UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
_________________________________
FORM 8-K
_________________________________
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of Report (Date of Earliest Event Reported) September 18, 2013
_________________________________
Matador Resources Company
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
_________________________________
Texas | 001-35410 | 27-4662601 | ||
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (Commission File Number) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) | ||
5400 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1500, Dallas, Texas | 75240 | |
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) | |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (972) 371-5200
Not Applicable
(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
_________________________________
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:
¨ | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
¨ | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
¨ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
¨ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |
Item 7.01 | Regulation FD Disclosure. |
Matador Resources Company expects to make presentations concerning its business to potential investors. The materials to be utilized during the presentations are furnished as Exhibit 99.1 hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
The information furnished pursuant to this Item 7.01, including Exhibit 99.1, shall not be deemed to be “filed” for the purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and will not be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated therein by reference.
Item 9.01 | Financial Statements and Exhibits. |
(d) Exhibits
Exhibit No. | Description of Exhibit | ||
99.1 | Presentation Materials. | ||
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
MATADOR RESOURCES COMPANY | ||||||
Date: September 18, 2013 | By: | /s/ Craig N. Adams | ||||
Name: | Craig N. Adams | |||||
Title: | Executive Vice President | |||||
Exhibit Index
Exhibit No. | Description of Exhibit | ||
99.1 | Presentation Materials. | ||
Investor Presentation September 2013
2 Disclosure Statements Safe Harbor Statement – This presentation and statements made by representatives of Matador Resources Company (“Matador” or the “Company”) during the course of this presentation include “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. “Forward-looking statements” are statements related to future, not past, events. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and include any statement that does not directly relate to a current or historical fact. In this context, forward-looking statements often address expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as “could,” “believe,” “would,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “should,” “continue,” “plan,” “predict,” “potential,” “project” and similar expressions that are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements, and such forward-looking statements may not prove to be accurate. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, the following risks related to our financial and operational performance: general economic conditions; our ability to execute our business plan, including whether our drilling program is successful; changes in oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids prices and the demand for oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids; our ability to replace reserves and efficiently develop our current reserves; our costs of operations, delays and other difficulties related to producing oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids; our ability to make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms; availability of sufficient capital to execute our business plan, including from our future cash flows, increases in our borrowing base and otherwise; weather and environmental conditions; and other important factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements. For further discussions of risks and uncertainties, you should refer to Matador’s SEC filings, including the “Risk Factors” section of Matador’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and any subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. Matador undertakes no obligation and does not intend to update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this presentation, except as required by law, including the securities laws of the United States and the rules and regulations of the SEC. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this presentation. All forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. Cautionary Note – The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proved, probable and possible reserves. Potential resources are not proved, probable or possible reserves. The SEC’s guidelines prohibit Matador from including such information in filings with the SEC.
Company Summary
4 Company Overview Completed IPO of 14,883,334 shares (12,209,167 primary) including overallotment at $12.00/share in March 2012 and Follow-on Offering of 9,775,000 shares including overallotment at $15.25/share in September 2013 Exchange: Ticker NYSE: MTDR Shares Outstanding(1) 65.6 million common shares Share Price(2) $16.95/share Market Capitalization(2) $1.1 billion 2012 Actual 2013 Guidance Capital Spending $335 million $370 million(3) Total Oil Production 1.214 million barrels 1.8 to 2.0 million barrels Total Natural Gas Production 12.5 billion cubic feet 11.0 to 12.0 billion cubic feet Oil and Natural Gas Revenues $156.0 million $220 to $240 million(4) Adjusted EBITDA(5) $115.9 million $155 to $175 million(4) (1) Includes 9,775,000 shares of common stock issued in Matador’s follow-on offering on September 10, 2013. (2) As of September 17, 2013. (3) As updated in Matador’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on September 5, 2013. (4) Estimated 2013 oil and natural gas revenues and Adjusted EBITDA at midpoint of production guidance range as updated on May 8, 2013. Guidance includes actual results for 1Q 2013 and estimated results for the remainder of 2013. Estimated average realized prices for oil and natural gas used in these estimates were $99.00/Bbl and $4.00/Mcf, respectively, for the period April through December 2013. (5) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix.
