re: Haynesville Shale North of Benton??

quote:

---

$100/acre ain't a life changing amount of money, then when you consider that O&G will get 75% of your royalty interest for that!

---

If you think like that why don't you pony up 6 or 7 million dollars to get 100% of your royalties? I'd say that's a good deal when you take into account you have no risk for someone to do what you cannot in developing your minerals.

According to most on here, I never had any credibility. So, I take that as a compliment. Before this is over, you too shall see the light.

quote:

---

but I see some people (in areas like northern Desoto) saying that they are throwing offers for $20,000/25% in the trash.

---

That is greed. This is the richest area of the shale and they're going to make money hand-over-fist on royalties and they're throwing away that kind of signing bonus? SHEESH.

I wonder where the bottom is on NG. We are at $9 now and I have to believe it will level off as winter approaches but I wonder how the price of that will affect lease bonuses? CHK is probably feelign a little heat now that the stock is 70% of where it was 3 weeks ago.

Just sayin'

What company has drilled the 4 good wells? I simply am trying to find out who is interested in the area right now.

quote:

---

I'd say that's a good deal when you take into account you have no risk

---

Sorry, 100 acres at $100/ac is $10,000, now back out taxes....I just don't find that money very compelling.

Understand the concept of risk applies to landowners as well, not just to O&G.

Does signing away 75% of your mineral interest for $10,000 not involve the concept of risk? Of course it does....in fact this is risk avoidance; just the flip side of the same coin. You cannot separate a landowner's mental calculus from the concept of risk. Some people are just less risk tolerant than others.

What I see is a lot of this...'well if you don't accept the bonus money (inference of greed here) you will miss out on a producing well and royalties are where the money is at' This is a perversion.

Bottom line here is that if gas is under your section - O&G is going to get it and you are not going to be 'left out'. A non-consenting landowner then has a working interest in the well and gets paid out of production net of costs, but with a 100% mineral interst. Note well that public policy maintains that a non-consenting landowner shall not be cast with the expense of exploration and drilling in the event of dry hole, that risk is solely borne by O&G.

So in the end, if you don't accept the bonus money and you are not cast with the cost of a dry hole, all the landowner has foresaken is the $10,000 bonus.... I will accept the risk and go non-consent if that is all O&G is willing to offer!

quote:

---

Bottom line here is that if gas is under your section - O&G is going to get it and you are not going to be 'left out'. A non-consenting landowner then has a working interest in the well and gets paid out of production net of costs, but with a 100% mineral interst. Note well that public policy maintains that a non-consenting landowner shall not be cast with the expense of exploration and drilling in the event of dry hole, that risk is solely borne by O&G.

---

The landowner would have to be consenting to get 100% of their share of royalties less production and drilling costs, and that would apply to paying their share of well costs at 6-7 million dollars a well for these HS wells, and up to 2-3 million dollars for some of the Cotton Valley wells for those outside the HS area. If they choose not to pay and go non-consent they are not going to see any money until the well pays out 100 percent of drilling costs, which could be a long time depending upon how many charges the operator incurs prior to establishing production, or could be nothing at all in the event a dry hole is drilled or a mechanical problem is encountered. The comment in regards to a good deal was regarding the 25% royalties. 25% royalties is a pretty good rate considering that the landowner incurs no expenses and has no risk. Historically in North Louisiana not very many landowners were able to negotiate even 25% royalties, with most of those being timber companies and only a select few of the largest private landowners. Nobody is likely to pay more than $500 per acre for standard Cotton Valley leases anyways because economics don't support it so anything near that for land outside the HS is a great deal. Unless landowners are on the HS they won't receive these substantial bonuses and holding out outside the shale hoping for bonuses in the thousands of dollars might mean holding out forever.

quote:

---

General Lee, Cad, Pitt, Tigerdog. You all may be correct about the sand/shale thing but YOUR WRONG ABOUT THE LEASE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the current offer is 10,200/25%--------That I know for a fact. That is a far cry from 200-500dollars. I now have to be sceptacle about your posts. I know, you now want me to tell you what operator and what(S,T,R), well unfortunatly I can't say. But pitt knows where i'm at so I didn't tell you that either. Oh and go ahead and bash me for not providing facts as I laugh in the background! No hard feelings I now stand with FLOP!

---

Is this still the offer. I have been contacted by a company also.

Guess you don't know the right people PB? lol...

Didn't say I had a lease or money.. A hole....But I am talking to people unlike yourself...You just got your panties in a wad because Acadiana says he has the money....

YOu are welcome...I have to fill in for Flop since it isn't on tonight!