Northern Oil and Gas, Inc. Price & Performance (NOG)

I'm standing in for Evelyn and Verna today, could not be here, but will be back soon. Yesterday after the market closed, released our financial results for the fourth quarter. You can access our earnings release and presentation on our Investor Relations website at noginc.com. We will be filing our twenty twenty four ten ks with the SEC within the next few days. I'm joined this morning by our Chief Executive Officer, Nick O'Grady, our President Adam Durham, our Chief Financial Officer, Chad Allen and our Chief Technical Officer, Jim Evans, Our agenda for today's call is as follows. First, Nick will provide his introductory remarks. Then, Adam will give you an overview of operations and business development activities. And finally, Chad will review our financial results and walk through the details of our 2025 guidance. After our prepared remarks, the team will be available to answer any questions. Before we begin, let me cover our Safe Harbor language. Please be advised that our remarks today, including the answers to your questions, may include forward looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These forward looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to be materially different from the expectations contemplated by our forward looking statements.

Those risks include among Northern, matters that we have described in our earnings release as well as in our filings with the SEC. Including our annual report on Form 10 ks, and our quarterly reports on Form 10 Q. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward looking statements. During today's call, we may discuss certain non GAAP financial measures. Including adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net income, free cash flow. Reconciliations of these measures to the closest GAAP measures can be found in our earnings release. With that, I will turn the call over to Nick. Thanks, Eric. Welcome and good morning, everyone. I'm going to deviate from my typical rundown of points and my comments will be fairly brief this quarter. One of the hallmarks of the non operated strategy is in its diversification. Our broad footprint of operators, basins and well exposures typically means that we're well insulated from more acute disruptions that happen from time to time in is something we've purposely built here at NOG over the past seven years. In the past four months, refinery outages, freeze offs, shut ins, delays of every kind and material deferments many of which have been a result of the aforementioned issues, all at the same time.

This confluence of events, while beyond anyone's control, is extraordinary in nature and very rare for our business. With that said, it had a material effect not just on the fourth quarter, but started us out at a lower level of base oil volumes primarily in the Williston and to a lesser extent in the Uinta coming into 2025, and our capital program will spend a portion of 2025 catching back up. As a result, we'll exit 2025 much stronger than we would have otherwise [indiscernible] I think it's important that we put these events in perspective. Oftentimes, we have a tendency to compartmentalize results versus expectations and forego looking at the actual trends at hand. The reality is that we grew volumes last year 25% year over year and despite recent disruptions, oil volumes will grow again in the high single digits this year and will exit materially higher than that. These are huge numbers. The oil that was deferred in Q4 is still there in the ground and much of the capital for those wells has already been spent.

The wells in production continue to perform as expected So ultimately, this is an issue about timing. We think and execute for the long term here. As a non operator, we allocate capital and focus meticulous But as we've discussed in the past, the timing for these wells can shift leading to periodic lumpiness quarter to quarter.

We don't and frankly cannot run our business in ninety day increments.

Our budget this year is designed purposely in that fashion. With a hefty spud schedule to drive long term growth and that it will. As an example of this thinking, our Uinta program is immediately going to a larger program of optimally spaced three mile laterals which will materially improve longer term production, performance, returns and capital efficiency but it also has the added effect of pushing out turning lines and thus volumes later into the year given they also take longer to drill. So you only look at the 2025 numbers might come to the opposite capital efficiency conclusion, but you'd be wrong.

We're setting the stage not just to grow in 2025, but position NOG for the future We often have a choice. We can front end load capital so can grow more now at the expense of the future or vice versa. And here at NMG, we'll always choose what's best for the long term. Both from an organic growth perspective which may involve recasting the cadence of the development plan and in the way we underwrite and pursue hold ons and other inorganic opportunities. On the topic of inorganic opportunities, things are looking increasingly strong. As oil prices weaken, we find our competitive advantage grows and the need for our capital and the request for partnerships from a variety of operators and other potential partners has never been greater As gas prices strengthen, we find that this market is becoming healthier on the M and A front that there is more activity and that M and A activity becomes more realistic at contango spread improves. Operators continue to seek our capital to accelerate development and many assets remain stranded looking for permanent homes. As Adam will discuss, we've had success in every one of our basins adding leasehold. But especially in Appalachia.

We have stated that we can double our business over the next several years. We are looking at some of the largest transactions in our history. And the need for and call on our capital has never been greater. The inbound activity and backlog of evaluations underwriting on a daily basis is as high or higher than at any time during my tenure. It gives me confidence that we can continue to find meaningful ways inorganically to create value for our investors over time. It will require discipline but the right opportunities will present themselves. And that discipline has paid off over the years. Our corporate return on capital employed has remained above almost all our peers and as we do multiyear lookbacks on our acquisitions from our early Wilson deals to the Marcellus to our series of Permian transactions, our underwriting has continued to deliver strong returns. Which gives us confidence in our forward plan to grow further over time. As an example, our 2021 Marcellus transaction we estimate has delivered well over double the internal return we originally projected. Paid out in less than two years and still has decades of life on it. Based on the current gas strip, it's positioned for multiple years of strong cash flow ahead.

It's important to note that as we have scaled our platform, we have also been mindful to ensure that we have the internal infrastructure in place to support our growth. During 2025, we'll be investing significantly in our financial land data science and engineering teams and have already expanded our capabilities by building on geology function that when paired with our engineering prowess can help identify additional value that can be extracted from the acreage we already own and find value where we do not. I'll conclude with a review of the highlights of our business model. As the dominant non operator in the space, NOG is uniquely positioned as a growth story and a consolidator. Our opportunity set continues to grow as we scale, And as a non operator, our diversification by region, commodity mix and operator over time should give us a stable business profile. Our strong margins provide a durable cash profile that has provided steady peer leading growth in dividends over time we will continue to thicken and to manage risk properly and hedge where appropriate. All of this combined with a disciplined approach to capital allocation should translate into superior shareholder return over time.

This has been proven out in the marketplace over the past seven years we're going to continue with the same methodical approach to creating value for our investors going forward.

I remain incredibly excited for what lies ahead for our company. That concludes my prepared remarks. Thanks to everyone for listening and again for your interest in our company. I'll turn it over to Adam. Thank you, Nick.

First, I'll expand on our operations, what we have observed in the fourth quarter and how that influences the business for 2025.

From there, I will touch on our acquisition efforts as of late and what we are seeing across the landscape. As Nick alluded to, we had a confluence of events hit in the fourth quarter from weather to logistics but as we look forward, and continuing to ramp through 2026. During the fourth quarter, we turned 25.8 net wells to sales. The Permian accounted for 60% of the additions as our joint venture's accelerated activity from what was previously underwritten. Offsetting that acceleration were reef frac start up delays deferrals in the Williston were 5.5 completed wells were delayed primarily due to a downtick in commodity pricing from one of our more price sensitive operators. We expect almost all will be turned in line by the end of the first quarter. The UNs also experienced some delays in expected completions in connection with third party takeaway issues that have since been resolved.

As of January, SM has taken the reins on operations and we're excited about the long term partnership as we optimize spacing extend laterals realized cost savings from our newly operational sand mine and find other ways to drive operational value. Despite some of the temporary headwinds, we saw outperformance across our portfolio's base assets and most recently with our point assets. Vital hit the ground running and has outperformed on expected volumes. Since taking the handoff on operations, they have been able to optimize completion techniques, as well as accelerate on the underwritten drill schedule. Turning to our D and C list, finished the year with 50.4 net wells in process with the Permian making up about a third of our wells in process and the remaining two thirds evenly split across the Uinta, Williston and Appalachia. Looking ahead, the Permian had the highest level of election activity on the year during Q4. Normalized costs in the region were in line with our annual average However, we have seen some meaningful efficiencies gained on our recent co purchased assets as our larger operators push costs lower relative to AFEs. As usual, we maintained over a 90% consent rate on recent well proposals driven by strong economics.

As we think about the cadence for 2025, we expect the Permian to account for 50% to 60% of our TILs. With the Williston accounting for a about a quarter of the activity, in Appalachia and Uinta evenly making up the difference. Overall, we expect till activity to be weighted forty-sixty to the front and back halves of the year were spending evenly split. Drilling down further, expected completion timing in the Williston will be driven by weather as is typical while the Uinta completions will be evenly split between the first and second halves of the year.

In Appalachia, two thirds of the development primarily from our recently announced drilling partnership, is slated to start in the second half of the year and build the D and C list as we finish the year. Finally, the Permian makes up roughly half of the well activity for '25 but we expect 70% of those completions Unpacking this further, the drivers around completion timing include the recent flurry of AFE elections, are ground game success and certain joint venture activity that consists of high working interests and large pads with a focus on full field development. Putting all of these pieces back together, illustrates the overall cadence at a corporate level and lays out the expectations of an accelerated growth profile as we exit the year. While our pace and production volumes may be muted in the immediate term, we continue to focus on long term value drivers optimizing development for the organization and our capital allocation decisions will reflect as much. Our asset base long term sustainability and diversification has never been stronger and we will continue to build on our successes Pivoting to our business development efforts, NOG finished the year off strong taking advantage of a weaker than usual A and D market.

Capitalizing on depleted budgets from our competitors and flexing our creativity we were able to close 14 ground game deals in Q4, across each basin where we have operations. During the quarter, we added over three net wells of near term development in the Permian and continued to layer in longer dated inventory across the Williston, Uinta and Appalachia. We had an extremely successful 2024 ground game campaign adding 10.7 net wells and over 7,000 net acres while strictly adhering to our internal hurdle rates.

Our success is attributed to a relentless pursuit in leveraging NOG's proprietary data and technology to accurately screen over 500 opportunities during the year. NOG continues to solidify its Our focus on alignment and equitable outcomes continues to produce opportunities as evidenced by our previously announced 2025 Apple with a top public gas producer was signed in December of last year and most recently the acquisition and drilling partnership we announced last week the Midland Basin Moving on to the broader M and A landscape, our size and scale continues to attract compelling prospects across various basins even as the opportunity set for others is shrinking, Majors and large cap independents are looking to trim longer dated inventory or reduce debt through asset sales and private equity is consistently looking for full or partial exits.

All said, we've got around $8,000,000,000 in assets across 13 different processes that we are currently evaluating Operators of scale we sit in a unique position with a total addressable market as large as any player in the space, but we will continue to be disciplined capital allocators with a focus on long term and sustainable returns. With that, I'll turn it over to Chad. Thanks, Adam. Jumping into our results, our fourth quarter average daily production was 131,800 BOE per day, and 124,100 BOE per day for the year. Above the high end of our guided range. Oil production increased to 78,900 barrels up 11% from Q3 as we rolled in a full quarter of our point that and closed our XCL acquisition on October 1. The strength of our production was offset by the various events Despite those disruptions, Permian Basin volumes remained strong and grew approximately 12% quarter over quarter and our Point acquisition is materially ahead of schedule. Adjusted EBITDA in the quarter was $4.00 7,000,000 and free cash flow was $96,000,000 which remains strong even with a lower oil price disruptions and a higher capital investment. Adjusted EBITDA and free cash flow for 2024 were 1 point dollars and $461,000,000 respectively both all time highs for NLG.

Oil differentials came in at $3.86 per barrel for the quarter better than our expectations as more of our production is weighted towards the Permian even with the inclusion of our XCL acquisition which carries a higher differential compared to our corporate average. Natural gas realizations were 81% of benchmark price for the Northern. Materially better than Q3 due to strong Williston realizations which were partially offset by the overhang of continued weakness in Waha Gas during the first half of the quarter. LOE was $9.62 per BOE slightly higher than Q3 as a result of higher fixed carrying costs related to the aforementioned disruptions primarily in the Williston which was offset by lower lease operating expenses in the Uinta Basin which is about half of our corporate average. On the CapEx front, we invested $259,000,000 inclusive of elective ground game $27,000,000 in the quarter. Of the $259,000,000 fifty one percent of the capital was allocated to the Permian, 31% of the Williston and 9% to each of the Appalachian and Uinta Basins respectively. Although our development capital was in line with expectations during the quarter, we continue to see work over costs increase throughout 2024 as our producing well count grows and shale wells age.

These workovers coupled with more refracing activity are becoming bigger contributors to CapEx but should be productive over time and contribute to better well performance as the work is completed. We exited the year with over $800,000,000 of liquidity comprised $9,000,000 of cash on hand and $810,000,000 of availability on our revolving credit facility. Our net debt to LQA EBITDA ratio is close to higher end of our stated one to 1.5 times range reflecting the addition of XCL to our revolver. However, given the strength of our base asset and the strong cash flow profiles of our base business in recent acquisitions, we expect to trend towards the lower end of our leverage range by the end of twenty twenty five based on current pricing trends. Since closing XCL, we reduced borrowings on our revolver by $145,000,000 inclusive of a modest share buyback of $25,000,000 and $42,000,000 common dividend payment in the fourth quarter. As we execute our acquisition strategy, we've always said we'd be mindful of the balance sheet without excluding the potential for capitalizing on opportunities to retire shares when market conditions allow. As I mentioned earlier, we found those opportunities in the fourth quarter with the repurchase of just under 700,000 shares.

In fact, we are proud to have delivered nearly $260,000,000 in returns comprised of share repurchases, and dividends to our shareholders in 2024. In the interest of time, so that we can get to Q and A, I'm going to touch upon a few major line items in our guidance. The balance of the details can be found on Page 15 of our earnings deck. We anticipate annual production the 130,000 to 135,000 BOE per day range of which 75,000 to 79,000 barrels per day for annual oil production. Based on our expected till cadence, we expect a relatively flat production profile with a significant ramp towards the end of the year. As always, depending on pricing, we could see a pull forward of activity which could affect the cadence. With respect to CapEx, we have budgeted for a range of $1,050,000,000 to $1,200,000,000 As a reminder, the post closing CapEx associated with our recently announced Midland is already in this number. Approximately 25% of our budget is earmarked for ground game acquisition and development capital, and approximately 10% capital outlay for our recently announced [indiscernible] Cash taxes in 2025 will be immaterial with an estimate of under 10,000,000 mostly comprised of state income taxes.

Lastly, I want to touch briefly on reserves and inventory. In 2024, we grew our proved reserves 11% year over year to a record three seventy eight million BOE despite reduced SEC pricing and record production, This increase was driven by both our organic ads and acquisitions. In addition, we added almost 200 high quality net through announced large acquisitions and organic acreage. In an era where inventory is becoming more and more precious, it highlights the strength and quality of our asset base the logic of our acquisitions over recent years, and the non operated business model's superior ability to replace drilling locations and generate organic inventory. That concludes our prepared remarks. I'd like to open the call up to questions. Your first question comes from the line of Neil Dingmann with Juris Securities.

Please go ahead.

Good morning, guys. Thanks for the details. Nick, my you know, even Chad just sort of hit on anticipated sort of late 'twenty five, 'twenty six guidance. And then knowing that I know it's a bit difficult to go that far out being a non op and all, I'm just wondering if you could walk me through how you all come up with sort of the such the notable production growth linked this year and next year and does that incorporate? I know you had a couple one offs wildfires and deferments in 4Q this sort of incorporate some of that as well?

Yes, Neal, it's not terribly complicated. Look, there are two factors really driving that. One, One, we're spudding a significantly greater number of wells than we're completing this year. And so therefore, that inherently drives additional growth in [indiscernible] The second factor is that as Adam also talked about is that the completion timing is relatively back half waiting. So you're really only getting effectively on a daily production basis sort of partial credit given the back the partial contribution this year. So an example would be like the Appalachian JV. We're capitalizing that throughout the year, but the first production really won't be until past midyear. So you're not getting really a meaningful per BOE contribution in effect this year. Obviously, you're going to exit really strong, but then 'twenty six, you're getting the full annual contribution from those volumes. So it's largely baked, but much of the development that you're getting here, you will you will see the benefit, but really it's not until you get to mid and later in the year that you get that. So it gives us a lot of confidence as you get into 2026 and that translates on a twenty four month average into significant growth and it's fairly locked and loaded.

Now look forward to seeing that. And then second question just on Uinta specifically. Seemed last night that SM's Uinta production, I'd call it maybe slightly light to start the year, but it seems like listen to them their well expectations are certainly have not changed. I just wondered doesn't sound like maybe just has your thoughts around the assets changed at all and maybe could you discuss sort of 25 expectations there? Yes, I mean look, The U. S. Has been the fastest growing play in North America over the past several years with some of the largest EUR oil wells drilled in the country. Amongst oil industry players, It's been one of the most sought after areas to get into, I can't tell you how much competition we face to get into the play. Not week goes by, I don't have one of our peers, you know, lauding us and discussing the merits of our deal and the love of the geology and specifically the part of the play where we and our partner acquired. I'm not sure Wall Street has yet warmed to it in same way and I'm fine with that taking time. I think we've been doubted before And to be fair, we and our partner have to deliver results over time to prove it.

But we bought this asset for a ten, fifteen year development period. That being said, if you look at what Oventiv just sold their asset for, it implies a material kind of 30 plus percent premium for what we just paid for our asset. And frankly, that was sold at a lower oil price than what what we purchased ours validating it even further. The reality is, we've owned the asset for a couple of months, I mean a couple of months are And look, our point transaction as an example is absolutely crushing it out of the gates. And while we think that transaction is going to be be great, we do, it will still take several years in our minds to determine the validity of our acquisition strategy. That's how we do our look backs. When we look at our board, we judge all our look backs on a multiyear basis. Early performance is great, but it's just that it's early performance. To me that's like judging a well on a twenty four hour rate. It's just nonsensical. Can't. So SM took over operations on Jan one. And prior to that, obviously, there was as we mentioned, there was an unfortunate and unplanned outage which had some effect.

So So I think we're planning to develop this asset over the next decade We've gotten an optimal spacing, long lateral and big savings development plan here. It's an incredible resource and I think frankly we're just scratching the surface geologically. We've got plans to explore more in the next several years. Of course, we want to prove it to our investors as fast as possible, but it will take time. But I think look at the end of the day, I don't think there's anything you can do judge the asset over the next couple of months. I think it's going to take I think it's going to take all year really for us to deliver results frankly. I think it's going to be over the next several Great details. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Scott Hanold with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Yes.

Yes, thanks. Good morning.

Could you all talk a little bit about your Appalachian partnership and just your understanding and thoughts on on do you think that extends into 2026 and if it doesn't, what is the production profile of that asset do? Well, it is a it is a one year transaction with an option to extend it for another two years is a mutual right to extend it Scott Whether or not we do that is a mutual decision. So we'll come to that when we do. If it does not, we do these one at a time and we'll take it one at a time. Production would theoretically peak in 2026 over that period of time if it does not. I think we'll take it in stride over that period of time.

And I guess just to add, Scott, so the first part of that, there will be development activity kind of finishing up in 2026, right? So as we're spudding wells in back half of the year, those will be completed in the first half of '20 Okay.

So it doesn't seem like you were at this point time, you've got there's not a lot of visibility on your partner's appetite to extend it at this point. So it seems like it's a conversation throughout this year. Is that fair? I guess that was the point of the That's right. It's kicking off now and we'll have those conversations as we move along.

Okay. And then Adam, you had mentioned that you all are building out both technology and people to kind of Prepare to further scale the business. Obviously, you guys have done a pretty fantastic job of building the business over the last two to three years and just could you give us a sense of like the confidence level and how build are you or how how are you setting this company up? Like how big do you think you can build the business here over the next few years? Well, I think the focus on the infrastructure is to continue to scale the business. Now, where we go with that in terms of stacking assets and continuing to do what we've done over the past five years. We'll continue to stick to our knitting and focus on returns. The opportunity set is clearly out there with $8,000,000,000 of quality assets that we're underwriting now at more to come And last year was a big push in terms of really implementing all of the in for insights and analytics from the data that we're that we're getting through the 10,000 wells that we have and the focus is as we scale to continue to stay nimble like we have in the past.

And in order to do that, we need to pick up the velocity in terms of the overall analytics and we're there, but I don't think it's ever going to be an ending process in terms of just overall process improvement Nick, I don't know if you want to add to that. Yes. I mean, the view is that we want to be able to ring Mattel over so tighter, right? So for every for every process that we do Scott, we want to be able to do we want to be able to take it a layer deeper. Right? So on our Northern it's externally focused in terms of inorganic opportunities, it's also looking inwards the assets we own and finding ways to squeeze the lemon even harder.

Understood.

Thanks.

Your next question comes from the line of Charles Meade with Johnson Rice. Please go ahead. Good morning, Nick and Adam and Chad.

I want to go back to some of your prepared comments talking about the shape of production over the course of twenty five and I want to make sure I'm understanding. I think I heard you say that volumes are going to be relatively flat over the course of 25% quarter to quarter, but then ramp into year end. And if I look at that I look at that relative to your guidance, does that mean that you're going to be that like 1Q was going to show a sequential decline versus 4Q Northern we're going to hold that relatively flat maybe through the first half of the year and then ramp in the back half of the year? Is that what I should be thinking about?

That's generally been the pattern.

Charles. I mean, I think look, the reality is that we are baking in a look, you've seen in the last several years where we have seen pull forwards of activity, right? And so certainly a possibility now. We have designed our capital program this year to be able to absorb meaning our CapEx program is designed to absorb any potential pull forwards But it's certainly we could see a pull forward as we've seen in past several years of that cadence of development. So I think there's definitely room for that, but we have a conservative basis certainly pushed our till schedule towards the back part of the year.

That's right. I mean, I think if you're going to see a pull forward, it likely comes from the Permian and with the Williston and the seasonality there, you're going to obviously have that impact on the front So if you remember last year, Charles, we suggested the same thing in the first quarter and then we obviously saw material pull forwards in the first quarter. That's a possibility, but I don't think we would want to going to be dependent on weather and other factors and obviously last year things wound up being more favorable and we saw deferments being pulled forward and things like that, but we can't always depend on that. It's going to be operator specific.

Right. And it's still cold right here in the back half of February.

That's right. I mean, that's right. It's minus 30 in North Dakota today.

Glad I'm not there. Nick, I want to go back to you've touched on the $25,000,000 and the 26 comments. You touched on in your prepared comments and I think the first question you elaborated a bit on it. But so I think I don't want to flog that because I think I get that message. But I wanted to ask, it seems to me that it's different for you guys to give this kind of next year outlook or plus one year outlook on your 4Q call? And if that's the case, could you maybe talk about what's different this year that kind of gives you either the or gives you more confidence in the visibility that far out? It's more just a function that it's the first year in several years where we've had a material build in the BNC C list and we felt that it warranted an explanation, right?

So what we've had in the past two years either a drawdown of the D and C list or one that's been relatively match right? So when you're spending capital that's building the D and C list, ultimately the investors need to understand where that money is going, right, where it's going to drive.

So ultimately, especially given where a lot of that capital is is driven towards the back half of the year. And again, as a non operator, the timing is a little bit murky at times in the sense of that it's going to be whether or not it's November or December and stuff like that, it can shift from time to time, but ultimately, you're going to have a bit of a hockey stick type scenario because of where it's lying. We wanted to make sure the investors understood from a capital efficiency perspective that all of that capital when you stretch it out past that twelve month window is really driven towards driving a longer term growth profile. Got it. I think the only other thing I'd add is this this year, right, we've got five or six different JVs of sorts, right? And that governance lends itself to longer dated conversations with our operators. Now does that change potentially, right? And it also only makes up call it 30% of the business give or take in terms of kind of overall activity on the year.

But given the relationships, the size and scale of Northern Northern capital commitments that we have with our other operating partners, that tend to have those longer dated conversations with us.

Yes. And just as a like a frame of reference and I'm probably getting these numbers off a little bit Charles, but using the Appalachian JV as an example, you're talking about spending 80% of the capital and getting about 10% of the production credit for it, right? So your investors need to Got it. Thank you. That is a helpful elaboration. And Adam, thank you for pointing out that dynamic with the JVs. Next question comes from the line of John Freeman with Raymond James. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys.

The first topic Chad, you mentioned that you kind of had this we've had this steady kind of increase in kind of work over refrac activity, which is consistent with what we've been seeing and hearing from operators as well. Can you kind of quantify how much in the budget this year is allocated to the work groups of refrac this year relative to last year?

Yes, I think we expect relatively similar levels of workovers in refracs. I think we saw more of it towards the Williston last year versus I think this year we expect it to be more spread out between the basins. I think we're expecting around 10% to 15% of our budget to kind of be allocated towards the workovers and and refrac, that's pretty similar to last year.

But obviously a large number in total. Yes, that's right.

Okay. And then just my follow-up question obviously, there was a lot of discussions early last year about just sort of the way that you all kind of accrual process works with AFEs, etcetera. And I'm curious if now that you've been able to do kind of a look back, can you kind of like quantify how AFEs ended up coming in relative to the initial was embedded in that initial 2024 budget Yes. I mean, I think year over year, if I was looking at the normalized costs with AFEs we saw about a 15% Benefit in that regard and then obviously that net basis that's also going to depend on what our working interests are. But as I alluded to, earlier in my prepared remarks, seeing a lot of that meaningful downward pressure on AFP costs through a lot of the JVs, which obviously have Super normal. Working interest.

Yes.

And not to to Adam's horn, but we also have a evergreen mass of joint interest audit program ongoing where we routinely look over our shoulder and check the operators on a on a regular basis. Make sure we're being charged what we should be. Got it. Thanks, guys.

Your next question comes from the line of Paul Diamond with Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Good morning all. Thanks for taking my call. Just a quick one on the Appalachian Drilling partnership. Can you talk a bit about the opportunity set to either to mirror that elsewhere or do you see any kind of opportunities to do similar structures in other basins? [indiscernible] Scott's question where he said, well, we just signed this thing a month and a half ago and while you haven't renewed it yet, well, we hadn't I don't think the ink was dry when we had had about six phone calls of people asking in the immediate area, that was cool, would you be interested in doing another one? I think the answer is there is a lot of interest in structures such as these I mean, look, we we do things on small scales like this all the time We obviously just signed a small scale one in the Midland Basin But the answer is I see multiple opportunities for structures such as these or structures like these embedded Your next question comes from the line of Donald Clark.

Okay.

Sorry about that.

The Thawy Northern, please go ahead. Hi, Noel Parks from Tuohy Brothers.

I was just interested in your thoughts on sort of the hedging environment As we've been hearing operators talk about their outlooks you know, we're going through earning season, It seems like with both gas and oil, you've got some pretty variable drivers. And we also sort of have attitudes with different producers, some of them being acquisitive, and or looking to sort of try to bring value forward, others sort of being more in hanging back mode and looking to sort of piece out their inventory and maybe look for stronger price environments down the road. So are you just seeing anything that makes you think that there might be different patterns of hedging emerging from certain operators as you we go forward, Well, would just say this, we obviously have taken advantage of hedging windows. So as an example, you you would have seen that we've had several spikes in oil prices and we've added judiciously to our oil hedges since our last report at very favorable prices and largely completed our 2025 hedging program for oil more or less. On gas, we have added modestly to hedges, albeit, we have been very careful and the bulk of our gas hedges coming into this year were in the form of costless collars.

That's been the structure of the gas the gas curve had been very favorable to that. And so as gas prices have rallied even as we on a percentage basis have been very hedged, we've been able to participate in the bulk of the gas rally And so therefore, we can both be hedged and participate in that upside We have obviously added some hedges as you've seen the tremendous strength of weight But again, we wound up being we've been able to think Our hedge program around gas has been very very strong. Again, as we look out to the out years, we tend to be much more careful. I think the backwardation in oil is relatively unfavorable. I think in the last several years, we have been much slower in hedging our oil volumes and just much more judicious because of that backwardation. And so we've just tended to take our time in doing so. So we've been doing it kind of quarter by quarter as opposed to just on a programmatic and blanket basis. It's proven to be, I think, a more profitable angle for us. Certainly, it's prevented us from [indiscernible] stupid things, and I'd say on the gas front, Contango has is certainly helpful, but obviously the market is a lot stronger.

I don't know if that answers your question.

Sure. Yes, I was just sort of getting in my sense that there might be a little bit of a divergence just in terms of how aggressive operators were as they try to sort of suss out Good. Sort of medium term pricing environment But it sounds like from your perspective, you're you kind of are sort of following your own instincts and just sort of leaving the producers to sort of do what they're going to do. Is that fair?

Yes. I mean, we do our own hedging. No. We don't follow any of what the producers do. So we have our own volumes. We're real property owners. So we have to deal with our own stuff, not necessarily what our operators Sure. Totally fair. And just one other thing, I just wonder if you have any thoughts on Permian gas, There's been some speculation that with most supportive environment from Washington, overall, we might see Northern infrastructure spending and and again sort of hear mixed things about people's attitudes towards embracing gas or sort of avoiding avoiding gas in the Permian? Well, I mean, I'm not sure what I would say this is that What I do here, as part of a few industry groups is that it is a great resource and it is constantly facing bottlenecks in the sense that the growth in the Permian Basin volumes has it has outstripped its ability to build out infrastructure. And so there are thoughts about for example, building data centers directly in the Permian Basin and effectively building plants and things like that, that could be direct use within the basin?

Sure.

So perhaps those are some things that you might be referring to not sure if Chad, is there anything? No. No. I think you're right. We saw this in the Williston. I think just takes time. And I think the new administration likely probably helps helps with the infrastructure build out. So, certainly we'll welcome that.

Great. Thanks a lot.

Your next question comes from the line of Paul Diamond with Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Sorry about that, Paul.

No, good morning. I apologize for audio cutting out there. Appreciate you answering the first question. Just wanted to circle back on [indiscernible] opportunities that you're all seeing inorganic growth by scale, is it more at the leasehold level or is it you're seeing more opportunities kind of more conversations on those larger co purchase type deals?

Yes. So I would say this that at Sort of at the ground game level, I would say definitely we've had a lot of success [indiscernible] package level, I would say it's been more just true I would say, asset packages, I actually I wouldn't say that necessarily, it's been a mix Yes, I think it ebbs and flows. So I guess going back to the ground game, I mean, you saw us both in the fourth quarter and we'll continue to screen it all and I think that's where we've got to be able to zig where everyone else is zagging and going back to some of comments with Scott's questions around the technology, right? We've got to be able to underwrite all of this stuff and We're seeing at least two to three, even sometimes five of things coming in the door. And the competition levels are going to wax and wane When we think about some of the larger A and D processes out there, I think Nick at this moment in time Nick is spot on. I think got a handful of regular way non op packages at least four of them that are kind of out there and active now.

Due to some of the majors or larger independents rationalize their core portfolio with non op packages post M and A That's certainly conversations that we've had. And then we've got a handful of drilling partnerships that we're looking at and probably another three to four co buying types of exercises across our respective basins. As well as kind of this minority interest buy down or partial monetization. [indiscernible] kind of the whole buffet of options out there and really for us to it's a focus on quality and overall alignment.

Understood.

Appreciate the clarity.

Next question comes from the line of Noah Hungas with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. For my first question, I wanted to ask on how you guys are seeing steel tariffs potentially impacting AFE costs, especially for smaller operators who may not have OCGG pricing or service costs contracted out?

Yes. So, this was a topic we're a member of ACEBC and this is a topic that just was circulated as part of that and the answer is it's it's unclear at this point in time, but it's likely going to have some effect. So the answer is, it's going to have some upward impact that the magnitude of which I do not know at this point in time.

Got you. So I think from a planning purpose, maybe just to jump on that. A little bit further. I think from a planning purpose as a non operator, we're generally conservative on well costs. We're going to let that flow through from an actual standpoint. And so typically, we're building in some level of buffer to mitigate that to next point, we'll see what the true ramifications are Yes, to the extent that there are. And what I would just say this is that we've seen in general overall AFE, like we budgeted for zero reduction in costs when in reality the overall, we have seen cost reductions. So we have plenty of wiggle room, I would say, in general within our overall budget. And the next one is on buybacks. I mean, just given the stock's recent performance over this year, how are you thinking about buybacks right now? Yes. I mean, I think everything is on the table and obviously we've been in quiet period for some period of time and these are board decisions. So we sit down with the board and discuss this every single quarter and we basically take their guidance and we'll have that conversation in the next week or two as we go into the next quarter when Appreciate it guys.

Thanks. [indiscernible] I will turn the call back over to Nick O'Grady for closing remarks.

Thank you for joining us today. We appreciate your continued support and look forward to touching base with you in the coming weeks.

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.