Some times things aren’t good or bad they just may be distasteful from your perspective.

If I sell a piece of property and reserve minerals, I want the gas companies to drill NOW before I lose my interests. The buyer of the property hopes they don’t drill soon enough and the mineral rights will become theirs. In it’s basic form that sounds simple enough.

But what if I sell someone 300 acres of prime development property that is held by production by an old minuscule producing well. They spend tons of money making plans to develop the property. Then the gas company that has a well almost a mile away wants to put a well on this property because the old lease (maybe decades ago) didn’t have a no drill clause. Now you have three parties with different needs and desires. And before it is all said and done maybe even a lawsuit. But who you believe is “right” may have to do with your own view point. And since we are all human is going to be viewed through our own analysis.

Or how about a Section of land that is leased except for 80 acres. The owners of the remaining 560 acres want the people who own the 80 acres to lease so that they can get their well drilled. The other owners may be holding out for an unattainable amount or they may be holding out for a reasonable amount. The sticky part comes in as to “who” is making the determination as to “what” is reasonable. If my friend on GHS is in the 560 acre owner group, I may interpret the 80 acre group as “unreasonable”. You can make the dollar amount $500 per acre or $50,000 per acre. When someone else’s interpretation is different than yours it is easy to decide that they are being unreasonable.

My thoughts are that sometimes we just can’t all agree, but I think it makes it easier to work through issues (or at least contend with them) if we at least try to look at things from the other parties viewpoint. Maybe after we do we can come up with a solution that each party can live with. And when we can’t maybe we can at least gain respect for the other person’s perspective.

Views: 14


You need to be a member of to add comments!


Comment by lanadan Ds3 on March 5, 2009 at 6:35am
I am an unleased MO and make no apologies about it. I try to live my life in such a way as to not say or do anything that would cause harm to another. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes not. I am at that point where I am hesitant to post on this site (and I asure you, I am not thin-skinned, so to speak) as there have been times when I have offered postings that I thought might benefit someone by my sharing some of my knowlege and experience (albeit limited, yet having done a great deal of inquiry and research in the leasing aspect of the OG field and having dealt with landmen/women for over 7 years now), that I have been referred to by some as greedy, selfish, unreasonable, etc. because I have not yet signed a lease. I have been also been called a "tree-hugger" because I simply expressed a profound love and respect for the land and will insist on certain REASONABLE surface protection clauses in any future lease agreement. So go ahead, some of you OG guys (certainly not all) who have a habit of posting sarcastic, condensending remarks -- take your best shot. I'll simply consider the source.
To me, some of the thoughts that I have just read on this site smacks of the old standard liberal agenda of "lets all hold hands and sing Cum-ba-ya songs and all will be well" . This, again, is the time-worn socialist thought of "Share our Wealth" or, (as more recently voiced by "you-know-who" )-- "distribution of income". I would be the first to stand up and say that there's nothing wrong with banding together at times to accomplish desired ends that benefit all. However, when it comes to sacraficing at the expense of my family and and me, then I must, and will, draw the line.
Comment by Anna Mauck-Member Services on March 3, 2009 at 1:12pm
Your perespective Parker is right on here, and it applies to much more than leasing but in anything in life when working with others. Remember St. Francis?

...O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love. ...

I look forward to when the day comes that I can challenge myself to have this perspective with others in my section! It may be a years off :-)
Comment by Dion Warr, CPL on March 3, 2009 at 1:00pm

Now you've touched on the very thing that causes more strife than anything else in this play: the value each individual involved places on 'me', 'my friends and neighbors', and 'them'.

The ugly truth is that generally most of us make personal decisions based on the advantage (or minimizing disadvantage) gained by 'me', without much regard to someone else, and then to whatever degree rationalize our 'me-centric' decision in terms of how it may help 'my friends and neighbors', and to h#@! with them. Then, rather than find blame in ourselves when faced with an inequitable situation (as with what happened in the last year), we blame the 'them' that helped set up or further the situation in the first place.

Unless people are able to admit their 'me-centricity', IMO, it will be hard going in an attempt to get them to understand anyone else's perspective.

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service