Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on August 6, 2012 at 9:58pm

Wondering who was paid the $6100.00 per acre ?

The landowner or the leasehold owner ?

Permalink Reply by Alan Pavlik on August 7, 2012 at 4:11am

The leaseholder (Lessee) sold his 7/8th interest in the leasehold, the landowner (Lessor) can also sell his 1/8th in the leasehold to the highest bidder!

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on August 7, 2012 at 5:46am

But you can bet that if 7/8 got $6100, 1/8 won't.

Permalink Reply by Alan Pavlik on August 7, 2012 at 6:08am

How could it? Do the math. That's why the 7/8th pays for the exploration and development cost

of the 1/8th.

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on August 7, 2012 at 11:47am

Just pointing out that landowners should not see this as reality for per acre lease prices and then expect that much. Many will.

Permalink Reply by Joseph-Ohio on August 6, 2012 at 11:07pm

Found another post on this at the Ohio Landowners group.

There I read that a company called NCL Appalachian Partners, L.P. out of The Woodlands, Texas sold their Leaseholds to Halcon, out of Houston, Texas.

Read the article in a little more depth and discovered that many of the Leaseholds that were sold were decades old.

Wondering how this will all shake out as I would like to learn more.

Here's a link to the article:

http://www.vindy.com/news/2012/aug/03/texas-company-pays-m-for-dril...

Permalink Reply by Billy Park Whyde on August 8, 2012 at 3:40am

Here is VERY INTERESTING WEB SITE http://www.milliondollarwayblog.com/p/faq.html it deals with the Baken Shale  but if we are anyway close it will be VERY VERY INTERESTING. I causally looked over it and production is WOW but then again some data is missing to draw a good idea of what is going on. For example not mentioned is the length of a lateral of the well which of course could mean a big change.

  My belief is the lease amounts will be exceptionally higher for hold outs if the forced pooling  remains in effect. Think of it this way if two or three neighbors can hold 11% of a 640 acre area it puts forced pooling out of the picture( if Ohio keeps my understanding of it a company must have 90%)  so it looks as if a parcel of or combination 11%o = 70.4 acres could prevent forced pooling .

   WOW ! With that idea a company could easily go about trying to set up such a lucrative acquisition using strategic planning to cash in on this. It would also allow individual landowners to do the same. A multi acreage family farm spread out in different plots would be a dream come true. Supply and demand pricing!