When is a deal a deal?

I will try to make this short, but overall, my question is "when is a deal a deal?"

We all have read the stories about leases and the problems that come up on them. We have all read stories of shady outfitters. I have been lucky enough to never have a bad deal on a lease, some minor issues, but nothing that I consider unethical or back-handed, of course until now. So, the question begs, when is a deal a deal.

If you tell someone "I will take it", they say "Great", and then you set up a weekend in March to go and look at the property and meet the owner to go over the contract...would you assume that you have the lease?

Lets take it a step farther. You have talked to this person off and on for the last 2 or 3 years. You have discussed the possibility of leasing out some of the owners other land or even being a member of their lease, and you sent them a couple of hunters to help fill a few spots on their lease.

This year, the "lease manager" is getting off and they are looking to replace him. You talk with the same guy four or five times, they send you the contract, pictures of the properties, all the details and go over the "good and bad" of the lease. All sounds like it is going to work out and you have the conversation that I dictated in the first of this post.

Then you get a call from one of the hunters that you sent, who also thought I was going to be leasing the property, to say that they gave it to someone else. While they avoided calling to tell me, they at least answered the phone. Not sure what I expected because I just don't see that there is an answer for agreeing to a deal, sending the contract and land descriptions, and setting up a meeting with the owner, then giving it to someone else. I guess maybe an apology, but instead I got excuses and lack of accountability. Even got the "blame others" game. It is also a good thing that I knew one of the hunters or I guess I would have made a long trip for nothing.

If I was guessing, the guy I was talking to had no real part in the decision making process and made a deal he wasn't in place to make. Really no telling, but for the sake of the hunters I sent over to them, I hope that the new "lease manager" is more stand up than the ones that were running it...

I guess to answer my own question, a deal isn't a deal until contracts are signed and money is exchanged. A man's word and a verbal agreement just aren't what they used to be.

Sorry for the rant and sounding like a whiny -----, but people constantly surprise me and I wonder at what point, my expectations of others will be lowered to reality.

Think of all those rounds of golf and steak dinners you saved on though.

Now that that's out of the way. It sucks and never can tell why people do the things that they do.

Where you dealing with the LO?

Different meaning to folks. My word is my bond.

No. He was a current lease member. Lease and contract would have been directly with the LO though. They were setting up the meeting with the LO for me to take it over

I can attest to that

Could have not even been ran by the landowner, in the grand scheme of things an agreement with someone not in position to be having that discussion leads to problems.

Sketchy

That's when I take a deep breath and say next..

I would call the LO and speak with him directly and let him know about how this "deal" went down.

This statement makes the difference in all that to me

""If you tell someone "I will take it", they say "Great", and then you set up a weekend in March to go and look at the property and meet the owner to go over the contract...would you assume that you have the lease?""

At 1st I though maybe you came across a bit indecisive, but "I will take it", pretty much takes care of that. Could have been someone else came in with more $, seen that a time or 2, still a crappy way of doing business.

No money issues. That was part of the contract with the owner

If I had met them, I would. Wouldn't be hard to find.

Probably a lot of truth to that

I would make the trip to meet with him, your deal might be being shoved under the door mat.

I think it was more of the case that RM was leaning toward....guy was making a deal and had no authority to do it.

You up for a road trip

Ha!!! I see what you did there...

I am for it...you take your check book and get the steaks......

Who's bringing the clubs?

You probably want a round of golf too

he steal your thunder

Aw hail naw!! Amplified it!

I have to admit, I thought about you when I was posting this.

I thought of steaks and golf just reading the title...then I starting thinking feeders and child birth.

Lol. I would have been real mad if I had made it to the steak and golf level. That would have just been wrong!!!

So, you were dealing with the lease manager that eventually has gotten off? Sounds like he was either wishful thinking with you and didn't have the authority or never really intended to get you on as it turned out.

Rise above it, learn from it and leave it in the dust. Mix a good drink, put a dip in and never let it cross your mind again.
Landowners loss.

I am with ya bud. People just surprise me sometimes. Didn't have to have a place but could have been a good deal for a few guys.

I think we're all learning that one of the earliest questions needs to be 'Do you have the power to truly make this deal?'

"a weekend in March to go and look at the property"

would you assume that you have the lease?

Absolutely not. I wonder how many times a landowner or lease manager has been told over the phone, land unseen, contract unseen, that a hunter will take it. Then when they show up weeks later and don't like what they see, want to negotiate price, or find something in the contract they want to negotiate. From past experience, I would not consider that lease mine till the contract is signed and the money is in the landowner' or manager's hand. If it was an I'll Take It situation where I was going to agree to the price and take the lease without looking at it, I would have asked them to mail the contract for me to sign and mailed a check immediately. I have lost two leases because we were too slow to pay and sign a contract after a price increase. Both times someone offered considerably more money than we were to pay and they paid immediately. One of those landowners had fallen on bad times, so there was no hard feelings, but if we had acted sooner, we might not have lost those leases.

I once accepted an old Maverick car from a neighbor kid that had borrowed money from me. I sold it twice to people I knew from the neighborhood with a set payment plan and had to repossess it both times because I never received a payment. Up for sale again I had three separate "I'll take it's" with hand shake, going to the bank, be right back. None came back. I was not going to hold that car for anyone again even if they said they would take it. The next guy that walked up I decided I was going to ask to make and offer and I was going to take his offer no matter what it was. The next person that walked up with an offer three times over what I had been asking and paid from a roll of cash in his pocket. Just the way it is these days.

Understood John and agree. There are many people that aren't a man of their word, and your examples are just more of the same.

I was leasing it sight unseen (except google) and said so. I leased my other three properties up there the same way, and still haven't ever actually met the landowner in person. Had the contract and was asked if I wanted any revisions made, said Nope.

The one handling the contract was meeting with me in March to introduce me to the owner as the new "lease manager." March was the soonest they could make it up there or I would have gone earlier. Made it very clear my schedule was flexible. Wasn't a trip to decide if I wanted it and per the contract, money wasn't due yet or I would have written the check.

The trip included them showing me the properties so I would actually know what they looked like, not to make a decision on.

