A guy my brother works with stopped over last night and told us after contacting Shell and inquiring where his money was, they tolf him they were cancelling his lease. He lives in Plain grove Twp., right off of 79. They actually eluded to him they were low on money. What a joke. I still think there should be a law against this. If the landowner is bound the second he/she signs a lease, so should the gas company signing them.
No you don't. What you do have is an answer for everything, none of which is ever based on fact. I would trust that like I would a Contractor. Always a clever story.
I don't like seeing people decieved.
I just found out about an interesting little loop hole to the no deductions clause some companies use. There are and will be "NO DEDUCTIONS" for "operations" such as separation, compression... on the lease hold. If there is no specific wording to the contrary they can deduct for those cost if they are done off the leasehold or on another leasehold. I am still trying to understand this but what is factored in is where the production is calculated at. Point of Sale or from the well head. Just another thing to consider.
Your hilarious. You know whats on my desk better than I do. I'll put his card in my wallet, anyone wants to see it come to the meeting at the Stoneboro Fire Hall Thursday night at 6:30.
So you don't like seeing people deceived. You told everyone that we weren't being honest about getting the best deal. We got a deal better than you. So who deceived the people? Gonna reimburse them for their losses?
For all unleased landowners out here, who did you sign with and for what terms? Just askin as you seem very happy with your lease! Also, why is 18.5% a myth? Details please.
Seneca, and could not have been more pleased and which terms? The document was 9 pages long with small print.
Jim's-alias-petej...a CX Landman. a lease at 18.5% is and will never be profitable for any company to act on at 2.50 gas. Gas will likely remain at this level 2.50 -3.50 area for the forseeable future meaning the next 20 years given the glut of production. Meaning every well will have to be Cheesman well to make any real money. Every well won't be in that range. The companies will have to get their money back somehow. The Cheesman well was drilled on a lease, that was taken long before any talk of phony terms based on false hope. It was also done at a 1/8 interest to the landowner. Which is profitable. 18.5% is not. I have been told that the big companies will come back and renegotiate the royalty interest as the areas get proven. You wont have a choice, take the reduction. or no well.
By your thought process, then the landowner would be able to back out as well since as you state "it is not binding".
The companies have the experience under their belt to tilt the leasing game way into their favor and they have lawyers just waiting to jump on landowner lawsuits. Unfortunately, as we see in Chesapeake, when you live by the fine line, you die by the fine line that you have been crossing.
Their day has come to reap what they sowed with all the questionable tactics they have been using.
I knew exactly what I signed, when I signed it.
"breach of contract" has nothing to do with it. But the topic does stir debate and is an opportunity to put ones self in the spotlight as a knowledgeable and trustworthy source of information.
Vote for Pedro
Which oil and gas company has the majority of leases in Lawrence county and the most contiguous acre's ?
Shell. It's not even close. HillCorp is second with maybe a 10th of the leased acreage Shell has. Rex has a tiny bit in southeastern Lawrence.
Do you know if a 3-D seismic was done in that area recently ?
I don't know if the ratio is ten to one but Shell is the dominate player. Don't forget that Chevron has a lot of acreage in northern Lawrence Co by way of the Atlas wells they bought a few years back. Probably more than Hilcorp.
What's the chances the "guy your brother works with" has land with mineral rights issues?
Has he approached any other Companies to test their interest?
Have heard rumors that Shell was buying Range and now Chesapeke........? Maybe there is a Capitol issue that needs resolved. They didn't get this big by being stupid.
@2.50 mmf , a slowdown in interest is probably to be expected , I guess..........?
BUT , If Shell's interest is beginning to wain , why are they drilling more wells at the Patterson Site? Still not tapped in to the adjacent pipeline , and yet they drill more wells. My money is on them concentrating on wet areas for now in anticipation of their impending Cracker Plant to be built in Monaca.
Let's face it , this gas is everywhere and it can't all be produced simultaneously. This is an extremely long range play and alot of us may never see a royalty check , but our kids or grandkids will.