What was the primary reason for PVA's strategic shift in 2012?

The primary driver was the depressed price environment for natural gas due to oversupply. As shown on Slide 19, the company ceased drilling in dry gas plays despite having favorable hedges. They pivoted toward 'liquids-rich' plays like the Eagle Ford Shale, where oil and NGL prices offered better margins and higher returns on capital compared to dry gas.

How did PVA manage its financial risk during this period?

PVA utilized an aggressive hedging program and CAPEX reduction. According to Slide 4, they hedged 66% of their 2012 oil at $100.04/bbl and 31% of their gas at $5.43/MMBtu. Additionally, they cut their capital program by approximately 30% compared to 2011 levels to preserve liquidity and avoid the need for unattractive capital market raises.

What specific operational improvements were highlighted in the Eagle Ford Shale?

Slide 13 details significant cost efficiencies. Between 3Q11 and 4Q11, the average total well cost dropped from over $10 million to roughly $8 million. This was attributed to drilling efficiencies and altered completion designs. During the same period, sales volumes ramped up significantly, moving from near zero in 1Q11 to over 500 MBOE (projected) by early 2012.

What did the company's reserve profile look like at the time of this presentation?

As of year-end 2011, PVA reported 883 Bcfe of proved reserves. Slide 10 breaks this down geographically: Cotton Valley held the most at 261 Bcfe, followed by Selma Chalk at 170 Bcfe and Haynesville at 147 Bcfe. Notably, the Eagle Ford, despite being the growth engine, only accounted for 60 Bcfe of proved reserves at that time.

What were the company's options for building further liquidity?

Slide 4 outlines three main pillars: maintaining a $300 MM borrowing base, pursuing significant asset sales of high-decline or non-core gassy assets, and reducing capital expenditures. The company aimed to fund its 2012 CAPEX entirely through internal cash flow and asset sales, precluding the need for new equity or debt issuances in a difficult market.

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) Pitch Deck (2012) Breakdown

See all 22 slides of the Penn Virginia Corporation pitch deck, with a slide-by-slide teardown of what the deck does well and where it falls short.

The 2012 Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) investor presentation serves as a case study in defensive corporate maneuvering within the energy sector. Facing depressed natural gas prices, the company utilized this 22-slide deck to communicate a pivot toward oil and natural gas liquids (NGLs). Key financial metrics, such as a 30% reduction in year-over-year CAPEX and a robust hedging program, were emphasized to reassure investors of liquidity. The deck relies heavily on operational data from the Eagle Ford Shale to demonstrate efficiency gains, showing a decrease in well costs alongside increased…

Key takeaways

The company planned a significant reduction in capital expenditures, dropping from $446 MM in 2011 to a projected $300-325 MM in 2012 (Slide 4).
A strategic shift toward oil and NGLs resulted in adjusted EBITDAX growth, reaching approximately $65 million in 3Q11 (Slide 7).
PVA maintained a high level of price protection, with 66% of 2012 oil production hedged at a weighted average of $100.04 per barrel (Slide 4).
The Eagle Ford Shale became the primary focus, accounting for approximately 85% of the 2012 capital program (Slide 10).
Operational efficiency in the Eagle Ford was demonstrated by a reduction in average total well costs from over $10 million in 3Q11 to approximately $8 million in 4Q11 (Slide 13).
Total proved reserves were reported at 883 Bcfe at the end of 2011, with the largest portion (261 Bcfe) located in the Cotton Valley (Slide 10).
The company explicitly stated a cessation of drilling in dry gas plays due to oversupply, despite having hedges locked in above forecast prices (Slide 19).
Liquidity management was a central theme, with $184 MM in immediate liquidity reported as of February 29, 2012 (Slide 4).

Introduction: A Public Company in Transition

The Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) investor presentation from March 2012 is a technical and financial roadmap for a company navigating a volatile commodity market. Unlike early-stage startup decks that focus on vision and team, this NYSE-listed company deck (Slide 1) focuses on asset optimization, balance sheet preservation, and operational efficiency. The core narrative is a pivot: moving away from natural gas, which was suffering from oversupply, and toward oil and natural gas liquids (NGLs).

