Oil and Gas

Gana LLP Now Representing Investors That Suffered Losses in Quicksilver Resources

May 18, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The law offices of Gana Weinstein LLP are currently representing investors who have suffered losses in in now bankrupt oil and gas company Quicksilver Resources, Inc. (Quicksliver) (Stock Symbols: KWKAQ, KWKA, and KWK). Quicksilver is an independent oil and gas company engaged in the acquisition, exploration, development, production, and sale of natural gas, natural gas liquids, and oil in North America headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. Quicksilver filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 14, 2015.

Our offices continue to report on investment losses suffered by investors in various oil and gas investments that brokerage firms have increasingly recommended to retail investors in recent years. These investments include private placements, master limited partnerships (MLPs), leveraged ETFs, mutual funds, and even individual stocks. See Overconcentrated in Oil and Gas Investments?, MLP Fund MainStay Cushing Royalty Energy Hurt by Failing Oil & Gas Prices; Oil and Gas Investments – Issuers Profit While Investors Take All the Risk, BlackGold Opportunity Fund Investors Suffer Losses

Oil and gas related investments have been recommended by brokers under the assumption that oil & gas would continue to be sold at around $100 and increase steadily over time. However, last summer the price of oil & gas plummeted due to a strengthening dollar and increased global supply of oil and remains below $60 to this day. Some experts are saying that if production volume continues to be as high as it currently is and demand growth weak that the return to $100 a barrel is years away.

Has Your Financial Advisor Overconcentrated Your Investments In Oil & Gas?

May 14, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

Long time readers of this blog know that we have previously reported that brokerage firms have increasingly recommended that retail investors invest heavily in various types of oil & gas investments including private placements, master limited partnerships (MLPs), leveraged ETFs, mutual funds, and even individual stocks. See Overconcentrated in Oil and Gas Investments?, MLP Fund MainStay Cushing Royalty Energy Hurt by Failing Oil & Gas Prices; Oil and Gas Investments – Issuers Profit While Investors Take All the Risk

For instance, MLPs are publicly traded partnerships where about 86% of approximately 130 MLP securities, a $490 billion sector, can be attributed to energy and natural resource companies. Billions more have been raised in the private placement market. These oil and gas private placements suffer from enormous risks that often outweigh any potential benefits including securities fraud, conflicts of interests, high transaction / sales costs, and investment risk.

These investments have been recommended by brokers under the assumption that oil & gas would continue to be sold at around $100 and increase steadily over time. However, last summer the price of oil & gas plummeted due to a strengthening dollar and increased global supply of oil and remains below $60 to this day. Some experts are saying that if production volume continues to be as high as it currently is and demand growth weak that the return to $100 a barrel is years away.

Gana LLP Investigation Spotlight: Source Capital Group and Donald Saccomano

February 10, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently brought a complaint against Source Capital Group, Inc. (Source Capital) broker Donald Saccomano (Saccomano) alleging misconduct in connection with suitability, false representation, and failure to supervise claims relating to Direct Participation Products, limited partnerships, and municipal debt securities. FINRA has not released detailed information concerning the pending complaint but this is only one of several recent actions FINRA has taken against Source Capital and its financial advisors in recent years.

As we recently reported, FINRA filed a complaint against former Source Capital broker Joseph Hooper (Hooper) alleging that Hooper was working for a company called the iPractice Group, Inc. (iPractice) in a capacity that included solicited and participating in the sale of iPractice stock to customers. In that complaint FINRA alleged that Hooper was compensated for his activities. FINRA alleged that Hooper participated in 53 private securities transactions involving 41 investors or investor groups and a total of $3,400,648 worth of iPractice stock. In return, FINRA alleged that Hooper received $425,081 and more than 21,000 shares of iPractice stock as compensation for his activities.

Previously, our firm wrote about supervisory and disclosure issues at Source Capital, including FINRA’s action against Source Capital and certain principals concerning the failure of the firm’s brokers to adequately disclose material facts and the transaction of sales through misstatements. The allegations in FINRA’s action concerned certain oil and gas partnership interests in Blue Ridge Securities (Blue Ridge) and Argyle Securities. (Argyle) offered by Source Capital.

Overconcentrated in Oil and Gas Investments?

January 22, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

A strengthening dollar and increased global supply of oil has sent crude oil prices tumbling in the second half of 2014. Recently, crude futures for delivery in February 2015 fell to $52.69 a barrel, the lowest finish since April 2009. Some experts are saying that if production volume continues to be as high as it currently is and demand growth weak that the return to $100 a barrel is years away.

As a result, in recent months investors have contacted our firm about being concentrated in various oil and gas exposed investments including private placements, stocks, and ETFs. On the private placement side alone the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), has stated that since 2008, approximately 4,000 oil and gas private placements have sought to raise nearly $122 billion in investor capital. However, these oil and gas private placements suffer from enormous risks that often outweigh any potential benefits including securities fraud, conflicts of interests, high transaction / sales costs, and investment risk.

