),
entered into and closed an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and
Plan of Merger with Line Drive Energy, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Line Drive”), under which
agreements TAC merged with and into Line Drive and the separate
existence of TAC ceased, with Line Drive being the surviving
organization and becoming our wholly-owned subsidiary. Line Drive,
which was wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman, owned
certain assets and securities, including approximately 40.66% of
12,000 gross acres in the Hazel Project and 521,739 warrants to
purchase our common stock (which warrants had been assigned by Mr.
McCabe to Line Drive). Under the merger transaction, our shares of
common stock of TAC converted into a membership interest of Line
Drive, the membership interest in Line Drive held by Mr. McCabe
immediately prior to the transaction ceased to exist, and we issued
Mr. McCabe 3,301,739 restricted shares of common stock as
consideration therefor. Immediately after closing, the 521,739
warrants held by Line Drive were cancelled, which warrants had an
exercise price of $1.40 per share and an expiration date of June 9,
2020. A Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed
with the Secretary of State of Texas on January 31, 2017.
Subsequent to the closing the name of Line Drive Energy, LLC was
changed to Torchlight Hazel, LLC.
Also on
January 30, 2017, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into and
closed a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Wolfbone Investments,
LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Wolfbone”)
which is wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman. Under the
agreement, TEI acquired certain of Wolfbone’s Hazel Project
assets, including its interest in the Flying B Ranch #1 well and
the 40 acre unit surrounding the well, for consideration of
$415,000, and additionally, Wolfbone caused to be cancelled a total
of 2,780,000 warrants to purchase our common stock, including
1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum Corporation, an entity
owned by Mr. McCabe, and 1,280,000 warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals, an entity owned by Mr. McCabe’s son, which warrant
cancellations were effected through certain Warrant Cancellation
Agreements. The 1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum
Corporation had an exercise price of $1.00 per share and an
expiration date of April 4, 2021. The warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals included 100,000 warrants with an exercise price of $1.73
and an expiration date of September 30, 2018 and 1,180,000 warrants
with an exercise price of $0.70 and an expiration date of February
15, 2020.
Since
Mr. McCabe held the controlling interest in both Line Drive and
Wolfbone Investments, LLC, the transactions were combined for
accounting purposes. The working interest in the Hazel Project was
the only asset held by Line Drive. The warrant cancellation was
treated in the aggregate as an exercise of the warrants with the
transfer of the working interests as the consideration. The Company
recorded the transactions as an increase in its investment in the
Hazel project working interests of $3,644,431 which is equal to the
exercise price of the warrants plus the cash paid to
Wolfbone.
Upon
the closing of the transactions, the Company’s working
interest in the Hazel project increased by 40.66% to a total
ownership of 74%.
Effective
June 1, 2017, the Company acquired an additional 6% working
interest from unrelated working interest owners in exchange for
268,656 shares of common stock valued at $373,430, increasing its
working interest in the Hazel project to 80%.
Winkler Project, Winkler County, Texas
On
December 1, 2017, the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization that we
and our newly formed wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Wolfbone
Properties, Inc., a Texas corporation (“TWP”), entered
into with McCabe Petroleum Corporation, a Texas corporation
(“MPC”), and Warwink Properties, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Warwink Properties”) closed. Under
the agreement, which was entered into on November 14, 2017, TWP
merged with and into Warwink Properties and the separate existence
of TWP ceased, with Warwink Properties becoming the surviving
organization and our wholly-owned subsidiary. Warwink Properties
was wholly owned by MPC which is wholly owned by Gregory McCabe,
our Chairman. Warwink Properties owns certain assets, including a
10.71875% working interest in 640 acres in Winkler County, Texas.
At closing of the merger transaction, our shares of common stock of
TWP converted into a membership interest of Warwink Properties, the
membership interest in Warwink Properties held by MPC ceased to
exist, and we issued MPC 2,500,000 restricted shares of common
stock as consideration. Also on December 1, 2017, MPC closed its
transaction with MECO IV, LLC (“MECO”) for the purchase
and sale of certain assets as contemplated by the Purchase and Sale
Agreement dated November 9, 2017 (the “MECO PSA”), to
which we are not a party. Under the MECO PSA, Warwink Properties
received a carry from MECO (through the tanks) of up to $1,475,000
in the next well drilled on the Winkler County leases. A
Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed with the
Secretary of State of Texas on December 5, 2017.
Also on
December 1, 2017, the transactions contemplated by the Purchase
Agreement that our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into with
MPC closed. Under the Purchase Agreement, which was entered into on
November 14, 2017, TEI acquired beneficial ownership of certain of
MPC’s assets, including acreage and wellbores located in Ward
County, Texas (the “Ward County Assets”). As
consideration under the Purchase Agreement, at closing TEI issued
to MPC an unsecured promissory note in the principal amount of
$3,250,000, payable in monthly installments of interest only
beginning on January 1, 2018, at the rate of 5% per annum, with the
entire principal amount together with all accrued interest due and
payable on December 31, 2020. In connection with TEI’s
acquisition of beneficial ownership in the Ward County Assets, MPC
sold those same assets, on behalf of TEI, to MECO at closing of the
MECO PSA, and accordingly, TEI received $3,250,000 in cash for its
beneficial interest in the Ward County Assets. Additionally, at
closing of the MECO PSA, MPC paid TEI a performance fee of
$2,781,500 in cash as compensation for TEI’s marketing and
selling the Winkler County assets of MPC and the Ward County Assets
as a package to MECO.
ITEM 1.
BUSINESS -
continued
Hunton Play, Central Oklahoma
As of December 31, 2017, we were producing from one well in the
Viking AMI, and one well in Prairie Grove.
Legal Proceeding
In May, 2016, Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its subsidiary
Torchlight Energy, Inc. filed a lawsuit in the 429th judicial
district court in Collin County, Texas against Husky Ventures,
Inc., Charles V. Long, April Glidewell, Silverstar of Nevada, Inc.,
Maximus Exploration, LLC, Atwood Acquisitions, LLC, Gastar
Exploration Inc., J. Russell Porter, Michael A. Gerlich, Jerry R.
Schuyler, and John M. Selser, Sr. Reference is made to Item 3,
“Legal Proceedings,” for more information regarding
this lawsuit.
Viking AMI
In the fourth quarter of 2013 we entered into an Area of Mutual
Interest (AMI) with Husky Ventures, the Viking Prospect. We
acquired a 25% interest in 3,945 acres and subsequently acquired an
additional 5% in May, 2014. We had an interest in 8,800 total acres
as of December 31, 2016. (Net undeveloped acres = 2,600 Our net
cumulative investment through December 31, 2016 in undeveloped
acres in the Viking AMI was $1,387,928. In addition the company
incurred $133,468 as its share of costs related to the early stages
of the construction of a gas pipeline which was to serve the Viking
AMI. As of December 31, 2017, to the best knowledge of the Company,
substantially all of the leases have expired (although some may
have been renewed without notice to Torchlight) and the leases
remain subject to settlement negotiations in the legal action
referenced above.
Rosedale AMI
In January of 2014 we contracted for a 25% Working Interest in
approximately 5,000 acres in the Rosedale AMI consisting of eight
townships in South Central Oklahoma. We subsequently acquired an
additional 5% in May, 2014. The Company had an interest in 11,600
total acres as of December 31, 2016 (Net undeveloped acres = 3,500)
Our cumulative investment through December 31, 2016 in the Rosedale
AMI was $2,833,744. As of December 31, 2017, to the best knowledge
of the Company, substantially all of the leases have expired
(although some may have been renewed without notice to Torchlight)
and the leases remain subject to settlement negotiations in the
legal action referenced above.
Prairie Grove – Judy Well
In February of 2014, we acquired a 10% Working Interest in a well
in the Prairie Grove AMI from a non-consenting third party who
elected not to participate in the well. The well is producing at
December 31, 2017.
Thunderbird AMI
In July of 2014, we contracted for a 25% Working Interest in the
Thunderbird AMI. The total acres in which the Company has an
interest at December 31, 2016 was 4,300 acres (Net undeveloped
acres = 1,100). Our cumulative investment through December 31, 2016
in the Thunderbird AMI was $949,530. As of December 31, 2017, to
the best knowledge of the Company, substantially all of the leases
have expired (although some may have been renewed without notice to
Torchlight) and the leases remain subject to settlement
negotiations in the legal action referenced above.
Industry and Business Environment
We are experiencing a time of fluctuating oil prices caused by
lower demand, higher US Supply, and OPEC’s policies on
production. Unfortunately, this is the cyclical nature of the oil
and gas industry. We experience highs and lows that seem to come in
cycles. Fortunately, advances in technology drive the US market and
we feel this will drive the development costs down on our
exploration and drilling programs.
Competition
The oil and natural gas industry is intensely competitive, and we
will compete with numerous other companies engaged in the
exploration and production of oil and gas. Some of these companies
have substantially greater resources than we have. Not only do they
explore for and produce oil and natural gas, but also many carry on
midstream and refining operations and market petroleum and other
products on a regional, national, or worldwide basis. The
operations of other companies may be able to pay more for
exploratory prospects and productive oil and natural gas
properties. They may also have more resources to define, evaluate,
bid for, and purchase a greater number of properties and prospects
than our financial or human resources permit.
ITEM 1.
BUSINESS -
continued
Our larger or integrated competitors may have the resources to be
better able to absorb the burden of current and future federal,
state, and local laws and regulations more easily than we can,
which would adversely affect our competitive position. Our ability
to locate reserves and acquire interests in properties in the
future will be dependent upon our ability and resources to evaluate
and select suitable properties and consummate transactions in this
highly competitive environment. In addition, we may be at a
disadvantage in producing oil and natural gas properties and
bidding for exploratory prospects because we have fewer financial
and human resources than other companies in our industry. Should a
larger and better financed company decide to directly compete with
us, and be successful in its efforts, our business could be
adversely affected.
Marketing and Customers
The market for oil and natural gas that we will produce depends on
factors beyond our control, including the extent of domestic
production and imports of oil and natural gas, the proximity and
capacity of natural gas pipelines and other transportation
facilities, demand for oil and natural gas, the marketing of
competitive fuels, and the effects of state and federal regulation.
The oil and gas industry also competes with other industries in
supplying the energy and fuel requirements of industrial,
commercial, and individual consumers.
Our oil production is expected to be sold at prices tied to the
spot oil markets. Our natural gas production is expected to be sold
under short-term contracts and priced based on first of the month
index prices or on daily spot market prices. We will rely on our
operating partners to market and sell our production.
Governmental Regulation and Environmental Matters
Our operations are subject to various rules, regulations, and
limitations impacting the oil and natural gas exploration and
production industry as a whole.
Regulation of Oil and Natural Gas Production
Our oil and natural gas exploration, production, and related
operations, when developed, will be subject to extensive rules and
regulations promulgated by federal, state, tribal, and local
authorities and agencies. Certain states may also have statutes or
regulations addressing conservation matters, including provisions
for the unitization or pooling of oil and natural gas properties,
the establishment of maximum rates of production from wells, and
the regulation of spacing, plugging, and abandonment of such wells.
Failure to comply with any such rules and regulations can result in
substantial penalties. The regulatory burden on the oil and gas
industry will most likely increase our cost of doing business and
may affect our profitability. Although we believe we are currently
in substantial compliance with all applicable laws and regulations,
because such rules and regulations are frequently amended or
reinterpreted, we are unable to predict the future cost or impact
of complying with such laws. Significant expenditures may be
required to comply with governmental laws and regulations and may
have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and
results of operations.
Environmental Matters
Our operations and properties are and will be subject to extensive
and changing federal, state, and local laws and regulations
relating to environmental protection, including the generation,
storage, handling, emission, transportation, and discharge of
materials into the environment, and relating to safety and health.
In the future, environmental legislation and regulation may trend
toward stricter standards. These laws and regulations
may:
· require the acquisition of a permit or other authorization
before construction or drilling commences and for certain other
activities;
· limit or prohibit construction, drilling, and other
activities on certain lands lying within wilderness and other
protected areas;
· impose substantial liabilities for pollution resulting from
operations; or
· restrict certain areas from fracking and other stimulation
techniques.
The permits required for our operations may be subject to
revocation, modification, and renewal by issuing authorities.
Governmental authorities have the power to enforce their
regulations, and violations are subject to fines or injunctions, or
both. In the opinion of management, we are and will be in
substantial compliance with current applicable environmental laws
and regulations, and have no material commitments for capital
expenditures to comply with existing environmental requirements.
Nevertheless, changes in existing environmental laws and
regulations or in interpretations thereof could have a significant
impact on our company, as well as the oil and natural gas industry
in general.
The Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and comparable state statutes
impose strict, joint, and several liability on owners and operators
of sites and on persons who disposed of or arranged for the
disposal of “hazardous substances” found at such sites.
It is not uncommon for the neighboring landowners and other third
parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage
allegedly caused by the hazardous substances released into the
environment. The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(“RCRA”) and comparable state statutes govern the
disposal of “solid waste” and “hazardous
waste” and authorize the imposition of substantial fines and
penalties for noncompliance. Although CERCLA currently excludes
petroleum from its definition of “hazardous substance,”
state laws affecting our operations may impose clean-up liability
relating to petroleum and petroleum related products. In addition,
although RCRA classifies certain oil field wastes as
“non-hazardous,” such exploration and production wastes
could be reclassified as hazardous wastes thereby making such
wastes subject to more stringent handling and disposal
requirements.
ITEM
1. BUSINESS - continued
The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) seeks to ensure that
activities do not jeopardize endangered or threatened animal, fish,
and plant species, nor destroy or modify the critical habitat of
such species. Under ESA, exploration and production operations, as
well as actions by federal agencies, may not significantly impair
or jeopardize the species or its habitat. ESA provides for criminal
penalties for willful violations of the Act. Other statutes that
provide protection to animal and plant species and that may apply
to our operations include, but are not necessarily limited to, the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the National
Historic Preservation Act. Although we believe that our operations
will be in substantial compliance with such statutes, any change in
these statutes or any reclassification of a species as endangered
could subject our company to significant expenses to modify our
operations or could force our company to discontinue certain
operations altogether.
Hydraulic
fracturing is regulated by state and federal oil and gas regulatory
authorities, including specifically the requirement to disclose
certain information related to hydraulic fracturing operations.
Operators must follow applicable legal requirements for groundwater
protection in our operations that are subject to supervision by
state and federal regulators (including the Bureau of Land
Management on federal acreage). Furthermore, well construction
practices require the installation of multiple layers of protective
steel casing surrounded by cement that are specifically designed
and installed to protect freshwater aquifers by preventing the
migration of fracturing fluids into aquifers. Regulatory proposals
in some states and local communities have been initiated to require
or make more stringent the permitting and compliance requirements
for hydraulic fracturing operations. Federal and state agencies
have continued to assess the impacts of hydraulic fracturing, which
could spur further action toward federal and/or state legislation
and regulation of hydraulic fracturing activities. In addition, in
light of concerns about seismic activity being triggered by the
injection of produced waters into underground wells and hydraulic
fracturing, certain regulators are also considering additional
requirements related to seismic safety for hydraulic fracturing
activities. Further restrictions on hydraulic fracturing could make
it prohibitive to conduct our operations, and also reduce the
amount of oil and natural gas that we or our operators are
ultimately able to produce in commercial quantities from our
properties.
Climate Change
Significant studies and research have been devoted to climate
change and global warming, and climate change has developed into a
major political issue in the United States and globally. Certain
research suggests that greenhouse gas emissions contribute to
climate change and pose a threat to the environment. Recent
scientific research and political debate has focused in part on
carbon dioxide and methane incidental to oil and natural gas
exploration and production. Many states and the federal government
have enacted legislation directed at controlling greenhouse gas
emissions, and future legislation and regulation could impose
additional restrictions or requirements in connection with our
drilling and production activities and favor use of alternative
energy sources, which could affect operating costs and demand for
oil products. As such, our business could be materially adversely
affected by domestic and international legislation targeted at
controlling climate change.
Employees
We currently have four full time employees and no part time
employees. We anticipate adding additional employees, when adequate
funds are available, and using independent contractors,
consultants, attorneys, and accountants as necessary to complement
services rendered by our employees. We presently have independent
technical professionals under consulting agreements who are
available to us on an as needed basis.
Research and Development
We did not spend any funds on research and development activities
during years ended December 31, 2017 or 2016.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
An investment in us involves a high degree of risk and is suitable
only for prospective investors with substantial financial means who
have no need for liquidity and can afford the entire loss of their
investment in us. Prospective investors should carefully consider
the following risk factors, in addition to the other information
contained in this report.
Risks Related to the Company and the Industry
We have a limited operating history relative to larger companies in
our industry, and may not be successful in developing profitable
business operations.
We have a limited operating history relative to larger companies in
our industry. Our business operations must be considered in light
of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered in
establishing a business in the oil and natural gas industries. As
of the date of this report, we have generated limited revenues and
have limited assets. We have an insufficient history at this time
on which to base an assumption that our business operations will
prove to be successful in the long-term. Our future operating
results will depend on many factors, including:
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS -
continued
●
|
our ability to raise adequate working capital;
|
●
|
the success of our development and exploration;
|
●
|
the demand for natural gas and oil;
|
●
|
the level of our competition;
|
●
|
our ability to attract and maintain key management and employees;
and
|
●
|
our ability to efficiently explore, develop, produce or acquire
sufficient quantities of marketable natural gas or oil in a highly
competitive and speculative environment while maintaining quality
and controlling costs.
|
To achieve profitable operations in the future, we must, alone or
with others, successfully manage the factors stated above, as well
as continue to develop ways to enhance our production efforts.
Despite our best efforts, we may not be successful in our
exploration or development efforts, or obtain required regulatory
approvals. There is a possibility that some, or all, of the wells
in which we obtain interests may never produce oil or natural
gas.
We have limited capital and will need to raise additional capital
in the future.
We do not currently have sufficient capital to fund both our
continuing operations and our planned growth. We will require
additional capital to continue to grow our business via
acquisitions and to further expand our exploration and development
programs. We may be unable to obtain additional capital when
required. Future acquisitions and future exploration, development,
production and marketing activities, as well as our administrative
requirements (such as salaries, insurance expenses and general
overhead expenses, as well as legal compliance costs and accounting
expenses) will require a substantial amount of additional capital
and cash flow.
We may pursue sources of additional capital through various
financing transactions or arrangements, including joint venturing
of projects, debt financing, equity financing, or other means. We
may not be successful in identifying suitable financing
transactions in the time period required or at all, and we may not
obtain the capital we require by other means. If we do not succeed
in raising additional capital, our resources may not be sufficient
to fund our planned operations.
Our ability to obtain financing, if and when necessary, may be
impaired by such factors as the capital markets (both generally and
in the oil and gas industry in particular), our limited operating
history, the location of our oil and natural gas properties and
prices of oil and natural gas on the commodities markets (which
will impact the amount of asset-based financing available to us, if
any) and the departure of key employees. Further, if oil or natural
gas prices on the commodities markets decline, our future revenues,
if any, will likely decrease and such decreased revenues may
increase our requirements for capital. If the amount of capital we
are able to raise from financing activities, together with our
revenues from operations, is not sufficient to satisfy our capital
needs (even to the extent that we reduce our operations), we may be
required to cease our operations, divest our assets at unattractive
prices or obtain financing on unattractive terms.
Any additional capital raised through the sale of equity may dilute
the ownership percentage of our stockholders. Raising any such
capital could also result in a decrease in the fair market value of
our equity securities because our assets would be owned by a larger
pool of outstanding equity. The terms of securities we issue in
future capital transactions may be more favorable to our new
investors, and may include preferences, superior voting rights and
the issuance of other derivative securities, and issuances of
incentive awards under equity employee incentive plans, which may
have a further dilutive effect.
We may incur substantial costs in pursuing future capital
financing, including investment banking fees, legal fees,
accounting fees, securities law compliance fees, printing and
distribution expenses and other costs. We may also be required to
recognize non-cash expenses in connection with certain securities
we may issue, which may adversely impact our financial
condition.
Our auditor indicated that certain factors raise substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern.
The financial statements included with this report are presented
under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern,
which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction
of liabilities in the normal course of business over a reasonable
length of time. We had a net loss of approximately $.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2017 and an accumulated deficit in
aggregate of approximately $83.5 million at year end. We are not
generating sufficient operating cash flows to support continuing
operations, and expect to incur further losses in the development
of our business.
In our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2017,
our auditor indicated that certain factors raised substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern. These factors
included our accumulated deficit, as well as the fact that we were
not generating sufficient cash flows to meet our regular working
capital requirements. Our ability to continue as a going concern is
dependent upon our ability to generate future profitable operations
and/or to obtain the necessary financing to meet our obligations
and repay our liabilities arising from normal business operations
when they come due. Management's plan to address our ability to
continue as a going concern includes: (1) obtaining debt or equity
funding from private placement or institutional sources; (2)
obtaining loans from financial institutions, where possible, or (3)
participating in joint venture transactions with third parties.
Although management believes that it will be able to obtain the
necessary funding to allow us to remain a going concern through the
methods discussed above, there can be no assurances that such
methods will prove successful. The accompanying financial
statements do not include any adjustments that might result from
the outcome of this uncertainty.
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS -
continued
As a non-operator, our development of successful operations relies
extensively on third-parties who, if not successful, could have a
material adverse effect on our results of operation.
We expect to primarily participate in wells operated by
third-parties. As a result, we will not control the timing of the
development, exploitation, production and exploration activities
relating to leasehold interests we acquire. We do, however, have
certain rights as granted in our Joint Operating Agreements that
allow us a certain degree of freedom such as, but not limited to,
the ability to propose the drilling of wells. If our drilling
partners are not successful in such activities relating to our
leasehold interests, or are unable or unwilling to perform, our
financial condition and results of operation could have an adverse
material effect.
Further, financial risks are inherent in any operation where the
cost of drilling, equipping, completing and operating wells is
shared by more than one person. We could be held liable for the
joint activity obligations of the operator or other working
interest owners such as nonpayment of costs and liabilities arising
from the actions of the working interest owners. In the event the
operator or other working interest owners do not pay their share of
such costs, we would likely have to pay those costs. In such
situations, if we were unable to pay those costs, there could be a
material adverse effect to our financial position.
Because of the speculative nature of oil and gas exploration, there
is risk that we will not find commercially exploitable oil and gas
and that our business will fail.
The search for commercial quantities of oil and natural gas as a
business is extremely risky. We cannot provide investors with any
assurance that any properties in which we obtain a mineral interest
will contain commercially exploitable quantities of oil and/or gas.
The exploration expenditures to be made by us may not result in the
discovery of commercial quantities of oil and/or gas. Problems such
as unusual or unexpected formations or pressures, premature
declines of reservoirs, invasion of water into producing formations
and other conditions involved in oil and gas exploration often
result in unsuccessful exploration efforts. If we are unable to
find commercially exploitable quantities of oil and gas, and/or we
are unable to commercially extract such quantities, we may be
forced to abandon or curtail our business plan, and as a result,
any investment in us may become worthless.
Strategic relationships upon which we may rely are subject to
change, which may diminish our ability to conduct our
operations.
Our ability to successfully acquire oil and gas interests, to build
our reserves, to participate in drilling opportunities and to
identify and enter into commercial arrangements with customers will
depend on developing and maintaining close working relationships
with industry participants and our ability to select and evaluate
suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly
competitive environment. These realities are subject to change and
our inability to maintain close working relationships with industry
participants or continue to acquire suitable property may impair
our ability to execute our business plan.
