Blog – Full Width

by

The growth of the pipelines in SEE: a political or an economic development?

tapIn the last period, by a rapid glimpse seems that we are in a multiplication of initiatives gas pipeline that advance with chaotic and indefinite roadmap interesting directly the South East Europe (SEE). Than without losing here with reporting, about the long list of the initiate, what is evident for sure is that the SEE is passing in the stage of the most interest region regard the growth of the gas pipeline.

In second to understand the reason is interesting a return to genesis that refer to the initiative of the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC), proposed in its first time, by the European Commission’s Communication “Second Strategic Energy Review – An EU Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan” (COM/2008/781). In regard of particular interest for the last developments, is that in the same document, the Commission proposes also the following among other with the priority regard the North-South Gas and Electricity Interconnections within Central and South-East Europe.

The following with an in-depth retrospect make us to report in particular that the gas market development of the South East region of the Europe was shaped by the Energy Community Treaty (EnCT). In framework of which in 2011, Ministerial Council (MC) invited the Contracting Parties (CPs) to prepare the Energy Community Strategy and the list of Projects of Energy Community Interest (PECI). A Task Force set up see the undertake in a first step the Strategy, prepared and approved by the MC in 2012. As a further step, the project proposals collected by the Energy Community Secretariat (ECS) submitted by 31 December 2012 and endorsed by MC on October 2013. In last, the MC meeting on October 2013 adopted a list of 35 Peci.

Arriving in the nowadays developments concerns, representatives of Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia as well as European Commission Vice-President for Energy Union Maroš Šefčovič and Commissioner for Climate Action & Energy Miguel Arias Cañete have held the first meeting of the Central East South Europe Gas Connectivity (CESEC) High Level Group in Sofia. The objective of the High Level Group was to establish a regional priority infrastructure roadmap and advance its implementation in order to develop missing infrastructure and improve security of gas supplies. The ultimately, objective affirmed is that each Member State of the region should have access to at least three different sources of gas.

The timely implementation of infrastructure is particularly important in view of the vulnerable situation of the Central Eastern Europe and South East Europe region. This was demonstrated most recently by the European Energy Security Strategy and Stress Tests performed in the last year. Security of energy supply as one of the building blocks of the Energy Union project, is one of the priorities for the European Commission.[1]

Than in the last in the framework of expert level analyses – carried out in sub-groups looking at specific infrastructure corridors with the aim of identifying missing links and other barriers hindering effective market integration – has taken place the initiative of the Bulgaria and Greece sent letter to the European Commission, signifying their application for an EU grant worth EUR 220 million for the construction of a gas interconnector linking the two countries (ICGB).

Actually, the budget of the ICGB project company for 2015, amounting only to EUR 10 million, was approved during the meeting of Bulgarian, Greek, Hungarian, Romanian and Slovenian representatives on the future of the Vertical Gas Corridor in Sofia on 22 April 2015. Construction works on the interconnector should start in March 2016 and it is set for completion some time in 2018. The final investment decision is expected to be signed on May 29. And the Bulgaria’s state-run Bulgarian Energy Holding (BEH), which has a 50 percent stake in the ICGB project company, is partnering with the IGI Poseidon consortium consisting of Edison S.p.A (Italy) and the Greek state-owned DEPA.

All here above reported leads by our opinion in two simple conclusions: first, the all ongoing is developing in framework of the completing of the ancient project of the internal energy market made today more than ever as the unique option able to guarantee security of supply for all Member States (MSs). In the second, the all to have such market available, depend mostly by the triggering of the private investment in infrastructure. In addition, what is important for the EU is to make all of this bringing to real gas-to-gas competition to all MSs: then it can be say that the Union have achieved something important.

[1] Joint Press Statement by Ministers and Representatives of Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia and the European Commission on 09 February 2015

By : Dr Lorenc Gordani

by

Challenges to financing renewables projects in the Balkans

Financial-Insight-Qendresa-Rugova1Global investment in renewable power has seen impressive growth, even surpassing anticipations with a total investment of USD 270.2 billion in 2014, 17% higher than 2013 (BNEF, 2015). This surge in investment has become possible as costs for solar panels and wind turbines are rapidly decreasing thereby making renewable technologies more competitive relative to conventional power generation.

Balkan countries, with their vast untapped renewable energy potential, have adopted obligatory binding targets for renewable energy, but have struggled to mobilize capital to fund and bring projects to fruition. It is estimated that EUR 2.3 billion is required to finance regional renewable projects of common regional interest (Energy Community, 2013). Restricted by public budgets, state-owned incumbent utilities are unable to finance such projects on their own balance sheets, thus creating opportunities for private sector independent power producers (IPPs) to bridge the funding gap. However, attracting investors has proven to be rather difficult as national energy markets do not yet provide for stable, transparent regulatory frameworks and a competitive environment for such investments. Moreover, national markets are considered to be small on an individual basis which limits potential for economies of scale.

Balkan countries, with their vast untapped renewable energy potential, have adopted obligatory binding targets for renewable energy, but have struggled to mobilize capital to fund and bring projects to fruition.

Renewable energy projects essentially go through three distinct phases: development, financing and implementation. A combination of both equity and debt is required for renewable projects, with equity sponsors being instrumental in driving projects through the first two phases. As each phase is completed and the project de-risked by the structuring and development work, project values increase and they become more attractive for equity investors and lenders alike (Figure 1).


Figure 1 – Renewable energy projects, implementation phases, value creation and risk profile – Source: Burg Capital analysis

Initial development funding in the Balkans is usually sourced from either local developers or international renewable project developers with a local or regional presence. There has been some progress in project planning activities throughout the region (Phase 1), however challenges remain to structuring complete bankable solutions to attract non-recourse project financing (Phase 2).

Sourcing debt for renewable projects requires use of internationally tested financing structures, such as project finance, which are designed to suit the long term nature of infrastructure projects in heavily regulated industries, such as energy. In such structures, project debt (typically covering up to 70% of total cost) is issued entirely on the basis of the project as a stand-alone activity with repayment entirely dependent on the future cash flow of the project and with limited or no recourse to the ultimate project owners.

Permitting-related risks are especially important to equity investors who require clarity to be able to commit to developing renewable projects in any particular market.

Non-recourse debt relies on  a robust contractual structure allowing for major risks (regulatory, offtake,  operational, construction, fuel supply etc.) to be mitigated often by a pass-through to third parties via project agreements – power purchasing (PPA), engineering, procurement and construction (EPC), operation and maintenance (O&A), leasehold agreement etc., so as to give the necessary comfort to the investors and financiers that the project is indeed viable and bankable.