Founded by Joe Foran in 1983 – most participants are still shareholders today. Foran Oil funded with $270,000 in contributed capital from 17 friends and family members Sold to Tom Brown, Inc.(1) in June 2003 for an enterprise value of $388 million in an all-cash transaction Foran Oil & Matador Petroleum 5 Matador History Matador Resources Company Founded by Joe Foran in 2003 with $6 million, a proven management and technical team and board of directors Grown entirely through the drill bit, with focus on unconventional reservoir plays, initially in Haynesville In 2008, sold Haynesville rights in approximately 9,000 net acres to Chesapeake for approximately $180 million; retained 25% participation interest, carried working interest and overriding royalty interest Redeployed capital into the Eagle Ford, relatively early in the play, acquiring over 30,000 net acres for approximately $100 million, mainly in 2010 and 2011 2012 and 2013 capital spending focused primarily on developing Eagle Ford and transitioning to oil IPO in February 2012 (NYSE: MTDR) had net cash proceeds of approximately $136 million Follow-on Offering in September 2013 had net cash proceeds of approximately $142 million CAGR since 2008(2) – Average Daily Production (55%), Revenues (53%) and Adjusted EBITDA(3) (59%) Predecessor Entities (1) Tom Brown purchased by Encana in 2004. (2) Through first six months 2013. See page 35. (3) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix. Matador Today
T h o u s a n d Bb l TOTAL OIL AND TOTAL OIL PRODUCTION (1) NATURAL GAS REVENUES (1) ADJUSTED EBITDA (1)(2) $8.1 $18.4 $15.2 $23.6 $49.9 $115.9 $165.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013E $14.0 $30.6 $19.0 $34.0 $67.0 $156.0 $230.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013E 22 37 30 33 154 1,214 1,900 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013E Matador’s Continued Growth 6 (1) 2013 estimates at midpoint of guidance range as updated on May 8, 2013. Guidance includes actual results for 1Q 2013 and estimated results for the remainder of 2013. Estimated average realized prices for oil and natural gas used in revenue and Adjusted EBITDA estimates were $99.00/Bbl and $4.00/Mcf, respectively, for the period April through December 2013. (2) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix. in m il li o n s in m il li o n s Growth Since the IPO
Matador Execution History – IPO (February 7, 2012) vs. Today Grow with a focus on the Eagle Ford to create a more balanced portfolio Production 7.1 MBOE/d 414 Bbl/d of oil 6% oil 12.7 MBOE/d(8) 6,200 Bbl/d of oil(8) 49% oil(8) Proved Reserves 27 MMBOE 1.1 MMBbl of oil 4% oil 39 MMBOE 12.1 MMBbl of oil 31% oil PV-10(2) $155.2 million 24% of PV-10 value in the Eagle Ford $522.3 million 90% of PV-10 value in the Eagle Ford LTM Adjusted EBITDA(3) $50 million(4) $148 million Identify and develop additional oil opportunities Acreage ~7,500 net acres in the Permian ~32,900 net acres in the Permian(9) Create value for stakeholders Enterprise Value(5) $0.65 billion(6) Over $1.25 billion(10) 15x growth in oil production Over 11x growth in oil reserves ~200% growth Doubled Enterprise Value Increased Permian leasehold position by over 4x What we said at IPO 7 At IPO(1) What we’ve done Today(7) Over 3x growth in PV-10 (1) Unless otherwise noted, at or for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. (2) PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a reconciliation of Standardized Measure (GAAP) to PV-10 (non-GAAP), see Appendix. (3) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix. (4) For the twelve months ended December 31, 2011. (5) Enterprise value equals market capitalization plus borrowings under our revolving credit agreement. (6) As of February 7, 2012 at time of IPO. (7) Unless otherwise noted, at or for the six months ended June 30, 2013. (8) During the months of June and July 2013. (9) As of September 1, 2013. (10) As of September 17, 2013. Metric
8 Total Enterprise Value(1) Over $1.25 billion Average Daily Production(2) 12,689 BOE/d Oil (% total) 6,200 Bbl/d (49%) Natural Gas (% total) 38.9 MMcf/d (51%) Proved Reserves @ 6/30/2013 38.9 million BOE % Proved Developed 42% % Oil 31% PV-10(3) $522.3 million 2013E CapEx $370 million % South Texas ~78% % Oil and Liquids ~98% Gross Acreage(4) 194,673 acres Net Acreage(4) 121,427 acres Engineered Drilling Locations(4)(5) 962 gross / 444.3 net (1) Enterprise value equals market capitalization plus borrowings under credit agreement as of September 17, 2013. (2) Average daily production during months of June and July 2013. (3) PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a reconciliation of Standardized Measure (GAAP) to PV-10 (non- GAAP), see Appendix. (4) Presented as of September 1, 2013. (5) Identified and engineered Tier 1 and Tier 2 locations identified for potential future drilling, including specified production units and estimated lateral lengths, costs and well spacing using objective criteria for designation. Matador Resources Company Overview ~78% 2013E CapEx
9 Investment Highlights Strong Growth Profile with Increasing Focus on Oil / Liquids Average daily production CAGR of 55% since 2008 with 15x growth in oil production since IPO ~98% of 2013E capital expenditure program focused on oil / liquids exploration and development High Quality Asset Base in Attractive Areas ~27,200 net acres in the Eagle Ford in some of the most active counties in the play including Atascosa, DeWitt, Gonzales, Karnes, La Salle, Wilson and Zavala counties ~32,300 net acres in the Permian Basin prospective for the liquids-rich Wolfcamp, Bone Spring and other targets Long-term option on natural gas, with Haynesville, Cotton Valley and Bossier assets almost all HBP Multi-year Drilling Inventory 218.4 net identified drilling locations in the Eagle Ford 74.5 net identified drilling locations in the Permian Basin with escalating activity to de-risk the play 151.4 net drilling locations in the Haynesville and Cotton Valley Low Cost Operations Substantially reduced Eagle Ford drilling days and well costs since IPO Batch drilling program has potential to further reduce well costs by $300,000 per well Strong Financial Position Liquidity available to execute planned drilling program Proven Management and Technical Team and Active Board of Directors Management and senior technical team average over 25 years of industry experience Board with extensive industry knowledge, business experience and company ownership Strong record of stewardship
