Approached by Lucy Land & Minerals Llc Hayden Rieveschl. Do not know what their offer is, will find out and post.
Rodney
That is good, what area did they contact you about if you do not mind me asking?
I got the same thing. It was a mass mailing. There is also an outfit from Texas called Dale Operating Company who we get letters from periodically. Ironically they are in the same office building where I work, but I have not mustered the energy to visit with them because I am a little skeptical about vague mass mailing offers. I probably won't respond to Lucy either, but I'd be interested in seeing what you find out.
He is an attorney for Baker Donelson. Their main focus is mergers and acquisitions. I would not be surprised if they have some inside info or a permit has been applied for recently. Last time I saw an offer, not in Texas, it was because they just reworked an old well and before that permitted a new one.
A few comments -- First, looks like Mr. Rieveschl is doing a little moonlighting. If he is the outside attorney for Lucy Land, he probably would have identified himself as such. Second, the area mentioned in the letters that we received wereT:2N, R:1W, sections 21, 28, 30 and 31. Third, I'm not particularly interested in selling now since we own fractional mineral interests and if I am going to do a deal, I would want to sell all of our interests which constitute fractional portions of several thousand acres in Wilkinson Co. I don't think that a follow-up offer from a mass mailing will be terribly fair. Now, if someone was serious enough to call me on the phone or visit with me in person and prove to me that he\she wanted to make a serious offer, then we could talk. The only vibe I am getting from these mass mailings is that someone wants to make a quick killing at the expense of generally unsophisticated (including me) interest owners. Rodney, I am still interested in what you might discover.
Howard
s-25, t:2-n, r:1e and s-28 t:2n r-1e
R. Ike Craig said:
That is good, what area did they contact you about if you do not mind me asking?
Will contact on Monday do believe they are just fishing.
Howard Rubin said:
A few comments -- First, looks like Mr. Rieveschl is doing a little moonlighting. If he is the outside attorney for Lucy Land, he probably would have identified himself as such. Second, the area mentioned in the letters that we received wereT:2N, R:1W, sections 21, 28, 30 and 31. Third, I'm not particularly interested in selling now since we own fractional mineral interests and if I am going to do a deal, I would want to sell all of our interests which constitute fractional portions of several thousand acres in Wilkinson Co. I don't think that a follow-up offer from a mass mailing will be terribly fair. Now, if someone was serious enough to call me on the phone or visit with me in person and prove to me that he\she wanted to make a serious offer, then we could talk. The only vibe I am getting from these mass mailings is that someone wants to make a quick killing at the expense of generally unsophisticated (including me) interest owners. Rodney, I am still interested in what you might discover.
Howard
Mr. Fortenberry:
Your property is right in the heart of the deal, so it should be good to go if things keep on. It does seem like it is probably a "fishing" letter, more than anything to see if they have the right person/owner. We recently leased a small amount of minerals in S4 & S5 T2 R1E in Wilkinson County. Luckily a small plot was in S5 which is included in a new permit by Goodrich for the new CMR/Foster Creek Well, H1 I think it is. The other portion that we leased was in S25 T2N, R1W.
Where your property is, assuming things go as they seem to be, you should be in fine shape, as will Mr. Rubin. I believe the longer you all go without leasing the better deal you will get, again assuming things continue to improve. We only own a small amount of minerals so I opted to lease a portion of them for the best deal I could get, which was a little better than the major companies were offering. Due to the forced pooling laws in MS, I don't believe that leases will ever approach the amounts of what is seen in the Eagle Ford or other areas. Also the high cost of the wells will keep some companies out of the TMS. It probably worked out better for us, as a portion of the minerals were in the section of this new well.
I do believe some of the large land/mineral owners have received better deals than smaller mineral and land owners like I have. Thus if you are forced pooled in a good section, you should get the best deal that has been given in that unit.
Rodney E. Fortenberry III said:
s-25, t:2-n, r:1e and s-28 t:2n r-1e
R. Ike Craig said:That is good, what area did they contact you about if you do not mind me asking?
thanks for the information the entire parcel is 308 aces split 3 ways within the family
R. Ike Craig said:
Mr. Fortenberry:
Your property is right in the heart of the deal, so it should be good to go if things keep on. It does seem like it is probably a "fishing" letter, more than anything to see if they have the right person/owner. We recently leased a small amount of minerals in S4 & S5 T2 R1E in Wilkinson County. Luckily a small plot was in S5 which is included in a new permit by Goodrich for the new CMR/Foster Creek Well, H1 I think it is. The other portion that we leased was in S25 T2N, R1W.
Where your property is, assuming things go as they seem to be, you should be in fine shape, as will Mr. Rubin. I believe the longer you all go without leasing the better deal you will get, again assuming things continue to improve. We only own a small amount of minerals so I opted to lease a portion of them for the best deal I could get, which was a little better than the major companies were offering. Due to the forced pooling laws in MS, I don't believe that leases will ever approach the amounts of what is seen in the Eagle Ford or other areas. Also the high cost of the wells will keep some companies out of the TMS. It probably worked out better for us, as a portion of the minerals were in the section of this new well.
I do believe some of the large land/mineral owners have received better deals than smaller mineral and land owners like I have. Thus if you are forced pooled in a good section, you should get the best deal that has been given in that unit.
Rodney E. Fortenberry III said:s-25, t:2-n, r:1e and s-28 t:2n r-1e
R. Ike Craig said:That is good, what area did they contact you about if you do not mind me asking?
Any mass mailing letter for a lease or purchase is probably a “fishing” letter, but it’s still worth following up to at least hear an offer. The offer may not be even close to the mark, but you’ll probably never get any offer (good or bad) if you don’t respond. Virtually all mineral purchasers, even serious ones who pay top dollar, contact owners by mail. Of course, if you know you wouldn’t sell your minerals for any price then there’s no point in responding except for out of idle curiosity.
For leasing by oil companies, it is more common for their Landman to contact and owner by phone or a knock on the door if the owner is local. Usually an unsolicited letter about leasing only goes out if the Landman can’t find another way to contact the owner. However, if the company is engaging in lease speculation and only intends to sell the lease, they can be more indiscriminate about what leases the acquire. I would at least find out what the lease offer was even from a speculator, because they can sometimes overpay. I know of some people in the Haynesville Shale who received $20,000+ from lease speculators right before that bubble burst. Though I’m sure that was a terrible investment for the speculator, the mineral owner made out Iike a bandit. Be extremely cautious in dealing with these companies though, because they can tend to do business in an unsavory manner.