Following are some of the main obstacles holding back renewable developments in the Balkan region:

Limited institutional capacities and project development know-how

Commercial structuring and financing of energy projects (Phase 2) is a lengthy and detailed process as it requires expertise in a number of disciplines (technical, legal, financial and environmental). This is particularly important for the renewable industry given its dynamics in terms of capital cost reductions, financial innovation, technological advancements in efficiency, system integration and storage, among other factors.

Expertise is often missing, both on institutional and project development levels, which hinders implementation of targets.

Such expertise is often missing in the Balkans, both on institutional and project development levels, which hinders implementation of renewable targets in terms of speed and scale. This is particularly important given the recent trend of incumbent utilities eyeing expansion in domestic renewable sector (Macedonia, BiH), which may further delay implementation (given financial limitations on public companies) and also prevent transfer of know-how from other more developed markets for renewable energy.

Cumbersome permitting processes

The permitting process in the Balkan region is considered to be cumbersome and opaque often involving multiple authorities. Despite existing renewable legislation, secondary legislation, such as one pertaining to grid access and connection costs, is often absent and need to be addressed in order for laws to become operational. This creates an information gap as to the necessary steps required to bring projects to a ready-to-build status. Furthermore, permitting and licensing procedures do not always distinguish between small scale and utility-size projects, subjecting small developers (such as rooftop solar developers) to the lengthy and costly administrative procedures.

Permitting-related risks are especially important to equity investors who require clarity to be able to commit to developing renewable projects in any particular market. It is usually such regulatory obstacles that discourage investors from investing in the region and, conversely, to favor others in the global competition to attract capital. It is therefore important that administrative and regulatory processes are streamlined and properly communicated to stakeholders.

Reliability and stability of regulatory support schemes

Renewable technologies continue to be dependent on support schemes to ensure long-term cash flow stability in terms of preferential pricing for renewables and guaranteed priority offtake enforced through power purchase agreements (PPAs). Support schemes should ensure a stable, efficient and balanced support for renewables (given the decreasing cost of solar panels and wind turbines) with limited impediments on public spending. Any sudden material policy change should be avoided as it can be detrimental to further industry development. Recent reverse policy actions for renewables in Romania, Bulgaria have made investors and financiers wary of such change-in-law risks, with some investors being forced to cancel uneconomic projects in the absence of such support.

Secondary legislation, such as one pertaining to grid access and connection costs, is often absent.

Priority access and mandatory power offtake is also of significant importance as it manages volume risk. Mandatory offtake should be guaranteed for the entire project lifetime or alternatively projects should be allowed to access wholesale power markets or to enter bilateral agreements with third parties. Such obstacles are currently being faced by small-scale solar projects (less than 1 MW) in Turkey, for example, as the mandatory offtake risk post feed-in-tariff (FIT) period is not explicitly guaranteed in the regulations.

Limited creditworthy parties for Offtake, EPC, O&M, Fuel Supply

As previously mentioned, project finance structures require robust project agreements to allow for risks to be transferred to those parties that are best able to manage them. However, it is challenging to conclude bankable agreements with strong, creditworthy counterparties able to undertake and deliver on those agreements. Such limitations are typical in all key areas i. e. power offtake, EPC companies, O&M providers and fuel suppliers (for biomass and biogas plants).  Offtake challenges, for example, have been experienced in Albania as the national power company KESH faced difficulties in meeting its obligations to renewable generators.

Limitations on the availability of creditworthy counterparties make it difficult to anticipate and guarantee long-term stability in terms of price and quality. The long-term aspect is particularly important as investors and lenders need to rely on the fact that such parties will be in the market for the life of the project.

Despite challenges, progress is underway

The Balkan region has made significant strides forward in incorporating renewable targets in respective national strategies and implementing a number of initial renewable projects. Despite limitations on funding sources, multilateral financing institutions (MFIs) like the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development provide lending facilities for renewable financing as well as technical assistance programs designed to assist developers in achieving bankable projects and to serve as a catalyst for private sector financing. Furthermore, the Energy Community Secretariat is making significant efforts to encourage and foster inter-regional cooperation and coordination in terms of market design and policymaking for a successful promotion of renewable projects, and policymakers appear to be increasingly oriented towards improving the local regulatory environment to attract foreign direct investment. Based on these trends, all indications are that the current challenges will be overcome, allowing the region to unlock its significant potential for renewable energy.

Burg Capital is corporate & project finance advisory practice focused on the energy sector with comprehensive experience across all generating technologies.

References:

  • BNE Intellinews, Winds change for renewable energy in Southeast Europe, April, 2015
  • EBRD, ’What is missing to finance renewable energy projects?’, June, 2014
  • Energy Community Secretariat, Annual Implementation Report, 2013
  • Global trends in Renewable Energy Sources, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2015
  • Irena – Executive Strategy Workshop on Renewable Energy in South East Europe. Background Paper Topic B, Practical Policies for Financing Renewable Energy Action Plan Investments

By Qendresa Rugova, Burg Capital GmBH, Vienna
esa.rugova@burgcapital.com

Source : http://balkangreenenergynews.com

by

Building Together Italia ed Albania Seminari e B2B – May 13/14

ICE-Building-Together-Invito-elettronico1

ICE – Agjencia për promovimin dhe ndërkombëtarizimin e sipërmarjeve italiane, seksion i Ambasadës Italiane, në bashkëpunim me ANCE (Shoqata Italiane e Ndërtuesve) dhe Ambasadën Italiane, organizon në Tiranë takime biznesi b2b në datën 14 Maj 2015, Hotel Rogner – Salla Apollonia, nga ora 14:30 në 19:00.

Do të jenë të pranishme kompani italiane në sektorët:

  • Ndërtim dhe Infrastrukturë
  • Energji (prodhim, menaxhim dhe ndërtim)
  • Mjedis (projektim, prodhim, ndërtim, shërbime)

Ju ftojmë të merrni pjesë dhe të prenotoni axhendën tuaj të takimeve të biznesit b2b nëpërmjet konsultimit të katalogut.
Për një organizim sa më të mirë të axhendës së takimeve, jeni të lutur të regjistroheni brenda datës 9 maj 2015.
Ju mirëpresim!

