Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 10, 2013 at 5:20

Thanks, Mark.  Pretty good synopsis in three short paragraphs.  I think we often overlook the dynamics associated with corporate issues such as street coverage/analysis, share price and management compensation.  Impressing the street obviously isn't always the most prudent metric used in management decisions.  I recall a quote from McClendon quite early in the Haynesville Play that, to paraphrase, basically described E&P companies going forward as the the "shale haves" and the "shale have nots".  The implication was quite clear and I think the industry, especially mid-majors focused on natural gas, bought it and acted accordingly.  They all wanted to discover the next big resource play and to have a presence is multiple plays favored by the street and investors.  I hope improving and more stable prices along with increases in F&D efficiencies will ultimately prove the Haynesville Shale Dry Gas Play to be worth the big bucks thrown at it in the beginning. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on May 12, 2013 at 1:25

There is at least one additional dynamic in most unconventional plays that bears consideration, although it was obviously not a primary consideration when leasing the Haynesville - other reservoirs/reserves that get HBP when the primary target is drilled.  

Cotton Valley is a primary example, but you might also get James Lime, Fredricksburg, Pettit, Hoston, etc.  the Eagle Ford has Austin Chalk, Buda, Edwards, etc, the Marcellus has several additional zones etc.  

In the Haynesville and Eagle Ford, these extra resources are bonus, but may provide a long term inventory of targets.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page