In addition, investor accounts may be overconcentrated in oil and gas stocks or ETFs. Some of these ETFs may be leveraged or non-traditional ETFs. These leveraged ETFs seek to increase the return on the oil and gas index by using leverage to amplify returns exposing the investor to greater volatility during an already volatile period in the oil market. Below are some of oil and gas related ETFs.

Complaint Filed Against Joseph Hooper Relating to iPractice Group Investment Sales

January 3, 2015 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) recently filed a complaint against former Source Capital Group, Inc. (Source Capital) broker Joseph Hooper (Hooper) alleging that Hooper was serving as the Director of Investor Relations for a company called the iPractice Group, Inc. (iPractice) and that in such capacity, Hooper participated in the sale of iPractice stock and was compensated for that participation without notifying Source Capital of these activities. FINRA alleged that Hooper participated in 53 private securities transactions involving 41 investors or investor groups and a total of $3,400,648 worth of iPractice stock. In return, FINRA alleged that Hooper received $425,081 and more than 21,000 shares of iPractice stock as compensation for his activities.

This is not the first time our firm has written about supervisory and disclosure issues at Source Capital. Our firm has previously written concerning FINRA’s action against Source Capital concerning the agency’s findings that certain Source Capital brokers failed to adequately disclose material facts and made sales through misstatements in oil and gas partnership interests in Blue Ridge Securities (Blue Ridge) and Argyle Securities. (Argyle).

In FINRA’s recent action, when Hooper became associated with Source Capital in May 2012, he was also the Director of Investor Relations for iPractice, a medical technology company. FINRA alleged that Hooper remained the Director of Investor Relations for iPractice throughout the time he was associated with Source. iPractice raised funds for its operations by selling stock in the company through exempt private placement securities offerings. FINRA alleged that Hooper participated in the solicitation and sale of iPractice stock to investors. In addition, Hooper was listed by iPractice as a promoter on an amended Form D filed with the SEC on May 18, 2012.

Oil and Gas Investments – Issuers Profit While Investors Take All the Risk

December 29, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

As recently reported in Reuters, oil and gas companies such as Reef Oil & Gas Partners, Black Diamond, and Discovery Resources & Development LLC have marketed themselves to investors as a way to get into the U.S. energy boom. These companies issue private placement partnership that will drill for oil and gas and pay investors the profits that will result. However, oil and gas private placements contain substantial risks that often outweigh any potential benefits including securities fraud, conflicts of interests, high transaction / sales costs, and investment risk. Due to these risks investors often lose money while issuers make handsome profits.

According to Reuters, of 34 deals Reef has issued since 1996, only 12 have paid out more cash to investors than they initially contributed. In addition, Reuters found that Reef sold an additional 31 smaller deals between 1996 and 2010 collecting $146 million for itself while paying out investors a paltry $55 million.

Under the terms of one Reef deal, investors raised $50 million and Reef immediately took $7.5 million for fees and broker commissions. After that, Reef received a monthly management fee of $41,667 from the fund. Reef also charged for drilling, operating, legal, and other expenses to the fund. Reef completely controlled these expenses and determined which other Reef entities would be hired to do work for the venture. In fact, no more than half of the money would be used to buy oil and gas land where there were reserves.

Equipment Leasing Programs LEAF and ICON: Too Costly to Invest In

December 23, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

Our firm has written numerous times about investor losses in programs such as various equipment leasing programs like LEAF Equipment Leasing Income Funds I-IV and ICON Leasing Funds Eleven and Twelve. These direct participation programs, like their non-traded REIT and oil and gas cousins, all suffer from the same crippling flaw that dooms these investments to a high likelihood of failure from the get go. The costs and fees associated with all of these investments cause the security to be so costly that only unprecedented market boom conditions can lead to profitability. Market stagnation or decline makes any significant return a virtual impossibility.

Yet, investors are in no way compensated for these additional risks. These investments tout high yield like returns for risks far in excess of traditional high yield investments. In fact, the only reason brokers sell these products is because of the high sales commissions coupled with the lack of price transparency that allows these products to be displayed at inflated values for years on investor account statements.

In an equipment leasing program a sponsor sells limited partnership units then takes out substantial offering costs and fees and invests the remainder in a pool of equipment leases that are leveraged up with additional borrowing. Brokers market these products as a predictable income stream but in fact, and what nearly all brokers fail to mention, is that a substantial portion of investor distributions are actually a return of their original investment and not actually income generated from operations.

