Significant Accounting Policies

9 Months Ended

Jan. 31, 2015

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Significant Accounting Policies

(a) Use of Estimates:

The preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant estimates include volumes of oil and natural gas reserves, abandonment obligations, impairment of oil and natural gas properties, depreciation and accretion, income taxes, fair value of financial instruments, and contingencies.

Oil and gas proven reserve estimates, which are the basis for unit-of-production depletion and the full cost ceiling test, have a number of 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 gas that are ultimately recovered. In addition, reserve estimates are vulnerable to changes in prices of crude oil and gas. Such prices have been volatile in the past and can be expected to be volatile in the future. As of January 31, 2015, the Company had proven reserves in Oklahoma in relation to the Bandolier transaction.

(b) Cash and Cash Equivalents:

Cash and cash equivalents include all highly liquid monetary instruments with original maturities of three months or less when purchased. These investments are carried at cost, which approximates fair value. Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash deposits. The Company maintains its cash in institutions insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). At times, the Company’s cash and cash equivalent balances may be uninsured or in amounts that exceed the FDIC insurance limits.

(c) Oil and Gas Operations:

Oil and Gas Properties: The Company uses the full-cost method of accounting for its exploration and development activities. Under this method of accounting, the costs of both successful and unsuccessful exploration and development activities are capitalized as oil and gas property and equipment. Proceeds from the sale or disposition of oil and gas properties are accounted for as a reduction to capitalized costs unless the gain or loss would significantly alter the relationship between capitalized costs and proved reserves of oil and natural gas attributable to a country, in which case a gain or loss would be recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. All of the Company’s oil and gas properties are located within the continental United States, its sole cost center.

Oil and gas properties may include costs that are excluded from costs being depleted. Oil and gas costs excluded represent investments in unproved properties and major development projects in which the Company owns a direct interest. These unproved property costs include non-producing leasehold, geological and geophysical costs associated with leasehold or drilling interests and in process exploration drilling costs. All costs excluded are reviewed at least annually to determine if impairment has occurred.

The Company accounts for its unproven long-lived assets in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 360-10-05, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.” ASC Topic 360-10-05 requires that long-lived assets be reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the historical cost carrying value of an asset may no longer be appropriate. As of April 30, 2014, management engaged a third party to perform an independent study of the oil and gas assets. Management concluded that the Montana assets were impaired by $75,000 and the Kansas assets were impaired by $4,638,973. The Company recorded $4,713,973 impairment to the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended April 30, 2014.

Proved Oil and Gas Reserves: In accordance with Rule 4-10 of SEC Regulation S-X, proved oil and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids which geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions. All of the Company’s oil and gas properties with proven reserves were impaired to the salvage value prior to the Bandolier transaction. The price used to establish economic producibility is the average price during the 12-month period preceding the end of the entity’s fiscal year and calculated as the un-weighted arithmetic average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month within such 12-month period. Upon completion of the Bandolier transaction, the Company acquired $2,460,632 in proved developed oil and gas assets and $5,921,641 in proven undeveloped oil and gas assets.

Depletion, Depreciation and Amortization: Depletion, depreciation and amortization is provided using the unit-of-production method based upon estimates of proved oil and gas reserves with oil and gas production being converted to a common unit of measure based upon their relative energy content. Investments in unproved properties and major development projects are not amortized until proved reserves associated with the projects can be determined or until impairment occurs. If the results of an assessment indicate that the properties are impaired, the amount of the impairment is deducted from the capitalized costs to be amortized. Once the assessment of unproved properties is complete and when major development projects are evaluated, the costs previously excluded from amortization are transferred to the full cost pool and amortization begins. The amortizable base includes estimated future development costs and, where significant, dismantlement, restoration and abandonment costs, net of estimated salvage value.

In arriving at rates under the unit-of-production method, the quantities of recoverable oil and natural gas reserves are established based on estimates made by the Company’s geologists and engineers which require significant judgment, as does the projection of future production volumes and levels of future costs, including future development costs. In addition, considerable judgment is necessary in determining when unproved properties become impaired and in determining the existence of proved reserves once a well has been drilled. All of these judgments may have significant impact on the calculation of depletion expenses. There have been no material changes in the methodology used by the Company in calculating depletion, depreciation and amortization of oil and gas properties under the full cost method during the three and nine months ended January 31, 2015 and 2014.

