$5,000.00 per acre done deal

Picked up a petro hawk check for a family member. $5000.00 per acre for 80 + acres 15n 12w

Views: 95

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on March 29, 2009 at 17:26
r.w.,

Would you care to elaborate on any other details of the lease.
Permalink Reply by r.w. on March 29, 2009 at 19:08
vanilla type lease similar to what we signed on other property @ 200.00 per acre 3 years ago. this lease was overlooked when 100.00 per acre extension checks went out. they did choose to pass on aprox. 100 adjoining acres that lies across a section line. This property is now unleased.
Permalink Reply by Bill Fowler on March 30, 2009 at 2:24
So I assume that CHK is filling in a section for a well, which is why they were willing to pay the high $$, but weren't willing to pay it in the adjacent section.
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on March 30, 2009 at 2:43
He said it was Petrohawk, not Chesapeake.
Permalink Reply by Bill Fowler on March 30, 2009 at 2:26
Could you give the section please.
Permalink Reply by Paul Jackson on March 30, 2009 at 2:03
Don't have a lease map. What is the general proximity of the lease? When finalized?
Permalink Reply by Bill Fowler on March 30, 2009 at 2:22
What was the royalty?
Permalink Reply by r.w. on March 30, 2009 at 3:06
It is actually in 15n 11w sec 7&8. the royalty was 25%. They unintentionally let this lapse. They intentionally allowed an adjoining 100 acre tract in sec. 17 lapse when they could have renewed them for 100.00 per acre. The reason was that they wouldn't be able to it before the lease extension lapsed. This property was expropriated by the rrwc and we were granted minerals in perpetuity. It is at the southern tip of the Elm Grove field. Finalized last week. Paid with check not draft.
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on March 30, 2009 at 3:09
No surface?

Pugh clause?


THANKS
Permalink Reply by r.w. on March 30, 2009 at 4:49
We dont own any surface. All land was expropriated leaving us with perpetual minerals.
Thay have to work out surface with the state. No depth restrictions. Pugh clause only covered release of minerals not included in producing unit. This was a big bird in the hand that puts the rest of it one step closer to production.
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on March 30, 2009 at 4:44
Sounds like their land department dropped the ball. They probally thought is was part of the states water bottom, stupid, and expensive mistake.
Permalink Reply by r.w. on March 30, 2009 at 5:59
K.c.s. Had it leased and forgot it when the extension checks went out. We have a few different family tracts in that area that have similar acreage. We own no surface. Easy to confuse as this was half interest in a 163 acre undivided tract. They extended the other half for 100 per acre.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service