"NEW GROUP OFFER" unveiled with mysterious Texas Operator... any news?

Does anyone have any news about the alleged offer that the group is supposed to be unveiling soon?  I have heard a lot of rumors but nothing concrete to this point.  I should disclose that I am working on behalf of Shell in Lawrence County via Long Consulting Group, LLC and can't understand why a landowner that has been contacted by one of our agents would consider accepting the offer that I heard about.  Why would anyone lease with an operator that hasn't drilled in Pennsylvania and doesn't have ONE acre leased in Lawrence County, especailly when you consider that Shell is drilling already and has plans for many more production units.  I've seen this happen so many times and the outcome is that the landowner that signs with the company that isn't drilling or doesn't have the leases around their property either end up getting excluded from production units altogether or delayed for years until the two companies can come to terms on some sort of joint participation or land swap.   Like I've been told and told people a bunch of times, 17% royalty from ZERO production is still ZERO dollars.  I'd love some input from the landowners that are considering signing with this group, and if you have already, I wish you luck.

Views: 7449

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on September 11, 2011 at 7:44pm

I need to be somewhat careful here.  It's possible Shell has changed East.  What I'm documenting below is all "pre-Shell".

 

I can tell you East's reputation in NEPA, and particularly in Tioga County, is abysmal.  This is by comparison with other companies operating nearby, especially Chesapeake and Talisman.  East has been a real hardball player from the viewpoint of landowners . . and that's the only viewpoint that matters to me.  I am so grateful I never had to do business with them.  The steady stream of complaints about East is off the charts.  East, as a company, is widely disliked.  Their leases stink, their landowner relations stink, their attitude stinks.  And again, this is all by comparison with other companies.  East has done their best to take advantage of landowners and, failing that, they simply stonewall.

 

I live in NEPA.  I would not do business with East . . ever!  And I do not believe they should be relieved of responsibility for their practices here merely by moving on to harass landowners in western Pennsylvania.  If you can avoid dealing with East:  do so by all means.  If you cannot avoid 'em, make sure they give you a decent lease and pay you at the going rate.  They certainly did not do that here!!!!!!! 

Permalink Reply by ShaleAdvice (Steven C. Townsend) on September 11, 2011 at 7:59pm

Agreed.  The most important issue are the lease terms.  No matter who you deal with, get advice and counsel before signing. 

Permalink Reply by Todd J. Scott on September 11, 2011 at 8:04pm
Frank.  Can you cite something specific?
Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on September 13, 2011 at 5:04pm

My information comes from here on the internet, the postings of Tioga County (PA) landowners.  Primarily my information is gleaned from another board, another competing website to this one, which I'm uncertain it is OK to mention here.  That other board is somewhat more slanted toward NEPA than is this one.

 

I can tell you this:  it was not just one or two disgruntled landowners carping on the net for the "halibut".  There was a pattern and practice evident I've not seen with any other gas company.  East is, or at least it was, In Tioga County, the "worst of the worst".

 

Stipulated:  maybe Shell has changed 'em.  I have no way to know, and I don't claim to know.  But at one time and not all that long ago, East had a miserable reputation with landowners.  They were detested. 

Permalink Reply by Farmhouse on September 13, 2011 at 9:22pm

Frank,

Please look for my message in your inbox. Thanks

Permalink Reply by Rick Cancelliere on September 15, 2011 at 9:21pm
Just maybe their offer is better than your current offers!
Permalink Reply by ShaleAdvice (Steven C. Townsend) on September 16, 2011 at 8:00am
I had Shell change thier offer by more than $1000 and acre in a matter of 35 minutes.  Just because they try to hard sell doesn't mean you have to foolishly buy.  Bringing a pre-printed replica check with your name on it to show how much money you  can make will do you no good when they take 30% of your land or cut a 55 foot road on your property.
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on September 16, 2011 at 8:45am
Or build a miniature refinery. Or a regional water containment pond. Or criss cross it with numerous pipelines. Or put ten acres into a unit and tie up the entire parcel for 30 years. Or use your land for storage. Or drill one shallow vertical well and HBP the land for decades.  Or.........
Permalink Reply by Todd J. Scott on September 19, 2011 at 10:11am
I'm not aware of any refineries in Tioga County, show me a real world instance in Tioga County where numerous foreign pipelines or a water impoundment, or any other facility has been installed without a separate written agreement.  Put ten of my acres in a unit.... I won't complain.  It beats having no royalties and it's likely the rest of the property will get picked up by adjacent units soon.  Show me a recent permit where a shallow well has been drilled in Tioga.  It's all just scare tactics.  
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on September 19, 2011 at 10:17pm

1.  This is the Lawrence Co page. Don't know squat about Tioga Co

     1b. The "miniature refinery" comment was in reference to large compressor stations with dehydrators, cryogenic separators, and other equipment. Bet there are a couple of them in Tioga Co.

2. There are several instances of people with foreign pipelines or large regional impoundments without their prior permission or acknowledgement in Pa

3.  They may have been done by companies other than Shell but it is still an issue that should be addressed in the lease  when signing with Shell or any company since these companies will trade parcels like boys trade baseball cards.

4. I wouldn't want ten acres out of 200 in a unit collecting small royalties and having the other 190 acres tied up by HBP for a decade or longer.

5. If these are just scare tactics then Shell wouldn't mind putting clauses into the leases to protect against them.

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service