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500 $550 $600 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Q2 2013 Growth in PV-10(1) from SEC Proved Reserves $57.65 oil $3.87 gas $75.96 oil $4.38 gas $92.71 oil $4.12 gas $91.21 oil $2.76 gas $88.13 oil $3.44 gas P V -1 0 (1 ) , mil li o n s 10 SEC Pricing Oil, $/Bbl Gas, $/MMBtu $41.00 oil $5.71 gas (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (1) PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a reconciliation of Standardized Measure (GAAP) to PV-10 (non-GAAP), see Appendix. (2) At December 31 of each respective year. (3) At June 30, 2013. (3)
12/31/2012 12/31/2011 11 Proved Reserves Value Growth (1) PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a reconciliation of Standardized Measure (GAAP) to PV-10 (non-GAAP), see Appendix. (2) Oil prices in $/Bbl; natural gas prices in $/MMBtu. 6/30/2013 Proved Oil (MBbl) 3,794 10,485 12,128 Proved Natural Gas (Bcf) 170 80 161 Total Proved (MBOE) 32,196 23,819 38,931 % Oil 12% 44% 31% % Developed 34% 58% 42% Proved Reserves PV-10(1) (in millions) $248.7 $423.2 $522.3 $92.71 oil / $4.12 gas(2) $91.21 oil / $2.76 gas(2) $88.13 oil / $3.44 gas(2) Cotton Valley 8% Eagle Ford 52% Haynesville 39% SE New Mexico 1%SE New Mexico 1 Cotton Valley 8% Haynesville 39% Cotton Valley 2% Eagle Ford 89% Haynesville 8% SE New Mexico 1% SE New Mexico 1% Cotton Valley 2% Haynesville 8% Cotton Valley 1% Eagle Ford 93% Haynesville 5% SE New Mexico 1% SE New Mexico 1% Cotton Valley 1% Haynesville 5%
Eagle Ford South Texas
13 Significant Eagle Ford Exposure (1) For the year ended December 31, 2011. (2) During the months of June and July 2013. (3) At September 1, 2013. (4) Identified and engineered Tier 1 and Tier 2 locations identified for potential future drilling, including specified production units and estimated lateral lengths, costs and well spacing using objective criteria for designation. Proved Reserves @ 6/30/2013 15.7 million BOE % Proved Developed 59% % Oil 75% Daily Oil Production(2) 6,145 Bbl/d Gross Acres(3) 38,899 acres Net Acres(3) 27,233 acres 2013E CapEx Budget $288 million Engineered Drilling Locations(3)(4) 269 gross (218.4 net) Overview Operations Summary Returning to a two-rig program in the Eagle Ford Significantly reduced number of days to drill wells (days on wells) ~78% of 2013E total capital expenditure program focused on oil and liquids development in the Eagle Ford Realized three-fold growth in proved oil reserves since December 31, 2011 Established acreage position in the Eagle Ford shale in some of the most active counties including: Atascosa, DeWitt, Gonzales, Karnes, La Salle, Wilson and Zavala – ~16,000 net acres are also prospective for Austin Chalk in addition to potential prospects in the Buda, Edwards and Pearsall formations – ~9,000 net acres in Zavala County prospective for emerging Buda play 50 gross (43 net) wells(2) producing from the Eagle Ford, increasing oil production from ~330 Bbl/d(1) to ~6,145 Bbl/d(2) with an additional 269 gross (218.4 net) locations identified for potential future drilling
14 Eagle Ford Properties Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Uvalde Medina Zavala Frio Dimmit La Salle Webb Bexar Atascosa McMullen Live Oak Bee Goliad Dewitt Gonzales Wilson EAGLE FORD EAST 7,713 gross / 6,611 net acres EOG OPERATED, MTDR WI ~21% 9,508 gross / 1,778 net acres GLASSCOCK (WINN) RANCH 8,891 gross / 8,891 net acres EAGLE FORD WEST 12,787 gross / 9,953 net acres EAGLE FORD ACREAGE TOTALS 38,899 gross / 27,233 net acres Matador Resources Acreage San Antonio Glasscock Ranch Shelton Newman Martin Ranch Northcut Affleck Troutt Sutton MRC/EOG Pawelek Danysh Sickenius Lyssy Repka RCT Wilson Love Cowey Keseling Lewton Hennig Nickel Ranch Pena COMBO LIQUIDS / GAS FAIRWAY DRY GAS FAIRWAY OIL FAIRWAY ZLS
15 Eagle Ford Well Costs and Estimated Ultimate Recovery (“EUR”) Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. EUR’s represent typical range of results over last 12 months by area. Well costs reflect actual costs of all 2013 wells by area. See pages 17-19 for additional information. Uvalde Medina Zavala Frio Dimmit La Salle Webb Atascosa McMullen Live Oak Bee Goliad Dewitt Gonzales Wilson Matador Resources Acreage San Antonio Glasscock Ranch Shelton Newman Martin Ranch Northcut Affleck Troutt Sutton MRC/EOG Pawelek Danysh Sickenius Lyssy Repka RCT Wilson Love Cowey Keseling Lewton Hennig Nickel Ranch Pena COMBO LIQUIDS / GAS FAIRWAY DRY GAS FAIRWAY OIL FAIRWAY EAGLE FORD “WEST” (p. 17) Well Costs: $6-7 million EUR: 300-500 MBOE EAGLE FORD “EAST” (p. 19) Well Costs: $8-10 million EUR: 600-1,000 MBOE EAGLE FORD “CENTRAL” (p. 18) Well Costs: $7-8 million EUR: 400-500 MBOE
Overview 16 Operational Improvements Note: “2013 YTD” and “Last Well” – As of September 1, 2013. Year classification is based on spud date. (1) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. Drilling days are from spud to total depth. (2) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. (3) Reflects the most recent development well – excludes a well that is burdened with extra costs associated with drilling the first well on any given lease, for example: constructing a frac pit, building the lease road, etc. Eagle Ford Drilling Days(1) Eagle Ford Total Well Cost(2) West Central East 19.2 12.6 11.4 8.3 2011 2012 2013YTD Last Well 18.8 20.1 15.4 13.9 2011 2012 2013YTD Last Well 24.7 18.2 16.6 2012 2013YTD Last Well West Central East $9.9 $7.8 $6.8 $6.3 2011 2012 2013YTD Last Well $11.0 $9.4 $7.5 $7.1 2011 2012 2013YTD Last Well $8.4 $8.3 $10.4 2012 2013YTD Last Well Experience in the Eagle Ford has led to significant reductions in drilling days and well costs Drilling from four-well batch drilled pads has the potential to yield additional savings (3) (3) (3) Cost Savings Rig Moves ~$115,000 Location ~$60,000 Drilling Efficiencies ~$125,000 Total Per Well Cost Savings ~$300,000 Four-Well Batch Drilled Pad vs. Single Well Pad
DRILLING DAYS (1) FRAC STAGE COST TOTAL WELL COST (2) ($ in thousands) ($ in millions) $9.9 $7.8 $6.8 $6.3 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well $247.9 $126.2 $123.4 $105.5 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 19.2 12.6 11.4 8.3 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 17 Eagle Ford “West” 8,000’ – 9,000’ True Vertical Depth ~240°F (3) 2-String Casing Design White Sand Note: “2013 YTD” and “Last Well” – As of September 1, 2013. Year classification is based on spud date. (1) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. Drilling days are from spud to total depth. (2) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. (3) Reflects the most recent development well – excludes a well that is burdened with extra costs associated with drilling the first well on any given lease, for example: constructing a frac pit, building the lease road, etc.
