Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on September 17, 2009 at 13:25

Bill R,
Thanks for the information. A lesson to be learned for all of us. Big Brother[s] are reading our posts. Usually with a confidentiality clause comes additonal money from the party requesting the clause. Hope you received something for your silence. Have you noticed that the postings are usually limited to what some people have been offered but we seldom read about the finalized leases. The OG's are finalizing leases, the mineral rights owners just aren't posting for fear of repercussions. What do you think Motherload People...Do you think silence is worth about $2,000.00 an acre??? Ogmladvisor: Now that you know what a confidentiality clause is would you pay $2,000.00 per acre for the silence of a mineral rights owner?? On top of $5,000-$6,000 of course!!1

Permalink Reply by ogmladvisor on September 18, 2009 at 3:52

Cheerleader, once again you have proven your lack of understanding about oil and gas leases. A lease must be filed of record in order to give constructive notice, and without constructive notice the lease is in danger of being invalidated by another...basic real property law. As I am sure you realize, a real property conveyance also must fulfill certain criteria to be valid, among them the identity of the grantor and grantee, as well as a valid property description. Bill R claims that his "lease" has neither, which tells me it is not actually a lease, but more of an agreement to lease in the future. So you see, you can't have a truly binding and protected lease agreement without it being filed of record, and possessive of certain criteria.

So, why would a company go to such great lengths to hide the fact that they have such an agreement with certain mineral owners? I think it's very simple: the company in question is well aware that said mineral owners are in violation of their current lease terms by signing a new agreement before the old one expires, and they wish to avoid sticky legal issues for both themselves and their future lessors, such as a lawsuit for tortious interference. Many leases in SA County possess "right of first refusal" language...I know this because I have worked on and off here for 25 years and see them all the time...and I would bet my next paycheck that Bill R's current lease has one (with whoever it is), simply based on his postings about the language of the new agreement. So Cheerleader, if Bill R's lease does have a clause such as this, would you still suggest that it is a good idea to do business with a company that will assist you in breaking the terms of an existing, binding contract?

I surely hope not.

Permalink Reply by ALongview on September 18, 2009 at 6:14

Maybe he has a lease with the Congress.....that way they can make up the "legality" of the lease after it is signed but as they go along at the same time!

Permalink Reply by CH on September 21, 2009 at 7:10

My lease has this clause and if I could get help in breaking it I WOULD!!! We got screwed!

Permalink Reply by ogmladvisor on September 21, 2009 at 15:14

CH:

When you say your lease has this clause, which one do you mean: the right of first refusal, or the confidentiality?

Thanks...

ogmladvisor

Permalink Reply by Bill R on September 24, 2009 at 8:33

Hey ogmladvisor and cheerleader!
Well I am not sure about all the 'Legal Eagle' language behind all of what was in the original lease agreement(s) and other attached forms and 'foo-foo' that I had to have notorized at the time of signing.... BUT, I will say that just our "discussion" caught someones attention, because I have been served with a Court 'Gag order' stating that any additional attempts at disclosure will result in 'Bench Warrant for Contempt of Court' as filed in the County of Multnomah, State of Oregon. Needless to say this will be my last input into the subject, however, I will still be looking in and responding to items other than the current one. No matter what the outcome, it has been a pleasure discussing things with everyone, just wish I could have asked more. Thanks again!!
><)))))} *>

Permalink Reply by pops Ferg on September 22, 2009 at 3:04

On route 353 and Higgenbothem lane they are getting ready or have already begun to drill down for seismographic studies. They are going down 20,000 feet. They will then set off charges. There is probably 800 acres in this study area. Companies requesting the study are XTO, Devon and I believe Southwest.

The site above is about 1 mile North of Devon site near 353 and 21.

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on September 22, 2009 at 14:46

Thanks pops Ferg,
Do you know which survey[s] the 800 acres cover?? and how far north to which survey?
or Any other MotherLoad people who may know???? Any one who has been paid in a survey north of Devon's current well [Quirk T] for seismographic studies please let us know if the seismographic studies are happening in your survey.
20,000 feet?? Is that indicative of a possible Devon lime well??? Go Devon Go!!
The Motherload People of San Augustine County would like one [or more] of your fabulous wells!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks

Permalink Reply by pops Ferg on September 24, 2009 at 3:38

reply to Cheerldr Surveys I know a few J Chumbley, Wm Humphries, JB Dillard, T. Wright
Both sides of 353 both sides of Higgenbothem lane including going into the sabine forrest where there is private owned land. Payment for seismographic studies is done prior to any work. When I said 800 acres that was an estimate for the area I am aware of. I have no idea of the total scope of the miles or acres. The 20,000 feet depth is a definite. How many and where? I do not know other than the area we talked about I hope others can uncover more info.

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on September 24, 2009 at 17:29

Thanks pops Ferg,
Please keep us posted on the seismographic studies if you hear more!

Permalink Reply by Crandell Addington on October 26, 2009 at 5:02

pops Ferg:

Shot holes for seismic surveys are not drilled to 20,000 feet. Shot holes are very shallow holes. In this area, I would be surprised if they were more than 100 feet deep, probably less. I'm unfamiliar with near surface conditions in this area.

They may indeed have a target at 20,000 feet that they are trying to define.

Permalink Reply by jerry smith on September 23, 2009 at 12:11

can some one tell me if things are going to pick up in the drilling . i dont think i can very much longer for a well to be drill. if it dont pick up soon i am thinking about selling out of all my mineral interest in 2 counties they both in the core

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• 14
• Next ›
• Page