To continue to develop our business, we will endeavor to use the
business relationships of our management to enter into strategic
relationships, which may take the form of joint ventures with other
private parties and contractual arrangements with other oil and gas
companies, including those that supply equipment and other
resources that we will use in our business. We may not be able to
establish these strategic relationships, or if established, we may
not be able to maintain them. In addition, the dynamics of our
relationships with strategic partners may require us to incur
expenses or undertake activities we would not otherwise be inclined
to in order to fulfill our obligations to these partners or
maintain our relationships. If our strategic relationships are not
established or maintained, our business prospects may be limited,
which could diminish our ability to conduct our
operations.
The price of oil and natural gas has historically been volatile. If
it were to decrease substantially, our projections, budgets, and
revenues would be adversely affected, potentially forcing us to
make changes in our operations.
Our future financial condition, results of operations and the
carrying value of any oil and natural gas interests we acquire will
depend primarily upon the prices paid for oil and natural gas
production. Oil and natural gas prices historically have been
volatile and likely will continue to be volatile in the future,
especially given current world geopolitical conditions. Our cash
flows from operations are highly dependent on the prices that we
receive for oil and natural gas. This price volatility also affects
the amount of our cash flows available for capital expenditures and
our ability to borrow money or raise additional capital. The prices
for oil and natural gas are subject to a variety of additional
factors that are beyond our control. These factors
include:
●
|
the level of consumer demand for oil and natural gas;
|
●
|
the domestic and foreign supply of oil and natural
gas;
|
●
|
the ability of the members of the Organization of Petroleum
Exporting Countries ("OPEC") to agree to and maintain oil price and
production controls;
|
●
|
the price of foreign oil and natural gas;
|
●
|
domestic governmental regulations and taxes;
|
●
|
the price and availability of alternative fuel
sources;
|
●
|
market uncertainty due to political conditions in oil and natural
gas producing regions, including the Middle East; and
|
●
|
worldwide economic conditions.
|
ITEM 1A. RISK
FACTORS -
continued
These factors as well as the volatility of the energy markets
generally make it extremely difficult to predict future oil and
natural gas price movements with any certainty. Declines in oil and
natural gas prices affect our revenues, and could reduce the amount
of oil and natural gas that we can produce economically.
Accordingly, such declines could have a material adverse effect on
our financial condition, results of operations, oil and natural gas
reserves and the carrying values of our oil and natural gas
properties. If the oil and natural gas industry experiences
significant price declines, we may be unable to make planned
expenditures, among other things. If this were to happen, we may be
forced to abandon or curtail our business operations, which would
cause the value of an investment in us to decline or become
worthless.
If oil or natural gas prices remain depressed or drilling efforts
are unsuccessful, we may be required to record additional write
downs of our oil and natural gas properties.
If oil or natural gas prices remain depressed or drilling efforts
are unsuccessful, we could be required to write down the carrying
value of certain of our oil and natural gas properties. Write downs
may occur when oil and natural gas prices are low, or if we have
downward adjustments to our estimated proved reserves, increases in
our estimates of operating or development costs, deterioration in
drilling results or mechanical problems with wells where the cost
to re drill or repair is not supported by the expected
economics.
Under the full cost method of accounting, capitalized oil and gas
property costs less accumulated depletion and net of deferred
income taxes may not exceed an amount equal to the present value,
discounted at 10%, of estimated future net revenues from proved oil
and gas reserves plus the cost of unproved properties not subject
to amortization (without regard to estimates of fair value), or
estimated fair value, if lower, of unproved properties that are
subject to amortization. Should capitalized costs exceed this
ceiling, an impairment would be recognized.
The Company recognized an impairment charge of $70,080 for the year
2016.
During the year ended December 31, 2017 the Company performed
assessments of evaluated and unevaluated costs in the cost pool to
conform the cumulative value of the Full Cost Pool to the combined
amount of Reserve Value of evaluated, producing properties (as
determined by independent analysis at December 31, 2017), plus the
lesser of cumulative historical cost or estimated realizable value
of unevaluated leases and projects expected to commence production
in future operating periods. The Company identified impairment of
$2,300,626 in 2017 related to its unevaluated properties. Although
we had no recognized impairment expense in 2017, the Company has
adjusted the separation of evaluated versus unevaluated costs
within its full cost pool to recognize the value impairment related
to the expiration of unevaluated leases in 2017 in the amount of
$2,300,626. The impact of this change will be to increase the basis
for calculation of future period’s depletion, depreciation
and amortization to include $2,300,626 of cost which will
effectively recognize the impairment on the Statement of Income
over future periods. The $2,300,626 has also become an evaluated
cost for purposes of future period’s Ceiling Tests and which
may further recognize the impairment expense recognized in future
periods.
Because of the inherent dangers involved in oil and gas operations,
there is a risk that we may incur liability or damages as we
conduct our business operations, which could force us to expend a
substantial amount of money in connection with litigation and/or a
settlement.
The oil and natural gas business involves a variety of operating
hazards and risks such as well blowouts, pipe failures, casing
collapse, explosions, uncontrollable flows of oil, natural gas or
well fluids, fires, spills, pollution, releases of toxic gas and
other environmental hazards and risks. These hazards and risks
could result in substantial losses to us from, among other things,
injury or loss of life, severe damage to or destruction of
property, natural resources and equipment, pollution or other
environmental damage, cleanup responsibilities, regulatory
investigation and penalties and suspension of operations. In
addition, we may be liable for environmental damages caused by
previous owners of property purchased and leased by us. In recent
years, there has also been increased scrutiny on the environmental
risk associated with hydraulic fracturing, such as underground
migration and surface spillage or mishandling of fracturing fluids
including chemical additives. As a result, substantial liabilities
to third parties or governmental entities may be incurred, the
payment of which could reduce or eliminate the funds available for
exploration, development or acquisitions or result in the loss of
our properties and/or force us to expend substantial monies in
connection with litigation or settlements. We currently have no
insurance to cover such losses and liabilities, and even if
insurance is obtained, there can be no assurance that it will be
adequate to cover any losses or liabilities. We cannot predict the
availability of insurance or the availability of insurance at
premium levels that justify our purchase. The occurrence of a
significant event not fully insured or indemnified against could
materially and adversely affect our financial condition and
operations. We may elect to self-insure if management believes that
the cost of insurance, although available, is excessive relative to
the risks presented. In addition, pollution and environmental risks
generally are not fully insurable. The occurrence of an event not
fully covered by insurance could have a material adverse effect on
our financial condition and results of operations, which could lead
to any investment in us becoming worthless.
The market for oil and gas is intensely competitive, and
competition pressures could force us to abandon or curtail our
business plan.
The market for oil and gas exploration services is highly
competitive, and we only expect competition to intensify in the
future. Numerous well-established companies are focusing
significant resources on exploration and are currently competing
with us for oil and gas opportunities. Other oil and gas companies
may seek to acquire oil and gas leases and properties that we have
targeted. Additionally, other companies engaged in our line of
business may compete with us from time to time in obtaining capital
from investors. Competitors include larger companies which, in
particular, may have access to greater resources, may be more
successful in the recruitment and retention of qualified employees
and may conduct their own refining and petroleum marketing
operations, which may give them a competitive advantage. Actual or
potential competitors may be strengthened through the acquisition
of additional assets and interests. Additionally, there are
numerous companies focusing their resources on creating fuels
and/or materials which serve the same purpose as oil and gas, but
are manufactured from renewable resources.
ITEM 1A. RISK
FACTORS -
continued
As a result, there can be no assurance that we will be able to
compete successfully or that competitive pressures will not
adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial
condition. If we are not able to successfully compete in the
marketplace, we could be forced to curtail or even abandon our
current business plan, which could cause any investment in us to
become worthless.
We may not be able to successfully manage our growth, which could
lead to our inability to implement our business plan.
Our growth may place a significant strain on our managerial,
operational and financial resources, especially considering that we
currently only have a small number of executive officers, employees
and advisors. Further, as we enter into additional contracts, we
will be required to manage multiple relationships with various
consultants, businesses and other third parties. These requirements
will be exacerbated in the event of our further growth or in the
event that the number of our drilling and/or extraction operations
increases. There can be no assurance that our systems, procedures
and/or controls will be adequate to support our operations or that
our management will be able to achieve the rapid execution
necessary to successfully implement our business plan. If we are
unable to manage our growth effectively, our business, results of
operations and financial condition will be adversely affected,
which could lead to us being forced to abandon or curtail our
business plan and operations.
Our operations are heavily dependent on current environmental
regulation, changes in which we cannot predict.
Oil and natural gas activities that we will engage in, including
production, processing, handling and disposal of hazardous
materials, such as hydrocarbons and naturally occurring radioactive
materials (if any), are subject to stringent regulation. We could
incur significant costs, including cleanup costs resulting from a
release of hazardous material, third-party claims for property
damage and personal injuries fines and sanctions, as a result of
any violations or liabilities under environmental or other laws.
Changes in or more stringent enforcement of environmental laws
could force us to expend additional operating costs and capital
expenditures to stay in compliance.
Various federal, state and local laws regulating the discharge of
materials into the environment, or otherwise relating to the
protection of the environment, directly impact oil and gas
exploration, development and production operations, and
consequently may impact our operations and costs. These regulations
include, among others, (i) regulations by the Environmental
Protection Agency and various state agencies regarding approved
methods of disposal for certain hazardous and non-hazardous wastes;
(ii) the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and
analogous state laws which regulate the removal or remediation of
previously disposed wastes (including wastes disposed of or
released by prior owners or operators), property contamination
(including groundwater contamination), and remedial plugging
operations to prevent future contamination; (iii) the Clean Air Act
and comparable state and local requirements which may result in the
gradual imposition of certain pollution control requirements with
respect to air emissions from our operations; (iv) the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 which contains numerous requirements relating
to the prevention of and response to oil spills into waters of the
United States; (v) the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act which
is the principal federal statute governing the treatment, storage
and disposal of hazardous wastes; and (vi) state regulations and
statutes governing the handling, treatment, storage and disposal of
naturally occurring radioactive material.
Management believes that we will be in substantial compliance with
applicable environmental laws and regulations. To date, we have not
expended any amounts to comply with such regulations, and
management does not currently anticipate that future compliance
will have a materially adverse effect on our consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows. However, if we are
deemed to not be in compliance with applicable environmental laws,
we could be forced to expend substantial amounts to be in
compliance, which would have a materially adverse effect on our
financial condition. If this were to happen, any investment in us
could be lost.
Government regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing
could result in increased costs and additional operating
restrictions or delays.
Vast quantities of natural gas, natural gas liquids and oil
deposits exist in deep shale and other unconventional formations.
It is customary in our industry to recover these resources through
the use of hydraulic fracturing, combined with horizontal drilling.
Hydraulic fracturing is the process of creating or expanding
cracks, or fractures, in deep underground formations using water,
sand and other additives pumped under high pressure into the
formation. As with the rest of the industry, our third-party
operating partners use hydraulic fracturing as a means to increase
the productivity of most of the wells they drill and complete.
These formations are generally geologically separated and isolated
from fresh ground water supplies by thousands of feet of
impermeable rock layers.
We believe our third-party operating partners follow applicable
legal requirements for groundwater protection in their operations
that are subject to supervision by state and federal regulators.
Furthermore, we believe our third-party operating partners’
well construction practices are specifically designed to protect
freshwater aquifers by preventing the migration of fracturing
fluids into aquifers.
Hydraulic fracturing is typically regulated by state oil and gas
commissions. Some states have adopted, and other states are
considering adopting, regulations that could impose more stringent
permitting, public disclosure, and/or well construction
requirements on hydraulic fracturing operations.
ITEM 1A. RISK
FACTORS -
continued
In addition to state laws, some local municipalities have adopted
or are considering adopting land use restrictions, such as city
ordinances, that may restrict or prohibit the performance of well
drilling in general and/or hydraulic fracturing in particular.
There are also certain governmental reviews either underway or
being proposed that focus on deep shale and other formation
completion and production practices, including hydraulic
fracturing. Depending on the outcome of these studies, federal and
state legislatures and agencies may seek to further regulate such
activities. Certain environmental and other groups have also
suggested that additional federal, state and local laws and
regulations may be needed to more closely regulate the hydraulic
fracturing process.
Further, the EPA has asserted federal regulatory authority over
hydraulic fracturing involving “diesel fuels” under the
SWDA’s UIC Program The EPA is also engaged in a study of the
potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing activities on drinking
water resources in the states where the EPA is the permitting
authority. These actions, in conjunction with other analyses by
federal and state agencies to assess the impacts of hydraulic
fracturing could spur further action toward federal and/or state
legislation and regulation of hydraulic fracturing
activities.
We cannot predict whether additional federal, state or local laws
or regulations applicable to hydraulic fracturing will be enacted
in the future and, if so, what actions any such laws or regulations
would require or prohibit. Restrictions on hydraulic fracturing
could make it prohibitive for our third-party operating partners to
conduct operations, and also reduce the amount of oil, natural gas
liquids and natural gas that we are ultimately able to produce in
commercial quantities from our properties. If additional levels of
regulation or permitting requirements were imposed on hydraulic
fracturing operations, our business and operations could be subject
to delays, increased operating and compliance costs and process
prohibitions.
Our estimates of the volume of reserves could have flaws, or such
reserves could turn out not to be commercially extractable. As a
result, our future revenues and projections could be
incorrect.
Estimates of reserves and of future net revenues prepared by
different petroleum engineers may vary substantially depending, in
part, on the assumptions made and may be subject to adjustment
either up or down in the future. Our actual amounts of production,
revenue, taxes, development expenditures, operating expenses, and
quantities of recoverable oil and gas reserves may vary
substantially from the estimates. Oil and gas reserve estimates are
necessarily inexact and involve matters of subjective engineering
judgment. In addition, any estimates of our future net revenues and
the present value thereof are based on assumptions derived in part
from historical price and cost information, which may not reflect
current and future values, and/or other assumptions made by us that
only represent our best estimates. If these estimates of
quantities, prices and costs prove inaccurate, we may be
unsuccessful in expanding our oil and gas reserves base with our
acquisitions. Additionally, if declines in and instability of oil
and gas prices occur, then write downs in the capitalized costs
associated with any oil and gas assets we obtain may be required.
Because of the nature of the estimates of our reserves and
estimates in general, we can provide no assurance that reductions
to our estimated proved oil and gas reserves and estimated future
net revenues will not be required in the future, and/or that our
estimated reserves will be present and/or commercially extractable.
If our reserve estimates are incorrect, the value of our common
stock could decrease and we may be forced to write down the
capitalized costs of our oil and gas properties.
Decommissioning costs are unknown and may be substantial. Unplanned
costs could divert resources from other projects.
We may become responsible for costs associated with abandoning and
reclaiming wells, facilities and pipelines which we use for
production of oil and natural gas reserves. Abandonment and
reclamation of these facilities and the costs associated therewith
is often referred to as “decommissioning.” We accrue a
liability for decommissioning costs associated with our wells, but
have not established any cash reserve account for these potential
costs in respect of any of our properties. If decommissioning is
required before economic depletion of our properties or if our
estimates of the costs of decommissioning exceed the value of the
reserves remaining at any particular time to cover such
decommissioning costs, we may have to draw on funds from other
sources to satisfy such costs. The use of other funds to satisfy
such decommissioning costs could impair our ability to focus
capital investment in other areas of our business.
We may have difficulty distributing production, which could harm
our financial condition.
In order to sell the oil and natural gas that we are able to
produce, if any, the operators of the wells we obtain interests in
may have to make arrangements for storage and distribution to the
market. We will rely on local infrastructure and the availability
of transportation for storage and shipment of our products, but
infrastructure development and storage and transportation
facilities may be insufficient for our needs at commercially
acceptable terms in the localities in which we operate. This
situation could be particularly problematic to the extent that our
operations are conducted in remote areas that are difficult to
access, such as areas that are distant from shipping and/or
pipeline facilities. These factors may affect our and potential
partners’ ability to explore and develop properties and to
store and transport oil and natural gas production, increasing our
expenses.
Furthermore, weather conditions or natural disasters, actions by
companies doing business in one or more of the areas in which we
will operate, or labor disputes may impair the distribution of oil
and/or natural gas and in turn diminish our financial condition or
ability to maintain our operations.
Our business will suffer if we cannot obtain or maintain necessary
licenses.
Our operations will require licenses, permits and in some cases
renewals of licenses and permits from various governmental
authorities. Our ability to obtain, sustain or renew such licenses
and permits on acceptable terms is subject to change in regulations
and policies and to the discretion of the applicable governments,
among other factors. Our inability to obtain, or our loss of or
denial of extension of, any of these licenses or permits could
hamper our ability to produce revenues from our
operations.
ITEM 1A. RISK
FACTORS -
continued
Challenges to our properties may impact our financial
condition.
Title to oil and gas interests is often not capable of conclusive
determination without incurring substantial expense. While we
intend to make appropriate inquiries into the title of properties
and other development rights we acquire, title defects may exist.
In addition, we may be unable to obtain adequate insurance for
title defects, on a commercially reasonable basis or at all. If
title defects do exist, it is possible that we may lose all or a
portion of our right, title and interests in and to the properties
to which the title defects relate. If our property rights are
reduced, our ability to conduct our exploration, development and
production activities may be impaired. To mitigate title problems,
common industry practice is to obtain a title opinion from a
qualified oil and gas attorney prior to the drilling operations of
a well.
We rely on technology to conduct our business, and our technology
could become ineffective or obsolete.
We rely on technology, including geographic and seismic analysis
techniques and economic models, to develop our reserve estimates
and to guide our exploration, development and production
activities. We and our operator partners will be required to
continually enhance and update our technology to maintain its
efficacy and to avoid obsolescence. The costs of doing so may be
substantial and may be higher than the costs that we anticipate for
technology maintenance and development. If we are unable to
maintain the efficacy of our technology, our ability to manage our
business and to compete may be impaired. Further, even if we are
able to maintain technical effectiveness, our technology may not be
the most efficient means of reaching our objectives, in which case
we may incur higher operating costs than we would were our
technology more efficient.
The loss of key personnel would directly affect our efficiency and
profitability.
Our future success is dependent, in a large part, on retaining the
services of our current management team. Our executive officers
possess a unique and comprehensive knowledge of our industry and
related matters that are vital to our success within the industry.
The knowledge, leadership and technical expertise of these
individuals would be difficult to replace. The loss of one or more
of our officers could have a material adverse effect on our
operating and financial performance, including our ability to
develop and execute our long-term business strategy. We do not
maintain key-man life insurance with respect to any employees. We
do have employment agreements with each of our executive officers.
There can be no assurance, however, that any of our officers will
continue to be employed by us.
Our officers and directors control a significant percentage of our
current outstanding common stock and their interests may conflict
with those of our stockholders.
As of the date of this report, our executive officers and directors
collectively and beneficially own approximately 32% of our
outstanding common stock (see Item 12 of this report for an
explanation of how this number is computed). This concentration of
voting control gives these affiliates substantial influence over
any matters which require a stockholder vote, including without
limitation the election of directors and approval of merger and/or
acquisition transactions, even if their interests may conflict with
those of other stockholders. It could have the effect of delaying
or preventing a change in control or otherwise discouraging a
potential acquirer from attempting to obtain control of us. This
could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our
common stock or prevent our stockholders from realizing a premium
over the then prevailing market prices for their shares of common
stock.
In the future, we may incur significant increased costs as a result
of operating as a public company, and our management may be
required to devote substantial time to new compliance
initiatives.
In the future, we may incur significant legal, accounting, and
other expenses as a result of operating as a public company. The
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”),
as well as new rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, have
imposed various requirements on public companies, including
requiring changes in corporate governance practices. Our management
and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of
time to these new compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and
regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs
and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For
example, we expect these new rules and regulations to make it more
difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer
liability insurance, and we may be required to incur substantial
costs to maintain the same or similar coverage.
In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things,
that we maintain effective internal controls for financial
reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we
are required to perform system and process evaluation and testing
on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial
reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In
performing this evaluation and testing, management concluded that
our internal control over financial reporting is effective as of
December 31, 2017. Our continued compliance with Section 404, will
require that we incur substantial accounting expense and expend
significant management efforts. We do not have an internal audit
group. We have however, engaged independent professional assistance
for the evaluation and testing of internal controls.
Terrorist attacks or cyber-incidents could result in information
theft, data corruption, operational disruption and/or financial
loss.
Like
most companies, we have become increasingly dependent upon digital
technologies, including information systems, infrastructure and
cloud applications and services, to operate our businesses, to
process and record financial and operating data, communicate with
our business partners, analyze mine and mining information,
estimate quantities of coal reserves, as well as other activities
related to our businesses. Strategic targets, such as
energy-related assets, may be at greater risk of future terrorist
or cyber-attacks than other targets in the United States.
Deliberate attacks on, or security breaches in, our systems or
infrastructure, or the systems or infrastructure of third parties,
or cloud-based applications could lead to corruption or loss of our
proprietary data and potentially sensitive data, delays in
production or delivery, difficulty in completing and settling
transactions, challenges in maintaining our books and records,
environmental damage, communication interruptions, other
operational disruptions and third-party liability. Our insurance
may not protect us against such occurrences. Consequently, it is
possible that any of these occurrences, or a combination of them,
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows. Further, as cyber
incidents continue to evolve, we may be required to expend
additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our
protective measures or to investigate and remediate any
vulnerability to cyber incidents.
ITEM 1A. RISK
FACTORS -
continued
Certain Factors Related to Our Common Stock
There presently is a limited market for our common stock, and the
price of our common stock may be volatile.
Our common stock is currently quoted on The NASDAQ Stock Market
LLC. There could be volatility in the volume and market price of
our common stock moving forward. This volatility may be caused by a
variety of factors, including the lack of readily available
quotations, the absence of consistent administrative supervision of
“bid” and “ask” quotations, and generally
lower trading volume. In addition, factors such as quarterly
variations in our operating results, changes in financial estimates
by securities analysts, or our failure to meet our or their
projected financial and operating results, litigation involving us,
factors relating to the oil and gas industry, actions by
governmental agencies, national economic and stock market
considerations, as well as other events and circumstances beyond
our control could have a significant impact on the future market
price of our common stock and the relative volatility of such
market price.
Offers or availability for sale of a substantial number of shares
of our common stock may cause the price of our common stock to
decline.
Our stockholders could sell substantial amounts of common stock in
the public market, including shares sold upon the filing of a
registration statement that registers such shares and/or upon the
expiration of any statutory holding period under Rule 144 of the
Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), if
available, or upon the expiration of trading limitation periods.
Such volume could create a circumstance commonly referred to as a
market “overhang” and in anticipation of which the
market price of our common stock could fall. Additionally,
we have a large number of warrants that are presently exercisable.
The exercise of a large amount of these securities followed by the
subsequent sale of the underlying stock in the market would likely
have a negative effect on our common stock’s market price.
The existence of an overhang, whether
or not sales have occurred or are occurring, also could make it
more difficult for us to secure additional financing through the
sale of equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time
and price that we deem reasonable or
appropriate.
Our directors and officers have rights to
indemnification.
Our Bylaws provide, as permitted by governing Nevada law, that we
will indemnify our directors, officers, and employees, whether or
not then in service as such, against all reasonable expenses
actually and necessarily incurred by him or her in connection with
the defense of any litigation to which the individual may have been
made a party because he or she is or was a director, officer, or
employee of the company. The inclusion of these provisions in the
Bylaws may have the effect of reducing the likelihood of derivative
litigation against directors and officers, and may discourage or
deter stockholders or management from bringing a lawsuit against
directors and officers for breach of their duty of care, even
though such an action, if successful, might otherwise have
benefited us and our stockholders.