Gabriella Lombardi
Drejtor

http://www.buildingtogethertirana.it/

Lista e shoqërive pjesëmarrëse

1 – 2° Piano Progettisti Associati
2- 3ti Progetti Spa
3- A.E.T. Srl
4- Abils Consorzio Stabile
5- Acmei Sud Spa
6- Acri Srl
7- Airone Srl
8- Allodi Srl
9- Ance Associazione Nazionale Costruttori Edili
10- Ance Frosinone
11- Ance Livorno
12- Ance Ragusa
13- Ance Siena, Sezione Costruttori Edili Ed Affini Di Confindustria Toscana Sud
14- Aodisegni Sas
15- Architetto Massimo Accoto
16- Asacert Srl
17- Asset G.E.I.E.
18- Atena Srl
19- Bam! Studio
20- Bautech Srl
21- Berna Costruzioni Srl
22- Blc Sas
23- Btp Europroject & Consulting Srl
24- C. G. Costruzioni Srl
25- C.T.E. S.P.A (Consorzio Cons.Al.T.)
26- Caec Scarl
27- Celi Energia Srl
28- Condor Spa
29- Cosedil Spa
30- Costruzioni Linee Ferroviarie Spa43
31- Crivelli Progetti Srl
32- D.P. Costruzioni Sas Di Monia Paglia
33- De.Pa. S.R.L.S.
34- Debar –Sedir-Guerrato
35- Ditta Ind. Guerrera Enrico
36- Diva Eris – International Marketing Consultants, S.A.S.
37- Ecoimpianti Sud Srl
38- Edil Ma.Ca Srl
39- Edil Man Srl
40- Edil Pi.Ma. Srl
41- Edil Toscoumbra Srl
42- Edil.Cos Srl
43- Ej Italia Srl
44- Ep&S
45- Erre.Vi.A. Ricerca Viabilita’ Ambiente Srl
46- European Engineering Consorzio Stabile Di Ingegneria
47- Faresin Building Spa
48- Fiel Spa
49- Frangerini Impresa Srl
50- Gentile Costruzioni Srl
51- Ggp – Gestione Grandi Progetti Rete D’imprese
52- Global Service Italia Srl
53- Gruppo Cesim
54- Gruppo Iren
55- Guardo & Lo Nero Snc
56- Hauraton Italia Srl
57- Hesc Servizi Per Il Territorio
58- I.Ge.Cos. Imresa Gestione Costruzioni
59- Ilc Srl
60- Impresa Benito Stirpe Costruzioni Generali Spa
61- Impresa Chiantini Srl
62- Impresa Di Costruzioni “Patrizi Cesare Franco”
63- Impresa Luigi Notari Spa
64- Impresa Picciolini Febo Srl
65- Impresa Spa – Interchimica Srl
66- Imresa Pizzarotti & C. Spa
67- In.Tec Srl
68- Inc Hotel & Restaurants
69- Injectosond Italia Srl
70- Intermin Srl
71- Isme Di Bramanti Francesco Srl
72- Isomec Srl
73- Ital System Spa
74- Italcostruzioni Srl
75- Itl Italconsult Costruzioni Srl
76- Lacasa Srl
77- Lauria Impianti
78- Ledear Costruzioni Srl – Sinatra Group
79- Main Management & Ingegneria Spa
80- Manifattura Filippo Russo
81- Massaro Costruzioni Srl
82- Mattia Parmiggiani Architects
83- Micos Srl
84- Mke Srl
85- Monforte Srl
86- Nicoli’ Srl
87- Novaco Costruzioni
88- Novus Srl
89- Nuove Energie
90- Oice – Associazione Confindustria
91- Piano Strada Srl
92- Pietro De Pascalis Srl
93- Preve Costruzioni Spa
94- Re.Com. Srl
95- Re.S.T.Ing
96- Redaelli Costruzioni Spa
97- Rigenera Sud Snc
98- Rizzo Costruzioni 1962 Srl
99- S.A.M. Engineering Spa
100- S.A.M. Spa
101- S.A.T.P.I. Consulting Engineers Srl
102- Saciarkeo – Servizi Archeologici Italia – Srl
103- Salc Spa
104- Sea Spa
105- Setten Genesio Spa
106- Siag Srl
107- Sintecnica Srl
108- Sintel Engineering Srl
109- Sisco Ingegneria Srl
110- Stagi Srl
111- Structura Ingegneria Srl
112- Studio Pirovano
113- T.H.E.Ma Srl
114- Tanzini Quintilio & Figlio S.A.S.
115- Tei Srl
116- Tuelo’s Consulting
117- Unolab Srl
118- Vds Consorzio
119- Welldom Srl

by

Iran to present plan to Switzerland for Europe gas exports

zwisIran’s media said on Sunday the country is reviving a plan to pipe natural gas to Switzerland and thereon across Europe.   

A package of proposals over the project will be presented to a high-profile Swiss trade delegation that will arrive in Tehran on Sunday, Fars news agency reported. 

“Iran’s package of proposals focuses on the Swiss investment in the project to pipe gas to Switzerland,” an unidentified official has told Fars.

The official added that “the grounds appear to be ready” at the current juncture for signing a deal between Tehran and Bern over the proposed scheme. 

“Iran negotiated with a Swiss team [over the project] last year. They welcomed the idea to import gas from Iran because they believe they cannot put all their eggs in Russia’s basket when it comes to satisfying their domestic energy needs.”   

The Swiss energy group EGL announced in 2007 that it had completed a 25-year deal with Iran to deliver 5.5 billion cubic meters of gas per year to Europe. However, the scheme was abandoned due to US sanctions against Iran. 

It now appears, through the Fars report, that Turkey has also been instrumental in the failure of the scheme.

“Based on the deal with EGL, Iran’s natural gas was envisaged to be piped to Switzerland through Turkey. However, the plan remained incomplete after Ankara started to dig in its heels to have a share from the transit of Iran’s gas,” the report added.   

Accordingly, it said, officials at Iran’s Ministry of Petroleum plan to encourage Switzerland to make a direct investment in the project without involving any third-party country. 

The deal with EGL, also known as Elektrizitaetsgesellschaft Laufenburg, would take Iran’s gas to Greece and Albania through Turkey. It would thereon flow to Italy through a pipeline under the Adriatic Sea before reaching Switzerland.

A parallel plan to export Iranian gas to Europe – again through Turkey – was being pursued by a consortium led by Austria’s OMV. However, Iran was sidelined from the project – named Nabucco – as a supplier country in 2008 due to a series of complications that emerged – the most important of which were US sanctions against Iran.   

by

Missionaries Help Flood Victims in Ghana

Proin eget tortor risus. Curabitur arcu erat, accumsan id imperdiet et, porttitor at sem. Sed porttitor lectus nibh. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec velit neque, auctor sit amet aliquam vel, ullamcorper sit amet ligula. Donec rutrum congue leo eget malesuada. Nulla quis lorem ut libero malesuada feugiat. Curabitur non nulla sit amet nisl tempus convallis quis ac lectus. Donec sollicitudin molestie malesuada. Donec rutrum congue leo eget malesuada. Donec sollicitudin molestie malesuada.

