Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Carol Willis Gray on August 29, 2013 at 11:37

(a) and (b) of the above royalities shame not implies that the royalties will be different for oil.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by GoshDarn on August 29, 2013 at 12:06

I concur with ShaleGeo.

Also, at the hearing you might want to bring your lawyer and as many other landowners in opposition as possible, if that's your intent.

Having stated that, I can only assume that if you are able to prevent Anadarko's plans, you do realize that such a tactic might stall the drilling completely for the foreseeable future.

Might.

Also, you haven't stated what your lawyer thinks about opposing APC's plans.  If he's a vetted O&G lawyer -- which I'm sensing he's not -- then that's yet another point to consider.

So, to be clear, IMHO, you don't want to deal with a middle-man . . . but probably will, at some point, want to sign a lease with a landman who's representing a legit operator such as APC.

Others might not agree.

Also, I agree you are wise to be using a lawyer.  Kudos, even if he's not an O&G attorney.

And as to the advice that you receive on GHS, you must remember that this is "free" advice.  And if some members go off in tangents, it doesn't take much effort to ignore their foibles, being as you're not paying them for their time.

Note:  Overall, you do appear to have a reasonable grasp of the general dynamics that your family is facing.  I might suggest that you also reach out to other landowners involved and ask them their thoughts on this and their intent.

Note:  I haven't told you what I would do, if I was in your shoes, about Anadarko's plans, whereas my family does own minerals in another, somewhat different proposed drilling situation with APC . . . which just had a hearing for 4 CUL's. 

Good luck.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by GoshDarn on August 29, 2013 at 12:14

Again, I concur with ShaleGeo.  He's offering some very well-seasoned, excellent advice from the facts that I know at this point in time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on August 29, 2013 at 12:26

Carol, Strata Acquisitions is one of four land companies working under contract for Anadarko E&P Onshore.  They have recorded a number of leases in the public records of Caddo Parish.  And there are recorded assignments of those leases to Anadarko in the public record so they are not a "flipper".  The lease offer you mention is the standard terms that have been offered by all of the land companies since early in 2012.  However just because others have leased for those terms does not mean that you should accept them but they are not low ball offers.  In the last few months Anadarko's land companies have begun to bid a quarter royalty on state lease tracts.  The bids are public record and include bonus amounts.  If your attorney is actually an O&G attorney he/she should know that.  If they don't, they are not paying attention.  If you attend the Commissioner's hearing in Baton Rouge you will find that there is little or no credence afforded mineral owner concerns of force pooling  If you do not have a geologic argument and an expert witness who can make it there is virtually zero chance of avoiding the approval of the unit.  If you don't care to deal with Mr. Bean you could ask to work with another Strata landman.  And you always have the option to decline a lease and be force pooled as a UMI (Unleased Mineral Interest).  You can explore the regulations governing UMI status by reading through KB's UMI Basics: 

http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/UMI-Basics

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on August 29, 2013 at 13:19

Carol,

Both Jay and Skip are offering good advice.

The following are my suggestions, nothing more: I would make it clear that you are interested in leasing. BUT, that the lease has to be right and you are not going to be pressured into signing.

That being said, among other things I would want a better definition of the royalty than they are giving in the lease for clause b. What they could do if I am correct is separate the NG liquids from the NG stream and pay you only for the gas not the liquids. The liquids would probably be valued at close to crude price. So that would be lagniappe for them. As for C, I would want that stricken and something along the lines of a no cost royalty clause inserted.  Also, again personally, I may sign a three year lease but I would not allow an option clause to be added. If they want to extend the lease after 3 years then it should be at market value not today's value. Also, since you only own 40 acres you need to put a no surface activities clause in. Again, I'm not telling you what to do just making suggestions. I think you are beginning to understand that the companies are going to try to take advantage of landowners with the "hurry up and do it now" approach and that in the long term may not be to your advantage. 

I hope this helps.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on August 30, 2013 at 9:19

If you don't have an Oil & Gas Attorney (and it sounds like you don't) then get one!  A good Oil & Gas Attorney will have clients who have already leased to Anadarko with his help and will be very familiar (through his negotiation) with lease terms that are acceptable to both you and Anadarko.  You don't want to be a UMI, if at all possible.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on August 30, 2013 at 10:35

Randall Davidson is excellent.

http://www.djslawfirm.com/

Ph: (318) 424-4342

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NA on August 30, 2013 at 11:05

Joe Aldridge,

While this is off the subject don't NGLs (propane/butane) trade below half the price of the spot price for oil? That is to say a bbl. of NGLs is percentages of butane methane propane thus a price difference.

• ▶ Reply