Take your example of the car. If someone said they would take it and you told them "great", come pick it up in two weeks. Then you sold the car to someone else the next Tuesday, is that acceptable?

I don't understand who this person was who said they would do what they would do. A friend or who? Luckily only had to deal with one lease boss who I didn't trust him then. Then they call me years later asking if they can get on my current lease. Sure... I can't trust anyone even if you say I have $100, come get it...

I thought you were on a pretty good lease. We had a spot open this year that two guys swore they would pay for to get on. I read the ridiculous texts from them as to why they couldn't come up or pay but would tomorrow, etc. It was comical and thank God they didn't get on. I brought guys on to fill it but tell the freaking the truth. Who cares if you can't honor a deal or pay, just tell the truth upfront and you will be respected.

X's 3. But easy for Kent to say, he doesn't have a "short complex"

I guess for future reference, always ask to speak with the "leader", sounds like someone may have been making arrangements they couldn't stand behind anyway.

IMO, contacting the LO would be fruitless and waste more of your time, he has his cash already. Move on and be thankful there was few damages. BTW, if you don't trust some folks enough to give them some rope, you will never find trust-able people, I wouldn't let this incident make a hill of beans in your thinking as long as you can sleep at night, the world still turns.

A. You're supposed to be the optimist on here. Get back to work.
B. I think deer leases are a separate business category from any other business. Lots of shady characters on both sides. Very few folks that do what they say they will do.

This should do it txhntr.....

Someone I met on here. Never thought to ask them if they had the authority to make a deal. He was actually very clear that he didn't run the day to day portion of the lease because he couldn't handle it. He said that his buddy did. He was the one that found the lease and his buddy helped him run it.

I have a good lease. This place is in Kansas and I was going to keep the 3 properties I currently have but lease them to someone else and try this new place. I have seen the deer that they have killed in the past and figured it was worth a try if the price was right.

Ah man...too little too late I guess

Keep it for the next place and we will just go around the screw ball and deliver that directly to the owner

It doesn't bother me that bad and it won't change the way I handle business. I wouldn't contact the LO direct, deal was never with them and my guess is they have an idea of the type of person I was dealing with anyway. Probably a good reason why they weren't actually the lease manager.

Sounds like the fella could have actually had a some "say so", or at least passed y'alls conversation on to his bud. Oh well, you have enough trouble chut'n one on the lease you have, why bother with another, of course your PoP's gets it done

I got mine last year...pops just gets it done every year

True, I should'nt have "SHORTED" you on that fact but he does it with less "drama"

Txshntr, I agree on a mans word is his word and a hand shake is a deal. I'm sure the land owners idea is the first one that brings the money and signs the lease agreement. I'm sorry you lost out on that.

I know a former outfitter for KS that could probably help with this situation....

I learned long ago that sometimes losing something can be the best thing.

Let him talk to the LO?

STX gets it, nothing to worry about.

If you ain't dealin with the deal maker than chances are it ain't a deal.

Think you said it best...

Caught out in the fast paced world of hunting lease arbitrage. It happens.

Sooooooooooooooo what are you going to do with all those extra leftover steaks you know have?

Yep, that's it in a nutshell. It's a mad, mad, mad, world out there these days.

They keep well in the freezer until the next "oppurtunity"

Send me a dozen bone-in Cowboy ribeyes and I'll throw you a lead on a little place I know of in east TX. Warning: LO is a little weird though-names his deer after green, bendy cartoon characters.

He'd call CPS to come wrangle up some munchkin running around the place unsupervised.

And ribeyes won't work with that guy, he just had an errand girl go pick up a case from Rosenthal on her campus visit.

"money wasn't due yet or I would have written the check."

That's where your wheel left the road.

How I would have handled it if I had a middle man (I'll never have one because of folks who bribe middlemen BTW :-)) :

I would have asked him "What?.... You want me to hold a place on a promise, from someone you've never met??? I've got guys with cash in hand here, call your guy and get money to hold it, or I'm taking these guys' $."

Kind of surprised you expected someone to hold a place through prime leasing time for you without something other than a phone call to hold it.

Rancher has a point

When both sides are happy

Hey Davy, I know a guy that has a friend, whose BIL knew someone that had a cousins aunt, with 20k acres to lease, I will take those steaks and a round of golf and try to work you up a lease deal..

Unfortunate buddy, hope you get the next one

Dang! Beat me to it!

Typically, unless I'm joking around, I do have a point. Most of the time the point either makes someone uncomfortable, or it's at least from a perspective different enough to generate some lively debate.

It's what they pay me for.

"They" still had the lease. Current lease manager that was getting off hadn't told the owner he was getting off yet. As far as the owner knew, he was coming up to renew the lease. The lease manager was the one getting off, not the entire group. Guy I was talking too wanted to stay on the lease as a member. No one was holding the lease and a different group wasn't there to pay for it while they were waiting on me. As a side note, I was asked if I wanted the lease because of previous conversations, it wasn't a lease I found somewhere.

Didn't feel like it was a "middle man", more of an introduction to the owner.

Otherwise, I would say you hit the nail on the head

And sometimes you make up your own point for the sake of an argument

Rancher, iirc, it was you they where referring to as having the land You mean your foreman hasn't spoken to you about this?? OOOPS

Can you imagine if I ended up leasing from Therancher...bet he would take my steaks and incentives and think find a way to screw me for the sake of making a point

Well then. There was "stuff" you didn't know about that we'll never know. So the lease manager was attempting to get rid of the current group? Or your friend on here was trying to lease it out from under his buds? No one was "holding" it?? Sounds like some folks thought they just lost a couple of hunters.

Maybe the landowner was more savvy than the lease manager and your friend on here thought. Lotta variables to this.

None of which a check probably wouldn't have "fixed" though.

Yep by here was "stuff" I didn't know about. Lease manager was getting off, not trying to get rid of the group. Guy I was talking to was looking for someone to be the new lease manager.

ta the world of Big Bucks Hunting [/i]. As they say on here. Ya Gotta Pay ta Play. or as pappy once said: the more money ya have the more Freedom ya have from the ignorance list

And that makes me different from your "buddies" how??

