How Chesapeake tried to unload "worthless" acreage

Tue Oct 2, 2012 7:05am EDT

Related Topics

(Reuters) - Selling land leases is as much part of Chesapeake's land grab as acquiring them. Some are proving hard to unload.

On October 30, 2010, Chesapeake CEO Aubrey McClendon told Jeff Wojahn, a top executive of Encana Corp, that he was ready to sell Michigan leases held by Chesapeake - "at reasonable terms if you were interested." Wojahn replied that he wanted to "trade well information first," according to emails reviewed by Reuters.

Encana and Chesapeake declined to comment on the emails.

Chesapeake executives knew that their test well in Michigan had performed poorly. But the emails indicate that McClendon wanted to provide Encana just enough information about Chesapeake's well to keep the sale talks going, without showing the well's full - and disappointing - results.

"But isn't our possible gain that they could want to buy our (now worthless) leases?" McClendon wrote to three top Chesapeake officials on October 31, 2010. The words in parentheses - "now worthless" - were his. So was the suggestion to provide Encana barebones information.

"We need to know what is the data that we could release to Encana that makes us look like we have nothing to hide, yet won't show anything negative about the play?" he wrote in the same email.

Encana didn't bite, and Chesapeake is now marketing some 450,000 acres to other potential buyers.

Though McClendon once called the acreage "worthless," a prospectus for the sale touts it as containing "the strong possibility" of valuable oil and other liquids.

The sale was scheduled to close on August 31. So far, there have been no takers.

(Reporting By Brian Grow and Joshua Schneyer; editing by Blake Morrison and Michael Williams)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
matthewslyman wrote:
Perfect example of the information advantage that CEOs hold.

Oct 02, 2012 8:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
9times wrote:
With every one of these Chesapeake articles, Reuters loses journalistic integrity. While there is plenty to not like about Aubrey McClendon or Chesapeake’s blatant lack of corporate governance/spending, Reuters has became the Fox News of business report. These stories are so far slanted they’re past showing facts and are focusing only on sensationalism, true or not.

State-wide Rule 37 Texas is nothing new to the oil & gas business. Chesapeake would be expected to have the most Rule 37 applications because they have drilled more wells in Texas then any other operator since 2007! The comparison to Exxon is irrelevant and is only based on Exxon’s size compared to Chesapeake. XTO Energy (owned by Exxon)has used the same method in their development of the Barnett Shale in and around Fort Worth, TX.

The fact is you cannot drill in the city limits without Rule 37. One person can’t and shouldn’t be able to hold up the drilling in an area surrounded by thousands of others who are eager to have their minerals produced. That’s why Oklahoma is a much better state to develop in based on their correct way of force pooling.

I can appreciate no one likes Chesapeake but let’s stop pigeon-holing for every sensational story that can be written and stick to issues that actually have merit.

Oct 02, 2012 11:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.