INVESTOR PRESENTATION September 2017 Forward Looking Statements and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
INVESTOR PRESENTATION September 2017 Forward Looking Statements and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
INVESTOR PRESENTATION September 2017 Forward Looking Statements and Cautionary Statements Forward-Looking Statements The information in this presentation includes forward-looking statements that are made pursuant to the S afe Harbor
Forward Looking Statements and Cautionary Statements
2
Forward-Looking Statements The information in this presentation includes “ forward-looking statements” that are made pursuant to the S afe Harbor Provisions of the Private S ecurities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in this presentation, regarding our strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated revenues and losses, proj ected costs, prospects, plans and obj ectives of management are forward-looking statements. When used in this presentation, the words “ could,” “ believe,” “ anticipate,” “ intend,” “ estimate,” “ expect,” “ proj ect” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. These forward-looking statements are based on Parsley Energy, Inc.’ s (“ Parsley Energy,” “ Parsley,” or the “ Company” ) current expectations and assumptions about future event s and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. We caution you that these forward-looking statements are subj ect to all of the risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control, incident to the exploration for and development, production, gathering and sale of oil and natural gas. These risks include, but are not limited to, commodity price volatility, inflation, lack of availability of drilling and production equipment and services, environmental risks, drilling and other operating risks, regulatory changes, the uncertainty inherent in estimating reserves and in proj ecting future rates of production, the production potential of our undeveloped acreage, cash flow and access to capital, the timing of development expenditures and the risk factors discussed in or referenced in our filings with the United S tates S ecurities and Exchange Commission (“ S EC” ), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K and our subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this presentation. Except as otherwise required by applicable law, we disclaim any duty to update any forward-looking statements, all of which are expressly qualified by the statements in this section, to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this presentation. Our production forecasts and expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rates from existing wells and the undertaking and
- utcome of future drilling activity, which may be affected by significant commodity price declines or cost increases.
Industry and Market Data This presentation has been prepared by Parsley and includes market data and other statistical information from third-party sources, including independent industry publications, government publications or other published independent sources. Although Parsley believes these third-party sources are reliable as of their respective dates, Parsley has not independently verified the accuracy
- r completeness of this information. S
- me data are also based on Parsley’ s good faith estimates, which are derived from its review of internal sources as well as the third-party sources described
above. Oil & Gas Reserves This presentation provides disclosure of Parsley’ s proved reserves, which are those quantities of oil and gas, which, by analysis of geoscience and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible— from a given date forward, from known reservoirs, and under existing economic conditions (using unweighted average 12-month first day of the month prices), operating methods, and government regulations— prior to the time at which contracts providing the right to operate expire, unless evidence indicates that renewal is reasonably certain, regardless of whether deterministic or probabilistic methods are used for the estimation. In this presentation, proved reserves attributable to Parsley as of 12/ 31/ 16 are estimated utilizing S EC reserve recognition standards and pricing assumptions based on S EC pricing, as adj usted for market differentials, transportation fees, and quality, of $39.36 / Bbl crude, $2.23 / Mcf gas, and $15.03/ Bbl NGL. References to our estimated proved reserves as of 12/ 31/ 16 are derived from our proved reserve report audited by Netherland, S ewell & Associates, Inc. (“ NS AI” ). We may use the t erm “ expected ultimate recoveries” (“ EURs” ) or other descriptions of volumes of reserves, which terms include quantities of oil and gas that may not meet t he S EC’ s definitions of proved, probable and possible reserves, and which the S EC's guidelines strictly prohibit Parsley from including in filings with the S
- EC. Unless otherwise stated in this presentation, such estimates have
been prepared internally by our engineers and management without review by independent engineers. These estimates are by their nature more speculative than estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves and accordingly are subj ect to substantially greater risk of being actually realized, particularly in areas or zones where there has been limited or no drilling history. We include these estimates to demonstrate what we believe to be the potential for future drilling and production by the Company. Actual locations drilled and quantities that may be ultimately recovered from our properties will differ substantially. In addition, we have made no commitment to drill all of the drilling locations. Ultimate recoveries will be dependent upon numerous factors including actual encountered geological conditions, the impact of future oil and gas pricing, exploration and development costs, and our future drilling decisions and budgets based upon our future evaluation of risk, returns and the availability of capital and, in many areas, the outcome of negotiation of drilling arrangements with holders of adj acent or fractional interest leases. Our estimates may change significantly as development of our properties provides additional data and therefore actual quantities that may ultimately be recovered will likely differ from these estimates. Our related expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rat es from existing wells, the undertaking and outcome of future drilling activity and activity that may be affected by significant commodity price declines or drilling cost increases. Unless otherwise noted, Net Present Value (“ NPV” ) estimates are before taxes and assume the Company generated EUR and decline curve estimates based on Company drilling and completion cost estimates that do not include facilities, land, seismic, general and administrative (“ G&A” ) or other corporate level costs.