Nulla quis lorem ut libero malesuada feugiat. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Donec velit neque, auctor sit amet aliquam vel, ullamcorper sit amet ligula. Curabitur non nulla sit amet nisl tempus convallis quis ac lectus. Vivamus suscipit tortor eget felis porttitor volutpat. Curabitur non nulla sit amet nisl tempus convallis quis ac lectus. Nulla porttitor accumsan tincidunt. Curabitur aliquet quam id dui posuere blandit. Donec rutrum congue leo eget malesuada. Quisque velit nisi, pretium ut lacinia in, elementum id enim. Vestibulum ac diam sit amet quam vehicula elementum sed sit amet dui.

Curabitur non nulla sit amet nisl tempus convallis quis ac lectus. Mauris blandit aliquet elit, eget tincidunt nibh pulvinar a. Quisque velit nisi, pretium ut lacinia in, elementum id enim. Pellentesque in ipsum id orci porta dapibus. Vestibulum ac diam sit amet quam vehicula elementum sed sit amet dui. Vivamus suscipit tortor eget felis porttitor volutpat. Sed porttitor lectus nibh. Nulla quis lorem ut libero malesuada feugiat. Curabitur aliquet quam id dui posuere blandit. Nulla porttitor accumsan tincidunt.

by

Bankers Petroleum – An Overlooked Gem In An Otherwise Floundering Industry

Summary

Bankers is extracting crude from continental Europe’s largest onshore oilfield; Patos-Marinza in Albania.

Growing production with the move from old, reactivated, vertical wells to efficient, horizontal wells.

Thriving in the recent crude price slump due to improving efficiencies, netbacks, and market price of crude extracted.

Target price of $4.50 based on DCF & Comps.

 

Analyst: Keegan Taberner

Business Summary

Bankers Petroleum (OTCPK:BNKJF) is a heavy oil producer based in Calgary, AB, with all extraction operations in south-western Albania. Bankers began exploration and operation in Albania in 2004 to revive the then defunct Patos-Marinza oilfield. The Patos-Marinza field is the largest onshore oil field in continental Europe. Bankers is Albania’s largest oil producer and foreign investor.

What do they do?

Bankers Petroleum controls two oilfields and an oil and gas exploration holding in Albania. Using a combination of pre-existing, low-cost, vertical wells and new horizontal wells, Bankers has been able to effectively reactivate continental Europe’s largest oilfield; the once defunct Patos-Marinza oilfield (191 million barrels proven plus probable).

Why does the opportunity exist?

Bankers Petroleum has been a seemingly undervalued company for a number of years. The market discredited the young and risky company after an inability to meet overenthusiastic early predictions of 20,000 barrels of oil per day in 2011 due to liner issues on a number of old Albpetrol wells it restarted. Since this hiccup, Bankers has had large capital expenditures and has seen significant increases in production growth. Additionally, the oil and gas market has seen a recent jump in volatility, a significant drop in Brent crude oil prices, and oil and gas stock prices (including Bankers Petroleum) have plummeted. With an expected rise in Brent crude prices during coming months, today represents an extraordinary time to invest in an undervalued stock in an undervalued market.

What’s changed?

Bankers is growing their production significantly with the move from vertical wells to horizontal wells. The new wells are much more efficient, and are able to achieve higher yields than the old, reactivated, Albpetrol wells. Bankers is also currently exploring the option of hydraulic fracturing through water and polymer injection to further improve recovery rates.

As the company becomes more efficient, netback per barrel (revenues from oil sales, less all costs associated with getting the oil to market) is also increasing significantly.

Continued increases in efficiency will allow Bankers Petroleum to survive during periods of extremely volatile and low Brent prices; and flourish in the coming months as Brent prices rise to an estimated $70 per barrel (as estimated by Bankers Petroleum in 2015 capital budget).

Valuation Summary

Our $4.50 target price for Bankers Petroleum is based on our DCF (discounted cash flow) valuation of $3.98, which uses historical trends, and a $70 per barrel Brent crude price going forwards. These cash flows are then discounted back to present day using a calculated WACC of 10.85%; this is similar to the oil and gas industry standard discount rate of 10%.

In addition to the DCF valuation, we also used a comparable valuation. In the comparable valuation, we compared Bankers with four oil and gas companies with similar market capitalization using three multiples: price to earnings ratio, enterprise value to proven plus probable reserves, and enterprise value to barrels of oil equivalent per day. We found that Bankers was being valued at approximately half of the mean. Were Bankers to trade at the level of its peers, it would imply a $5.50 valuation.

Our target price of $4.50 is the mean of these two valuations ($4.74) rounded down.

Business Description

Bankers Petroleum is a Calgary, Alberta, based oil production company with all extraction operations taking place in south-western Albania.

In Albania, Bankers operates and has the rights to develop the Patos-Marinza heavy oilfield under a contract established in 2004 from Albpetrol: Albania’s state oil company. The contract initially awarded exploration rights, then control of part of the oilfield, and finally, control of the entire oilfield in 2011. The Patos-Marinza oilfield is the largest onshore oilfield in continental Europe, holding approximately 5.1 billion barrels of oil initially in place, and 191 million barrels proven plus probable.

Additionally, through the indirect ownership of all common shares of Sherwood International Petroleum, Bankers holds a 100% interest in the Kuçova oilfield located in Albania, providing it with the right to explore and redevelop the area. Bankers initially acquired 50% of Sherwood’s shares in January 2008, and after an evaluation of the oilfield, acquired the remaining 50%. The Kuçova oilfield has approximately 297 million barrels of oil initially in place and 12 million barrels proven plus probable.

In December 2009, Bankers agreed to a contract with the National Agency of Natural Resources regarding future exploration and development of a 740 square kilometer area located directly west of the Patos-Marinza oilfield known as Block “F”. This area omits three gas fields currently operated by Albpetrol within the boundary of Block “F”.

Bankers Petroleum has significant control over Albania’s oil and gas sector. The company is Albania’s largest oil and gas company, and largest foreign investor. At the end of 2013, Bankers employed 522 people in Albania.

