Eric Nuttall: Maximizing Oil and Gas Investments
Source: Brian Sylvester and Karen Roche of
"If you want to talk about the Gulf and the oil leak in terms of
investment, I think it's creating some pretty interesting
investment opportunities," says Eric Nuttall, portfolio manager of
Sprott Asset Management's Energy Fund. The straight-shooting
Nuttall never fails to opine or shine as he explains why onshore
oil plays are solid investments and talks oil and gas juniors,
shales and prices in this exclusive interview with
The Energy Report.
The Energy Report:
How do you see the European Union's sovereign bailout of Greece
affecting the oil price?
It relates to the overall psychology about global and European
economic growth. We've seen the price of oil have unbelievable
volatility on different headlines. A few weeks ago when Goldman
Sachs was being investigated for fraud, oil took a tumble. It is
largely being driven by traders looking for an excuse to buy or
sell, depending on whatever headline they read that day. It's
difficult now to appreciate the effect the bailout of Greece is
going to have on European and global oil demand. I think that it's
more of a knee-jerk reaction than an actual shift in fundamental
demand or supply.
The oil price is up a few dollars since we first heard about
British Petroleum (NYSE:BP; LSE:BP)
's accident in the Gulf of Mexico, which is likely to delay further
offshore exploration there. How do you see this incident
influencing the oil price?
As it stands, I think it has had almost no fundamental impact, and
there's a few reasons for that. One, the route of oil imports into
Louisiana has not been impacted because the slick is too far east.
As long as there are no disruptions in actual imports of crude oil,
there really should be minimal impact on pricing.
And over the long term?
Were there to be a permanent ban on offshore drilling, that would
obviously have an impact given the Gulf accounts for a meaningful
percentage of overall U.S. oil production. However, with the long
lead-time to projects, be it three to five years to first oil or
first gas, a short-term ban on drilling is not going to have an
impact on longer-term supplies. I really don't see it having a
large impact in either the short term or long term.
What about the environmental implications?
I think that it's too early to accurately say, though there is
obviously a bias in the media to over-sensationalize at times.
There are suspicions that 5,000 barrels of oil per day are leaking
into the Gulf. I've read that over 2,000 barrels per day naturally
leak from subsurface cracks in the seabed. Longer term, I think the
impact is not going to be as significant as some people are
Has the oil spill created investment opportunities?
I think it has created some pretty interesting investment
opportunities, one being British Petroleum. I started buying it the
last Friday in April. It's turned into a sin stock, along with the
tobacco companies. We've seen an erosion of over $21 billion in
market cap, which I find just astounding. I put pen to paper in
terms of what the maximum exposure could be, and my maximum cost
scenario amounted to around $10 billion. That's less than half the
market cap erosion. In the meantime, the price of oil is doing
quite well. You can buy a company, with a PE at seven, yielding
about 7% annually, and it's obviously out of favor.
How much BP did you buy?
I made it about a 2% weighting for the overall energy fund,
thinking that it looks like a pretty easy 10% trade over an
undefined time period, but I don't expect it to be a long-term
holding. You get paid 7% per annum in the meantime.
Why didn't the oil spill decrease all oil company stocks? Why just
There's no reason that it should have. There is some thought that
for offshore drilling companies, it's going to become more
expensive because of increased insurance costs; and secondly, there
is likely going to be a need for more safety equipment such as a
second blowout preventer, or maybe more servicing of the equipment.
So higher cost, lower margins. Some companies that would actually
benefit should a long-term offshore drilling ban be enacted would
be the onshore oil producers. The Bakken names have been very, very
strong. In addition, the Canadian oil sands become increasingly
attractive, given that the Gulf of Mexico is one of the few areas
of tremendous prospectivity. If reason goes out the window and
there is a medium- to long-term ban on offshore drilling in the
Gulf, then the only remaining large source of oil is either the
Bakken or the Canadian oil sands.
There's not much fundamental support for oil in the $80 range. Some
experts believe the trading of oil derivatives is largely
responsible for pushing the price to that level. What's really
I would agree that a price in the high $80s is probably not
justified. The most important number to look at now is OPEC's
capacity and compliance on production rates. We have seen a
significant deterioration in OPEC compliance relative to what their
production quotas are. I think we've had six months now of abiding
to 50% overall compliance, and they're sitting on 5-6 million
barrels a day spare capacity. They've publicly stated-at least
Saudi Arabia has-that they find a price in the $70s or $80s to be
"fantastic." The largest holder of spare capacity in the world is
telling you that the high $70s and $80s is its price point. That
tells me that in the medium to long term, that will probably be the
going price until a global economic recovery is able to soak up a
majority of OPEC's spare capacity.
How long will that take?