S uperior acreage port folio
- Premier combination of acreage quality and quantity
- Large, concent rat ed development blocks in heart of Midland
Basin and S . Delaware Basin oil windows
- Ongoing consolidat ion, lat eral ext ension, and invent ory uplift
t hrough acreage t rades Est ablished t rack record of operat ional and capit al efficiency
- Robust operat ing margins and t op-t ier recycle rat io
- Differentiat ed organic oil growt h per dollar invest ed
Efficient and sust ainable growt h profile
- Low reinvest ment risk wit h decade plus inventory of
premium drilling locat ions in proven t arget int ervals
- Flexible, low-risk development plan wit h st rong hedge book
and secured services and equipment Financial flexibility wit h st rong balance sheet
- No debt out st anding and $500 MM in cash at end of 2Q17
Organic resource expansion
- Favorable well product ivit y t rends via ongoing complet ion
design evolut ion
- Unlocking invent ory upside t hrough delineat ion of new t arget
zones and spacing configurat ions
Parsley Energy Overview
3
Market Snapshot Parsley Leasehold
NYS E S ymbol: PE Market Cap: $7,876 MM(1) Net Debt : $997 MM(2) Ent erprise Value: $8,873 MM S hare Count : 314 MM Permian Basin Net Leasehold Acreage: ~231,000 Midland Basin: ~179,000 Delaware Basin: ~52,000 Permian Basin Net Royalt y Acreage: ~7,000
Note: All data as of end 2Q17 pro forma for subsequent acreage trades; (1) Calculated using 8/31/2017 closing price; (2) Net Debt is a non-GAAP financial measure that is defined as total debt less cash and cash equivalents. Parsley Energy Leasehold
Premier Permian Pure-Play
ANDREWS MARTIN ECTOR LEA WINKLER LOVING WARD CRANE REEVES PECOS UPTON MIDLAND GLASSCOCK REAGAN HOWARD
Sustained Production Momentum
4
- S
trong production momentum despite intensive delineation agenda
- 2Q17 daily net production up 18%
versus 1Q17 and 81% year-over-year
- At 2Q17 update, raised full-year and 4Q17E
production guidance
- 16%
compound quarterly production growth rate over thirteen quarters as a public company(1)
(1) Parsley completed its initial public offering on May 29, 2014
Quarterly Production Trajectory Production Guidance (Net MBoe/d)
65 - 71 67 - 73 78 - 88 80 - 90 2017E (Previous) 2017E (Updated) 4Q17E (Previous) 4Q17E (Updated) 9.2 64.7 80.0 - 90.0 20 40 60 80 100 MBoe/d Net Production (MBoe/d)
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Top-Tier Capital Efficiency
5
Source: SGS E&P Comp Sheets – Week Ending June 23, 2017. Companies include APA, APC, AR, BBG, CHK, CLR, CNX, COG, CPE, CRC, CRK, CRZO, CXO, DNR, ECA, ECR, EGN, EOG, EPE, EQT, FANG, GPOR, HES, HK, JONE, LPI, MRO, MTDR, MUR, NBL, NFX, NOG, OAS, OXY, PDCE, PE, PXD, QEP, REN, RICE, RRC, RSPP, SD, SGY, SM, SN, SRCI, SWN, UNT, WLL, WPX, WTI, XCO, and XEC. Operating margin based on 1Q17. Oily E&P Companies are defined as companies with oil accounting for 40% or more of 2016 production, and Gassy E&P Companies are defined as companies with oil accounting for less than 40% of 2016 production. (1) Based on 2016 data. Recycle ratio is equal to operating margin divided by PD F&D. PE recycle ratio includes actual 2016 PD F&D/Boe of $8.04.
- Rank in top 10%
- f E&P universe on key capital efficiency measures
- S
uperior capital efficiency translates to value-adding-growth
- Position at low end of cost curve incents differentiated growth profile
Recycle Ratio(1)
Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies Parsley Energy
Operating Margin ($/Boe)
$0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 Parsley Energy Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies
$503 $997
$1,500 MM
Cash on hand First lien credit facility
- Peer-leading(1) liquidity of $1.5 billion
provides ample flexibility to fund efficient growth plan
- Fully undrawn borrowing base of $1.4
billion, with company-elected commitment
- f $1.0 billion
- Favorable maturity schedule, with earliest
notes maturity in 2024
Strong Financial Position
6
Favorable Debt Maturity Schedule
$1,000
$650 $450
$1,400 $400 $1,100 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 ($MM) Borrowing Base Senior Notes
Committed Amount Borrowing Base
1H25 2H25
Ample Liquidity
(2)
Liquidity vs. SMID-Cap Peers ($MM)(1)
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 PE Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5 Cash on Hand Borrowing Base Availability
(1) Permian SMID-Cap peers include CPE, EGN, FANG, LPI, and RSPP. Calculated as availability on committed portion of borrowing base plus cash on hand. Peer data obtained from 2Q17 presentations and filings. (2) Committed portion; net of letters of credit on the Company’s fully undrawn revolver.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
- Proactive hedging program protects cash
flow and balance sheet
- Over 90%
- f consensus oil volumes
hedged in 2018
- S
ignificantly more hedge protection than peers in 2018
- Heightened visibility facilitates
- perational continuity and steady
execution
Substantial Oil Hedge Position
7
$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 15 30 45 60 75 90 3Q17 4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19 WTI ($/Bbl) MBbls/d MBbls/d Hedged Consensus MBbls/ d Weighted Average Long Put Price
Hedge positions as of 8/24/2017; (1) Source: Wells Fargo E&P: Mile High View dated August 11, 2017. Operators include APA, BBG, CLR, CRZO, CXO, DVN, EOG, EPE, FANG, JAG, LPI, MTDR, NFX, OAS, PE, PXD, REN, RSPP, SRCI, WLL, WRD, and XOG. Includes operators with 2016 oil production greater than or equal to 40% of total production; Parsley data reflects the Company’s hedged oil volumes as of 8/24/2017 as a percentage of consensus oil volumes; (2) FactSet consensus estimates as of 8/24/2017; (3) Excludes swaps
Oil Volumes Hedged Estimated Percent of 2018 Oil Hedged(1)
(3)
Parsley Energy
4 operators with 0% hedged
(2)
Accretive Acreage Trades
8
- Recent acreage trades enhance development potential of core
- perated footprint
- Traded out of scattered non-operated properties with low
working interest (“ WI” ) into concentrated operated properties with high WI
- ~25%
average WI on acreage traded away
- ~85%
average WI on acreage traded for
- Recent trades added more than 500,000 net lateral feet to
horizontal drilling inventory, on top of 900,000 net lateral feet previously added following Double Eagle (“ DEEP” ) acquisitions
- Post-DEEP trades akin to adding ~5,600 premium net acres
with four target intervals(1)
Midland Basin Acreage Trades Trade Spotlight – “Four Corners” Trade
Leasehold Acquired via Trade Leasehold Traded Away Parsley Energy Leasehold
- Gained operatorship of core “ Four
Corners” acreage block
- Traded away 24 net non-operated
locations with 21% average WI
- Added 56 net operated locations with
85% average WI
- Effectively adds 31 net operated locations
near the front of Parsley’ s drilling inventory at no cost
- Potential for subsequent fill-in trades to
further increase associated inventory
HOWARD GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND MARTIN
(1) Assumes 32 wells per drilling spacing unit (DSU) and that 7,500’ stimulated lateral length wells correspond to a 960 acre DSU
Delineation Milestones
9
Parsley Energy Leasehold GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND WARD PECOS REEVES
Midland Basin Delineation Delaware Basin Delineation
Midland Basin Delineation Objectives First Wolfcamp C well First Upper Wolfcamp A well 330’ Downspacing in Upper/Lower Wolfcamp B Compressed stage spacing test Second Wolfcamp C well
1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
Southern Delaware Basin Delineation Objectives First Upper Wolfcamp A well First Wolfcamp B well
1 2 2 1 1
Parsley Energy Leasehold
150 300 450 600 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 30 60 90 120 150 180 Cumulative Production (MBoe) Daily Production (Boe/d) Days of Production
Glasscock Nose CBP
Wolfcamp C Play Fairway Paige Wolfcamp C
MARTIN MIDLAND UPTON HOWARD GLAS S COCK REAGAN
1,200’
10 mi.
Strong Indications from Wolfcamp C Interval
10
- First Wolfcamp C well (Taylor) st ill nat urally flowing and
cont inues robust product ion t rend wit h 255,000 barrels
- f oil recovered t hrough 180 days(1)
- Achieved payout wit hin six mont hs(2)
- S
econd Wolfcamp C well (Paige) report ed IP20 rat e of
- ver 2,000 Boe/ d (~65%
- il)
- Aggressively incorporat ing Wolfcamp C in development
program, wit h several wells in process or t o be drilled by year-end
- Abundant inventory in Wolfcamp C play fairway,
characterized by favorable t hermal mat urit y and subst ant ial t hickness and reservoir pressure
Taylor Wolfcamp C Exceeding 1 MMBoe Type Curve by ~135%
(3) (1) Normalized for downtime; (2) Based on realized commodity prices; (3) 3-stream; Normalized for downtime; 1 MMBoe type curve normalized to Taylor lateral length (approx. 10,000’)
Wolfcamp C Fairway & Well Locations
200’ 400’ 600’ 800’ 1,000’ 1,200’ GROS S THICKNES S
Taylor Wolfcamp C 2017 Planned Wolfcamp C
900+ Wolfcamp C Locations in the Play Fairway
Increasing GOR and decreasing reservoir pressure to south and east (red arrows)
Second Wolfcamp A Landing Zone Confirmed
11
- Encouraging results from first Upper / Lower
Wolfcamp A stack test, confirming a second landing zone in the Wolfcamp A interval
- Pad average production keeping pace with 1
MMBoe EUR type curve
- S
ignificant inventory upside pending additional tests
Strong Production Trends from Upper / Lower WC A Stack Test
20 40 60 80 30 60 90 Cumulative Production (MBoe)(1) Days of Production
Wolfcamp A Stacked Well Average
1-Mile
Current Inventory Inventory Upside
Upper / Lower WC A Stack Test (Online)
2nd WC A Stack Test Combined with WC B Stack (1Q18)
Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp B
330’ S pacing
(1) 3-stream; Normalized to 7,000’ stimulated lateral and for downtime
Upcoming proj ect tests two Wolfcamp A targets stacked over two Wolfcamp B targets, showcasing Parsley’s differentiated Wolfcamp thickness
800’
Stacked Upper / Lower Wolfcamp A Gun Barrel
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% % NPV Increase vs. 660’ Spaced Development Per Well Cost Savings from 660’ Spaced Development
Promising Results from Wolfcamp B Downspacing Pilot
12
(1) Standard 660’ Development: 4 wells with area-average type curve; Downspaced development: 8 wells at 330’ spacing; $50 oil, $3/mcf gas, $20 NGL
- Initial results from 8-well Wolfcamp B proj ect at 330’
spacing support downspacing potential with proj ected NPV uplift of 30% + versus 660’ spaced development
- Value uplift driven by favorable production rates and
cost savings
- For the 7 wells that have achieved 30-day peak
rates, average IP30 of 960 Boe/ d is 84%
- f offset
wells with 660’ spacing
- Dual-pad proj ect design incorporates baseline cost
savings of 5% , driven primarily by facilities and infrastructure efficiencies
- Analysis suggests less intensive frac design could
deliver comparable productivity at enhanced cost savings, driving additional NPV uplift Downspaced Test Results Suggest Value-Add Potential(1)
330’ Product ion %
- f 660’
Downspaced Pad Design 5% cost reduction & 84% production of 660’ spacing
1-Mile
Current Inventory Inventory Upside 330’ Downspaced Project
Wolfcamp B Downspaced Wolfcamp B Pilot Gun Barrel
~230’
330’ S pacing
20 40 60 80 100 30 60 90 Cumulative Production (MBoe)(1)
Days of Production
Upper / Lower WC A Stagger Pad Well Average Upper WC A / WC B Stack Pad Well Average
Three Productive Wolfcamp Targets in Pecos County
13
- Positive results in two previously-untested
Wolfcamp flow units in Pecos County, one above and one below traditional Lower Wolfcamp A landing zone
- Lower Wolfcamp A / Wolfcamp B pad with stack
configuration on pace with Pecos standalone well average
- Upper / Lower Wolfcamp A pad with stagger
configuration j ust 20% below Pecos standalone average
Promising Results in Wolfcamp Zone Delineation Tests
PECOS (1) 3-stream; Normalized to 7,000’ stimulated lateral and for downtime
Parsley Energy Leasehold 2017 Wells Planned or In Progress Completed Horizontal Wells / Pads Completed Vertical Wells
1-Mile
Not e: Current invent ory count based on an average of t wo flow unit s across acreage 330’ S pacing
Upper Wolfcamp A Wolfcamp B Lower Wolfcamp A
200’ 200’ Upper/Lower WC A Stagger Lower WC A / WC B Stack
- S. Delaware Wolfcamp A and B Gun Barrel
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 30 60 90 120 150 180 Cumulative Production (Mboe)(1) Days of Production
Louis 4413H (Compressed Stages) Louis 4415H (Standard Design)
Significant Productivity Gain with Compressed Stage Design
14
- Initial Wolfcamp B compressed stage test outperforming
direct offset with standard design by 20% with less than 5% incremental cost
- Reduced stage spacing from ~170’ to ~100’ , increasing
number of total frac stages from ~30 to ~50
- Parsley’ s most prolific 1-mile Wolfcamp B well to date
- Compelling early-time proj ect economics
- Design generated higher bottomhole pressures than
standard design, indicating increased fracture efficiency and hydrocarbon recovery factor
- Broad application could translate to portfolio-wide
productivity increase
- S
everal additional compressed stage tests planned in 2H17
(1) 3-stream; Normalized to 7,000’ stimulated lateral and for downtime
Compressed Stage Test Outperforming Standard Design
+20% vs S tandard Design S tandard Design Compressed S tages
~170’ Stage Length ~100’ ~100’
5 clusters/ stg 3 clusters/ stg 3 clusters/ stg Compressed Stage Design Modification
2017 Guidance Summary
15
Unit Costs LOE ($/Boe) $3.50 - $4.50 $3.50 - $4.50 Cash G&A ($/Boe) $4.00 - $5.00 $4.00 - $5.00 Production & Ad Valorem Taxes (%
- f Revenue)
6.0 - 7.0% 6.0 - 7.0% Capital Program Drilling & Completion ($MM) $840 - $960 $840 - $960 Infrastructure & Other ($MM) $160 - $190 $160 - $190 Total Development Expenditures ($MM) $1,000 - $1,150 $1,000 - $1,150 % Non-Operated 3 – 5% 3 – 5% Activity Gross Operated Horizontal Completions Midland Basin Delaware Basin Average Lateral Length 130 – 150 95 – 105 35 – 45 ~8,000’ 120 – 140 95 – 105 25 – 35 ~8,000’ Gross Operated Vertical Completions 5 - 10 5 - 10 Average Working Interest 85 – 95% 85 – 95% Production Annual Net Production (MBoe/d) % Oil 4Q17 Net Production (MBoe/d) 2017E (Previous) 65 – 71 68 – 73% 78 – 88 2017E (Updated) 67 - 73 67 – 70% 80 - 90
At 2Q17 update:
- Increased FY17 and 4Q17 production guidance on stronger
well productivity
- Adj usted product mix to reflect infusion of acquired
vertical production, improved plant efficiencies, increased Wolfcamp C contribution, and broadly higher gas recoveries
- S
hifted 10 Delaware completions to early 2018
- Maintained full-year capital budget
- Accelerated spuds offset fewer completions
Quarterly Completion Cadence
Midland Basin Delaware Basin Capital Allocation (%
- f 2017E capex)
65 – 70% 30 – 35%
2017E Capital Allocation
22 27 30 - 40 40 - 50 1Q17 2Q17E 3Q17E 4Q17E
Gross Operated Horizontal Completions
Parsley Energy Investment Summary
16
Parsley Energy Leasehold HOWARD GLASSCOCK REAGAN UPTON MIDLAND MARTIN ANDREWS ECTOR CRANE WARD PECOS REEVES LOVING WINKLER GAINES DAWSON MITCHELL STERLING IRION
- Premier acreage in oil
windows
- S
trong financial position
- Robust returns
- Abundant resource upside
- Capital efficient growth
Investment Highlights
17
SUPPLEMENTARY SLIDES
Midland Basin Production Overview
18
(1) Includes Parsley completed Midland Wolfcamp A/B and Lower Spraberry wells in core operating area; (2) Includes all Parsley completed Midland Wolfcamp A/B/C and Lower Spraberry wells in the Midland Basin.
- Oil volumes tracking type curve
- Gas volumes outpacing type curve
Midland Basin GOR and % Oil Trends(1) Midland Basin Production vs 1 MMBoe Type Curve
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 180 360 540 720 3-Stream Net of POP Oil Cut % GOR (scf/bbl) Days of Production GOR % Oil
- Wolfcamp A/ B wells showing
relatively stable GOR and oil % after initial drawdown period
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 90 180 270 360 450 540 630 720 Cumulative Production: Oil (MBo) and Gas (MMscf)(2) Days of Production 1MMBOE Gross Oil Midland Basin Actual Oil 1MMBOE Gross Gas Midland Basin Actual Gas
Efficient Midland Basin Drilling
19
- Three casing string design proving
effective across Midland Basin drilling program
- No shift in drilling pace through the
S an Andres zone
- Thick disposal interval and
distributed disposal network alleviate pressurization potential
Midland Basin Drill Times(1)
S an Andres Drilling Days
(1) Parsley vertical sections since 4Q16. Excludes wells drilled with pilot hole.
0' 1,000' 2,000' 3,000' 4,000' 5,000' 6,000' 7,000' 8,000' 9,000' 10,000' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vert ical Dept h
40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Parsley Energy
Capital Efficient Oil Growth
20
Sources: Bloomberg, FactSet. includes E&P Companies with oil accounting for 40% or more of 2016 production and is comprised of APA, BBG, CLR, CPE, CRC, CRZO, CXO, DNR, DVN, EGN, EOG, EPE, FANG, HES, LONE, LPI, MRO, MTDR, MUR, NFX, NOG, OAS, OXY, PE, PXD, REN, RSPP, SRCI, WLL, and WPX; (1) Production from reported acquisitions/divestitures excluded from calculations based on estimated monthly decline of 3%; capital expenditures adjusted for acquisitions of royalty interests where disclosed
2Q17 % Liquids Organic Bo/d Added per $MM Capex – LTM(1)
(60) (40) (20) 20 40 60 Parsley Energy
Favorable production mix, with high oil/ liquids weighting Top-tier organic oil growth per capex dollar
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 90 180 270 360 450 540 630 720 Cumulative Production (MBoe)(2) Days of Production Midland
- S. Delaware
(1) 3-stream; Normalized for downtime; Average IP30s and IP30s per 1,000’ reflect unweighted average of well set; (2) Normalized to 7,000’ stimulated lateral and for downtime; (3) Wells achieving a 30-day IP since 1Q17 quarterly update
Positive Well Performance Trends
Midland Delaware Wells 22 5 Average Lateral Length 7,730’ 7,090’ 30-day IP (Boe/d) 1,245 1,056 30-day IP per 1,000’ (Boe/d) 165 154 % Oil 74% 78%
2Q17 Well Summary(1)(3) Midland Basin Normalized IP30s Continue to Strengthen(1)
163 167 171 180 165 50 100 150 200 2H15 1H16 2H16 1Q17 2Q17 IP30 per 1000' (Boe/d) 185*
* Excludes Downspaced Wolfcamp B Wells
- S
t rong well performance in 2Q17 despit e high proport ion of delineat ion proj ect s
- During 2Q17, t he Morgan 25-26-4215H in Upt on Count y
set a new company record for highest IP30 in t he Wolfcamp A at 2,213 Boe/ d
`
21
Expansive, High-quality Drilling Inventory
22 Horizontal Drilling Inventory(1)
(1) As of end 2Q17 pro forma for recently executed acreage trades; Location counts rounded to the nearest ten; (2) Assumes current annual ~130 completion run rate; (3) 16 wells per section reflects two landing zones (4) Reflects an average of two landing zones
- Extensive inventory of premium drilling
locations provides visibility to years of high- return production growth
- Operate 93%
- f net inventory
- 12+ drilling years of long-lateral, high
working interest, operated inventory in Development Zones(2)
- Minimum 90%
working interest
- Minimum 7,500’ lateral length
- Abundant inventory upside through
increased development density and new target possibilities, including the Jo Mill and Woodford intervals
- Nearly 600 net Wolfcamp locations in the
S
- uthern Delaware Basin with a low average
royalty burden of 15%
GROSS NET WELLS PER SECTION Development Zones Midland Basin Lower S praberry 1,490 870 8 Wolfcamp A 1,850 1,060 8 Wolfcamp B 3,170 1,890 8 / 16(3) Wolfcamp C 1,460 920 8 Delaware Basin Wolfcamp 610 570 16(4) Development Total 8,580 5,310 Delineation Zones Midland Basin Middle S praberry 1,050 600 5 / 6 Cline 1,900 1,140 8 Atoka 1,450 870 8 Delaware Basin 2nd Bone S pring 160 150 4 3rd Bone S pring 160 150 4 Delineation Total 4,720 2,910 Total 13,300 8,220
Robust Well Economics
23
$40 WTI $60 WTI $50 WTI
$0.0 $0.5 $1.0 $1.5 $2.0 $2.5 $3.0 $3.5 $4.0 $4.5 $5.0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% $5.5 MM D&C $6.0 MM D&C $6.5 MM D&C ROR NPV $0.0 $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0 $7.0 $8.0 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% $5.5 MM D&C $6.0 MM D&C $6.5 MM D&C ROR NPV $0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% $5.5 MM D&C $6.0 MM D&C $6.5 MM D&C ROR NPV
Current D&C Costs(1)
Type curve-implied returns are strong across oil price spectrum Actual results are outpacing type curve, translating to even stronger returns on development program
Midland Basin ROR and NPV Sensitivities
Note: Economics based on 1 MMBoe type curve; NGL price 40% of WTI; Gas $3/Mcf; (1) Based on 7,000’ stimulated lateral
Efficient Reserve Growth
24
- YE16 proved reserves up 80%
Y/ Y (oil up 85% Y/ Y) despite writing off remaining ~18 MMBoe of vertical PUD reserves
- S
trong organic reserve replacement ratio of approximately 680%
(2)
- PD F&D down 70%
Y/ Y to $8.04/ Boe(3) Strong Growth in Proved Reserves
Total Proved Reserves (MMBoe) Oil (MMBbl) Gas (Bcf) NGL (MMBbl) Total (MMBoe) PDP 59.3 121.8 23.7 103.3 PDNP 1.9 2.2 0.6 2.8 PUD 75.4 99.7 24.2 116.2
Total Proved 136.6 223.7 48.5 222.3
124
- 14
- 4
- 7
24 99 222
- 50
50 100 150 200 250
YE15 Prod. Rev. Divest. Acq. Adds YE16
(1) Source: SGS E&P Comp Sheets – Week Ending June 23, 2017. Companies include APA, APC, AR, BBG, CDEV, CHK, CLR, COG, CPE, CRK, CRZO, CXO, DNR, DVN, ECA, ECR, EGN, EOG, EPE, EQT, FANG, GPOR, HES, HK, JAG, JONE, LPI, MRO, MTDR, NBL, NFX, NOG, OAS, OXY, PDCE, PE, PXD, QEP, REN, RICE, RRC, RSPP, SD, SGY, SM, SN, SRCI, SWN, SWTF, UNT, WLL, WPX, WTI, XCO, XEC, and XOG. Oily E&P Companies are defined as companies with 2016 percent oil of 40% or greater, and Gassy E&P Companies are defined as companies with 2016 percent
- il of less than 40%; (2) Organic reserve replacement ratio calculated as total 2016 reserves additions and revisions (technical and pricing) divided by total 2016 production; excludes
acquisitions and divestitures; (3) PD F&D calculated as total 2016 Capex (including Infrastructure and Other) divided by total 2016 proved developed reserves additions and revisions (technical and pricing); excludes acquisitions and divestitures; (4) Reserve summary as of 12/31/2016 and audited by NSAI; Data for Parsley only; not pro forma for pending acquisitions
Proved Reserves Summary(4)
+80%
$0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $40
PD F&D ($/Boe) Ranks Highly among Oily E&Ps(1)
Oily E&P Companies Gassy E&P Companies Parsley Energy
Substantial Oil Hedge Position
25
Hedge positions as of 8/24/2017; (1) When the NYMEX price is above the put price, Parsley receives the NYMEX price. When the NYMEX price is between the put price and the short put price, Parsley receives the put price. When the NYMEX price is below the short put price, Parsley receives the NYMEX price plus the difference between the short put price and the put price; (2) Functions similarly to put spreads except that when the index price is at or above the call price, Parsley receives the call price; (3) Premium realizations represent net premiums paid (including deferred premiums), which are recognized as income or loss in the period of settlement; (4) When the NYMEX price is above the call price, Parsley receives the call price. When the NYMEX is below the put price, Parsley receives the put price. When the NYMEX price is between the call and put prices, Parsley receives the NYMEX price; (5) Parsley receives the strike price; (6) Parsley receives the swap price
3Q17 4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19 2Q19 3Q19 4Q19 Put Spreads (MBbls/d)1 35.7 45.5 38.3 37.9 42.4 45.7 6.7 6.6 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $51.23 $50.96 $51.74 $51.09 $49.52 $49.55 $50.00 $50.00 Short Put Price ($/ Bbl) $41.14 $41.43 $41.09 $41.09 $39.52 $39.55 $40.00 $40.00 Three Way Collars (MBbls/d)2 21.7 28.0 31.0 31.0 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.2 Short Call Price ($/ Bbl) $68.85 $70.79 $75.65 $75.65 $80.40 $80.40 $80.40 $80.40 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 Short Put Price ($/ Bbl) $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 $40.00 Premium Realization ($MM)3 ($8.3) ($14.6) ($21.2) ($19.6) ($16.7) ($18.0) ($4.2) ($4.2) ($1.5) ($1.5) Collars (MBbls/d)4 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Short Call Price ($/ Bbl) $59.73 $59.98 $61.31 $61.31 $61.31 $61.31 Put Price ($/ Bbl) $46.75 $46.75 $45.67 $45.67 $45.67 $45.67 Swaps (MBbls/d)5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Strike Price ($/ Bbl) $55.00 $55.00 $55.00 $55.00 $55.00 $55.00 Total MBbls/d Hedged 40.2 50.0 63.5 69.4 76.9 80.1 15.0 14.8 8.2 8.2 Mid-Cush Basis Swaps (MBbls/ d)6 16.7 16.7 9.8 9.8 9.7 9.7 Swap Price ($/ Bbl) ($1.00) ($1.00) ($0.92) ($0.92) ($0.92) ($0.92)