Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by FairMktValue on August 9, 2013 at 12:59am

Oily Gasman (love the handle by the way)

You bring up some good points. Your longer post above hits near and dear to my heart. Why, Why, Why, ever sign a surface lease? The first paragraph is a standard boilerplate lease allows them to do almost anything but take your firstborn child.  Sign a non-surface lease and negotiate anything else they may want to do if you do not have a problem w/what they want to do. 

Oh they will push for the surface lease even if you have only one acre dangling some extra cash. That always puzzled me why they would offer to pay on average an extra 500 or so an acre while telling you that nothing on your property will ever be disturbed. So the last time my happy little landman was around I asked him. "Why are you guys willing to pay up to an extra half million dollars per unit for surface rights that you claim will never be used".

He did not even flinch "We just like to have em just in case down the road we may need em. Don't have to negotiate anything"  I was a bit surprised he did not weasel word the answer. So even if you have a small parcel, some day that access  road, pipeline, water line,etc may come down through the middle of your yard.

As for the Caporali I was a bit curious when I first saw it a while back why Shell would just drill a " vertical". Hold some acreage?  Maybe. Test well? More likely.  In light of Shells recent announcements that they are going to shed a lot of their gas acreage that might make sense, Shells position in Butler Co right now is rather uncertain, Who know what they are going to do.

Pugh Clauses. As I have mentioned before, say Pugh clause to a landman and it is like throwing "holy water" at the Devil. Although I have noticed that if you keep coming back to it they start to soften on some other things. "Well, we can have your cash in 60 days rather than 90". "Maybe we can go a little higher on the non surface money". All maybes, but its a start.

Permalink Reply by Geo5 on August 9, 2013 at 2:28am

Gasman, your being selective on bringing  facts to the table to highlight your points.  You talk about the one permit on the Caporali pad, but dont mention the other seven that shell has appliled for. 

Looking at what shell has done in the butler area, it is possible that the Caporali site was only a back up site to the Renick site.  Although, i still hope, and they may still drill at the Caporali site, sooner, rather then later.

The Renick Site is in Center Township.  They are a very tough township to do business in. A coal mine was at first denied permits by the township.  A shallow driller down the road from the renick property was first denied permits to do business in the township.  Im guessing when shell first approached Center township, the townships response wasn't very nice.  This could be a reason whey they would have gone as far as they did with the permits at the Caporali site, in case they had to change plans.

Permalink Reply by Oily Gasman on August 9, 2013 at 2:53am

Geo, I didn't mention the other sites because they weren't relative to the discussion at hand. Robert was talking about his property specifically. I also didn't mention the Nicodemus or Leonard units that Chevron is working on in Fairview Twp.

Permalink Reply by Geo5 on August 9, 2013 at 3:03am

Just to be clear, Robert is part of the Caporali pad, and it has 7 horizontals already permitted.  I believe the Renick site was also permitted for only one well at first, and 40 acre unit, but since then, has been enlarged with more wells added.

I don't have anything against US Energy, they are just new to the area.  I know one family that signed with them and they were told they would get a horizontal well on their property.  It has since been applied for as a vertical well only.

Permalink Reply by Oliver Perry on August 11, 2013 at 2:45pm

Oily Gasman,

You are completely uninformed on the Caporali wells and your arrogant tone towards Robert in the above post is uncalled for. Check out the more recent Caporali plats and permit report I attached here for you to look over. You will notice the HORIZONTAL permits issued, including one for the Utica, three for the Marcellus, and three for the Burkett.

If you have any class at all, you would apologize to Robert for the arrogant, misleading, and just plain wrong information you posted relative to his situation in your post above.

Attachments:

• Swepi - Caporali Horizontal Well Plats.pdf, 2.8 MB
• Swepi - Caporali Well Permits.pdf, 29 KB

Permalink Reply by FairMktValue on August 11, 2013 at 11:23pm

Have to agree w/ya Oliver/

Gasman, intentional or not that post came across pretty harsh.

ps: Thanks Oliver for the tip on the eNotice, painless, and a lot of timely info there.

Permalink Reply by Oily Gasman on August 9, 2013 at 2:59am

Looks like somebody is moving a mountain along route 38 above Hooker. Big site across from that little pizza shop. That's gotta be a deep well but I can't seem to find a plat for it. I saw trucks hauling rock into it from Kuhn road. Anybody got the 411 on that.

Permalink Reply by nitr01 on August 9, 2013 at 3:05am

That site is a US Energy Shallow well.  I met with the landman yesterday and was asking about it.

Permalink Reply by Oily Gasman on August 9, 2013 at 3:58am

Nitro1, are you sure that's a shallow well? That's a pretty good size pad for just a shallow well. What are they drilling for gas, oil, or both? How big of units are they trying to build? What else do they have in your area near you? Does the landman work for the drilling company or is he some dude from Texas that once you sign, you'll never see him again. If you sign with them make sure you have specific language limiting the depth or formation you allow them to drill to if it's a shallow lease only. 

Permalink Reply by nitr01 on August 9, 2013 at 4:06am

I'm working with a direct representative of US Energy (who has the same opinions as you on EdgeMark and told me to avoid them).  I'm also working on a lease and concerned on the pad size of their shallow wells.  They own hundreds of acres of oil rights under me and several other of the landowners in the area due to some awful deal in the 50s/60s that people made with some shregngost dude.  They plan to pull oil and gas from the area and the pad size they proposed to me was between 75' x 75' to 125' x 125'.  I'm still waiting on him to send me a diagram or pictures of other pads they have to support this size request.  Once I have it I'll post.  This entire conversation was started by me because I wanted to know the deal with this shallow well stuff and how it may affect anything I do with the lower depths.  I still need to get it to SR Law to verify but I have had other legal representation go over it and its one of the better ones for the landowner.  Don't mistake that for me being ignorant because I know at the end of the day these companies are out to make money or they wouldn't be in business.

Permalink Reply by FairMktValue on August 9, 2013 at 4:43am

Quite a curious situation you have there nitro - gooood luck!!!!!

Permalink Reply by Geo5 on August 9, 2013 at 4:36am

That pad is for two horizontal wells, both shallow.  I have the plats in my office if I can find them. I will look around.  I believe from memory they are going to build two pads for horizontals, and a few vertical well pads on different properties. 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page