I think that could take several years. In the meantime, an $80 oil
price is as high as we go for the short term.
Among your Energy Fund's bigger holdings is
Bankers Petroleum Ltd. (
, which is up to $9 now from about $1.70 a year ago. What are
things you look for when you seek investment opportunities in oil
companies like Bankers?
We look for companies that have a very meaningful resource upside
that is not currently being recognized by the market. In addition,
we look for companies that are well funded, preferably have
production, and are stewarded by good management teams.
That sounds like Bankers.
Bankers is a perfect example. We got involved in the company a few
years ago. I had been following the asset, which is the largest
onshore oil field in Europe and was discovered by the Russians in
1929. A new management team parachuted in and we had known the new
CEO Abdel (Abby) Badwi and his technical team from a previous
company that we had done extraordinarily well with called Rally
Is that when you got involved?
The day that Abby joined Bankers we offered, and they accepted, a
$50 million financing. Bankers have used those funds to increase
production, but much more importantly, it was able to delineate the
field. Since our initial investment, the field has grown from about
2.2 billion barrels to over 5 billion barrels of oil in place. And
they have used Canadian drilling technologies-pumping and
horizontal drilling-to meaningfully increase the production profile
of a typical well. They've been having wells come on at over 150
barrels a day on a horizontal basis, which is just phenomenal. It
really increases the net present value of the company because you
accelerate production. The company is producing over 8,000 barrels
a day and has a visible window to grow to over 30,000 over the next
Is it a takeover target?
There are very few assets like this that have the strategic nature
of both being onshore and also being of a material enough size to
attract the attention of a large state oil company. We think
Bankers is likely to be taken over in the next, I would say, two
years, most likely at a 50% to 100% premium from where it's trading
today. I think that when Abby and his team are ready to part with
it and move on, it should generate quite a bit of interest.
You also hold a lot of
Corridor Resources Inc. (
, which has exploded from about $2 this time last year to around
$6.30. Tell us about it.
Corridor has a lot of the same attributes as Bankers. It had a
large land base in New Brunswick, which is not a province that is
typically associated with hydrocarbon production. We saw quite a
bit of running room in their McCully Gas Field. In addition, we
thought that they had very significant onshore shale gas potential,
as well as a huge offshore exploration prospect that could contain
up to 1 billion barrels of oil. Corridor owns 100% of that prospect
and we're hoping that they will be able to drill it later this
Since our investment, they've increased production at McCully
and, most importantly, a very significant a shale gas producer
Apache Corporation (
agreed to evaluate the commercial potential of natural gas in the
Frederick Brook shale formation. Having such a premium quality
shale gas producer come to New Brunswick really validated the
How is that working out?
Corridor has drilled a few wells into it, had promising test
results, and so now Apache is carrying them for $25MM, on an
earn-in basis, which will take them through proof of concept. At
that point, Corridor could have over 50 TCF (trillion cubic feet of
natural gas) net to the company. That's a huge, huge potential
resource and that's something I look for. We weren't paying for it
at the time. It always makes me uncomfortable when you're expected
to have to pay for exploration success. I much prefer to buy
companies that are cheap with existing production; you get the
resource upside for free, because exploration doesn't always
Is that an investment philosophy?
I tell my sales force I never want to come into the office and be
afraid that I am going to have a name down 80% because they dusted
one individual well. It's a tough way to get rich. I much prefer
buying companies with existing production where you get the
exploration as a free option as opposed to the exploration upside
being the only thesis to the investment.
What are some other juniors you have your eye on?
One name that's done very well for us is
Rock Energy Inc. (
. It's a conventional producer of heavy oil in the Lloydminster
area of Alberta, Canada; it's trading about four times cash flow on
existing production, but at the same time, they're testing a
natural gas play in the Elmworth area of Alberta. It's surrounded
by the likes of
Encana Corporporation (
Daylight Energy Ltd. (TSX:DAY.UN;DAY)
(formerly Daylight Resources Trust), all of which are well-regarded
companies. These companies have either successfully tested or have
existing production from two zones, which Rock is targeting, which
are the Montney and the Nikanassin zones. They have had a
successful Montney test rate. They should have a good Nikanassin
test rate over the next couple of quarters. If 10% of their acreage
works in one of those two zones, then it could triple their
reserves. So they have a highly significant exploration program;
but at the same time, it's trading at four times cash flow and
existing production-so your downside is largely protected.
Delphi Energy Corp. (
is also a name I like a lot for a one- to two-year investment. They
have a great asset base in the Deep Basin of Alberta where they are
targeting in 2010 over five new zones that have no meaningful
reserve bookings. I see them having the potential to triple their
production and quadruple their reserve base through a successful
exploration program this year, which so far has been going
extremely well. At the same time, they produce over 8,000 boe/d and
trades at around six times enterprise value to cash flow, so it is
not being valued at an egregious valuation.
