Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by 3mfqdrnrij9ia on February 28, 2012 at 12:48pm

Is it possible that these rejections are due to that fact that some people over the years have lost track of who really owns the mineral rights to their property, and they are just now finding out that it is not them?  Just a thought.

Permalink Reply by Doulittle on February 28, 2012 at 7:05pm

This rejection reason would not explain entire group being mass rejected.

Another possibility, the energy companies are stepping back and away from some of the large group offerings because of some "irregularities" or outright deceptive practices, tactics, or lease terms which may provide grounds for future legal disputes.

The last thing an energy concern would want would be having already committed sizeable up front payouts and investing into drilling, then get delayed in realizing any production because of some lengthy legal dispute over terms in lease agreement with landowners.

Worse yet, for them to become an active (and easy) entity to include and target in a lawsuit for payout when the lease agent may be depleted of funding. 

I understand some practices are now being looked at for some "unconventional and misleading practices'. Court actions and appeals can take a long time to resolve.

Permalink Reply by time will tell on February 28, 2012 at 1:57pm

were you there  when all of this was said doctor do little or was this rumor ? 

It would seem to be a little strange in this environment with that pesky rise of oil prices to stop the buying of lease's .

There are quit a few companies looking to get in to this play .They are looking at updated maps to see how this can work . 

Permalink Reply by Doulittle on February 28, 2012 at 7:24pm

The deposits are very likely there and well plotted by the "Big Guys"; but, as I mentioned in the previous post reply,nobody would "win" if a dispute arises due to how a mineral lease was obtained which puts completing one (or numerous) drill tracks on hold.

I agree, the rise in oil prices would make a driller most eager to sign on desirable parcels. But if lease sign-ons were mis-handled in large, third-party groups, the very large risk may offset the large reward intent.

Underlining mantra: "Greed is a terrible thing". Some groups may have succumb to the financial temptations happening all over our area.

Permalink Reply by Craig Stull on February 28, 2012 at 1:26pm

Speculate all you want but you are WRONG.

Permalink Reply by Finnbear on February 29, 2012 at 3:20am

That link goes to a map. I assume it was intended to be to an article - please repost.

Permalink Reply by Doulittle on February 29, 2012 at 6:49am

Ooops. sorry. fixed it below. 

Thanks for pointing out my error.

Permalink Reply by Doulittle on February 29, 2012 at 6:48am

Craig,

If you are referring to my posts, where am I "WRONG"?

What do you believe to be more correct? I am interested in knowing.

Post or email to doulittle@gmail.com

Also, Is anyone aware of any "referral programs" being promoted by any of the landowner groups, where one might receive a "finders fee" or discount in one's own fee for having referred someone to the group?  Curious again.....

Permalink Reply by 015334grltd9m on February 29, 2012 at 9:03am

In an ODNR meeting in Columbus today, an official related information that CHK is fed up about its treatment by landowner groups and is warning that its bonus and royalty offers is going to go south.   This is not rumour and may tie into landgroups and sour grape landowners biting the hand that feeds them.

Permalink Reply by dr j on February 29, 2012 at 12:00pm

Have heard from two different reliable sources this week that in fact as of a certain day and time last week, CHK's offer is at 2500/acre tops.  A very good fitting puzzle piece or sweet spot may be able to command more but it appears the land grab may be slowing down.      

Permalink Reply by time will tell on February 29, 2012 at 12:27pm

I'm glad that CHK is not the only one looking to lease land . Funny how CHK can purchase lease's  for 3-5 K and flip them for 15 K  sounds like they might be trying to get them down lower for a better return and that's ok but the way I see it there is no more land being made . 

It's way to soon to be shakin and sell cheap . 

A company was at my house less than two weeks ago and was offering 5k but only 15% . Didn't sign .

They are very good at what they do so don't forget that .

Permalink Reply by Tom Frey on February 29, 2012 at 11:56pm

Ridgeman, Can you tell us the name of that company? And what county your in?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• 14
• 15
• …
• 19
• Next ›
• Page