- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haynesville Shale
Posted on 7/1/08 at 9:26 am to TigerDog83
Posted on 7/1/08 at 9:26 am to TigerDog83
Didn't find humor--what's funny?
1
Posted on 7/1/08 at 9:30 am to gingles
Some of the posts over there are unbelievable. Landowners who say that a well "hit gas" even though it hasn't been completed yet, people who are way out of the shale area holding out for $27,000 per acre, people thinking that 1/8 acre is going to make them a billionaire, etc. Everyone is excited around NW LA, but some people are losing sight of reality.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 10:03 am to TigerDog83
I've heard a lot of this...People that live in a neighborhood with 1/4 an acre, or people that have ~5 acres thinking they will be a millionaire. A man I worked with said it best, "This thing will change where you go out to eat, but it's not going to change where you live."
This post was edited on 7/1/08 at 11:00 am
Posted on 7/1/08 at 10:21 am to LSU0358
This shite is going to be a bust - these companies will never payout on the lease investments alone. They did this simply to pump the stock. Wall Street only sees success and failure in wells based on completing as a producer and never take into account the amount/rate of production. Also these companies are going to book huge reserves which are just bullshite made up numbers. What is going on up there is insanity. The only people who are going to make money are the mineral owners that cash in on the lease bonus. If I was up there I'd tell the lesse I'd lease at $35,000/Ac and take no royalty as I'm pretty sure most will never see a penny in royalty.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 10:30 am to LSU0358
Can someone explain (in real terms) what it means that Petrohawk has 275,000 acres under lease and plans on the board for 10 wells over the next 2 years?
What does the 640 acre 'section' mean? Does that mean a well drilled will assume the 640 sq. acres around it are included in the royalties for that well?
Would there need to be a well drilled for every 640 acre section for everyone who has leased (those 275,000 acres) for everyone to have a shot at royalties?
I know all about different areas of the shale being more productive than others so I know not every location is getting a well..I'm just trying to get a feel for what happens to those who signed 4k/acre leases in 3 years if no well is built. Yes, the future is unclear..I'm guessing one of 2 things:
1. further examination found it to be a non-productive area so HK or some other gas company offers a much lower lease/acre? ..or no lease at all?
2. Gas co. hasn't gotten around to putting a well there so they re-up (at possibly higher lease raet?) for another 3 years or whatever landowner renegotiates.
I know this is still unknown..but what can people expect? Did those 'early signers' in Ft Worth re-sign at much higher lease rates after the intial 3 years?
What are other possible outcomes (other than #1 or #2)?
What does the 640 acre 'section' mean? Does that mean a well drilled will assume the 640 sq. acres around it are included in the royalties for that well?
Would there need to be a well drilled for every 640 acre section for everyone who has leased (those 275,000 acres) for everyone to have a shot at royalties?
I know all about different areas of the shale being more productive than others so I know not every location is getting a well..I'm just trying to get a feel for what happens to those who signed 4k/acre leases in 3 years if no well is built. Yes, the future is unclear..I'm guessing one of 2 things:
1. further examination found it to be a non-productive area so HK or some other gas company offers a much lower lease/acre? ..or no lease at all?
2. Gas co. hasn't gotten around to putting a well there so they re-up (at possibly higher lease raet?) for another 3 years or whatever landowner renegotiates.
I know this is still unknown..but what can people expect? Did those 'early signers' in Ft Worth re-sign at much higher lease rates after the intial 3 years?
What are other possible outcomes (other than #1 or #2)?
Posted on 7/1/08 at 11:38 am to nyvram
Hi all, I am a national correspondent for the Los Angeles Times and I've come across this very informative site as I research an article I'm doing on the HS gas play and the speculative rush it has triggered. This is one of the better resources I have seen on this subject online (and no, by the way, I don't root for USC, I am a native Philly guy who's more into the Eagles and the NFL).
Anyway, I was hoping to speak to some landowners who have leased about the process for the article I'm writing. I'm also hoping to talk to some folks who have gotten a fair number of offers but are still holding out.
My e-mail is Miguel dot Bustillo at LA Times dot com, and my number in Houston where I am based is 713-237-1608. I'd love to learn more from people on the ground about what sounds like a pretty wild situation.