The only time it's the best thing is if we learn from it. I'll bet you approach the next situation with this experience in mind.

This ^

David, If you hunted with therancher, I would wager you two fellas would be buds, easier to size up a fella in person. Or y'all could at least have an ole fashioned Texas shoot out LOL

Didn't say you were different

My guess is that we would get along just fine and share a story or two. Probably solve all the worlds problems while he ate all my steaks

You've got to get away from golf & steaks and start sending the wives Spa packages, restaurant gift cards, etc. you can keep the middle men in check when them goofing up has their wife 10' up their rear concerned about why they're not treating someone fairly and threatening to go on strike...

Rancher, iirc, it was you they where referring to as having the land You mean your foreman hasn't spoken to you about this?? OOOPS


Ha! Guess you missed the "I don't do bribe susceptible ranch managers" statement. Something I knew before I met txhuntr, but something he did re-affirm for me. :-)

Without a doubt. I still will try to see the best in folks and put my trust in their word. It will mean that there is a chance I will get burned again but I have seen more good from it than bad and without it, wouldn't have some of the buddies I have now. Birds of a feather and all that.

If they're honorable the deal is complete upon the handshake. 17 years ago there was a handshake between myself a gentleman at a TXDOT golf tournament in Waco, my company was about 2 years old and I'd just been stiffed by a couple of contractors to the tune of over 80,000 dollars. He was one of my first customers and had been around for many years supplying products for the highway industry to contractors. I turned over all contractors in every state to him and kept the state contracts for myself. I could have undercut him on many contracts and he most likely never would have known, but there's trust in a handshake. When I decided to get out of the business instead of selling the business to the top bid I turned it over to him for a down payment and percentage over a 10 year period. We're going on 2 years and I couldn't be happier, the thought of auditing his books has never crossed my mind even though I could were I to choose. Other than some simple documents transferring property and patents that's all the attorney had to do, a simple handshake took care of the rest. Is that rare deal, well it might be for some. Among honorable men it's a standard.

Ah yes, another instance of distorted "facts"

What??? You made a deal with golf involved??? Therancher would say you bribed him!!!

In all seriousness, this is the way 99% of my business is handled. As I said above, I will keep doing business this way because more good than bad has come from it.

Ok. But he wasn't looking for a LM with the owners knowledge because you said the owner didn't even know the LM was leaving.

Man. There's WAY too many loose ends and variables for me to feel comfortable with a $less electronic commitment.

FWIW when tens of thousands of dollars are at stake I would never depend on $less commitment to hold it for weeks. I know, I'm not like your other landowner who tens of thousands of dollars doesn't matter to..

Did I miss something? The way I read it you never met the person you were dealing with. You were just a voice on a phone and an entity behind a keyboard.

Playing golf and knowing someone and shaking their hand is a LOT different IMO. However, also IMO it's good bull to give a little green in good faith to make someone you don't really know comfortable holding tens of thousands of dollars worth of business in limbo for.

I am with you and would agree if the contract period was up. Do you look to replace your current hunters before the lease contract is up? Again, it wasn't being held and wasn't the LO that did anything. At this point, they weren't involved

That isn't distorted. I don't have ranch managers.

My dad and then my family did business over the phone by way of verbal agreements for fifty years. Starting in the early nineties that all went out the window. All of a sudden everybody wanted written contracts signed and notarized. It was fun while it lasted.

I was talking about the "other" deal we discussed and giving you a hard time. The rest of the stuff you said is true.

Good question. I typically expect 1/2 payment after hunting season is over. But if I get the feeling the hunters might bail I ask them early and start looking before their lease is up. I don't accept payment before then, but I wouldn't hold it for someone I don't know without a deposit.

You're young, Weedhopper. While I admire your approach, just remember that your assets and the risk you take now will benefit and affect your kids later. Unfortunately the bad guys (and there are many) use the handshake and their "word" as a tool. It's a sad but true fact. Just learn how/when to protect yourself and your family from those that will take from you by using your trust against you.

I used to not want a deposit for hunting. If a person told me he wanted to come hunt on a certain day that was good enough for me. Then after several did not show up at the Court House in Bandera where we were to meet and did not even have the courtesy of calling I stopped that. Now I have a few that usually come every year that I don't ask for a deposit but the rest I do. It is a shame some people word does not mean a thing to them.

I would be screwed because I refuse to talk on a phone

A Man's Handshake is his Word...

Lets count the flags
No LO
Phone call
Kansas (Only thing worse would be Okla )
Trusting a guy from (see above)


I prefer Divorce's easiest way to swoop in and get deals and spots

Not putting important stuff in writing is a very silly risk to take. It always has been. Honorable men are still honorable even if there is a contract. And even honorable men can remember things differently. I have seen many lives and families ruined-all because the parties didn't put a deal down in a few pages of writing.

But, hey, it's job security....

That's how bad guys get found on the side of the road with the living chit kicked out of them.

Wait, enough of this about this lease that ain't gonna happen. I wanna know about these leftover steaks

IIRC, the first time we ever met was on a job site...but I have a bad memory

And yes, you would be screwed if you ran your business by phone

Hes stingy

No sir, didn't miss it, that is why I threw that in. It's called "ribbing", or sarcasm. BTW, TREX may change the bribe to "work for a hunt", that could be considered a "bribe" since the work doesn't compensate for the hunt value.. Nice write off though

I sent them all to Therancher. Might not be able to bribe his non-existent lease manager but sounds like he will turn on his hunters for the right price

IIRC, according to mr. Rancher, that happens all the time and all his rancher buddies do it, so it can't be a bribe. In his case, only able bodied people capable of the work can get a "free" hunt.

One of the wisest sayings my Momma had was:

"Never get in the mud with a pig. You just both end up dirty-and the pig likes it anyway."

Okay....

HMMM..So it is "OK" to bribe someone to work for a hunt??? I see....

Ha! Either you're ribbing, or neither of y'all understand what bribe means.

Damn I been doing it wrong all along. I thought you give them free hunts because you liked them. That means there's a bunch a fellers here on the forum have a few chores to do. Wait a minute that means I owe a few myself!