Slide 1: Title and Branding

The cover slide is functional, featuring the company logo and three photographs of drilling rigs. It establishes the scale of operations and provides the essential trading information (NYSE: PVA). The date, March 21, 2012, is critical context, as this was a period of significant price divergence between oil and natural gas in North America.

Slide 4: Options to Build Financial Liquidity

This is arguably the most important slide for an investor concerned about solvency. PVA outlines a clear defensive strategy. They state that current liquidity is sufficient, citing $184 MM available as of February 29, 2012. The slide lists three primary levers: asset sales, CAPEX reduction, and hedging. Specifically, they note a 30% reduction in the capital program compared to 2011 ($300-325 MM vs $446 MM). The hedging data is granular, showing 66% of 2012 oil hedged at $100.04 per barrel, providing a floor for revenue despite market fluctuations.

Slide 7: EBITDAX and Cash Margin Growth

PVA uses this slide to prove that their strategic shift is working. The bar chart shows Quarterly EBITDAX (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization, and Exploration expenses) growing from approximately $45 million in 1Q10 to over $60 million in 4Q11. The line graph overlaying the bars shows the Gross Operating Margin per Mcfe (thousand cubic feet equivalent) rising from under $3 in 2Q10 to over $5 in 4Q11. This visualizes the direct correlation between their 'Oil/Liquids Strategy' and improved profitability.

Slide 10: Core Operating Regions

This slide provides a geographic and asset-class breakdown. It uses a map of the United States (focusing on Texas, Pennsylvania, and Mississippi) to categorize plays into Oil/Liquids, Wet Gas, and Dry Gas. The slide reiterates the 2012 CAPEX focus: 85% of the budget is allocated to the Eagle Ford Shale. Two pie charts compare 2012E Production (41.5 Bcfe) against 2011 Proved Reserves (883 Bcfe). This highlights a mismatch: while the Eagle Ford is the growth engine, the bulk of the company's legacy reserves remain in gas-heavy regions like Cotton Valley and Selma Chalk.

Slide 13: Eagle Ford Shale Performance

Focusing on their primary growth asset, this slide presents two key charts. The 'Sales Volumes by Commodity' chart shows a massive ramp-up in production, particularly in net oil sales (represented in green). The second chart, '2H11 Drilling & Completion Costs,' is a classic efficiency play. It shows total well costs dropping from roughly $10.5 million in 3Q11 to $8 million in 4Q11. The company attributes this to 'drilling efficiencies and altered completion design,' which is a standard industry way of saying they learned how to drill faster and cheaper as they gained experience in the field.

Slide 18: Appendix Transition

A simple transition slide featuring a high-resolution image of a drilling rig. In a 22-slide deck, moving to the appendix at this stage suggests the core narrative has been established, and the remaining slides will provide supporting technical data.

Slide 19: Natural Gas Hedges

This slide addresses the 'elephant in the room': the depressed natural gas market. PVA shows that they have locked in prices well above the forecast. A bar chart compares their 'Weighted Average Floor / Swap Price' (ranging from $5.10 to $5.70 per MMBtu) against a 'Forecast Price' that dips toward $3.00. Despite these favorable hedges, the company explicitly states they are 'not drilling dry gas plays' because the commodity remains oversupplied. This demonstrates disciplined capital allocation—choosing not to chase production even when hedged, in favor of higher-return oil assets.

Slide 22: Contact Information

The final slide provides the corporate address in Radnor, PA, a phone number, and the company website. It is set against a backdrop of a drilling rig obscured by trees, maintaining the industrial theme of the presentation.

What PVA Does Well

The deck is exceptionally transparent regarding financial risk and mitigation. By listing specific hedge prices and floor values (Slide 4 and 19), PVA gives investors a clear way to model the company's downside protection. The use of 'EBITDAX' is appropriate for the sector, and the clear link between the strategic pivot and margin expansion (Slide 7) creates a compelling narrative of a management team reacting effectively to market conditions. The operational data on Slide 13 is also strong, providing concrete evidence of 'learning curve' benefits in their most important asset, the Eagle Ford Shale.

