Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Henry on March 4, 2011 at 4:14

Probably not.  I am most interested in Haynesville Shale wells.  If I go into other formations, I run a risk of the BTU factor being different, or some such thing.  I'm trying to keep my data "apples-to-apples" as much as possible.  But thanks for offering.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry on March 25, 2011 at 6:06

I updated the data today.  Some of you have not sent in your prices lately.  Please help everyone out by continuing to send me your prices.  By sharing, you are helping many people who are learning that they are not receiving what they are owed.  Some of these people have already gotten things fixed.  Others are working on getting their payments fixed.  Please continue to share your prices, and help all shalers.  I do not share your identity with anyone, just your prices.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cobb on March 25, 2011 at 12:31

Henry

Here are the Jan prices.  There is some difference in pricing, but I think this comes from the BTU factor.  Qep list the BTU factor and the difference in the two wells is the Miss Chub is 1.018 and the Bienville SG is .978.  Anyway, thank you for keeping up with all this and sorry about being a little late.  Just got the procing this week.

Thanks

Jim Cobb

Attachments:

• Jan 2011 pricing.xlsx, 10 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Cobb on April 18, 2011 at 4:58

Henry

Feb Pricing

Jim C

Attachments:

• Feb 2011 pricing.xlsx, 10 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Torr on May 9, 2011 at 9:31

I'm a royalty owner in the Haynesville play with several different tracts of land throughout DeSoto parish, I'm also a Petroleum Engineer with over 30 years experince in this field.  Since I different tracts of royalty, I can directly compare what Chesapeake is paying compared to other operators and I have found that Chesapeake's net payments to royalty owners are consistenly substantially less than other operators.  I'm in the process of putting together a class action lawsuit agaisnt Chesapeake.  Chesapeake has recently been accused of the same wrongful conduct in a class action suit filed by royalty owners in the Barnett Shale field in and around Fort Worth, TX.  If you are interested in joining this lawsuit, please contact me by email: douglas.torr@sbcglobal.net.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry on May 10, 2011 at 4:30

Doug,

You might want to also post this in the "Leased by Chesapeake" Group.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry on June 2, 2011 at 8:37

It's been two months since I've updated the data on gas prices.  I'd like to put out new data for all to see.  Please send me your prices, via GHS email, and I'll post the updated numbers.  Thanks, in advance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry on June 16, 2011 at 14:29

Roy,

Can you tell me for what month these are the the prices?  The last data you gave me was for Oct 2010.  If you could update me with all the months, that would be great.

 

Also, my records show you with four wells:

30-11-14

31-11-14

10-11-15

11-11-15

Am I wrong, or is there a typo in what you just posted?

 

I'll start a new line for the well in 8-11-15.  I don't have any data on that one at all.

 

Finally, some CHK royalty owners are now getting statements that show the amount of deductions.  I don't know if everyone is getting these or not.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry on June 16, 2011 at 23:44

Roy,

Once someone's royalties get down below a certain level (something like $100/year), CHK will send an annual statement and check.  They won't send monthly checks for something so small.  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Diana on June 17, 2011 at 4:35

Roy, EXCO here also... Kinda funny - I have been under the Ac'curative Int., from there end: for a year. Still Nothing as of yet.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on August 16, 2011 at 8:14

Henry

 

Bump...  Since the Chk Pony Express Mail "should" be arriving soooooon?  I hope all Oil and Gas Shalers will start sending you their royalty check numbers.  I cannot stress strongly enough just how important your documentation is to ALL who contribute to GHS, those who are leased, no-cost royalty or not, and the least of these...UMOs who are HBP.   IMO, mineral owners across this Country need to take a look at this $/mcf and possibly get some "language" in a lease addressing...at the very least...an "averaged" $/mcf royalty from minerals produced in their oil or nat gas shale reservoir/field price using payors receipts. 

Anyway, thought you might go over to Wikipedia's entry "Hollywood accounting."   Looks to me like "Some" get away with seemingly similar "accounting for" methods."  ???? 

 

Any help is better than the lowest price per mcf...  Help Henry Now!

 

Thanks again, Henry.  You have no idea how much your Gas Price Survey is in demand.

 

DrWAVeSport Cd1  8/16/2011

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on August 16, 2011 at 9:23

Henry,

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting

 

Does the term, "monkey points," ring a bell?  Funny, but not so funny?

 

DrWAVeSport Cd1  8/16/2011

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 34
• 35
• 36
• 37
• 38
• 39
• Next ›
• Page