What about onshore oil juniors in places that are maybe not quite
as stable as Canada but still relatively stable? Something like
Tethys Petroleum Ltd. (
Tethys has had some extraordinary well results in Kazakhstan;
they're also in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. The market is highly
anticipating a follow-up well from their original well. Management
thinks they could be sitting on a very material oil discovery in
the hundreds of millions of barrels. The geographical location of
their discovery is kind of in the no man's land in Kazakhstan in
terms of where it was thought you would find oil; it was thought to
be a much more gas-prone area of the country. They could have an
incredible material oil discovery; there have been some very large
numbers thrown around, like several hundred million barrels
recoverable potential. If further drilling is successful, then the
company should do quite well, even though it's been a big winner
over the past year.
You also own a lot of
Questerre Energy Corporation (
Questerre is in the Utica Shale, an emerging shale play in Quebec.
Of the juniors, Questerre has the largest and highest-quality
acreage swath in the play. The stock has been weak recently;
Questerre did a financing at over $4 and now trades around $3. They
have had some very encouraging test rates from a recent eight-stage
horizontal well that rivals the Marcellus Shale, We think, given
the passage of time, assuming that future horizontal wells confirm
the first test rate, Questerre could be sitting on a four-to-five
net TCF discovery, and on a market cap today of roughly $700
million with well over $160 million in the bank, it's a pretty good
higher-risk investment. However, they have limited production, so
your risk is a little higher than other names.
Could you provide with an overview of natural gas exploration over
the last 20 years?
Until recently, the majority of natural gas was produced from
conventional sandstone; these would be highly permeable,
high-porosity reservoirs of consolidated sand. You typically drill
a vertical well that requires no fracking, which is when you put
pressure on the reservoir to induce artificial cracks to enhance
the flow rates. Until the last 15 years, sandstone deposits were
the predominant focus of the industry. As large discoveries became
more rare, the industry started targeting unconventional zones.
These include tight sands, a sandstone where natural permeability
is low. If you drilled a vertical or horizontal well into one of
those without fracking it, it would yield an uneconomic rate. Tight
gas has been a focus for about the past 15 years as large
discoveries have been made such as the Pinedale anticline in
After that, the industry went toward coal bed methane-coal seams
saturated with gas that must be desorbed. CBM, too, had a large
increase in production but is now in decline. After coal bed
methane, the industry started going toward shale gas.
Shale has natural gas in the actual porosity of the reservoir
and the natural fractures; however, it really needed better
fracking technology to make most plays economic. The revolution was
to drill a horizontal well using a very long lateral hole and then
be able to place not one frack but up to 30 different fracks in an
individual well bore. The Barnett Shale was really the first to
take off commercially. That led then to the Marcellus Shale,
Fayetteville Shale, and then most recently the Haynesville Shale,
which is being touted as probably the most economic shale play. It
straddles the border between Louisiana and Texas.
How has finding natural gas in shales changed the industry?
In Canada, going back a couple of years, the average well would
come on at about a quarter of million a day in initial production.
In the Haynesville Shale, it is not uncommon to drill a 15
million-a-day well-or 60 times the average initial production of a
Canadian conventional vertical well. This is a huge change in
average productivity, which has led to a very bloated natural gas
storage situation in North America, which has led to low
Is it true that certain shale leases are artificially inflating
A lot of companies acquired acreage in these shale plays,
predominantly the Haynesville Shale, and the terms of the leases
require a company to drill and produce within about a three-year
timeframe. For a lot of these companies the expiration window is
fast approaching. Companies are being forced to drill and produce
on this acreage, even though the economics may not be as stellar as
they once thought they would be. That's leading to an artificial
influx of natural gas.
Where do you see prices going for the rest of 2010 and then maybe
for the next three to four years?
I think for the next three years there's a cap of about $6 on
natural gas. There is an unbelievable amount of supply that is
highly economic at that price point. You have companies that are
the largest in the industry such as Encana and
Chesapeake Energy Corp. (
, both sending out very aggressive growth forecasts. They're both
growing by 50% over the next three to five years. So when you have
the largest companies bringing on production at a time when natural
gas pricing is in the $4-$5 range, it tells you that they view the
marginal cost of supply to their portfolio as much less than
historically. We used to think that we needed $7-$8 to grow natural
gas profitably. That is no longer the case.
What effect is hedging having?
