no check for january

several people in central bradford county did not get checks in january for january.  some did not receive from stat, either, tho' the monthly statement from them showed  what SHOULD have been sent to them.  did get year's statement from chk. one person that i know of got a january stat oil check.

anyone else having this problem.?  NO chk checks for january 2014?

anyone know what this is all about?

thanks...

Views: 6592

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by lamar r king on February 11, 2014 at 3:10pm

TONI-YOUR PROBLEMS W/ CHESAPEAKE MAY SOON BE OVER-TODAY IT HAS COME OUT ON THE INVESTOR NEWS[SEEKING ALPHA]THAT CHESEPEAKE IS BEING GROOMED FOR SALE BY THEIR BILLIONAIRE INVESTOR CARL ICAHN.MR ICAHN SUPPOSEDLY WANTS 40.00 PER SHARE OF STOCK AS A SELLING PRICE.POSSIBLE BUYERS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING CHK ARE-EXXONMOBIL,BP,AND SHELL.THIS WAS REPORTED BY AN INVESTMENT FIRM OF SOME TYPE[IT IS IN THE REPORT].WISH FOR THE BEST AS I AM NOT AWARE THAT THESE COMPANIES TAKE MUCH IN THE WAY OF DEDUCTIONS WHICH IS WHAT WE NEED.SEE BLUE LIGHT SPECIAL ON CHESEPEAKE IN GOMARCELLUS FORUNM DISCUSSIONS.

Permalink Reply by Nancy LeNau on February 11, 2014 at 3:41pm

lamar,   This is WONDERFUL NEWS !   Thank you for posting !  

Permalink Reply by Toni on February 11, 2014 at 3:52pm

That would indeed be GREAT news if new buyer did what they should do.  I was under the impression that Chesapeake was just about out of Bradford County but have recently heard that they will be building 25 pads this year in our county.  Unfortunately for my husband and I (like many others) it will be too little to late as we had to sell our farm and pick up extra jobs to make ends meet in this ever tightening economy.  But, we are grateful that we are able to do that. Will be checking out the forum for more information.  Have you heard about the rally on Friday?

Permalink Reply by Thomas Lilli on February 8, 2014 at 4:57am
It seems to me, if the O&G industry can charge production costs to the mineral owner, the mineral owner ends up subsidizing the industry. It also negates the necessity for the O&G company to look for improved efficiencies if they can merely pass those expenses onto the mineral owner.

So, if the production costs the same or less than the royalty costs, there would be no incentive to increase efficiency. If the production costs are some fraction above and beyond the royalty payment, they might be interested analyzing the difference to determine if it made financial sense to increase efficiency.

If the royalty costs were based on total production value at the well head and independent of production costs, there would be enormous incentive at $3-4/mcf to improve efficiency.
Permalink Reply by Bob Fuhrman on February 8, 2014 at 8:30am

Same here in S.E. Bradford County....don't have a clue "why" but will call next week to find out why only one check.

We actually get checks from 4 different companies for, get this, 3/4 of an acre! Mitsui, Anadarko, Stat and CHK.

The rest of our land is in a different unit that is not in production yet.

Permalink Reply by RB on February 8, 2014 at 8:48am

Are your deductions the same?  It all gets transported and processed the same way.  If costs are variable between them, I would say that's a bad sign of dipping in the cookie jar.

Permalink Reply by marilyn ascani on February 10, 2014 at 1:54am

Same problem in Sullivan County, no stat check for January, said it was mailed on the 31st but not received yet.

Permalink Reply by marilyn ascani on February 12, 2014 at 3:45am

Still waiting for Stat check for January in Sullivan County, as well.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service