Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by dbob on May 25, 2011 at 5:03

I'm still trying to figure out who STM is.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on May 25, 2011 at 7:26

SOS:  Manager: David McAlpine

Filing Number:	801400085	Entity Type:	Domestic Limited Liability Company (LLC)
Original Date of Filing:	March 21, 2011	Entity Status:	In existence
Formation Date:	N/A
Tax ID:	32043868531	FEIN:
Duration:	Perpetual

Name:	STM Oil & Gas LLC
Address:	7100 OAKMONT BLVD STE 102 FORT WORTH, TX 761323911 USA

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on May 25, 2011 at 7:30

Mr. McAlpine appears to be a Ft. Worth OBGyn. 

http://www.healthgrades.com/directory_search/physician/profiles/dr-...

Address & Contact Information:

David B Mc Alpine MD

7100 Oakmont Boulevard Suite 102
Fort Worth, TX 76132

Phone

Permalink Reply by dbob on May 25, 2011 at 7:32

Must..... resist.....urge.... to....make....bad...jokes

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on May 25, 2011 at 7:34

ROFL!!

Permalink Reply by dbob on May 25, 2011 at 7:50

More seriously, this is 7 vertical wells to 12,000 feet. Maybe $4million per hole. Lotta risk unless someone is certain something of interest is there.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on May 25, 2011 at 8:30

Do you think maybe if they have good shows in the first well they wouldn't have to drill another hole and could just flip the acreage to someone else?

Permalink Reply by G. T. Summerlin Jr. on May 25, 2011 at 8:50

I see only one dry hole drilled in this survey and I cannot determine any other information from RRC.

It seems very unusual to permit 7 wells in a small unproven area at one time. Not sure what to make of this but  could prove very interesting for future conversations.  

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 25, 2011 at 9:12

I suggest someone post the plats from the well permits.

Permalink Reply by Dave McAdoo on May 30, 2011 at 3:13

There was a dry hole drilled for oil on this survey back in the 1980s.  It was located about 150 yards west of Hwy 59.  You can still see a pipe sticking out of the ground in that location.  Is that the dry hole to which you refer?

For a suggestion about "what to make of this", see my post below.

Permalink Reply by G. T. Summerlin Jr. on May 30, 2011 at 4:19

Dave,

According to the RRC the location you mention appears to be the dry hole for oil.

 

The seven permitted wells are less than 1 mile north of a large number of oil wells that run northeast to southwest and have been producing for many years with many of those wells  capped. I was in hope that the Keahey would be an extension of this oilly field and the seven wildcats would be part of the expansion.

Permalink Reply by Dave McAdoo on May 30, 2011 at 5:08

I have seen all those oil wells you mention.  Since I own minerals in the area of the 7 permits, I share your "hope",  but I have been told that the current wildcat activity is going for gas at a lower depth.  I'm sure it's possible that a little oil and other distillates will come along with it, but the main play is for gas. 

As you can see from my other posts, it is my opinion that the seven permits are not bona fide expressions of drilling intent. 

Sorry to quash your hopes on the expansion of an "oilly field", but I think there is evidence that this area may be a gas producer.  The Keahey and Pegasi wells along with aggressive leasing activity by Bachtell seem to indicate that. 

Do you own minerals in the area?  Have you leased them?

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