I say the same about you

"Judge he crawfished a deal and called me a liar that's why I shot him in the foot". Case dismissed.

If I remember that story right the judge awarded the defendant 2 horses and a Mexican saddle but did make the defendant purchase a cane for the plaintiff just to prove he was a fair and impartial judge.

I think I would have liked that judge

Yep and then the ones that wear Ties came into the picture...and the rest is history

What a load of crap. The "ones that wear ties" came into the picture because one screwed the other and nothing was in writing. You're in my wheelhouse now Hand-I live it every day. I don't drag folks off the street, they walk in with a problem.

Now days, they have no choice.

Feel Better

Your so easy
In your wheelhouse

Horse on the right wanted no part of that agreement.

Yep, been practicing law almost 30 years. In my wheelhouse.

Yeah, they've got a choice. They can just take their butt-whoopin' and go on. Or do like they did before the "suits" came along-and kill each other. Oh, I forgot, nobody had any problems before them bad ol' lawyers came on the scene. We caused all the contract breaking, crime, divorce, and every other problem known to man.



Yeah, I get tired of hearing folks blame all their problems on somebody else. Sounds like democrats.

Pretty sure most democrats are lawyers...

If everybody was always honorable, they wouldn't need a lawyer. So they always have a choice. I ain't never caused a single problem that walked in my door.

Really? Most of the ones I see couldn't get into a law school.

Huh...

party of lawyers

Most democrats are not lawyers.

The man made an absurd statement. That everything was fine until the lawyers came along.

If you want to go with that, fine.

I call out when I see it.

Objection
Purely Speculation

Democrats are considered the Party of Lawyers...I didn't say it, the article did (along with many others that say the same)

Lawyers get a bad rap. They are a necessary evil and at times they are evil, but at other times they are a great ally. If the world was honest, they wouldn't be needed. As we all know, that is not "real world" and not a realistic view. Therefore, lawyers exist.

Have to admit. Was probably much easier when people just shot each other

And I have a strong suspicion Sniper is just poking at you for the sake of poking at you....

I am not as big a fan of Sniper as others-primarily because he has "sniped" at me personally several times. I'm sure he's a great guy, but you couldn't prove it by me. I'll give like I get. Always have-always will.

I'm thinking times may have changed Noggy P.

Touching....

They got better...we have lawyers

For sure. But the lawyers are the result of the change, not the cause of it. All I'm saying.

Every lawsuit has at least 2 clients.

Meh...i don't take much personal or there would be more than a few on here I wouldn't care for.

Be just like me coming on here and saying nobody had any building problems until all the low-life contractors came along. And, believe me, I have seen a lot of chitty contractors in my day. But I have a brain-so I don't paint all of them with the same brush.

That's why I always keep a "Better Call Saul" on speed dial, I agree it's a necessary evil like Toilet Paper.
Having a District Attorney for a neighbor is always interesting banter...but he don't rattle easy

I don't take anything on the interwebs personal. But I do give like I get.

I should probably work on that I know.

Bad example...most things aren't built as well as it used to be. More efficient and cost effective, but not built to last like it used to be. I have worked on buildings and houses built around the turn of the century and it is truly impressive.

Most of us are just tired of hearing/responding to the . Hear it all the time and tune it out. Most of the time I do the same. Today, I didn't. Just bored, I guess.

Well, you said it. Not me.

Over ruled...

I'm just saying there are a lot of democrat JDs hitting the market. Wife can't understand it BC she just can't see how educated business professionals would ever side that way. Even in her line of work she's found she's a better fit with the MT/WY attorneys.

(Also has worked with 12 gay guys, which is a statistical anomaly...1 republican in that bunch)

Lots of lawyers lean democrat because tort reform seeks to take them out of their jobs. Agree or disagree with tort reform, that's the reason.

It is what it is. I know the reality of the business I am in and know the reason that contractors have the reputation they do. I deal with it daily and have to clean up the messes of others on a fairly regular basis.

Me too. So forgive me if I chafe a little at Sniper's and and such when dissing my profession.

If you know the reality of your business and why it has the reputation, why would it bother you. I also own a roofing company and there are more horror stories about roofers than lawyers. Hell, I can tell you plenty, but don't get riled when someone bad mouths them. Truly curious and not poking fun at you anymore

Can't say I have met many that are Dems, but I've seen them jump party faster than greased Lightning so they can become a Judge Rifleman

I don't know if they grasp that leaving school. Even the ones older like Shana was were left leaners from the i35 corridor. 80% women in her class......

I have some really great friends who are Criminal Defense Attnys and damn good ones. The ones that are doing excellent could care less, the ones that came out of the Dallas "Attny Mills" all are chasing a Robe to be behind the Bench.

Because I am proud of my education, hard work, and, yes, profession. I have solved a bunch of problems in my day. I stand between the little guy and big government/corporate utilities-every day. I didn't cause any of it. My profession is not a "necessary evil" like "toilet paper". Or, if it is, it's because someone's got to clean up the chit people create.

I get that and have pride in what I do and what I have done and am able to accomplish, just don't take it personal when someone has a problem with my chosen profession, particularly when there is truth to it.

Could just be republicans have been vilifying lawyers for so long not many republicans become lawyers. IDK that's been after my time......

Well, when I got out 30 years ago there wasn't near as much truth to it. So part of it is I am kind of a fogey who still has pride in his profession.

Three disastrous things have happened since I got out:

1) Advertising door thrown wide open; and
2) Bunch of marginal to crappy law schools have sprung up, handing out law degrees to a bunch of folks who have no business with them; and
3) Insurance companies pushing tort reform have vilified lawyers-and most folks have gulped it down hook, line, and sinker.

I'm probably living in the past.....

Just feel lucky your not in the oil business.

No Attack on a Proffesion
It's the narrow minded egotistical attacks on ones way and view of hunting and weapon of choice, as far as if you like me..I could absolutely care less. I'm not taking on any new friends im full. The tantrum deserved no response but you cast the first stone. It's your World Counsler im just passing through, you shouldn't rattle so easy.

It's an attack on a profession. If you don't mean it or don't know what it means, don't type it.

