JHH
  • Elysian Fields, Texas
  • United States
Share on Facebook Share

JHH's Friends

  • Preston J. Dugas III
  • Jeff Henry
  • Kathy M. Stephens
  • Shawn Holmes
  • Carla French
  • Ben Elmore
  • frances b. suryan  (mccain)
  • CATWOMAN
  • Krkyoldhag
  • Mason Woodard
  • w.r. frank
  • Robby Patterson
  • Henry
  • Skip Peel - Independent Landman
  • Jack Blake

JHH's Groups

JHH's Discussions

Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
6 Replies

Started this discussion. Last reply by Jay Apr 29.

Natural Gas Storage
1 Reply

Started this discussion. Last reply by Chloe Apr 8.

Natural Gas to Methanol Plants
2 Replies

Started this discussion. Last reply by JHH Feb 27.

 

JHH's Page

Latest Activity

Jay replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"I agree it can be frustrating.  I have a lease with CHK so I get it.  I am also a geologist in the E & P world.   Jay"
Apr 29
Mister Sunday replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"And had I said "No, I don't like that deal" they would've still taken it out of the ground underneath me.  I'm just curious as to why I pay for all that when they take it from me, and then I have to pay for it again…"
Apr 29
JHH replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"Saw this the other day.   jack NARO is the only national organization representing, solely and without compromise, oil and gas royalty owners' interests. CALL TO ACTION! We Need Your Help Now!!! NARO…"
Apr 29
Jay replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"Good luck getting your gas to market without a pipeline, processing plant, etc.   Jay"
Apr 29
Mister Sunday replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"I don't know.  It just feels like I sold you my cattle, then you get to charge me for having to butcher it to sell the beef."
Apr 29
JHH's discussion was featured

Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs

Interesting to Texas Royalty owners and Oil/Gas Producers.I might need some of your knowledge on what this means.To the relief of oil and gas producers, the Texas Supreme Court ruled on March 1, 2019, in Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Company, L.P. v. Texas Crude Energy, LLC  (No. 17-0266), that post-production costs were rightfully deducted when calculating overriding royalty payments based on the "amount realized" from the sale when the royalty interest is to be delivered "into the…See More
Apr 17
JHH replied to Skip Peel - Independent Landman's discussion Clean energy future might be closer than we previously thought
"I'm sort of interested in batteries.  It seems energy storage is and will be a growing need in the future.  And I'm interested in the process of keeping those new generation batteries powered up.  Post more on this when…"
Apr 16
jffree1 replied to JHH's discussion Texas Supreme Court Rules on Post_Production Costs
"Here is the decision."
Apr 13

Profile Information

How would you describe yourself?
Landowner
Plays that you follow
Haynesville

Comment Wall (5 comments)

You need to be a member of GoHaynesvilleShale.com to add comments!

Join GoHaynesvilleShale.com

At 10:01am on February 9, 2018, Skip Peel - Independent Landman said…

We can't protect everyone.  People have to own their decisions.  Thanks for posting this.

At 9:39am on February 9, 2018, Skip Peel - Independent Landman said…

JHH, Lumberjack showed up on GHS sometime back.  If you use the key word, Lumberjack, and use the search box that appears to the right of My Page in the task bar below the GHS logo on any page, you can pull up those old discussions.  There was some pretty antagonistic back and forth but I stand by what I posted then.  Lumberjack Energy is registered as operator with the State of Louisiana, I don't know about Texas, however after all this time the company has zero wells in LA.  I think this guy is simply looking to flip leases.  That's not illegal but I would be very careful concerning the depths I would consider leasing to him.  I would never grant an "all depths" lease to someone like this.

At 9:52am on October 17, 2009, Skip Peel - Independent Landman said…
JHH. Just to help you understand what is going on with the city minerals and the value they command. Consider the following: Companies have been actively leasing residential and commercial properties within the city limits of Shreveport for eighteen months. That investment is worth more when they have the city properties that help make the leasehold more contiguous. And gives the winning bidder an advantage over those competitors holding urban leases. I believe the winning bidder considers the price paid to be quite reasonable. And it is 478 acres. Although landowners tend toward the opinion that on a per acre basis, one acre is as valuable as 100 in the same general location. The operators don't think, or do business, that way.
At 11:35am on August 14, 2009, Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) said…
Take a moment to fill the GHS Survey. Your feedback & assistance will help me guage what we need to do on the site to improve your shaling experience.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Keith "Haynesville"
Site Publisher
At 5:48pm on March 29, 2009, JHH said…
Welcome to GoHaynesvilleShale.com! I hope the site is a place for to learn, network and contribute. My name is Keith and I started the site in June of 2008 to open up lines of communication between landowners. We now have over 10,000 members. Be sure to peruse the site.

To give you a feel for current discussions, go HERE. Also be sure to follow details on the site HERE. Have fun SHALING!

Keith "Haynesville"
Site Publisher

P.S. Be sure to check out our BLOGS

Box Files

PollDaddy

 
 
 

Groups

Not a member? Get our email.



© 2019   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service