Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 10:13

I'm trying to stay at arms length Earl.

Just passing on what I heard. They sounded like they were starting to realize just how much acreage they bought, and how much they paid for it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Coonman on November 18, 2008 at 10:23

and how much they are gonna make off of it?....hmm

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 10:34

At 30k an acre and 8.5 mil a well, hopefully enough to keep things going.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 11:19

Only because they lumpin all those $100/ac leases from the begining.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by intrepid on November 18, 2008 at 12:25

Don't they count also? In the average?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grillin' - MmmMmm on November 18, 2008 at 11:12

Naw...its "cost fixing". They will team up and drill wells either together or they'll share rigs and/or service crews. Doubt either would trust the other one to enter into some kind of lease arrangement for mineral leases. May work on pulling together some units that are already leased, share some support services, etc. But they probably won't share data/results. This partnering thing can only go so far!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 11:34

They are sharing data and results. Petrohawk is a working intrest owner in many third party wells, including CHK. This is why they were buying leases outside of their core areas. Other areas they have farmed out the leaseholds, this allows them to require access to data as a condition of doing the deal.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 11:46

yes. the JOA usully gives wi owners access to the data. Usually they even get hard copies of logs, core tests, etc.

I appologize. I should have been more clear.

In a farmout, it would have to be set out in the agreement.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 11:30

There you go again KB, here comes the conspiricy theory.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on November 18, 2008 at 11:48

I will clarify my statement. They said they were working together, and a common goal is lower lease bonuses.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Grice on November 18, 2008 at 12:24

If you could measure the length of that gentleman's agreement, would you use a ruler or a transit? Fierce competition has a tendency to create selective amnesia. If a new player was to walk in on the game, would they continue to respect the agreement?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on November 18, 2008 at 12:35

Jim, I think that you are correct. And that many members have overlooked this aberration as the prime factor in the escalation of bonus offers. I do not expect that the head to head competition will return regardless of national/global economic conditions or any future increase in the price of natural gas. The period of competition for leasehold stakes has run its course. Including prospective leasehold that is HBP in much of the defined area of the play, most E&P's have more than sufficient acreage to develop for the next decade.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 11
• Next ›
• Page