评论:交易如何完成(和融资)

银行市场的变化更多地取决于公司规模,而区域银行仍然是储备贷款的支柱。

Mari Salazar 和 Cristina Stellar,贡献者

随着交易数量跌至近二十年来的最低点,我们在 2023 年上半年看到并购领域出现了大量活动。勘探与生产公司扩大库存的需求使市场复苏。虽然 2022 年下半年的交易流以大型上市公司交易为主,但今年迄今为止,中小型公司已占据主导地位。 

今年剩余时间里发生了什么变化以及哪些因素影响着行业前景? 

管理层和投资者的大部分核心叙述仍然相同,他们专注于建立强大的库存并通过股票回购和股息来要求资本回报。  

在买方方面,市值达到或超过 100 亿美元的大型公司展示了其资产负债表实力和有利的股票估值,以执行既能增加当前现金流又能扩大钻探地点的交易。 

对于中小盘股(SMID)来说,解决库存困境并不是那么简单。他们的股权交易规模不大,因此很难在保持交易增值的同时提出重视库存的激进报价。我们看到了一种趋势,即公司正在转向更具创造性的战略,包括非运营北方石油天然气公司首先与Vital Energy合作收购Forge Energy II 的交易;随后, Earthstone Energy Inc.在 8 月份成功 收购Novo Oil & Gas Holdings LLC的过程中也发挥了类似的作用 。 

交易资产使Callon Petroleum成为一家二叠纪纯业务公司,而 Ridgemar Energy Operating LLC 在红玉髓能源资本管理公司 (Carnelian Energy Capital Management LP) 的支持下,在 Eagle Ford 达成了第一笔交易。同样,Encap Investments能够为Grayson Mill 收购威利斯顿盆地资产,作为将其三家米德兰盆地投资组合公司出售给Ovintiv协议的一部分。  

在卖方方面,私募股权处于领先地位,并继续利用公共买家专注于确保未来钻井库存所产生的势头。稳定的大宗商品价格以及随着私募股权公司筹集新资金而退出成熟投资并向有限合伙人展示回报的需要,促成了这一战略的成功。 

市场展望 

石油价格不再处于买家和卖家之间的僵局。如果价格能够在 70 年代至 80 年代保持区间波动,我们将继续看到活跃的并购市场和进一步的整合。规模和规模很重要:核心业务的库存可能会增值,因为具有规模的优质职位越来越少。 

企业合并应促使二次交易出售相对于收购目标而言被视为非核心的资产。这应该会缓解 A&D 中间市场今年开局缓慢的局面。 

公共买家,尤其是 SMID 上限,正在使用现金和增加杠杆来追求增值。我们预计这种趋势将持续下去,直到他们的股价估值更加有利。 

石油和天然气银行缺口?

信贷条款仍然保守,通常需要 50:50 的债转股比例来进行收购融资。尽管银团融资具有挑战性,但这些多银行融资正在通过不断努力确保参与者来完成。

能源银行业的支柱已经并将继续是 A&D 活动。 

自2016年以来,拥有专门上游贷款机构的银行数量有所下降。由于巨大损失或减少化石燃料敞口的压力,外资银行要么撤退,要么减少其能源敞口。 

留下来的能源银行已经重新审视了如何配置资本。一些较大的银行已经向高端市场寻求大额承诺、投资银行业务机会和高额一次性费用。中型银行专注于为私人资助的石油和天然气公司提供债务、存款和交叉销售。  

随着银行重新定义其目标客户,多银行银团与特定客户的业务目标保持一致。

地区银行不想成为数十亿美元以上信贷额度的 2%,而货币中心银行对没有资本市场潜力的小公司兴趣不大。

那么,银行业是否存在缺口?这取决于。

说存在传统的贷款缺口过于简单化。基于公司规模的银行市场变化现在更加明显。生产商的期望最终将决定是否与新的银行业动态保持一致。如果没有适当的调整,生产商在受监管的银行之外拥有额外的资本选择权。 

对于传统的以储备为基础的贷款(RBL),生产商应该期望一致的信贷条款、在整个银团中竞标服务的需要以及银行内部风险评估的重要性。

就像私人生产商彻底改变了页岩气繁荣一样,区域银行仍然是 RBL 的支柱。  

那些仍然坚定致力于上游石油和天然气的贷款人将继续支持下一代,尽管银行资本的回报有更多的商业期望。


Mari Salazar 是 BOK Financial 能源银行业务经理,Cristina Stellar 是 BOK Financial Securities 能源投资银行业务董事总经理。

原文链接/hartenergy

Commentary: How Deals Are Getting Done (and Financed)

The shifting bank market is more based on company size, while regional banks remain the backbone of reserve-based lending.

