Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013:

The Global Oil And Gas Sector

Primary Credit Analyst:
Thomas A Watters, New York (1) 212-438-1000; thomas_watters@standardandpoors.com
Secondary Contact:
David C Lundberg, CFA, New York (1) 212-438-1000; david_lundberg@standardandpoors.com

Table Of Contents
What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Oil Prices In 2013?
What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Oil-Refining Margins Globally?
Where Are U.S. Natural Gas Prices Headed?
What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Long-Term Secular Demand For
Natural Gas In The Electricity Sector?
What's The Outlook For LNG And The Prospects For Global Gas Price
Convergence?
How Do We Expect Prices For Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) To Trend In
2013?
What Impact Have Foreign Investors Had On North American Oil And Gas
Companies' Expansion Plans And Operating Efficiency?
What Is The Outlook For Midstream Energy Construction Projects In North
America?
Will There Be Any Ratings Impact From Weakening Margins In The Oilfield
Services And Contract Drilling Sectors?

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 1
1045976 | 301735744

Table Of Contents (cont.)

What Are The Prospects For Brazil's Oilfield Services And Equipment
Sector For 2013?

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 2
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global

Oil And Gas Sector
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services expects the oil and gas sector to remain dynamic in 2013. At a high level, the
global economic slowdown is tempering demand and creating headwinds for the industry. For crude oil, demand
growth in emerging markets, particularly China, has helped offset declines in mature economies. Any unexpected
changes in Chinese demand could materially affect global prices.
Geopolitical concerns around supply disruption in the Middle East also have the potential to move markets sharply.
This has long been the case. But the newer story on the supply side is production growth from shale plays. During the
past decade, U.S. operators have been so successful in extracting natural gas from shale plays that production levels
have reached all-time highs and prices have dropped precipitously. More recently, producers have become more
successful in tapping oil shale plays, such as the Bakken and Eagleford. Given this success, some sources--such as the
International Energy Agency--are projecting that the U.S. will surpass Saudi Arabia in oil production by 2020. Of
course, North America does not have a monopoly on geological shale formations. Companies have not been successful
in economically tapping shale plays outside the U.S. thus far, but this could change.
Such technology innovations have been and will continue to be highly disruptive. There is now so much oil being
produced in the middle of the U.S. that it can't get to market due to pipeline constraints. As a result, crude grades such
as West Texas Intermediate (WTI) have recently traded at more than a $20/barrel discount to Brent. MidContinent
refiners have been able to buy these crudes cheaply and generate strong profits, while much of the industry has
struggled due to tepid demand for refined products. The Canadian Oil Sands also continue to face healthy growth
prospects--albeit with logistical constraints. The fate of the high-profile Keystone pipeline project that would transport
crude from Canada to the Gulf Coast should soon be decided. Generally speaking, we expect the midstream industry
to find solutions for producers to bring their products to market, but timing can be difficult to predict.
On the natural gas side, huge liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants are being built in places such as Australia, Qatar, and
West Africa. Following Fukushima, nuclear energy faces an increasingly uncertain future, and climate concerns paint a
darker outlook for coal. As a result, countries are increasingly turning to natural gas as a so-called bridge fuel until
renewable energy sources--like wind and solar--prove more abundant and economical. These trends provide a solid
longer-term foundation for natural gas. In the shorter term, however, natural gas faces a tougher reality. In North
America, there has been significant coal-to-gas switching in recent years, and this trend should continue, but these
demand increases pale in comparison to the massive supply additions from the shale plays.
Despite the dynamic nature of the industry, in general we expect credit quality and ratings to remain relatively stable
for 2013. Internationally, many producers and service companies continue to benefit from high oil prices. In North
America, natural gas rig counts have declined dramatically, causing pressure, but the overall onshore rig count has
held up reasonably well given the demand for rigs focused on liquids-related drilling plays. Moreover, offshore rig day
rates and utilizations, including what was the very depressed jack-up market, have rallied. The outliers will continue to
be exploration and production (E&P) companies with heavy exposure to weak natural gas prices and some oilfield
service companies that are subject to overbuilding, particularly with respect to pressure pumping.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 3
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Oil Prices In 2013?