DRILLING DAYS (1) FRAC STAGE COST TOTAL WELL COST (2) ($ in thousands) ($ in millions) $11.0 $9.4 $7.5 $7.1 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well $159.5 $130.1 $119.3 $120.4 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 18.8 20.1 15.4 13.9 2011 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 18 Eagle Ford “Central” (3) 10,500’ – 11,500’ True Vertical Depth ~300°F 2-String Casing Design White Sand Note: “2013 YTD” and “Last Well” – As of September 1, 2013. Year classification is based on spud date. (1) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. Drilling days are from spud to total depth. (2) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. (3) Reflects the most recent development well – excludes a well that is burdened with extra costs associated with drilling the first well on any given lease, for example: constructing a frac pit, building the lease road, etc.
DRILLING DAYS (1) FRAC STAGE COST TOTAL WELL COST (2) ($ in thousands) ($ in millions) $10.4 $8.4 $8.3 2012 2013 YTD Last Well $219.7 $215.3 $214.6 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 24.7 18.2 16.6 2012 2013 YTD Last Well 19 Eagle Ford “East” (3) 12,500’ – 13,500’ True Vertical Depth ~330°F 2-String or 3-String Casing Design Premium Proppant(4) Note: “2013 YTD” and “Last Well” – As of September 1, 2013. Year classification is based on spud date. (1) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. Drilling days are from spud to total depth. (2) Excludes any/all wells drilled with a pilot hole. (3) Most recent development well – used to exclude a well that is burdened with extra costs associated with drilling the first well on any given lease, for example: constructing a frac pit, building the lease road, etc. (4) Premium proppant typically used is resin-coated sand which is more expensive than white sand.
Batch Drilling – Reducing Well Costs and Well Times Further 20 Time Savings •Rig Moves ~2 Days •Drilling Efficiencies ~1 Day Total Per Well Time Savings ~3 Days Cost Savings •Rig Moves ~$115,000 •Location ~$60,000 •Drilling Efficiencies ~$125,000 Total Per Well Cost Savings ~$300,000 Approx. $300,000 cost reduction per well when going from single well pad to a four-well batch drilled pad! Four-Well Batch Drilled Pad vs. Single Well Pad
21 Evolution of Matador Frac Design Note: Figure depicts proppant and fluid volume pumped per 300 ft. of horizontal wellbore. (1) Mlbs = thousands of pounds of proppant pumped.
22 Well Improvement with Evolution of Frac Design Example 1: Eagle Ford “East” Offsetting Wells Example 2: Eagle Ford “Central” Offsetting Wells Example 3: Eagle Ford “Central” Offsetting Wells Example 4: Eagle Ford “West” Offsetting Wells 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 Cumulative Oil Production, Bbl Prod uctio n Rate, B bl/ d Second Generation Design (DOFP: 6/10/12) Third Generation Design (DOFP: 6/22/12) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 0 10,000 2 ,000 3 ,000 4 ,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 Cumulative Oil Production, Bbl Prod uctio n Rate, B bl/ d First Generation Design (DOFP: 12/28/11) Third Generation Design (DOFP: 11/16/12) 0 100 200 3 400 500 600 700 900 1,000 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 Cumulative Oil Production, Bbl Prod uctio n Rate, B bl/ d Second Generation Design (DOFP: 3/17/12) Third Generation Design (DOFP: 9/29/12) Note: DOFP = Date of first production. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 1 , 2 ,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 Cumulative Oil Production, Bbl Prod uctio n Rate, B bl/ d Second Generation Design (DOFP: 3/25/12) Third Generation Design (DOFP: 9/14/12) Fourth Generation Design (DOFP: 12/18/12)
Permian Basin Southeast New Mexico and West Texas
24 Gross Acres(1) 50,756 acres Net Acres(1) 32,899 acres Increasing Exposure to the Permian Foothold of existing production and reserves Acreage position in good neighborhoods, surrounded by other operators’ ongoing drilling Company considers ~43,100 gross (~32,300 net) acres to be prospective for multiple oil and liquids- rich targets, including the Wolfcamp and Bone Spring plays Targeting 107 gross (74.5 net) engineered drilling locations(2) Currently running one rig in Southeast New Mexico and West Texas to conduct a three-well exploration program Plan to run one rig throughout remainder of 2013 and 2014 Year to date(3) acquired approximately 35,000 gross (26,800 net) acres primarily in Lea and Eddy Counties, New Mexico (1) Total acreage in Southeast New Mexico and West Texas as of September 1, 2013, including some tracts not shown on map. Matador acreage shown in red. (2) At September 1, 2013. (3) From January 2, 2013 through September 1, 2013. RANGER- QUERECHO WOLF INDIAN DRAW E D D Y L E A LOVING
