Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Seeker on March 11, 2013 at 7:58am

Joe,

I have appreciated your posts on many discussions. Your insights from the industry are very valuable.

You mentioned a relatively new company that was founded by retired executives from a very, very large multi-national as an example of a young company that had experience.

The concerns and unanswered questions about DUX go far beyond the company being new. For example, would those experienced executives select a 30 year old part time real estate agent with no apparent oil and gas experience as the only member of the company? Would they found a company with no telephone number, a one page website and its only address as a modest 1 floor house in a residential neighborhood?

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 11, 2013 at 11:03am

Joe: DUX has produced nothing at all to show that they are legitimate. All of the research that has been done reveals nothing to make one feel good about DUX and a whole lot to make one feel bad. Witch Hunt...unbelievable that you would use the word "witch hunt"  to label the attempts by a number of people to discover if this company is legitimate. It appears to be a one man corporation that recently came up with an amateurish looking website. Since you are a gas professional, perhaps you might e-mail them some questions and whatever answers you get, I will look forward to them! By the way how many wells have they drilled with their 55 years of experience. These horizontal wells cost in excess of $5,000,000 / well. And where did they drill them? And where are their satisfied  clients? Give me a break, will you? Or maybe your last post was totally tongue in cheek and meant to be humorous. If so, I took the bait, and you got me! If your post was serious, then I think you have seriously damaged your credibility going forward! IMHO!

Permalink Reply by Landowner1 on March 11, 2013 at 3:45am

If a company is proud of the company's and its employees' record of experience and accomplishment they put that information on their website for all to see.

There is no "about us" link because the last thing DUX wants is for people to really learn "about them".

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 11, 2013 at 1:48pm

Joe Corrado: You have been called out....and no response!???

Michael Householder: You have been called out...and no response!????

The DUX website is not reassuring! It is to the contrary amateurish, alarming, and makes me more sure than ever that DUX is nothing but a shell company with few if any assets! I hope readers of this thread deluge DUX with relevant questions, since they have invited questions and posted an e-mail address on their website inviting such questions!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 11, 2013 at 2:27pm

Thanks Joe:

          I apparently did not correctly interpret the tenor of your remarks. I think the critics of DUX have become more vocal because the more we try to learn about DUX reveals more and more reasons to be suspicious of them. I can't help anyone who has already signed with DUX but my efforts have been serious attempts to raise suspicions of those people who have not as yet signed with DUX but are perhaps still being encouraged to do so by Attorney John Wells and a number of others. In this business, I believe an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I probably over-reacted when you used the word "witch hunt" because I do not think that is a fair characterization for the efforts of those of us who have warned people to Beware of Dux unless and until they have received answers to all the very legitimate questions posed on this thread. Regards, Sam

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seeker on March 14, 2013 at 3:38am

Michael,

You miss the point of Landowner1’s earlier post. Not one landowner involved in the 11,000 acre DUX deal has come forward and stated that they were provided with 1) financial documents from a respected financial institution proving that DUX had the funds to pay for the leases or 2) documents stating what large company was “supposedly” behind the DUX deal or 3) that there was any actual employee of DUX (as opposed to a contract employee handing the paperwork) at the lease signings that could answer landowner questions.

We know of many landowners who tried to get these things and could not. You know many people in the area. Have you found one person who has been successful in getting any of these things?

You are the chief supporter of John Wells, Drill BABY and the DUX deal on GMS. You have stated that you know and trust both John Wells and DrillBABY (founders of Southern Ohio Energy Consultants – SOEC) and this is not surprising as you are is the leader of the SOEC Ames, Bern, Wesley Landowner Association.

You have stated that “If I am ever presented with an offer from this or any other company, large or small, I will be requesting financials if they are not readily available to the public.”

So, why don’t you perform a great service for all of the landowners involved in the DUX deal or who have been following this discussion and go ask John Wells and DrillBaby if those documents exist and if there was an actual employee of DUX present at the signing.

If so, we know a lot of landowners who would like to see the documents and would like the telephone number of someone at DUX that can answer their questions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on March 14, 2013 at 3:49am

If it looks like a DUX, walks like a DUX, swims like a DUX, and quacks like a DUX, then you probably want to duck out ... before you get goosed.