I ain't rattled. It's words on a keyboard.

Duly Noted

Well, OK then. You would not think I was near as bad around a campfire. I'm sure I would feel the same way.

No...you would feel very differently after being around a campfire with him trust me on this one

I think it's a mixture of a lot of things; urban sprawl, location of law schools, demographics, etc. I just know it's worse than I thought, surprisingly, the Pittsburgh folks/native she works with lean heavily republican.

Having guns handy keeps people civil.

Or it's simply just all about tort reform and $$$$$$$$

Especially me because I'm told I can't shoot worth a crap.

Not always. http://petroglobalnews.com/2015/02/oilfield-employer-shot-killed-during-salary-dispute/

That was my original thought. Everybody loves tort reform-right up until they get "torted".

That is because you don't shoot a 223.

LOL. No catcalls from the cheap seats Mr. Don.

I thought it was "HAMMERED!!!"

My latest story of honest and dishonest.

Called a concrete contractor in late October. He came out the first weekend of November to see my dirt pad. I told him what I wanted, he told me how he was gonna build it, and how much it was gonna cost, I agreed. Theb we talked about rifle shooting for an hour (his idea). He finally made it out in mid January due to weather. Drilled piers, got em poured, and started the forms. Two weeks later, due to weather, he made it back out, trenched, sand, rebar, finished out the forms. I still hadn't paid a dime. Next day the mats got put in, and loose ends tied up. Next day the trucks came out, his six man crew, and the slab got finished. Still hadn't paid a dime. End of the day I went up to him and said figure up the bill. He did, it was exactly what we talked about, and I wrote him a check. Two honest men, no cotract, just a handshake.

Wife wanted to make life better for my stepdaughter, and hold her ex accountable for the wrongs he has done for years. I wanted to give him some stick time with a cheater pipe, but that aint legal, so she hired a lawyer, and we went to court. Truth is, some layers are just like any other craftsman that knows how to do what we don't and ya gotta hire em on.

My which is free.

Marvin I said guns meaning everybody has one.

I'm still holding out for the keystone XL to run through the panhandle.......

Keystone XL deal is pure politics.

There have been 3 pretty much identical pipelines put in and/or repurposed to run the heavy shale crude in the past few years. Keystone just happened to catch the press and, as a result, the politics. Once it became a political football, everything went downhill. Bammy would have signed off on it 3 years ago if the press hadn't lached onto it. The Repubs rose up for it, and the rest is history.

By the time it is approved now they may not even want/need it.....

There's allot of truth in that.

Agree. Read a survey some years back where folks were polled on what they thought about various professions in general. Lawyers, insurance agents, brokers, doctors, etc. Many of these professions were ranked very low.

Then folks were asked what they thought specifically about THEIR lawyer, insurance agent, etc. and the rankings reversed - they thought THE PERSON REPRESENTING THEM was first class. Perception is a funny thing.

Our company lawyers are damn nice guys as is a good friend who is the District Attorney. My personal lawyer I don't even like he is one arrogant, abrasive SOB and the one who handled my divorce. I pay him allot of money when needed, he's worth it.

No, but the point I was making is I prefer not putting myself in that situation as buyer or seller because like it or not those kind of deals are just asking for trouble. If someone tells me they would take it, I'll pick it up in two weeks, I would actually respond "great", it's yours provided you pay me now and pick it up no later than two weeks, or it will go to the first person that wants to pay what we ageed on or more. At minimum to hold it would require a deposit that day. If I were the buyer I would try to leave a deposit with a note signed by both parties on the agreed balance in two weeks.

As an example. I have bought a gun from a forum member before were I could not pick it up for around two weeks, but I mailed a check the day I agreed to buy it. I picked it up when I passed through their area while I was on a hunting trip.

Been there..had a deal set up to look at on friday..and mind you I was already leasing from this guy and he was adding 5500ac next door to us..the day before he calls and says he leased to a group for a corp deal..rug jerked right out from under me after I had gotten all my hunters lined up..well right before the season started the LO came back to mr rancher man and jerked the rug out from under him and the corp hunters told him "no maas"..karma got him..

Like I said still holding out for them to switch from East Texas to the panhandle...

There's one coming that it can tie into and head this way.

Ha!

Tort reform. Awesome doo doo. Otherwise you'd have a bunch of john eddie Williams running around and unemployed people running around. I prefer employed people and poor attorneys.

Now it all makes perfect sense.....the birds of a feather are flocking up.

Wonder how many calls I'd get if the pipeline was headed through the panhandle.... " hi, I'm the Hammer here to help you get the best $$$$$ possible "

Like I said earlier can't cap the lawsuits......

Hi rancher!!! You're too late-we've all moved on now. You can stalk me on another topic soon though!

What are you talking about? I don't follow.....

Do you want a cap on what your property is worth?

I dunno about the flocking part?

Ya....we don't live in a sue happy society...nor do we live in a society where ignorance wins over common sense... Lol

Whatever Bobo....

All I hear on hear is "property rights, property rights, property rights". I fight for them every day representing landowners. And guys dis what I do and side with the pipeline companies. Guess it shouldn't surprise me-republican judges do it too.

My property is capped with ED, as it is on the open market. Just like yours is.
Regardless of that cap, your still going to get more then it's worth, while retaining ownership and getting taxable depreciation.

I'm all for tort reform.

I've never will be a fan of ED, its no longer just about public utility.

But I'll also be the first to admit that a pipeline through my property would most likely exceed 100 year ROI for that given amount of land. So one has a hard time agruing you not getting fully compensated vs land value

Never ends...You ever argue with Fence Posts

You don't know what you are talking about.

Tort reform doesn't even apply to ED. My clients are not Plaintiffs. The Constitution provides full compensation for property taken. Using the free market value. Thank God for that. Would you change it? Give it to them?

Same song-different verse. Folks call themselves conservatives and don't even know what the word means.

Someone has to rep the midstream companies....those evil, evil, pipeline companies.

yall need to get a room and work this out

I dang sure don't need a lawyer negotiating for me on a pipeline. I'd get more than enough premium to cover fees and then some.