Ranger Prospect Area: Proposed Wolfbone Multi-Zone Exploration Program and Surrounding Results 7 7 5 0 8 0 0 0 8 2 5 0 8 5 0 0 8 7 5 0 9 0 0 0 9 2 5 0 9 5 0 0 9 7 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 5 0 1 0 5 0 0 1 0 7 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 5 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 150 GR (CTR) 0.2 2000 LLD 0.2 2000 LLS Log Depth(ft) Log Depth(ft) 7500 7500 7750 7750 8000 8000 8250 8250 8500 8500 8750 8750 9000 9000 9250 9250 9500 9500 9750 9750 10000 10000 10250 10250 10500 10500 10750 10750 11000 11000 11250 11250 11500 11500 Wells 9,000' > HS=0 PETRA 11/28/2012 5:33:57 PM Bone Spring Lime 1st Bone Spring Sand 2nd Bone Spring Sand Wolfcamp Bone Spring / Upper Wolfcamp Type Log 3rd Bone Spring Sand Location of Matador 2013 test wells 25 Concho Stratojet 31 State #3H 2nd Bone Spring 21 mo.cum: 336 MBbl; 405 MMcf Cimarex Energy Lynch 23 Fed #1H 3rd Bone Spring 18 mo.cum: 163 MBbl; 139 MMcf Legacy Operating Lea Unit 4H 3rd Bone Spring 20 mo.cum: 72 MBbl; 72 MMcf Concho AirCobra 12 #2H 3rd Bone Spring 22 mo.cum: 276 MBbl; 183 MMcf XOG Operating (Vertical well) Jordan B #1 Wolfcamp 20 years cum: 387 MBbl; 5 Bcf Concho (Vertical well) Neuhaus 14 Fed #2 Wolfcamp 8 years cum: 156 MBbl; 2 Bcf 3 Rivers Oper Eagle 2 State 6H 3rd Bone Spring 5 mo.cum: 54 MBbl; 26 MMcf Cimarex Energy Mallon 35 Fed 4H 3rd Bone Spring 24 mo.cum: 38 MBbl; 29 MMcf Amtex Energy Teapot 2H 2nd Bone Spring 22 mo.cum: 60 MBbl; 50 MMcf Concho Condor State #1H 2nd Bone Spring 3 mo.cum: 38 MBbl; 21 MMcf Devon Ironhouse 19 State #1H 2nd Bone Spring IP: 603 Bbl/d; 298 Mcf/d Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Well information from public sources as of August 2013. Matador acreage shown in red.
Wolf Leasehold: Proposed Wolfbone Multi-Zone Exploration Program and Surrounding Results Wolf Energy Wolf #1 (Vertical well) 3rd BS / Upr Wolfcamp 33 years cum: 60 MBbl; 640 MMcf Wolf Energy Dorothy White #1 (Vertical well) 3rd BS / Upr Wolfcamp 17 years cum: 25 MBbl; 92 MMcf Shell Johnson 1-88 Lov #1H Wolfcamp 15 mo.cum: 57 MBbl; 239 MMcf Shell Johnson 1-86 (1H) Wolfcamp 27 mo.cum: 158 MBbl; 455 MMcf OXY Reagan-McElvain #1H Wolfcamp IP: 570 Bbl/d 2.6 MMcf/d 6 mo.cum: 81 MBbl; 202 MMcf Shell Johnson 1-76 (1H) Wolfcamp 32 mo.cum: 165 MBbl; 536 MMcf Energen Grayling 1-69 Wolfcamp IP: 791 Bbl/d 7.3 MMcf/d 3,500 psi FTP 10 mo.cum: 70 MBbl; 605 MMcf Energen Black Mamba 1-57 Wolfcamp 13 mo.cum: 178 MBbl; 439 MMcf Proposed location of Matador 2013 test well Shell Owens 1-75 Lov #1H Wolfcamp 15 mo.cum: 89 MBbl; 199 MMcf Energen Bushmaster 1-58 1H Wolfcamp 13 mo.cum: 121 MBbl; 332 MMcf Energen Katie 1-72 Wolfcamp 15 mo.cum: 72 MBbl; 207 MMcf Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Well information from public sources as of August 2013. Matador acreage shown in red. Bone Spring / Upper Wolfcamp Type Log Bone Spring Lime 1st Bone Spring Sand 2nd Bone Spring Sand Wolfcamp 3rd Bone Spring Sand Avalon Shale Base Avalon Shale 26
Haynesville & Cotton Valley Northwest Louisiana and East Texas
Significant Option Value on Natural Gas Balanced portfolio of assets provides optionality should natural gas prices continue to recover Significant acreage position in the Haynesville play Also prospective for the Cotton Valley, Travis Peak and other shallow formations 97% of Haynesville acreage is HBP(4)(6) Potential drilling locations remain available to be drilled at any future time Competitive well economics on Tier 1 Haynesville wells at $4.50 / Mcf natural gas price Added ~80.1 Bcf of proved undeveloped reserves at June 30, 2013 as a result of the improvement in natural gas prices over the past year NW Louisiana / East Texas(1) Proved Reserves(2) 136.6 Bcfe Daily Production(3) 3,362 BOE/d (99% natural gas) Net Acres(4) 25,291 acres Net Producing Wells(4) 82.6 Drilling Locations(4)(5) 151.4 net wells % HBP(4)(6) 97% (1) Includes both Haynesville and Cotton Valley acreage. (2) At June 30, 2013. (3) During the months of June and July 2013. (4) At September 1, 2013. (5) Identified and engineered Tier 1 and Tier 2 locations identified for potential future drilling, including specified production units and estimated lateral lengths, costs and well spacing using objective criteria for designation. (6) Acreage held by production or fee mineral interests owned by Matador. 28 CADDO BOSSIER BIENVILLE RED RIVER DESOTO Elm Grove Cotton Valley: 49 Net Locations Matador Operated Acreage(4): 9,992 gross, 9,802 net Locations(4)(5): 71 gross, 49 net Tier 1 Haynesville: 50 Net Locations Acreage(4): 12,896 gross, 6,063 net Locations(4)(5): 440 gross, 51 net MTDR CV Horizontal T. Walker #1H MTDR Haynesville L.A. Wildlife #1H MTDR Haynesville Williams (BLM) #1H TIER 1: 6 – 10+ Bcf TIER 2: 4 – 6 Bcf TIER 3: 2 – 4 Bcf MATADOR CALLON CHESAPEAKE ENCANA EXCO GOODRICH J-W PETROHAWK / BHP QUESTAR SAMSON SHELL Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Matador acreage shown in red.