We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common
stock.
We do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our common stock for
the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends, if any, would be
contingent upon our revenues and earnings, if any, capital
requirements, and general financial condition. The payment of any
dividends will be within the discretion of our Board of Directors.
We presently intend to retain all earnings, if any, to implement
our business strategy; accordingly, we do not anticipate the
declaration of any dividends in the foreseeable
future.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Not Applicable.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
Our principal executive offices are located at 5700 W. Plano
Parkway, Suite 3600, Plano, Texas 75093. We currently lease this
office space which totals approximately 3,181 square feet. We
believe that the condition and size of our offices are adequate for
our current needs.
Investment in oil and gas properties during the years ended
December 31, 2017 and 2016 is detailed as follows:
|
|
|
Property
acquisition costs
|
$7,227,362
|
$3,265,807
|
Development
costs
|
$8,034,962
|
$2,055,526
|
Exploratory
costs
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
$15,262,324
|
$5,321,333
|
Property
acquisition costs presented above exclude interest capitalized into
the full cost pool of $1,010,868 in 2017 and $215,938 in
2016.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Property acquisition cost relates to the Company’s
acquisition of additional working interests in the Hazel Project in
west Texas and the acquisition of the Warwink Project, also in west
Texas. The development costs include work in the Orogrande and
Hazel projects in west Texas. No development costs were incurred
for Oklahoma properties in 2017.
Oil and Natural Gas Reserves
Reserve Estimates
SEC Case. The following tables
sets forth, as of December 31, 2017, our estimated net proved oil
and natural gas reserves, the estimated present value (discounted
at an annual rate of 10%) of estimated future net revenues before
future income taxes (PV-10) and after future income taxes
(Standardized Measure) of our proved reserves and our estimated net
probable oil and natural gas reserves, each prepared using standard
geological and engineering methods generally accepted by the
petroleum industry and in accordance with assumptions prescribed by
the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). All of
our reserves are located in the United States.
The PV-10 value is a widely used measure of value of oil and
natural gas assets and represents a pre-tax present value of
estimated cash flows discounted at ten percent. PV-10 is considered
a non-GAAP financial measure as defined by the SEC. We believe that
our PV-10 presentation is relevant and useful to our investors
because it presents the estimated discounted future net cash flows
attributable to our proved reserves before taking into account the
related future income taxes, as such taxes may differ among various
companies. We believe investors and creditors use PV-10 as a basis
for comparison of the relative size and value of our proved
reserves to the reserve estimates of other companies. PV-10 is not
a measure of financial or operating performance under GAAP and
neither it nor the Standardized Measure is intended to represent
the current market value of our estimated oil and natural gas
reserves. PV-10 should not be considered in isolation or as a
substitute for the standardized measure of discounted future net
cash flows as defined under GAAP.
The
estimates of our proved reserves and the PV-10 set forth herein
reflect estimated future gross revenue to be generated from the
production of proved reserves, net of estimated production and
future development costs, using prices and costs under existing
economic conditions at December 31, 2017. For purposes of
determining prices, we used the average of prices received for each
month within the 12-month period ended December 31, 2017, adjusted
for quality and location differences, which was $48.53 per barrel
of oil and $2.58 per MCF of gas. This average historical price is
not a prediction of future prices. The amounts shown do not give
effect to non-property related expenses, such as corporate general
administrative expenses and debt service, future income taxes or to
depreciation, depletion and amortization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Producing
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
$132
|
$96
|
Proved
Nonproducing
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
Total
Proved
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
$132
|
$96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standardized Measure of Future Net Cash Flows Related to Proved Oil
and Gas Properties
|
$123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probable
Undeveloped
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Producing
|
1,400
|
23,300
|
5,284
|
$31
|
$29
|
Proved
Nonproducing
|
46,800
|
467,600
|
124,733
|
$776
|
$301
|
Total
Proved
|
48,200
|
490,900
|
130,017
|
$807
|
$330
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standardized Measure of Future Net Cash Flows Related to Proved Oil
and Gas Properties
|
$341
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probable
Undeveloped
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
The upward revisions of previous estimates from 2016 to 2017 of
proved producing reserves of 900 BBLS and 20,500 MCF results
primarily from 2017 reserve report calculations for the
Company’s properties driven by industry conditions and the
change in the proportional quantities of oil and gas in production
from the Judy well in Oklahoma from 2016 to 2017.
Reserve values as of December 31, 2017 are related to a single
producing well in Oklahoma – the Judy well in the Prairie
Grove AMI.
BOE equivalents are determined by combining barrels of oil with MCF
of gas divided by six.
Standardized Measure of Oil & Gas Quantities - Volume
Rollforward
|
Year Ended December 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth the Company’s net proved
reserves, including the changes therein, and proved
|
developed reserves:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
PROVED RESERVES:
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of period
|
48,200
|
490,900
|
130,017
|
Revisions
of previous estimates
|
(35,509)
|
(437,841)
|
(108,483)
|
Extensions,
discoveries and other additions
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Divestiture
of Reserves
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Acquisition
of Reserves
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Production
|
(10,391)
|
(9,259)
|
(11,934)
|
End
of period
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROVED
DEVELOPED RESERVES
|
|
|
|
Proved
developed producing
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
Proved
nonproducing
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Standardized
Measure of Oil & Gas Quantities
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2017 & 2016
|
|
|
|
The
standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows
relating
|
|
to
proved oil and natural gas reserves is as follows :
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future
cash inflows
|
$240,370
|
$3,156,970
|
Future
production costs
|
(108,000)
|
(1,000,410)
|
Future
development costs
|
-
|
(1,350,000)
|
Future
income tax expense
|
-
|
-
|
Future
net cash flows
|
132,370
|
806,560
|
10%
annual discount for estimated
|
|
|
timing
of cash flows
|
(9,102)
|
(465,644)
|
Standardized
measure of discounted future
|
|
|
net
cash flows related to proved reserves
|
$123,268
|
$340,916
|
|
|
|
A
summary of the changes in the standardized measure of
discounted
|
future
net cash flows applicable to proved oil and natural gas
reserves
|
is
as follows :
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
beginning of period
|
$340,916
|
$5,935,188
|
Net
change in sales and transfer prices and in production (lifting)
costs related to future production
|
207,241
|
(482,569)
|
Changes
in estimated future development costs
|
116,934
|
(791,630)
|
Net
change due to revisions in quantity estimates
|
(129,565)
|
482,272
|
Accretion
of discount
|
28,604
|
80,393
|
Other
|
(43,372)
|
172,169
|
|
|
|
Net
change due to extensions and discoveries
|
-
|
-
|
Net
change due to sales of minerals in place
|
-
|
(191,470)
|
Sales
and transfers of oil and gas produced during the
period
|
(397,490)
|
(29,749)
|
Previously
estimated development costs incurred during the period
|
-
|
58,575
|
Net
change in income taxes
|
-
|
(4,892,263)
|
Balance,
end of period
|
$123,268
|
$340,916
|
Due to the inherent uncertainties and the limited nature of
reservoir data, both proved and probable reserves are subject to
change as additional information becomes available. The estimates
of reserves, future cash flows, and present value are based on
various assumptions, including those prescribed by the SEC, and are
inherently imprecise. Although we believe these estimates are
reasonable, actual future production, cash flows, taxes,
development expenditures, operating expenses, and quantities of
recoverable oil and natural gas reserves may vary substantially
from these estimates.
In estimating probable reserves, it should be noted that those
reserve estimates inherently involve greater risk and uncertainty
than estimates of proved reserves. While analysis of geoscience and
engineering data provides reasonable certainty that proved reserves
can be economically producible from known formations under existing
conditions and within a reasonable time, probable reserves involve
less certainty than reserves with a higher classification due to
less data to support their ultimate recovery. Probable reserves
have not been discounted for the additional risk associated with
future recovery. Prospective investors should be aware that as the
categories of reserves decrease with certainty, the risk of
recovering reserves at the PV-10 calculation increases. The
reserves and net present worth discounted at 10% relating to the
different categories of proved and probable have not been adjusted
for risk due to their uncertainty of recovery and thus are not
comparable and should not be summed into total
amounts.
Reserve Estimation Process, Controls and Technologies
The reserve estimates, including PV-10 estimates, set forth above
were prepared by PeTech Enterprises, Inc. for the Company’s
Properties in Oklahoma. A copy of their full reports with regard to
our reserves is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this annual report on
Form 10-K. These calculations were prepared using standard
geological and engineering methods generally accepted by the
petroleum industry and in accordance with SEC financial accounting
and reporting standards.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
We do not have any employees with specific reservoir engineering
qualifications in the company. Our Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer worked closely with PeTech Enterprises Inc. in connection
with their preparation of our reserve estimates, including
assessing the integrity, accuracy, and timeliness of the methods
and assumptions used in this process.
PeTech Enterprises, Inc. (“PeTech”), who provided 2017
reserve estimates for our Oklahoma Properties, is a Texas based
family owned oil and gas production and investment company that
provides reservoir engineering, economics and valuation support to
energy banks, energy companies and law firms as an expert witness.
PeTech has been in business since 1982. Amiel David is the
President of PeTech and the primary technical person in charge of
the estimates of reserves and associated cash flow and economics on
behalf of the company for the results presented in its reserves
report to us. He has a PhD in Petroleum Engineering from Stanford
University. He is a registered Professional Engineer in the state
of Texas (PE #50970), granted in 1982, a member of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers and a member of the Society of Petroleum
Evaluation Engineers.
Proved Nonproducing Reserves
As of December 31, 2017, our proved nonproducing reserves totaled
-0- barrels of oil equivalents (BOE) compared to 124,733 as of
December 31, 2016, a decrease of 124,733 BOE. The proved
nonproducing reserves at December 31, 2016 were associated with our
Hunton project Judy and Loki wells located in Oklahoma. The Loki
well was determined to be uneconomic at 12/31/17. The change
consists of a decrease of 124,733 BOE based on the 2017
engineering. These numbers are taken from the third party reserves
studies prepared by PeTech for 2017 and 2016. The net reserves
change associated with nonproducing reserves from this property is
a decrease of approximately 46,800 bbls of oil and a decrease of
approximately 467,600 Mcf of gas (calculated with a gas-oil
equivalency factor of six). The Company does not intend to pursue
any behind pipe reserves which may exist and there is no additional
acreage available to consider future development.
We made investments and development progress during 2017 to further
develop proved producing reserves in the Orogrande and Hazel
Projects in the Permian Basin in West Texas. As of December 31,
2017 three test wells have been developed in the Orogrande Project
and four test wells have been developed in the Hazel Project.
Although the Hazel wells have each produced a quantity of oil (the
Flying B #3 is in continuous production at December 31, 2017), the
wells remain categorized as test wells for 2017.
Our current drilling plans, subject to sufficient capital resources
and the periodic evaluation of interim drilling results and other
potential investment opportunities, include drilling additional
evaluation wells in the Orogrande and Hazel AMI’s to continue
to derisk the prospects and obtain initial production from the
development efforts. The next scheduled well in the Hazel Project
is scheduled to spud near the end of May, 2018. The first
horizontal well in the Orogrande Project was spudded in November,
2017 and was in development as of December 31, 2017.
Production, Price, and Production Cost History
During the year ended December 31, 2017, we produced and sold
10,391 barrels of oil net to our interest at an average sale price
of $52.37 per bbl. We produced and sold 9,259 MCF of gas net to our
interest at an average sales price of $2.84 per MCF. Our average
production cost including lease operating expenses and direct
production taxes was $14.51 per BOE. Our depreciation, depletion,
and amortization expense was $7.39 per BOE.
During the year ended December 31, 2016, we produced and sold 8,488
barrels of oil net to our interest at an average sale price of
$34.15 per bbl. We produced and sold 36,513 MCF of gas net to our
interest at an average sales price of $1.77 per MCF. Our average
production cost including lease operating expenses and direct
production taxes was $22.54 per BOE. Our depreciation, depletion,
and amortization expense was $43.67 per BOE.
The changes in production were impacted by the divesture of the
Oklahoma Cimmaron and the Texas Marcelina properties early in 2016
and by the production from the Flying B #3 well in the Hazel
Project beginning in late September, 2017.
Our 2017 production was from properties located in central Oklahoma
and in west Texas. Reserves at the beginning of 2017 from central
Oklahoma comprised more than 15% of total reserves. For 2017,
approximately 2,000 BOE was produced in Oklahoma and 9,935 BOE
produced in Texas, or 17% from Oklahoma and 83% from wells in west
Texas.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Quarterly Revenue and Production by State for 2017 and 2016 are
detailed as follows:
Property
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q1 - 2017
|
101
|
2,303
|
$5,346
|
$7,604
|
$12,950
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q1 - 2017
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q1-2017
|
|
101
|
2,303
|
$5,346
|
$7,604
|
$12,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q2 - 2017
|
140
|
2,332
|
6,594
|
6,709
|
13,303
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q2 - 2017
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q2-2017
|
|
140
|
2,332
|
$6,594
|
$6,709
|
$13,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q3 - 2017
|
132
|
2,041
|
5,733
|
3,727
|
9,460
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q3 - 2017
|
204
|
0
|
8,836
|
-
|
8,836
|
Total Q3-2017
|
|
336
|
2,041
|
$14,569
|
$3,727
|
$18,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q4 - 2017
|
84
|
2,583
|
4,739
|
8,227
|
12,966
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q4 - 2017
|
9,730
|
0
|
512,984
|
-
|
512,984
|
Total Q4-2017
|
|
9,814
|
2,583
|
$517,723
|
$8,227
|
$525,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,391
|
9,259
|
$544,232
|
$26,267
|
$570,499
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q1 - 2016
|
3,000
|
0
|
$92,546
|
$-
|
$92,546
|
Oklahoma
|
Q1 - 2016
|
2,026
|
21,148
|
54,289
|
38,624
|
92,913
|
Kansas
|
Q1 - 2016
|
312
|
0
|
8,854
|
-
|
8,854
|
Total Q1-2016
|
|
5,338
|
21,148
|
$155,689
|
$38,624
|
$194,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q2 - 2016
|
917
|
0
|
$38,812
|
$-
|
$38,812
|
Oklahoma
|
Q2 - 2016
|
675
|
9,689
|
30,411
|
11,142
|
41,553
|
Kansas
|
Q2 - 2016
|
731
|
0
|
28,834
|
-
|
28,834
|
Total Q2-2016
|
|
2,323
|
9,689
|
$98,057
|
$11,142
|
$109,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q3 - 2016
|
464
|
0
|
$20,190
|
$-
|
$20,190
|
Oklahoma
|
Q3 - 2016
|
180
|
2,830
|
7,925
|
6,170
|
14,095
|
Kansas
|
Q3 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q3-2016
|
|
644
|
2,830
|
$28,115
|
$6,170
|
$34,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q4 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
Oklahoma
|
Q4 - 2016
|
184
|
2,845
|
8,024
|
8,569
|
16,593
|
Kansas
|
Q4 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q4-2016
|
|
184
|
2,845
|
$8,024
|
$8,569
|
$16,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,488
|
36,513
|
$289,885
|
$64,505
|
$354,390
|
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Drilling Activity and Productive Wells
Central Oklahoma Projects
Having sold the Chisholm Trail and Cimarron wells and acreage in
previous years, the only remaining producing wells in Oklahoma are
the Judy and the Loki wells as of December 31, 2017. The Company
retains ownership of the Viking, Rosedale, and Thunderbird
AMI’s at December 31, 2017
Combined Well Status
The following table summarizes drilling activity and Well Status as
of December 31, 2017:
|
|
|
|
Drilling Activity/Well Status
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development
Wells:
|
|
|
|
|
Productive
-Texas (Hazel)
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-
|
-
|
Productive
- Okla
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
-
|
-
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
Test
Wells (Dry) - Orogrande
|
2.00
|
0.95
|
-
|
-
|
2.00
|
0.95
|
Test
Wells (Dry) - Hazel
|
2.00
|
1.60
|
2.00
|
1.60
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Productive
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Dry
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Productive
-Texas
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-
|
-
|
Productive
- Okla
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
-
|
-
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
Test
Wells (Dry)
|
4.00
|
2.55
|
2.00
|
1.60
|
2.00
|
0.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Productive
-Texas
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Productive
- Okla
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Wells:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Productive
-Texas
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-
|
-
|
Productive
- Okla
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
-
|
-
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
Test
Wells (Dry)
|
4.00
|
2.55
|
2.00
|
1.60
|
2.00
|
0.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
7.00
|
3.75
|
3.00
|
2.40
|
4.00
|
1.35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well Type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Gas
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Combination
-Oil and Gas
|
3.00
|
1.20
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
2.00
|
0.40
|
Test
Wells (Dry)
|
4.00
|
2.55
|
2.00
|
1.60
|
2.00
|
0.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
7.00
|
3.75
|
3.00
|
2.40
|
4.00
|
1.35
|
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Our acreage positions at December 31, 2017 are summarized as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leasehold Interests - 12/31/2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Texas
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orogrande
|
133,000
|
90,108
|
-
|
-
|
133,000
|
90,108
|
Hazel
Project
|
12,000
|
9,600
|
-
|
-
|
12,000
|
9,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Viking
|
640
|
192
|
640
|
192
|
-
|
-
|
Prairie
Grove
|
640
|
64
|
640
|
64
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
146,280
|
99,964
|
1,280
|
256
|
145,000
|
99,708
|
Current Projects
As of December 31, 2017 the Company had interests in four oil and
gas projects:, the Orogrande Project in Hudspeth County, Texas, and
the Hazel Project in Sterling, Tom Green, and Irion Counties,
Texas, the Winkler Project in Winkler County, Texas, and the Hunton
wells in partnership with Husky Ventures in Central Oklahoma
..
Orogrande Project, West Texas
On August 7, 2014, we entered into a Purchase Agreement with
Hudspeth Oil Corporation (“Hudspeth”), McCabe Petroleum
Corporation (“MPC”), and Greg McCabe. Mr. McCabe was
the sole owner of both Hudspeth and MPC. Under the terms and
conditions of the Purchase Agreement, at closing, we purchased 100%
of the capital stock of Hudspeth which holds certain oil and gas
assets, including a 100% working interest in 172,000 mostly
contiguous acres in the Orogrande Basin in West Texas. As of
December 31, 2017, leases covering 133,000 acres remain in effect.
This acreage is in the primary term under five-year leases that
carry additional five-year extension provisions. As consideration,
at closing we issued 868,750 shares of our common stock to Mr.
McCabe and paid a total of $100,000 in geologic origination fees to
third parties. Additionally, Mr. McCabe has, at his option, a 10%
working interest back-in after payout and a reversionary interest
if drilling obligations are not met, all under the terms and
conditions of a participation and development agreement. All
drilling obligations through December 31, 2017 have been
met.
On September 23, 2015, our subsidiary, Hudspeth Oil Corporation
(“HOC”), entered into a Farmout Agreement by and
between HOC, Pandora Energy, LP (“Pandora”), Founders
Oil & Gas, LLC (“Founders”), McCabe Petroleum
Corporation and Greg McCabe (McCabe Petroleum Corporation and Greg
McCabe are parties to the Farmout Agreement for limited purposes)
for the entire Orogrande Project in Hudspeth County, Texas. The
Farmout Agreement provided for Founders to earn from HOC and
Pandora (collectively, the “Farmor”) an undivided 50%
of the leasehold interest in the Orogrande Project by
Founder’s spending a minimum of $45 million on actual
drilling operations on the Orogrande Project in the following two
years.
Under a joint operating agreement (on A.A.P.L. Form 610 –
1989 Model Form Operating Agreement with COPAS 2005 Accounting
Procedures) (“JOA”) also entered into on September 23,
2015, Founders is designated as operator of the
leases.
On
March 22, 2017, the Company, along with Founders, their operating
partner, signed a Drilling and Development Unit (DDU) Agreement
with University Lands on its Orogrande Basin Project. The agreement
has an effective date of January 1, 2017 and required a payment
from both Torchlight and Founders of $335,323 as part of the
extension fee. Torchlight's portion of the fee was paid by Founders
in April 2017 and will be deducted from the required spud fee
payable to Torchlight at commencement of the next well
drilled.
The DDU
agreement allows for all 192 existing leases covering the 133,000
net acres leased from University Lands to be combined into one
lease for development purposes. The time to drill on the unit is
extended through April of 2023 on the first extension. The
agreement also grants exclusive right to continue through April of
2028 if compliance with the agreement is met and extension fee
associated with the additional time paid. The Company's drilling
obligations begin with one well in the first year, and increase to
five wells per year by year 2023. The drilling obligation set is a
minimum requirement and may be exceeded if acceleration is desired.
The DDU agreement replaces all prior agreements and will govern
future drilling obligations on the lease.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
The Orogrande Rich A-11 test well that was drilled by Torchlight in
second quarter, 2015 was evaluated and numerous scientific tests
were performed to provide key data for the field development
thesis. Future utility of this well may be conversion to a salt
water disposal well in the course of further development of the
Orogrande acreage.
The second test well, the University Founders B-19 #1, was spudded
on April 24, 2016 and drilled in second quarter, 2016. The well
successfully pumped down completion fluid in the third quarter of
2016 and indications of hydrocarbons were seen at the surface on
this second Orogrande Project test well. Future utility of this
well may be conversion to a salt water disposal well in the course
of further development of the Orogrande acreage.
During the fourth quarter, 2017, the Company took back operational
control from Founders Oil and Gas on the Orogrande Basin Project.
Torchlight was joined by Wolfbone Investments, LLC, ("Wolfbone"), a
company owned by Greg McCabe, Torchlight's Chairman. The two
entities have entered into an Assignment of Farmout Agreement with
Founders and will share the remaining commitments under the prior
agreement with Founders. All original provisions of Torchlight's
carried interest will remain in place including reimbursement to
the Company on each wellbore. Founders will remain a 9.5% Working
Interest owner in the project under the agreement for the $9.5
million it has spent to date and be carried until the remaining
$40.5 million is spent by Wolfbone and Torchlight, with each
contributing 50% of that capital spend, under the existing
agreement. Torchlight's interest in the Project thereby increased
by 20.25% Working Interest to a total of 67.75% and Wolfbone now
owns 20.25%.
Founders will operate a newly drilled well called the University
Founders #A25 with supervision from Torchlight and its Partners.
The University Founders #A25 was spudded on the
27th
of November and satisfies the
obligation under the University Lands D&D Agreement. Once the
#A25 is completed Torchlight will assume full operational control
including managing drilling plans and timing for all future wells
drilled in the Project.
Hazel Project in the Midland Basin in West Texas
Effective April 1, 2016, Torchlight Energy Inc. acquired from
McCabe Petroleum Corporation, a 66.66% working interest in
approximately 12,000 acres in the Midland Basin in exchange for
1,500,000 warrants to purchase our common stock with an exercise
price of $1.00 for five years and a back-in after payout of a 25%
working interest to the seller.
Initial development of the first well on the property, the Flying B
Ranch #1, began July 10, 2016 and development continued through
September 30, 2016. This well is classified as a test well in the
development pursuit of the Hazel Project. It is anticipated that
this wellbore will be utilized as a salt water disposal well in
support of future development.
In
October, 2016, the holders of the Company's Series C Preferred
shares (which were issued in July, 2016) elected to convert into a
33.33% Working Interest in the Company's Hazel Project, reducing
Torchlight's ownership from 66.66% to a 33.33% Working
Interest.
On
December 27, 2016, drilling activities commenced on the second
Hazel Project well, the Flying B Ranch #2. The well is a vertical
test similar to the Company's first Hazel Project well, the Flying
B Ranch #1. Recompletion in an alternative geological formation for
this well was performed during the three months ended September 30,
2017 however the results were uneconomic for continuing production.
