Blackstone in Discussion to Buy Shell's Haynesville JV Position

Blackstone Group LP, the private-equity firm led by billionaire Stephen Schwarzman, is in advanced talks to acquire Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA)’s 50 percent stake in a shale-gas field in Louisiana, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Blackstone would pay about $1.2 billion for Shell’s half-interest in the Haynesville formation, the person said. The deal would follow a parade of gas-acreage sales by oil companies including Shell and Apache Corp. (APA) to investors as they trim holdings amassed when natural-gas prices were higher.

The New York-based PE firm would buy the stake in a joint venture that owns more than 350,000 acres in the Haynesville Shale formation in northern Louisiana and East Texas, according to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported the talks earlier today. Shell, based in The Hague, struck a deal to explore the field in 2007 in partnership with Encana Corp., the newspaper reported.

Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Blackstone, and Destin Singleton, a spokeswoman for Shell, declined to comment. Blackstone is the world’s largest manager of alternative assets including private-equity, hedge funds and real estate.

Blackstone, which has bankrolled refineries and off-shore drilling projects, avoided investing in gas late last decade, when prices rose to more $13 per million British thermal units. It has recently gathered positions in the Marcellus gas formation in Pennsylvania, Bloomberg News reported in March. Gas futures recently traded for about $4 per million Btu, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Blackstone’s holdings include a plant in Louisiana that it’s building with Cheniere Energy Inc. (LNG), through a venture called Cheniere Energy Partners LP (CQP), to export liquefied natural gas. The facility, the first to win government approval to export from the Gulf Coast, is scheduled to come on line in 2016.

To contact the reporter on this story: David Carey in New York at dcarey13@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Kevin Miller at kmiller@bloomberg.net Sylvia Wier

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-10/blackstone-said-in-talks-t...

Views: 4351

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

A problem with XCO is that they are for the most part already owned by private equity, Ross, Oaktree, KKR, etc. and would they want to play with Blackstone?  Since Exco hasn't had a CEO since October, do Wilbur Ross and Stephen Schwarzman get along?

BHP just completed three cross unit laterals in RRP west of the Red River near the DeSoto Parish line.

Based on rumor mill, I think they will operate if they can't find good terms with someone.  They are actually listed as operator on a few wells in Texas.

Not withstanding CEO personalty conflicts, I think XCO could benefit from acting as a contract operator of LA Blackstone wells in a number of ways.

Its not just the Haynesville that Shell is leaving. 

Rex Energy is expanding in Pennsylvania and Ohio with the acquisition of about 208,000 acres from Royal Dutch Shell for $120 million in cash in a deal that stands to increase the company’s footprint in the Appalachian Basin by 200 percent, the State College-based driller said Tuesday.

Rex Energy said it struck a deal with affiliate of Shell called SWEPI to acquire a 100 percent interest in 208,000 acres in the Marcellus, Upper Devonian/Burkett and Utica shales in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The acreage is in Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Lawrence, Mercer and Venango counties in Pennsylvania and Columbiana and Mahoning counties in Ohio, which the company calls its “Butler operated area.”

The deal ups Rex’s position in those counties by 230 percent to 298,000 gross acres.

“We are proud to announce this acquisition, which is a milestone for Rex Energy," said CEO Tom Stabley in a prepared statement. "The proximity of the Shell acreage to our Butler operated area, combined with our solid operating history, strong recent production results, and the attractive economics of our projects in the area made this transaction a natural fit for Rex Energy.

The divestment is not entirely a surprise for Shell, whose CEO Ben van Beurden said in March that the company would be cutting spending and staff in its dry gas operations in the U.S. by about 30 percent.

As of earlier this year, Shell controlled 900,000 acres in Pennsylvania. It had acquired more than 1 million acres in 2010 when it bought Warrendale-based East Resources for $4.7 billion.

Tuesday’s sale to Rex represents about 22 percent of its Marcellus portfolio.

Shell has slowed its pace of permitting new wells this year, but still received about 75 permits to drill in counties where it has a joint venture agreement with Ultra Petroleum Corp. The two energy companies are jointly developing acreage in central and northeastern Pennsylvania.

Butler County accounted for only a handful of new permits.

Outside of the joint venture, Shell is currently running only one rig in the Marcellus, according to Morningstar analyst Stephen Simko.

"Despite so many people having so much success in the Marcellus, it doesn't seem Shell, despite buying so much acreage, caught on to too much of it," he said.

The company's push to restrict capital spending and reign in unprofitable projects is in line with the sale to Rex, he said.

"Shell does not talk optimistically very often about Appalachia," Mr. Simko said. "Where they're really focused is in the Permian and in Canada."

Mr. Stabley said the deal will allow Rex to “strategically expand” its development program in that area.

Rex said this latest purchase and future leasing plans will position the company for a multi-year development plan that includes 400 potential liquids-rich drilling locations, a 24 percent increase over its inventory prior to the deal with Shell.

The new assets include about 16 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d) of production and estimated proved reserves of about 21 billion cubic feet equivalent of natural gas from those wells.