Atlas Energy Oil and Gas Investments: Risks Investors Should Know Part II

December 17, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

This article follows up on a recent article reported in Reuters concerning Atlas Energy LP’s private placement partnerships in oil and gas. Atlas Resources LLC, a subsidiary the energy group, has filed documents with the SEC for Atlas Resources Series 34-2014 LP stating that it seeks to raise as much as $300 million by Dec. 31 of 2014. The deal allows investors to participate in investments where advances in drilling technology have turned previously inaccessible reservoirs of oil into viable prospects. In addition, Atlas promises to invest up to $145 million of its own capital alongside investors.

In the last article we explored how the house seems more likely to win on these deals over investors. But beyond the inherent risks with speculating on oil and gas and unknown oil deposits most investors don’t realize the deals are often unfair to investors. In a normal speculative investment as the investment risk goes up the investor demands greater rewards to compensate for the additional risk. However, with oil and gas private placements the risks are sky high and the rewards simply don’t match up.

In order to counter this criticism, issuers say that the tax benefits of their deals where the investor can write off more than 90 percent of their initial outlay the year they make it helps defray the risk and increase the value proposition. First, the same tax advantage claims are often nominal compared to the principal risk of loss of the investment as seen by Puerto Rican investors in the UBS Bond Funds who have now seen their investments decline by 50% or more in some cases. Second, often times brokers sell oil and gas investments indiscriminately to the young and old who have lower incomes and cannot take advantage of the tax benefits.

Atlas Energy Oil and Gas Investments: A Risky Proposition Part I

December 16, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

As recently reported in Reuters, Atlas Energy LP has marketed itself to investors as a way to get into the U.S. energy boom. By contributing at least $25,000 in a private placement partnership that will drill for oil and gas in states such as Texas, Ohio, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania and share in revenues generated from the wells. Atlas Resources LLC, a subsidiary the energy group, has filed documents with the SEC for Atlas Resources Series 34-2014 LP stating that it seeks to raise as much as $300 million by Dec. 31 of 2014. The deal sounds good when pitched: participate in investments where advances in drilling technology have turned previously inaccessible reservoirs of fossil fuels into potentially viable prospects and to boot Atlas will invest up to $145 million of its own capital alongside investors. Through this method and similar deals, oil and gas projects have issued nearly 4,000 private placements since 2008 seeking to raise as much as $122 billion.

But before you take the plunge a review of the Atlas’s offering memorandum reveals some red flags and given Atlas’ past failure rate investors should think twice. First, up to $45 million of the money raised will be paid to Atlas affiliate Anthem Securities that will then be turned over to as commissions to broker-dealers who pitch the deal to investors. Up to $39 million more will be used to buy drilling leases from another affiliate. Think investors will get a fair price on the leases when Atlas controls both sides of the deal? More conflicts ahead as Atlas affiliated suppliers may also get up to $53 million for buying drilling and transport equipment. Next, an additional $8 million of Atlas’s investment is a 15 percent markup on estimated equipment costs. Finally, Atlas will pay itself nearly $52 million in various other fees and markups.

In sum, at least 40% of Atlas’s $145 million investment alongside mom and pop goes right back to the company. In addition, Atlas’ profits don’t stop there, when the venture starts generating revenue Atlas is entitled to 33% before accounting for those payments and markups. In the end, not much of a risk at all for Atlas.

Broker Kevin Nevin Sanctioned Over Alleged Sales of Private Securities Transactions

August 4, 2014 | by Staff Attorney

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) sanctioned broker Kevin Nevin (Nevin) concerning allegations that Nevin participated in 11 private securities transactions totaling $690,000 over the course of two years without first disclosing his participation his member firm. Through this conduct, FINRA found that Nevin violated NASD Conduct Rules 3040 and 2110.

Nevin entered the securities industry in 1994 and is currently a representative of Capital Guardian, LLC. In March 2006, Nevin became associated with VSR Financial Services (VSR) until February 2011, when he was terminated. In addition, to the recent FINRA complaint, Nevin has also been subject to three customer complaints. Some of the customer complaints concern allegations of unsuitable sales practices and securities fraud concerning variable annuities. Another customer complaint concerns the recommendation of oil & gas and real estate related private placements.

FINRA alleged that during part of the time he was registered with VSR, Nevin operated out of an office with another VSR registered representative referred to by the initials “PL.” FINRA found that PL was involved with at least three private placement offerings involving real estate and/or appurtenant property rights entities in the state of Colorado: Breakwater Capital Group, LLC; Yokam Land Holdings, LLC; and South Platte Land & Water, LLC. FINRA found that PL assured Nevin that he had informed VSR of the involvement in the Colorado water rights and real estate activity and that the private placement offerings were conducted entirely under the operations of PL’s real-estate agency. According to FINRA, PL told Nevin that he could recommend investments in these offerings to his customers and earn commissions on any ensuing investments if he obtained a real-estate license.