Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on June 19, 2008 at 5:07

Snakestewart,

Just thinking...How about a coalition of "Neighborhood Associations" that includes "Haynesville's" list in the upper left-hand legend of webpage (same-named link)? How many mineral owners do you suppose are included there?

That, my Shaler Friend, would be the Thousand Pound Gorilla "In the Mist." Or should I say "In the Shale." ha! ha!

DrWAVeSport 6/19/2008

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BC004 on June 19, 2008 at 7:27

Go to http://www.dogwoodhoa.com/. $8,750.00 per acre if 90% sign.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DNATALI on July 1, 2008 at 3:38

I went to Twin Cities location in the Capital One bldg last week. My offer had come from them originally and the first letter offered $250. per acre, the last letter offered $5500.. I asked why there were so many different amounts offered by so many companies for the same land. They said offers differed because of competition between companies. Twin Cities is the local name of Chesapeake. They say they are the biggest and that some smaller companies are buying as much as they can and will in turn sale to them. The money seems to be based on the large chunks in one deal. The more you come to the table with, the more the offer, thus smaller companies will offer more to get large chunks. All of the chunks combined will give better position if they want to sell to Chesapeake.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Muddigger on July 1, 2008 at 6:16

I would be more inclined to believe that Chesapeake is Chesapeake(The Dog) and Twin Cities is Twin Cities(The tick) and land owners are the bushes that get the ticks on the dog. The local name of Chesapeake is Chesapeake.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kassi on July 1, 2008 at 9:28

Muddigger, good analagy! You are right. Chesapeake has set up an office in Shreveport. Twin Cities is simply the company they contracted with (a subsidiary of a subsidiary of Chesapeake). Chesapaeak has a lot of land in the play but they are not the only big boys on the field. XTO, Shell, Goodrich, Encana, etc. are here also and Petrowhawk recently announced having a billion dollors for the Haynesville shale play.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kassi on July 1, 2008 at 15:12

OK, we just hired an hourly attorney for our group. Based on the fact that I have already done the research, we are doing our own negotiations and we only need the attorney for a few things our group felt it wise not to go with one of the percentage attorneys. Our costs are going to be significantly less this way. Anyway, if anyone wants to join our group for negotiating that has not already contacted me please do so. Word is the companies are interested in larger acreage offerings even if they are not contiguouse. email me @ kassi205@aol.com if you want to discuss joining your group or section or land with ours.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james anderson A1 on July 15, 2008 at 7:52

ok, am new to all this research, and people and places jumping out of the wall, that seems to make things more confusing than ever. i guess a multiparish is what i feel, and it seems that this could be made to be more simple than it is. i feel taht there should be a consensus on the price that is given for the lease that involves all people with land that the oil will come from, being 1/2 acre, or 100 acres. area that has anything on top of the ground, involving there land would be negotiated, but all chemicals under the ground spreading into different sections would get same amount per acre. is that something like multiparish? would like to see everyone else get what is due, and hopefully prevent the one with the most pull gets more per acre, and the ones left out inj the field would ultimitly get the lesser per acre. a lot are going to get much, and i can only hope all is happy when this is over. i appreciate you :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Johnyd on July 15, 2008 at 8:08

Not that I realy understand what you are trying to say here. But what you are explaining is Mass Units 20,000+ Acres.....and no you do not whant that. The O & G company will pull these small units into large ones once the play has almost Played out. They have done this in the Cotton Valley field to absorb some of the cost of the non profitable wells. You have some wells that are making money and others that are costing money. It is good for some and bad for others, Not realy fare though....Kind of like equal Distribution of wealth. If its not yours than its not yours. SOrry about your luck. If you own a larger track of land you should get more per acre, thats just common economics. If you go down to the car dealer ship and buy 1 car from the lot should you get the same deal as a company buying 100...No and you want. Same as acreage, you have one acre and joe blow has 1000 acres guess what he is going to get more.....its a bigger package for the O&G companys that the whole reason for pooling in the first place.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Snake Stewart on July 15, 2008 at 11:10

Hello James , In its simplest form, a coalition is an act of consolidating neighbors with others that share a common goal. Being in the group affords the weaker members( small tract ) to lean on the stronger (large tracts ). The individual small tract owner sees instant benefits by the safety in numbers, while larger tracts benefit by increased size of the group as a whole. The one car deal turns into a fleet by agreeing to help oneanother.

It is simple economics in its simplest form. The small tract seems to benefit more per capita but because the small tracts greatly out number the larger tracts , it tends to balance out in the end.

From the small tract owners point,he has benefited a tremendous amount from the group by having the voice of the multitude , thus being far more valuable then he was by himself. The signing bonus will be much larger then if he were by himself as well as % royalty. He will probably receive a much better lease in general. But you certainly can't expect the royalties to be equal irregardless to the amount of land that you have. You have increased your worth dramaticaly but you don't have rights to royalties that are not yours. Just as those that unfortunatly signed early can't expect to get the same money that others get for holding out longer. Unless of course that have provisions in their contract like Most Favored Nation Clause

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james anderson A1 on July 15, 2008 at 10:56

mmmmm, ok, thanks. i am flexable. i guess that is why a lot of us are stumbling thru this, trying to understand some of it. you know it does present a challenge for most.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page