 

All IMHO,

                    JS

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 14, 2013 at 6:32am

Jay: Another suggestion that might stop these flippers would be the requirement that any "lease" or "lease option" require the deposit in escrow of 10 % of the agreed upon bonus money to be paid.  If the title was defective the O&G company would get the escrow money back. If the O&G company declined during the grace period or "due diligence period" to elect not to pay the full agreed upon bonus money for any reason other than a defect in the landowners' title, that money would be retained by the landowner, and landowner would be free to market his land to whomever. I am not saying this particularly well, but I think you get the drift of it. Had M&P/CX insisted upon such language the landowners would at least have gotten something for the acreage that Halcon rejected. My proposal would get rid of a lot of "flippers" as well as a lot of "shell companies like DUX." Dux appears to offer real leases but appears to have no assets or any means to pay landowners unless it is able to flip the leases! Jay: Perhaps you can refine what I am trying to say, or perhaps one of the other lawyers who post can do so?

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 15, 2013 at 2:08am

Michael: I have been very critical of Dux and will continue to be. Their website indicates that they have done or are doing business in 20 states. I hope they are legitimate and that all the landowners get paid. I have strong reservations about DUX because they are so new. If they really have managed  to do business in 20 states since late October when the company was formed, I would think they would leave some footprints. From the tenor of your post above, I assume that if you acquire information favorable or unfavorable to DUX, that you will post it. Am I correct on this point?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 11, 2013 at 5:36pm

I am glad to hear you are a person of reasonable prudence who knows when and why to be skeptical, to ask questions, and most of all to get credible answers before before signing an O&G lease with DUX or any other O&G company.It does not appear to me that the owners of some 40,000 acres in Washington County, Ohio had the same attitude. Their attitude seems to be "If the messenger brings bad news, kill the messenger!" Such an attitude may cost them some money, potentially a whole lot of money. My posts are intended to inspire others to exhibit caution before signing with DUX. If DUX had answers to allay my fears and those of others, it seems to me the answers would have been forthcoming! Perhaps you can suggest some reason why they have not been!!?? But I am gratified that you have not signed a lease with DUX. I only wish that a lot of other landowners had the same attitude about DUX as you do, an attitude which I think might be described as skepticism, and appropriate skepticism at that! Having worked 13 hours, I hope you made some money and that you get a good nights sleep. If DUX pays landowners $4000/acre only  if and when DUX assigns the leases to a real O&G company for $6000/ acre, I will say that the landowners got screwed royally! And I do not believe that any landowner will get paid by DUX unless and until DUX has successfully flipped said lease to a real O&G company! I could be wrong and hope that I am wrong! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Markus on March 11, 2013 at 8:58pm

Mr. Popejoy has been involved in the importation of industrial products from the PRC in the past.  

My bet is that he is now in the PRC, or in the wider region, shopping the acreage around to foreign investors.  Given that he has just a few months to get a deal done, don't bother e-mailing him 'cause he needs to really get hustling!

Total speculation here BTW...Given that this discussion has been so rich, why not add to the mystery with a few hypotheses!?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on March 11, 2013 at 10:33pm

Maybe Mr. Popejoy is with Attorney Wells looking for an Island in the South Pacific that does not have an extradition treaty with the United States? That assumes that Mr. Popejoy with the assistance of, and in the company of,  Attorney. Wells is on his way back from the PRC having already shopped the leases. An alternative theory is that they are both in North Korea with Dennis Rodman!?  This too is speculation but enlarges the possibilities. It is also possible that Popejoy and Wells are in Hollywood shopping a screen play entitled "Never Give a Sucker an Even Break"! They may have a problem because there was movie from the 1940's starring starring W.C. Fields. Fields' heirs have been difficult to locate because he may have fathered a number of children out of wedlock and these children whose identities  and whereabouts are unknown may themselves have died leaving heirs, whose identities and  whereabouts are also unknown. Popejoy is unconcerned because he has the ultimate confidence in Attorney Wells, given that Wells seems to have been instrumental in convincing a number of sane and presumptively competent citizens from Washington County, Ohio to sign O&G  leases with DUX Petroleum, an entity founded in October of 2012 by none other than Popejoy himself. Some have ventured that  Attorney Wells may be in cahoots with Popejoy. This is unlikely because Wells is supposedly  charging the landowners who signed with DUX a fee of 1% of their bonus money. It must be said that Wells apparently has a sterling reputation down in Washington, County, Ohio, and therefore it must be assumed that he has done nothing wrong. If there are problems down the road Bernie Madoff has offered to appear as a character witness for either Adam Popejoy or Attorney John Wells... but only if the price is right??!!  Popejoy and Wells are reportedly in a bidding war for Mr. Madoff's testimony. Madoff says he won't be a character witness for both Popejoy and Wells because  if he did so, his credibility as a witness would be compromised!...Again this is all just speculation!!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 15
• Next ›
• Page