LOL. Guys come on here pontificating about what I do every day-and I'm the one who would argue with a fence post?

Its like listening to that "one" Uncle that hated Nixon

Quick...Fraizer or Ali

Tyson would chew them both up and spit them out.

all I got to say is "GEEEEEZ!!"

Yeah, hear it all the time. And the folks who say that change their tune when they find out their neighbors got 5-10x as much. I don't work by the hour. And for every dollar I get (over and above what they were offered) my clients get two.

They're not evil. But they will dang sure pay 25 cents on the dollar if folks are stupid enough to take it. Start out offering 15 cents, negotiate with guys like therancher up to 25-35 cents, and make out like a bandit. The few that fight and get the dollar don't affect much when 85% have already settled.

(This does not apply to all of them. But enough of them to keep me in business for 30 years, with no end in sight.)

You need to keep up. It's the Information age. Anyone can find out how much a 20" pipeline pays in their area if they have half a brain. And that info is gold. You have no idea how well I can negotiate.

Your job is to get your cleint the maximum amount of return they can get above and beyond what was initially offered.

You don't beat ED..excluding some one offs.

I already said I'm not a fan of ED it has out lived it's purpose. You're right Tort and ED aren't the same except in the end they both have a money exchange.

Although ED compensation is extremely high vs true land value it's not on par with some of the outrageous liability suits. Your mostly likly a set hourly fee, not commission

What they are paying doesn't mean anything to me. That info is worthless. (Like I said-you get the 15 cent price, work it to a quarter, and think you won.) What it's worth does. The jury is not asked what they are paying-they are asked what it's worth.

You are in kindergarten and think you are a college professor.

That's right. I can't make my clients winners (because they have lost the land and have to pay to fight). But I can make them much less of a loser than they would have been.

I'm glad you think ED compensation high in your area. It rarely is at first in mine.

I image you only work via a hourly billable cost, not tiered or commission type

You imagine wrong. I only get paid a % of what I get OVER AND ABOVE what the offer is. If I don't win, I don't get paid. Period. No backstops. The jury decides.

If they were fair in all cases I wouldn't have a job. And I've had one for 30 years-with no slowdown in sight.

So you charge No Billable hours if you lose...period

That's correct. Our office doesn't send bills. Period.

Interesting

Have you ever not won?

If they offer a fair deal I tell my clients that and don't take the case. Why would I? If they are being fair and the jury agrees, I don't get paid.

It happens that way sometimes.

No. But that statement can be misleading. Some wins have been bigger than others. I don't always get everything I ask for. But I do often enough to keep my opponents concerned.

i get why the no hourly rate now.

You have no idea. And you know it.

Nope, no idea rancher.

I know top dollar and I get it. Period.

You da man.

Theirs lots of shady deals.. Know some people who had lease in 5yr contract. They spent money time. At 5yr renewal Land owner said had higher bidders. Guys had first chance at new price. They couldn"t aford it.

Juries think they're evil. Big time, greedy O&G companies looking to tear up their communities......

Love to see the success vs failure record

tip my hat ta you sir.

Working O&G's is a piece of cake. Anyone who pays a lawyer to do it for them is just plain lazy.

http://www.stereogum.com/1709835/watch-junior-browns-better-call-saul-theme-song-video/video/

The worst thing probably is that they don't communicate/work with each other and lay about 10 times more lines than they need to. Most of the time they won't even lay a new line beside an existing line, if it's not theirs. Lots of places in the Barnett completely ruined with a spider-web of lines all over their land. It didn't have to be that way. Most of them truly don't give a rat's a** about the landowner.

We have 2 more coming..one company wanting to use their existing ROW, another company wanting to parallel with a new ROW.

That's good. Things were a free-for-all in the Barnett. They were all racing against each other.

NP I've been on both sides of the table on a few pipeline negotiation and I have to say I find that 5-10 times as much a little over the edge. I've never seen rod prices and damages vary that much property to property. Do you actually tell your clients you can get them 5 to 10 times more than their neighbors? DCP is looking at 7 miles of 8 inch going across the east end of the big ranch. If you can tell me you can get just 2 and half times as much as my neighbors we need to talk.

Lost their land due to a pipeline, how does that happen?

Deal is a deal once the cash or "consideration" has been exchanged.

At least for a land leasing deal, I think you'd find that to be the point of legal enforceability.

Seen 2 deals where the cash(check) was sent in and the "consideration" was agreed to only to have the cash sent back due to a new offer of more had been excepted.

That was a breach of contract then unless there was a provision stating something to the effect that a pending contingent higher counteroffer or newer offer were to come in at a higher amount. Still, that'd have had to have been accepted by the prospective purchaser.

Don't mind, except that'll then be 4 lines and 180-200' of ROW + WS....starting to be a slight inconvenience when it comes to wanting to build up there.

Now your argument is confusing me. Why would I want to run my line beside somebody else's? Where is that an advantage or a cost savings to me? Running lines side by side is not the safest way to operate as many an old ditcher or back hoe operator has found out, may they rest in peace. Too many twists, turns and lateral taps to avoid. The only lines I've run parallel to each other were both delivery lines, one running pentane and the other propane, Both of these lines cross the south end of the ranch and run from New Mexico to Houston. While there may be boosters along the way there are no incoming taps and both were put in at the same time.

The unsigned contract was agreed to and signed by the person wanting the lease, then it was sent (along with his check) back to the LO for him to sign. The contract was never signed by LO and the check was never cashed, check was returned to the person wanting the lease in both instances. Very similar to what has happened here with txshntr except there was no contract signed yet nor any check sent in his case. Just a verbal agreement in both cases that seems to have meant nothing in the big scheme of things. The only difference is the 2 examples I just told about happened in the late 90's and his was this week.

I see side by side all the time. It's not an issue. See Rifleman's example.

What you can get all depends on the circumstances. If they are being fair, you can't expect to get much more. It's harder to show damages to ranchland than development land, improved land, etc. But each case is different. By and large, the pipeline companies see it all the same. That's their flaw.

Last case I tried was in Flower Mound. 8" line. Pipeline company offered $44,000. Jury awarded $794,000. With interest it came to over $900,000.