It is anticipated that this wellbore
will be utilized as a salt water disposal well in support of future
development.
The
Company commenced planning to drill a horizontal well in the
Project in June, 2017 in compliance with the continuous drilling
obligation. The well, the Flying B Ranch #3, was spudded on June
10, 2017. The well was completed and began production in late
September, 2017.
Acquisition of Additional Interests in Hazel Project
On
January 30, 2017, we and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Acquisition Corporation, a Texas corporation (“TAC”),
entered into and closed an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and
Plan of Merger with Line Drive Energy, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Line Drive”), under which
agreements TAC merged with and into Line Drive and the separate
existence of TAC ceased, with Line Drive being the surviving
organization and becoming our wholly-owned subsidiary. Line Drive,
which was wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman, owned
certain assets and securities, including approximately 40.66% of
12,000 gross acres in the Hazel Project and 521,739 warrants to
purchase our common stock (which warrants had been assigned by Mr.
McCabe to Line Drive). Under the merger transaction, our shares of
common stock of TAC converted into a membership interest of Line
Drive, the membership interest in Line Drive held by Mr. McCabe
immediately prior to the transaction ceased to exist, and we issued
Mr. McCabe 3,301,739 restricted shares of common stock as
consideration therefor. Immediately after closing, the 521,739
warrants held by Line Drive were cancelled, which warrants had an
exercise price of $1.40 per share and an expiration date of June 9,
2020. A Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed
with the Secretary of State of Texas on January 31, 2017.
Subsequent to the closing the name of Line Drive Energy, LLC was
changed to Torchlight Hazel, LLC.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
-
continued
Also on
January 30, 2017, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into and
closed a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Wolfbone Investments,
LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Wolfbone”)
which is wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman. Under the
agreement, TEI acquired certain of Wolfbone’s Hazel Project
assets, including its interest in the Flying B Ranch #1 well and
the 40 acre unit surrounding the well, for consideration of
$415,000, and additionally, Wolfbone caused to be cancelled a total
of 2,780,000 warrants to purchase our common stock, including
1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum Corporation, an entity
owned by Mr. McCabe, and 1,280,000 warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals, an entity owned by Mr. McCabe’s son, which warrant
cancellations were effected through certain Warrant Cancellation
Agreements. The 1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum
Corporation had an exercise price of $1.00 per share and an
expiration date of April 4, 2021. The warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals included 100,000 warrants with an exercise price of $1.73
and an expiration date of September 30, 2018 and 1,180,000 warrants
with an exercise price of $0.70 and an expiration date of February
15, 2020.
Since
Mr. McCabe held the controlling interest in both Line Drive and
Wolfbone Investments, LLC, the transactions were combined for
accounting purposes. The working interest in the Hazel Project was
the only asset held by Line Drive. The warrant cancellation was
treated in the aggregate as an exercise of the warrants with the
transfer of the working interests as the consideration. The Company
recorded the transactions as an increase in its investment in the
Hazel project working interests of $3,644,431 which is equal to the
exercise price of the warrants plus the cash paid to
Wolfbone.
Upon
the closing of the transactions, the Company’s working
interest in the Hazel project increased by 40.66% to a total
ownership of 74%.
Effective
June 1, 2017, the Company acquired an additional 6% working
interest from unrelated working interest owners in exchange for
268,656 shares of common stock valued at $373,430, increasing its
working interest in the Hazel project to 80%.
Winkler Project, Winkler County, Texas
On
December 1, 2017, the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization that we
and our newly formed wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Wolfbone
Properties, Inc., a Texas corporation (“TWP”), entered
into with McCabe Petroleum Corporation, a Texas corporation
(“MPC”), and Warwink Properties, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Warwink Properties”) closed. Under
the agreement, which was entered into on November 14, 2017, TWP
merged with and into Warwink Properties and the separate existence
of TWP ceased, with Warwink Properties becoming the surviving
organization and our wholly-owned subsidiary. Warwink Properties
was wholly owned by MPC which is wholly owned by Gregory McCabe,
our Chairman. Warwink Properties owns certain assets, including a
10.71875% working interest in 640 acres in Winkler County, Texas.
At closing of the merger transaction, our shares of common stock of
TWP converted into a membership interest of Warwink Properties, the
membership interest in Warwink Properties held by MPC ceased to
exist, and we issued MPC 2,500,000 restricted shares of common
stock as consideration. Also on December 1, 2017, MPC closed its
transaction with MECO IV, LLC (“MECO”) for the purchase
and sale of certain assets as contemplated by the Purchase and Sale
Agreement dated November 9, 2017 (the “MECO PSA”), to
which we are not a party. Under the MECO PSA, Warwink Properties
received a carry from MECO (through the tanks) of up to $1,475,000
in the next well drilled on the Winkler County leases. A
Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed with the
Secretary of State of Texas on December 5, 2017.
Also on
December 1, 2017, the transactions contemplated by the Purchase
Agreement that our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into with
MPC closed. Under the Purchase Agreement, which was entered into on
November 14, 2017, TEI acquired beneficial ownership of certain of
MPC’s assets, including acreage and wellbores located in Ward
County, Texas (the “Ward County Assets”). As
consideration under the Purchase Agreement, at closing TEI issued
to MPC an unsecured promissory note in the principal amount of
$3,250,000, payable in monthly installments of interest only
beginning on January 1, 2018, at the rate of 5% per annum, with the
entire principal amount together with all accrued interest due and
payable on December 31, 2020. In connection with TEI’s
acquisition of beneficial ownership in the Ward County Assets, MPC
sold those same assets, on behalf of TEI, to MECO at closing of the
MECO PSA, and accordingly, TEI received $3,250,000 in cash for its
beneficial interest in the Ward County Assets. Additionally, at
closing of the MECO PSA, MPC paid TEI a performance fee of
$2,781,500 in cash as compensation for TEI’s marketing and
selling the Winkler County assets of MPC and the Ward County Assets
as a package to MECO.
Hunton Play, Central Oklahoma
As of December 31, 2017, we were producing from one well in the
Viking AMI, and one well in Prairie Grove.
Central Oklahoma Projects
The Company retains any leases remaining effective in the three
AMI’s (Viking, Rosedale, and Thunderbird), the Loki well in
the Viking AMI, and the Judy well in the Prairie Grove AMI as of
December 31, 2017 pending information which will come from and
results of, the Husky legal matter. The Judy and the Loki wells are
producing at December 31, 2017. Reserve value at December 31, 2017
is only from the Judy well.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Torchlight
Energy Resources, Inc. and its subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc.
has pending in the 429th judicial district court in Collin County,
Texas a lawsuit against Husky Ventures, Inc., Charles V. Long,
Silverstar of Nevada, Inc., Gastar Exploration Inc., J. Russell
Porter, Michael A. Gerlich, and Jerry R. Schuyler that was
originally filed in May 2016 (previous defendants April Glidewell,
Maximus Exploration, LLC, Atwood Acquisitions,LLC and John M.
Selser, Sr have been non-suited without prejudice to re-filing the
claims). In the lawsuit, we allege, among other things, that the
defendants acted improperly in connection with multiple
transactions, and that the defendants misrepresented and omitted
material information to us with respect to these transactions. The
lawsuit seeks damages arising from 15 different causes of action,
including without limitation, violations of the Texas Securities
Act, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty,
breach of contract, unjust enrichment and tortious
interference.
On
April 13, 2017, Husky Ventures, Inc. filed in the above lawsuit a
counterclaim against Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its
subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc., and a third-party petition
against John Brda, the Chief Executive Officer of Torchlight Energy
Resources, Inc., and Willard McAndrew III, a former officer of
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. (“Husky
Counterclaim”). The Husky Counterclaim asserts breach of
contract against Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its
subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc. and asserts a claim for tortious
interference with Husky’s contractual relationship with
Torchlight and a claim for conspiracy to tortiously interfere with
unspecified Husky business and contractual relationships against
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its subsidiary Torchlight
Energy, Inc., John Brda and Willard McAndrew III. We believe the
Husky Counterclaim is without merit and intend to vigorously defend
against it.
On May
22, 2017, the Court granted Gastar Exploration, Inc., J. Russell
Porter, Michael A. Gerlich, and Jerry R. Schuyler’s
(“Gastar Defendants”) motion for summary judgment
dismissing all of Torchlight’s claims against the Gastar
Defendants with prejudice. The only claim remaining related to the
Gastar Defendants is a counterclaim against Torchlight by Gastar
Exploration, Inc. for Torchlight’s alleged breach of a
release that Gastar Exploration, Inc. claims occurred because
Torchlight filed this lawsuit against the Gastar Defendants.
Torchlight alleges in its lawsuit that this release is
unenforceable against all the Defendants including but not limited
to Gastar Defendants. On January 12, 2018, the Court heard
but has not yet ruled on cross-motions for summary judgment by
Gastar and Torchlight to resolve Gastar’s remaining claims
against Torchlight. The case is currently set for trial on May 30,
2018.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not Applicable.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
Our common stock is quoted on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC under the
symbol, “TRCH.” Trading in our common stock has
historically been limited and occasionally sporadic and the
quotations set forth below are not necessarily indicative of actual
market conditions. The high and low sales prices for the common
stock for each quarter of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2017
and 2016, according to NASDAQ, were as follows:
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/31/2017
|
$1.51
|
$1.06
|
9/30/2017
|
$1.81
|
$0.95
|
6/30/2017
|
$1.96
|
$1.16
|
3/31/2017
|
$1.88
|
$1.06
|
|
|
|
12/31/2016
|
$1.48
|
$0.66
|
9/30/2016
|
$1.75
|
$0.55
|
6/30/2016
|
$0.94
|
$0.55
|
3/31/2016
|
$1.13
|
$0.42
|
Record Holders
As of March 8, 2018, there were approximately 239 stockholders of
record of our common stock, and we estimate that there were
approximately 3,900 additional beneficial stockholders who hold
their shares in “street name” through a brokerage firm
or other institution. As of March 15, 2018, we have a total of
63,640,034 shares of common stock issued and
outstanding.
The holders of the common stock are entitled to one vote for each
share held of record on all matters submitted to a vote of
stockholders. Holders of the common stock have no preemptive rights
and no right to convert their common stock into any other
securities. There are no redemption or sinking fund provisions
applicable to the common stock.
Dividends
We have not declared any cash dividends on our common stock since
inception and do not anticipate paying any dividends in the
foreseeable future. The payment of dividends is within the
discretion of the Board of Directors and will depend on our
earnings, capital requirements, financial condition, and other
relevant factors. There are no restrictions that currently limit
our ability to pay dividends on our common stock other than those
generally imposed by applicable state law. The Company issued
preferred stock in 2016 and 2015 on which dividends were paid. No
preferred stock is outstanding as of December 31,
2017.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table sets forth all equity compensation plans as of
December 31, 2017:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
available
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for future
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
issuance
|
|
|
securities to
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
under
|
|
|
be issued
|
|
average
|
|
equity
|
|
|
upon
|
|
exercise
|
|
compensation
|
|
|
exercise of
|
|
price of
|
|
plans
|
|
|
outstanding
|
|
outstanding
|
|
(excluding
|
|
|
options,
|
|
options,
|
|
securities
|
|
|
warrants
|
|
warrants
|
|
reflected in
|
Plan Category
|
|
and rights
|
|
and rights
|
|
column (a))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by security
holders
|
|
7,414,931
|
|
$ 1.51
|
|
1,085,069
|
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
-
continued
Sales of Unregistered Securities
Other than the sales below, all equity securities that we have sold
during the period covered by this report that were not registered
under the Securities Act have previously been included in a
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or in a Current Report on Form
8-K.
In
November 2017, we issued a total of 350,000 shares of common stock
to a total of four consultants in connection with the acquisition
of mineral interests.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2017, we issued 278,099 shares
of common stock in warrant exercises.
All of the above sales of securities described in this Item 2 were
sold under the exemption from registration provided by Section
4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and the rules and regulations
promulgated thereunder. The issuances of securities did not involve
a “public offering” based upon the following factors:
(i) the issuances of securities were isolated private transactions;
(ii) a limited number of securities were issued to a limited number
of purchasers; (iii) there were no public solicitations; (iv) the
investment intent of the purchasers; and (v) the restriction on
transferability of the securities issued.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Under SEC rules and guidance, an issuer that no longer qualifies as
a smaller reporting company at the determination date may continue
to use the scaled disclosures permitted for a smaller reporting
company through its annual report on Form 10-K and begin providing
non-scaled larger company disclosure in the first Form 10-Q of the
next fiscal year. Although we are filing as an accelerated filer,
we are allowed to continue reporting as a smaller reporting company
in this Form 10-K. As such, we are not required to provide
information under this Item.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Information set forth and discussed in this Management’s
Discussion and Analysis and Results of Operations is derived from
our historical financial statements and the related notes thereto
which are included in this Form 10-K. The following information and
discussion should be read in conjunction with such financial
statements and notes. Additionally, this Management’s
Discussion and Analysis and Plan of Operations contain certain
statements that are not strictly historical and are
“forward-looking” statements within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and involve a high
degree of risk and uncertainty. Actual results may differ
materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements
due to other risks and uncertainties that exist in our operations,
development efforts, and business environment, and due to other
risks and uncertainties relating to our ability to obtain
additional capital in the future to fund our planned expansion, the
demand for oil and natural gas, and other general economic
factors.
All forward-looking statements included herein are based on
information available to us as of the date hereof, and we assume no
obligation to update any such forward-looking
statements.
Summary of Key Results
Overview
We are engaged in the acquisition, exploration, exploitation,
and/or development of oil and natural gas properties in the United
States.
During the year ended December 31, 2016 the Board of Directors
initiated a review of Company operations in view of the divestiture
of its Oklahoma properties, which included the previous sale of the
Chisholm Trail and Cimarron properties. During 2016 development had
continued on the Orogrande Project in West Texas and in April,
2016, the Company acquired the Hazel Project in the Midland Basin
also in West Texas. These West Texas properties demonstrate
significant potential and future production capabilities based upon
the analysis of scientific data being gathered in the day by day
development activity. Therefore, the Board has determined to focus
its efforts and capital on these projects to maximize shareholder
value for the long run.
During 2017 the Company increased its commitment to the Orogrande
and Hazel Projects. Additional working interests were acquired and
test wells were drilled on the properties which is detailed in the
Properties section of this filing. Near the end of 2017 the Warwink
Project, also in West Texas, was acquired.
The strategy in divesting of projects other than the Orogrande and
the Hazel Projects was to refocus on the greatest potential future
value for the Company while systematically eliminating debt as
noncore assets are sold and operations are
streamlined.
The following discussion of our financial condition and results of
operations should be read in conjunction with our audited financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 included
herewith. This discussion should not be construed to imply that the
results discussed herein will necessarily continue into the future,
or that any conclusion reached herein will necessarily be
indicative of actual operating results in the future. Such
discussion represents only the best present assessment by our
management.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
-
continued
Historical Results for the Years Ended December 31, 2017 and
2016
For the year ended December 31, 2017, we had a net loss of $919,910
compared to a net loss of $7,684,346 for the year ended December
31, 2016.
Revenues and Cost of Revenues
For the year ended December 31, 2017, we had production revenue of
$570,499 compared to $354,390 of production revenue for the year
ended December 31, 2016. Refer to the table of production and
revenue for 2017 included below. Our cost of revenue, consisting of
lease operating expenses and production taxes, was $173,187, and
$328,438 for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016,
respectively.
The change in revenue was impacted by the new production from the
Flying B #3 well in the Hazel Project that began in late September,
2017.
Total income for 2017 includes $2,781,500 of Consulting Fees
received by the Company in connection with the Warwink acquisition
in the fourth quarter. Reference Item 1: Current Projects included
in this filing.
Production and Revenue are detailed as follows:
Property
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q1 - 2017
|
101
|
2,303
|
$5,346
|
$7,604
|
$12,950
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q1 - 2017
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q1-2017
|
|
101
|
2,303
|
$5,346
|
$7,604
|
$12,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q2 - 2017
|
140
|
2,332
|
6,594
|
6,709
|
13,303
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q2 - 2017
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q2-2017
|
|
140
|
2,332
|
$6,594
|
$6,709
|
$13,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q3 - 2017
|
132
|
2,041
|
5,733
|
3,727
|
9,460
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q3 - 2017
|
204
|
0
|
8,836
|
-
|
8,836
|
Total Q3-2017
|
|
336
|
2,041
|
$14,569
|
$3,727
|
$18,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oklahoma
|
Q4 - 2017
|
84
|
2,583
|
4,739
|
8,227
|
12,966
|
Hazel
(TX)
|
Q4 - 2017
|
9,730
|
0
|
512,984
|
-
|
512,984
|
Total Q4-2017
|
|
9,814
|
2,583
|
$517,723
|
$8,227
|
$525,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,391
|
9,259
|
$544,232
|
$26,267
|
$570,499
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q1 - 2016
|
3,000
|
0
|
$92,546
|
$-
|
$92,546
|
Oklahoma
|
Q1 - 2016
|
2,026
|
21,148
|
54,289
|
38,624
|
92,913
|
Kansas
|
Q1 - 2016
|
312
|
0
|
8,854
|
-
|
8,854
|
Total Q1-2016
|
|
5,338
|
21,148
|
$155,689
|
$38,624
|
$194,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q2 - 2016
|
917
|
0
|
$38,812
|
$-
|
$38,812
|
Oklahoma
|
Q2 - 2016
|
675
|
9,689
|
30,411
|
11,142
|
41,553
|
Kansas
|
Q2 - 2016
|
731
|
0
|
28,834
|
-
|
28,834
|
Total Q2-2016
|
|
2,323
|
9,689
|
$98,057
|
$11,142
|
$109,199
|
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
-
continued
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q3 - 2016
|
464
|
0
|
$20,190
|
$-
|
$20,190
|
Oklahoma
|
Q3 - 2016
|
180
|
2,830
|
7,925
|
6,170
|
14,095
|
Kansas
|
Q3 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q3-2016
|
|
644
|
2,830
|
$28,115
|
$6,170
|
$34,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcelina
(TX)
|
Q4 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
Oklahoma
|
Q4 - 2016
|
184
|
2,845
|
8,024
|
8,569
|
16,593
|
Kansas
|
Q4 - 2016
|
0
|
0
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total Q4-2016
|
|
184
|
2,845
|
$8,024
|
$8,569
|
$16,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,488
|
36,513
|
$289,885
|
$64,505
|
$354,390
|
We recorded depreciation, depletion and amortization expense of
$100,156 for the year ended December 31, 2017 compared to $636,426
for 2016. Impairment expense recognized was $-0- in 2017 compared
to $70,080 for 2016. Although we had no recognized impairment
expense in 2017, the Company has adjusted the separation of
evaluated versus unevaluated costs within its full cost pool to
recognize the value impairment related to the expiration of
unevaluated leases in 2017 in the amount of $2,300,626. The impact
of this change will be to increase the basis for calculation of
future period’s depletion, depreciation and amortization to
include $2,300,626 of cost which will effectively recognize the
impairment on the Statement of Income over future periods. The
$2,300,626 will also become an evaluated cost for purposes of
future period’s Ceiling Tests and which may further recognize
the impairment expense recognized in future
periods.
General and Administrative Expenses
Our general and administrative expenses for the years ended
December 31, 2017 and 2016 were $3,652,970 and $6,447,706,
respectively, a decrease of $2,794,736. Our general and
administrative expenses consisted of consulting and compensation
expense, substantially all of which was non-cash or deferred,
accounting and administrative costs, professional consulting fees,
and other general corporate expenses. The decrease in general and
administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2017
compared to 2016 is detailed as follows:
Increase(decrease)
in non cash stock and warrant compensation
|
$(2,509,404)
|
Increase(decrease)
in consulting expense
|
$(85,916)
|
Increase(decrease)
in professional fees
|
$(71,387)
|
Increase(decrease)
in investor relations
|
$94,183
|
Increase(decrease)
in travel expense
|
$(18,760)
|
Increase(decrease)
in salaries and compensation
|
$(367,234)
|
Increase(decrease)
in legal fees
|
$42,713
|
Increase(decrease)
in insurance
|
$(16,932)
|
Increase(decrease)
in general corporate expenses
|
$14,463
|
Increase(decrease)
in audit fees
|
$123,538
|
|
|
Total
(Decrease) in General and Administrative Expenses
|
$(2,794,736)
|
The decrease in noncash stock and warrant compensation arises from
the decrease in vested employee stock options expense and a
reduction in outside services compensated with stock and warrants.
Employee options were initially issued with 50% immediate vesting
of option valuation at June, 2015. The balance of the vesting was
set at 25% in June, 2016 and 25% in June, 2017. The valuation was
recorded over the periods up to the full vesting date using the
straight line method.
The decrease in consulting expense parallels the reduction in
outside services compensated with stock and warrants as noted
above.
The reduction in salaries and compensation arises from a reduction
in staff size due to the resignation of our inside Petroleum
Engineer and the resignation of our COO in 2016.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
-
continued
Liquidity and Capital Resources
For the year ended December 31, 2017, we had a net loss of $919,910
compared to a net loss of $7,684,346 for the year ended December
31, 2016. The reduction in Net Loss is principally due to the
receipt of Consulting Fee income of $2,781,500 during the fourth
quarter and the reduction in General and Administrative expense in
2017.
At December 31, 2017, we had current
assets of $3,165,951 and total assets of $28,767,308. As of
December 31, 2017, we had current liabilities of $2,279,448.
Stockholders’ equity was
$15,959,305 at December 31, 2017.
Cash from operating activities for the year ended December 31,
2017, was $465,594 compared to $(4,826,089) for the year ended
December 31, 2016, an increase of $5,291,683. Cash from operating
activities during 2017 can be attributed principally to net loss
from operations of $919,910 adjusted for noncash stock based
compensation of $1,151,061.
Cash used in operating activities during 2016 can be attributed
principally to net losses from operations of $7,684,346 adjusted
for noncash stock based compensation of $2,956,044.
Cash used in investing activities for year ended December 31, 2017
was $9,458,648 compared to $167,871 for the year ended December 31,
2016. Cash used in investing activities consisted primarily of
investment in oil and gas properties during the year ended December
31, 2017. In 2016 the investment in properties was combined with
proceeds from sale of leases in 2016.
Cash from financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2017
was $8,275,275 as compared to $5,736,859 for the year ended
December 31, 2016. Cash from financing activities in 2016 consisted
primarily of proceeds from common and preferred stock issues and
warrant exercises. 2017 activity consisted principally of debt
financing transactions. We expect to continue to have cash provided
by financing activities as we seek new rounds of financing and
continue to develop our oil and gas investments. Reference Note 11
to the Financial Statements regarding additional funding closed
subsequent to December 31, 2017.
Our current assets are insufficient to satisfy our cash needs over
the next twelve months and as such we will require additional debt
or equity financing to meet our plans and needs. We face obstacles
in continuing to attract new financing due to our history and
current record of net losses and past working capital deficits.
Despite our efforts, we can provide no assurance that we will be
able to obtain the financing required to meet our stated objectives
or even to continue as a going concern.
We do not expect to pay cash dividends on our common stock in the
foreseeable future.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Oil and gas properties –
The Company uses the full cost method of accounting for exploration
and development activities as defined by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Under this method of
accounting, the costs of unsuccessful, as well as successful,
exploration and development activities are capitalized as
properties and equipment. This includes any internal costs that are
directly related to property acquisition, exploration and
development activities but does not include any costs related to
production, general corporate overhead or similar activities. Gain
or loss on the sale or other disposition of oil and gas properties
is not recognized, unless the gain or loss would significantly
alter the relationship between capitalized costs and proved
reserves.
