Unfortunately for me, my inherited mineral lease (without a Pugh Clause) is held by production by a previous oil well. So, it is my understanding that I’m locked into the royalty of the original lease when a new producing well comes in. But, I got my division order for my new Haynesville Shale well and it is apparent that only a 1/20th (5%) royalty was used for the decimal interest calculation – way lower than the original royalty! Can anyone explain why this would happen?
Tags:
Permalink Reply by Hale Yayuh on June 19, 2011 at 15:50
Permalink Reply by Wonderland on June 19, 2011 at 19:27
Permalink Reply by Varice Mire on June 19, 2011 at 20:05 The acreage of the new Haynesville Shale unit is taken into account along with my property acreage. The other factor left in the calculation of the decimal interest is the royalty. To derive the decimal interest proposed in my division order, a royalty of only 1/20th (5%) was used.
Permalink Reply by Hale Yayuh on June 19, 2011 at 21:45
Permalink Reply by Varice Mire on June 20, 2011 at 14:19 I called them this afternoon. I finally got in touch with a real person after several minutes of menu diving and waiting on hold. This person did not have a clue as to why the decimal interest of the DO they sent to me was so far off. He tried to pull up a spreadsheet used for the decimal interest calculation, but he could not find it. He said he would have to “kick it up to an analyst” who would call me back later.
Permalink Reply by Henry on June 19, 2011 at 23:13 Varice,
Some people, who leased to CHK, receive 20% of their payment from Plains and 80% from CHK under the Joint Venture agreement of 2008. I don't know if this applies to you or not. These people signed a lease with CHK, but under terms of the JV, CHK sold 20% of their holdings to Plains. So these people receive checks from two different companies each month. This might explain why you get a 5% royalty from one company (is it Plains?), and you might soon receive the other 20% royalty from CHK.
Permalink Reply by kittycatmama on June 20, 2011 at 4:14
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 20, 2011 at 4:36
Permalink Reply by kittycatmama on June 20, 2011 at 5:12
Permalink Reply by Hale Yayuh on June 20, 2011 at 16:33
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on June 20, 2011 at 10:34 441 members
248 members
690 members
455 members
7 members
6 members
7 members
386 members
402 members
194 members
In researching the decades-old Tuscaloosa Trend and the immense wealth it has generated for many, I find it deeply troubling that this resource-rich formation runs directly beneath one of the poorest communities in North Baton Rouge—near…
ContinuePosted by Char on May 29, 2025 at 14:42 — 4 Comments
© 2025 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
| h2 | h2 | h2 |
|---|---|---|
AboutAs exciting as this is, we know that we have a responsibility to do this thing correctly. After all, we want the farm to remain a place where the family can gather for another 80 years and beyond. This site was born out of these desires. Before we started this site, googling "shale' brought up little information. Certainly nothing that was useful as we negotiated a lease. Read More |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoHaynesvilleShale.com