What is Missing

From the provided slides, there is a notable absence of a 'Team' or 'Management' slide. While this is common in quarterly investor updates for public companies, a teardown of a fundraising deck usually looks for the human element. Furthermore, there is no explicit 'Competitor' analysis. While they mention the broader commodity market, they do not compare their cost per well or flow rates against other operators in the Eagle Ford or Granite Wash. Finally, the deck lacks a long-term vision beyond 2012; it is very much a 'survive and pivot' document focused on the immediate fiscal year.

Founder Takeaways

Founders in capital-intensive industries should study Slide 4. It doesn't just say 'we need money'; it lists the 'Options to Build Financial Liquidity.' This shows a proactive approach to balance sheet management that doesn't rely solely on external investors. Additionally, the way PVA uses Slide 13 to show costs going down while volume goes up is the 'holy grail' of operational slides. If you can prove that you are getting more efficient as you scale, you significantly de-risk the investment. Lastly, the discipline shown on Slide 19—refusing to invest in a low-return area despite having hedges—is a lesson in avoiding the 'sunk cost' fallacy and staying focused on the highest-margin opportunities.

Frequently asked questions

What was the primary reason for PVA's strategic shift in 2012?: The primary driver was the depressed price environment for natural gas due to oversupply. As shown on Slide 19, the company ceased drilling in dry gas plays despite having favorable hedges. They pivoted toward 'liquids-rich' plays like the Eagle Ford Shale, where oil and NGL prices offered better margins and higher returns on capital compared to dry gas.
How did PVA manage its financial risk during this period?: PVA utilized an aggressive hedging program and CAPEX reduction. According to Slide 4, they hedged 66% of their 2012 oil at $100.04/bbl and 31% of their gas at $5.43/MMBtu. Additionally, they cut their capital program by approximately 30% compared to 2011 levels to preserve liquidity and avoid the need for unattractive capital market raises.
What specific operational improvements were highlighted in the Eagle Ford Shale?: Slide 13 details significant cost efficiencies. Between 3Q11 and 4Q11, the average total well cost dropped from over $10 million to roughly $8 million. This was attributed to drilling efficiencies and altered completion designs. During the same period, sales volumes ramped up significantly, moving from near zero in 1Q11 to over 500 MBOE (projected) by early 2012.
What did the company's reserve profile look like at the time of this presentation?: As of year-end 2011, PVA reported 883 Bcfe of proved reserves. Slide 10 breaks this down geographically: Cotton Valley held the most at 261 Bcfe, followed by Selma Chalk at 170 Bcfe and Haynesville at 147 Bcfe. Notably, the Eagle Ford, despite being the growth engine, only accounted for 60 Bcfe of proved reserves at that time.
What were the company's options for building further liquidity?: Slide 4 outlines three main pillars: maintaining a $300 MM borrowing base, pursuing significant asset sales of high-decline or non-core gassy assets, and reducing capital expenditures. The company aimed to fund its 2012 CAPEX entirely through internal cash flow and asset sales, precluding the need for new equity or debt issuances in a difficult market.

Cover slide of the Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — Public (NYSE) 2012 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck, slide 1 (2012)

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck: the facts

Company: Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA)
Year: 2012
Stage: Public (NYSE)
Slides: 22
Sector: Energy / Oil & Gas
Deck type: Investor Presentation
Outcome: Strategic pivot to oil/liquids
Headquarters: Radnor, PA

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck PDF

The full Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) deck is embedded on this page and can be read slide by slide in the browser — no download or account required. Each slide is covered in the breakdown above.

What the Penn Virginia Corporation pitch deck was used for

This March 21, 2012 investor presentation was delivered by Penn Virginia Corporation, then a small‑cap NYSE‑listed onshore E&P company, to public market investors. The deck explains a strategic pivot away from dry natural gas toward higher‑margin oil and liquids‑rich plays, led by the Eagle Ford Shale, after transformational capital allocation in 2010–2011. It positions PVA’s Eagle Ford drilling inventory, production growth and EBITDAX expansion, and argues that the equity remained attractively valued versus cash‑flow peers. While framed as an investor presentation rather than a specific equity issuance roadshow, it appears designed to support ongoing access to public equity and credit markets during this gas‑to‑oil transition.