Oil and gas properties include costs that are excluded from costs
being depleted or amortized. Oil and natural gas property costs
excluded represent investments in unevaluated properties and
include non-producing leasehold, geological, and geophysical costs
associated with leasehold or drilling interests and exploration
drilling costs. The Company allocates a portion of its acquisition
costs to unevaluated properties based on relative value. Costs are
transferred to the full cost pool as the properties are evaluated
over the life of the reservoir. Unevaluated properties are reviewed
for impairment at least quarterly and are determined through an
evaluation considering, among other factors, seismic data,
requirements to relinquish acreage, drilling results, remaining
time in the commitment period, remaining capital plan, and
political, economic, and market conditions.
Gains and losses on the sale of oil and gas properties are not
generally reflected in income unless the gain or loss would
significantly alter the relationship between capitalized costs and
proved reserves. Sales of less than 100% of the Company’s
interest in the oil and gas property are treated as a reduction of
the capital cost of the field, with no gain or loss recognized, as
long as doing so does not significantly affect the
unit-of-production depletion rate. Costs of retired equipment, net
of salvage value, are usually charged to accumulated
depreciation.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
-
continued
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization – The depreciable base for oil and natural
gas properties includes the sum of all capitalized costs net of
accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization
(“DD&A”), estimated future development costs and
asset retirement costs not included in oil and natural gas
properties, less costs excluded from amortization. The depreciable
base of oil and natural gas properties is amortized on a
unit-of-production method.
Ceiling test – Future
production volumes from oil and gas properties are a significant
factor in determining the full cost ceiling limitation of
capitalized costs. Under the full cost method of accounting, the
Company is required to periodically perform a “ceiling
test” that determines a limit on the book value of oil and
gas properties. If the net capitalized cost of proved oil and gas
properties, net of related deferred income taxes, plus the cost of
unproved oil and gas properties, exceeds the present value of
estimated future net cash flows discounted at 10 percent, net of
related tax affects, plus the cost of unproved oil and gas
properties, the excess is charged to expense and reflected as
additional accumulated DD&A. The ceiling test calculation uses
a commodity price assumption which is based on the unweighted
arithmetic average of the price on the first day of each month for
each month within the prior 12 month period and excludes future
cash outflows related to estimated abandonment
costs.
The determination of oil and gas reserves is a subjective process,
and the accuracy of any reserve estimate depends on the quality of
available data and the application of engineering and geological
interpretation and judgment. Estimates of economically recoverable
reserves and future net cash flows depend on a number of variable
factors and assumptions that are difficult to predict and may vary
considerably from actual results. In particular, reserve estimates
for wells with limited or no production history are less reliable
than those based on actual production. Subsequent re-evaluation of
reserves and cost estimates related to future development of proved
oil and gas reserves could result in significant revisions to
proved reserves. Other issues, such as changes in regulatory
requirements, technological advances, and other factors which are
difficult to predict could also affect estimates of proved reserves
in the future.
Asset retirement obligations –The fair value of a liability for an
asset’s retirement obligation (“ARO”) is
recognized in the period in which it is incurred if a reasonable
estimate of fair value can be made, with the corresponding charge
capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the related
long-lived asset. The liability is accreted to its then-present
value each subsequent period, and the capitalized cost is depleted
over the useful life of the related asset. Abandonment costs
incurred are recorded as a reduction of the ARO
liability.
Inherent in the fair value calculation of an ARO are numerous
assumptions and judgments including the ultimate settlement
amounts, inflation factors, credit adjusted discount rates, timing
of settlement, and changes in the legal, regulatory, environmental,
and political environments. To the extent future revisions to these
assumptions impact the fair value of the existing ARO liability, a
corresponding adjustment is made to the oil and gas property
balance. Settlements greater than or less than amounts accrued as
ARO are recorded as a gain or loss upon settlement.
Share-based compensation – Compensation cost for equity awards is
based on the fair value of the equity instrument on the date of
grant and is recognized over the period during which an employee is
required to provide service in exchange for the award. Compensation
cost for liability awards is based on the fair value of the vested
award at the end of each period.
The
Company accounts for stock option awards using the calculated value
method. The expected term was derived using the simplified method
provided in Securities and Exchange Commission release Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110, which averages an awards weighted
average vesting period and contractual term for “plain
vanilla” share options.
The
Company accounts for any forfeitures of options when they occur.
Previously recognized compensation cost for an award is reversed in
the period that the award is forfeited.
The
Company also issues equity awards to non-employees. The fair value
of these option awards is estimated when the award recipient
completes the contracted professional services. The Company
recognizes expense for the estimated total value of the awards
during the period from their issuance until performance completion,
at which time the estimated expense is adjusted to the final value
of the award as measured at performance completion.
The
Company values warrant and option awards using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
-
continued
Commitments and Contingencies
Leases
The Company has a
noncancelable lease for its office premises that expires on
November 30, 2019 and which requires the payment of base lease
amounts and executory costs such as taxes, maintenance and
insurance. Rental expense for lease was $84,197 and $81,595 for the
year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.
Approximate future
minimum rental commitments under the office premises lease
are:
Year Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2018
|
$96,660
|
To
2019 Expiration
|
88,605
|
Total
|
$185,265
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had interests in four oil and
gas projects: the Orogrande Project in Hudspeth County, Texas, the
Hazel Project in Sterling, Tom Green, and Irion Counties, Texas,
the Warwink Project in Winkler County, Texas, and Hunton wells in
Central Oklahoma, .
See the description under “Current Projects” above
under “Item 1. Business” for more information and
disclosure regarding commitments and contingencies relating to
these projects which description is incorporated herein by
reference.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
Under SEC rules and guidance, an issuer that no longer qualifies as
a smaller reporting company at the determination date may continue
to use the scaled disclosures permitted for a smaller reporting
company through its annual report on Form 10-K and begin providing
non-scaled larger company disclosure in the first Form 10-Q of the
next fiscal year. Although we are filing as an accelerated filer,
we are allowed to continue reporting as a smaller reporting company
in this Form 10-K. As such, we are not required to provide
information under this Item.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors
and
Stockholders of Torchlight Energy
Resources, Inc.
Plano,
Texas
Opinions
on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Torchlight
Energy Resources, Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2017 and
2016, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in
the two-year period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes
(collectively referred to as the financial statements). We also
have audited the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in
Internal Control—Integrated
Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
In our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as
of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations
and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period
ended December 31, 2017, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects,
effective internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework
(2013) issued by COSO.
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared
assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As
discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the
Company has incurred recurring losses from its operations and has a
net capital deficiency which raises substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in
regard to these matters are also described in Note 2. The
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments
that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.
Basis for Opinion
The
Company’s management is responsible for these financial
statements, for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting included in the
accompanying Item 9A, “Management’s Annual Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.” Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s
financial statements and an opinion on the Company’s internal
control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a
public accounting firm registered with the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required
to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with
the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and
regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the
PCAOB.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements
are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud,
and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects.
Our
audits of the financial statements included performing procedures
to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial
statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing
procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included
examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included
evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates
made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation
of the financial statements. Our audit of internal control over
financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a
material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and
operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed
risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as
we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
A
company’s internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control
over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures
that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and
dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable
assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures
of the company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3)
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
company’s assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also,
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods
are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ Briggs &
Veselka Co.
|
|
|
|
We have
served as the Company’s auditor since 2016.
|
|
|
Houston,
Texas
|
|
|
March
16, 2018
|
|
TORCHLIGHT ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
Cash
|
$1,051,720
|
$1,769,499
|
Accounts
receivable
|
596,141
|
603,446
|
Production
revenue receivable
|
142,932
|
7,325
|
Prepayments
- development costs
|
1,335,652
|
583,347
|
Prepaid
expenses
|
39,506
|
26,829
|
Total
current assets
|
3,165,951
|
2,990,446
|
|
|
|
Oil
and gas properties, net
|
25,579,279
|
9,392,288
|
Office
equipment, net
|
15,716
|
29,848
|
Other
assets
|
6,362
|
18,362
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$28,767,308
|
$12,430,944
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
$762,502
|
$422,684
|
Funds
received pending settlement
|
520,400
|
520,400
|
Accrued
payroll
|
695,176
|
565,176
|
Related
party payables
|
45,000
|
237,044
|
Convertible promissory notes (Series B) net of discount
of
|
$94,083
at December 31, 2016
|
-
|
3,475,417
|
Due
to working interest owners
|
54,320
|
54,320
|
Accrued
interest payable
|
202,050
|
6,049
|
Total
current liabilities
|
2,279,448
|
5,281,090
|
|
|
|
Unsecured
promissory notes, net of discount and financing costs of
$795,017
|
7,269,281
|
-
|
at
December 31, 2017
|
|
|
Note
payable
|
3,250,000
|
-
|
Asset
retirement obligation
|
9,274
|
7,051
|
|
|
|
Total
liabilities
|
12,808,003
|
5,288,141
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’
equity:
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $.001, 10,000,000 shares
authorized;
|
-0- issued and outstanding at December 31, 2017 and
2016
|
-
|
-
|
Common
stock, par value $0.001 per share; 150,000,000 shares
authorized;
|
63,344
|
55,100
|
63,340,034 issued and outstanding at December 31,
2017
|
55,096,503 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2016
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
99,403,654
|
89,675,488
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
(83,507,693)
|
(82,587,785)
|
Total
stockholders' equity
|
15,959,305
|
7,142,803
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
$28,767,308
|
$12,430,944
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
TORCHLIGHT ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Oil
and gas sales
|
$570,499
|
$354,390
|
|
|
|
Cost
of revenue
|
(173,187)
|
(328,438)
|
|
|
|
Gross
profit
|
397,312
|
25,952
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
General
and administrative expense
|
(3,652,970)
|
(6,447,706)
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
(100,156)
|
(636,426)
|
Impairment
expense
|
-
|
(70,080)
|
Loss
on sale of properties
|
-
|
(283,285)
|
Total
operating expenses
|
(3,753,126)
|
(7,437,497)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
income (expense)
|
|
|
Consulting
income
|
2,781,500
|
-
|
Interest
income
|
454
|
36
|
Interest
and accretion expense
|
(346,050)
|
(272,837)
|
Total
other income (expense)
|
2,435,904
|
(272,801)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
before income taxes
|
(919,910)
|
(7,684,346)
|
|
|
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
$(919,910)
|
$(7,684,346)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss per common share:
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted
|
$(0.02)
|
$(0.19)
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
|
Basic and Diluted
|
59,623,105
|
43,122,514
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
TORCHLIGHT ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2015
|
33,166,344
|
$33,168
|
134,000
|
$134
|
$78,252,411
|
$(74,903,439)
|
$3,382,274
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of common stock for cash
|
3,750,000
|
3,750
|
-
|
-
|
2,996,250
|
-
|
3,000,000
|
Issuance
of preferred stock for cash
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
10
|
999,990
|
-
|
1,000,000
|
Issuance
of common stock for services
|
768,832
|
769
|
-
|
-
|
669,305
|
-
|
670,074
|
Issuance
of common stock - mineral interests
|
2,824,881
|
2,825
|
-
|
-
|
1,972,221
|
-
|
1,975,046
|
Issuance
of common stock in warrant exercise
|
3,888,745
|
3,891
|
-
|
-
|
2,539,855
|
-
|
2,543,746
|
Issuance
of common stock for note interest
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Issuance
of common stock for preferred dividends
|
440,262
|
440
|
-
|
-
|
(440)
|
-
|
-
|
Preferred
dividends paid in cash
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(320,724)
|
-
|
(320,724)
|
Warrants
issued with lease interests
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,290,761
|
-
|
1,290,761
|
Warrants
issued for services
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,205,231
|
-
|
2,205,231
|
Lease
interest issued in conversion of preferred stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(10)
|
(999,990)
|
-
|
(1,000,000)
|
Common
stock issued in conversion of preferred stock
|
10,257,439
|
10,257
|
(134,000)
|
(134)
|
(10,132)
|
-
|
(9)
|
Warrants
issued in connection with promissory note
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
80,750
|
-
|
80,750
|
Net
loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(7,684,346)
|
(7,684,346)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2016
|
55,096,503
|
$55,100
|
-
|
-
|
$89,675,488
|
$(82,587,785)
|
$7,142,803
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of common stock for services
|
507,897
|
508
|
-
|
-
|
579,246
|
|
579,754
|
Issuance
of common stock for lease interests
|
6,420,395
|
6,421
|
-
|
-
|
6,805,941
|
|
6,812,362
|
Issuance
of common stock in warrant exercise
|
307,349
|
307
|
-
|
-
|
242,993
|
|
243,300
|
Issuance
of common stock-conversion of promissory note
|
1,007,890
|
1,008
|
-
|
-
|
1,006,882
|
|
1,007,890
|
Warrants
issued for services
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
161,560
|
|
161,560
|
Stock
options issued for services
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
931,544
|
|
931,544
|
Net
loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(919,910)
|
(919,910)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2017
|
63,340,034
|
$63,344
|
-
|
-
|
$99,403,654
|
$(83,507,693)
|
$15,959,305
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
TORCHLIGHT ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$(919,910)
|
$(7,684,346)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash from
operations:
|
|
Stock
based compensation
|
1,151,061
|
2,956,044
|
Accretion
of note discounts
|
291,386
|
186,532
|
Loss
on sale of assets
|
-
|
283,285
|
Impairment
expense
|
-
|
70,080
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
100,156
|
636,426
|
Change
in:
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
7,305
|
138,207
|
Note
receivable
|
-
|
613
|
Production
revenue receivable
|
(135,607)
|
191,992
|
Prepayment
of development costs
|
(752,305)
|
(1,583,347)
|
Prepaid
expenses
|
(12,676)
|
11,946
|
Other
assets
|
12,000
|
59,240
|
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
519,818
|
(396,456)
|
Due
to working interest owners
|
-
|
(49,044)
|
Funds
received pending settlement
|
-
|
520,400
|
Interest
payable
|
204,364
|
(167,661)
|
Net cash provided by (used) in operating activities
|
465,592
|
(4,826,089)
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
|
|
Investment
in oil and gas properties
|
(9,460,830)
|
(2,293,497)
|
Acquisition
of office equipment
|
2,182
|
(1,863)
|
Proceeds
from sale of leases
|
-
|
2,127,489
|
Net cash provided by (used) in investing activities
|
(9,458,648)
|
(167,871)
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
|
|
Proceeds
from short term advance
|
-
|
150,000
|
Repayment
of short term advance
|
-
|
(150,000)
|
Proceeds
from sale of common stock
|
-
|
3,000,000
|
Proceeds
from sale of preferred stock
|
-
|
1,000,000
|
Preferred
dividends paid in cash
|
-
|
(320,724)
|
Proceeds
from warrant exercise
|
243,300
|
1,999,310
|
Proceeds
from promissory notes
|
10,541,475
|
708,014
|
Repayment
of convertible notes
|
(2,509,500)
|
-
|
Repayment
of promissory notes
|
-
|
(649,741)
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
8,275,275
|
5,736,859
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
|
(717,781)
|
742,899
|
Cash - beginning of period
|
1,769,499
|
1,026,600
|
|
|
|
Cash - end of period
|
$1,051,720
|
$1,769,499
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: (Non Cash
Items)
|
|
Common
stock issued for financing costs
|
$279,754
|
$-
|
Common
stock issued for mineral interests
|
$6,812,362
|
$1,975,046
|
Common
stock issued in conversion of promissory notes
|
$1,007,890
|
$-
|
Accounts
payable increase-Investment in oil and gas properties
|
$375,000
|
$-
|
Warrants
issued for mineral interests
|
$-
|
$1,290,761
|
Cash
paid for interest
|
$813,652
|
$603,157
|
|
.
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. NATURE OF BUSINESS
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. (“Company”) was
incorporated in October 2007 under the laws of the State of Nevada
as Pole Perfect Studios, Inc. (“PPS”). From its
incorporation to November 2010, the company was primarily engaged
in business start-up activities.
On November 23, 2010, we entered into and closed a Share Exchange
Agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”) between the major
shareholders of PPS and the shareholders of Torchlight Energy, Inc.
(“TEI”). As a result of the transactions effected by
the Exchange Agreement, at closing TEI became our wholly-owned
subsidiary, and the business of TEI became our sole business. TEI
was incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada in June
2010. We are engaged in the acquisition, exploitation and/or
development of oil and natural gas properties in the United States.
We operate our business through our subsidiaries Torchlight Energy
Inc., Torchlight Energy Operating, LLC, and Hudspeth Oil
Corporation, Torchlight Hazel LLC, and Winkler Properties
LLC.
2. GOING CONCERN
At December 31, 2017, the Company had not yet achieved profitable
operations. We had a net loss of $919,910 for the year ended
December 31, 2017 and had accumulated losses of $83,507,693 since
our inception. We expect to incur further losses in the development
of our business. The Company had working capital as of December 31,
2017 of $886,503. These conditions raise substantial doubt about
the Company’s ability to continue as a going
concern.
The Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is
dependent on its ability to generate future profitable operations
and/or to obtain the necessary financing to meet its obligations
and repay its liabilities arising from normal business operations
when they come due. Management’s plan to address the
Company’s ability to continue as a going concern includes:
(1) obtaining debt or equity funding from private placement or
institutional sources; (2) obtain loans from financial
institutions, where possible, or (3) participating in joint venture
transactions with third parties. Although management believes that
it will be able to obtain the necessary funding to allow the
Company to remain a going concern through the methods discussed
above, there can be no assurances that such methods will prove
successful.
These
consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that
the Company will continue as a going concern and therefore, the
financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the
possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of
assets or the amount and classifications of liabilities that may
result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Company maintains its accounts on the accrual method of
accounting in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. Accounting principles
followed and the methods of applying those principles, which
materially affect the determination of financial position, results
of operations and cash flows are summarized below:
Use of estimates – The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and certain assumptions that
affect the amounts reported in these consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from
these estimates.
Basis of presentation—The
financial statements are presented on a consolidated basis and
include all of the accounts of Torchlight Energy Resources Inc. and
its wholly owned subsidiaries, Torchlight Energy, Inc., Torchlight
Energy Operating, LLC, Hudspeth Oil Corporation, Torchlight Hazel
LLC, and Warwink Properties LLC. All significant intercompany
balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Risks and uncertainties –
The Company’s operations are subject to significant risks and
uncertainties, including financial, operational, technological, and
other risks associated with operating an emerging business,
including the potential risk of business
failure.
Concentration of risks –
At times the Company’s cash balances are in excess of amounts
guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The
Company’s cash is placed with a highly rated financial
institution, and the Company regularly monitors the credit
worthiness of the financial institutions with which it does
business.
Fair value of financial instruments – Financial instruments consist of cash,
receivables, payables and promissory notes, if any. The estimated
fair values of cash, receivables, and payables approximate the
carrying amount due to the relatively short maturity of these
instruments. The carrying amounts of any promissory notes
approximate their fair value giving affect for the term of the note
and the effective interest rates.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
-
continued
For assets and liabilities that require re-measurement to fair
value the Company categorizes them in a three-level fair value
hierarchy as follows:
·
|
Level 1 inputs are quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for
identical assets or liabilities.
|
·
|
Level 2 inputs are quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities
in active markets or inputs that are observable for the asset or
liability, either directly or indirectly through market
corroboration.
|
·
|
Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs based on management’s
own assumptions used to measure assets and liabilities at fair
value.
|
A financial asset or liability’s classification within the
hierarchy is determined based on the lowest level input that is
significant to the fair value measurement.
Cash and
cash equivalents - Cash and cash equivalents include certain
investments in highly liquid instruments with original maturities
of three months or less.
Accounts receivable –
Accounts receivable consist of uncollateralized oil and natural gas
revenues due under normal trade terms, as well as amounts due from
working interest owners of oil and gas properties for their share
of expenses paid on their behalf by the Company. Management reviews
receivables periodically and reduces the carrying amount by a
valuation allowance that reflects management’s best estimate
of the amount that may not be collectible. As of December 31, 2017
and December 31, 2016, no valuation allowance was considered
necessary.
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016 accounts receivable included
$419,839 the Company computed as being due from Husky Ventures with
respect to the sale of Chisholm Trail properties in 2015 and in
dispute as part of the Husky legal action in process at those
dates. Additionally, a payment of $520,400 made by Husky Ventures
which is also disputed by the Company is included in current
liabilities captioned “Funds received pending
settlement”.
Oil and gas properties –
The Company uses the full cost method of accounting for exploration
and development activities as defined by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Under this method of
accounting, the costs of unsuccessful, as well as successful,
exploration and development activities are capitalized as
properties and equipment. This includes any internal costs that are
directly related to property acquisition, exploration and
development activities but does not include any costs related to
production, general corporate overhead or similar activities. Gain
or loss on the sale or other disposition of oil and gas properties
is not recognized, unless the gain or loss would significantly
alter the relationship between capitalized costs and proved
reserves.
Oil and gas properties include costs that are excluded from costs
being depleted or amortized. Oil and natural gas property costs
excluded represent investments in unevaluated properties and
include non-producing leasehold, geological, and geophysical costs
associated with leasehold or drilling interests and exploration
drilling costs. The Company allocates a portion of its acquisition
costs to unevaluated properties based on relative value. Costs are
transferred to the full cost pool as the properties are evaluated
over the life of the reservoir. Unevaluated properties are reviewed
for impairment at least quarterly and are determined through an
evaluation considering, among other factors, seismic data,
requirements to relinquish acreage, drilling results, remaining
time in the commitment period, remaining capital plan, and
political, economic, and market conditions.
Gains and losses on the sale of oil and gas properties are not
generally reflected in income unless the gain or loss would
significantly alter the relationship between capitalized costs and
proved reserves. Sales of less than 100% of the Company’s
interest in the oil and gas property are treated as a reduction of
the capital cost of the field, with no gain or loss recognized, as
long as doing so does not significantly affect the
unit-of-production depletion rate. Costs of retired equipment, net
of salvage value, are usually charged to accumulated
depreciation.
Capitalized interest – The Company capitalizes interest on unevaluated
properties during the periods in which they are excluded from costs
being depleted or amortized. During the years ended December 31,
2017 and 2016, the Company capitalized $1,010,868 and $215,938,
respectively, of interest on unevaluated
properties.
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization – The depreciable base for oil and natural
gas properties includes the sum of all capitalized costs net of
accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization
(“DD&A”), estimated future development costs and
asset retirement costs not included in oil and natural gas
properties, less costs excluded from amortization. The depreciable
base of oil and natural gas properties is amortized on a
unit-of-production method.
Ceiling test – Future
production volumes from oil and gas properties are a significant
factor in determining the full cost ceiling limitation of
capitalized costs. Under the full cost method of accounting, the
Company is required to periodically perform a “ceiling
test” that determines a limit on the book value of oil and
gas properties. If the net capitalized cost of proved oil and gas
properties, net of related deferred income taxes, plus the cost of
unproved oil and gas properties, exceeds the present value of
estimated future net cash flows discounted at 10 percent, net of
related tax affects, plus the cost of unproved oil and gas
properties, the excess is charged to expense and reflected as
additional accumulated DD&A. The ceiling test calculation uses
a commodity price assumption which is based on the unweighted
arithmetic average of the price on the first day of each month for
each month within the prior 12 month period and excludes future
cash outflows related to estimated abandonment
costs.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
-
continued
The determination of oil and gas reserves is a subjective process,
and the accuracy of any reserve estimate depends on the quality of
available data and the application of engineering and geological
interpretation and judgment. Estimates of economically recoverable
reserves and future net cash flows depend on a number of variable
factors and assumptions that are difficult to predict and may vary
considerably from actual results. In particular, reserve estimates
for wells with limited or no production history are less reliable
than those based on actual production. Subsequent re-evaluation of
reserves and cost estimates related to future development of proved
oil and gas reserves could result in significant revisions to
proved reserves. Other issues, such as changes in regulatory
requirements, technological advances, and other factors which are
difficult to predict could also affect estimates of proved reserves
in the future.
