Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by kittycatmama on August 15, 2008 at 10:40

Supposedly Petrohawk has backed out of Emberwood & Dixie Garden Subdivisions in Shreveport? Can anyone confirm this? Why did they back out? Have they backed out of any other areas?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by insomniacnla on August 15, 2008 at 11:56

I posted in the DeSoto Parish Group that today I had spoken to the Petrohawk landman I have been negotiating with. I told him that I had heard rumors of Petrohawk pulling out of some areas. He said that "things changed" about a week ago and that Petrohawk is currently only interested in leasing in sections where PK already has at least 160 acres under lease. That PK wants to be able to concentrate their leasing efforts on sections where they may be able to be the operator.

He said that he will know by next week where those areas and sections are. I will post the sections when I find out which ones.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JM on August 16, 2008 at 8:21

Natrual gas is a fossil fuel.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Iris on August 15, 2008 at 11:26

Not me...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jaybird on August 16, 2008 at 8:43

Petrohawk/KCS sent us a letter wanting to lease our 255 acres in South Claiborne Parish. 33 days ago they said they were not interested in renewing our lease...but low and behold...this letter arrived yesterday.

We are waiting.....and they are not pulling out of Terryville Field and Sugar Creek Field. Which is great for us.

We are waiting to sign.

Jaybird

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by po boy on August 16, 2008 at 10:49

Thanks for that update.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by RAY on August 16, 2008 at 14:43

The big boys's huge $$ bonuses ran off the little boys. they got everybody waiting on the big bucks for their leases.

now they can slow the pace down while drilling more wells than leasing land, and not have to worry about the competition getting a foothold, simply because they cant afford to pay the big bonuses...
and most people will wait until thay start-up again

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by po boy on August 16, 2008 at 14:57

O/T (off topic)
How are the landmen paid? If they are paid a bonus on productivity (number of leases signed, or per contract) is it possible that the high signing bonuses paid to landowners could have been a result of their drive to make as much as they (the contracted landmen) could and a result of lack of supervision by the O/G companies rather than the value of the property? Temporary comissioned employes with blank checks? Or am I out in left field?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jkw3 on August 16, 2008 at 15:38

Nearly all field landmen are employed by land brokerage companies who contract with the petroleum companies to provide field brokers. They are paid a day rate plus expenses. I don't know of anyone working for the big guys who are paid on a per acre basis, but it is possible. There are alot of smaller groups out trying to pick up acreage and flip to other companies for $ and overriding royalties -playing any game to pick up a profit.

As for lack of supervision by the company's in-house landmen - from some of the allegations on this website, the company supervision leaves something to be desired. There are some urban legends about the spending habits of HK and CHK that defy reason. Some are true - CHK did purchase the abstract company in Mansfield and moved it to their offices. Did a broker for CHK pay a Shreveport country club $150,000 ($1000/acre) just to write a "demand to release" letter to the Club's lessee which held a valid lease on the property? The lessee (rightfully) refused to release.

The petroleum companies have put out a helluva lot of money for lease bonuses, but they did it believing they'd get it bcak in production. No matter what you think of the petroleum companies, they paying the tab here. They are responsible for the actions of the field brokers they retain, though they are not directly employed by the petroleum companies.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by po boy on August 16, 2008 at 16:04

I quess we will have to wait and see if one of the landmen that read and post on this site to volunteer that info.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ETOilman on August 16, 2008 at 16:11

Day rate only for 99% of field landmen. Rates are up but pale in comparison to what the mineral owners are getting here. It will have ramifications for the business all over, outside of the Haynesville. I have been a landman for over 27 years and I am not working in the play, but I have had to remind some mineral owners that they are NOT in the Barnett or Haynesville when they ask for what I believe are unreasonable per acre requests.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on August 16, 2008 at 16:11

I buy a bad lease then I have to pay it back, I can handle $100 per acre but I can't handle $15,000.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Next ›
• Page