Under both our baseline forecast and the credit assumptions in our price deck for E&P companies, we anticipate prices
remaining high on average in a historical context, but with a moderate decline in prices in 2013 compared with 2012.
Our price deck modeling assumption for WTI crude is $80/barrel in 2013 (from $85 in 2012), and the similar Brent
crude price is $90/barrel (from $100).
The assumed price decrease versus 2012 reflects in part some conservatism, given the inherent volatility of these
commodity prices, but also our view that oil production from both OPEC and non-OPEC countries is likely to grow
into 2013. This production supply growth might not be matched by a similar level of global economic growth and
hence demand for crude oil and products, though we anticipate that this should also be positive overall. There are
further downside risks, however, if, for example, a timely fiscal consensus is not reached in the U.S. or if the eurozone
were to suffer a further severe recession or confidence shock. Marked and persistent price drops would, in our view,
likely be cushioned by a reduction in production from some OPEC members.
We see the prevailing and near-term price environment, even under our credit assumptions, as supportive for
upstream operations that are reliant on oil or oil-linked revenues, such as LNG exporters. This view Is signalled
through the preponderance of stable outlooks on rated companies engaged in oil production.
In general we believe our ratings on many oil-focused E&P companies have some flexibility. This reflects prevailing
prices as well as our anticipation that some capital investments for many operators could be deferred if the outlook for
prices weakens materially. Those companies with less ratings headroom today could be challenged in a price
environment below our credit price deck, and we could revise some ratings and outlooks downwards, especially where
capital investment could not easily be curtailed or mitigating steps taken in 2013. (Watch the related CreditMatters TV
segments titled, "The Global Oil And Gas Sector: Standard & Poors Addresses The Top Investor Questions," and "The
Global Midstream Energy And Refining Industries: Standard & Poors Addresses The Top Investor Questions," dated
Dec. 6, 2012.)

What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Oil-Refining Margins Globally?

A decline of refined product demand in western economies--combined with high crude prices and large, efficient
refining capacity build-outs coming online over the next few years in the Middle East and Asia--is driving a weak
outlook for the global refining industry. Declining demand in OECD countries is a consequence of stagnating
economies, more fuel-efficient cars, and--to some extent--the impact of biofuel and other energy sources that
substitute for refinery output. However, in North America, we expect a continuation of high margins for refiners able to
source discounted crude from the mid-continent. Although crude pipeline development should compress the discount
after 2013, we believe these refiners will realize and average savings of about $5/barrel in the long term, reflecting the
cost of transportation to the U.S. Gulf Coast, with occasional spikes due to dislocations.
Atlantic coast refiners in Europe, the Caribbean, and the east coast of the U.S. have seen improved crack spreads in
2012 as a result of capacity rationalization, but we believe long-term prospects are poor. Structurally, the U.S. and

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 4
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

European refineries are not well suited to meet distillate-focused product demand without significant investment.
Assuming continued dependency on Brent-based crude slates and their low complexity relative to facilities in the U.S.
Gulf Coast and newer refineries in the Middle East and Asia that are able to process disadvantaged slates, we do not
expect long-term margin prospects to improve. European and Caribbean refiners also have an energy cost structure
directly or indirectly reliant on crude oil prices, a further disadvantage relative to U.S. refiners that can utilize much
cheaper natural gas fuel.
Trends for refiners in the Asia-Pacific region are diverse and depend on the regulatory environment in which they
operate. Refining margins for domestic suppliers in India, China, and Indonesia are hurt by government-regulated
product prices designed to control inflation and protect continued economic growth. However, there is increasing
pressure to move toward a more market-driven pricing mechanism, which could be favorable for refiners. Our
medium-term (2013-2014) outlook for refining margins has a negative bias reflecting additional capacity from newer
refineries in the region, mostly China. This will overshadow expected demand growth from emerging economies and
lead to downward pressure on refining margins. Nevertheless, Asia-Pacific refiners continue to invest to enhance the
efficiency and complexity of their refineries and to improve downstream integration into petrochemical manufacturing,
as in South Korea.

