Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
In other words, you are not going to tell us about the recent activity you were referencing? The header of this board is an advertisement for BECC and you have brought little new, relevant information in, what, six months?
In light of the fact that historically CF has crowed about his activities on every week or so and the fact that the Patriot website has not changed in months and the fact Breitling Operating has not spudded any wells, I think is prudent to assume they are inactive. Could be wrong. He may have a big enough pool of satisfied investors that he doesn't need to advertise.
Reaper, could you point us to the Breitling drilling activity after 10/01/2015. I can't find any and I would like to know what they are up to. As you know, it is hard to track minority working interests or royalty interests and I just would like to see what you have.
Yes, you shifted the topic to 299 wells, including some from Andrews County, three counties west.
That was not what we were discussing. We were talking about a handful of Clayton Williams wells specifically located in Sterling County. While you are quick to claim they are bad, Sterling County wells among other counties look like a mixed bag.
You mean the 13 wells that have cumed 17 MBOE per well and only one has made over 50 Mbbl (IHS allocated production)? Yes, a mixed bag, indeed. I didn't see a need to bring it up, but I used three more wells near the BECC wells because it was a bigger relevant set. However, it is of little consequence. I used the red and blue wells, you were talking about the red wells. IF you want to make a big deal about it, that's fine.
I guess you missed my post within an hour or two that you were correct that the Andrews wells were distal, that it was an error to include them and then I subsequently used only the 17 wells near the BECC wells. Besides, since I was talking about the success of CW, the 299 wells are relevant because they are in the same play. As far as reserves of the BECC wells, they are less relevant than the poorer 17 nearby wells. You are nit picking because, I presume, you have nothing substantive. Perhaps you are trying to discredit me and facts keep getting in your way.
To hear some tell the story, oil and gas wells in Sterling County suck. Oil and gas wells in Taylor County suck. Oil and gas wells in Andrews county suck.
Is there any recoverable oil and gas in the Permian Basin in your opinion?
I don't know who was telling what story, but I never said that. Should that be construed as shifting the subject? Which is OK with me. To answer your question, yes. You might find this Forbes article interesting:
"None of these plays are remotely commercial at present oil prices. In the most-likely per-well reserve case, these plays require break-even oil prices in the range of at least $50-$75 per barrel..."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/arthurberman/2015/12/18/less-than-2-percent-of-permian-basin-commercial-at-30-oil/#39f68bb3407e
The Clayton Williams Parramore located in Sterling County, in the location of the Breitling farm out agreement has been a solid producer.
Which Parramore are you talking about? The Parramore 66 lease has three wells, has produced 70 Mbbl and 256 MMCF and is currently producing 10 BOPD, 70 MCF a day, and less than 2 BWPD. Yes, this is one of the better leases in the sense that it may have paid out. Yes, amongst the CW wells, you can find some that may have paid out. One of the prime objectives of any oil company is to drill only the good wells. Some are better than others at achieving this and CW failed in this area. Not to say he had anything to do with the prospects, he is the operator and I don't know what his business arrangements are.
Since you are up on the economics of wells, I'll let you calculate the rate of return and return on investment for the wells. If I have some time, I will do it if you don't get the opportunity.
According to the TRRC, Clayton Williams has produced 189,722bbls, from a half a dozen leases since 2009 in Sterling County. Most of these CWEI leases are still online and producing.
That area appears to be consistent in production, so why is Clayton Williams so smart for drilling it, while many accuse Breitling of being shady by participating in the same productive field?
The ambiguity is yours by shifting your focus and comments, to the 299 or whatever wells scattered throughout the Spraberry formation.
The fact of the matter is that the Clayton Williams Parrarmore has been a solid producer for six years as you have mentioned.
The Breitling farmout in that area was the topic of discussion before you shifted it to include whatever it is you are trying to shift it to. Typical for the BECC board though.
The above are copied from your posts. How am I shifting off subject? Yes, I included wells in Andrews County then narrowed it to wells near the BECC wells. Really, I don't understand how I shifted the subject off what you brought up or off the farm-out for that matter, since I narrowed the selection to offsets of the BECC wells. The CW Spraberry wells suck overall, the CW wells offsetting BECC suck. Just because you don't like that, doesn't mean it is off subject.
By the way, IHS reports 12 wells with CW as operator in Sterling Co. 190 Mbbl divided by 12 equal 16 Mbbl per well. The wells suck.