Business model: Independent oil and gas exploration and production company focused on domestic onshore resources, with a strategic emphasis on oil and natural gas liquids plays, particularly the Eagle Ford Shale.

Year: 2012
Headquarters: Radnor, Pennsylvania, USA.
Industry: Oil & Gas Exploration and Production.

Round: Public offerings of common stock and convertible preferred equity by a NYSE‑listed issuer.

Raised: Approximately $140 million in gross proceeds from concurrent public offerings of common stock and depositary shares representing 6.00% convertible preferred equity, priced on October 12, 2012.

Use of funds as presented: Net proceeds (about $38 million from the common stock offering and roughly $96 million from the preferred equity offering) were expected to be used primarily to repay remaining borrowings under PVA’s revolving credit facility and for general corporate purposes.

What happened after the Penn Virginia Corporation deck

The March 2012 investor presentation preceded a series of steps in which PVA executed its liquids‑focused growth plan, expanded Eagle Ford reserves and inventory, and used public equity and convertible preferred offerings in October 2012, along with later debt and equity placements, to fund acquisitions and drilling. The deck’s core thesis of shifting value from gas to oil and NGLs was borne out t

By March 2012, PVA had approximately 40 Eagle Ford wells online and year‑end 2011 Eagle Ford PV‑10 of about $278 million
From Q2 2010 to early 2012, PVA grew oil/NGL production from around 2,461 barrels per day to about 7,194 barrels per day
In October 2012, PVA priced concurrent public offerings of 8 million shares of common stock at $5.00 per share and depos
PVA stated it would use the proceeds from the 2012 offerings primarily to repay borrowings under its revolving credit fa
By early 2013, PVA reported Eagle Ford crude reserves increasing to about 26.1 million barrels of oil equivalent, roughl
In April 2013, PVA announced an agreement to acquire Eagle Ford Hunter, Inc. for roughly $400 million, financed in part

What the Penn Virginia Corporation deck got right

Clear articulation of a focused yet diversified asset portfolio. The deck presents Penn Virginia as a "small‑cap domestic onshore E&P" with a focused yet diversified asset base: a core Eagle Ford oil play with YE11 PV‑10 of about $278 million and HBP positions in Granite Wash, East Texas, Mississippi and Appalachia with YE11 PV‑10 around $596 million, giving investors both growth and optionality.
Strong use of concrete production metrics to support the strategy. It quantifies the gas‑to‑oil transition with specific production data, showing oil/NGL output increasing from roughly 2,461 barrels per day in Q2 2010 to about 7,194 barrels per day by early 2012, which helps investors see that the strategic pivot is already delivering measurable results.
Compelling Eagle Ford development and inventory story. The deck highlights Eagle Ford operational progress and inventory, including roughly 40 wells online as of March 20, 2012 and an estimated 190 well locations, plus additional locations to be earned through a recently announced AMI in Lavaca County, providing visibility into future drilling runway.
Effective framing of valuation upside with peer comparison. By presenting PV‑10 values, cash‑flow estimates and a trading multiple of about 1.4x 2012E CFPS versus peers, the deck positions PVA as attractively valued, giving fundamental investors a clear, quantitative value proposition alongside the growth narrative.
Linkage between strategic pivot and improved margins/EBITDAX. The presentation connects the strategic shift to financial performance by noting growth in EBITDAX and improving cash margins resulting from higher oil pricing and declining unit operating costs, reinforcing that the pivot has enhanced profitability, not just volumes.
Coherent multi‑year narrative that supports capital‑markets access. Consistent messaging across 2011–2012 investor decks about transitioning capital to oil/NGL plays like Eagle Ford builds a coherent multi‑year story that likely helped PVA access the capital markets for the October 2012 common and convertible preferred offerings.