Anyway, I was hoping to speak to some landowners who have leased about the process for the article I'm writing. I'm also hoping to talk to some folks who have gotten a fair number of offers but are still holding out.
My e-mail is Miguel dot Bustillo at LA Times dot com, and my number in Houston where I am based is 713-237-1608. I'd love to learn more from people on the ground about what sounds like a pretty wild situation.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 11:41 am to Bustillo
It is very smart of you to disassociate yourself from USC 
Posted on 7/1/08 at 11:47 am to igoringa
Yeah, I just wanted to put that out there right away. I cover Texas as well as Louisiana full time, so I know there is no love for USC in these parts, especially after that national title controversy a few years back.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 11:52 am to Bustillo
There was no controversy. We won, they lost. No controversy required. 
Posted on 7/1/08 at 11:56 am to cwill
quote:
This shite is going to be a bust - these companies will never payout on the lease investments alone. They did this simply to pump the stock. Wall Street only sees success and failure in wells based on completing as a producer and never take into account the amount/rate of production. Also these companies are going to book huge reserves which are just bullshite made up numbers. What is going on up there is insanity. The only people who are going to make money are the mineral owners that cash in on the lease bonus. If I was up there I'd tell the lesse I'd lease at $35,000/Ac and take no royalty as I'm pretty sure most will never see a penny in royalty.
Cwill, are you on tilt?
This post was edited on 7/1/08 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 7/1/08 at 12:33 pm to Tiger JJ
Hear what Cwill is saying, but some large companies (including Shell?)are putting up very large amounts of lease dollars and making very large statements. Would they really stake this much cash and their international reputations on a bust(scam?) just to run up their share prices for a short while? At some point wells will be drilled or not.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 12:33 pm to Tiger JJ
quote:
This shite is going to be a bust - these companies will never payout on the lease investments alone. They did this simply to pump the stock. Wall Street only sees success and failure in wells based on completing as a producer and never take into account the amount/rate of production. Also these companies are going to book huge reserves which are just bullshite made up numbers. What is going on up there is insanity. The only people who are going to make money are the mineral owners that cash in on the lease bonus. If I was up there I'd tell the lesse I'd lease at $35,000/Ac and take no royalty as I'm pretty sure most will never see a penny in royalty.
Care to wager on that? I'd almost bet everything I have that you are wrong. I've seen enough information already to convince me this play is for real. To make statements like that you must not be involved.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 12:54 pm to TigerDog83
My mother is a retired RN who worked hard all her life in a small town and of course most of those years when RN's weren't paid like they are now. We lost my dad (retired welder) a year and a half and ago, but it would sure be nice to see mom get a little benefit from her 30 acres in her later years. It would just be fitting.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 1:03 pm to TigerDog83
quote:
Some of the posts over there are unbelievable.
Just kidding. It seems everyone with a piece of dirt is thinking he's the next 'JR'.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 1:34 pm to gingles
This post was edited on 7/1/08 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 7/1/08 at 3:41 pm to cwill
quote:
If I was up there I'd tell the lesse I'd lease at $35,000/Ac and take no royalty as I'm pretty sure most will never see a penny in royalty.
According to the landmen/O&Gs who are "leasing up" the rest of NWLa...the best bet is to rely on a future payout of 25% royalty payment...and not rely on a "larger" upfront bonus payment/acre.
The NWLa mineral/landowner/homeowner is being sold the "lease for less" bonus $ and "reach for royalty" $..."royalty money is where the payoff comes in...not bonus moneys."
OK..What's the true story???? The pundits over here cannot seem to make up their collective minds (for being the "expert" bloggers).
The "haynesvilleshale.ning" bloggers are attempting to help each other...not deride each other. Without them...some of the TDs would still be signing them up for $200/acre 1/8 royalty.
Thank G for the web! It has made this play much more equitable for NWLa! (IMO)
Posted on 7/1/08 at 4:00 pm to DrWAVeSport
Posted on 7/1/08 at 4:00 pm to DrWAVeSport
We got an offer for 17,000 per acre plus 25% royalties
Posted on 7/1/08 at 4:29 pm to tigerskin
CHK up 4% in after hours trading.
Posted on 7/1/08 at 4:31 pm to Tiger JJ
Should that bump PXP as well?
This post was edited on 7/1/08 at 4:34 pm
Page 31 of 59
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News