The Company was incorporated in the state of Nevada on May 29, 2002 as Mondial Ventures, Inc.

In December 2003, the Company owned a 100% interest, subject to a 2% net smelter returns royalty, in four mineral claims located in the Namaimo Mining Division of British Columbia.

Effective December 1, 2010, the Company increased its authorized common shares to 250,000,000 with a par value of $0.001, and authorized shares of blank check preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share.

On December 15, 2010 the claims related to the 100% interest owned in the British Columbia mineral claims expired.

On December 30, 2010, the Company completed a merger with Legacy Athletic Apparel, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company (Legacy) in a Merger Agreement dated December 14, 2010, by and between the Company and Legacy. Pursuant to the Plan of Merger, Legacy merged into the Company, with the Company being the surviving entity (“the Merger”). The transaction was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting.

On July 31, 2012, the Company purchased oil and gas assets and interests in the J.B. Tubb Leasehold Estate from EGPI Firecreek, Inc. The Company issued 14,000,000 shares of common stock to EGPI Firecreek, Inc. and the assumption of debt for 37.5% working interest and corresponding 28.125% net revenue interest in the oil and gas interests and pro rata oil and gas revenue and reserves in the North 40 plus additional right agreement for the South 40 of the J.B. Tubb Leasehold Estate, and for all depths below the surface to 8,500 ft. Also included are all related assets, fixtures, equipment, three well heads and three well bores.

On October 30, 2012, the Company entered into a Definitive Short Form Agreement with EGPI Firecreek, Inc. for development of 240 acre leases, reserves, three wells and equipment located in Callahan, Steven and Shackelford Counties, West Central Texas, which includes but is not limited to continuing negotiations to buy out 50% partner interests, due diligence, evaluation and preparation including an initial 3-D Seismic study reserve studies and roll over leases if necessary. The agreement is non-binding and the parties intend to finalize the agreement by executing a Definitive Long Form Agreement in the future. The parties had until November 6, 2012 to finalize this agreement but did not do so by that date. Both parties are still interested in pursuing this transaction in the future.

Use of Estimates- The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make reasonable estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of the assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses at the date of the consolidated financial statements and for the period they include. Actual results may differ from these estimates.

Oil and Gas: Revenue is recognized from oil and gas sales in the period of delivery. Settlement on sales occurs anywhere from two weeks to two months after the delivery date. The Company recognizes revenue when an arrangement exists, the product has been delivered, the sales price has been fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured.

Cash Equivalents The Company considers all highly liquid investments with the original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents. There were no cash equivalents as of March 31, 2013 or March 31, 2012.

Oil and Gas Activities The Company uses the successful efforts method of accounting for oil and gas producing activities. Under this method, acquisition costs for proved and unproved properties are capitalized when incurred. Exploration costs, including geological and geophysical costs, the costs of carrying and retaining unproved properties and exploratory dry hole drilling costs are expensed. Development costs, including the costs to drill and equip developmental wells, and successful exploratory drilling costs to locate proved reserves are capitalized.

Exploratory drilling costs are capitalized when incurred pending the determination of whether a well has found proved reserves. A determination of whether a well has found proved reserves is made shortly after drilling is completed. The determination is based on a process which relies on interpretations of available geologic, geophysic, and engineering data. If a well is determined to be unsuccessful, the capitalized drilling costs will be charged to expense in the period the determination is made. If an exploratory well requires a major capital expenditure before production can begin, the cost of drilling the exploratory well will continue to be carried as an asset pending determination of whether proved reserves have been found only as long as: i) the well has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion as a producing well if the required capital expenditure is made, and: ii) drilling of the additional exploratory well is under way or firmly planned for the near future. If drilling in the area is not under way or firmly planned, or if the well has not found a commercially producible quantity of reserves, the exploratory well is assumed to be impaired, and its costs are charged to expense.

In the absence of a determination as to whether the reserves that have been found can be classified as proved, the cost of drilling such an exploratory well is not carried as an asset for more than one year following completion of drilling. If after that year is passed, a determination that proved reserves exist cannot be made, the well is assumed impaired and it’s costs are charged to expense. Its costs can, however, continue to be capitalized if a sufficient quantity of reserves is discovered in the well to justify its completion as a producing well and sufficient progress is made in assessing the reserves and the well’s economic and operating feasibility.

The impairment of unamortized capital costs is measured at a lease level and is reduced to fair value if it is determined that the sum of expected future net cash flows is less than the net book value. The Company determines if impairment has occurred through either adverse changes or as a result of the annual review of all fields.