Where Are U.S. Natural Gas Prices Headed?

Natural gas is now more abundant because of the shale gas production, while we see few near-term demand catalysts.
Production will likely fall from current levels as companies move drilling rigs out of gas basins, but a combination of
improved rig efficiency and gas production associated with oil wells will prop up supply, suggesting that prices are
likely to remain below $4/mcf for 2013 unless market dynamics change significantly.
Current gas prices are high enough to cap coal-to-gas switching, and the construction of additional gas-fired
generation capacity is not imminent. Other potential sources of additional demand include transportation fuel and
expanded chemical production could provide support for gas prices in the long term--but not enough to drive
near-term gas prices. The economy is a potential variable. If the U.S. economy expands faster than expected in 2013
and 2014, industrial demand could grow enough to boost prices.

What Is Standard & Poor's Outlook For Long-Term Secular Demand For
Natural Gas In The Electricity Sector?
Coal-to-gas switching remains significant in the U.S., though not enough to materially affect natural gas prices. The
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects that natural gas consumption will average 69.7 billion cubic feet
per day (Bcf/d) in 2012, an increase of 3.2 Bcf/d (about 5%) from 2011. Large gains in electric power use more than
offset declines in residential and commercial use. Projected consumption of natural gas in the electric power sector
averages 25.4 Bcf/d in 2012, 22% higher than in 2011. This increase in fuel share stemmed from natural gas costs that
were very low relative to coal costs. We note that coal-to-gas switching is more intense in the middle of the supply
stack and is usually along a sliding scale--first between inefficient coal and efficient CCGT units and then progressively

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 5
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

between efficient coal units and mid-merit CCGT as gas prices decline relative to coal prices. Efficient coal units that
burn cheaper Powder River Basin (PRB) coal has a lower equivalent gas price (i.e., converting coal and gas prices on a
comparable dollar per million Btu basis) compared with inefficient units that burn Central Appalachian (CAPP) coal.
Because CAPP coal is more expensive than PRB coal, switching competition has occurred even between mid-merit
combined-cycle gas units and efficient coal-fired units using CAPP coal. However, in July 2012, the average Henry
Hub natural gas spot price surpassed the average spot price for Central Appalachian coal for the first time since
October 2011, indicating that the recent trend of substituting coal-fired generation with natural gas-fired generation
could be slowing.
So far, much of the switching has occurred due to economic factors and not from environmental considerations. As the
EPA implements its environmental agenda (such as Mercury and Toxin standards), there would be more permanent
shifts to gas usage. CCGT units were utilized an average 37% in 2011. If the capacity factors for CCGTs were to
increase to 50%, we expect natural gas demand by the electricity sector to increase by an incremental 5 Bcf/d relative
to consumption today. However, in addition to the economics, there is a logistical constraint driven by availability of
gas-fired units. It is not a coincidence that the Southeast Electric Reliability Council, the Southwest Power Pool, and
the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions are reporting the highest coal displacement. These regions use higher-priced
CAPP coal and have spare CCGT capacity available.

What's The Outlook For LNG And The Prospects For Global Gas Price
Convergence?
Our outlook for LNG producers is positive for the short term (two to three years). They should largely maintain
favorable pricing power for the next few years, both in long-term contracts and spot pricing. This is because of
continued growth in natural gas consumption, particularly in Asia. At the same time, domestic gas supplies in Asia will
remain constrained and the use of imported gas, namely LNG, will increase. We expect tight LNG supplies and the
short-term forecast for demand to outpace new liquefaction capacity until at least 2014.
In the medium-term however (2015 and onwards), LNG producers face risks in the form of higher global gas supply
from additional LNG capacity and the possible development of unconventional gas resources. These conditions could
force changes to current long-term, oil-indexed offtake contractual conventions and encourage the convergence of
global gas prices through downward pressure on LNG prices and upward pressure on domestic gas prices from
increasing use of higher cost gas imports.
We view the following developments for the global gas market over the longer term (post 2018) for a variety of
reasons:

Potential delays in Australian LNG projects from cost overruns and a shortage of equipment and labor.
Continuing debate in North America of the benefits and future impacts of exporting shale gas production.
Infrastructure and regulatory impediments to the development of other unconventional resources globally.
Lastly and more importantly, existing regulatory frameworks and contractual conventions in Asia-Pacific
economies, which affect domestic gas prices that are either heavily government controlled/influenced or negotiated
under long-term bilateral supply contracts with gas prices either linked to crude oil prices or linked to domestic

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 6
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

reference points, such as cost of supply or economic indices.

How Do We Expect Prices For Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) To Trend In 2013?
NGLs production has increased significantly in the U.S. over the past few years while E&P companies, seeking to boost
low returns from dry-gas plays, have aggressively pursued unconventional natural gas and oil shale plays rich in NGLs.
Not unlike the natural gas markets in years past, this rampant production increase is leading to oversupply concerns.
We forecast that the total supply of NGLs could increase about 30% to 3.3 million barrels per day (bpd) by 2015-2016,
based on our view that the crude-to-gas pricing ratio remains between 30x and 40x (the 2012 average was 39x) and
relatively high crude prices and the NGL uplift will motivate producers to continue drilling in these liquid-rich regions.
Demand, while increasing, has not kept pace.
The two main markets, or trading hubs, for NGLs are Mont Belvieu, Texas, and Conway, Kansas. Mont Belvieu is the
more liquid hub and fetches higher prices for NGLs because it's close to the Louisiana Gulf Coast and a key end-user
for NGL feedstocks--the U.S. petrochemical industry. Conway prices usually are discounted relative to Mont Belvieu
prices because of the cost to transport y-grade (a mix of NGLs) to so-called fractionators that separate the NGLs into
purity products for consumption as feedstocks for other products or resale. This discount has widened considerably
since 2009 and recently reached a high of more than 20 cents/gallon for a composite barrel of NGLs. We believe there
is a current oversupply of NGLs into Conway due to active drilling in the MidContinent region. Once additional
takeaway capacity comes online in 2013, we believe that this differential could narrow to about 10 cents, which is our
estimate of the average transportation cost of shipping a barrel of NGLs from Conway to Mont Belvieu.
Ethane and propane prices at the main U.S. trading hub of Mt. Belvieu, Texas, have been the hardest hit of any NGLs.
Collectively, these two purity products generally constitute at least two-thirds of the typical NGL battle. Since the
beginning of 2012, ethane's value has dropped about 60% to the low-30 cent per-gallon area. Meanwhile, the price of
propane has slid 35% to about 90 cents per gallon. Prices at Conway, Kan., the Mid-Continent region's pricing hub,
have decreased even further. Although ethane's price decline has been mainly due to ongoing maintenance and
turnarounds (when a plant is taken offline for a certain period of time to revamp) of petrochemical facilities on the U.S.
Gulf Coast, we think at least some of the decline stems from rising supply from the production of NGLs. In 2012,
domestic supply and demand of ethane has been roughly in balance at about 1 million bpd. However, because the
petrochemical industry consumes almost 100% of the ethane produced as a feedstock to make other products, any
reduction in demand will result in a sharp, if only temporary, price decline. In recent years, the petrochemical industry
has been adept at increasing ethylene cracker capacity levels. However, we believe it will be difficult to sustain rising
demand. Although expanding capacity at existing plants can be done more quickly, building new ethane crackers costs
billions of dollars and can take several years. We think supply could outpace demand until petrochemical companies
complete several large ethane crackers in 2016 and 2017. What this means for prices is not entirely clear, but we
believe ethane prices could be subdued for a prolonged period.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 7
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