Industry Overview

Albania’s energy industry is relatively small when compared against giants such as Russia, Saudi Arabia, or the United States, but Bankers control of Albania’s market is a highly strategic move that allows Bankers to command lower prices for consumables, and influence infrastructure development in the nation.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2013, Albanian crude production was 17.01 million barrels, and Bankers produced 6.63 million barrels of that total. This represents 39% of the total Albanian crude production; a significant market share that has only been bolstered by the acquisition of Sherwood International Petroleum, and an attempted privatization of Albpetrol by Bankers. This behaviour shows that Bankers is certainly interested in becoming a consolidating force and growing its share of the Albanian crude market.

As Albania is not a member of the European Union, the country sets its own environment and commodity regulations. Currently, regulation is remarkably lenient to encourage foreign investment. However, be advised that this leniency is at risk of Albania joining the European Union and adopting much stricter regulation.

Business History

In June 2004, Bankers acquired an interest in the Patos-Marinza heavy oilfield in Albania.

The Patos-Marinza License and Petroleum Agreements provided 24 months to evaluate the Patos-Marinza field and propose a plan of development to Albpetrol and the Albanian National Agency of Natural Resources.

Bankers completed the evaluation phase of the field in December 2005, and submitted a proposal of development. Albpetrol and the National Agency of Natural Resources approved the proposal of development in March 2006.

These approvals allowed Bankers to take over the existing wells in the field within the development area and sell oil for a period of 25 years with options to extend for further five-year increments, subject to approvals.

Additional proposals were submitted in March 2008, and December 2008 to provide supplementary detail for the infill vertical and horizontal drilling, water and polymer injection, and thermal (steam) programs that were planned. The amendments were approved in December, 2008.

During 2008, Bankers acquired a 100% interest in Sherwood International Petroleum, which holds the rights to the Kuçova oilfield in Albania that has approximately 297 million barrels oil initially in place, and 12 million proven plus probable. Bankers now operates the Kuçova oilfield. The Kuçova Petroleum Agreement became operational in September 2007 and has a 25-year development term after the evaluation phase, with options to extend for further five-year increments.

During 2010, Bankers completed negotiation of the Block “F” Production Sharing Agreement. Block “F” is located nearby the Patos-Marinza oilfield, and covers an area of approximately 740 square kilometers. The area contains several areas defined by natural structural rock anomalies prospective for oil and natural gas.

In March, 2011, Bankers reached an agreement with Albpetrol to take control of all remaining Albpetrol wells in the area that is already controlled, and expand the contract area to include all of the Patos-Marinza oilfield.

In September, 2012, Bankers announced its participation in a proposition for the privatization of Albpetrol. Bankers’ bid was a combination of cash and future programs funding social programs and the remediation of inherited environmental issues.

While the bid was ultimately unsuccessful, the winning bid enhances Bankers oilfields’ valuation and demonstrates Bankers commitment to expand its business activities in Albania.

Patos-Marinza Oilfield History

The Patos-Marinza oilfield is the largest on-shore oil field in Europe, the proven plus probable reserves are approximately 191 million barrels. The oilfield was discovered in 1928, and production by state-run Albpetrol began shortly after, in 1930. Albpetrol was in control of the Patos-Marinza oilfield for the entire period spanning 1928 to 2004, before Bankers took control.

However, the field has not been producing to capacity the entire time. Initially, World War II led to a decline in output. Consequently, the 1948 production was just 1.37 million barrels per year. Maximum production was achieved in 1974 with 17.38 million barrels per year. Production gradually began to decline as instability plagued the country. In 1989, total annual production was 7.9 million barrels per year and in March 1994 it was just 3.75 million.

In 1994, Anglo-Albanian Petroleum Ltd. a joint venture of Albpetrol and Premier Oil Plc. was formed as a new company and operated a small portion of the field with just 20 wells until 2004

Capital Structure

Receivables

At December 31, 2014, total receivables consisted of $81 million. $48 million from Albanian petroleum refineries, $30 million for Albanian VAT, and $3 million for miscellaneous in Canada.

Prepaid Expenses

Of the total deposits and prepaid expenses of $45 million, $35 million was paid to the Albanian court as deposits for procedure purposes on a number of legal cases. The recoverability of these amounts is dependent on the outcome of these cases. As of December 31, 2013, these amounts were considered recoverable. The company expects to collect the full amount of deposits paid to the Albanian court and has classified the full amount as current.

Credit Facilities

Bankers has credit facilities totaling $223 million, of which $99 million was being used at fiscal year 2014 end. The facilities consist of a $20 million operating loan from Raiffeisen Bank, a $3 million environmental term loan, and $200 million in revolving loans, equally funded by the International Finance Corporation and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Bankers approach to managing liquidity is to ensure a balance between capital expenditure requirements and funds generated from operations, available credit facilities and working capital.

Capital Expenditures

Bankers’ capital expenditure budget of $313 million for 2014 was funded by a mix of cash flows, existing credit lines and existing cash. The budget focused on continuing to increase production in Patos-Marinza, with exploration of profitability of Kuçova, and mapping and testing of Block “F” to determine if reserves of oil or natural gas exist.

Major capital outlays included the continued reactivation program of old wells, the acquisition of 6 drilling platforms, and the conversion of 14 existing wells for water and polymer injection.

Bankers typical horizontal well costs approximately $1.2 million (down from $1.3 million in 2012) and produces about 150,000 barrels. With a 50% drop in initial production over the following 12-18 months the company recovers its capital cost of a well on average in about 10 months during which some 28,000 barrels of oil are produced. This leaves the well with an additional 128,000 barrels of reserves to be produced over another ten years with annual declines of 15%.

Additional expenditures include 3D seismic graphing of rock formations in Block “F” and horizontal test wells in Kuçova.

Expanding Margins

As Bankers production continues to grow rapidly, management is seeking methods to reduce costs and increase netback on a low price Brent. This will be achieved through a number of controllable costs, which include diluent costs, in-field transportation costs, cost of energy to operate wells, and well servicing costs.

Diluent costs

Bankers uses diluent extensively throughout the Albanian operations. Beyond the most common use, diluting the thick crude before being brought to market, it is also used to help break out water content at smaller and older well operations, as well as at Bankers central treating facility, and is used to flush out wells clogged with sand and to reduce the viscosity of well contents to lower pump labouring.

The Patos-Marinza oilfield has traditionally produced very thick, viscous oil from the older vertical wells. Before this oil can be brought to market, it must be diluted to become salable. Unfortunately for Bankers, the process of dilution is expensive, and accounted for $7.12 per barrel of oil in 2013.