29 Haynesville Total Resource Potential – Price Sensitivity (1) PV-10 is a non-GAAP measure. For a reconciliation of Standardized Measure (GAAP) to PV-10 (non-GAAP), see Appendix. All PV-10 values estimated as of June 30, 2013. (2) NYMEX gas price, less property-specific differentials. $22 $30 $38 $46 $54 $62 $70 $102$26 $79 $141 $207 $275 $342 $619 $6 $21 $101 $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.00 $5.50 $6.00 $8.00 PV -1 0( 1) , $ m ill ion s Gas Price(2) , $/Mcf Haynesville - Tier 2 (Undrilled), $millions Haynesville - Tier 1 (Undrilled), $millions Haynesville Proved Producing, $millions
Gracie Wyoming, Utah and Idaho
Matador Gracie Project Total Prospect Acreage IDAHO UTAH W YO M IN G W Y O M IN G ID A H O U T A H WYOMING 76,497 gross acres 36,004 net acres Crawford Federal #1H 31 Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Crawford Federal #1H completion scheduled for fall 2013
Southwest Wyoming Stratigraphy and Target Zones Lamberson, Paul, 1982, The Fossil Basin and its Relationship to the Absaroka Thrust System, Wyoming and Utah, RMAG 13% TOC Meade Peak Shale Cretaceous Shales 2% TOC Crawford Federal #1: Drilled straight hole in late 2011 Encountered 161’ Meade Peak with 46’ of main pay Recovered 50’ conventional core across pay zone TOCave 4.52% (Maximum 14.2%) Thermally mature: Ro 1.69% Porosity Average: 3.0–5.0% Micro-Darcy Permeability Drilled 2,500-ft horizontal lateral in late 2012; plan to complete in fall 2013 32
Financial Overview
34 2013 Revenue and Adjusted EBITDA(1)(2) Estimated oil and natural gas revenues of $220 to $240 million − Mid-point is an increase of 47% from $156.0 million in 2012 Estimated Adjusted EBITDA(1)(2) of $155 to $175 million − Mid-point is an increase of 42% from $115.9 million in 2012 Adjusted EBITDA(1)(2) growth expected to be impacted by lower oil price realizations and an estimated decrease of approximately $13 million in realized hedging gains compared to 2012 2013 Financial Guidance (1) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix. (2) Estimated 2013 oil and natural gas revenues and Adjusted EBITDA at midpoint of production guidance range as updated on May 8, 2013. Guidance includes actual results for 1Q 2013 and estimated results for the remainder of 2013. Estimated average realized prices for oil and natural gas used in these estimates were $99.00/Bbl and $4.00/Mcf, respectively, for the period April through December 2013. (3) Midpoint of 2013 annual guidance. Oil and Natural Gas Revenues(2) (millions) Adjusted EBITDA(1)(2) (millions) $19.0 $34.0 $67.0 $156.0 $230.0 $0.0 $50.0 $100.0 $150.0 $200.0 $250.0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013E $15.2 $23.6 $49.9 $115.9 $165.0 $0.0 $20.0 $40.0 $60.0 $80.0 $100.0 $120.0 $140.0 $160.0 $180.0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013E (3) (3)
$18.4 $15.2 $23.6 $49.9 $115.9 $148.1 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 6/30/2013 LTM 1.5 2.3 3.9 7.0 9.0 10.7 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1H 2013 Matador’s Continued Growth 35 Average Daily Production(1) (MBOE/d) Oil Production Mix(1) (% of Average Daily Production) Oil & Natural Gas Revenues ($ in millions) Adjusted EBITDA(2) ($ in millions) $30.6 $19.0 $34.0 $67.0 $156.0 $208.3 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 6/30/2013 LTM 47% 37% 6% 2%4% 7% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1H 2013 (1) 1H 2013 reflects average daily production for first six months of 2013. 2008 – 2012 average daily production reflects average for each respective year. (2) Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. For a definition of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to our net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, see Appendix. (3) LTM is last 12 months through June 30, 2013. (unaudited) (3) (3)
36 2013 and 2014 Hedging Profile At September 1, 2013, Matador had: 0.6 million barrels of oil hedged for remainder of 2013 at a weighted average floor and ceiling of $88/Bbl and $106/Bbl, respectively 2.5 Bcf of natural gas hedged for remainder of 2013 at a weighted average floor and ceiling of $3.19/MMBtu and $4.45/MMBtu, respectively 4.0 million gallons of natural gas liquids hedged for remainder of 2013 at a weighted average price of $1.20/gal 2.3 million barrels of oil, 8.4 Bcf of natural gas and 5.1 million gallons of natural gas liquids hedged for 2014 Note: Hedged volumes shown in table for 2013 are for remainder of 2013; volumes shown in table for 2014 are for full calendar year. Oil Hedges (Costless Collars) 2013 2014 Total Volume Hedged by Ceiling (Bbl) 528,800 2,294,000 Weighted Average Price ($ / Bbl) $108.23 $98.92 Total Volume Hedged by Floor (Bbl) 528,800 2,294,000 Weighted Average Price ($ / Bbl) $87.27 $87.75 Oil Hedges (Swaps) 2013 2014 Total Volume Hedged (Bbl) 80,000 - Weighted Average Price ($ / Bbl) $90.43 - Natural Gas Hedges (Costless Collars) 2013 2014 Total Volume Hedged by Ceiling (Bcf) 2.49 8.40 Weighted Average Price ($ / MMBtu) $4.45 $5.15 Total Volume Hedged by Floor (Bcf) 2.49 8.40 Weighted Average Price ($ / MMBtu) $3.19 $3.32 Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) Hedges (Swaps) 2013 2014 Total Volume Hedged (gal) 3,969,600 5,100,000 Weighted Average Price ($ / gal) $1.20 $1.32