Asset retirement obligations –The fair value of a liability for an
asset’s retirement obligation (“ARO”) is
recognized in the period in which it is incurred if a reasonable
estimate of fair value can be made, with the corresponding charge
capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the related
long-lived asset. The liability is accreted to its then-present
value each subsequent period, and the capitalized cost is depleted
over the useful life of the related asset. Abandonment costs
incurred are recorded as a reduction of the ARO
liability.
Inherent in the fair value calculation of an ARO are numerous
assumptions and judgments including the ultimate settlement
amounts, inflation factors, credit adjusted discount rates, timing
of settlement, and changes in the legal, regulatory, environmental,
and political environments. To the extent future revisions to these
assumptions impact the fair value of the existing ARO liability, a
corresponding adjustment is made to the oil and gas property
balance. Settlements greater than or less than amounts accrued as
ARO are recorded as a gain or loss upon settlement.
Income taxes - Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and
liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to
differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of
existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and
operating loss carry forwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities
are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable
income in the years in which those temporary differences are
expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax
assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in
income in the period that includes the enactment date. A valuation
allowance is established to reduce deferred tax assets if it is
more likely than not that the related tax benefits will not be
realized.
Authoritative guidance for uncertainty in income taxes requires
that the Company recognize the financial statement benefit of a tax
position only after determining that the relevant tax authority
would more likely than not sustain the position following an
examination. Management has reviewed the Company’s tax
positions and determined there were no uncertain tax positions
requiring recognition in the consolidated financial statements.
Company tax returns remain subject to Federal and State tax
examinations. Generally, the applicable statutes of limitation are
three to four years from their respective filings.
Estimated interest and penalties related to potential underpayment
on any unrecognized tax benefits are classified as a component of
tax expense in the statement of operation. The Company has not
recorded any interest or penalties associated with unrecognized tax
benefits for any periods covered by these financial
statements.
Share-based compensation – Compensation cost for equity awards is
based on the fair value of the equity instrument on the date of
grant and is recognized over the period during which an employee is
required to provide service in exchange for the award. Compensation
cost for liability awards is based on the fair value of the vested
award at the end of each period.
The
Company accounts for stock option awards using the calculated value
method. The expected term was derived using the simplified method
provided in Securities and Exchange Commission release Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110, which averages an awards weighted
average vesting period and contractual term for “plain
vanilla” share options.
The
Company accounts for any forfeitures of options when they occur.
Previously recognized compensation cost for an award is reversed in
the period that the award is forfeited.
The
Company also issues equity awards to non-employees. The fair value
of these option awards is estimated when the award recipient
completes the contracted professional services. The Company
recognizes expense for the estimated total value of the awards
during the period from their issuance until performance completion,
at which time the estimated expense is adjusted to the final value
of the award as measured at performance completion.
The
Company values warrant and option awards using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model.
Revenue recognition – The
Company recognizes oil and gas revenues when production is sold at
a fixed or determinable price, persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists, delivery has occurred and title has
transferred, and collectability is reasonably
assured.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
-
continued
Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share – Basic earnings (loss) per common share is computed
by dividing net income (loss) available to common shareholders by
the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the
period. Diluted earnings (loss) per common share is computed in the
same way as basic earnings (loss) per common share except that the
denominator is increased to include the number of additional common
shares that would be outstanding if all potential common shares had
been issued and if the additional common shares were
dilutive. The calculation of diluted earnings per share
excludes 20,882,132 shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants and options because their effect would be
anti-dilutive.
Environmental laws and regulations – The Company is subject to extensive
federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations.
Environmental expenditures are expensed or capitalized depending on
their future economic benefit. The Company believes that it is in
compliance with existing laws and regulations.
Recent
accounting pronouncements – In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU
2014-09, Revenue From
Contracts With Customers that
introduces a new five-step revenue recognition model in which an
entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised
goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the
consideration to which the entity expects to be entitledin exchange
for those goods or services. This ASU also requires disclosures
sufficient to enable users to understand the nature, amount,
timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from
contracts with customers, including qualitative and quantitative
disclosures about contracts with customers, significant judgments
and changes in judgments, and assets recognized from the costs to
obtain or fulfill a contract. This standard is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods
within that reporting period. The Company adopted this standard on
January 1, 2018 and has elected the modified retrospective method
of adoption. The new standard is not expected to have a material
impact on the financial statements but will require expanded
disclosure of revenues.
In
February 2016 the FASB, issued ASU, 2016-02, Leases. The ASU
requires companies to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and
liabilities for the rights and obligations created by leased
assets. ASU 2016-02 will be effective for the Company in the first
quarter of 2019, with early adoption permitted. The Company is
currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-02
will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements
and related disclosures.
Other recently issued or adopted accounting pronouncements are not
expected to have, or did not have, a material impact on the
Company’s financial position or results from
operations.
Subsequent events – The
Company evaluated subsequent events through March 15,
2018, the date of issuance of these
financial statements. Subsequent events are disclosed in Note
11.
4. OIL & GAS PROPERTIES
The following table presents the capitalized costs for oil &
gas properties of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and
2016:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluated
costs subject to amortization
|
$5,022,129
|
$1,470,939
|
|
26,100,749
|
13,376,742
|
Total
capitalized costs
|
31,122,878
|
14,847,681
|
Less
accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
(5,543,599)
|
(5,455,393)
|
Total
oil and gas properties
|
$25,579,279
|
$9,392,288
|
The
Company identified impairment of $2,300,626 in 2017 related to its
unevaluated properties. Although we had no recognized impairment
expense in 2017, the Company has adjusted the separation of
evaluated versus unevaluated costs within its full cost pool to
recognize the value impairment related to the expiration of
unevaluated leases in 2017 in the amount of $2,300,626. The impact
of this change will be to increase the basis for calculation of
future period’s depletion, depreciation and amortization to
include $2,300,626 of cost which will effectively recognize the
impairment on the Consolidated Statement of Income over future
periods. The $2,300,626 has also become an evaluated cost for
purposes of future period’s Ceiling Tests and which may
further recognize the impairment expense recognized in future
periods.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
4. OIL & GAS PROPERTIES
-
continued
Due to the volatility of commodity prices, should oil and natural
gas prices decline in the future, it is possible that a further
write-down could occur. Proved reserves are estimated quantities of
crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, which geological
and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be
recoverable from known reservoirs under existing economic and
operating conditions. The independent engineering estimates include
only those amounts considered to be proved reserves and do not
include additional amounts which may result from new discoveries in
the future, or from application of secondary and tertiary recovery
processes where facilities are not in place or for which
transportation and/or marketing contracts are not in place.
Estimated reserves to be developed through secondary or tertiary
recovery processes are classified as unevaluated
properties.
Acquisition of Additional Interests in Hazel Project
On
January 30, 2017, we and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Acquisition Corporation, a Texas corporation (“TAC”),
entered into and closed an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and
Plan of Merger with Line Drive Energy, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Line Drive”), under which
agreements TAC merged with and into Line Drive and the separate
existence of TAC ceased, with Line Drive being the surviving
organization and becoming our wholly-owned subsidiary. Line Drive,
which was wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman, owned
certain assets and securities, including approximately 40.66% of
12,000 gross acres in the Hazel Project and 521,739 warrants to
purchase our common stock (which warrants had been assigned by Mr.
McCabe to Line Drive). Under the merger transaction, our shares of
common stock of TAC converted into a membership interest of Line
Drive, the membership interest in Line Drive held by Mr. McCabe
immediately prior to the transaction ceased to exist, and we issued
Mr. McCabe 3,301,739 restricted shares of common stock as
consideration therefor. Immediately after closing, the 521,739
warrants held by Line Drive were cancelled, which warrants had an
exercise price of $1.40 per share and an expiration date of June 9,
2020. A Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed
with the Secretary of State of Texas on January 31, 2017.
Subsequent to the closing the name of Line Drive Energy, LLC was
changed to Torchlight Hazel, LLC.
Also on
January 30, 2017, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into and
closed a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Wolfbone Investments,
LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Wolfbone”)
which is wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman. Under the
agreement, TEI acquired certain of Wolfbone’s Hazel Project
assets, including its interest in the Flying B Ranch #1 well and
the 40 acre unit surrounding the well, for consideration of
$415,000, and additionally, Wolfbone caused to be cancelled a total
of 2,780,000 warrants to purchase our common stock, including
1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum Corporation, an entity
owned by Mr. McCabe, and 1,280,000 warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals, an entity owned by Mr. McCabe’s son, which warrant
cancellations were effected through certain Warrant Cancellation
Agreements. The 1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum
Corporation had an exercise price of $1.00 per share and an
expiration date of April 4, 2021. The warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals included 100,000 warrants with an exercise price of $1.73
and an expiration date of September 30, 2018 and 1,180,000 warrants
with an exercise price of $0.70 and an expiration date of February
15, 2020.
Since
Mr. McCabe held the controlling interest in both Line Drive and
Wolfbone Investments, LLC, the transactions were combined for
accounting purposes. The working interest in the Hazel Project was
the only asset held by Line Drive. The warrant cancellation was
treated in the aggregate as an exercise of the warrants with the
transfer of the working interests as the consideration. The Company
recorded the transactions as an increase in its investment in the
Hazel project working interests of $3,644,431 which is equal to the
exercise price of the warrants plus the cash paid to
Wolfbone.
Upon
the closing of the transactions, the Company’s working
interest in the Hazel project increased by 40.66% to a total
ownership of 74%.
Effective
June 1, 2017, the Company acquired an additional 6% working
interest from unrelated working interest owners in exchange for
268,656 shares of common stock valued at $373,430, increasing its
working interest in the Hazel project to 80%.
Winkler Project, Winkler County, Texas
On
December 1, 2017, the Agreement and Plan of Reorganization that we
and our newly formed wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Wolfbone
Properties, Inc., a Texas corporation (“TWP”), entered
into with McCabe Petroleum Corporation, a Texas corporation
(“MPC”), and Warwink Properties, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Warwink Properties”) closed. Under
the agreement, which was entered into on November 14, 2017, TWP
merged with and into Warwink Properties and the separate existence
of TWP ceased, with Warwink Properties becoming the surviving
organization and our wholly-owned subsidiary. Warwink Properties
was wholly owned by MPC which is wholly owned by Gregory McCabe,
our Chairman. Warwink Properties owns certain assets, including a
10.71875% working interest in 640 acres in Winkler County, Texas.
At closing of the merger transaction, our shares of common stock of
TWP converted into a membership interest of Warwink Properties, the
membership interest in Warwink Properties held by MPC ceased to
exist, and we issued MPC 2,500,000 restricted shares of common
stock as consideration. Also on December 1, 2017, MPC closed its
transaction with MECO IV, LLC (“MECO”) for the purchase
and sale of certain assets as contemplated by the Purchase and Sale
Agreement dated November 9, 2017 (the “MECO PSA”), to
which we are not a party. Under the MECO PSA, Warwink Properties
received a carry from MECO (through the tanks) of up to $1,475,000
in the next well drilled on the Winkler County leases. A
Certificate of Merger for the merger transaction was filed with the
Secretary of State of Texas on December 5, 2017.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
4. OIL & GAS PROPERTIES
- continued
Also on
December 1, 2017, the transactions contemplated by the Purchase
Agreement that our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Energy,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered into with
MPC closed. Under the Purchase Agreement, which was entered into on
November 14, 2017, TEI acquired beneficial ownership of certain of
MPC’s assets, including acreage and wellbores located in Ward
County, Texas (the “Ward County Assets”). As
consideration under the Purchase Agreement, at closing TEI issued
to MPC an unsecured promissory note in the principal amount of
$3,250,000, payable in monthly installments of interest only
beginning on January 1, 2018, at the rate of 5% per annum, with the
entire principal amount together with all accrued interest due and
payable on December 31, 2020. In connection with TEI’s
acquisition of beneficial ownership in the Ward County Assets, MPC
sold those same assets, on behalf of TEI, to MECO at closing of the
MECO PSA, and accordingly, TEI received $3,250,000 in cash for its
beneficial interest in the Ward County Assets. Additionally, at
closing of the MECO PSA, MPC paid TEI a performance fee of
$2,781,500 in cash as compensation for TEI’s marketing and
selling the Winkler County assets of MPC and the Ward County Assets
as a package to MECO.
During 2016 the Company sold its Cimarron and Marcelina properties.
Those sales of the Cimarron and the Marcelina properties in 2016
represented substantial percentages of reserves at the time of each
sale and were presented on the Consolidated Statement of Operations
for 2016. Proceeds from the sale of Cimarron and Marcelina
properties were $750,000 and $877,489 respectively. The combined
loss on sale for 2016 was $283,285.
5. RELATED PARTY PAYABLES
As of December 31, 2017, related party payables consisted of
accrued and unpaid compensation to one of our executive officers
totaling $45,000.
As of December 31, 2016, related party payables consisted of
accrued and unpaid compensation to one of our executive officers
totaling $45,000 and $192,044 in Director Fees payable to our
Directors.
6. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Leases
The
Company has a noncancelable lease for its office premises that
expires on November 30, 2019 and which requires the payment of base
lease amounts and executory costs such as taxes, maintenance and
insurance. Rental expense for lease was $84,197 and $81,595 for the
year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.
Approximate
future minimum rental commitments under the office premises lease
are:
Year Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2018
|
$96,660
|
To
2019 Expiration
|
88,605
|
Total
|
$185,265
|
Environmental matters
The Company is subject to contingencies as a result of
environmental laws and regulations. Present and future
environmental laws and regulations applicable to the
Company’s operations could require substantial capital
expenditures or could adversely affect its operations in other ways
that cannot be predicted at this time. As of December 31, 2017 and
2016, no amounts had been recorded because no specific liability
has been identified that is reasonably probable of requiring the
Company to fund any future material amounts.
Litigation
Torchlight
Energy Resources, Inc. and its subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc.
has pending in the 429th judicial district court in Collin County,
Texas a lawsuit against Husky Ventures, Inc., Charles V. Long,
Silverstar of Nevada, Inc., Gastar Exploration Inc., J. Russell
Porter, Michael A. Gerlich, and Jerry R. Schuyler that was
originally filed in May 2016 (previous defendants April Glidewell,
Maximus Exploration, LLC, Atwood Acquisitions,LLC and John M.
Selser, Sr have been non-suited without prejudice to re-filing the
claims). In the lawsuit, we allege, among other things, that the
defendants acted improperly in connection with multiple
transactions, and that the defendants misrepresented and omitted
material information to us with respect to these transactions. The
lawsuit seeks damages arising from 15 different causes of action,
including without limitation, violations of the Texas Securities
Act, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty,
breach of contract, unjust enrichment and tortious
interference.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
6. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
-
continued
On
April 13, 2017, Husky Ventures, Inc. filed in the above lawsuit a
counterclaim against Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its
subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc., and a third-party petition
against John Brda, the Chief Executive Officer of Torchlight Energy
Resources, Inc., and Willard McAndrew III, a former officer of
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. (“Husky
Counterclaim”). The Husky Counterclaim asserts breach of
contract against Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its
subsidiary Torchlight Energy, Inc. and asserts a claim for tortious
interference with Husky’s contractual relationship with
Torchlight and a claim for conspiracy to tortiously interfere with
unspecified Husky business and contractual relationships against
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its subsidiary Torchlight
Energy, Inc., John Brda and Willard McAndrew III. We believe the
Husky Counterclaim is without merit and intend to vigorously defend
against it.
On May
22, 2017, the Court granted Gastar Exploration, Inc., J. Russell
Porter, Michael A. Gerlich, and Jerry R. Schuyler’s
(“Gastar Defendants”) motion for summary judgment
dismissing all of Torchlight’s claims against the Gastar
Defendants with prejudice. The only claim remaining related to the
Gastar Defendants is a counterclaim against Torchlight by Gastar
Exploration, Inc. for Torchlight’s alleged breach of a
release that Gastar Exploration, Inc. claims occurred because
Torchlight filed this lawsuit against the Gastar Defendants.
Torchlight alleges in its lawsuit that this release is
unenforceable against all the Defendants including but not limited
to Gastar Defendants. On January 12, 2018, the Court heard
but has not yet ruled on cross-motions for summary judgment by
Gastar and Torchlight to resolve Gastar’s remaining claims
against Torchlight. The case is currently set for trial on May 30,
2018.
7. STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Common Stock
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued -0- and 3,750,000 shares of common stock, respectively, for
cash of $-0- and $3,000,000.
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued 507,897 and 768,832 shares of common stock with total fair
values of $579,754 and $670,074, respectively, as compensation for
services.
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued 6,420,395 and 2,824,881 shares of common stock for lease
interests with total fair values of $6,812,362 and $1,975,046,
respectively.
During the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued -0- and 10,257,439 shares of common stock, respectively, in
conversions of preferred stock valued at $-0- and
$13,399,992.
During the year ended December 31, 2017 the Company issued
1,007,890 shares of common stock, in conversions of notes payable
valued $1,007,890.
During the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued 307,349 and 3,888,745 shares of common stock, respectively,
resulting from warrant exercises for consideration totaling
$243,300 and $2,543,749.
Preferred Stock
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company issued 10,000
shares of Series C preferred stock for $1,000,000 in cash. The
proceeds were deposited as a prepayment with the operator for
development cost of the Flying B #2 well in the Hazel Project. The
preferred holders exercised their option in fourth quarter of 2016
to convert their preferred shares into an aggregate 33.33% working
interest in the Flying “B” #2 whereupon they received
credit for the prepayment to their working interest joint interest
billing accounts.
During the year ended December 31, 2016 the Company paid dividends
on preferred stock in cash of $320,724. In addition, during the
year 2016, 440,262 shares of common stock were issued for dividends
on preferred stock.
There was no outstanding Preferred Stock as of December 31,
2017.
Warrants and Options
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued/vested 1,808,026 and 6,437,267 warrants and options with
total fair values of $1,093,104 and $2,205,231, respectively, as
compensation for services.
During the years ended December 31, 2017, and 2016, the Company
issued -0- and 137,500 warrants, respectively, in connection with
financing transactions, with total values of $-0- and
$80,750.
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company
issued -0- and 3,412,525 warrants and 6,420,395 and 2,824,881
shares of common stock, respectively, in connection with the
acquisition of lease interests, respectively, with total value of
$6,812,362 and $3,265,807.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
7. STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
-
continued
A summary of warrants outstanding as of December 31, 2017 by
exercise price and year of expiration is presented
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.50
|
400,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
400,000
|
$0.70
|
-
|
-
|
420,000
|
-
|
420,000
|
$0.77
|
-
|
100,000
|
-
|
-
|
100,000
|
$1.00
|
-
|
25,116
|
-
|
-
|
25,116
|
$1.03
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
120,000
|
120,000
|
$1.08
|
-
|
37,500
|
-
|
-
|
37,500
|
$1.40
|
-
|
-
|
1,121,736
|
|
1,121,736
|
$1.64
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
200,000
|
200,000
|
$1.73
|
100,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
100,000
|
$1.80
|
-
|
-
|
1,250,000
|
-
|
1,250,000
|
$2.00
|
1,906,249
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,906,249
|
$2.03
|
2,000,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,000,000
|
$2.09
|
2,800,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,800,000
|
$2.23
|
-
|
-
|
832,512
|
-
|
832,512
|
$2.29
|
120,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
120,000
|
$2.50
|
-
|
35,211
|
-
|
-
|
35,211
|
$2.82
|
38,174
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
38,174
|
$3.50
|
-
|
15,000
|
-
|
-
|
15,000
|
$4.50
|
-
|
700,000
|
-
|
-
|
700,000
|
$6.00
|
523,123
|
22,580
|
-
|
-
|
545,703
|
$7.00
|
-
|
700,000
|
-
|
-
|
700,000
|
|
7,887,546
|
1,635,407
|
3,624,248
|
320,000
|
13,467,201
|
A summary of stock options outstanding as of December 31, 2017 by
exercise price and year of expiration is presented
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.97
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
259,742
|
-
|
259,742
|
$1.10
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
800,000
|
800,000
|
$1.57
|
-
|
-
|
5,997,163
|
-
|
-
|
5,997,163
|
$1.63
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
58,026
|
-
|
58,026
|
$1.79
|
-
|
-
|
300,000
|
-
|
-
|
300,000
|
|
-
|
-
|
6,297,163
|
317,768
|
800,000
|
7,414,931
|
At
December 31, 2017, the Company had reserved 20,882,132 common
shares for future exercise of warrants and
options.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
7. STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
-
continued
Warrants
and options granted were valued using the Black-Scholes Option
Pricing Model. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value
of the warrants issued were as follows:
2017
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
1.47% - 2.06%
|
Expected volatility of common stock
|
106% - 122%
|
Dividend yield
|
0.00%
|
Discount due to lack of marketability
|
20%
|
Expected life of option/warrant
|
2.75 years - 5 years
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
0.78%-1.22%
|
Expected volatility of common stock
|
101% - 189%
|
Dividend yield
|
0.00%
|
Discount due to lack of marketability
|
20-30%
|
Expected life of warrant
|
3 years - 5 years
|
8. INCOME TAXES
The
Company recorded no income tax provision for 2017 and 2016 because
of losses incurred. The Company has placed a full valuation
allowance against net deferred tax assets because future
realization of these assets is not
assured.
The following is a reconciliation between the federal income tax
benefit computed at statutory federal income tax rates and actual
income tax provision for the years ended December 31, 2017 and
2016:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
income tax benefit at statutory rate
|
$(312,769)
|
$(2,869,293)
|
Permanent
Differences
|
1,640
|
3,000
|
Other
|
719,197
|
4,096,946
|
Change
in valuation allowance
|
(9,186,334)
|
(1,230,653)
|
Change
in federal tax rate
|
8,778,266
|
-
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
$-
|
$-
|
The tax effects of temporary differences that gave rise to
significant portions of deferred tax assets and liabilities at
December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 are as
follows:
|
|
|
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|
|
Net
operating loss carryforward
|
$11,116,332
|
$16,269,090
|
Accruals
|
9,450
|
15,300
|
Reserves
|
4,501,899
|
7,156,559
|
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|
|
Intangible
drilling and other costs for oil and gas properties
|
(1,447,405)
|
(74,340)
|
Net
deferred tax assets and liabilities
|
14,180,276
|
23,366,609
|
Less
valuation allowance
|
(14,180,276)
|
(23,366,609)
|
Total
deferred tax assets and liabilities
|
$-
|
$-
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
8. INCOME TAXES
- continued
The
Company had a net deferred tax asset related to federal net
operating loss carryforwards of $52,934,915 and $51,028,330 at December 31, 2017
and December 31, 2016, respectively. The federal net operating loss
carryforward will begin to expire in 2032. Realization of the
deferred tax asset is dependent, in part, on generating sufficient
taxable income prior to expiration of the loss carryforwards. The
Company has placed a 100% valuation allowance against the net
deferred tax asset because future realization of these assets is
not assured.