Bankers is currently making improvements regarding the consumption of diluent, and the cost of diluent. Bankers is experimenting with the ratio of produced oil to diluent for flushing of wells; hoping to find a higher ratio to reduce the amount of diluent required per barrel. Similarly, Bankers is drilling in new zones with horizontal wells that are producing oil with lower viscosity. This is vital to a reduction in quantity of diluent consumed. Finally, Bankers has negotiated a contract with a new chemical supplier at a reduced price.

Future initiatives include optimizing treating chemicals to reduce water content, and continued exploration for lower viscosity oil through the expanded horizontal well drilling program.

Energy Consumption

Diesel generators power the majority of Bankers operations due to remote locations, and lack of local power infrastructure. In the past, all of Bankers single wells and wells on a pad were powered by diesel generators. Energy accounted for $3.13 per barrel in 2013; a significant improvement in the consumption of energy, or an improvement in the cost of the energy will generate in significant savings for Bankers.

Energy costs vary widely depending on the power type for the wells. Single diesel wells currently cost approximately $220 a day to operate, electric wells cost $70, and natural gas wells cost $10. A pilot project has been started with the intention of testing the viability of natural gas and electric wells. The cost to convert from diesel to electric is $15K, and to natural gas costs $20K. Current well drives consist of 61% diesel, 32% natural gas, and 7% electric.

Current pad setups include many diesel generators, with many fuel tanks, and many heaters to keep the fuel liquid in low temperatures. This set-up is not very efficient, and Bankers is improving by consolidating fuel tanks and heaters, and trapping vented combustible gas produced from heating the fuel.

Future initiatives are focused on the expansion of current improvements. Bankers hopes to increase the number of natural gas, and electric wells. In addition, Bankers hopes to have their operational field electrified to further reduce costs.

Finally, Bankers is exploring the option of capturing gas from produced oil to power the field. This gas is expected to power 70 wells at current output.

Well Servicing

Servicing of Bankers large inventory of numerous types of wells is a costly operation. Servicing accounted for $4.11 per barrel in 2013. In the past, Bankers pumps were a “one size fits all” design that was a high efficiency, tight running pump that coped poorly with the heavy Albanian crude. Generic repair programs were implemented, and production lost as a result was minimal.

Currently, Bankers is running a low efficiency pump that handles the thick crude much better. Future initiatives include fitting a specialized pump to each well to further improve longevity and efficiency. Additionally, Bankers is developing optimizing the metallurgy of its rods and tubing as well as implementing a chemical coating program to reduce corrosion.

In-Field Transportation

As Bankers continues to scale from a small operation with a handful of single wells, to a large operation with hundreds of wells and a half-a-dozen pads, transportation of oil, water, diesel and other commodities within the field is an important infrastructure to keep scaled and efficient. In-field transportation accounted for $2.41 per barrel in 2013.

Previously, single wells required trucking of oil, water, diesel and emulsion to and from individual wells to treating facilities.

Now, Bankers is focusing on pad site optimization. A portion of the field has been tied in with flow lines (small pipelines). Focus is currently on development surrounding high volume routes near major treating facilities and on setting up a header system as multi-well pads to allow easy connection to the flow line system. Finally, despite a desire to move away from trucking, it still exists in some extent. The current goal is to optimize in-field trucking system within the field to reduce number of truck movements.

Future initiatives consist of a single goal: significant expansion of the flow line system between well pads and treating facilities.

During the period from 2005 – 2014 netback increased from $6.44, to $45.36. Over the same period, barrels of oil per day output increased from 1,668 to 20,630 (as is shown below). However, we can see that these increases have a positive correlation with average Brent prices and average realized Brent prices.

During this period we see average Brent prices rose from $55.19, to $98.95 and average realized price rises from $22.52, to $77.26. This suggests that Bankers has spent much of its capital expenditures improving the quality of oil it brings to market, which increases the average realized price. It also suggests that Bankers has not done much to significantly reduce costs, as the rise in netback is mostly associated with the rise in realized Brent price.

Going forwards we can expect to see a large effort for reductions in cost of bringing the oil to market as the company contends with low Brent prices to maintain a reasonable netback.

WestPeak-Research-Association_origin

Revenue Model

Bankers revenue is directly associated with Brent crude prices, production levels, and costs. Bankers significantly increased its oil revenue and net income in 2013. This was primarily achieved due to continued success in the horizontal drilling program. Note this was less significant in 2014 to due lower Brent prices.

 bankers graph2

In 2014 revenue from oil and gas sales was $583 million which was an increase of 3% on 2013. In 2013, revenue from oil and gas sales increased by 31% to $566 million, up from $432 million in 2012.

Part of this revenue increase in 2013 can be attributed to an increase in the average realized price of Bankers’ oil, which climbed to 79% of average Brent, up from 71% of average Brent in 2012 because of Bankers’ new focus on higher quality, lower viscosity oil. In addition, Banker’s has continued to increase production, with 2014 production of 20,690 boe/day, compared to 18,169 boe/day, and 15,020 boe/day in 2013 and 2012, respectively. This represents production growth of over 20% year over year.

During Bankers early years, focus was on increasing growth and quality of oil being extracted. Going forwards, we expect to see a continued focus on increasing growth and quality, with an additional focus on decreasing costs due to a lower Brent price.

Brent Crude Pricing

Bankers preference for Brent crude stems from the fact that it is a better indicator of global oil prices. Brent crude draws its oil from more than a dozen oil fields located in the North Sea. Although most Brent is destined for European markets, it is used as a price benchmark for other grades.

Bankers has forecasted Brent oil prices to average $70 per barrel in 2015. We see this as a valid price and have incorporated it into our predictions.

Bankers is currently commanding an average price per barrel that represents approximately 78% of Brent oil price, due to the heavy nature of the oil. During 2014 Bankers achieved a netback of $45.36, with costs of $31.90 on a $98.95 Brent. This shows that even at $70 per barrel, netback will be $22.70: a positive net income.

Royalty Structure

The terms of the Petroleum Agreement include a 1% gross overriding royalty payable to Albpetrol which increases to 3% (based on an incremental sliding scale) after payout of funds by Bankers.

In addition, Bankers pays a royalty to Albpetrol for the share of pre-existing or base production from the Albpetrol wells taken over by Bankers. This royalty is calculated on a per well basis using 70% of the average production for the preceding six months declining at 15% per year. For the original 28 oil wells taken-over in July 2004, a fixed pre-existing production rate was applied and is declined at 10% per year; 20 of the 28 wells have no pre-existing production liability as they were newly drilled wells by the previous operator, Anglo-Albanian Petroleum.

In 2008, a new royalty tax of 10% was implemented on sales volumes payable directly to the Government of Albania. The tax is applied to gross sales amounts net of pre-existing production royalties in a fashion similar to the share of production royalty payable to Albpetrol.