Rex said it has infrastructure and pipeline takeaway capacity — about 80 MMcf/d — in place to handle production. The company plans to add one or two drilling rigs in 2015 on the newly acquired acreage.

http://powersource.post-gazette.com/powersource/companies-powersour...

I think that RDS/SWEPI made the decision some time ago to divest these positions and may have just now found willing buyers.  Begs the question, is smart money moving back into dry gas based on bargain acqisition prices and a perception of an improved price environment in the near future? 

I'd like to correct a previous post.

A 50% stake in 350,000 acres @ $1.2B would equate to an acquisition price of ~$6850/acre.  For those lessors with a quarter royalty that would be ~$3425/royalty acre for comparison purposes.  Location is key to value so $3425/royalty acre would be an average across the entire 350,000 acre leasehold.

I divided by 2 when I should have divided by 3.  The price would actually represent  ~$2283/royalty acre.  Based on the fact that SWEPI got into the Haynesville early and quietly, I suspect that they may have a NRI greater than 75% and probably closer to 77.5% or 80%. 

SWEPI may be divesting their interest but I have heard from talking to a few people (non land management) folks that SWEPI was looking to come back to the haynesville and was looking for a third party to team up with to go along with their JV with encana. For some reason I was thinking maybe they were looking for a partner had perfected the drilling side of the haynesville, but looking back this would make more since. With Blackstone's stake in the LNG export this would make a perfect partnership. They can set a price per MCF that guarantee both sides profit. EUR have been going up based on perfecting completion methods and cost have been going down. Guaranteed cost per well + contract nat gas = guaranteed profit.  

Also I know of a few employees (more of area management type)of Shell that have been moved to the area (as in relocating families). One thing the haynesville has going for it is it predictability. Compared to some of the other Shales the production numbers do not vary as much as the other shales, one reason I heard they sold their eagle ford assets.

I know I have said "I heard" a lot but I base my "heard" from people within the company discussing, kind of like the rumor mill from within, so please take it with a grain of salt. However, the moving back of employee's I can confirm as fact, as to the extent, I have no idea. 

Nixon, interesting rumor.  By "non land management folks" I assume you are referring to field operations personnel.  Blackstone will need experienced people to run field operations for the HA wells they operate.  Encana operates the majority of the JV wells.  I'm unsure however how SWEPI fully divesting their interests in their LA Haynesville holdings provides them with any advantage in the scenario you sketch.  The advantages are certainly plausible for Blackstone.

Let me clarify. Yes assuming the WSJ is correct the reason for the moving of individuals would be that Blackstone would need those individuals in place any they would transfer with the sale. However, my thinking is that the WSJ might more or less shed the light on the third party rumor. Being that there is not going to be a divesting but more of a partnership. Remember Shell was going to the LNG plant but didn't want to spend the money. Shell gets in foot in the door in the LNG side Blackstone gets production for the plant. Basically this would create a natural gas price hedge for both sides. Natural prices go down losses from production are mitigated by profit from LNG export, Nat prices go up losses from lng export  are mitigated by profit from production side.

Also my reference to "non-land folks", is more like field operations management. Does this distinction make a difference, maybe not but in my train of thought it makes me believe more of a partnership is expected than a all out sell but, then again Blackstone would need these in place so I could see it as a preparation for both possibilities.

Regardless as long as either deal happens, I see this a  good thing for both the short and long term development of he haynesville shale. The only things holding back development of the haynesville is natural gas price. 

i like your analysis, a texas hedge

i'm told the gold standard for lng sales agreements is to price the lng off of a basket of world crude prices. so, floating sales price linked to a decades long sales agreement.

and, if they wanted to, they could fix the raw material price via the cme

Also, Majors (Like Shell) don't just want upstream they want development in downstream as well. With the current market as it is this possible partnership would be perfect for them. For one it would help increase the asset value of the haynesville on their books. They have taken a huge hit on that but by doing these they can spin it as an asset because of the "hedge" factor. The only real variables left would be demand for LNG and expected EUR for the well they drill. The haynesvilles just like all shales has pretty much been mapped out as to expected EUR per area, an personally I think a lot of area have massive potential now that the completion side is starting to get perfected.

IMO LNG demand is only going to increase going forward. Shale development for the mostly part, works off a much smaller profit margin than conventional well/area development. This is mainly because of the predictabiliy of development over a large area (E.I. no dry holes). While these small margins can be met in the U.S. other area around the world can't come close(for a multitude of factors). A shale well drilled in other area might cost 2-3x as much as one drilled in the US.  For that reason I don't see nat gas from foreign shale product being to big of a factor for some time, if at all.

I hate to inform you that shale NG is expensive compared to NG from the Middle East and Australia and the cost of energy to liquefy the NG is also very important.  For US LNG to compete against these areas, plus Canada, requires NG prices to stay below $5 and for the US dollar also to stay weak for decades.  Also it will be difficult to hedge at the CME, because it will be almost impossible to find a counterparty with enough capital to hedge a large amount of NG for years/decades.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service