Comment

Comment by Nancy Mosley on June 9, 2014 at 3:34pm

Link to discussion about American Energy Partners purchasing leases in Tyler and a few other counties

http://gomarcellusshale.com/forum/topics/mcclendon-buys-48-000-acre...

Comment by flyingls on May 2, 2014 at 2:40pm

Can anyone tell me which is better in a lease? Royalty at the wellhead or the getting royalties after some deductions are made from the "Market Enhancement Clause" for processing the gas at a cracker plant? Has anyone received royalties from both that could tell me which opportunity pays out the most? Or the pros and cons of each? Thank you.

Comment by Bob Donaghy on July 15, 2013 at 11:59pm

Folks, I felt I needed to post a portion of an email I received from an Antero representative last night. This is apparently Antero's response to Vortex Energy making a very good lease offer to the Middle Island Landowners Group. Draw your own conclusion!

#1 Vortex Energy has drilled zero Marcellus wells in WV and it is unclear if they have ever drilled a well at all. Antero has drilled 156 in 2013 alone. We are by far the most active operator in the Marcellus Shale with 15 rigs. The next most is CHK with 8. You don't want your acreage to be a learning process for a company that has never drilled a well

#2 Antero has firm take away and processing capacity. Vortex will get pushed out once capacity fills up and they will be forced to shut-in your wells for extended periods

#3 Antero will have a water line infrastructure in place by year end 2013 greatly reducing truck traffic. Antero has 15 rigs under contract.

   Vortex will have to ship a rig in and will be forced to truck all of your water, limiting their ability to complete wells during the winter months due to poor road conditions.

#4 Antero will not be working any trades/acquisitions with Vortex. Any acreage signed up to Vortex will be excluded from our drilling program. All excluded acreage will be sterilized as to Marcellus development once Antero's drilling program is in full effect by year end 2014.

#5 Vortex is unfamiliar with WV title and will be defecting acreage that should be approved based on misinterpretations of royalty reservations.

#6 Vortex will not have the man-power to approve all of this acreage during the time frame given.

Comment by Bob Donaghy on July 22, 2012 at 10:27am

http://channels.isp.netscape.com/news/story.jsp?floc=ne-main-9-l8&a...

Interesting article discussing cancer, radioactivity and drinking water contamination caused by natural gas drilling/fracking/etc.

Comment by TylerCH4Us on June 27, 2012 at 12:59pm

The next Western Tyler Mineral and Landowner Group meeting is at 6:00 PM, on Friday, June 29, 2012 at the Little Methodist Church in Friendly WV.  Meetings are open to all mineral and landowners.  We will continue to review lease terms and clauses.

For directions or more information call: 304-771-1063

Information + Education + Patience + Cooperation = Better Results

www.tylerch4us.com

Comment by Ken Barton on June 13, 2012 at 11:47am

I have not met him yet, but I'm sure he is a member or is involved with the local AAPL chapter.  I'll look for him.

Comment by Jim White on June 13, 2012 at 11:26am

Yes that's me and I just sent you an email stating that I should stick with pretty much what I know best......which is not much! Did you know Harry Moats, the oil and gas lawyer from Harrisville?

Comment by Ken Barton on June 13, 2012 at 11:10am

Are you "Jim White" from NYC?  If so, I am hoping to give you some definitive information on the mineral interest very soon.   I believe-just from what you have shared-that it is very possible that the "royalty" you refer to is, indeed, mineral interest.  In my experience, some owners sold interest in certain wells to individuals or to O & G companies, like South Penn, but in conveyances of the surface, they usually witheld at least 1/2 minerals for themselves.  I look at the 1/2 minerals they conveyed to the purchaser of the tract as a "sweetener", to make the sale proceed smoothly.  In instances where there was existing production, rarely, unless the sale was to family members, would any minerals be conveyed, only the "use of free gas", as many deeds read. 

Comment by Jim White on June 13, 2012 at 10:24am

Ken

I initially was going to add a comment to Gas Girls post when I reread your post. I practiced with my brother who was circuit judge of Tyler for many years and we discussed the royalty issue quite a bit since it came up in his court and in his private practice as well as with our families interests. Unfortunately this was over 30 years ago and I am unclear as to everything that was said. When I was getting the deeds for one of the county, I came up with several which stated that the Grantors conveyed a half (whatever) royalty interest in certain pieces of land. I though this was the issue in Gas Girls case where her deed stated royalties, not mineral interests just as some of ours did. I am pretty sure that my brother assumed these were royalty conveyances (for profits from production) and not mineral interest, since we did talk about the fact that he thought our royalty interests should be taxed along with our mineral interests. Long story. When I saw your post, I though that maybe the language of our deeds could be construed as mineral interests, or in fact should be construed that way. Unfortunately, the man who mapped most of our interests from these deeds somehow lost the ones from this county which took me two weeks to collect! and I am uncertain as to the exact language in the deed. We may be talking about different issues. I will leave this one to you experts!

Comment by Ken Barton on June 13, 2012 at 10:14am

He is a fine man, very capable and extremely knowledgeable about Tyler County.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• …
• 15
• Next ›
• Page