CHK breaking camp, for all practical purposes, on new Utica action in Ohio

Good riddance.

This appears to be primarily because of bankers pounding on them. 

None of the scumbagery has caught up with the shale players yet.  It will

Wait till those chickens come home to roost.  Wait till the people that purchased assets from them and lent money actually examine the title.  When they realize that they have color of title instead of marketable title, I predict they will be very angry. 

Many of the "landmen" that ginned up the garbage title for the Shale players will be called to answer as well.  Mark my words, that shoe will drop.  It's a major, major part of the con shale players have been running on Wall Street and the bankers. 

Players in the state bar associations are boning up on their shareholders derivative law and there will be Civil RICO actions naming not only shale players but brokers as defendants.  Many of the large brokers will be disclosed to have ties to the Shale players themselves. which facilitated the conspiracy.

Oh what a tangled web we weave.........

Here is the story on CHK's Utica contraction:

Chesapeake Energy to scale back Utica Shale drilling in eastern Ohio

By Bob Downing
Beacon Journal staff writer




prices for natural gas and related liquids are forcing Chesapeake Energy Corp. to cut into Ohio operations.

The Oklahoma-based energy giant said Wednesday that it intends to scale back its Utica Shale drilling in the coming months as profits drop and production continues to climb.

Chesapeake will lower the number of drilling rigs in Ohio from five to two by the middle of the third quarter and will reduce the number of Ohio crews that hydraulically fracture, or frack, the rock from four to 2.5 for the rest of 2015, the company said in an earnings call with analysts and the media.

Similar cuts are being made elsewhere, with some of the biggest reductions coming in the Eagle Ford Shale in Texas.

The company needs to maintain two drilling rigs in order to hold on to its leased acreage in eastern Ohio.

Chesapeake, the No. 1 player in the Utica Shale and No. 2 producer of natural gas in the United States, said it is has been very pleased with recent natural gas results in Columbiana County.

Three wells recently completed there show significantly more potential than nine earlier-drilled wells, spokesman Chris Doyle said.

The company is seeing a 50 percent improvement in production with the new wells, he said, and the company could expand its core area beyond neighboring Carroll County into Columbiana County.

Chesapeake is continuing to expand its laterals in Ohio to produce better results, officials said.

The company in 2012 averaged 4,900 feet per lateral. That grew to 5,150 feet in 2013 and to 6,200 feet in 2014.

Laterals likely will average about 7,900 feet with 41 frack stages in 2015, about 27 percent longer than the previous year, officials said.

Longer laterals with additional fracking pay out far more than shorter laterals, the company said.

Extending Ohio laterals will cost Chesapeake more, however. It anticipates spending $8.2 million per well in 2015, up from $6.7 million in 2013 and $7.2 million in 2014.

Chesapeake began production on 38 Utica wells in the first quarter. The average peak production of those wells was 1,272 barrels of oil equivalents per day.

Net production in the Utica Shale in the first quarter averaged about 110 thousand barrels of oil equivalents per day, an increase of 10 percent from the previous quarter, the company said.

Chief Executive Officer Doug Lawler reported that despite commodity low prices, Chesapeake’s overall production grew by 14 percent in the first quarter compared to first-quarter 2014.

Bob Downing can be reached at 330-996-3745 or bdowning@thebeaconjournal.com.


Views: 3492

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dexter Green on May 9, 2015 at 10:48am

"I'm not trying to prove anything."

Then you don't understand the very basics of debate.

"Take it for what's it's worth."

It's worth nothing without some sort of proof.  That's the point.  You're telling people something that you cannot demonstrate is even remotely true, which isn't exactly how a heads-up works.  There will be instances where the title work was not done to the highest degree and those cases will end up in law suits.  That much is obvious to anyone who has a grasp of the scope of the play.  But to say that all title work done is worthless is such a misrepresentation of reality that it challenges the very notion of voracity with which you can speak about any other issue.  It's tin foil hat level alarmism.  

Permalink Reply by Paul Butler on May 9, 2015 at 12:04pm

Read my lips Dex:  It's all garbage. 

How much of it did you gin up? 

It's all for sale.  I've talked to my friends in Houston who are doing due diligence for banks that the shale players are trying to borrow from.  They tell me it's all  garbage. 

The due diligence I've done tells me its all garbage.

I'm highly confident I'll be vindicated as things unfold.

