Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Sarah on May 15, 2010 at 19:12

I agree. I just recently discovered that I have just over 88 acreas in Sabine Co. In an area they believe will be productive in both Haynesville and Bossier shale. They need to drill to find out if it's indeed productive but they should be doing that soon as a well was permitted recently near the survey. I think we should get as much for our acreage if it is in a good area as they pay Shreveport.
I really don't want the gas being sold at these low prices anyway. I miss the good ole days of summer 2008.

I feel kind of guilty even talking about this though with that horrific oil spill out in the gulf. Eleven men lost their lives. How sad.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on May 16, 2010 at 5:06

Which Sabine County survey are you in, Sarah? There has not been anything permitted "recently" in Sabine County for the HA/BO. There are some Lacy permits that are sort of "recent" but they are targeting shallow oil formations in the south end of the county. Just curious as to where your minerals are located and who "they" is, that "believe (your acreage) will be productive in both Haynesville and Bossier shale".

Cheerleader, as one of three siblings who own 315 (unleased) mineral acres in Sabine County... I wish your question/statement could make it so but that is not how this business works. You are comparing apples and oranges, mostly. Exploration in NW La. is about a year ahead of East Texas. There have been nearly twice as many wells drilled to define the HA/BO which is nearly 3,000' shallower (much less challenging to drill).

At the price of gas right now (which may stay depressed for the next year or two) the only acreage that will get drilled will be what was leased in the last two years. There won't be any more leasing if mineral owners hold out for huge bonuses. And further step-out drilling to the south will cease.

I watch permits daily for district 6 HA wells and even permits (good for two years in Texas) have slowed dramatically in the last two months. Keep going with your outlandish demands and you will get to see exploration stop completely.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ALongview on May 16, 2010 at 7:40

I agree with you jffree1regarding the high bonus requests especially considering the shift to oil that we have seen recently and the low price of gas. These companies have a lot of acreage to get to in the next 2-3 years. There has been a bit of a slowdown in permits lately but there has still been just about one Haynesville/Bossier permit filed per day in District 6 on average in the last two months. With the new acreage limits per unit increasing in Texas, a well per day drilled in an 800 acre unit would hold almost 600,000 acres in two years. I honestly think that the goal for most of these companies that have already invested a lot of money in the area is to not lose acreage. I just hope they keep drilling and not just permitting wells.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sarah on May 16, 2010 at 10:54

Hi jffreel, I may have misquoed Les when I said "recently". Sorry if I got that wrong. Funny thing is he just told me to contact you, so I just sent a friends request.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sarah on May 16, 2010 at 11:48

Just read alongviews post. At least they are still Haynesville/Bossier permits being filed.
I'm not really interested in leasing in todays environment. Not good as a mineral owner.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 16, 2010 at 12:59

Those who choose to make decisions concerning the management of their minerals based on articles such as the one excerpted in the topic of this thread will likely make expensive mistakes. For example, this is my GHS sample article on the same state lease sale. "Four bidders submitted bids for a 24 acre Bossier tract in 16N - 11W with bonuses ranging from $9,588 to $19,878 and a quarter royalty. Tract 41354 - 133 acres in seven sections of 20N - 16W, Caddo Parish received a single bid of $200 and an eighth. Tract 41380 - 107.9 acres in 17N - 15W and Tract 41384 - 15.457 acres in 16N - 14W, Caddo Parish received no bids. The average bid for the remaining tracts, all in Caddo, was $6,870/quarter." Compare this to the article above and you will realize that the authors of the articles in the discussion title chose to include the information that made the sale sound as successful as possible. I took the opposite approach. I think the differences fairly illustrate the pit falls of assuming too much without doing the requisite research to get an accurate snapshot of a particular mineral tract. In general E. TX. minerals prospective for the shale, or shales, should be similar in value to those in NW. LA. Though true, that statement is worthless. Each mineral tract is a separate and fairly unique question of value. And without the specific facts pertinent to that tract, no one can assign an accurate value.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sarah on May 16, 2010 at 14:36

"Each mineral tract is a separate and fairly unique question of value"

There hasn't been any drilling really close to my minerals in Sabine, so we don't know for sure yet. Just a general idea of what their survey said. We just have to wait and see. In the mean time, I'm not signing any low ball offers.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 16, 2010 at 14:48

Sarah, I'm not suggesting that you or any GHS member "sign for a low ball offer". In fact if you throw out the $200 and the $19,878 bids as not representative of the average HS acreage, all the other bonuses are in the "ball park", IMO. The information required to access the public databases and perform a specific review of your minerals are contained here on the site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sarah on May 16, 2010 at 15:10

Oh I know you weren't suggesting that Skip. And thank you so much for the information you shared in your article and in the above post. You know, about the databases to review minerals here on the site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on May 16, 2010 at 16:33

i suggest anyone who questions the statistics go to www.haynesvilleplay.com and read the two articles for themselves. The first article shows an average bonus of $8,108 for 15 parcels representing 277 acres. The second article represents 13 tracts for an average of $7,907 per acre. No shell game just simple statistics.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 16, 2010 at 16:41

Cheerleader, I did not say and am not suggesting that the articles are inaccurate. Just that they are excerpts of the "best of the sale". My report was taken directly from the lease tract sale report on SONRIS and is equally accurate. The point being if you want the unfiltered information direct and in full from the source, go to SONRIS and review the results. Those who post only the good and ignore the rest provide a slanted view although it certainly fits your MO. LOL!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on May 16, 2010 at 17:59

Skip,
The posting of the sale results was not my "opinion" or my interpretation of the statistics. Or as you state "slanted" to report high results.
The following are the exact results of the sale. If you wish to add any sale, in addition to the following, then we can provide additional information to the readers. In the meantime, there is no indication that any bonus has been deleted from the list and certainly no deletion as a result from me changing the list. If a sale was deleted it is without my knowledge.
LOUISIANA MINERAL BOARD: MINERAL LEASE SALE RESULTS
APRIL 2010
24.0 ACRES BOSSIER 17/11 $19,878
8.2 ACRES CADDO 17/15 $6,867
67.5 ACRES CADDO 17/13 $6,867
87.6 ACRES CADDO 16/13 $9,532
35.8 ACRES CADDO 13/14 $10,389
0.3 ACRES CADDO 15/16 $7,272
17.9 ACRES CADDO 16/14-15 $7,695
1.5 ACRES CADDO 16/14 $8,137
11.0 ACRES CADDO 16/14 $8,137
7.2 ACRES CADDO 15/16 $7272
2.2 ACRES CADDO 14/15 $8,595
1.2 ACRES CADDO ?/? $7,272
1.0 ACRES CADDO 15/15 $8,595
10.4 ACRES CADDO ?/? $7,272
1.2 ACRES CADDO 15/15/ $8,595
AVERAGE BONUS $8,108

• ▶ Reply

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