What could have been stronger

Limited visibility into leverage, liquidity and funding runway. The March 2012 deck leans heavily on PV‑10 reserve values and relative valuation metrics but provides limited detail on corporate leverage, covenant headroom or liquidity runway, despite the capital‑intensive nature of accelerating Eagle Ford development. For a public‑market audience, the absence of explicit capital structure and funding‑plan disclosure in the slides makes it harder to fully assess downside risk and financing needs.
Sparse disclosure on well economics and downside sensitivities. While the deck quantifies Eagle Ford PV‑10 and well counts, it does not show detailed well‑level economics such as type curves by area, full‑cycle returns at different commodity prices, or sensitivity analyses to further gas price weakness and oil price volatility. That leaves investors to infer robustness of the gas‑to‑oil transition under stress scenarios from high‑level margins rather than transparent economics.
Limited articulation of competitive differentiation in Eagle Ford. The presentation describes PVA as a "small‑cap domestic onshore E&P" competing in the Eagle Ford against much larger peers but does not clearly differentiate its operating capabilities, acreage quality or cost structure versus those peers beyond a statement that margins and valuation are attractive. Without clearer competitive benchmarking, investors may struggle to see a distinct moat or advantage.
Weak linkage between strategic pivot and shareholder return framework. Although the deck notes a transformational shift in production mix and growing EBITDAX, it does not explicitly connect those metrics to shareholder returns, dividend policy changes, or long‑term capital allocation discipline. Given later references to reducing dividends in subsequent presentations, the lack of discussion in this deck about how the pivot affects payout versus reinvestment may leave income‑oriented investors uncertain.

How an investor would read this deck

What draws attention

Eagle Ford Shale inventory, including approximately 190 potential well locations over one year with roughly 41 already drilled and up to 150 remaining, plus acreage to be earned in a newly announced AMI in Lavaca County.
Demonstrated oil/NGL production growth from about 2,461 barrels per day in Q2 2010 to roughly 7,194 barrels per day by early 2012, reflecting tangible execution on the gas‑to‑oil transition.
PV‑10 reserve values at year‑end 2011, with about $278 million attributed to Eagle Ford and about $596 million to HBP gas‑weighted positions like Granite Wash, East Texas, Mississippi and Appalachia, indicating a diversified reserves base.
Valuation metrics such as trading at approximately 1.4x 2012E cash flow per share versus peers, which the company uses to argue that PVA is attractively valued and offers upside as the oil‑liquids transition matures.
Subsequent capital‑markets access, including concurrent public offerings of common stock and convertible preferred equity in October 2012, showing that public investors did support PVA’s strategy with new capital.

Risks that stand out

Execution risk in scaling Eagle Ford development, given the capital intensity highlighted in later 2012–2013 materials and the need to fund up to ~190 well locations plus potential incremental acreage.
Commodity‑price risk, as the strategy hinges on sustained oil and liquids price strength relative to depressed gas prices; a reversal in oil prices or prolonged weakness could impair margins and PV‑10 values.
Financing and balance‑sheet risk, since PVA’s growth program required significant external capital, evidenced by the October 2012 common and convertible preferred offerings and later private placements of notes, creating exposure to credit‑market conditions and covenant constraints.
Operational and geological risk in the Eagle Ford, including the possibility that type‑curve assumptions prove optimistic or that certain acreage positions underperform, which could undermine the projected PV‑10 and drilling inventory value.
Strategic concentration risk, as the pivot increases dependence on one primary play (Eagle Ford) even though PVA retains other HBP gas assets; underperformance in Eagle Ford would disproportionately impact the company’s growth narrative.

