the interest
due until June 5, 2007 by increasing the principal due by a like amount. As of
the July 21, 2005 retirement date, the outstanding balance of the Senior Secured
Notes had been increased by $0.5 million for such interest paid in kind. Subject
to certain conditions, we had the option to pay the interest on and principal
of (at maturity or upon prepayment) the Senior Secured Notes with our common stock,
as long as the Secured Note Purchaser would not hold more than 9.99% of the number
of shares of our common stock outstanding immediately after giving effect to such
payment. The value of such shares issued as payment on the Senior Secured Notes
was determined based on 90% of the volume weighted average trading price during
a specified period of days beginning with the date of the payment notice and ending
before the payment date. Our issuance costs related to the transactions were $0.5
million and were amortized over the life of the Senior Secured Notes using the
effective interest method. The Senior Secured Notes Purchaser is an affiliate
of the Subordinated Notes Purchaser. Effects of Inflation
and Changes in Price Our results of operations
and cash flows are affected by changing oil and natural gas prices. If the price
of oil and natural gas increases (decreases), there could be a corresponding increase
(decrease) in the operating cost that we are required to bear for operations,
as well as an increase (decrease) in revenues. Inflation has had a minimal effect
on us. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements On
December 16, 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment”
(SFAS No. 123(R)”). SFAS No. 123(R) will require companies to measure all employee
stock-based compensation awards using a fair value method and record such expense
in their consolidated financial statements. In addition, the adoption of SFAS
No. 123(R) requires additional accounting and disclosure related to the income
tax and cash flow effects resulting from share-based payment arrangements. SFAS
No. 123(R) was effective beginning as of the first interim or annual reporting
period beginning after June 15, 2005. On April 14, 2005, the SEC recently adopted
a new rule that defers the effective date of SFAS No. 123(R) and allows companies
to implement the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) at the beginning of their next
fiscal year. We will adopt the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) during the first
quarter of 2006 using the modified prospective method for transition. We believe
it is likely that the impact of the requirements of SFAS No. 123(R) will significantly
impact our future results of operations and continue to evaluate it to determine
the degree of significance. In May 2005, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, a replacement of Accounting
Principals Board (APB) Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3. This statement
changes the requirements for the accounting and for reporting of a change in accounting
principal. It also applies to changes required by an accounting pronouncement
in the unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition
provisions. This statement shall be effective for accounting changes and corrections
of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. The adoption
of SFAS No. 154 was implemented for our restatement of financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2004, including all quarterly periods for 2004, and
the first three quarters in 2005 due to the change in accounting for our derivatives.
Summary of Critical Accounting Policies The
following summarizes several of our critical accounting policies. See a complete
list of significant accounting policies in Note 2 to our consolidated financial
statements. Use of Estimates The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent
assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results
could differ from these estimates. The use of these estimates significantly affects
our natural gas and oil properties through depletion and the full cost ceiling
test, as discussed in more detail below. Significant
estimates include volumes of oil and natural gas reserves used in calculating
depletion of proved oil and natural gas properties, future net revenues and abandonment
obligations, impairment of undeveloped properties, future income taxes and related
assets/liabilities, bad debts, derivatives, contingencies and litigation. Oil
and natural gas reserve estimates, which are the basis for unit-of-production
depletion and the ceiling test, have numerous inherent uncertainties. The accuracy
of any reserve estimate is a function of the quality of available data and of
engineering and geological interpretation and judgment. Results of drilling, testing
and production subsequent to the date of the estimate may justify revision of
such estimate. Accordingly, reserve estimates are often different from the quantities
of oil and natural gas that are ultimately recovered. In addition, reserve estimates
are vulnerable to changes in wellhead prices of crude oil and natural gas. Such
prices have been volatile in the past and can be expected to be volatile in the
future. |