Overall royalties for the 2013 fiscal year represented 17% of oil revenue, down from 18% the year before; Bankers expects this to continue decreasing to 14% over the next 5 years as pre-existing well production drops.

NI51-101 Summary

bankers data

 

Patos-Marinza

The proven and probable undeveloped reserves are being put on stream by a program of 203 attempted vertical well reactivations, with an average success rate of 65%, resulting in 132 successful reactivations.

The success rate for any given reactivation attempt is uncertain, therefore has been treated probabilistically. Historically, the average success rate is estimated at 65%, which is carried forward in future well reactivation development forecasts.

In addition to vertical reactivations, the program consists of 995 horizontal wells. For the first four years, this program includes successful vertical well reactivations numbering 11 in 2014, 14 in 2015, 16 in 2016 and 17 in 2017. The horizontal well program is comprised of 139 wells in 2014, 143 wells in 2015, 155 wells in 2016 and 160 wells in 2017 (see graph below).

The development programs are scheduled to maximize and maintain the capacity of production facilities for as long as is feasible.

 bankers fical year

 

Kuçova

The Kuçova oilfield was discovered in 1928 and was developed with the drilling of 1,722 wells in 5 major crude oil pools (Kozare, Gege, Ferme, Arreza, and Kucova Sector 1). As of the end of fiscal year 2013, approximately 357 wells were producing on primary production at approximately 170 barrels of oil per day from the four main pools that Sherwood is planning development on (Kozare, Gege, Ferme, and Arreza).

The proven plus probable reserves are currently estimated at 12 million barrels of oil. The future redevelopment forecast for the field involves the implementation of secondary recovery schemes (water flooding) to improve recovery. All future reserves recovery assigned to Bankers, proven undeveloped and probable, is based upon the successful implementation of the secondary recovery projects. Production forecasts are based on performance of similar type reservoirs under secondary recovery processes located in Western Canada. Initial fieldwork was commenced in 2011 and production was commenced in 2012.

Investment Risk

Operations in Albania

Currently, nearly all activities are conducted in, and all assets are located in south-western Albania. This represents some risk, as Albania transitioned from a communist regime to a modern economy in 1992. While the change has brought economic stability to the country, significant challenges still exist.

Nationalization is often a major risk facing investors in many emerging markets. However, in over two decades since breaking the communist regime it appears the nationalization risk in Albania is low. In fact, the previously state-owned Albpetrol was recently privatized in a sale that Bankers placed a bid on. As Albania’s modern economy continues to develop, we can expect any nationalization risk to continue to drop.

Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that Albania’s government won’t implement different policies in regards to development and ownership of petroleum resources by foreign companies. Any changes could negatively affect both the ability to undertake exploration and development of future properties, and the ability to continue to extract resources from current properties.

The government of Albania encourages direct financial investment to aid the country’s economic development. However, it provides little incentive to encourage this much-needed investment, and Albania’s energy and transportation infrastructure is continuing to deteriorate as a result.

Bankers Petroleum is Albania’s largest oil producer and foreign investor. Albania has treated resource extraction companies well over the past two decades, especially Bankers, and we expect this trend to continue as Albania continues to develop and as Bankers continues to grow.

Volatility in Oil Prices

As with any petroleum company, profitability is directly linked to the price and demand for oil. The sales of oil will be affected by numerous factors beyond Bankers’ control, including general demand for crude oil by the refineries in the Mediterranean region. In addition, prices for petroleum products are affected by numerous factors beyond control including international economic and political conditions, weather, levels of supply and demand, pipeline capacity, and currency exchange rates.

Bankers has confidently predicted a $70 per barrel Brent for 2015 and we feel this is a valid prediction. However, significant movements in the price of oil could render any of the exploration and production activities unprofitable. Costs were last reported at $32.77 per barrel in Q3; therefore, the company will continue to have a positive net profit for any price Brent higher than $32.77.

However, this does not represent a positive cash flow, as the company has and will continue to have significant capital expenditures. Capital expenditures were $234 million for 2013, which resulted in a negative change in cash of $9.1 million.

If we see a lower Brent price than predicted, Bankers will see significant losses and share price will fall, which could render this valuation invalid.

Environmental Risk

Environmental laws and regulations affect all of the operations in located in Albania. These laws and regulations set standards regarding certain aspects of health and environmental quality, and establish obligations to remediate current and former facilities.

Bankers could face significant penalties for discharges into the environment or environmental damage caused by non-compliance. These penalties could have adverse effects on the financial condition of the company.

Additionally, Albania’s aspiration to join the EU may result in the adoption and enforcement of tighter environmental laws and regulations. In October 2012, the European Commission recommended that Albania be granted EU candidate status, subject to key changes in political stability, economic stability, integration and the ability to assume the obligations of a member state.

Loss of right to Oilfields

In 2011, Albania voided an agreement for exploring oil and gas with Sky Petroleum. The license affected would have given the Texas company exclusive rights to three exploration blocks totaling approximately 5,000 square km. In May 2013, the International Court of Arbitration rejected all claims by Sky Petroleum and ordered them to pay Albania 383,000 Euros to cover expenses.

Bankers right to extract oil from the Patos-Marinza field is administered by the Patos-Marinza Licence Agreement, the right to redevelop the Kuçova heavy oilfield is administered by the Kuçova Petroleum Agreement, and the right to explore Block “F” is administered by the Block “F” exploration contract.

If Bankers is unable to finance capital expenditures and it is unable to obtain the agreement to a reduction in such expenditures in its annual plan, Bankers could be forced to relinquish some or all of its oilfield areas.

Should a dispute arise, there is no assurance that it would be resolved in a manner acceptable to Bankers, and if a decision were made that would reduce the rate at which Bankers is able to develop the field or increase production, or that would require a reduction in production from the field, it will have adverse effects on the earning potential of Bankers.

Investment Summary

Bankers Petroleum represents a lucrative opportunity for investors to participate in the turnaround of a once defunct oilfield by a small, Alberta based underdog in the petroleum business.

Production has improved significantly over the past year, and is set to increase going forward with new wells about to go on line. This will be coupled with a rise in netback due to significant reductions in cost being currently being put on line. As these changes continue to take place and as Brent begins to rise in the coming months, the market is likely to take notice of the company it brushed off. Bankers is thriving, and continues to meet or exceed expectations.

Keen investors will long the stock now, as shares are undervalued. Bankers is easily worth $4.50 per share as per our valuations.