What Impact Have Foreign Investors Had On North American Oil And Gas
Companies' Expansion Plans And Operating Efficiency?
As foreign national oil companies (NOCs) are increasingly looking beyond their borders to bolster their oil and gas
resources, investment activity in North America's oil and gas sector has been accelerating since 2008.
Standard & Poor's believes foreign NOCs' interest and investments in Canadian and U.S. oil and gas assets will likely
continue. China's NOCs have featured prominently in North American acquisition and joint venture arrangements to
date. NOCs from other Asian countries--such as South Korea, Japan, and Malaysia, which have the same interest in
securing access to energy resources to offset future domestic requirements--are also competing for North American
unconventional oil and gas assets. These government-owned companies are willing to pay increasing premiums to
acquire these assets, so many nongovernment-owned companies would likely find the return prospects at the
NOC-offered prices insufficient to meet their minimum required internal investment hurdle rates.
Nevertheless, as ExxonMobil Corp. (AAA/Stable/A-1+) demonstrated with its October 2012 C$3.1 billion bid to
acquire Alberta-based Celtic Exploration Ltd. (not rated), the international oil companies also appear prepared to
compete for these assets. ExxonMobil's offered price equates to about C$120,000/barrel of oil equivalent daily
production (excluding land), which is a significant premium to current oil and gas transaction values. Very few
companies have ExxonMobil's financial capacity; therefore, the companies that are unable to compete at these
transaction values to supplement their organic reserve replacement with cost-effective acquisitions might have to
assume greater exploration risk to keep pace with reserve replacement requirements.
For the E&P companies contributing acreage to a joint venture and managing their development as operators, the
partnerships offer attractive benefits. Growth-oriented companies such as Chesapeake Energy Corp.
(BB-/Negative/--), which have limited capacity to take on additional debt, can finance the huge costs associated with
shale development while retaining a portion of potential upside to properties. Investors typically provide cash at the
close of the transaction and a share of the cost as drilling and development progresses (often a disproportionate share
of the cost during the initial development period). Not surprisingly, Chesapeake has been the most active participant in
such ventures in recent years. Even for companies with more financial flexibility, joint ventures offer a way to diversify
risk.

What Is The Outlook For Midstream Energy Construction Projects In North

America?
We expect a high level of activity. Given the production growth in the shale plays and the Canadian oil sands, there is a
huge need to build crude oil and NGL infrastructure, and midstream companies are capitalizing on it. New-build
natural gas pipeline projects are being constructed as well, albeit to a lesser extent. Production growth and changing
regional price differentials are key drivers of new project expenditures, with the primary areas of focus the Canadian
Oil sands as well as the Marcellus, Bakken, and Eagle Ford shale plays given strong project economics. Potential
additional U.S. Department of Energy approvals of LNG export licenses could also prompt considerable capital
spending and incremental debt in the sector, but this is still an unfolding story that is not expected to be concluded in

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 8
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

the coming months.

In 2013, we expect NGL and natural-gas-related infrastructure expenditures to be heaviest in the Marcellus and
Eagleford shale plays. We estimate that the Marcellus region could need up to 10 bcf/d of additional takeaway
capacity from the Marcellus by 2017. The surge in Marcellus gas production, however, is diminishing the Northeast
region's need to import gas from elsewhere in the country, which is resulting in flat basis differentials on traditional
west-to-east pipeline routes. On the crude side, several large projects are being planned to take advantage of growing
Canadian and Midcontinent production. In Canada, crude oil production continues to rise, driven by the oil sands, and
large, long-haul projects are planned totaling more than C$15 billion to add nearly 2 million bbl/d of capacity through
2020. In the U.S., crude oil projects are mainly focused on the Bakken Shale oil fields in North Dakota and Montana
and the Eagleford Shale play in south Texas.
With respect to LNG exports from the U.S., thus far only one export license has been approved. This was for the 1.35
bcf/d Sabine Pass liquefaction project expected to cost about $6.7 billion and alongside it about $3.6 billion in debt
financing. Due to mixed political and social opinion related to exporting material amounts of domestic gas supplies,
the potential for additional export license approvals is currently stalled in Washington.

