Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Linda Whatley on January 17, 2011 at 14:54

ummmm....  very interesting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BirdDawg, plain ole' idiot on January 17, 2011 at 15:12

I agree, MS. iwantapony,

But what is it saying? Dollar amounts/per what?

I am somewhat confused. As usual.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by FXEF on January 17, 2011 at 15:27

BirdDawg,

 

It's just showing the amount of royalty CHK has paid in various zip codes from 2008 - 2010. 

 

I'm not sure why anybody would want such data... I certainly have no use for it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on January 18, 2011 at 19:16

FX - re. "...why anybody would want such data..."

 

Still having difficulty being objective, are we?

 

How about this...

 

Those royalty dollars represent money impacting the local economy.  Some of it, I'm sure, is being saved in banks & invested.  Money in the banks means money to lend to locals for, oh say, business ventures and dealings.  Personal loans to get some things done.

 

Some of that money is being spent here in our businesses.  Money that maintains/creates jobs.  Money spent locally generates local sales tax revenues.  Lots of things can be done with that, like improving parks, supporting the libraries, improve schools, building & maintaining roads, building/maintaining/improving infrastructures.  Get the drift?

 

And these are the royalty payments from just ONE company.  How many others are there in the area paying royalties?  One of the reasons "why" is the "ripple effect."

 

thanks for the thoughts, made me think ... lol,  80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on January 19, 2011 at 0:59

Oh, one other note.  All of this "ripple effect" in no way diminishes the need to be watchful of health/safety & environmental issues.  We still must be vigilant in that respect, but I'm sure the companies know this.  ;0)

 

Keepin' it balanced will keep it flowin'.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on January 18, 2011 at 19:20

Thanks for the questions, BD.  Always appreciated.  This definitely does provoke some thought and it's always better to see questioning rather than not.  Also, good to know that someone as seasoned as you sometimes belongs to the "Club of Confusion."  Makes me feel a little bolder about asking questions, too.

 

best,  80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Frank on January 17, 2011 at 15:38

I'm curious why that little slice of Caddo in 71106 won the lottery?  It takes 4 or 5 times the acreage to come close in DeSoto.  BS.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 17, 2011 at 16:04

The Caspiana Field was a focus of early HA development by Chesapeake.  The development of central and southern DeSoto occurred later.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Whatley on January 17, 2011 at 17:54

And it looks like central DeSoto might catch up real soon.  Lots of drilling going on in that area!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HBP on January 18, 2011 at 2:42

Is the graph showing where the payments were mailed instead of where the land related to the royalty exists?   That is what I thought when I first looked at it since that info would probably be easier for them to isolate by zip. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Whatley on January 18, 2011 at 3:35

Good question.  Does anybody know the answer?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 18, 2011 at 3:39

Ya never know with The Times.  LOL!  My impression was that the list was generated by well, not by royalty recipient.  In other words the totals are for all royalties paid out for wells within the various zips.

• ▶ Reply

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