That is an extreme example. But if we weren't able to get considerably more in many cases, we wouldn't have a job.

This line was already in the ground when this went to court? Where does the interest come from?

Nice job NP, I'd say that was a "small" difference.

It's on appeal so technically its not awarded correct...

"A pipeline company offered $44,000 for a 1.15 acre easement for a 6 inch gathering pipeline, obtained a judgment for $918,779 in a jury trial that is now on appeal."

When is a deal a deal?

I'm reminded of a quote from Richard Rawlings "Fast and Loud" & Gas Monkey Garage.

"In Texas you're born with your nuts and your word, and you gotta keep em both."

44 thousand is a ridiculous amount for 1.15 acre easement. Was there a house or something in the way? How are they claiming so much value?

Ooops. Facts suck sometimes.

I can see the problem here with an "official" acceptance/timing thing. Don't agree with it, but can see the "out" taken.

Been to church.

Appeal dropped. Case over. Money paid.

I grow tired of you calling me a liar rancher. I don't pull facts out of my nether regions like you.

HWYMAN

You say it's ridiculous-without facts. Jury said otherwise-with facts. I don't need to argue the case with you, but when you have a lot of new hurdles to develop a $14,000,000 tract, it damages it.

I have a friend in Vegas does pretty much the same thing, he plays hi-stakes poker with other peoples money.

Take it that it was a commercial tract?

Yes.

Bad analogy. I don't play with their money. That's what the "over and above the offer" means. Since time is my money, technically they are playing with mine.

If you'll notice I asked for facts when I asked where the value was. All I knew or anybody not involved in the case knew was a short tract of easement that in my opinion was way over valued. Had you said it was a 14 million dollar development that would have helped explain things a little. Was this development already in progress and is it still?

Time is his money also, whether he's winning or not he still has to sit at the table. He gets paid to win not to sit.

Not yet thank goodness. Otherwise the award would have likely been much more.

My only point is that putting blind faith in pipeline companies or power line companies or State or whomever is not wise. What they say and what they pay is meaningless. What the facts say is the only thing that matters.

Sorry not following. All I'm saying is my clients get all of their offers so the risk is on me. I'm not playing with their money.

So that leads to another question. How much work had already been put into place to develop this property. I'm assuming proof that the development was in fact going in would have had to have been shown. I'm just trying to understand how this case played out.

Yes. Everyone agreed it was ready to develop. Stuff all around it.

Would they even need on-site proof if the land was wrapped up in a large loan based on business plan that called for its development?

So the developer and end user was all aware and it was a complete deal before litigation on a commercial development ....
Okay...no way

Commission

LOL who's arguing with the fence post now. I don't know what the problem/point is and I don't really care. If you want to understand the case, read the briefs and court opinions online. They weren't kind to the pipeline company.

I did

And your facts are wrong

No. When land is in Flower Mound surrounded by high $$$ development, the proof of it's potential is on the ground. No one disputed it in that case. Sometimes they do. Every case is different.

I don't even know what you are talking about. Are you calling me a liar too? Look it up. Somebody already did. It's all there.

Arguing with a fence post indeed.

So the development is now taking place or has it been shelved? The "it was ready to development" part didn't answer my question. What proof was given that they were going to develop? Was the value determined by a what if it was developed? Was the owner in the business of developing property? I would have loved to be on this jury, I would have drove them nuts with questions.

Got ya. Had to look on a map to see where it was only to realize I hate going by Flower Mound at snails pace in construction.

Surely you guys knew there was more to it, than what NP gave out? I wouldn't expect him to give out every detail of one of his court cases? He gave the basic specifics and that was enough to elude, that he had a positive, factual case against those darn government condemnor's. To get from an offer of 44k to over 900k say's allot. Appeals are always expected when some one looses bad, does not mean the case is not valid, or sound, means it past muster in at least one court..


I don't care for "some attorneys" in "some fields", just as I don't care for every checkout girl at Walmart, but to say they are all bad and not needed is a bit nearsighted. If I get in a bind, I sure "aint" calling "My cousin Vinny", besides I bet NP knows the "taking act" by heart too! LOL


Maybe it is because I don't have any animosity against NP IDK, but at this point I take him pretty much at his word, just as I do many of you fellas, did I miss something? Is it because he just doesn't see some things the way others do?

One more question. Why was interest paid and what was it based on.

Most of your questions are answered by the instructions/definitions in the Court's Charge and the appraisal/damage methodology used by the experts. It's my job to answer those questions with evidence. All property is valued based on its highest and best use, which may or may not be its current use. It's all in the briefs and opinions.

If they offer $44,000, take your land, build the project, and the jury awards $794,000-the law provides interest on the difference (in that case, $750,000) from the date they took your property until the date they pay the full compensation awarded by the jury. That case was on appeal (by them) about 4 years. They lost at every step. Interest added up.

They paid. The case is over.

So was the original offer taken and later taken to court?

Nah, you've never heard me dis all lawyers. I LOVE my attorneys. But, I don't use them for negotiating with O&G's over damages. IF I had development property I might. But I own ranch land. It's not the same.

I think it's unwise to pay someone to do what I can do as good or better. Negotiating ROW's through ranch land falls in that category.

Yeah I know NP would say that he's not being paid out of my pocket. But, litigation takes time. It ties up assets and I KNOW I'm losing money if I'm waiting years to invest. Interest is miniscule in comparison.

The condemnor must deposit the offer into the registry of the court in order to gain possession of the property and build the project. The landowner can either withdraw it or leave it in there to draw interest. Their choice. There are some legal ramifications to withdrawing it that are not germane to our discussion here.

Fair enough Rancher, The difference in land in the metro vs West/South Texas land makes perfect sense. Same laws (constitutional and case law), effect both though when involved in ED. If you can handle it in a O%G easement type deal to your satisfaction, that is what matters.

BTW, I wasn't directing my comments at you per se. Just a general, personal observation. I try to get along and learn off anyone I can if they have something interesting, never know when I may need a fella with a HF, or a ED attorney, at the THF 95% discount of course

And to answer your question Western...again nothing against a honorable Proffesion

Just when you argue against everyone's choices of hunting and weapons and think that your thoughts are above reproach it bites you.

If you are so against certain types of hunting but you are associated with someone who owns one of the nicest high fenced operations in the State it's almost comical.

When someone harvests a animal I am happy for them regardless of where and what weapon was used, as long as it was legal moral and ethical...
And don't put yourself upon a higher ground and superior by your narrow minded comments.

To the OP
Dave has got this, a deal is a deal...Some people are squirrely it happens.

I haven't been following this for a little bit and I'm just too darn lazy to read back through. 'Have one question though: They have lawyers for erectile dysfunction now???

That will get a rise out of a few in this crowd.....

You take positional stances and opinions way too personal. Not everybody has to agree with you. And it doesn't give folks the right to call others liars. As is casually done around here.
This has nothing to do with that stuff.Constantly bringing up other topics on every thread is not only trolling, it's obsessing.

You guys just stalk me around. To no real end other than bitterness. I don't get it.

In court, it could take on a new meaning when the bailiff says....."All rise"

NP, I didn't think you could get business/entrepreneurial value? I thought it only took into account market value of the land, not how it is affected by ED.

Normally, you can't get lost profits/entrepreneurial value-unless the location drives the business and another suitable site is not available.

It was about MV of the land only in that case. What we proved was reduction in value to the raw land because of the additional development costs to caused by the pipeline that any prospective buyer would take into account. Their easement required boring under with utilities, cables encased in steel, etc. Plus it traversed a lot of the frontage where the commercial sites would go. Setback issues, etc. Basically it was a PITA for future development.

NP. You got to let some of us loose once in a while. It would be good for us and probably for you.

NP. When ever you figure that out please tell me because I haven't.

Again, my comments weren't directed at you Scooter,, or anyone in particular, just an observation, trying to catch up.

I bet David has already forgot about this topic (bad deal), done moved on to bigger fish

And when you decide that you want the way many others want to hunt/make a living outlawed, it will get you on several poo poo lists. That's so easy an O&G or ED attorney should be able to decipher it.

Already have two lines on a Kansas Deal
Can assure you
He's always looking

Well, then bound to run in to few lemons, will make the right property even better

Times running out before the permit application

Bribe...

"Hey pot, this is the kettle, you are black".

You've done the same to me more times than I can remember.

DITTO DITTO DITTO - you bring this all on yourself - give me a frickin break! You argue with the wall!

Maybe good for a lawyer but not good on a hunting forum. Go take a break, look at yourself, review your many post on here, and reevaluate. Read the OP and look at where you are now in your post. I have no dog in this fight but this is silly - you are making yourself look bad pure and simple. I am sure to follow will be your comeback but no matter what it is you are the one looking bad here - back up fast. I have known many people who are so smart they are clueless

I just don't think that's the case in general.

Lol. Not so. I don't post a word on most of the threads you participate in. And then I post on the topic at hand. Simply put, there's about 3 or 4 of you guys who think disagreeing with you is a capital offense. That's all.

Re-read all this mess. All I did was defend my profession, answer questions, and dispute accusations and lies with facts. I'll do that every time I'm called out. The "caller-outers" just expect everyone to lay down I guess.....

No Sir - you are not the only one on this forum with an education and financial resources - so don't elevate yourself too quickly

Y'all see ghosts. Seriously.

Got handed the Microphone and wasn't ready to sing..
Gets old

I hunt with a DEAR friend and he will have NO PROBLEM with using his name CMC, he loves a traditional Bow and homemade arrows and prefers a Old School and when I say Old School..He is a true Renaissance Man, he was born 100 years to late..But could hunt side by side with him with a Matthews that's faster than snot and he would say never say a word other than good shot Amigo. Same if I used a smoke stick, Dave prefers a Bow and will NOT use a pellet of Protein, and he knows I will pile up enough Feed to feed Taiwan but other than a polite discussion would never be combative. STX could tell you how many turds a Doe would drop consuming 2 pounds of Protein...ETC ETC
People have different means and methods its the Demographics, Traditions and personal preference. Hunting is your "Refuge"...enjoy it

I don't dispute any of that last post. IDK what the point of it is, but I don't take issue with it.

I don't think disagreeing with me is a capital offense. Dave3575, Chad, NTRP, dee, Judd, and others have disagreed with me, and I take no offense. They have a valid opinion. They also have the knowledge to back up their opinion. On some of my topics, you do not. When you're in over your head the best thing to do is stop digging.

Go back and read my words defending the goodness and the necessity of lawyers. I have a cousin five years my senior that just got appointed as a disctrict judge, and her husband (a lawyer) works for a federal judge. I love them both very much and respect them and their expertise very much. They would also never argue with me about shooting a rifle very small and/or very far.

One other thing I have observed after living a third of my life at a Fire station with 5-9 other men, for 24 hours straight.

When you are the guy everyone has a problem with, YOU are the problem!

NG dont you see? you cannot help yourself -

you dont get it - you really cannot help yourself

AND with that closing statement...

I rest my case...
When you can wear out 3 pair of Snake Boots a year, put 80K on a truck and wade azz deep through Cactus, sling feed to your hands bleed, study, analyze and work your back to the bone other than reading Field and Stream at the Barber and running up a Hill and hearing that one.. (not that I am against a Outfitter, love em)

Your post (like many) illustrates my point. You say I should "stop digging" because "I am in over my head." That's your opinion. Fine. But that's just your opinion. I have as much right to tap my keyboard as you.

And that no one should have the temerity to argue with you about shooting a rifle. (Because you are the last word I presume.) Again, it's a discussion forum. Get over it.

Lol. I was long gone from all this. Get called out. And I'm the one who can't help myself.

You da man. Good for you.

Your assumptions about me may be a wee bit off. Maybe because, unlike others, I don't have a need to throw my junk out on the table at the drop of a hat.

Geez. Still not getting it. Plenty of people can argue with me about rifles and making them go, but not YOU! It is not your field of expertise. Be the same as me giving you advice on being an attourney because I have been in a courtroom and I have read parts of Texas law.

Go ahead, you can have the last word. Can't help those that don't want help.