Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cassie on July 16, 2008 at 6:45

$4000 an acre with 25% royalties by Acadian Land. What do you think? Is this fair?

Permalink Reply by East Tex Landowner on July 17, 2008 at 0:49

where are you located within the parish?

Permalink Reply by Cassie on July 17, 2008 at 9:57

I AM RIGHT BESIDE THE HALL SUMMIT HIGH SCHOOL,OLDTIMER.

Permalink Reply by BLZBub on July 17, 2008 at 1:53

Cassie, got the same thing in April. Would demand more now. Our land was east/northeast of Coushatta. Our landman was fronting for Encana/Shell

Permalink Reply by Cassie on July 17, 2008 at 9:58

WE ARE NOT ACCEPTING THIS OFFER BLZBUB. AT LEAST NOT YET,I'M HEARING OF 10,000 AN ACRE BEING THE WAY TO GO.

Permalink Reply by Shaylon on July 17, 2008 at 7:19

5,500 and 25% royalty from Gulf Coast Oil

Permalink Reply by Kevin on August 15, 2008 at 5:50

Do you have a contact name and a phone number? I would like to find out if they are interested in leasing my land, too.

Is their offer still on the table for you? Have you signed with them or anyone else yet?

Thanks for any info you can offer.

Permalink Reply by copskid on August 20, 2008 at 5:51

I am interested in knowing if any offers have been submitted for the following area in Red River Parish: S36 T14N R9W. I believe this is near Hwy 507/Parish Rd 302 (Bethel Church Road). Are any of you near there and, if so, have you received any offers: how much and from whom??? Thanks for your help.

Permalink Reply by mooncookie on August 25, 2008 at 17:12

$$$ depends on the township, range and size of your land. Equally important should be the %%%% royalty interest you collect of production.

%%%% is where most people lose the $$$ and remember boys and girls:

if you sign for a small %, it will only get smaller as it passes down from one generation to the next, etc.

If you have a dab of land and are not in the "hotter" zones, It would be especially risky to aggressively seek a deal with any brokerage firm. Whoever "wants" the most will end up with the shorter end of the stick...the "wanting-it tax" is what economists and marketing execs call it.

Realistically, looks like my neighbors are getting 7,500 - 10,000 but I don't know what %% they got and that could make all the difference on who is better off.

Hope that helps!

Permalink Reply by Carol on September 22, 2008 at 3:37

I heard the state got $30,000/acre + annual leasing/rent the same. Some people have been offered around $15k + 25%. What happens if you are the only one who hasn't leased yet, in your section -- can you wait too long and not get a lease? I've heard that when they get a certain %, they can go ahead without you. Is this correct? Thanks.

Permalink Reply by Cassie on September 23, 2008 at 3:20

yes carol they can definitely go without you. basically what will happen is one of 2 things,1-they will either not put up a rig on that section and your neighbors will never recieve any royalties even though they got bonuses or 2-they can put up the rig but you will not get a bonus and you will become what is called a 100% owner but you will not recieve royalties until the rig company has made all their money back which is usually after the well is no longer producing at peak,therefore you would get very little by the time if ever you recieve a royalty check. also if there are any accidents or the rig owner is sued you would also be accountable for the lawsuit being that you are a 100% owner. if you are the only one left hopefully its not because you are being greedy holding out for more than your neighbors. if they haven't contacted you you might need to check and make sure you own your mineral rights if you don't then you will not hear from them because its already leased. hope this is helpful

Permalink Reply by Carol on September 23, 2008 at 3:36

My neighbors mostly leased years ago, for pennies. I'm holding out for guarantees that my retirement home doesn't become a storage facility for the oil company. Money is not the problem. The lawsuit problem is a non-event: persons without control are not held responsible for injuries, particularly not on unowned properties. I would not be a 100% WELL owner, but I would own 100% of the minerals under my property. The leases all make the lessees totally responsible for liability, and that would be binding on their activities where they occur. I think a good case could be made for timely payment, regardless of whether or not well costs have been made. I don't think, that properly formulated, a case on Constitutional rights and property ownership would fail. If somebody steals your cows, you don't have to wait until they make their expenses back to get reparations.

Also, has anybody actually read the State leases and seen the differences between them and the ones we're being asked to sign? Interesting.

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