Discounted Cash Flow Analysis

WACC

For the DCF analysis we calculated the weighted average cost of capital, rather than using the oil and gas industry standard of 10%.

The cost of debt was found by taking a weighted average of the yield to maturity rate on current debt. We then calculated the after-tax cost of debt using the historical tax rates which Bankers has experienced. This resulted in an after-tax cost of debt of 4.3%.

The cost of equity was found next. The risk free rate is the yield on a five year United States Treasury bond (1.63%). Next, the risk premium was found to be5.32% on Aswath Damodaran’s website. Finally, the Beta of Bankers was taken directly from Google finance (2.71). This results in a cost of equity of (.16).

Finally the WACC was calculated using the fully diluted number of shares (256,440,664), and was found to be 10.85%, which is strikingly similar to the industry standard of 10%.

WACC Calculation from DCF model

Figure 1: WACC Calculation from DCF model

 

DCF Assumptions

The most vital part of any discounted cash flow valuation is the integrity of the assumptions of growth and costs. We believe these assumptions to be as reasonable as possible given current price volatility of Brent, the previous performance of the company, the age of the company, and any indications of future growth and costs as given by the company.

Revenue

Revenue for Bankers Petroleum is based on two variables; the price of Brent, and the quantity of Brent that Bankers can extract and sell. Going forwards, Bankers has estimated the price of Brent to average $70 per barrel; we have used this estimate for 2015 through to perpetuity.

Bankers Petroleum has provided no future predictions for production, so we have estimated production based on number of vertical and horizontal wells being drilled and put on line and aging of wells. Production growth is expected to peak over 2015 and 2016, and growth will slow thereafter as all reserves are employed using the most efficient methods. This will allow Bankers growth to follow a natural bell curve shape due increases in efficiency and then finally an increased marginal cost and effort required to extract oil as the wells and reserves start to reach capacity.

Our next prediction is average realized prices. Bankers wells have traditionally produced very heavy, viscous oil that traded at a reduced cost from true Brent prices. As Bankers continues to transition more of their wells to horizontal wells, they expect viscosity to drop and quality to rise. From this, we can infer a gradual climb to higher quality oil. This is slowed from historical growth in marginal realized prices, as this reflects a strengthened effort to reduce costs rather than rapidly increase oil quality.

Costs

Our assumptions regarding cost are mainly derived from previous performance and a stated effort to further reduce costs rather than focusing on oil quality.

Cost of revenue (as a percent of revenue) since Bankers inception has been decreasing at a decreasing rate due to increasing economies of scale, and we can expect this continue over the years forecasted. In perpetuity this will reach a constant value as maximum economies of scale are realized.

Selling, general and administrative expenses have been relatively consistent as a percent of revenue for Bankers, with only a slight decline over the past four years. We can expect this trend to continue as Bankers growth continues; as all systems, offices, staff, and other miscellaneous items are already in place and will require little upgrading as oil production is increased.

Depreciation and amortization as a percent of revenue has been relatively consistent over the life of the company, and we expect this trend to continue as old equipment is phased out. There is no suggestion that this will change.

Capital expenditure as a percent of revenue is in slow decline as reserves begin to reach full capacity with the maximum number of wells active. The 2015 budget shows a relatively small $153 million dollar capital expenditure commitment, which reflects the recent drop in oil prices. However, Bankers still expects oil production to stay relatively close to 2014 levels, as new wells are put online and hydraulic fracturing programs are put online.

Next, we expect taxes to stay constant at previous rates given that Albania remains excluded from the European Union.

Finally, we expect the increase in working capital as a percent of revenue to drop slightly as production climbs as it has consistently been over the past few years.

Growth Rate in Perpetuity

We expect the company to grow at the rate of GDP growth into perpetuity. We understand that this is unreasonable after a certain number of years given the nature of oil reserves depleting over time, but this estimate is valid for upwards of twenty years given Bankers’ estimate of a 27 year proven plus probable reserve life. The average GDP growth of Albania for the 10 years from 2004 through 2013 is 4.24%.

Conclusion

Using the above assumptions, our DCF returned a valuation of $3.98. We feel this forecast is conservative and takes current market volatility properly into consideration. See the figures below for the full DCF model.

Figure 2: Assumption table from DCF model

Figure 2: Assumption table from DCF model

Figure 3 DCF Model Bankers Petroleum

Figure 3: DCF Model

 

Comparable Analysis

Comparing Bankers Petroleum against four similar companies using three metrics results in a $5.50 dollar valuation. The companies selected were TORC Oil and Gas, Bellatrix Exploration Ltd., Parex Resources Inc., and Gran Tierra Energy Inc. These companies were compared against Bankers using the price to earnings ratio, enterprise value to proven plus probable reserves, and enterprise value to barrels of oil equivalent per day. These metrics were selected due to their commonplace use in oil and gas valuations.

Comparable Companies

Bankers Petroleum produces 39% of Albania’s petroleum, the remainder is produced by a handful of publicly traded exploration firms and a handful private firms. This leaves no comparably sized oil and gas production companies in Albania to compare valuations with. Therefore, publicly traded companies had to be found around the world to compare against.

TORC Oil and Gas

TORC Oil & Gas Ltd. produces crude oil and natural gas in Western Canada. The company was founded in 2010 and is growing production and reserves rapidly. The company was selected due to a similar market capitalization and growth that mimics Bankers in the early years. The reserves reflect the size of Bankers’ during the same period of growth.

Bellatrix Exploration Ltd.

Bellatrix Exploration Ltd. is engaged in the production of oil and natural gas reserves in Canada. It focuses on developing light oil and liquids-rich natural gas on its two development properties. The company was founded in 2000. Bellatrix was selected based on a similar market capitalization, similar daily production, and similar reserve sizes.

Parex Resources Inc.

Parex Resources Inc. is engaged in the production of oil and natural gas in South America and the Caribbean region. It holds interests in onshore exploration and production blocks. Parex Resources Inc. was incorporated in 2009. The company was selected due to a similar market capitalization, similar political environment, and similar daily production.

Gran Tierra Energy Inc.

Gran Tierra Energy Inc., an independent energy company, is engaged in the production of oil and gas properties in Colombia, Peru, and Brazil. The company has 17 exploration and production contracts in Colombia, 5 exploration licenses in Peru, and 7 exploration blocks in Brazil. The company was incorporated in 2003. The company was selected due to a similar market capitalization, similar political environment, and similar daily production.

Figure 4: Comparables Valuation

Figure 4: Comparables Valuation

Editor’s Note: This article discusses one or more securities that do not trade on a major U.S. exchange. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.