On
December 22, 2017, the U.S. government enacted comprehensive
legislation titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Generally, effective
for years 2018 and beyond, it makes broad and complex changes to
the Internal Revenue Code, including, but not limited to, reducing
the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. As of
December 31, 2017 we have made a reasonable estimate of the effects
on our deferred tax assets and liabilities of the change in the
corporate tax rate to be effective in 2018. The estimated amount is
included our computation of net deferred tax assets and liabilities
and the related valuation allowance.
9. PROMISSORY NOTES
The total outstanding balance of the
12% Series B Convertible Unsecured Promissory Notes at December 31,
2016 was $3,569,500. On April 24, 2017 we used $2,509,500 of
the proceeds from the financing described below to redeem and repay
a portion of the outstanding 12% Series B Convertible Unsecured
Promissory Notes. Separately, $1,000,000 of the principal amount of
the Series B Notes plus accrued interest was converted into
1,007,890 shares of common stock valued at $1,007,890 and $60,000
was rolled into the new debt financing.
On April 10, 2017, we sold to investors in a private transaction
two 12% unsecured promissory notes with a total of $8,000,000 in
principal amount. Interest only is due and payable on the notes
each month at the rate of 12% per annum, with a balloon payment of
the outstanding principal due and payable at maturity on April 10,
2020. The holders of the notes will also receive annual payments of
common stock at the rate of 2.5% of principal amount outstanding,
based on a volume-weighted average price. Both notes were sold at
an original issue discount of 94.25% and accordingly, we received
total proceeds of $7,540,000 from the investors. Debt issuance
costs were paid by issuance of 204,574 shares of common stock
valued at $279,754. We are using the proceeds for working capital
and general corporate purposes, which includes, without limitation,
drilling capital, lease acquisition capital and repayment of prior
debt.
These
12% promissory notes allow for early redemption, provided that if
we redeem before April 10, 2018, we must pay the holders all unpaid
interest and common stock payments on the portion of the notes
redeemed that would have been earned through April 10, 2018. The
notes also contain certain covenants under which we have agreed
that, except for financing arrangements with established commercial
banking or financial institutions and other debts and liabilities
incurred in the normal course of business, we will not issue any
other notes or debt offerings which have a maturity date prior to
the payment in full of the 12% notes, unless consented to by the
holders.
The
effective interest rate is 16.15%.
In connection with the transaction effective December 5, 2017 for
the acquisition of the Warwink properties, the Company borrowed
$3.25 million from its Chairman, Greg McCabe on a three-year
interest only promissory note bearing interest at 5% per
annum.
10. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS
The
following is a reconciliation of the asset retirement obligation
liability for the period December 31, 2015 through December 31,
2017:
Asset
retirement obligation – December 31, 2015
|
$29,083
|
|
|
Accretion
expense
|
41
|
Removal
of ARO for wells sold
|
(22,073)
|
|
|
Asset
retirement obligation – December 31, 2016
|
$7,051
|
|
|
Estimated
liabilities recorded
|
2,007
|
Accretion
expense
|
216
|
|
|
Asset
retirement obligation – December 31, 2017
|
$9,274
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
11. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On
February 6, 2018, we sold to an investor in a private transaction a
12% unsecured promissory note with a principal amount of
$4,500,000. Interest only is due and payable on the note each month
at the rate of 12% per annum, with a balloon payment of the
outstanding principal due and payable at maturity on April 10,
2020. The holder of the note will also receive annual payments of
common stock at the rate of 2.5% of principal amount outstanding,
based on a volume-weighted average price. We sold the note at an
original issue discount of 96.27% and accordingly, we received
total proceeds of $4,332,150 from the investor. We intend to use
the proceeds for working capital and general corporate purposes,
which includes, without limitation, drilling capital, lease
acquisition capital and repayment of prior debt.
This
12% promissory note allows for early redemption, provided that if
we redeem before February 6, 2019, we must pay the holder all
unpaid interest and common stock payments on the portion of the
note redeemed that would have been earned through February 6, 2019.
The note also contains certain covenants under which we have agreed
that, except for financing arrangements with established commercial
banking or financial institutions and other debts and liabilities
incurred in the normal course of business, we will not issue any
other notes or debt offerings which have a maturity date prior to
the payment in full of the 12% note, unless consented to by the
holder.
TORCHLIGHT ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ON OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION
AND PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES
(Unaudited)
The
unaudited supplemental information on oil and gas exploration and
production activities has been presented in accordance with
Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards
Codification Topic 932, Extractive
Activities—Oil and Gas and the SEC’s final rule,
Modernization of Oil and Gas
Reporting.
Investment in oil and gas properties during the years ended
December 31, 2017 and 2016 is detailed as follows:
|
|
|
Property
acquisition costs
|
$7,227,362
|
$3,265,807
|
Development
costs
|
$8,034,962
|
$2,055,526
|
Exploratory
costs
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
$15,262,324
|
$5,321,333
|
Property acquisition cost relates to the Company’s
acquisition of additional working interests in the Hazel Project in
west Texas and the acquisition of the Warwink Project, also in west
Texas. The development costs include work in the Orogrande and
Hazel projects in west Texas. No development costs were incurred
for Oklahoma properties in 2017.
Property
acquisition costs presented above exclude interest capitalized into
the full cost pool of $1,010,868 in 2017 and $215,938 in
2016.
Oil and Natural Gas Reserves
Reserve Estimates
SEC Case. The following tables
sets forth, as of December 31, 2017, our estimated net proved oil
and natural gas reserves, the estimated present value (discounted
at an annual rate of 10%) of estimated future net revenues before
future income taxes (PV-10) and after future income taxes
(Standardized Measure) of our proved reserves and our estimated net
probable oil and natural gas reserves, each prepared using standard
geological and engineering methods generally accepted by the
petroleum industry and in accordance with assumptions prescribed by
the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). All of
our reserves are located in the United States.
The PV-10 value is a widely used measure of value of oil and
natural gas assets and represents a pre-tax present value of
estimated cash flows discounted at ten percent. PV-10 is considered
a non-GAAP financial measure as defined by the SEC. We believe that
our PV-10 presentation is relevant and useful to our investors
because it presents the estimated discounted future net cash flows
attributable to our proved reserves before taking into account the
related future income taxes, as such taxes may differ among various
companies. We believe investors and creditors use PV-10 as a basis
for comparison of the relative size and value of our proved
reserves to the reserve estimates of other companies. PV-10 is not
a measure of financial or operating performance under GAAP and
neither it nor the Standardized Measure is intended to represent
the current market value of our estimated oil and natural gas
reserves. PV-10 should not be considered in isolation or as a
substitute for the standardized measure of discounted future net
cash flows as defined under GAAP.
The
estimates of our proved reserves and the PV-10 set forth herein
reflect estimated future gross revenue to be generated from the
production of proved reserves, net of estimated production and
future development costs, using prices and costs under existing
economic conditions at December 31, 2017. For purposes of
determining prices, we used the average of prices received for each
month within the 12-month period ended December 31, 2017, adjusted
for quality and location differences, which was $48.53 per barrel
of oil and $2.58 per MCF of gas. This average historical price is
not a prediction of future prices. The amounts shown do not give
effect to non-property related expenses, such as corporate general
administrative expenses and debt service, future income taxes or to
depreciation, depletion and amortization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Producing
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
$132
|
$96
|
Proved
Nonproducing
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
Total
Proved
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
$132
|
$96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standardized Measure of Future Net Cash Flows Related to Proved Oil
and Gas Properties
|
|
$123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probable
Undeveloped
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proved
Producing
|
1,400
|
23,300
|
5,284
|
$31
|
$29
|
Proved
Nonproducing
|
46,800
|
467,600
|
124,733
|
$776
|
$301
|
Total
Proved
|
48,200
|
490,900
|
130,017
|
$807
|
$330
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standardized Measure of Future Net Cash Flows Related to Proved Oil
and Gas Properties
|
|
$341
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probable
Undeveloped
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
$-
|
$-
|
The upward revisions of previous estimates from 2016 to 2017 of
proved producing reserves of 900 Bbls and 20,500 MCF results
primarily from 2017 reserve report calculations for the
Company’s properties driven by industry conditions and the
change in the proportional quantities of oil and gas in production
from the Judy well in Oklahoma from 2016 to 2017.
Reserve values as of December 31, 2017 are related to a single
producing well in Oklahoma – the Judy well in the Prairie
Grove AMI.
BOE equivalents are determined by combining barrels of oil with MCF
of gas divided by six.
Standardized
Measure of Oil & Gas Quantities - Volume
Rollforward
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
The
following table sets forth the Company’s net proved reserves,
including the changes therein, and proved
|
developed
reserves:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
PROVED RESERVES:
|
|
|
|
Beginning
of period
|
48,200
|
490,900
|
130,017
|
Revisions
of previous estimates
|
(35,509)
|
(437,841)
|
(108,483)
|
Extensions,
discoveries and other additions
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Divestiture
of reserves
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Acquisition
of reserves
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Production
|
(10,391)
|
(9,259)
|
(11,934)
|
End
of period
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROVED
DEVELOPED RESERVES
|
|
|
|
Proved
developed producing
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
Proved
nonproducing
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total
|
2,300
|
43,800
|
9,600
|
|
|
|
|
Standardized
Measure of Oil & Gas Quantities
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2017 & 2016
|
|
|
|
The
standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows
relating
|
|
to
proved oil and natural gas reserves is as follows :
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future
cash inflows
|
$240,370
|
$3,156,970
|
Future
production costs
|
(108,000)
|
(1,000,410)
|
Future
development costs
|
-
|
(1,350,000)
|
Future
income tax expense
|
-
|
-
|
Future
net cash flows
|
132,370
|
806,560
|
10%
annual discount for estimated
|
|
|
timing
of cash flows
|
(9,102)
|
(465,644)
|
Standardized
measure of discounted future
|
|
|
net
cash flows related to proved reserves
|
$123,268
|
$340,916
|
A
summary of the changes in the standardized measure of
discounted
|
|
future
net cash flows applicable to proved oil and natural gas
reserves
|
|
is
as follows :
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
beginning of period
|
$340,916
|
$5,935,188
|
Net
change in sales and transfer prices and in production (lifting)
costs related to future production
|
207,241
|
(482,569)
|
Changes
in estimated future development costs
|
116,934
|
(791,630)
|
Net
change due to revisions in quantity estimates
|
(129,565)
|
482,272
|
Accretion
of discount
|
28,604
|
80,393
|
Other
|
(43,372)
|
172,169
|
|
|
|
Net
change due to extensions and discoveries
|
-
|
-
|
Net
change due to sales of minerals in place
|
-
|
(191,470)
|
Sales
and transfers of oil and gas produced during the
period
|
(397,490)
|
(29,749)
|
Previously
estimated development costs incurred during the period
|
-
|
58,575
|
Net
change in income taxes
|
-
|
(4,892,263)
|
Balance,
end of period
|
$123,268
|
$340,916
|
Due to the inherent uncertainties and the limited nature of
reservoir data, both proved and probable reserves are subject to
change as additional information becomes available. The estimates
of reserves, future cash flows, and present value are based on
various assumptions, including those prescribed by the SEC, and are
inherently imprecise. Although we believe these estimates are
reasonable, actual future production, cash flows, taxes,
development expenditures, operating expenses, and quantities of
recoverable oil and natural gas reserves may vary substantially
from these estimates.
In estimating probable reserves, it should be noted that those
reserve estimates inherently involve greater risk and uncertainty
than estimates of proved reserves. While analysis of geoscience and
engineering data provides reasonable certainty that proved reserves
can be economically producible from known formations under existing
conditions and within a reasonable time, probable reserves involve
less certainty than reserves with a higher classification due to
less data to support their ultimate recovery. Probable reserves
have not been discounted for the additional risk associated with
future recovery. Prospective investors should be aware that as the
categories of reserves decrease with certainty, the risk of
recovering reserves at the PV-10 calculation increases. The
reserves and net present worth discounted at 10% relating to the
different categories of proved and probable have not been adjusted
for risk due to their uncertainty of recovery and thus are not
comparable and should not be summed into total
amounts.
Reserve Estimation Process, Controls and Technologies
The reserve estimates, including PV-10 estimates, set forth above
were prepared by PeTech Enterprises, Inc. for the Company’s
Properties in Oklahoma. A copy of their full reports with regard to
our reserves is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this annual report on
Form 10-K. These calculations were prepared using standard
geological and engineering methods generally accepted by the
petroleum industry and in accordance with SEC financial accounting
and reporting standards.
Results of Operations for Oil and Gas Producing
Activities
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oil
and Gas revenue
|
$570,499
|
$521,820
|
$48,679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
costs
|
173,187
|
155,897
|
17,290
|
Depreciation,
depletion, and amortization
|
100,156
|
0
|
100,156
|
Exploration
expenses
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
273,343
|
155,897
|
117,446
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results
of Operations (excluding corporate overhead, impairment expense,
and interest costs)
|
$297,156
|
$365,923
|
$(68,767)
|
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING
AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
Not Applicable.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Management’s Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
Our
management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2017.
Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer have concluded that, as of December 31, 2017, our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective, in that they
ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the
reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is (1)
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and (2)
accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to
allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES -
continued
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting
Management
acknowledges its responsibility for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting in accordance
with Rule 13a-15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act. The
company’s internal control over financial reporting includes
those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only
in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding
prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or
disposition of the company’s assets that could have a
material effect on the financial statements.
Management
has also evaluated the effectiveness of its internal control over
financial reporting in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles within the guidelines of the Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission framework
(2013). Based on the results of this evaluation, management has
determined that the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting was effective as of December 31, 2017. The independent
registered public accounting firm of Briggs & Veselka Co, as
auditors of the Company’s financial statements included in
the Annual Report, has issued an attestation report on the
Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
Changes in Internal Controls
There
were no changes in our Company’s internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934) during the quarter ended December 31, 2017,
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls and
Procedures
Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, does not expect that disclosure controls or
internal controls will prevent all error and all fraud. A control
system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only
reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the
control system are met. In addition, the design of a control system
must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the
benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs.
Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no
evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all
control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within a company
have been detected. These inherent limitations include the
realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that
breakdowns can occur because of simple error or
mistake.
Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts
of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by
management’s override of the control. The design of any
systems of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about
the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that
any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all
potential future conditions. Over time, control may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of
compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because
of these inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system,
misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Individual persons may perform multiple tasks which normally would
be allocated to separate persons and therefore extra diligence must
be exercised during the period these tasks are
combined.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
Not applicable.
PART III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
Our executive officers and directors are as follows:
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s) and Office(s)
|
John A. Brda
|
|
53
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Director
|
Roger N. Wurtele
|
|
71
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
Greg McCabe, Sr.
|
|
56
|
|
Director
|
Alexandre Zyngier
|
|
48
|
|
Director
|
R. David Newton
|
|
63
|
|
Director
|
E. Scott Kimbrough
|
|
67
|
|
Director
|
Michael Graves
|
|
50
|
|
Director
|
Below is certain biographical information of our executive officers
and directors:
John A. Brda – Mr. Brda
has been our Chief Executive Officer since December 2014 and our
Secretary and a member of the Board of Director since January 2012.
He has been the Managing Member of Brda & Company, LLC since
2002, which provided consulting services to public
companies—with a focus in the oil and gas sector—on
investor relations, equity and debt financings, strategic business
development and securities regulation matters, prior to him
becoming President of the company.
We believe Mr. Brda is an excellent fit to our Board of Directors
and management team based on his extensive experience in
transaction negotiation and business development, particularly in
the oil and gas sector as well as other non-related industries. He
has consulted with many public companies in the last ten years, and
we believe that his extensive network of industry professionals and
finance firms will contribute to our success.
Roger N. Wurtele – Mr.
Wurtele has served as our Chief Financial Officer since September
2013. He is a versatile, experienced finance executive that has
served as Chief Financial Officer for several public and private
companies. He has a broad range of experience in public accounting,
corporate finance and executive management. Mr. Wurtele previously
served as CFO of Xtreme Oil & Gas, Inc. from February 2010 to
September 2013. From May 2013 to September 2013 he worked as a
financial consultant for us. From November 2007 to January 2010,
Mr. Wurtele served as CFO of Lang and Company LLC, a developer of
commercial real estate projects. He graduated from the University
of Nebraska and has been a Certified Public Accountant for 40
years.
Gregory McCabe – Mr. McCabe has been a member of our
Board of Directors since July 2016 and was appointed Chairman of
the Board in October 2016. He is an experienced geologist who
brings over 32 years of oil and gas experience to our company. He
is a principal of numerous oil and gas focused entities including
McCabe Petroleum Corporation, Manix Royalty, Masterson Royalty Fund
and GMc Exploration. He has been the President of McCabe Petroleum
Corporation from 1986 to the present. Mr. McCabe has been involved
in numerous oil and gas ventures throughout his career and has a
vast experience in technical evaluation, operations and
acquisitions and divestitures. Mr. McCabe is also our largest
stockholder and provided entry for us into our two largest assets,
the Hazel Project in the Midland Basin and the Orogrande Project in
Hudspeth County, Texas.
We
believe that Mr. McCabe’s background in geology and his many
years in the oil and gas industry compliments the Board
of
Directors.
E. Scott Kimbrough - Mr. Kimbrough has served on our Board
of Directors since October 2016. He is the owner of multiple
independent oil and gas related companies, which he has managed for
more than 20 years, including serving as the President of Maverick
Oil & Gas Corporation for the last 22 years. His diverse oil
and gas background spans 39 years and includes roles ranging from
field operations to senior corporate management. Mr. Kimbrough
began his career with Arco Oil & Gas Company, followed by work
with independents including Quintana Petroleum Corporation, Lasmo
Energy, and Nearburg Producing Company. His focus has been in
domestic U.S. fields including the Permian Basin in West Texas and
Southeast New Mexico, on and offshore Gulf Coast, Midcontinent,
Rocky Mountain area and onshore California. Mr. Kimbrough received
a Bachelor of Science in Personnel Management (Business) from
Louisiana Tech University and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical
Engineering from Texas A&M University. He is a Registered
Petroleum Engineer in the State of Texas.
We
believe Mr. Kimbrough’s wide ranging experience in operating
E&P (exploration and production) companies make him an
excellent fit to the Board of Directors.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
-
continued
R. David Newton - Mr. Newton has been a member of our Board
of Directors since October 2016. He has more than 25 years of
experience in management consulting from various positions he has
held with U.S. based investment firms. Additionally, he has been
active in farming, ranching and oil and gas exploration for over 30
years. Since 1994 he has owned and managed R. David Newton and
Associates, a management consulting and investment firm, through
which he has focused on funding venture capital, channel
distribution, startups, second and third stage financings, and
corporate turnarounds. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree from
the University of Texas at Austin.
Mr.
Newton brings a depth of relationships developed through decades of
participation in corporate finance and operational skills obtained
while focused on helping growth stage entities involved in oil and
natural gas, aerospace, timber and various other industries, and
accordingly can make a substantial contribution to the
Board.
Alexandre Zyngier - Mr. Zyngier has served on our Board of
Directors since June 2016. He has been the Managing Director
of Batuta Advisors
since founding it in August 2013. The firm pursues high return
investment and advisory opportunities in the distressed and
turnaround sectors. Mr. Zyngier has over 20 years of investment,
strategy, and operating experience. He is currently a director of
Atari SA, AudioEye Inc. and GT Advanced Technologies, Inc. Before
starting Batuta Advisors, Mr. Zyngier was a portfolio manager at
Alden Global Capital from February 2009 until August 2013,
investing in public and private opportunities. He has also worked
as a portfolio manager at Goldman Sachs & Co. and Deutsche Bank
Co. Additionally, he was a strategy consultant at McKinsey &
Company and a technical brand manager at Procter & Gamble. Mr.
Zyngier holds an MBA in Finance and Accounting from the University
of Chicago and a BS in Chemical Engineering from UNICAMP in
Brazil.
We
believe that Mr. Zyngier’s investment experience and his
experience in overseeing a broad range of companies will greatly
benefit the Board of Directors.
Michael J. Graves – Mr. Graves has served on the Board
of Directors since August 17, 2017. He is a Certified Public
Accountant, and since 2005 he has been a managing shareholder of
Fitch & Graves in Sioux City, Iowa, which provides accounting
and tax, financial planning, consulting and investment services.
Since 2008, he has also been a registered representative with
Western Equity Group where he has worked in investment sales. He is
also presently a shareholder in several businesses involved in
residential construction and property rentals. Previously, he
worked at Bill Markve & Associates, Gateway 2000 and Deloitte
& Touche. He graduated Summa Cum Laude from the University of
South Dakota with a B.S. in Accounting.
With
Mr. Graves’ extensive background in accounting and investment
businesses, we believe his understanding of financial statements,
business valuations, and general business performance are a
valuable asset to the Board.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our
directors and executive officers, and persons who own beneficially
more than ten percent of our common stock, to file reports of
ownership and changes of ownership with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Based solely upon a review of Forms 3, 4 and 5
furnished to us during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, we
believe that the directors, executive officers, and greater than
ten percent beneficial owners have complied with all applicable
filing requirements during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017,
with the exception of (i) three Form 4’s (including a Form
4/A) filed late by Gregory McCabe, and (ii) a Form 4 filed late by
Alexandre Zyngier.
Code of Ethics
We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our principal
executive officer, principal financial officer, principal
accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar
functions. The Code of Ethics is available at our website at
torchlightenergy.com. Further, we undertake to provide by mail to
any person without charge, upon request, a copy of such code of
ethics if we receive the request in writing by mail to: Torchlight
Energy Resources, Inc., 5700 W. Plano Parkway, Suite 3600, Plano,
Texas 75093.
Procedures for Stockholders to Recommend Nominees to the
Board
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which
stockholders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors since
we last provided disclosure regarding this process.
Audit Committee
We maintain a separately-designated standing audit committee. The
Audit Committee currently consists of our three independent
directors, Alexandre Zyngier, Michael Graves, and R. David Newton.
Mr. Zyngier is the Chairman of the Audit Committee, and the Board
of Directors has determined that he is an audit committee financial
expert as defined in Item 5(d)(5) of Regulation S-K. The primary
purpose of the Audit Committee is to oversee our accounting and
financial reporting processes and audits of our financial
statements on behalf of the Board of Directors. The Audit Committee
meets privately with our management and with our independent
registered public accounting firm and evaluates the responses by
our management both to the facts presented and to the judgments
made by our outside independent registered public accounting
firm.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The following table provides summary information for the years 2017
and 2016 concerning cash and non-cash compensation paid or accrued
to or on behalf of certain executive officers.
Summary Executive Compensation Table
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
John
A. Brda
|
2017
|
$375,000
|
-
|
-
|
$-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$375,000
|
CEO/Secretary/Director
|
2016
|
$375,000
|
-
|
-
|
$712,500
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$1,087,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger
Wurtele
|
2017
|
$225,000
|
-
|
-
|
$-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$225,000
|
CFO
|
2016
|
$225,000
|
-
|
-
|
$356,250
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$581,250
|
(A)
|
Stock/Option Value as applicable is determined using the Black
Scholes Method.
|
(1)
|
On June 11, 2015, we granted new stock option awards to our
executive officers, as follows: 3,000,000 stock options to John
Brda, President and Chief Executive Officer and 1,500,000 stock
options to Roger Wurtele, Chief Financial Officer. The options were
granted under our 2015 Stock Option Plan which plan was approved by
stockholders on September 9, 2015. The options are subject to a
two-year vesting schedule with one-half vesting September 9, 2015,
one-fourth vesting after one year of the grant date, and the
remaining one-fourth vesting after the second year, provided
however that the options will be subject to earlier vesting under
certain events set forth in the 2015 Stock Option Plan, including
without limitation a change in control.
|
Setting Executive Compensation
We fix executive base compensation at a level we believe enables us
to hire and retain individuals in a competitive environment and to
reward satisfactory individual performance and a satisfactory level
of contribution to our overall business goals. We also take into
account the compensation that is paid by companies that we believe
to be our competitors and by other companies with which we believe
we generally compete for executives.