Three years ago, on this site, I predicted 80%  of  the shale players would be gone by 2016.  I was the subject of much derision.  I was right then.  I'm right now.

It's my understanding lawsuits and arrests are coming.

By 12/31/2015, the scam will be big news.

When are you going to stop all your Player Hating?

Permalink Reply by Dexter Green on May 9, 2015 at 3:50pm

"Read my lips Dex:  It's all garbage. "

Your lips are meaningless.  Here in the real world we deal in facts.

"I've talked to my friends in Houston who are doing due diligence for banks that the shale players are trying to borrow from.  They tell me it's all  garbage. "

Due diligence was done years ago.  These transactions have been subjected to countless rounds of it.  If someone is using "bad title" as a reason to dump a deal it likely has little to do with bad title and everything to do with macro headwinds.  The banks blew it when they gave these guys enormous lines of credit.  Now they're looking for an excuse to get out.

"The due diligence I've done tells me its all garbage."

What are your qualifications?

"Three years ago, on this site, I predicted 80%  of  the shale players would be gone by 2016.  I was the subject of much derision.  I was right then.  I'm right now."

What percent of shale players are currently "gone" as of right now?  I wouldn't be so quick to call this a victory.  You're a looooong way off at the moment.

"When are you going to stop all your Player Hating?"

When are you going to start debating like a grown up?

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 8, 2015 at 1:01am
Reading more I'm interpretting now that 'color of title' is a phrase / legal concept used to describe an ownership / title document (such as / perhaps a leasehold agreement) that includes a defect which when ruled upon as a defect renders the ownership document impotent / voided. Do I have that right ?

Wondering now still (if such a document is ruled to be with defect) whether or not it can be remedied / cured / become binding on the parties involved ?
Permalink Reply by David on May 8, 2015 at 1:52am

have any of you actually seen or been involved with a lease using "color of title"?

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 8, 2015 at 1:56am
Not me.

Involved in this discussion to try and learn something upstream of any future conflict it may present me and mine.

How about you ?
Permalink Reply by David on May 8, 2015 at 2:14am

nope but have been involved in 3 lease processes as a landowner and every one has been "I's dotted and "t", crossed. If one word was misspelled they came back and re-did the paperwork. So it is hard for me to believe they would lease a "defective" title. I have also seen in the process if there is any question to title they walk.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 8, 2015 at 2:36am
My lease experience is limited to (1) one (pre-Utica) 'Tailgate Class' lease, (1) one (pre-Utica) 'Extension of Term' to same and finally recording an uncontested 'Affidavit of Forfeiture' (post-Utica).

I've read a lot since (including many sad horrer stories right here on these pages) and perceive things have changed in a very big way from the way they were back in 2006; and then with the advent of the Utica.

It seems to me anything is possible these days judging by what I think I've learned in the processes I've read about.

Just my take and see no reason to change my perspective on it.

Good luck - I think we need it.

BTW, can you share what company you're leased with (since you've given them what appears to me to be pretty high marks) ?

Thanks.
Permalink Reply by David on May 8, 2015 at 3:29am

EXCO and Shell

Permalink Reply by Buckets on May 8, 2015 at 5:51am

I believe "color of title" is the same things as clouded title.  This can be anything that puts the true ownership in question. 

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on May 8, 2015 at 8:09am
Thanks.
0ym9x5ag7ury2Permalink Reply by 0ym9x5ag7ury2 on May 9, 2015 at 9:42am

At the Buck Well 1H and 6H CHK has not paid for NGLs.

The ODNR says that NGLs are included in Natural Gas reported production. The laws of physics say that every 1 MCF of natural gas contains 1.9 gallons of NGLs (in the Utica Shale at 8,000 feet), so why not log that on the quarterly production report for NGLs. Better yet talk to WV who has a new requirement to document NGL production Annually or just ask the Kensington and Scio plants to report what they have seperated out of the Natural Gas. It's not rocket science, but it is CHK theft.

My CHK Revenue Department spreadsheet for Buck Well 1H shows that as much as 176% of our NGLs has been deducted from our Royalty Statements. CHK took them free then charged us 76% to process someone else's NGLs. Not to mention deductions for Energy use, 3rd Party Affiliates, Gathering/Compression/Treating for products that our lease say are taken at the well head with no deductions. Compression happens on down the line and gathering is paying for pipelines that we don't use due to the Well Head payment.

More to come after the CHK PA Racketeering conviction. Trust Me On This one Doug.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service