Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Aubrey C. Sanders, Jr. on July 23, 2013 at 6:42

Dream on, Keith. Just let everyone interpret the "information and facts." It is most important that each of us understand that guarantees are very scarce in this business!!!

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on July 30, 2013 at 10:02

Keith:

I have to agree with you.  The facts are not typical however, and bear some discussion.  Generally no one wants to contract a rig (particularly on a daily rig rate) and have to tie up a rig any longer than they absolutely have to.  It is likely that it turns out to be a series of technical problems, however, it would be far from the first time that an operator elected to conduct operations for a period of time far longer in duration than one would expect for reasons other than technical problems.  Anyone who has had a lease held due to continuous operations for a period well outside of the stated primary term (or for meager production reported every third month) would be sensitive to such delays.  For that matter, there were many complaints my landowners early in this forum's existence re: wells drilled with the seemingly sole purpose of HBP'ing the acreage without any real hope of proving up an economic well or functionally contributing to the proving up of a "play" in general.

 

What it would come down to in such situations is this: would a reasonable and prudent operator look to conduct their operations in this manner which would be commensurate to fulfilling their duties and obligations as a lessee and/or an operator.  "Post holes" or other wells designed for a purpose other than good-faith operations prosecuted in a more or less continuous manner to a stated objective in search of producible zone(s) generally do not fit this standard.  Nonproductive wells or wells incapable of producing in paying quantities kept "alive" by intermittent operations designed to comply with the minimum requirements of the lease to an uneconomic ends solely to maintain the leasehold is generally not considered to comply with the duties of the lessee, but is subject to judicial review on a case-by-case basis for those seeking to dissolve such a lease.  Call such a well a "science well" if you prefer, but if the ultimate result is continued non-economic operations which serve to hold leases.  The science well alone does not serve to further the interests of both the lessor and lessee in the unit in which it is located unless the purpose is to timely drill and develop.  "Someday" is not generally considered timely.

Either way, there are still as yet unrealized events that will ultimately tell the tale (like an attempted completion, for instance), whether the speculation is ongoing or not, and whether those engaged in the speculation have ulterior motives or not is not really germane to this discussion.  Judgments are going to be made anyway, whether certain people state them about certain others or not.  According to the views expressed here already, there are allegations that there are as many people who would have an interest in this well being successful as there are not, so at best, it's a wash.  More than likely, it's really just hot air.

 

Just my two cents.

Permalink Reply by Jon on July 25, 2013 at 6:27

WLL had an earnings conference call today.  They briefly talked about their Smackover play in Northern La..

It is on their web site. 

Also at

 http://seekingalpha.com/article/1570852-whiting-petroleum-corp-wll-...       39:35 into the conference

Permalink Reply by 2p6y7ycljui0u on July 25, 2013 at 6:39

Sounds like the public line confirms what David said. Hope this develops into something. It is a totally different play from LSBD (what Skip has consistently said). Thanks for the link.

Permalink Reply by tony allen on July 26, 2013 at 7:48

WLL has over 100K acres and they are still leasing, contrary to previous reports. A lot of N. La. people will have a chance to lease to WLL if SWN does not renew. Mr. Sanders has said for years that multiple targets were in our area and he is being proven correct. All the mineral owners should not listen to all the negativity being put out on GHS by so-called experts that have a hidden agenda. If you are a mineral owner, remember what Mr. Sanders has said," The lease agreement may be the most important document you ever sign!". Don't be fooled by shifty landmen that tell you there is no play and you better take what you can get. They are on here for a reason. It is for their own benefit.

Permalink Reply by Land Rat on July 26, 2013 at 8:37

but also remember....sometimes there is no play...

Permalink Reply by GoshDarn on July 26, 2013 at 8:57

Tony:

Mr. Sanders has always been a truth-teller on GHS.  He tells it like it is, not shaving points (like others do to fit their own agendas) so as to feather their own nests.  Many landowners have the greatest respect for Mr. Sanders' advice.  A straight shooter.

Conversely, seems to me one can't fault the company insiders for doing the job that they're being paid to do.

That's their job.

Yet, of course, the fly in the ointment, so to speak, has always been those flying false flags and not being straight up about who they're "actually" working for.

