Received lease offers from multiple landman companies and one from Mewbourne, the company most people believe will be the operator. The Mewbourne offer is significantly lower than the 3rd party offers. Any pros and cons to picking the highest NMA Bonus versus the operators low offer? Both offer 1/4 royalty, and of course leases need to be proofed and adjusted.
Does the operator offer low bonus because the leases they sign sets the pooling order prices?
You have picked up the general idea! You may be able to get more favorable lease terms with the third party folks. The lease clauses are the most important. A high royalty is also important to me.
The poster said both offers have the same royalty, the non op offer has a significantly higher lease bonus. Guess you could leave money on the table for the same ogl and terms to sign with the operator, but not sure why anyone would ever do that if both leases are the same?
Honestly, I was just curious. Thought perhaps operators might want the leases more, instead of dealing with third party investing partners. Thought perhaps since they can’t give higher NMA bonus because they want to keep the pooling numbers low, maybe they would offer better terms. Also, I wasn’t sure if well known operators were easier to work with in terms of communication and requests for information.
The lease bonus and royalty is the same, but I’m trying to get the best terms in the lease, and was wondering if operators were more likely to do that. Sounds like that is not necessarily the case.
You may want to find out what activity you have pending in those counties before selling. First offers to buy can tend to be lowball and you are at a disadvantage if you have pending drilling. Any buyer wants that upcoming royalty but may not pay for it.