Much of industry in the U.S. is hedged, approximately 55%, at
around $7; that's allowing companies to maintain a very active
capital-expenditure program. This has led to a very over-supplied
market, and my theory is that until the core areas of each of the
shale plays are drilled up, which I think could take three to five
years or longer, we're in a situation of a chronic oversupply. Four
dollar natural gas is too low; I do not think $4 is sustainable,
but at the same time, I do not think we need $7-$8 to bring on
supply. I think a $5-$6 range, probably closer to $6 than $5, is
probably what we should be expecting over the next three-odd
Which one gets you more excited: the oil or the gas sector?
It's a common question because a lot of people say oil is trading
at $84 and gas is at $4, obviously you must be looking for oil
companies and that's not necessarily the case. The valuations of
oil companies now and the multiple that you have to pay is
significantly higher than for natural gas companies. If we use a
long-term natural gas price of $5, we can buy some natural gas
companies at their proven net present value, which implies that
you're getting the probable and possible reserves for free. Given
the confidence in proven reserves, the risk/reward on that type of
investment is extraordinarily low. I think as gas prices firm up
from $5 over the next six months, those companies will be very good
performers. Despite having the stigma of being natural gas
producers, I think people are going to head to that area of the
market over the next couple of months.
Does that mean you're not looking at oil companies?
There are some oil companies as well that are trading at very
attractive valuations. It's not so much trying to target natural
gas or oil; it's trying to be opportunistic in trying to find the
most upside on a risk / reward basis.
What's Eric Nuttall's tried-and-true method of playing the
Buy companies that trade at reasonable valuations on existing
production but whom also have very meaningful reserve potential for
which you don't have to pay. Make sure that their balance sheets
are strong enough so that they can withstand a long period of low
commodity prices so they won't be forced to liquidate assets.
Invest in management teams that have proven themselves in the past,
but make sure you're buying into good assets. You can have a good
management team with a mediocre asset and they're still probably
going to do okay. But if you have a good asset and a bad management
team, you're probably not going to do terribly well. The quality of
the asset is terribly important.
One other thing. Try to recognize opportunities before others, and
this just doesn't apply to the oil and gas sector, but it's
something that we always try to do. Recognize opportunities before
others; don't be afraid to be wrong; act quickly if you see a very
exciting opportunity where the risk reward is very skewed; act
quickly, act big.
Is that what you did when you recently took a position in
Massey Energy Co. (
Massey is out of favor given that there was a significant mine
explosion in April. The stock has fallen 30% or $1.2 billion. The
ultimate cost of the monetary reimbursement for the families of the
fallen miners is likely to reach $100 million. So you have about an
18-times decrease in market cap relative to ultimate exposure.
You're buying a company at seven-times earnings. They have the
largest net metallurgical coal reserve of any U.S. company. Met
coal pricing has been extraordinarily strong due to strong steel
demand worldwide. You need met coal to produce steel. You've got a
market cap of $3.8 billion with some debt, so an enterprise of $4.5
billion and a coal reserve of almost three billion tons. It's not a
bad value proposition. The memories from the tragic accident will
pass with time and the stock should do quite well.
Eric Nuttall is a portfolio manager with
). He joined the firm in February 2003 as a research associate and
was subsequently promoted to research analyst in 2005, associate
portfolio manager in 2008, and then to portfolio manager in January
2010. Eric is co-manager of the Sprott Energy Fund along with Eric
Sprott, and also co-manages the Sprott 2010 Flow-Through Limited
Partnership with Allan Jacobs. In addition to his responsibilities
for those two funds, Eric supports the rest of the Sprott portfolio
management team with identifying top performing oil and gas
investment opportunities. Further, Eric contributes towards
internal macro energy forecasts, and his insight into emerging
unconventional plays has been covered in several financial
publications such as
The Wall Street Journal, Asia
Eric graduated with high honors from Carleton University with
an Honors Bachelor of International Business.
Want to read more exclusive Energy Report interviews like this?
for our free e-newsletter, and you'll learn when new articles have
been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry
analysts and commentators, visit our
1) Brian Sylvester and Karen Roche of
The Energy Report
conducted this interview. They personally and/or their families own
shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview:
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors
The Energy Report:
Tethys Petroleum and Rock Energy.
3) Eric Nuttall: I personally and/or my family own shares of the
following companies mentioned in this interview: Rock Energy and
Delphi. I personally and/or my family are paid by the following
is Copyright © 2010 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are
reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted
license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in
whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in
The Energy Report does not render general or specific investment
advice and does not endorse or recommend the business, products,
services or securities of any industry or company mentioned in this
From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its
directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as
well as persons interviewed for articles on the site, may have a
long or short position in securities mentioned and may make
purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or
Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or
thoroughness of the information reported.
Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are
listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor
pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C.
Participating companies provide the logos used in The Energy
Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the
Streetwise Reports LLC
P.O. Box 1099
Kenwood, CA 95452
Tel.: (707) 282-5593
Fax: (707) 282-5592