"KMP has a capex budget [one billion] higher than the money is expects to generate in 2005 [39 million] - then its distribution is too high?"
I admire your sangfroid in the face of a $961 million cash deficit in 2005. For a 10% increase in the distribution, that is some kind of risk for the reward.
As for whether the $1 billion investment is accretive, let me ask you this, since you were so kind as to answer my last question: The analyst earnings estimate for 2006 is 10c above this year's earnings, or about $22 million increase year over year. Would you consider $22 million a good return for $1 billion in capital investment?
BillyJoe asked: "How much money does KMP expect to generate in 2005 before the limited partner distribution and after expansion capex?"
Sounds like you are trying to pick on someone who has admitted accounting deficiency disorder in prior posts. But that looks like an easy question.
First third of question [How much money does KMP expect to generate in 2005]
From Q2 press release: "Excluding legal and environmental settlements, KMP has generated distributable cash flow in excess of distributions of approximately $51 million through the first six months of 2005 (which would have surpassed the company's published annual budget of $39 million). Including legal and environmental settlements, KMP generated distributable cash flow in excess of distributions of approximately $18 million through the first two quarters."
Second third of question - take LP units [209,465,000] times distribution amounts [74 cents in Q1 and 76 cents in Q2], then add that sum [$155 million plus $159 million = $314 million] to $18 million [generating a sum of $332 million].
Final third of your question [expansion capex]
From Q2 press release: "We also are on track to exceed $1 billion in 2005 in acquisitions and capital expansion projects. Through the first two quarters, KMP announced approximately $400 million in acquisitions and our published annual budget calls for more than $600 million in capital expansion projects."
Isn't that something like a "did you walk to school or did you bring your lunch" kind of question? Are you saying that because KMP has a capex budget [one billion] higher than the money is expects to generate in 2005 [39 million] - then its distribution is too high? I thought the important questions were  Are the expansions accretive?  What are the before and after coverage ratios on interest payments and dividends?
factoids, you sanctimonious idiot, I have an easy question for you. How much money does KMP expect to generate in 2005 before the limited partner distribution and after expansion capex? This is a real softball, and to make it simpler I'll leave out the $400 million in acquisitions. Of course, if you can't answer, you have no place passing judgment on my analyses or investing in this stock.
billyjoerobidoux wrote: "As for institutional ownership, kmp has 22% institutional ownership, per nasdaq. That has to be the lowest institutional ownership for any american comporation with a market cap greater than $10 billion."
Billyjoe - compare apples to apples - compare other MLP's institutional ownership ratios. [And KMP comes of better - but not stellar - in this comparison.] Of course a K-1 producing enity will have lower institutional ownership. Duh! Your seeking to indict KMP for its lower ratio - saying that such a low ratio is some kind of proof the KMP is shaddy and the pro's are avoiding it - that's just stupid.
Kinda like your question about gas volumes - which was kinda stupid.
I would like someone to drive down KMPs price. But billyjoe, you don't have any street cred here because of your past flimsy acusation a day misconduct. Unlike MC Hammer - who was too legit to quit - YOU should seek other avenues of employment.
I might point out that one of the settlements was for a case involving KNE and not KMI. This case was PRIOR to Kinder's leadership.
That is after 5 seconds of reading the article.
I find it curious my intelligence is insulted by posters who freely admit they have no idea how KMP makes its money. As for institutional ownership, kmp has 22% institutional ownership, per nasdaq. That has to be the lowest institutional ownership for any american comporation with a market cap greater than $10 billion. as for analyst recommendations, all the analysts do is downgrade it like RBC or, like today by deutsche bank, initiate at neutral. as for the auditor, I've already listed a $5.5 million payment for stock fraud, a $185 million fraud that Kinder covered up as general counsel at Enron, a $25 million settlement this year after being found guilty of bribery and theft, and a current investigation for skimming up to $15 million in coal from customer accounts. And that was after about 15 minutes of googling. Do you think Kinder Morgan has no other secrets to hide?
Verylblakely you wrote,
>>I would love to see someone refute Billy based on a knowledgable and calculated analysis of his assertions, but for some odd reason no has yet to make this attempt.
We know him as a disgruntled or fired employee. He has been doing his propaganda for a very long time. So he could not have been a short or he would be broke.
We do not answer his gibberish because anyone who knows KMP has put him on ignore a long time ago.
Thank you for your post.