In establishing compensation packages for executive officers,
numerous factors are considered, including the particular
executive’s experience, expertise, and performance, our
company’s overall performance, and compensation packages
available in the marketplace for similar positions. In arriving at
amounts for each component of compensation, our Compensation
Committee strives to strike an appropriate balance between base
compensation and incentive compensation. The Compensation Committee
also endeavors to properly allocate between cash and non-cash
compensation (including without limitation stock and stock option
awards) and between annual and long-term compensation.
Employment Agreements
On June 16, 2015, we entered into new five-year employment
agreements with each of John Brda, our President and Chief
Executive Officer and Roger Wurtele, our Chief Financial Officer.
Under the new agreements, which replace and supersede their prior
employment agreements, each individual’s salary was increased
by 25%, so that the salaries of Messrs. Brda and Wurtele were
$375,000, and $225,000, respectively, provided these salary
increases will accrue unpaid until such time as management believes
there is adequate cash for such increases. Also under the new
agreements, each individual was eligible for a bonus, at the
Compensation Committee’s discretion, of up to two times his
salary and was eligible for any additional stock options, as deemed
appropriate by the Compensation Committee. Each agreement also
provided that if we (or our successor) terminate the employee upon
the occurrence of a change in control, the employee will be paid in
one lump sum his salary and any bonus or other amounts due through
the end of the term of the agreement. Each employment agreement
also has a covenant not to compete.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
-
continued
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End
The following table details all outstanding equity awards held by
our named executive officers at December 31, 2017:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
Expiration
|
Name
|
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John A. Brda
|
245,000
|
|
-
|
-
|
$2.00
|
9/4/2018
|
|
3,000,000
|
(1)
|
|
-
|
$1.57
|
6/11/2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Wurtele
|
300,000
|
(2)
(3)
|
-
|
-
|
$2.09
|
10/10/2018
|
|
1,500,000
|
(1)
|
-
|
-
|
$1.57
|
6/11/2020
|
(1)
|
The options were awarded on June 11, 2015. The options were granted
under our 2015 Stock Option Plan which plan was approved by
stockholders on September 9, 2015. The options are subject to a
two-year vesting schedule with one-half vesting on September 9,
2015, one-fourth vesting after one year of the grant date, and the
remaining one-fourth vesting after the second year, provided
however that the options will be subject to earlier vesting under
certain events set forth in the 2015 Stock Option Plan, including
without limitation a change in control.
|
(2)
|
Mr. Wurtele gifted these options to Birch Glen Investments Ltd. Mr.
Wurtele and his wife together hold a 98% interest in the general
partner of Birch Glen Investments Ltd.
|
(3)
|
These options were awarded to Mr. Wurtele in October 2013. 100,000
options vested in October 2013 and the remaining 200,000 options
vested on January 2, 2014.
|
Compensation of Directors
We have no standard arrangement pursuant to which directors are
compensated for any services they provide or for committee
participation or special assignments. We anticipate, however,
implementing more standardized director compensation arrangements
in the near future.
Summary Director Compensation Table
Compensation to directors during the year ended December 31, 2017
was as follows:
|
Fees Earned
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
Paid
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
Deferred
|
All
|
|
|
in
|
Stock
|
Option
|
Incentive Plan
|
Compensation
|
Other
|
|
|
Cash
|
Awards
|
Awards
|
Compensation
|
Earnings
|
Compensation
|
Total
|
Name
|
($)
|
($)
|
($)(A)
|
($)
|
($)
|
($)
|
($)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandre Zyngier
|
-
|
$112,500 (1)
|
$110,000
(2)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$185,000
|
R. David Newton
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
(2)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
|
E. Scott Kimbrough
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
(2)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
|
Michael Graves
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
(2)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
$110,000
|
(A)
|
Stock Value as applicable is determined using the Black Scholes
Method.
|
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
-
continued
(1)
|
In October 2016, our Board of Directors formed a special committee
called the “Litigation Committee,” appointed Mr.
Zyngier to that committee, and approved compensating Mr. Zyngier
for his role with the Litigation Committee by paying him up to
$150,000 over four quarters, with the first quarterly payment of
$37,500 being made on October 11, 2016 and $37,500 being payable at
the beginning of each three months thereafter that certain
litigation is not settled or otherwise resolved, up to a maximum
amount of $150,000. Each payment was to either be paid in cash or
common stock at our election. For a stock payment, the amount of
shares of common stock issued would be based on the closing price
of our common stock on the day of the payment. On December 8, 2016,
stockholders approved giving the Company authority to make these
payments in stock. Immediately after the December 8, 2016 meeting
of stockholders, the Board of Directors held a meeting, at which
Mr. Zyngier and the Board discussed placing vesting restrictions on
all the above shares described in this footnote, and accordingly
such shares were not immediately issued. Subsequently in January
2017, the Board and Mr. Zyngier agreed on what the vesting
restrictions would be and we issued him the 136,986 shares in
connection with his directorship and 47,504 shares in lieu of the
cash payment of $37,500 that was payable to Mr. Zyngier on October
11, 2016 in connection with his role on the Litigation Committee.
Additionally on April 26, 2017, 28,626 shares were issued for the
$37,500 payment due 1/11/17 and 23,885 shares were issued for the
payment due 4/11/17. On 7/11/17, 25,000 shares were issued for the
final payment. As of the date of this report, none of these shares
have vested.
|
(2)
On August 17, 2017, this director
was granted 200,000 stock options under the 2015 Stock Option Plan as
director compensation. 100,000 of the stock options vested
immediately, and the remaining 100,000 stock options will vest on
August 17, 2018.
Compensation Policies and Practices as they Relate to Risk
Management
We attempt to make our compensation programs discretionary,
balanced and focused on the long term. We believe goals and
objectives of our compensation programs reflect a balanced mix of
quantitative and qualitative performance measures to avoid
excessive weight on a single performance measure. Our approach to
compensation practices and policies applicable to employees and
consultants is consistent with that followed for its executives.
Based on these factors, we believe that our compensation policies
and practices do not create risks that are reasonably likely to
have a material adverse effect on us.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT
The
following table sets forth information, as of March 15, 2018,
concerning, except as indicated by the footnotes below, (i) each
person whom we know beneficially owns more than 5% of our common
stock, (ii) each of our directors, (iii) each of our named
executive officers, and (iv) all of our directors and executive
officers as a group. The table includes these persons’
beneficial ownership of common stock. Unless otherwise noted below,
the address of each beneficial owner listed in the table is c/o
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc., 5700 W. Plano Parkway, Suite
3600, Plano, Texas 75093. We have determined beneficial ownership
in accordance with the rules of the SEC. Except as indicated by the
footnotes below, we believe, based on the information furnished to
us, that the persons and entities named in the table below have
sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of
common stock that they beneficially own, subject to applicable
community property laws. Applicable percentage ownership is based
on 63,378,033 shares of common stock outstanding at March 15, 2018
(which amount excludes the 262,001 restricted shares of common
stock issued to our director Alexandre Zyngier). In computing the
number of shares of common stock beneficially owned by a person and
the percentage ownership of that person, we deemed outstanding
shares of common stock subject to stock options or warrants held by
that person that are currently exercisable or exercisable within 60
days of March 15, 2018 and shares of common stock issuable upon
conversion of other securities held by that person that are
currently convertible or convertible within 60 days of March 15,
2018. We did not deem these shares outstanding, however, for the
purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person.
Unless otherwise noted, stock options and warrants referenced in
the footnotes below are currently fully vested and exercisable.
Beneficial ownership representing less than 1% is denoted with an
asterisk (*).
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT -
continued
Shares
Beneficially Owned
|
|
|
|
Name
of beneficial owner
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John
A. Brda
|
5,513,322
|
(1)
|
8.28
|
President,
CEO, Secretary and Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory
McCabe
|
13,648,390
|
(2)
|
21.51
|
Director
(Chairman of the Board)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger
N. Wurtele
|
1,810,000
|
(3)
|
2.78
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E.
Scott Kimbrough
|
258,884
|
(4)
|
*
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.
David Newton
|
258,884
|
(5)
|
*
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandre
Zyngier
|
100,000
|
|
*
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
J. Graves
|
125,000
|
(6)
|
*
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All
directors and executive officers as a group (7
persons)
|
21,814,480
|
|
32.10
|
|
|
|
|
Robert
Kenneth Dulin (7)
|
4,351,381
|
(7)
|
6.68
|
|
|
|
|
Willard
G. McAndrew III (8)
|
3,993,046
|
(8)
|
5.94
|
|
(1)
|
Includes 2,268,322 shares of common stock held by the John A. Brda
Trust (the “Trust”). Mr. Brda is the settlor of the
Trust and reserves the right to revoke the Trust without the
consent of another person. Further, he is the trustee of the Trust
and exercises investment control over the securities held by the
Trust. Also includes stock options that are exercisable into
3,245,000 shares of common stock, held individually by Mr.
Brda.
|
|
(2)
|
Includes (a) 10,264,335 shares of common stock held individually by
Mr. McCabe; (b) securities held by G Mc Exploration, LLC
(“GME”), including (i) 797,099 shares of common stock
and (ii) 86,956 shares issuable upon exercise of warrants; and (c)
2,500,000 shares of common stock beneficially owned by
McCabe
Petroleum Corporation (“MPC”). Mr. McCabe may be deemed to hold
beneficial ownership of securities held by GME as a result of his
ownership of 50% of the outstanding membership interests of
GME. Mr. McCabe may be deemed to hold
beneficial ownership of securities held by MPC as a result of his
ownership of 100% of the outstanding shares of capital stock of
MPC.
|
|
(3)
|
Includes 10,000 shares of common stock and stock options that are
exercisable into 1,500,000 shares of common stock held individually
by Mr. Wurtele. Also includes stock options held by Birch Glen
Investments Ltd. that are exercisable into 300,000 shares of common
stock. Mr. Wurtele and his wife together hold a 98% interest in the
general partner of Birch Glen Investments Ltd., and Mr. Wurtele
shares voting and investment authority over the shares held by
Birch Glen Investments Ltd. Additionally, the general partner and
1% owner of WMDM Family, Ltd. (see footnote “(7)”
below) is a limited liability company which is owned by a trust of
which Mr. Wurtele is the trustee. Securities held by WMDM Family,
Ltd. are not included, however, because Mr. Wurtele is not deemed
to have voting or investment authority over the shares held by WMDM
Family, Ltd. Mr. Wurtele disclaims beneficial ownership of shares
held by WMDM Family, Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Includes stock options that are exercisable into 258,884 shares of
common stock held individually by Mr. Kimbrough.
|
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
Includes stock options that are exercisable into 258,884 shares of
common stock held individually by Mr. Newton.
|
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
Includes stock options that are exercisable into 100,000 shares of
common stock held individually by Mr. Graves.
|
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT -
continued
|
(7)
|
Includes (a) securities held individually by Robert Kenneth Dulin,
including (i) 27,000 shares of common stock and (ii) warrants that
are exercisable into 150,000 shares of common stock; (b) 243,360
shares of common stock held in trust for the benefit of immediate
family members of Mr. Dulin; (c) securities held by Sawtooth
Properties, LLLP (“Sawtooth”), including (i) 892,258
shares of common stock and (ii) warrants that are exercisable into
234,745 shares of common stock; (d) securities held by Black Hills
Properties, LLLP (“Black Hills”), including (i) 612,099
shares of common stock, and (ii) warrants that are exercisable into
189,956 shares of common stock; (e) securities held by Pine River
Ranch, LLC (“Pine River”), including (i) 801,939 shares
of common stock and (ii) warrants that are exercisable into 450,024
shares of common stock; and (f) securities held by Pandora Energy,
LP (“Pandora”), including warrants that are exercisable
into 750,000 shares of common stock. Mr. Dulin is trustee/custodian
of each of the trusts and/or accounts referenced in
“(b)” above and has voting and investment authority
over the shares held by them. Mr. Dulin is the Managing Partner of
Sawtooth Properties, LLLP, the Managing Partner of Black Hills, the
Managing Member of Pine River, and the General Partner of Pandora,
and he has voting and investment authority over the shares held by
each entity. Mr. Dulin’s address is 8449 Greenwood Drive,
Niwot, Colorado, 80503. The information herein is based in part on
information provided to us by Mr. Dulin, and accordingly, we are
unable to verify the accuracy this information.
|
|
(8)
|
Includes 95,883 shares of common stock and stock options that are
exercisable into 1,497,163 shares of common stock held individually
by Mr. McAndrew. Also includes securities held by WMDM Family,
Ltd., including warrants that are exercisable into 900,000 shares
of common stock and stock options that are exercisable into
1,500,000 shares of common stock. The general partner and 1% owner
of WMDM Family, Ltd. is a limited liability company of which Mr.
McAndrew is the manager. He has voting and investment authority
over the shares held by WMDM Family, Ltd. Mr. McAndrew’s
address is 6608 Indian Trail, Plano TX 75024. The information
herein is based in part on information provided to us by Mr.
McAndrew, and accordingly, we are unable to verify the accuracy
this information.
|
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED
TRANSACTIONS
On February 15, 2016, we entered into a consulting service
agreement with Green Hill Minerals, LLC. As compensation for the
consulting services provided under the agreement, we agreed to
issue Green Hill Minerals 115,000 shares of common stock at
signing, 115,000 shares of common stock 90 days from signing,
115,000 shares of common stock 180 days from signing and 115,000
shares of common stock 270 days from signing. Also under the
agreement, we issued Green Hill Minerals 1,700,000 four-year
warrants to purchase shares of common stock at an exercise price of
$0.70 per share, vesting as follows: 425,000 warrants at signing,
425,000 warrants 90 days from signing, 425,000 warrants 180 days
from signing and 425,000 warrants 270 days from
signing.
On March 31, 2016, Mr. McCabe made a short term, non-interest
bearing loan to us of $500,000. We repaid the loan in full on April
29, 2016.
Effective April 4, 2016, our subsidiary, Torchlight Energy Inc.,
acquired from McCabe Petroleum Corporation (“MPC”) a
66.66% working interest in approximately 12,000 acres in the
Midland Basin in exchange for 1,500,000 warrants to purchase our
common stock at an exercise price of $1.00 for five years, and a
back-in after payout of a 25% working interest to MPC. Gregory
McCabe is the sole owner of MPC.
On January 30, 2017, we and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Acquisition Corporation, a Texas corporation (“TAC”),
entered into and closed an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization and
Plan of Merger with Line Drive Energy, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company (“Line Drive”), under which
agreements TAC merged with and into Line Drive and the separate
existence of TAC ceased, with Line Drive being the surviving
organization and becoming our wholly-owned subsidiary. Line Drive,
which was wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe, owned certain assets and
securities, including approximately 40.66% of 12,000 gross acres in
the Hazel Project and 521,739 warrants to purchase our common stock
(which warrants had been assigned by Mr. McCabe to Line Drive).
Under the merger transaction, our shares of common stock of TAC
converted into a membership interest of Line Drive, the membership
interest in Line Drive held by Mr. McCabe immediately prior to the
transaction ceased to exist, and we issued Mr. McCabe 3,301,739
restricted shares of common stock as consideration therefor.
Immediately after closing, the 521,739 warrants held by Line Drive
were cancelled, which warrants had an exercise price of $1.40 per
share and an expiration date of June 9, 2020. A Certificate of
Merger for the merger transaction was filed with the Secretary of
State of Texas on January 31, 2017.
Also on January 30, 2017, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Energy, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered
into and closed a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Wolfbone
Investments, LLC, a Texas limited liability company
(“Wolfbone”) which is wholly-owned by Gregory McCabe.
Under the agreement, TEI acquired certain of Wolfbone’s Hazel
Project assets, including its interest in the Flying B Ranch #1
well and the 40 acre unit surrounding the well, for consideration
of $415,000, and additionally, Wolfbone caused to be cancelled a
total of 2,780,000 warrants to purchase our common stock, including
1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum Corporation, an entity
owned by Mr. McCabe, and 1,280,000 warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals, an entity owned by Mr. McCabe’s son, which warrant
cancellations were effected through certain Warrant Cancellation
Agreements. The 1,500,000 warrants held by McCabe Petroleum
Corporation had an exercise price of $1.00 per share and an
expiration date of April 4, 2021. The warrants held by Green Hill
Minerals included 100,000 warrants with an exercise price of $1.73
and an expiration date of September 30, 2018 and 1,180,000 warrants
with an exercise price of $0.70 and an expiration date of February
15, 2020.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
-
continued
On
November 15, 2017, we and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Hudspeth Oil
Corporation, a Texas corporation (“HOC”), entered into
an Assignment of Farmout Agreement with Founders Oil & Gas, LLC
(“Founders”) and Wolfbone Investments, LLC
(“Wolfbone”), along with Pandora Energy, LP as a party
to the agreement for limited purposes. Wolfbone is owned by our
Chairman, Gregory McCabe. Under the agreement, Founders will assign
to HOC and Wolfbone all its right, title and interest in the
remaining leases under the original Farmout Agreement that Founders
entered into with us on September 23, 2015; provided, however, that
Founders will retain an undivided 9.5% of 8/8ths working interest
and 9.5% of 75% of 8/8ths net revenue interest to the remaining
leases, which retained interest will be carried by HOC and Wolfbone
through the next $40,500,000 in total costs. Accordingly, HOC and
Wolfbone will each gain a 20.25% working interest in the remaining
leases, bringing HOC’s total working interest to 67.75%. On
behalf of HOC and Wolfbone, Founders (through its operating
affiliate) will take such action necessary to spud the University
Founders A 25 Well on or before December 1, 2017. After spudding of
the well, Founders’ operating affiliate will remain operator
of that well under the direction of us and Gregory
McCabe.
On December 1, 2017, the transactions contemplated by the Agreement
and Plan of Reorganization that we and our newly formed
wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight Wolfbone Properties, Inc., a
Texas corporation (“TWP”), entered into with McCabe
Petroleum Corporation, a Texas corporation (“MPC”), and
Warwink Properties, LLC, a Texas limited liability company
(“Warwink Properties”) closed. Under the agreement,
which was entered into on November 14, 2017, TWP merged with and
into Warwink Properties and the separate existence of TWP ceased,
with Warwink Properties becoming the surviving organization and our
wholly-owned subsidiary. Warwink Properties was wholly owned by MPC
which is wholly owned by Gregory McCabe, our Chairman. Warwink
Properties owns certain assets, including a 10.71875% working
interest in 640 acres in Winkler County, Texas. At closing of the
merger transaction, our shares of common stock of TWP converted
into a membership interest of Warwink Properties, the membership
interest in Warwink Properties held by MPC ceased to exist, and we
issued MPC 2,500,000 restricted shares of common stock as
consideration. Also on December 1, 2017, MPC closed its transaction
with MECO IV, LLC (“MECO”) for the purchase and sale of
certain assets as contemplated by the Purchase and Sale Agreement
dated November 9, 2017 (the “MECO PSA”), to which we
are not a party. Under the MECO PSA, Warwink Properties received a
carry from MECO (through the tanks) of up to $1,475,000 in the next
well drilled on the Winkler County leases. A Certificate of Merger
for the merger transaction was filed with the Secretary of State of
Texas on December 5, 2017.
Also on December 1, 2017, the transactions contemplated by the
Purchase Agreement that our wholly-owned subsidiary, Torchlight
Energy, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“TEI”), entered
into with MPC closed. Under the Purchase Agreement, which was
entered into on November 14, 2017, TEI acquired beneficial
ownership of certain of MPC’s assets, including acreage and
wellbores located in Ward County, Texas (the “Ward County
Assets”). As consideration under the Purchase Agreement, at
closing TEI issued to MPC an unsecured promissory note in the
principal amount of $3,250,000, payable in monthly installments of
interest only beginning on January 1, 2018, at the rate of 5% per
annum, with the entire principal amount together with all accrued
interest due and payable on December 31, 2020. In connection with
TEI’s acquisition of beneficial ownership in the Ward County
Assets, MPC sold those same assets, on behalf of TEI, to MECO at
closing of the MECO PSA, and accordingly, TEI received $3,250,000
in cash for its beneficial interest in the Ward County Assets.
Additionally, at closing of the MECO PSA, MPC paid TEI a
performance fee of $2,781,500 in cash as compensation for
TEI’s marketing and selling the Winkler County assets of MPC
and the Ward County Assets as a package to MECO.
Director Independence
We currently have four independent directors on our Board,
Alexandre Zyngier, E. Scott Kimbrough, Michael Graves, and R. David
Newton. The definition of “independent” used herein is
based on the independence standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC.
The Board performed a review to determine the independence of these
Directors and made a subjective determination as to each of these
directors that no transactions, relationships, or arrangements
exist that, in the opinion of the Board, would interfere with the
exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the
responsibilities of a director of Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc.
In making these determinations, the Board reviewed information
provided by these directors with regard to each Director’s
business and personal activities as they may relate to us and our
management.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The following table sets forth the fees paid or accrued by us for
the audit and other services provided by our former auditor,
Calvetti Ferguson, during the years ended December 31, 2017 and
2016 and Briggs & Veselka Co. who were engaged in 2017 for our
year end December 31, 2017 audit.
|
|
|
Audit
Fees(1)
|
$196,666
|
$73,968
|
Audit
Related Fees(2)
|
-
|
26,280
|
Tax
Fees(3)
|
65,888
|
22,035
|
All
Other Fees
|
-
|
450
|
|
|
|
Total
Fees
|
$262,554
|
$122,733
|
(1)
|
Audit Fees: This category represents the aggregate fees billed for
professional services rendered by the principal independent
accountant for the audit of our annual financial statements and
review of financial statements included in our Form 10-K and
services that are normally provided by the accountant in connection
with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements for the fiscal
years.
|
(2)
|
Audit Related Fees: This category consists of the aggregate fees
billed for assurance and related services by our independent
consultant that are reasonably related to the performance of the
audit or review of our financial statements and are not reported
under “Audit Fees.”
|
(3)
|
Tax Fees: This category consists of the aggregate fees billed for
professional services rendered by the principal independent
consultant for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax
planning.
|
PART IV
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS
-
continued
101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document
|
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema
|
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase
|
101.DEF
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definitions Linkbase
|
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase
|
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase
|
* Incorporated by reference from our previous filings with the
SEC
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
|
Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John A.
Brda
|
|
|
By: John A. Brda
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
Date:
|
March
16, 2018
|
|
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on
behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates
indicated:
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John A. Brda
|
|
|
|
|
John A. Brda
|
|
Director, Chief Executive Officer, President and
Secretary
|
|
March
16, 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Gregory McCabe
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory McCabe
|
|
Director (Chairman of the Board)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Roger N. Wurtele
|
|
|
|
|
Roger N. Wurtele
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ E. Scott Kimbrough
|
|
|
|
|
E. Scott Kimbrough
|
|
Director
|
|
March
16, 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ R. David Newton
|
|
|
|
|
R. David Newton
|
|
Director
|
|
March
16, 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Alexandre Zyngier
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandre Zyngier
|
|
Director
|
|
March
16, 2018
|
/s/ Michael J. Graves
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
J. Graves
|
|
Director
|
|
March
16, 2018
|