Corporate Valuation, Oil & Gas
shutterstock_2364977019.jpg

September 11, 2017

How to Use Reserve Reports When Determining Fair Market Value

Last week, Lucas Paris analyzed the SEC’s $6.2 million settlement with a Big 4 audit firm relating to auditing failures associated with Miller Energy Resources, an oil and gas company with activities in the Appalachian region of Tennessee and in Alaska. In late 2009, Miller acquired certain Alaskan oil and gas interests for an amount the company estimated at $4.5 million. The company subsequently assigned a value of $480 million to the acquired assets, resulting in a one-time after-tax bargain purchase gain of $277 million. Following the deal, the newly acquired assets comprised more than 95% of Miller’s total reported assets.

The SEC order determines that the Big 4 audit firm did not properly use the reserve reports conclusion of PV-10 (present value at 10%).

This post considers the proper use of reserve reports and risk adjustment factors when determining fair market value.

What Is Fair Market Value?

The American Society of Appraisers defines the fair market value as:

The price, expressed in terms of cash equivalents, at which property would change hands between a hypothetical willing and able buyer and a hypothetical willing and able seller, acting at arm’s length in an open and unrestricted market, when neither is under compulsion to buy or sell and when both have reasonable knowledge of the relevant facts.1

Treasury Regulation Section 1.611-1(d)(2) provides guidance in determining the fair market value of oil and gas properties.  It similarly provides that “the fair market value of an [oil and gas] property is the amount which would induce a willing seller to sell and a willing buyer to purchase.”  Additionally, Section 1.611-2(g) outlines some considerations that a valuation of mineral properties must include for tax-oriented appraisals.  A summary of these considerations is shown in the chart below.

A review of Treasury Regulations 1.611-2(g) clearly demonstrates that an analyst must do more than rely on reserve reports when determining fair market value.

What Is a Reserve Report?

The SEC defines reserves as “estimated remaining quantities of oil and gas and related substances anticipated to be economically producible, as of a given date, by application of development projects to known accumulations.”

A reserve report is prepared by a petroleum engineer who estimates the remaining quantities of oil and gas and categorizes them based on the likelihood that they will be produced.  There are three main categories of proved reserves (P1) which are distinguished in a reserve report. Proven reserves are defined to have at least a 90% probability of being recovered.

  1. Proved Developed Producing (PDP) reserves are defined by the OJFG as “the estimated remaining quantities of oil and gas anticipated to be economically producible, as of a given date, by application of development projects to known accumulations under existing economic and operating conditions.”
  2. Proved Developed Non-Producing (PDNP) reserves are proven reserves “that can be expected to be recovered through existing wells and existing equipment and operating methods.”
  3. Proved Undeveloped (PUDs) reserves are proven reserves “that are expected to be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for completion.”
Other reserve categories include probable (P2) and possible (P3) reserves, which must exceed 50% and 10% probability of recovery, respectively. Reserve reports estimate future production of all proved reserves. From this, they predict future revenue and future expenses and discount the net income using a 10% standard discount rate.  PV-10 is the resulting estimate of the present value of the company’s cash flow from proved oil and gas reserves. It is standardized value which provides consistency across public companies filings.  However, PV-10 is not necessarily an accurate representation of fair market value. PV-10 assumes that all categories or proved reserves are equally risky.  In reality, a potential buyer would not pay as much for an interest in PUD acreage as they would for PDP acreage because there is substantially more risk associated with the PUD acreage. If a valuation expert had been hired to do a purchase price allocation for Miller Energy’s acquisition of oil and gas interest in Alaska, PV-10 would not have been used as the fair market value.  Rather, a valuation specialist with industry expertise would have performed a discounted cash flow analysis and evaluated how certain risks that pertain to each asset affect the value.

How to Use a Reserve Report

The income approach is generally accepted among industry professionals as the most accurate representation of fair market value of oil and gas interests, and the reserve report can be used as one of the main sources of information for the inputs of the discounted cash flow.  Treasury Reg 1.611-2(e)(4) provides a straightforward outline of how the approach should be used.  In general, a discounted cash flow analysis is the method of choice.

