Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Scott on October 13, 2009 at 11:40

Many landowners were given an 1/8th. Who ever leased those minerals got to reserve a hell of an override. At least early on.

Permalink Reply by Josh on October 14, 2009 at 3:30

Why would someone take pride in causing someine else to lose their way of providing for their family? Sounds immoral to me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on October 14, 2009 at 4:01

Josh, most people I have dealt with don't provide for their family by way of mailbox money. The few that do, always tell me to negotiate with their legal counsel.

The simple rule is, in business dealings, if you don't understand what you are doing, then you get help from someone who does. (Never help from the person who is working on the other side of the table.)

It's not immoral it's capitalism. In a leasing situation you are selling something to an interested party.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Josh on October 19, 2009 at 4:30

Randy, I'm all for capitalism. I was responding to what someone said about taking pride in getting soeone fired, not your post.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on October 19, 2009 at 5:22

Scamming someone out of their assets by taking advantage of their lack of knowledge also sounds a bit immoral too, huh?
Too bad landmen aren't required to provide some disclosures or to advise where materials or resources could be obtained, given the magnitude of such dealings.
Real estate agents are required, why not landmen?
Wouldn't be so bad then if a land owner ignored that advise. Most folks take others at their word! Might be a mistake when dealing with a landman. Not revealing important information that could knowingly effect a transaction is just as bad as giving bad information.
So really if a landman doesn't give a hoot for a MO's position, why should the MO give a hoot for the Landman's position?
Let the landman worry about his own job!
The real smooth talking ones will survive, right?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on October 19, 2009 at 5:56

Doh, sorry Josh.

To P.G.:

Like it has been said before, there are always bad apples. In every single occupation. Most of us would appreciate not being lumped in with those. I've been on lots of calls with other landmen, and with only a few exceptions, they've always asked the landowner if they understood what they were signing, if they had any questions.

In addition, we'll answer questions from landowners about clauses or wording, but if it starts getting to a point where it is creating a conflict of interest, then we'll tell the L/O to talk to someone they trust who has experience or get an attorney to look it over.

You're painting us all with a very broad brush P.G. In many cases we only know what the client told us (which is never everything), and in my experience L/O's are smarter than you're giving them credit for. Unless they have leased many times, they hardly ever "take me at my word", I usually have to come back when their son/neighbor/father/etc will be there. Now maybe that just means I am not as good at "getting the ink" as others, but you should chill out with all the insinuation that we are the nasty mean oil guys trying to take your stuff.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on October 19, 2009 at 7:21

How can one tell the difference?
I'm sure they all sound like your best buddies when they come calling!
Just like I said, many folks take others at their word. Finding out later that wasn't such a good idea is a bit late when a contract ends up being forever!
I'm sure there are some fine honest used car salesmen out there too, huh?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy on October 19, 2009 at 9:29

The point, is, the gross majority of people won't sign something dealing with money or property that they don't understand. And people are encouraged to get advice from someone they trust.

Isn't that all that one can really ask? I dunno. The system is never perfect, and life ain't either. All we can do is our best, and try to act as decent as possible to one another. I believe that's what most of us do.

Permalink Reply by David on October 19, 2009 at 10:04

PG,

I think you are too quick to see landmen in a bad light. We have leased our land - scattered across a dozen parishes - for decades and I do not recall any landmen that fit your view of them.

Were some more competent than others? Absolutely. But the evil intent you ascribe to them is unwarranted. Sometimes a landowner may ask a question of a landman that he cannot answer, because it involves giving legal or accounting advice. A good landman will tell you, at some point in the questioning, that your questions require professional counsel - whether legal or accounting.

Permalink Reply by P.G. on October 20, 2009 at 3:18

David, how can you compare yourself with those who never leased minerals before. You admit decades of dealings with this sort of thing. There are many pitfalls that one may not know about, that you know about, not because they are stupid but just have never had to think about it until the landman showed up one day. I'll bet many of those who leased at the beginning of this play would have done things much differently than a year into the play by just viewing this website. I can't believe the landman didn't know all about that (meaning of clauses and such) when he went calling. Landmen on here already admit landowner beware. The landman knows when when a landowner is making a foolish mistake and saying nothing is as bad as lying in my opinion. I think it would be safe to assume that anyone purchasing or selling real estate would be cautious but still agents must follow certain disclosure rules. Landmen can do anything they want.
I wonder how many mineral owners didn't know they got a bad deal until after they started viewing this website? It's obvious that landmen take advantage of folk's lack of knowledge. They know when they've found a sucker! How does that make them good Joes? Landmen just call it business. Landowners call it getting skinned. I guess we will have to agree to disagree..

One thing for certain, I'll bet landmen will find the picken's much more slim now than they did at the beginning of this play!

Permalink Reply by ELLIS HUGH on October 20, 2009 at 3:59

I will reiterate by previous comments.

Landmen work off of the authority provided by their client. They do not care if they provide a 25% royalty and 20 additional clauses to each lease, it is irrelevant to them.

P.G., your issue is with E&P companies, not landmen.

EnCana leased a majority of Red River Parish at a 3/16th royalty on a 'standard lease'. Leases were bought from attorneys, large landowners, millionaires (and their attorneys) and common folks alike, mostly under similar terms.

Landmen did not set the terms of these offers, they simply provided the offers to the mineral owners.

By the way, plenty of landmen do not understand the lease clauses they are negotiating (or not negotiating). In many cases, they are provided with limited information and sent into the field to buy leases.

It is very true, a large number of landmen hired to work in the Haynesville Shale when the land grab started had no experience. They were taught the basics and sent to provide the offer given to them by their client.

P.G., regarding your slim pickings comment,

In my opinion, this is the best time for landmen to work in Haynesville Shale. Mineral owners are more informed and those that are not understand to seek legal counsel. In most cases, clients are providing all of the necessary terms expected in the shale. As landmen, we love when we can offer 25% royalty and have the authority to provide all of the requested clauses, makes our job easier.

Permalink Reply by Randy on October 20, 2009 at 4:16

On a separate note Ellis, I don't mind it one bit when a landowner 'lawyers up'. 95% of the time, the attorney will tell me exactly what he wants, we can get it hashed out in one meeting, I order the check, I deliver it and pick up a signed document.

No mess, no hassle, no changing the deal at the last minute, no "oh I forgots", etc. That's my idea of a good transaction.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page