Appendix
Proven Management Team – Experienced Leadership 38 Management Team Background and Prior Affiliations Industry Experience Matador Experience Joseph Wm. Foran Founder, Chairman and CEO - Matador Petroleum Corporation, Foran Oil Company and James Cleo Thompson Jr. 33 years Since Inception David E. Lancaster EVP, COO and CFO - Schlumberger, S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc., Diamond Shamrock 34 years Since 2003 Matthew V. Hairford EVP and Head of Operations - Samson, Sonat, Conoco 29 years Since 2004 David F. Nicklin Executive Director of Exploration - ARCO, Senior Geological Assignments in UK, Norway, Indonesia, China and the Middle East 42 years Since 2007 Craig N. Adams EVP – Land & Legal - Baker Botts L.L.P., Thompson & Knight LLP 20 years Since 2012 Bradley M. Robinson VP and CTO - Schlumberger, S.A. Holditch & Associates, Inc., Marathon 36 years Since Inception Ryan C. London VP and General Manager - Matador Resources Company (Began as intern) 9 years Since 2004 Billy E. Goodwin VP of Drilling - Samson, Conoco 29 years Since 2010 Van H. Singleton, II VP of Land - Southern Escrow & Title, VanBrannon & Associates 17 years Since 2007 G. Gregg Krug VP of Marketing - Williams Companies, Samson, Unit Corporation 30 years Since 2005 Kathryn L. Wayne Controller and Treasurer - Matador Petroleum Corporation, Mobil 28 years Since Inception
Board of Directors and Special Board Advisors – Expertise and Stewardship 39 Board Members and Advisors Professional Experience Business Expertise Dr. Stephen A. Holditch Director - Professor Emeritus and Former Head of Dept. of Petroleum Engineering, Texas A&M University - Founder and Former President, S.A. Holditch & Associates - Past President of Society of Petroleum Engineers Oil and Gas Operations David M. Laney Lead Director - Past Chairman, Amtrak Board of Directors - Former Partner, Jackson Walker LLP Law and Investments Gregory E. Mitchell Director - President and CEO, Toot’n Totum Food Stores Petroleum Retailing Dr. Steven W. Ohnimus Director - Retired VP and General Manager, Unocal Indonesia Oil and Gas Operations Michael C. Ryan Director - Partner, Berens Capital Management International Business and Finance Carlos M. Sepulveda, Jr. Director - Chairman of the Board, Triumph Bancorp, Inc. - Retired President and CEO, Interstate Battery System International, Inc. - Director and Audit Chair, Cinemark Holdings, Inc. Business and Finance Margaret B. Shannon Director - Retired VP and General Counsel, BJ Services Co. - Former Partner, Andrews Kurth LLP Law and Corporate Governance Marlan W. Downey Special Board Advisor - Retired President, ARCO International - Former President, Shell Pecten International - Past President of American Association of Petroleum Geologists Oil and Gas Exploration Wade I. Massad Special Board Advisor - Managing Member, Cleveland Capital Management, LLC - Former EVP Capital Markets, Matador Resources Company - Formerly with KeyBanc Capital Markets and RBC Capital Markets Capital Markets Edward R. Scott, Jr. Special Board Advisor - Former Chairman, Amarillo Economic Development Corporation - Law Firm of Gibson, Ochsner & Adkins Law, Accounting and Real Estate Development W.J. “Jack” Sleeper, Jr. Special Board Advisor - Retired President, DeGolyer and MacNaughton (Worldwide Petroleum Consultants) Oil and Gas Executive Management
Southwest Glasscock Ranch Buda Production History Global Geophysical 3D Seismic Survey Area Outline Dan Hughes Heitz 302 3H 6/24/2012 IP: 350 Bbl/d 500 Mcf/d 13 mo.cum: 215,772 Bbl 147 MMcf Dan Hughes Buchanan 1H 4/1/2013 IP: 756 Bbl/d 556 Mcf/d 2 mo.cum: 38,348 Bbl 16 MMcf Dan Hughes Heitz 302 5H 8/1/2012 10 mo.cum: 125,396 Bbl 152 MMcf Crimson Beeler 2H 6/20/2013 IP: 761 Bbl/d 253 Mcf/d Sage Energy Mills-Wood Unit 1H 4/4/2013 IP: 585 Bbl/d 0 Mcf/d 2.5 mo.cum: 12,199 Bbl 26 MMcf Sage Energy Mills 2H 11/28/2012 IP: 889 Bbl/d 650 Mcf/d 8 mo.cum: 57,507 Bbl 30 MMcf Sage Energy Mills 1H 3/5/2013 IP: 959 Bbl/d 541 Mcf/d 2.5 mo.cum: 30,743 Bbl 26 MMcf Dan Hughes Heitz 303 2H 4/21/2012 IP: 351 Bbl/d 665 Mcf/d 14 mo.cum: 180,455 Bbl 168 MMcf Dan Hughes Heitz 1H 12/2/2011 IP: 200 Bbl/d 150 Mcf/d 14 mo.cum: 204,817 Bbl 251 MMcf Dan Hughes Heitz-Fehrenbach 1H 1/25/2013 IP: 85 Bbl/d 200 Mcf/d 6 mo.cum: 4,215 Bbl 210 MMcf US Enercorp Lang 1H 7/4/2012 IP: 165 Bbl/d 200 Mcf/d 15 mo.cum: 3,236 Bbl 29 MMcf Note: All acreage at September 1, 2013. Well information from public sources as of August 2013. 40