In practice, the income approach requires that:

  1. The appraiser project income, expense, and net income on an annual basis
Thus, revenue and expense projections used in the income approach can be directly harvested from this report.
  1. Each year’s net income is discounted for interest at the “going rate” to determine the present worth of the future income on an annual and total basis
This is where a reserve report and a calculation of fair market value differ.  While a reserve report uses a standard 10% discount rate, when determining fair market value a discount rate which considers potential risk factors should be developed.  An analyst could add a risk premium for each reserve category to adjust a baseline WACC or they could account for this risk in a separate adjustment.
  1. The total present worth of future income is then discounted further, a percentage based on market conditions, to determine the fair market value.
PV-10 treats PDP, PDNP, and PUDs the same. However, there are uncertainties and opportunities associated with PUDs that are not captured in the discount rate used for all proved reserves.  A risk adjustment factor could be used to the discounted present value of cash flows according to the category of the reserves being valued to account for PUDs upside and uncertainty by reducing expected returns from an industry weighted average cost of capital (WACC)

What About Probable and Possible Reserves?

Reserve reports only account for proven reserves; they do not estimate the value of possible and probably reserves which are less likely to be recovered.  While less certain, there is still some potential upside of the Probable and Possible reserve categories.  In order to estimate the value of probable and possible reserves the market approach can be used.

The market approach is a general way of determining a value indication of an asset by using one or more methods that compare the subject to similar assets that have been sold.  Because reserve values vary between oil and gas plays and even within a single play, finding comparable transactions is difficult. A comparable sale must have occurred at a similar time due to the volatile nature of oil and gas prices.  A comparable sale should be for a property that is located within the same play and within a field of similar maturity.

If transactions show premiums over the value of proven reserves, then the buyer likely was paying for something else in addition to the proved reserves; he was likely paying for the less certain upside potential of probable and possible reserves.  Through these transactions, the value of these reserves can be understood as they vary by basin and between fields.  In many basins probable and possible reserves may currently be worthless because the price of oil may not rebound to a point where it would be economical to explore for and drill these reserves; however, in fields such as the Delaware and Midland Basins in the Permian recent transactions tell a different story.

The valuation implications of reserves and acreage rights can swing dramatically in resource plays. While a reserve report is helpful, it does not measure fair market value or fair value.  Utilizing an experienced oil and gas reserve appraiser can help to understand how location impacts valuation issues in this current environment. Contact Mercer Capital to discuss your needs and learn more about how we can help you succeed.


End Notes

1 American Society of Appraisers, ASA Business Valuation Standards© (Revision published November 2009), “Definitions,” p. 27.