Questions this deck invites

How did PVA’s leverage, interest coverage and liquidity metrics (including revolving credit facility utilization and covenant levels) look around March 2012, and how did they evolve before and after the October 2012 common and convertible p
What were the realized well‑level returns, decline curves and operating costs for Eagle Ford wells drilled by PVA from 2010 through 2013, and how did those compare to regional peers in the same counties and benches?
To what extent did PVA successfully grow total corporate EBITDAX and cash margins after 2012, and were those improvements driven primarily by Eagle Ford, by cost reductions in legacy gas assets, or by acquisitions such as Eagle Ford Hunter,
How did the company’s pivot from dry gas to oil/NGLs affect long‑term shareholder outcomes, including share price performance, dividend policy, and any subsequent restructuring or rebranding (e.g., Ranger Oil Corporation)?
What specific risks did PVA face regarding commodity‑price volatility, regulatory changes and operational execution in the Eagle Ford, and how were those risks mitigated through hedging, joint ventures (such as the Lavaca County AMI) or ass

What founders can take from the Penn Virginia Corporation deck

A clear, data‑backed narrative around a strategic pivot—here, from dry gas to oil and liquids—can resonate with public investors when supported by concrete metrics like production growth, PV‑10 values, and margins, rather than abstract statements.
Demonstrating tangible progress before seeking additional capital (e.g., showing 40 Eagle Ford wells online and a tripling of oil/NGL production) helps build credibility that the strategy is already working and that new funds will scale proven results.
Articulating both asset quality (PV‑10, inventory, acreage expansions such as AMI in Lavaca County) and valuation (e.g., trading at a discount to peers on cash‑flow multiples) can frame an E&P equity story as both growth and value simultaneously.
Investor decks for capital‑intensive resource plays benefit when they link technical metrics (PV‑10, drilling inventory, margins) to the company’s financing strategy and balance‑sheet management, as later offerings show that equity and hybrid capital are central to executing the plan.
Maintaining a diversified asset base, with both liquids‑rich plays and legacy gas HBP positions, can be presented as a way to retain optionality for future gas‑price recovery while focusing near‑term capital on higher‑return oil projects.
Serial investor presentations across 2011–2013 show that updating the market on strategy execution—production growth, reserve additions, acquisitions—helps support repeated access to public and private capital over a multi‑year transition.

Penn Virginia Corporation pitch deck: common questions

What kind of company is Penn Virginia Corporation in the 2012 investor presentation?

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) is an independent, small‑cap, domestic onshore oil and gas exploration and production company. As of the March 2012 deck, it focused on building reserves and production in oil and natural gas liquids plays, with the Eagle Ford Shale as its primary growth engine.

What assets and plays does PVA emphasize in the March 2012 deck?

In the March 21, 2012 presentation, PVA highlights its Eagle Ford Shale position as a core asset, reporting year‑end 2011 PV‑10 (pre‑tax discounted value of proved reserves) of about $278 million for Eagle Ford alone and 40 wells online as of March 20, 2012. It also notes an HBP (held‑by‑production) portfolio in Granite Wash, East Texas, Mississippi and Appalachia, with YE11 PV‑10 of roughly $596 million.

What strategic shift is detailed in the March 2012 Penn Virginia investor deck?

The deck describes a “gas‑to‑oil” transition strategy begun in mid‑2010, reallocating capital from dry gas to oil and liquids‑rich projects. By early 2012, PVA had diversified its portfolio toward oil/NGLs and grown oil/NGL production from approximately 2,461 barrels per day in Q2 2010 to about 7,194 barrels per day, largely driven by Eagle Ford drilling.

Was the March 2012 investor deck tied to a specific financing round?

The March 2012 deck is an investor presentation for public‑market audiences (NYSE: PVA) and does not itself specify a concurrent equity or debt raise. Later in 2012, PVA used its public‑company access to capital to price concurrent offerings of common stock and depositary shares representing 6% convertible preferred equity totaling about $140 million in gross proceeds, primarily to repay borrowings under its revolving credit facility and for general corporate purposes.

What happened after the 2012 strategy described in the deck?

Following the strategy laid out in the deck, PVA continued to pursue Eagle Ford‑focused growth. By October 2012 it completed $140 million of concurrent common and convertible preferred offerings to strengthen liquidity. In subsequent years it expanded its Eagle Ford position further, including transactions such as the planned acquisition of Eagle Ford Hunter, Inc. announced in April 2013, and reported sizable increases in Eagle Ford crude reserves by early 2013.

Sources

Funding and outcome facts on this page were researched on 2026-08-22 from the pages below.

