So much for keeping the terms of the deal confidential as was mentioned at the meeting last night.
Wake up my brother and read the newspapers before you write. First, I am not a member of the ALOV, secondly, it is plastered all over the business papers. The secrecy is unproductive.
Incidentally, I feel you Trumbull landowners deserve more, it is only going to go up, not to say they (oil giants) won't play games to bring it down sometimes, but in business with daily investments of Global Billions, it will at the end of the day be higher. But many need the money so lease.
Actually I did see it in the paper before I logged onto this site, but thanks for the advice.
Thanks Ron. I wasn't trying to pick a fight with you and didn't know you were not part of ALOV. I know people were talking about the terms of the deal as they were walking out of the meeting last night, at least that is what the vindicator article stated. Also 21 was there last night with a car, but not sure if they had anything on the news. Considering the amount of people at the meeting, you would have to expect someone to spill the details of the terms, I thought it would take a little longer than this.
I think the price per acres is reasonable based on the unproven production in trumbull county. I never expected 5000 an acre, like some people thought we should get. Time will tell. The offer was better than what some of my clients have been receiving from other groups in Trumbull county, so I'm not going to complain.
Did I read the newspaper correctly, it would take six months before a landowner get's a check? I was talking to a major landowner in Trumbull and he was telling me by "October."
If this is true, I have a big problem with this. We all know leases are basically an option until signed and the check is tendered. Meaning for six months, the oil company can reject the lease for any reason. What is disturbing is if on the six month you get a letter that they do not like your face and "no check for you." Or, for that matter, they flip your lease to me and I play the flipping game and you are stuck with a non production entity. Now most likely this will not happen, but it does not take three months much less six months to wrap up a lease, we all know this.
I am thankful to the energy companies for even paying the landowner this kind of money, however delaying payment is really hurtful and a carrot for those hurting and needing money in this bad economy.
The leases that my company has negotiated with Shell, CHK and Hilcorp, standard practise is that they do not sign the lease upfront until or within the 90 banking day window. Therefore it really isn't a contract at all with two parties, only one has signed.
So you are saying that all the 100 year mineral searches for 75% of 85000 acres will be completed within the month of April?
they can pick and choose what they want out of the group is what i heard.
they can walk from the entire deal if 75% are not signed by the end of April.
and it is a 6 month option.
Basically, if 75% sign by the end of April. If they get in there and see that Trumbull is a mess concerning title, old wells, reservations, etc. they will most likely take the few blocks that may be clean within the group and walk from the rest.
Dont count your chickens before they hatch....still a lot that could happen.
The translation is that if at least 75% of the Trumbull ALOV group doesn't sign, BP has the option to walk away from the deal. This is BP's assurance that they are actually getting at least 63,000 acres in the deal. Every landowner group has a certain % who won't sign and then more acres that become unavailable due to title defects that are not able to be cured. The lessee normally stipulates that some % of the acres presented must be able to be signed for the deal to go through.
Maybe it is my thick head, but here is really what I am trying to get across.
It appears that 75% have to sign A LEASE within April, okay I get that. Now here is the question, Does BP have up to six months for THEIR turn to sign the lease RESULTING with the lease being now a CONSUMATED lease? Or, is this process other than the norm and obligates BP up front wherein they cannot walk away for any reason but bad title to minerals?
See pages 6 and 7 of the attached file. I've seen leases that had better wording on this.