Your analysis of $WTIC seem to be lacking as well. I was speaking of the price of oil at the time that Breitling announced the farmout agreement in February 2014. You seemed eager to point out oil prices well into summer 2015, which is not consistent with our conversation.
No, I was pointing out that oil was rarely over $100 a barrel and that it would take a fool to think that because oil was $100 on a particular day or month, that it would continue to be there. Second, the price of oil at the time of spud is particularly important, because if you need $80 oil and it is at $50, you should assume the well will not pay out. One might drill anyway to preserve a farmout, but to spend millions more to preserve non-commercial acreage tells a story. Now, if one makes money regardless of outcome because you take fees and overrides, so be it, but it doesn't do much for outside investors.
Since my point about $100 oil is that historically it was not the norm at the time of signing, it was foolish to think it suddenly would be a given, I don't see how my analysis was lacking. I should have spelled everything out, I suppose.
As far as the CW wells are concerned, you specifically suggested that I assumed CW could drill good wells and Breitling could not. I demonstrated, quite the contrary, that the CW wells were bad. I showed them bad overall with the 299 wells, then I showed them bad near BECC wells, so what else do you want?
What I am saying and have always said is that having Clayton Williams as a neighbor, pioneer and partner in Sterling County is worth taking note of, although it certainly does not define Breitling’s viability as a whole, since Breitling has interests in hundreds of wells that include, but are not limited to Texas.
It is worth taking note and it is worth taking note that CW wells were poor in the area. I didn't bring up CW wells and you are shifting the discussion. I simply responded to you being wrong about me thinking CW drilled good wells in the area. Maybe BECC had a specific location based on 3D just like they said. I think they drilled in an area that was not commercial at contemporaneous prices. I highly suspect the area is highly depleted, but I never stated that as fact. I didn't bring up CW, but when you did I simply demonstrated that his wells also sucked, for whatever that is worth.
BECC is transparent as mud about just about everything and I think there is a reason why, but the performance of the wells they put on line is all we have. Call them up, they invite you. Ask them for the top 5 prospects that they generated that they have drilled over their 12 year life.
As far as me not knowing how old the company is, I have already demonstrated that I was aware of the same facts you were and that we have different interpretations. The fact that you cannot move on is telling.
Just to re-iterate, I have never suggested that BECC has never made money for someone. I have suggested that all this industry leader, innovator, frackmaster is an exaggeration. No one has demonstrated otherwise, which doesn't prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt, so everyone should do their own research.
CF specifically stated that they could make money in a weak price environment. Doesn't seem to be the case based on the numerous lawsuits for failing to pay bills. I questioned whether they can continue drawing in outside investors. You said they are. I asked how you knew that and you ignored me.
You are constantly saying I am wrong, but everything I have said of any import has been correct. I have said there is no evidence, even in their filings, that they have the assets to justify even their current market value. I have said that they do not bring anything to the table, like expertise or drilling success to justify the market value. I have said that all the specific wells they mentioned in their corporate presentations are bad. Some of the wells in ND are good, but BECC has tiny interests and we will never know whether they will payout BECC's costs. We probably will never know whether the royalty interests that Breitling bought have or will payout purchase price.
Now let's look at why one should be confident of BECC's success. Chris Faulkner is good at convincing some people Breitling is a successful E&P company.
In some states, unpaid royalties are grounds for lease cancellation.
Mackfish,
Obviously, you have more information than I do and, of course, I never proposed that Clayton Williams didn't make any money on these non-commercial wells. I also have no reason to think CF hasn't made any money, at least in salary. I mean, that is kinda my point. Clayton Williams would be an example of a real oil man. No flying around the world trying to convince people he is a expert in thing he has no experience with. He has no need to.
When CF popped up because of the Bakken News article, I knew who CW was and not because I had seen him on Fox news. I knew who CW was because he actually had a footprint in the industry. I don't know a lot about him, but I would bet he has never thought up fictional names for wells he was involved with and I'll bet even money he has never used a term like Clayton Williams Energy-European Swallow No. 1 when the well name was actually something like Continental-Smith No. 1. I also bet he has never said he is an industry leader or innovator. I doubt he has ever claimed to spend two million dollars a year on research.
What does CW have to do with CF? Nothing except as an example of what CF wants people to think he is.