Mari Salazar and Cristina Stellar, Contributors

As the deal count stumbles to near a two-decade low, we saw a lot of activity in the M&A space during the first part of 2023. The need for E&P companies to expand their inventory revived the market. While the second half of 2022 was dominated by large-cap public company deal flow, small and mid-cap companies have taken over so far this year. 

What changed and what factors are influencing the industry outlook for the remainder of the year? 

Much of the central narrative remains the same with management and investors focusing on building a robust inventory and demanding return on capital via share buybacks and dividends.  

On the buy side, large-cap companies—with a market capitalization of $10 billion or more—showed their balance sheet strength and favorable stock valuations to execute deals that were both accretive to current cash flow and that expanded their drilling locations. 

For small-mid caps (SMID), solving the inventory dilemma wasn’t as simple. Their modest equity trading makes it challenging to put in an aggressive offer that values inventory while keeping the deal accretive. We’re seeing a trend where companies are turning to more creative strategies, including deals in which non-op Northern Oil & Gas partnered first with Vital Energy to acquire Forge Energy II; then played a similar role in Earthstone Energy Inc.’s successful acquisition of Novo Oil & Gas Holdings LLC in August. 

Trading assets allowed Callon Petroleum to become a Permian pure-play company while Ridgemar Energy Operating LLC, backed by Carnelian Energy Capital Management LP, struck their first deal in the Eagle Ford. Similarly, Encap Investments was able to pick up Williston Basin assets for Grayson Mill as part of their agreement to sell their trio of Midland Basin portfolio companies to Ovintiv.  

On the sell side, private equities led the way and continue to take advantage of the momentum created as public buyers focused on securing future drilling inventory. Stable commodity prices along with the need to exit mature investments and show returns to limited partners as private equity firms raise new funds contributed to the success of this strategy. 

Market outlook 

Oil prices are no longer at an impasse between buyers and sellers. If prices can stay range-bound in the 70s to 80s, we will continue to see an active M&A market and further consolidation. Size and scale matters: inventory in core plays will likely increase in value as fewer quality positions with scale are available. 

Corporate consolidation should prompt secondary transactions to sell off the assets considered non-core relative to the acquisition targets. This should provide some relief to what otherwise has been a slow start of the year for the A&D middle market. 

Public buyers, particularly SMID caps, are using cash and increasing leverage to pursue accretion. We expect this trend to continue until their share price valuation is more favorable. 

Oil and gas banking gap?

Credit terms remain conservative, often requiring a 50-50 debt-to-equity split for acquisition finance. While syndications are challenging, these multi-bank financings are getting done with increasing effort to secure participants.

The bread and butter of the energy banking industry has and will continue to be A&D activity. 

Since 2016, the number of banks with dedicated upstream lenders has declined. Foreign banks have either retreated or reduced their energy exposure due to significant losses or pressure to reduce exposure to fossil fuels. 

The energy banks that remain have re-examined how they deploy capital. Some larger banks have moved up market in search of large commitments, investment banking opportunities and large one-time fees. Midsized banks have focused on funded debt, deposits and cross-sales to privately funded oil and gas companies.  

As banks redefine their target clients, multibank syndications align with specific client’s business objectives.

Regional banks do not want to be 2% of a large billion-plus dollar credit facility while money center banks have little interest in smaller companies with no potential for capital markets.

So, is there a banking gap? It depends.

Saying there is a traditional lending gap is too simplistic. The shifting bank market based on company size is more apparent now. Producers’ expectations will ultimately determine proper alignment with the new banking dynamic. Without proper alignment, the producer has additional capital optionality outside regulated banks. 

For a traditional reserve-based lending (RBL), producers should expect consistent credit terms, the need to bid out services across the syndicate and the importance of a bank’s internal risk assessment.

Much like private producers revolutionized the shale boom, regional banks remain the backbone of RBL.  

Those lenders who remain steadfast in their commitment to upstream oil and gas will continue to support the next generation, albeit with more business expectations in return for bank capital.


Mari Salazar is the manager of energy banking at BOK Financial and Cristina Stellar is managing director of energy investment banking at BOK Financial Securities.