Continue Reading

Defying the Cycle: Haynesville Production Strength in a Shifting Gas Market
Defying the Cycle: Haynesville Production Strength in a Shifting Gas Market
Haynesville shale production defied broader market softness in 2025, leading major U.S. basins with double-digit year-over-year growth despite heightened volatility and sub-cycle drilling activity. Efficiency gains, DUC drawdowns, and Gulf Coast demand dynamics allowed operators to sustain output even as natural gas prices fluctuated sharply.
Haynesville Shale M&A Update: 2025 in Review
Haynesville Shale M&A Update: 2025 in Review
Key TakeawaysHaynesville remains a strategic LNG-linked basin. 2025 transactions emphasized long-duration natural gas exposure and proximity to Gulf Coast export infrastructure, reinforcing the basin’s importance in meeting global LNG demand.International utilities drove much of the activity. Japanese power and gas companies pursued direct upstream ownership, signaling a shift from traditional offtake agreements toward greater control over U.S. gas supply.M&A was selective but meaningful in scale and intent. While overall deal volume was limited, announced transactions and reported negotiations reflected deliberate, long-term positioning rather than opportunistic shale consolidation.OverviewM&A activity in the Haynesville Shale during 2025 was marked by strategic, LNG-linked transactions and renewed international investor interest in U.S. natural gas assets. While investors remained selective relative to prior shale upcycles, transactions that did occur reflected a clear pattern: buyers focused on long-duration gas exposure, scale, and proximity to Gulf Coast export markets rather than short-term development upside.Producers and capital providers increasingly refocused efforts on the Haynesville basin during the year, including raising capital to acquire both operating assets and mineral positions. This renewed attention followed a period of subdued transaction activity and underscored the basin’s continued relevance within global natural gas portfolios.Although the Haynesville did not experience the breadth of consolidation seen in some oil-weighted plays, the size, counterparties, and strategic motivations behind 2025 transactions reinforced the basin’s role as a long-term supply source for LNG-linked demand.Announced Upstream TransactionsTokyo Gas (TG Natural Resources) / ChevronIn April 2025, Tokyo Gas Co., through its U.S. joint venture TG Natural Resources, entered into an agreement to acquire a 70% interest in Chevron’s East Texas natural gas assets for $525 million. The assets include significant Haynesville exposure and were acquired through a combination of cash consideration and capital commitments.The transaction was characterized as part of Tokyo Gas’s broader strategy to secure long-term U.S. natural gas supply and expand its upstream footprint. The deal reflects a growing trend among international utilities to obtain direct exposure to U.S. shale gas through ownership interests rather than relying solely on long-term offtake contracts or third-party supply arrangements.From an M&A perspective, the transaction highlights continued willingness among major operators to monetize non-core or minority positions while retaining operational involvement, and it underscores the Haynesville’s attractiveness to buyers with a long-term, strategic view of gas demand.JERA / Williams & GEP Haynesville IIIn October 2025, JERA Co., Japan’s largest power generator, announced an agreement to acquire Haynesville shale gas production assets from Williams Companies and GEP Haynesville II, a joint venture between GeoSouthern Energy and Blackstone. The transaction was valued at approximately $1.5 billion.This acquisition marked JERA’s first direct investment in U.S. shale gas production, representing a notable expansion of the company’s upstream exposure and reinforcing JERA’s interest in securing supply from regions with strong connectivity to U.S. LNG export infrastructure.This transaction further illustrates the appeal of the Haynesville to international buyers seeking stable, scalable gas assets and highlights the role of upstream M&A as a tool for portfolio diversification among global utilities and energy companies.Reported Negotiations (Not Announced)Mitsubishi / Aethon Energy ManagementIn June 2025, Reuters reported that Mitsubishi Corp. was in discussions to acquire Aethon Energy Management, a privately held operator with substantial Haynesville production and midstream assets. The potential transaction was reported to be valued at approximately $8 billion, though Reuters emphasized that talks were ongoing and that no deal had been finalized at the time.While the transaction was not announced during 2025, the reported discussions were notable for both their scale and the identity of the potential buyer. Aethon has long been viewed as one of the largest private platforms in the Haynesville, and any transaction involving the company would represent a significant consolidation event within the basin.The reported talks underscored the depth of international interest in Haynesville-oriented platforms and highlighted the potential for large-scale transactions even in an otherwise measured M&A environment.ConclusionWhile overall deal volume remained selective, the transactions and reported negotiations in 2025 reflected sustained global interest in U.S. natural gas assets with long-term relevance. Collectively, the transactions and negotiations discussed above point to a Haynesville M&A landscape driven less by opportunistic consolidation and more by deliberate, long-term positioning. As global energy portfolios continue to evolve, the Haynesville basin remains a focal point for strategic investment, particularly for buyers seeking exposure tied to U.S. natural gas supply and LNG export linkages.
Mineral Aggregator Valuation Multiples Study Released-Data as of 06-11-2025
Mineral Aggregator Valuation Multiples Study Released

With Market Data as of June 11, 2025

Mercer Capital has thoughtfully analyzed the corporate and capital structures of the publicly traded mineral aggregators to derive meaningful indications of enterprise value. We have also calculated valuation multiples based on a variety of metrics, including distributions and reserves, as well as earnings and production on both a historical and forward-looking basis.

Cart

Your cart is empty