Reaper is correct on some points. I made a mistake about the location of Andrews County. Didn't spend enough time on it, I am afraid. I narrowed the well set to those near the Breitling wells in Sterling and Glasscock. There are 18. The currently producing 16 wells are not commercial now, averaging 2.5 BOPD per well, but assuming prices will improve and some per-well rates will improve because of abandoning some of the worst wells, the ultimate recovery from these 18 wells should be around 28 MBOE per well. These wells are actually worse the original set.
I don't know about Mackfish, but I was commenting on the Spraberry fields; but I can understand the confusion. All the Clayton Williams wells I mentioned are in the same field as the Breitling producers, the Spraberry Field. This field crosses a county line and is in Sterling and Andrews Counties.
The ambiguity was mine and I apologize. The 299 wells are in the same field as the Breitling producers. I was responding to your remark about why I assume Breitling wells will be bad when CW did well. The reasoning is 1) CW had a six year jump on production, thus suffering less depletion, 2) in a conventional play, location is important, not just area, 3) Clayton Williams didn't do so well anyway.
The relevance is in that you brought up the CW wells and I narrowed the scope to only the wells in the same field as BECC wells.
Its all a moot point though. Even based on your assumptions and guesstimations, a typical CWEI prospect would be profitable at $100 oil, which was the price of $WTIC at the time they signed the farmout agreement.
It would take quite a bit more than $100 a bbl to make a reasonable return on investment, but no matter. Between January 1, 2014 and July 31, 2015, spot oil was above $100 a barrel 42 days out of 297 trading days. At the time BECC spudded wells this August and fall, it was around $45 or below. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_spt_s1_d.htm
If you don't like my assumptions and "guesstimates," you are certainly the kind of investor BECC is looking for. If you think drilling in a field that needs $100 oil to pay back expenses is prudent, you are who they are looking for. The argument in favor of drilling is to earn the farmout, but my argument is look at what you would earn.
You are right that BECC undoubtedly has interests, however small, in hundreds of wells. Funny how they only mention the bad ones.
The question remains whether or not lower drilling and recovery costs, coupled with improved fracking efficiencies, will make future production profitable in a lower price environment and I don’t believe historical TRRC production numbers provide any insight.
You are right, it only provides insight into future well performance. Improved well cost and frac technology, something BECC has nothing to do with, is another subject that I have some knowledge about, but not the time.
According to the TRRC, Clayton Williams has produced 189,722bbls, from a half a dozen leases since 2009 in Sterling County. Most of these CWEI leases are still online and producing.
That area appears to be consistent in production, so why is Clayton Williams so smart for drilling it, while many accuse Breitling of being shady by participating in the same productive field?
Since 1/1/2009 Clayton Williams Energy has drilled 299 wells in the Spraberry fields. Those wells have a cumulative production of 6.5 MMBO and 14 BCF. Using a price-based conversion that is 7.2 MMBOE. Currently, the 247 producing wells are non-commercial, but a prudent operator will shut-in the worst wells to keep costs below income. If we generously assume the current production and current decline will continue for another six years, the wells will produce about 10 MMBOE. That’s 33 MBOE per well. Just to estimate the cost of the wells: Lease cost per well, $40 thousand; location and surface equipment cost, $400,000; drilling and completion, $1.75 million, abandonment and restoration, $75 thousand; operating cost over 13 years, $1 million. Total expenditure per well, $3.3 million, before you take into account overhead. OK, $3.3 million per well divided by 33 MBOE is $100 per bbl. Adjusting for an eighth royalty, $114 per bbl. Adjusting for severance tax, $119 per bbl costs.
OK, ok, let’s assume I am high on costs by 50%. That’s $80 per bbl costs.
No, Clayton Williams didn’t exactly hit one out of the park even with a 6 year head start on depletion.
BTW, I never said the farmout or his drilling it was shady. I said that he has a poor track record and exaggerates his involvement in the technical aspects of the industry. In fact, I have said he exaggerates just about everything. He is fast to promote the farmout and slow to comment on poor results.
Another Lawsuit Resolved:
03/11/2016 Judgment
Judicial Officer: TAPSCOTT, KEN
Judgment Type: DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Judgment Amount: $37,315.88
Court Costs: $270.00
Attorney Fees: $3,875.00
Total Judgment: of $41,460.88
Awarded To: HART ENERGY PUBLISHING, LLLP
Awarded Against: BREITLING ENERGY CORPORATION
Stock promotions happen for the sole purpose of liquidating stock, which obviously didn't happen here according to SEC filings.
I have every reason to think CF would have filed notifications in accordance with the rules, but some might think that if he doesn't file financials that he might not file other required filings. However, you said the stock has not been promoted and I simply asked for evidence. If stocks were not traded in an insider's name, how are you absolutely sure the trade didn't happen?
I continue to point out that nobody here knows what the proven producing and recoverable reserves are, of any single well that Breitling has participated in.
I was referring to actual filing by the company. I never called my estimates proved producing. By definition, proved producing reserves are estimates and the only proved producing reserves I ever referred to were those estimated by the consultants of the company.
You have already said that you don't know, that you are guessing and that your guesses were for fun and should not be taken seriously. Why is this still a debate?
Because it is not. It's not what I was talking about. The wells are bad, people who know anything about estimating reserves know they are bad. The fact that you don't know they are bad, is not something I can do anything about.
While you claim that Breitling will no longer be able to attract new investment, you are already wrong.
Breitling continues to work on development and expansion of its portfolio, without the need to dilute their shareholders.
What public information is there showing they have expanded their portfolio? Isn't exchanging that kind of information the point of this forum? In the last four months how much investment money have they brought in? What leases have they bought? What producing properties have they bought. What wells have they brought on line or for that matter how many have they spudded? If they have had significant activity along those lines, then I missed it and I am wrong as you suggest.
Reaper, I am not sure how you can be sure that no one has ever promoted this stock. Personally, I have no reason to think it happened.
There has been company promotion and person promotion and had it had anything to do with reality, I would be cool with it.
You keep pointing out that we don't know about BECC's royalty property or other property, but the company did file financial reports indicating they had very little in assets. They also filed a reserve report showing very little in proved producing reserves. So yes, the company has disavowed the financial reports, but is that a reason to assume more assets than reported? BECC has mentioned a handful of wells in its corporate presentations, all non-commercial. Outside the corporate presentations, some, but not all, of the ND wells that Breitling O & G participated in for a miniscule ownership decimal, were good wells. There was a horizontal well in Texas that might payout.
So unless BECC has a pentiant for only mentioning failures, they have a poor track record. Industry Leader? Frackmaster? And where did that two million a year in research go. What new thing did they come up with?
So, bottom line is that BECC has made it clear that they expect their revenue to come from overrides and management fees, but they can only exist and grow by continuing to attract investment. I think that time has past. When the sheriff comes by to pick up the office furniture, Faulkner's public persona may fall off.
The reason the farmout is a hot topic is that there is no way to know if the royalty properties made any money. The working interests in the wells in ND are likely in good wells, but they are tiny. They do allow coloring in whole counties, which is impressive. Every well mentioned on the slide you show is a commercial failure. Since that is all we have to go on, we can only guess that if he had lots of technical success he would have talked about that instead of his failures. ...just sayin'
The Hoppe is in the middle of a 1960s field that is drilled up and depleted. From what CF says, I think he believes drilling in depleted fields is low risk. It is low risk of a dry hole but high risk of a well that doesn't payout. Since BECC is as transparent as a lead safe, I really don't know what his prospects are based on. Should be another corporate presentation coming out soon. Maybe it will review successes and failures since the last one.
Wrong when you claimed Breitling had only been around as a private company for six seven years. They have actually been around for well over ten.
Wrong when you claimed that they have been public for at least five. In reality, it has only been two.
I disagree, but it really could not be less important.
Most recently, you wrongfully assumed that the continuous drilling obligation for the Clayton Williams farmout agreement was 90 days instead of the 180 days that it actually is.
Nope, never said that. I did say this: “Common leases expire after 90 days of not producing and with no drilling activity. There are dozens of ways around this, including leasing the land again. Leasing back in to a commercial well is sometimes difficult. Leasing back in to a non-commercial well on land with no viable prospects, not so hard. “ Not really the same thing, not really the same agreement, and not wrong. Could you show us a link to the farmout agreement?
I also said this:
“Well, mackfish, you are correct, but let me elucidate. I haven't read the farmout agreement, but it can be styled on the whim of the participants. Drilling ten wells may well earn a 3600 acre farmout. Whether drilling 10 wells to TD and leaving them counts is up to the terms of the agreement, but I suspect it does not. The farmout has underlying leases and usually, if they are not HBP by the end of the primary term, they expire. Extension clauses that stipulate more money as not all that uncommon. So yes, Breitling has some drilling and producing to do if they are going to "own" 3600 acres. The key is producing, drilling might earn the farmout, but production is needed to hold the leases, or perhaps more correctly, the units.
"Oh, and as to Clayton's opinion of the acreage, by entering into a farmout agreement with Breitling, Clayton gets an override in a well that will never payout at no cost to him. How could that possibly be bad regardless of his opinion of the acreage? And that is before one considers the bonus he got from BECC. He saw BECC coming a mile away."
Nothing about continuous drilling.
Please copy where I assumed the farmout agreement had a 90 day continuous drilling term. I am pleased to learn it has a 180 day continuous drilling clause. I assumed it had a time limit, but had no idea what it might be.
Our most recent debate on the oil and gas leases in general also leaves me with doubts. I still don’t understand how you know what the proven, producing and recoverable reserves are for the Hoppe 63?
I never said my estimate was proved producing. I said it was a guess. I don't "know" anything. I have an opinion as to what is likely to happen and, in terms of the BECC wells, I have expressed an opinion, I have been shown correct so far.
This is what I see when looking at the Sterling County farmout.
Clayton Williams has operations in the northern portion of Glasscock and Sterling counties, where they have the farm out agreement with Breitling Energy.
Clayton Williams has a well about 1200 feet west of the Hoppe. It, combined with another well on the lease, are not commercial and both have produced around 9000 bbls, thus 4500 bbls per well. He has a reason to farmout the acreage.
As a reminder you never answered this question:
On another note. Reaper could you explain how you know I know full well BECC hasn't been slowing the pump? By what mechanism am I supposed to know it was not slowed.
Unfortunately, reaper, you cannot follow what I am saying. You forget what I said in earlier posts and focus only on the last one. I say things in context.
I was talking about the BS CF flings on any well on which he has the smallest involvement in the technical aspect of the well. What you said has nothing to do with the point I have been makikng since June and that everyone except you at least understands what the subject is. I am not going to repeat eight months of comments, anyone interested and with the ability to understand can read my posts.
There's lots of poster children. Here's the Hoppe.
Just so you won't have to estimate, that's 2201 bbls in six months. At it's current rate of 10 BOPD and current prices, it might payout in 30 years or so. Current prices might not hold, but neither will the current rate. But like you said, It could jump up to 600 bbls at any time for no reason at all. That would make me wrong, happens every year to two. I've got more if you like.
Reaper, you didn't really say anything that I have not already said except for this nonsense:
I am not joking about “fluctuations” in month to month TRRC production numbers. I have seen oil wells go from 300bopm to 1,500bopm and back again without any rhyme or reason, which is why I continue to say that stock traders don’t benefit by wasting their time looking at the TRRC filings.
I don't look at only production. The fact that you don't know why a well would do that, doesn't mean no one does. But don't feel alone, CF doesn't know either:
Dallas, Texas – March 6, 2014 – Breitling Energy Corporation (OTC:BECC) (the “Company”) announced that its previously reported new oil discovery in Taylor County, Texas, the Teaff #1, began producing on February 11, 2014. The well has averaged 40 to 50 barrels of oil per day while pumping only 6 hours per day while the Company expands its onsite production equipment. The Company originally announced the well could be capable of producing 110 BOPD. However, at its current rate, the Teaff #1 should be able to produce over 160 BOPD. The Company will continue testing the well while monitoring pressures and fluid entry. Breitling’s Chief Geologist, Joe Simo and consulting geophysicist, Gerald Holden believe the Teaff #1 has 3 to 4 offset locations.
“We are very pleased with the current results of this well and hope we can expand the daily production flow in the near future,” said Chris Faulkner, Chief Executive Officer and President of Breitling Energy Corporation. “We hope to drill this acreage out by the close of 2014 and expand the field’s production along the way.”
For more information, visit www.breitlingenergy.com
I don't really care about traders, they can do what they want and I wish them success. If investors had paid attention to reserves, they might have avoided paying $30 a share for GDP. The importance of the Teaff with regard to BECC is that it is one of many examples of when what CF said does not line up with what happens. I know you like to come of with excuses, but excuses don't add up to industry leader.
As far as the Teaff #1, the company stated at the time that a disposal well was needed. I am pretty sure that everyone understands that there may have been some water involved that needed to be disposed of. That is not really rocket science.