41 Adjusted EBITDA Reconciliation This investor presentation includes the non-GAAP financial measure of Adjusted EBITDA. Adjusted EBITDA is a supplemental non-GAAP financial measure that is used by management and external users of consolidated financial statements, such as industry analysts, investors, lenders and rating agencies. “GAAP” means Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States of America. The Company believes Adjusted EBITDA helps it evaluate its operating performance and compare its results of operations from period to period without regard to its financing methods or capital structure. The Company defines Adjusted EBITDA as earnings before interest expense, income taxes, depletion, depreciation and amortization, accretion of asset retirement obligations, property impairments, unrealized derivative gains and losses, certain other non-cash items and non-cash stock-based compensation expense, and net gain or loss on asset sales and inventory impairment. Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure of net income (loss) or net cash provided by operating activities as determined by GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income (loss) or net cash provided by operating activities as determined in accordance with GAAP or as an indicator of the Company’s operating performance or liquidity. Certain items excluded from Adjusted EBITDA are significant components of understanding and assessing a company’s financial performance, such as a company’s cost of capital and tax structure. Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of another company because all companies may not calculate Adjusted EBITDA in the same manner. The following table presents the calculation of Adjusted EBITDA and the reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to the GAAP financial measures of net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, respectively, that are of a historical nature. Where references are forward-looking or prospective in nature, and not based on historical fact, the table does not provide a reconciliation. The Company could not provide such reconciliation without undue hardship because the forward-looking Adjusted EBITDA numbers included in this investor presentation are estimations, approximations and/or ranges. In addition, it would be difficult for the Company to present a detailed reconciliation on account of many unknown variables for the reconciling items.
42 Adjusted EBITDA Reconciliation The following table presents our calculation of Adjusted EBITDA and reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to the GAAP financial measures of net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities, respectively. LTM at (In thousands) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 6/30/2013 Unaudited Adjusted EBITDA reconciliation to Net Income (Loss): Net (loss) income ($300) $103,878 ($14,425) $6,377 ($10,309) ($33,261) ($20,771) Interest expense - - - 3 683 1,002 3,573 Total income tax provision (benefit) - 20,023 (9,925) 3,521 (5,521) (1,430) (703) Depletion, depreciation and amortization 7,889 12,127 10,743 15,596 31,754 80,454 97,801 Accretion of asset retirement obligations 70 92 137 155 209 256 306 Full-cost ceiling impairment - 22,195 25,244 - 35,673 63,475 51,499 Unrealized loss (gain) on derivatives 211 (3,592) 2,375 (3,139) (5,138) 4,802 13,945 Stock-based compensation expense 220 665 656 898 2,406 140 1,836 Net loss (gain) on asset sales and inventory impairment - (136,977) 379 224 154 485 617 Adjusted EBITDA $8,090 $18,411 $15,184 $23,635 $49,911 $115,923 $148,103 LTM at (In thousands) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 6/30/2013 Unaudited djusted EBITDA reconciliation to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities: Net cash provided by operating activities $7,881 $25,851 $1,791 $27,273 $61,868 $124,228 $156,614 Net change in operating assets and liabilities 209 (17,888) 15,717 (2,230) (12,594) (9,307) (12,162) Interest expense - - - 3 683 1,002 3,573 Current income tax provision (benefit) - 10,448 (2,324) (1,411) (46) - 78 Adjusted EBITDA $8,090 $18,411 $15,184 $23,635 $49,911 $115,923 $148,103 Year Ended December 31, Year Ended December 31, Note: LTM is last 12 months through June 30, 2013.
43 PV-10 Reconciliation PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure and generally differs from Standardized Measure, the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, because it does not include the effects of income taxes on future net revenues. PV-10 is not an estimate of the fair market value of the Company’s properties. Matador and others in the industry use PV-10 as a measure to compare the relative size and value of proved reserves held by companies and of the potential return on investment related to the companies’ properties without regard to the specific tax characteristics of such entities. The PV-10 at June 30, 2013, December 31, 2012, December 31, 2011, September 30, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 were, in millions, $522.3, $423.2, $248.7, $155.2, $119.9, $70.4 and $44.1 respectively, and may be reconciled to the Standardized Measure of discounted future net cash flows at such dates by reducing PV-10 by the discounted future income taxes associated with such reserves. The discounted future income taxes at June 30, 2013, December 31, 2012, December 31, 2011, September 30, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 were, in millions, $44.7, $28.6, $33.2, $11.8, $8.8, $5.3 and $0.8 respectively. We have not provided a reconciliation of PV-10 to Standardized Measure where references are forward- looking, estimates or prospective in nature. We could not provide such a reconciliation without undue hardship on account of many unknown variables for the reconciling items.