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slides

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 1 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 1 of 22

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 2 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 2 of 22

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 3 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 3 of 22

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 4 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 4 of 22

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 5 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 5 of 22

Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck slide 6 of 22 — Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck — slide 6 of 22

What each slide of the Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) pitch deck says

Slide 2

Forward-Looking Statements, Oil and Gas Reserves and Definitions Forward-Looking Statements Certain statements contained herein that are not descriptions of historical facts are “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. Because such statements include risks, uncertainties and contingencies, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and contingencies include, but are not limited to, the following: the volatility of commodity prices for natural gas, NGLs and oil; our ability…

Slide 3

PVA Overview I — * Small-cap domestic onshore E&P company « Very active in the Eagle Ford Shale oil play with excellent results to date: YE11 PV-10 of $278 MM * HBP positions in Granite Wash, East Texas, Mississippi and Appalachia: YE11 PV-10 of $596 MM * PVA is executing a strategy of growth in oil and NGL rich plays * 2010 and 2011 have been transformational years, diversifying our portfolio towards oil / NGLs * Successful drilling results in the Eagle Ford Shale — 40 wells on-line as of 3/20/12 * Adding to Eagle Ford drilling inventory — recent AMI in Lavaca County * Growth in EBITDAX has resulted « Attractively valued * Trades at 1.4x 2012E CFPS vs. 4.0x for peers (64% discount) * Trade…

Slide 4

Options to Build Financial Liquidity * Current liquidity is sufficient and we will build it up as 2012 progresses = 2012 CAPEX fully-funded and largely discretionary; no material debt maturities until 2016; pending borrowing base expected to be similar to current commitment amount of $300 MM «Immediate liquidity of approximately $184 MM at 2/29/12 and 2012E cash flow outspend of $107- 157 MM « Significant asset sale likely during 2012 * Reduces bank debt and replenishes liquidity going into 2013 * Precludes any need for capital markets, which are currently unattractive, or reduced spending = Sale candidates include high-decline, liquids-rich assets or low-decline, gassy assets + Significant…

Slide 5

’ . PVA’'s Growth Strategy is Sound Gas-to-0il / Liquids Has Increased Revenues and Cash Flows [ * We commenced our “Gas-to-Oil” transition in mid-2010 * Built Eagle Ford position from initial 6,800 net acres to at least 23,000 net acres in just over one year ~ Up to approximately 190 well locations (41 drilled with up to 150 drilling locations remaining) ~ Includes acreage and locations to be potentially earned in recently announced AMI in Lavaca County * Grew oil/NGL production from 2,461 Bbls/day in 2Q10 to 7,194 Bbls/day in 4Q11 (+192%) ~ Up 43% from 5,033 Bbls/day in 4010 * Other oily / liquids-rich plays include the Cotton Valley and Granite Wash * Retain substantial core gas assets f…

Slide 6

Value Growth From 2009-2012 Due to Drive Towards Oil & NGLs | + In mid-2010, PVA implemented a strategy to transition from dry gas to oil & liquids «+ Since then, the decrease in gas prices and increase in oil & liquids prices has shifted the market from a “6:1” to a “20:1” liquids-to-gas price environment + Examining revenue growth by commodity type reveals PVA’s true growth in value Perception: “6-to-1” Equivalent Environment CS Reality: “20-to-1” Price Environment Gas Producer With Little to No Production Growth Oil/NGL Producer With Revenue Growth Pro Forma Production by Commodity Pro Forma Quarterly Revenue by Commodity MMcfe per day (1 Bbl = 6 Mcfe) Pre-Hedging; SMM 160 $80 120 $60 ~7…

Slide text above is read directly from the Penn Virginia Corporation (PVA) deck PDF embedded on this page.

Related fundraising guides (24)

Decks from the same year (1)

2012 pitch deck examples

Decks from the same region (1)

US pitch deck examples

Browse companies alphabetically (1)

Pitch decks from companies starting with P

More pitch deck teardowns (16)

Recently published pitch deck teardowns (12)

Fundraising library · Pitch deck examples · Investor directory · Founder database