Right, predicting future production from a well isn't either, it's reservoir engineering.
On another note. Reaper could you explain how you know I know full well BECC hasn't been slowing the pump? By what mechanism am I supposed to know it was not slowed. It's not reasonable to think they were slowing the pump, but that doesn't mean they were not. Slowing the pump was your theory as to the poor performance of the Hoppe. I was simple acknowledging the possibility, not suggesting they had a reason to do so.
Wait for it... You are wrong again reaper.
There is nothing wrong with drilling unsuccessful wells, but you should not go around telling the world you are an industry leader until you have drilled a few successful wells and a tiny interest in someone else's well doesn't count. That is following, not leading. And you should not call a bad well great like CF did with the Teaff. Remember, CF said there were multiple development locations. Reaper says TRRC info is irrelevant. Needless to say, I disagree.
Monthly production from the Teaff:
Funny stuff reaper. I like it. BTW, what do you think is holding the lease?
Whether there is a pump jack there is unknown. I make inferences from what is common practice for a prudent operator. Common leases expire after 90 days of not producing and with no drilling activity. There are dozens of ways around this, including leasing the land again. Leasing back in to a commercial well is sometimes difficult. Leasing back in to a non-commercial well on land with no viable prospects, not so hard.
Some of what I do is educated guessing. I am fairly certain this is a high water cut well and the water probably has to be truck-hauled.
I assume you are joking about the "fluctuations," so I will leave that alone.
ROFL. Someone could be stealing from the stock tank and as soon as they catch him, everything will be great.
I suspect Breitling is judgement-proof. With several losses and the two recent default judgements, it's hard to see the value of getting another. It's interesting that these failure-to-pay-bills suits are from media related companies, none from service companies that I know of.
Is BECC stiffing only media companies? Is BECC CIA with the service companies? As you say, mackfish, it hardly matters now.
Suit dropped.
NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
CAUSE NO. CC-15-04586-E
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed please find a Notice of Dismissal Without Prejudice which was entered in the
above referenced matter on 9th day of February, 2016.
Respectfully,
John F. Warren, County Clerk
By:_ ___, Deputy Clerk
Veronica Harris
Ralston Outdoor Advertising Ltd.,
Plaintiff(s)
VS.
Breitling Energy Companies, Inc.,
Defendant(s)
In the County Court
of Dallas County, Texas
County Court at Law No. 5
No Show
12/02/2015 Judgment
Judicial Officer: GREENBERG, MARK
Judgment Type: DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Judgment Amount: $92,344.00
Court Costs: $304.00
Attorney Fees: $4,582.50
Total Judgment: of $97,230.50
Awarded To: IHEART MEDIA, INC.
Awarded Against: BREITLING ENERGY CORPORATION
Not showing up.
NOTICE OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT
CAUSE NO. CC-15-03934-D
The Teaff well, capable of 160 BOPD, has reported zero production for Oct through Dec. It has a cumulative oil production of 8609 bbls. I know it is not possible to to estimate reserves from performance, Breitling could have been slowing the pump a little each month for two years, but I am going to take a wild guess and say this well has an ultimate recovery of 8609 bbls of oil. Mind you, in it's last month of production it produced 9 BOPD, so if oil returns to 70-80 dollars, they could turn the pump back on...if the pump jack is still there.
By the way, Mackfish,
December numbers are out for the Hoppe 63. Seems Breitling has wisely slowed the pump even more.
Based on the data I have access to, all the Devon leases have expired, which is not surprising considering price. As for their opinion of the acreage, they took the leases three or four miles away from the Breitling wells. Chevron has taken out 11 permits in the last year, all in the southern part of the county. Devon permitted some wells, but did not drill them.
Well, mackfish, you are correct, but let me elucidate. I haven't read the farmout agreement, but it can be styled on the whim of the participants. Drilling ten wells may well earn a 3600 acre farmout. Whether drilling 10 wells to TD and leaving them counts is up to the terms of the agreement, but I suspect it does not. The farmout has underlying leases and usually, if they are not HBP by the end of the primary term, they expire. Extension clauses that stipulate more money as not all that uncommon. So yes, Breitling has some drilling and producing to do if they are going to "own" 3600 acres. The key is producing, drilling might earn the farmout, but production is needed to hold the leases, or perhaps more correctly, the units.
Oh, and as to Clayton's opinion of the acreage, by entering into a farmout agreement with Breitling, Clayton gets an override in a well that will never payout at no cost to him. How could that possibly be bad regardless of his opinion of the acreage? And that is before one considers the bonus he got from BECC. He saw BECC coming a mile away.
CC-15-02820-E - IHEART MEDIA, INC. vs. BREITLING ENERGY CORPORATION
CC-15-04586-E - RALSTON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LTD. vs. BREITLING ENERGY COMPANIES, INC., BREITLING ENERGY CORPORATION
Case Information
CC-15-03934-D - HART ENERGY PUBLISHING, LLLP vs. BREITLING ENERGY CORPORATION
Here is a re-write with a little more info:
It's OK mackfish, I am sure you know pretty much as well as I do how many times promoters of the oilfield sort have told me I was wrong. In some cases, as in this one, there was a chance I was wrong. There is one thing that is inevitable, the future will become the past. I have always said I was guessing (based on experience like knowing that if you offset a crappy well often times you end up with a crappy well. I'm being brief, there is a lot more to it.)
Also, I should remind everyone, that was a guess for fun and should not be used for serious purposes. reaper is correct in that if it were serious, I would have made some phone calls and looked at logs, tried to find out exact perforations, maybe calculated OOIP as best I could, etc. reaper is incorrect to suggest that one cannot have a clue as to reserves of some wells based on three months production (with other wells, that may be true.) If it were real serious, I would have someone drive out and watch the pumpjack. In hindsight, perhaps I should not have made the prediction for fear someone might make decisions based on an anonymous revenue projection on the internet. I meant only for people to watch the future unfold.
If a barber or a musician or an attorney says I am wrong, that's OK with me, if someone intentionally misleads laymen for profit, I am not so cool with it.
It's OK mackfish, I am sure you know pretty much as well as I do how many times promoters of the oilfield sort have told me I was wrong. In some cases, as in this one, there was a chance I was wrong. There is one thing that is inevitable, the future will become the past. I have always said I was guessing (based on experience like knowing that if you offset a crappy well often times you end up with a crappy well. I'm being brief, there is a lot more to it.)
If a barber or a musician or an attorney says I am wrong, that's OK with me, if someone intentionally misleads laymen for profit, I am not so cool with it.
As I said in my previous post, it's O.K. if you don't know about the oil business. Having someone who doesn't know what they are talking about telling me I can't estimate future production is mildly annoying, but whatever.
I will also say what I have said for decades, a layman should not invest in the oil business, it almost never works out unless it is with a friend of yours. If one wants to invest in energy, go for Exxon or Chevron or some other major.
If you want to just roll the dice, there are people who made money off Enron, Chesapeake, Halcon, Goodrich, Continental. Just start randomly picking oil companies and go for it. BECC just happens to be one of those companies, among thousands, that didn't work out.
But certainly on the level of saying a corporation came into existence when the corporation was chartered, particularly while acknowledging activity before that date. Neither is particularly important, but we are playing the pointing out errors game, don't you remember?
Anyway, someone who has knowledge of the oil and gas business would know the well did not have four laterals because such wells are rare so it's not a question of misremembering. Also, if someone had done a minimum amount of research, he would know the well was vertical. It's OK to not know anything about drilling wells or estimating reserves, just don't pretend you do like CF does--and I am not saying you did.
Here's an idea, stop harping out unimportant alleged errors that I make and I'll leave your alone (I have not mentioned quite a few because they were unimportant.) Besides I was just joking around.
(Howls of derisive laughter.) ...four laterals!
(I know, we are just having fun. Not much left to do.)
*Sigh*
Fine, I will stipulate the there has been at least one company with Breitling in it name, managed by Chris Faulkner since 2004. I apologize to Chris Faulkner, employees, and investors for suggesting they have not come up with an innovation in six or eight years when I should have said 12. No offense intended.
Happy, Now?
The bad news is that CBS is going to serve the corporation through the secretary of state.
2.2 Defendant, Breitling Energy Corporation, a Nevada Corporation, may be served by and
through the Texas Secretary of State at PO Box 12079, Austin, TX 78711 pursuant to
Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §5.25l(l)(B). The address for forwarding of process by the
Texas Secretary of State is 1910 Pacific Avenue, Suite 12000, Dallas, TX 75201.