Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by grasshopper on August 14, 2009 at 6:41

Buckmaster, SONRIS shows that #240099 is permitted to only 3,500'.

A new well (I don't think that it has been mentioned on this site before) , however, SN 240049, HA RA SUE; MCDONALD 1, 10-9N-14W' on the lake west of Converse is permitted to 12,000' TVD, and 16'200' TD.

This looks like a Haynesville well, and Sabine needs all we can get!!!!

Permalink Reply by buckmaster on August 14, 2009 at 9:41

grasshopper thanks for correcting my mistake. I was going through sonris bringing my haynesville list up to date and i just assumed that being a Nabors Logan it was a haynesville well. usually I check the depth if sonris doesnt list them hara. thanks

Permalink Reply by grasshopper on August 19, 2009 at 12:28

No sweat, Buckmaster. (Your comment caused me to look at SONRIS.)
Look at that McDonald 1 well! Permitted on July 29 and spudded on Aug 1.
Boy, that's FAST!!! Keep drillin' guys!

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on August 28, 2009 at 10:36

Confirmed offer of $5000.00 p/a on parcel on 483 between 171 turn off and midway road....still maybe a bit low......

Permalink Reply by Martin on August 29, 2009 at 6:05

By who? Royalty share? Several weeks past I heard of several offers of $3000/ac and 25% royalty for land between San Miguel (sp?) and 483. This was for Petrohawk.

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on August 29, 2009 at 14:27

Cheaspeake,25%....however he turned down $12,500.00 last year. I think he will wait till next year.

Permalink Reply by Martin on August 29, 2009 at 16:27

Glad Chesapeake is showing more interest in Sabine. Since my last post here, one of the land owners told me that the offer was not directly from Petrohawk, but from an independent landsman trying to to put together a lease package to flip to Petrohawk.

I've heard several owners say they also turned down bonus offers in the $10,000.00 to $12,500.00 last year. I don't know when or if we will see similar offers again

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on August 30, 2009 at 14:50

Some expert's are predicting N/g to be at 5 or 6 next year. That coupled with a good energy policy favoring N/g would help but i agree it might very well not get back!!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page