(d) Asset Retirement Obligations:

The Company recognizes a liability for the estimated fair value of site restoration and abandonment costs when the obligations are legally incurred and the fair value can be reasonably estimated. The fair value of the obligations is based on the estimated cash flow required to settle the obligations discounted using the Company’s credit adjusted risk-free interest rate. The obligation is recorded as a liability with a corresponding increase in the carrying amount of the oil and gas assets. The capitalized amount will be depleted on a unit-of-production method. The liability is increased each period, or accretes, due to the passage of time and a corresponding amount is recorded in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Revisions to the estimated fair value would result in an adjustment to the liability and the capitalized amount in oil and gas assets.

(e) Oil and Gas Revenue:

Sales of oil and gas, net of any royalties, are recognized when oil has been delivered to a custody transfer point, persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists, the rights and responsibility of ownership pass to the purchaser upon delivery, collection of revenue from the sale is reasonably assured, and the sales price is fixed or determinable. The Company sells oil and gas on a monthly basis. Virtually all of its contracts’ pricing provisions are tied to a market index, with certain adjustments based on, among other factors, whether a well delivers to a gathering or transmission line, the quality of the oil and gas, and prevailing supply and demand conditions, so that the price of the oil and gas fluctuates to remain competitive with other available oil supplies.

(f) Stock-based Compensation:

Generally, all forms of stock-based compensation, including stock option grants, warrants, and restricted stock grants are measured at their fair value utilizing an option pricing model on the award’s grant date, based on the estimated number of awards that are ultimately expected to vest.

The Company recognizes compensation expense for all equity–based payments in accordance with ASC 718 “Share–based payments". Under fair value recognition provisions, the Company recognizes equity–based compensation net of an estimated forfeiture rate and recognizes compensation cost only for those shares expected to vest over the requisite service period of the award.

The fair value of option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black–Scholes option valuation model. The Black–Scholes option valuation model requires the development of assumptions that are input into the model. These assumptions are the expected stock volatility, the risk–free interest rate, the option’s expected life, the dividend yield on the underlying stock and the expected forfeiture rate. Expected volatility is calculated based on the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock over the expected option life and other appropriate factors. Risk–free interest rates are calculated based on continuously compounded risk–free rates for the appropriate term. The dividend yield is assumed to be zero as the Company has never paid or declared any cash dividends on its common stock and does not intend to pay dividends on the common stock in the foreseeable future. The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on historical experience.

Determining the appropriate fair value model and calculating the fair value of equity–based payment awards requires the input of the subjective assumptions described above. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of equity–based payment awards represent management’s best estimates, which involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. As a result, if factors change and the Company uses different assumptions, the equity–based compensation expense could be materially different in the future. In addition, the Company is required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and recognize expense only for those shares expected to vest. If the actual forfeiture rate is materially different from our estimate, the equity–based compensation expense could be significantly different from what the Company has recorded in the current period.

The Company accounts for share–based payments granted to non–employees in accordance with ASC 505, “Equity Based Payments to Non–Employees”. The Company determines the fair value of the stock–based payment as either the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued, whichever is more reliably measurable.  If the fair value of the equity instruments issued is used, it is measured using the stock price and other measurement assumptions as of the earlier of either (1) the date at which a commitment for performance by the counterparty to earn the equity instruments is reached, or (2) the date at which the counterparty’s performance is complete.

The expenses resulting from stock-based compensation are recorded as general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statement of operations, depending on the nature of the services provided.

(g) Per Share Amounts:

Basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per common share is determined using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period, adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents. In periods when losses are reported, which is the case for the three and nine months ended January 31, 2015 and 2014 presented in these condensed consolidated financial statements, the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding excludes common stock equivalents because their inclusion would be anti-dilutive.

The Company had the following common stock equivalents at January 31, 2015 and 2014:

As at	January 31, 2015		January 31, 2014
Stock Options		108,938,281		88,228,281
Stock Purchase Warrants		40,625,000		40,625,000
Compensation Warrants		-		230,000
		149,563,281		129,083,281

(h) Fair Value of Financial Instruments:

All financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable and accrued expenses are recognized on the condensed consolidated balance sheet initially at carrying value. The carrying value of these assets approximates their fair value due to their short-term maturities.

