this is true. probably less than one tenth of one percent or even less of the total investors in kmi read this bb. actually it is about the same 10 people and that is it. to write here with an agenda and expect to influence the overall outcome of kmi in anyway is silly.
they signed an agreemnet to provide services to nucor. a side added benefit is that it brings in terminal busineess growth. great. what is with old coal assets.
always good to expand and diversify a little. a $900 million service contract is great if it brings in more than it costs to perform. profit is profit. and it brings in more terminal business also. growth is growth and if it is long term and profitable, great. does not matter if they deviate and of course they are going to issue a news release and should. why would you think going into a $900 million deal for profitable services as well as an added benefit of bringing customers into and growing their terminal business would equate to their terminal segment as it relates to energy being in trouble. does not make sense.
i do not get it. it says they signed a contract to provide nucor SERVICES. and of course, give them access to their terminals and grow that business. all good. but it is a contract basically for services, that is not an asset to sell for cash. it is a service contract. and you do not grow a terminal business to sell assets for cash, you grow a terminal business to generate cash. does not make sense ocelotz508.
depends. i think kmi will be higher 10 years from now or some time in between so holding should be good. as far as new money @ $18, that should grow, of course too. but a lot also depends on how much of your portfolio is in kmi percentage wise. you should never ever put all your money into one stock. if something unforseen bad happens and it tanks, you can ruin your savings. never put all your money in one company even if it seems guaranteed. if you have a majority of your portfolio in kmi. then better to hold that if you want for 10 years and look for good opportunities elsewhere for new money. there are plenty of great companies to consider for 10 year investments.
according to the balance sheet goodwill has been about $23 billion for 3 or 4 years. what do mean it has not. it is right on the balance sheet for years.
i agree but if you look at the march 2016 balance sheet after 2 quarters of this, nothing changed. assets were down a little a liabilities up. cash was not way up. why was not there a noticable decline in debt levels last quarter with 2 full quarters. nothing changed.
then how is the balance sheet shaping up acording to the title of this thread if debt nevers goes down. goodwill has been $23 billion for years. and at this point have not added any that much in new assets.
they have $49 billion in debt. how much of this sale will go to debt payment and how much would it actually take down debt.
$61 billion in assets plus $23 billion in goodwill. they added 30% of total assets with that. i know payment above a certain value adds goodwill, but $23 billion is excessive to say the least. sounds like they got hosed.
i would say your right on.
they need the cash for 2017.
and people think the dividend will be going right back up.
balance sheet is about the same as ever. $49 billion in debt. $61 billion in real assets. then they add $23 billion to artificially raise the book value. how is it shaping up if not much has changed.