Asset Retirement Obligations (“ARO”) - The estimated costs of restoration and removal of facilities are accrued. The fair value of a liability for an asset's retirement obligation is recorded in the period in which it is incurred and the corresponding cost capitalized by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The liability is accreted to its then present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated with the related long-lived asset. If the liability is settled for an amount other than the recorded amount, a gain or loss is recognized. For all periods presented, estimated future costs of abandonment and dismantlement are included in the full cost amortization base and are amortized as a component of depletion expense. At March 31, 2013 and 2012, the ARO of $5,237 and $0 is included in liabilities and fixed assets.

Development costs of proved oil and gas properties, including estimated dismantlement, restoration and abandonment costs and acquisition costs, are depreciated and depleted on a field basis by the units-of-production method using proved developed and proved reserves, respectively. The costs of unproved oil and gas properties are generally combined and impaired over a period that is based on the average holding period for such properties and the Company's experience of successful drilling.

Costs of retired, sold or abandoned properties that make up a part of an amortization base (partial field) are charged to accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization if the units-of-production rate is not significantly affected. Accordingly, a gain or loss, if any, is recognized only when a group of proved properties (entire field) that make up the amortization base has been retired, abandoned or sold.

Stock-Based Compensation- The Company estimates the fair value of share-based payment awards made to employees and directors, including stock options, restricted stock and employee stock purchases related to employee stock purchase plans, on the date of grant using an option-pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as an expense ratably over the requisite service periods. We estimate the fair value of each share-based award using the Black-Sholes option pricing model. The Black-Sholes model is highly complex and dependent on key estimates by management. The estimates with the greatest degree of subjective judgment are the estimated lives of the stock-based awards and the estimated volatility of our stock price. The Black-Sholes model is also used for our valuation of warrants.

Earnings Per Common Share-Basic earnings per common share is calculated based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per common share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted average number of common shares and dilutive common share equivalents (convertible notes and interest on the notes, stock awards and stock options) outstanding during the period. Dilutive earnings per common share reflects the potential dilution that could occur if options to purchase common stock were exercised for shares of common stock. Basic and diluted EPS are the same as the effect of our potential common stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive.

Fair Value Measurements - On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted guidance which defines fair value, establishes a framework for using fair value to measure financial assets and liabilities on a recurring basis, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. Beginning on January 1, 2009, the Company also applied the guidance to non-financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis, which includes goodwill and intangible assets. The guidance establishes a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the Company’s assumptions of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on the best information available in the circumstances. The hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the reliability of the inputs as follows:

Level 1 - Valuation is based upon unadjusted quoted market prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the Company has the ability to access.

Level 2 -Valuation is based upon quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in inactive markets; or valuations based on models where the significant inputs are observable in the market.

Level 3 - Valuation is based on models where significant inputs are not observable. The unobservable inputs reflect the Company's own assumptions about the inputs that market participants would use.

The following table presents assets and liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of March 31, 2013 on a recurring and non-recurring basis:

Total

Gains

Description

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

(Losses)

None

The following table presents assets and liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of December 31, 2012 on a recurring and non-recurring basis:

Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		(Losses)

None	$	-	$	-	$	-	$	104,272

The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and long-term debt. The estimated fair value of cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate their carrying amounts due to the short-term nature of these instruments. The carrying value of long-term debt also approximates fair value since their terms are similar to those in the lending market for comparable loans with comparable risks. None of these instruments are held for trading purposes.

Fixed Assets- Fixed assets are stated at cost. Depreciation expense is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the asset. The following is a summary of the estimated useful lives used in computing depreciation expense:

Expenditures for major repairs and renewals that extend the useful life of the asset are capitalized. Minor repair expenditures are charged to expense as incurred.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets-The Company has adopted Accounting Standards Codification subtopic 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment ("ASC 360-10"). ASC 360-10 requires that long-lived assets and certain identifiable intangibles held and used by the Company be reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The Company evaluates its long-lived assets for impairment annually or more often if events and circumstances warrant. Events relating to recoverability may include significant unfavorable changes in business conditions, recurring losses or a forecasted inability to achieve break-even operating results over an extended period. The Company evaluates the recoverability of long-lived assets based upon forecasted undiscounted cash flows. Should impairment in value be indicated, the carrying value of intangible assets will be adjusted, based on estimates of future discounted cash flows resulting from the use and ultimate disposition of the asset. ASC 360-10 also requires that those assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of the carrying amount or the fair value less costs to sell.