Will There Be Any Ratings Impact From Weakening Margins In The Oilfield
Services And Contract Drilling Sectors?
The overall outlook for ratings in the oilfield services and contract drilling sectors remains stable, though with some
caveats. The North American onshore oilfield services and contract drilling markets continue to experience declining
margins and utilization. We expect low natural gas drilling levels and the once-unthinkable oversupply of service
equipment and rigs to continue to hurt margins and utilization in 2013.
Nevertheless, we don't expect this to hurt most credit ratings because of E&P companies' generally strong balance
sheets and adequate liquidity. Strong crude oil prices, currently averaging about $90/barrel in 2013, should provide
strong returns on liquids production. As a result, we expect North American drilling levels to remain stable despite the
decline in natural gas drilling levels.
We believe most ratings can sustain a modest weakening in conditions, as our positive outlooks on Key Energy
Services Inc. and Basic Energy Services Inc. demonstrate. In particular, companies with significant international
diversity--such as Schlumberger, Halliburton, Baker Hughes, and National Oilwell Varco--should have improving
international operations to buffer the effect of the weakening North American markets. In addition, we expect the
offshore contract drilling market to continue to enjoy strengthening utilization and day rates. Nevertheless, ratings on
smaller companies with a combination of limited market and product diversity and weak financial performance could
come under pressure. However, we currently do not expect a significant amount of negative rating actions (like those
we took in 2009) in the near term.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 9
1045976 | 301735744

Top 10 Investor Questions For 2013: The Global Oil And Gas Sector

What Are The Prospects For Brazil's Oilfield Services And Equipment Sector
For 2013?
Oilfield services and equipment and contract drillers activity is tied to the projected capital spending levels of E&P
companies, and Brazil is not an exception. With very large investment plans ahead (mainly to be conducted by
government-controlled Petroleo Brasileiro Petrobras S.A.), the oil and gas industry in the country presents robust
growth prospects. In tandem with such growth, production plans would require a substantial number of
specialized--mostly offshore--drilling equipment and multiple services to carry out the perforation plans.
The large level of projected investments in the oil and gas sector also creates an opportunity to help foster industrial
and economic development in the country. Taking advantage of that, the government has included in E&P concession
contracts a clause requiring operators to purchase a certain percentage of goods and services from local suppliers. We
believe that the combination of large expected investments in the sector and the local content regulatory requirements
is having and will continue to have a significant impact on the development and growth of the oilfield services and
equipment sector in the country. Besides Petrobras' and Brazil's overall recognized expertise in offshore E&P, the
country is rapidly importing technology and knowledge through partnerships or by international players establishing or
expanding operations in the country.
A common factor among drillships in Brazil is the existence of medium to long-term (five to 20 years) charter
agreements with Petrobras. In our view, the long-term charter agreements with a creditworthy counterparty provide
relatively high stability and predictable cash-flows, though they mainly depend on dayrates-setting mechanisms. We
view the contracts' tenors as favorable when compared with the usually shorter tenor of contracts for less-complex and
easier-to-move onshore rigs. In addition, despite the differences between dayrates-setting clauses in each of the
contracts, we see some upward trend in those due to greater demand for drilling rigs, which is largely attributable to
Petrobras' expansion plan ($236.5 billion capital expenditures plan for the 2012-2016 period, including about $141
billion in its E&P segment).

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 10
1045976 | 301735744

Copyright 2012 by Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved.
No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof
(Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system,
without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used
for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents
(collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for
any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or
maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an "as is" basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT'S FUNCTIONING
WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no
event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential
damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by
negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and
not statements of fact. S&P's opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase,
hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to
update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment
and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does
not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be
reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives.
To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain
regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P
Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any
damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.
S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective
activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established
policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process.
S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P
reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites,
www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed
through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at
www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

DECEMBER 6, 2012 11
1045976 | 301735744