Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Scott on November 14, 2009 at 8:15

You and I are ready to see some of those IP numbers in 16N-14W. I received my AFE on Sec. 7-16N-14W from CHK this morning. Love to see that one join the list.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kim on November 14, 2009 at 18:18

What is a AFE?? I also own minerals in this sec. Are royalties anywhere in the near future?? Are the two pads on Chadler rd. superpads?

Thanks,
Kim

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on November 14, 2009 at 18:45

Kim:

AFE = Authorization For Expenditure.

Refers to the 'bill' that the operator sends to owners of working interest and/or unleased mineral interest owners to both advise them of anticipated expenses for drilling and/or completing a well. Also, provides for owner's consent (or nonconsent) to such expenses. Consent usually implies paying your portion of well costs in a timely manner so that the working interest owner can receive their portion of revenue from the well without incurring a further risk charge for having the operator carry your portion of the bill.

In LA, unleased mineral interest (UMI) owners neither incur a risk penalty, nor do they have to put up their share of the bill in advance. If your minerals are unleased, you'll have to wait until payout for your share of revenues. If your minerals are leased, you'll wait for approximately 90-120 days after first sales on production (provided your title has been examined and cleared) to begin receiving royalties.

There's a discussion around here about this somewhere..........

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kim on November 14, 2009 at 19:04

Dion Warr
I am unleased. Another person (Scott) in the same section got a notice of AFE. Is there something that I should do at this point.. What time line am I looking at for royalties if the leased owner is looking at 90-120 days? Who will examine my title, or even know that I exist?

Thanks for your help!!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on November 13, 2009 at 18:43

Thanks Les B,
You get an A+ on that project!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on November 13, 2009 at 22:30

I have questions about two wells, Les. 1) What about the Moran 34 in 14/13???
2) What about Sample 32 in 15/11??? ( surface in Section 5,14/11)
I would have thought both would easily qualify.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on November 15, 2009 at 16:34

SB, I have not seen any test data for the Sample well and the Moran 34 #H1 tested at 18.5 MMcfd according to Sonris.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on November 16, 2009 at 4:09

Les, you are right in so far as Sonris reports no IP for the Moran 34H #1. The only reporting on the Moran # 34 is the DT which shows18.5 MMcf. However, if I look at the Moran 33H #1 on Sonris ( (the # 3 well on your HOF list @ 29.6million/day),it only reflects a DT of 18,985 mcf/day. I see no reportedIP on that well either. This is a major problem I see with the reporting these companies do on IP.......no consistency at all. I assume you got your info on the Moran # 33 IP from a press release rather than from Sonris. It is clear to me that because an east offset (Moran 33) made 29.6 million/day and a north offset (Moran 27) made 26.1 million/day and there is only a few hundred psi difference between the DT of the Moran 33 and the Moran 34.........and because Exco has announced that all of their wells in Desoto Parish had IP's of at least 20 million/day that the Moran 34 belongs on the list somewhere. I certainly understand that unless Exco makes a public announcement of the Moran 34 IP, there is no way to put it on the list, which makes me wonder how these companies pick and choose which wells to make public announcements about. Without these announcements the list would be greatly shortened if you were going by Sonris alone. The Moran 27 (#6 on the list) would not be there, for example.
All that aside, you have been an extremely helpful addition to this web site and you are greatly appreciated, Les B.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on November 17, 2009 at 9:09

The "official" IP for the Sample 32 in 15/11 (pad in Section 5, 14/11) was reported on Sonris and it does make the HOF.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by w.r. frank on November 18, 2009 at 12:27

Les,

You have to sort of work backwards now since so many companies no longer report single wells. Moran 34 had its DT on October 4. At the November con call XCO reported all Desoto wells IP'd over 20 mmcfd, ranging from a low of 20.5 mmcfd. to a high of 30.1 mmcfd. SO Moran 34 HAD to be over 20 mmcfd.

Also, most of XCO's wells DT and/or SDM2G test in the teens, but their 24 hour IPs are all over 20.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LP on November 14, 2009 at 6:02

Would it be possible to have the choke size of each well included in the info?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on November 15, 2009 at 16:24

LP, only some of the wells have choke sizes and flowing pressures but I will see if I can generate a supplemental file with some information. Currently I cannot seem to access the site from my laptop so it may be a day or two before I can post.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page