At each balance sheet date, the Company assesses financial assets for impairment with any impairment recorded in the condensed consolidated statement of operations. To assess loans and receivables for impairment, the Company evaluates the probability of collection of accounts receivable and records an allowance for doubtful accounts, which reduces loans and receivables to the amount management reasonably believes will be collected. In determining the amount of the allowance, the following factors are considered: the length of the time the receivable has been outstanding, specific knowledge of each customer’s financial condition and historical experience.

Market risk is the risk that changes in commodity prices will affect the Company’s oil sales, cash flows or the value of its financial instruments. The objective of commodity price risk management is to manage and control market risk exposures within acceptable limits while maximizing returns.

The Company is exposed to changes in oil prices which impact its revenues and to changes in natural gas process which impact its operating expenses.

The Company does not utilize financial derivatives or other contracts to manage commodity price risks.

Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price).

Fair value measurements are categorized using a valuation hierarchy for disclosure of the inputs used to measure fair value, which prioritize the inputs into three broad levels:

Level 1 - Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.

Level 2 - Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date, and include those financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation methodologies.

Level 3 - Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value.

(i) Subsequent Events:

The Company evaluates subsequent events through the date the condensed consolidated financial statements are issued.

(j) Recent Accounting Pronouncements:

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update 2014–09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Amendments in this Update create Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, and supersede the revenue recognition requirements in Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, including most industry–specific revenue recognition guidance throughout the Industry Topics of the Codification. In addition, the amendments supersede the cost guidance in Subtopic 605–35, Revenue Recognition—Construction–Type and Production–Type Contracts, and create new Subtopic 340–40, Other Assets and Deferred Costs—Contracts with Customers. In summary, the core principle of Topic 606 is that an entity recognizes revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. This Accounting Standards Update is the final version of Proposed Accounting Standards Update 2011–230—Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Proposed Accounting Standards Update 2011–250—Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Codification Amendments, both of which have been deleted. Accounting Standards Update 2014–09. The amendments in this Update are effective for the Company for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that reporting period. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2014–09 on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In June 2014, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2014–12, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718), which clarifies accounting for share–based payments for which the terms of an award provide that a performance target could be achieved after the requisite service period. That is the case when an employee is eligible to retire or otherwise terminate employment before the end of the period in which a performance target could be achieved and still be eligible to vest in the award if and when the performance target is achieved. The updated guidance clarifies that such a term should be treated as a performance condition that affects vesting. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant–date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the periods for which the requisite service has already been rendered. The guidance will be effective for the annual periods (and interim periods therein) ending after December 15, 2015. Early application is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2014–12 on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In August 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update 2014–15, Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern.  The Update provides U.S. GAAP guidance on management’s responsibility in evaluating whether there is substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and about related footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued.  This Accounting Standards Update is the final version of Proposed Accounting Standards Update 2013–300—Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Going Concern Presumption, which has been deleted. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2014–15 on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In November 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-16 (ASU 2014-16), Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity. The amendments in this ASU do not change the current criteria in U.S. GAAP for determining when separation of certain embedded derivative features in a hybrid financial instrument is required. The amendments clarify that an entity should consider all relevant terms and features, including the embedded derivative feature being evaluated for bifurcation, in evaluating the nature of the host contract. The ASU applies to all entities that are issuers of, or investors in, hybrid financial instruments that are issued in the form of a share and is effective for public business entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2014–16 on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

In November 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-17 Business Combinations (Topic 805), Pushdown Accounting. The amendment provides that acquired entities have the option to apply pushdown accounting in its separate financial statements upon occurrence of an event in which an acquirer obtains control of an acquired entity. The acquired entity will have the option to elect to apply pushdown accounting in a subsequent reporting period and would be treated as a change in accounting principle. Additional disclosures are required to enable the users of the financial statements to evaluate the effect of pushdown accounting. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of ASU 2014–17 on the condensed consolidated financial statements.

Management does not believe that any other recently issued, but not yet effective accounting pronouncements, if adopted, would have a material effect on the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements.