Insight
Rejecting the myth of the 'fast follower' strategy in US shale
*Please note that this report only includes an Excel data file if this is indicated in "What's included" below
Report summary
The 'fast follower' strategy has long been considered the preeminent way to approach shale – simply follow the best geoscience companies with your own top-tier land team. Doing so should reduce subsurface exploration risk and allow fast followers to avoid paying peak acreage prices. What if it doesn't? We investigate the full-cycle value of shale asset deals again by adding 17 shale projects, including ten tight oil assets, to our popular study from last year. We dive into full cycle shale economics to debunk this myth and tackle other key issues including: • If being second in line isn't the way to win, what is? How does legacy acreage or a JV partner affect returns? • Which companies have created or destroyed value on a full-cycle basis? • Tight oil has better metrics than shale gas, but by how much?
Table of contents
-
Introduction
- Key takeaways from analysing 17 additional transactions:
- Differentiating between oil-focused and gas-focused assets
- Notable projects and deals
- A consistent methodology
- A clear-cut summary metric
- M&A
- Concluding thoughts
-
Appendix
- What deals did we add?
- Strategy tags
Tables and charts
This report includes the following images and tables:
- Oil versus gas project value ranges
- Aggregate PV by strategy, indexed to incumbent acreage holder values
- Updated project value ranges, including newly modelled projects by approach
- Projects added - defined by the seller and asset
What's included
This report contains:
