Comment

Comment by markkot on June 13, 2013 at 3:25pm

Joe-Ohio   I don't know if you ever found out (your post of May 16) but the well in Crawford is resting and supposed to be tested around July 11.  I'll try to attach the Halcon Ops Update here with a link.  It's under the 'Utica/PtPleasant' section and the 6th bullet point down..

   http://investors.halconresources.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=77...

 

Comment by john p halloran on June 10, 2013 at 6:31am

The website Seeking Alpha has an operational report that shows the preliminary results on area wells they have drilled.

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on May 16, 2013 at 8:30am

Watched ODNR's production presentation today.

I'll be impressed when the activity box (shown on their slides) grows to encompass the rest of the Utica Play including the northern tier and of course Ashtabula County.

They say the best is yet to come.

Put the pedal to the metal and bring it on.

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on May 16, 2013 at 1:26am

Any news on the well near Pymatuning (in Crawford County Pa.) ?

Or on the vertical wells in Ashtabula County south of 6 ?

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on April 28, 2013 at 2:24pm

http://www.vindy.com/news/2013/apr/28/landowners-face-challenges-ne...

Take this link to the Vindicator article Utica Shale's post was discussing.

Important reading for every landowner in my opinion and especially so for any unleased landowner.

The way I see it, to get a good landowner cognizant lease for your ground is about the only best thing a landowner can do to curtail force pooled / force unitized.

J-O

 

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on April 28, 2013 at 2:18pm

http://gomarcellusshale.com/forum/topics/landowners-face-challenges...

Take the link to an important post by Utica Shale at the General Shale Discussions pages.

Post your opinions / interpretations.

J-O

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on April 24, 2013 at 11:19am

Depolarized Farmer,

Well, I'm hearing numerous interpretations here and on the Trumbull Group's pages.

But, I've been thinking about it and have come up with an idea of what I think would be correct - but, I still have questions.

I think how you're treated as a landowner should your land be force pooled depends on your lease terms / if you're already leased.

Seems to me landowners can lease their land to Company A and be paid their signing bonus and agreed to royalty share and then Company A may be force pooled into a drill unit that Company B wants to develop.  The landowner's agreement / lease terms don't change as they are already leased with Company A.  Only Company A would be bound by the forced pooling statutes not the landowner.  A bad deal for Company A could occur / probably would / probably has.

However, if a landowner is unleased and Company B wants their lands included in a drill unit - then Company B would have to make an equitable offer to the unleased landowner.  Seems to me that serious problems could arise for the unleased landowner should Company B include the unleased landowner's acreage in a drill unit whose leasehold agreements are deficient (by the unleased landowner's standards) and force the unleased landowner into having to accept the deficient terms and conditions.  Personally I can't see how any entity / jurisdictional authority can legally force a landowner to accept terms and conditions deficient by said landowner's standards - unless by something like 'eminent domain'.

Is it actually possible to force deficient (as interpretted by the landowner) terms and conditions upon the landowner ?

Comment by Depolarized Farmer on April 24, 2013 at 10:32am

Joseph, This is a strong signal from ODNR that they want to encourage drilling by not allowing hold-out landowners or even hold-out O&G companies from getting in the way.  Because this will reduce the risks and unknowns faced by the driller, it will likely have the effect of accelerating drilling in many areas.

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2013 at 9:00am

http://www.oilandgaslawreport.com/2013/04/22/odnr-issues-two-more-u...

Take the link above to a read about a couple of new Unitization Orders (Forced Pooling Orders) issued by the ODNR for Units in Trumbull Co.

It looks like one (1) deals with O & G Companies and the other deals with O & G Companies plus unleased landowners.

In either instance it reads to me like the O & G Companies didn't earn a signing bonus with their inclusion but in one (1) instance only the landowners did.

Check it out and comment / post your interpretations.

J-O

P.S.: Computer's acting a little squirelly as I tried to delete similar comments earlier but I'm still seeing them reporting.  Just wanted to correct a minor typo. and ended up with apparent duplications - kindly forgive the repetition - maybe it will self correct later - don't know.

J-O

 

Comment by Joseph-Ohio on April 23, 2013 at 8:03am

Comment by Joseph-Ohio 17 minutes ago           Delete Comment

http://www.oilandgaslawreport.com/2013/04/22/odnr-issues-two-more-u...

Take the link above to a read about a couple of new Unitization Orders (Forced Pooling Orders) issued by the ODNR for Units in Trumbull Co.

It looks like one (1) deals with O & G Companies and the other deals with O & G Companies plus unleased landowners.

In either instance it reads to me like the O & G Companies didn't earn a signing bonus with their inclusion but in one (1) instance only the landowners did.

Check it out and comment post your interpretations.

J-O

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 13
• 14
• 15
• 16
• 17
• …
• 61
• Next ›
• Page