There's the rub.

The tricksters who are hiding the truth and not explaining who their real bosses are.

In other words, when landowners are dealing with a landman working for whatever operator, it's quite clear who is paying the landman's paycheck.  And many of us on GHS have had both positive and negative experiences with such guys.  Many times they're just doing what they're being told to do and are not at fault for the techniques they use to ink leases.

Blame their bosses, not them.  And a landowner needs to always be wary and use a good O&G lawyer.

And those of us who've been leasing for many decades, truly appreciate the more honest landmen, who tend to have many years of experience and who seem to have some ethical code to the way they do business.

I know of several landmen on GHS who have proven themselves to have many more positives than negatives.  Good landmen have helped many landowners.

Then again, over the years, there have been the bad apples, too.

Still, it does help to know who the landman is actually working for and how the landman actually makes his/her money.  False flags can fool folks and cause 'em to make bad decisions.  If a landman is hiding the fact that they've worked for (or still are under contract to) a crooked operator like CHK, while advising landowners on CHK issues and not explaining why they're framing their advice in the fashion which favors CHK (as a hypothetical example) . . . such tactics aren't the most truthful, to put it mildly.

Then again, it's business (and not personal).  It's really about making money (at a basic level) for all involved.

It's always good to read your posts, Tony.  Glad you're still here. 

Permalink Reply by 2p6y7ycljui0u on July 26, 2013 at 10:20

And you just never know, some who caution against landmen are trying to be lease hounds. I am sure some of the louder barking dogs would whimper and pout if folks found it out. Just saying. People can be complicated. Some folks have talked themselves and others into thinking this is going to be the biggest thing in N Louisiana since the Rodessa Boom, and they have put OP $ in the gamble. Heed the words of Land Rat. Sometimes there is no play.

Permalink Reply by tony allen on July 26, 2013 at 10:52

GoshDarn... I agree 100%.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Glenn Kadison on July 26, 2013 at 11:25

I sense a slam on people's reputation here. For those not in the area of interest of WLL, and those not knowing employees of the leasing agents involved, WLL did cease leasing abruptly not long after spuding in Claiborne Parish. I was personally involved with WLL and the leasing agent at the time. I am a mineral owner and surface owner with representation. I am in a bloc just south of the permitted Dykesville Unit in Webster. 

If one listened to the conference call one would know that WLL has 100000 acre area with some more to lease. WLL also stated they were specifically interested in the area south of the "other play" and are the first in their area of interest, the basin. I do not know if this means they are simply going to pick up from where they left off or not.

I fail to see how this means they will pick up SWN leased acreage in a totally different geologic area. The assertion was plain, they are interested in the basin where the targeted area is deep, pressured, and condensate rich. They even stated, this is different than the exploration in S. Ark. This was what Mr. Peel has been saying for a number of months. In dealing with WLL, Miller, and my attorney I have not found I have been misled by the postings of Mr. Peel. He might be seemingly understated and tepid because he is not hoping his mineral interest is in the sweet spot as we as landowners hope for.

If Mr. Peel is wrong in his caution we can all unload on him after we are rich and famous in this "iteration," as he calls it. However, if this is a play and we become better off--this will be far from our thoughts, I am sure. I appreciate Mr. Peel's perspective and I feel I have sense enough to not be misled by his opinion or the grandiose delusional hopes of others.    

Permalink Reply by Land Rat on July 26, 2013 at 11:32

I agree.  The only thing I will add is that they kind of only very briefly discussed what their target was, but I do believe I heard "lower part of the smackover" in this imprecise comment made by whomever was speaking at the time.

Also, I know this website is a valuable resource to many people, but I just don't think that comments here, negative or positive, will or should have much affect on the expectations of a mineral owner, operator, or landman.  I'd trust Edwin Edwards before many of the assertions I have seen on here....that's just me, though.

Permalink Reply by Glenn Kadison on July 26, 2013 at 11:46

I have more confidence in Anthony Weiner's rehab than I do in some of the hopes and assertions spouted here. However, if they are correct and I am enriched, I will not care one way or another what they said or how they felt. In the meantime, I appreciate Skip's info.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page