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets - The Company periodically reviews the carrying value of intangible assets not subject to amortization, including goodwill, to determine whether impairment may exist. Goodwill and certain intangible assets are assessed annually, or when certain triggering events occur, for impairment using fair value measurement techniques. These events could include a significant change in the business climate, legal factors, a decline in operating performance, competition, sale or disposition of a significant portion of the business, or other factors. Specifically, goodwill impairment is determined using a two-step process. The first step of the goodwill impairment test is used to identify potential impairment by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. The Company uses level 3 inputs and a discounted cash flow methodology to estimate the fair value of a reporting unit. A discounted cash flow analysis requires one to make various judgmental assumptions including assumptions about future cash flows, growth rates, and discount rates. The assumptions about future cash flows and growth rates are based on the Company’s budget and long-term plans. Discount rate assumptions are based on an assessment of the risk inherent in the respective reporting units. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is considered not impaired and the second step of the impairment test is unnecessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit’s goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill recognized in a business combination. That is, the fair value of the reporting unit is allocated to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination and the fair value of the reporting unit was the purchase price paid to acquire the reporting unit. The Company’s evaluation of goodwill completed at December 31, 2012 pertaining to Legacy resulted in a full impairment. This impairment was recorded as an impairment expense of $104,272.

Income taxes- The Company accounts for income taxes using the asset and liability method, which requires the establishment of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the Company’s assets and liabilities at enacted tax rates expected to be in effect when such amounts are realized or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. A valuation allowance is provided to the extent deferred tax assets may not be recoverable after consideration of the future reversal of deferred tax liabilities, tax planning strategies, and projected future taxable income.

The Company uses a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The guidance requires the Company to recognize tax benefits only for tax positions that are more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by tax authorities. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50 percent likely to be realized upon settlement. A liability for “unrecognized tax benefits” is recorded for any tax benefits claimed in our tax returns that do not meet these recognition and measurement standards.

Recent accounting pronouncements - Effective January 2012, we adopted ASU No. 2011-04, Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (ASU 2011-04). ASU 2011-04 represents the converged guidance of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) on fair value measurement. A variety of measures are included in the update intended to either clarify existing fair value measurement requirements, change particular principles requirements for measuring fair value or for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For many of the requirements, the FASB does not intend to change the application of existing requirements under Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements. ASU 2011-04 was effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this update did not have a material impact on the financial statements.

Effective January 2012, we adopted ASU No. 2011-05, Presentation of Comprehensive Income (ASU 2011-05). ASU 2011-05 is intended to increase the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income and to facilitate convergence of accounting guidance in this area with that of the IASB. The amendments require that all non-owner changes in shareholders’ equity be presented in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-12, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 (ASU 2011-12). ASU 2011-12 defers the provisions of ASU 2011-05 that require the presentation of reclassification adjustments on the face of both the statement of income and statement of other comprehensive income. Amendments under ASU 2011-05 that were not deferred under ASU 2011-12 will be applied retrospectively for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this update did not have a material impact on the financial statements.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, “Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) of Fair Value Measurement – Topic 820.” ASU 2011-04 is intended to provide a consistent definition of fair value and improve the comparability of fair value measurements presented and disclosed in financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The amendments include those that clarify the FASB’s intent about the application of existing fair value measurement and disclosure requirements, as well as those that change a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or for disclosing information about fair value measurements. This update is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In December 2010, the FASB issued FASB ASU No. 2010-28, “When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts,” which is now codified under FASB ASC Topic 350, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other.” This ASU provides amendments to Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not a goodwill impairment exists. When determining whether it is more likely than not an impairment exists, an entity should consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors, such as a significant deterioration in market conditions, indicating an impairment may exist. FASB ASU No. 2010-28 is effective for fiscal years (and interim periods within those years) beginning after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is not permitted. Upon adoption of the amendments, an entity with reporting units having carrying amounts which are zero or negative is required to assess whether is it more likely than not the reporting units’ goodwill is impaired. If the entity determines impairment exists, the entity must perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test for that reporting unit or units. Step 2 involves allocating the fair value of the reporting unit to each asset and liability, with the excess being implied goodwill. An impairment loss results if the amount of recorded goodwill exceeds the implied goodwill. Any resulting goodwill impairment should be recorded as a cumulative-effect adjustment to beginning retained earnings in the period of adoption. This ASU did not have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11: Balance Sheet (topic 210): Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities, which requires new disclosure requirements mandating that entities disclose both gross and net information about instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position as well as instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. In addition, the standard requires disclosure of collateral received and posted in connection with master netting agreements or similar arrangements. This ASU is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. Entities should provide the disclosures required retrospectively for all comparative periods presented. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting ASU 2011-11 on the consolidated financial statements.

Other recent accounting pronouncements issued by the FASB (including its Emerging Issues Task Force), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission did not or are not believed by management to have a material impact on the Company’s present or future financial statements.