Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. Message Board

dar200 123 posts  |  Last Activity: 23 hours ago Member since: Nov 16, 1998
  • Reply to

    Read The Whole Release Before You React!

    by newguy7001 Feb 25, 2016 8:29 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 25, 2016 10:11 AM Flag

    Well, they have announced a partial liquidation. They are going to sell assets, pay down debt to reduce leverage ratio and buy back stock. I'll wait for year end numbers to calculate hypothetical effects on cad and nav.

    In the meantime, we have an equity reit paying a safe 1.60. At 13, it's a 12.3% yield. At 16, it's a 10% yield.

    IMO, their greed and sneakiness destroyed the company, but the price is what it is. I'm a yield investor, so I'm not selling.

  • Reply to

    Office Building Prices in SF may Have Peaked

    by mattmateuchi Feb 23, 2016 8:29 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 24, 2016 11:31 AM Flag

    I never get tired of correcting people who post things which are not true, especially things about me.

  • Reply to

    4Q report

    by dar200 Feb 23, 2016 1:26 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 24, 2016 10:25 AM Flag

    I don't have a feel for daily RV rates because I've never experienced them first hand. Daily boat dockage rates in Narragansett Bay, I'm expert, but RVs, not a clue. To me, 20 bucks per night for a 40 ft motor home at the height of the Florida season seems too, too cheap. A 40 ft boat pays about 150 per day (plus metered electricity) to dock in Newport in the summer.

    I welcome first hand reports of NRF communities on this board. Is it clean? Is it full? Are amenities attractive?
    Was management and staff (if observed) competent, polite, friendly and helpful? Is it a place you would go to again?

  • Reply to

    January 2017 $3 Puts

    by kumarsn99 Feb 23, 2016 8:50 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 24, 2016 9:34 AM Flag

    Delete "care to" and you have a correct statement. Another case of presuming a fact which is not in evidence.

    Kumar did not care to explain why he posted the post the way he did. Perhaps it is just a lack of English composition skills.

  • dar200 by dar200 Feb 23, 2016 1:26 PM Flag

    Very good report all around, imo.

    SUI = get rich slowly.

  • Reply to

    reckoning day tomorrow

    by zooplankton200 Feb 23, 2016 10:59 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 23, 2016 11:50 AM Flag

    Correction to correction. You know I'm a stickler for precision. NRF's 2015 taxable income barely exceeded about 84 million of preferred dividends.

  • Reply to

    dividend last year

    by ruswise Feb 22, 2016 10:19 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 22, 2016 10:29 AM Flag

    As the lawyers say, "You are presuming a fact which is not in evidence."

    Rus will wait until Friday to stop beating his wife.

  • Reply to

    message to management

    by zooplankton200 Feb 20, 2016 10:35 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 21, 2016 10:45 AM Flag

    "Well NRF is paying NSAM CAD which is book value."

    WRONG!!

    I just beat you up until you finally posted part of the correct fee schedule. I assume you read what you copied.
    Just how stupid are you?

  • Reply to

    message to management

    by zooplankton200 Feb 20, 2016 10:35 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 20, 2016 1:35 PM Flag

    I could not agree more with that statement, octo.

    In addition, they could use the cash from a dividend cut to buy property yielding, say, a ridiculous 4%, pay nsam 1.5% on the undistributed cad thus adding 2.5% to cad. With the same number of shares out, such a terrible return to nrf would actually be accretive to cad per share, thus causing more incentive fee payable to nsam.

    We all know that the bigshots own a much greater percentage of nsam than they own in nrf. Thus, a dollar out of their left pocket (nrf) becomes, to illustrate only, 1.15 in their right pocket (nsam). As the respective boards are currently constituted, any dividend cut just opens a door to self enrichment by the bigshots at our expense.

    If the cad per share is there, the dividend should remain 75 cents.

  • dar200 dar200 Feb 19, 2016 3:03 PM Flag

    When a prostitute becomes a faithful nun, how long does she have to be a faithful nun before she is no longer thought of as a prostitute?

    Many of these financial articles are not much better than some of the junk posted here. The most reliable research is done first hand with original source documents. No middleman = no errors from using middleman data.

  • Reply to

    Management fee Revised Nov. 02 2015

    by hanakookie Feb 18, 2016 8:52 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 18, 2016 11:37 AM Flag

    You said: "In the past you have stated in complaints no matter what you will not sell."

    I will pay you $100,000 if you can find a post by me where I said I will not sell "no matter what." You pay me $1,000 if you can't. That's 100 to 1 odds in case you can't calculate odds.

    Not only are you very stupid, you are also a liar.

    And you STILL have not posted a complete, correct fee schedule.

    The only reason you have not joined my iggy list is I will not let your trash posts here stand unchallenged.

  • Bottom line ffo, cad and income is a manipulated number. Gladstone waives whatever fees are necessary to leave ffo sufficient to cover the 1.50 dividend and satisfy bank loan requirements on dividend coverage.
    Thus, the real measure of GOOD's recovery from recession vacancies, imo, is the per share fee waiver.
    This is calculated by dividing the amount of waived fees by weighted average shares outstanding.
    On an annual basis, fees waived per share were:

    2013 26.3 cents
    2014 17.5
    2015 11.8

    So, dividend coverage is getting better. If all continues to go well, maybe operations for 2016 will cover the dividend without a fee waiver. Only after that can one dream of a dividend increase.

    IMO, the dividend is more than safe at 1.50 due to Gladstone's ego. He loves to brag about never reducing or skipping a dividend. IMO, he will continue to waive whatever fees are necessary to maintain 1.50 and satisfy the banks.

    I love the mostly tax deferred cash flow.

  • Reply to

    Management fee Revised Nov. 02 2015

    by hanakookie Feb 18, 2016 8:52 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 18, 2016 9:42 AM Flag

    This is incredible:

    "So my conclusion is to grow CAD to $6B ........"

    I am no longer leaning toward malevolent intent. I conclude you really are stupid. 6 billion of cad. Gimmee-a-break stupid.

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 4:01 PM Flag

    This entire post is Clinton on display: Deflect, divert, attack the messenger. That still leaves uncorrected junk you posted early on in this thread.

    Answer the question: Since you took so much time to post a junk fee schedule here and now you claim you have found the correct fee schedule, why do you not post the correct fee schedule?

    And you did not spell "your" incorrectly. You used that word incorrectly. There is a difference, but you don't appear to know that.

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 3:24 PM Flag

    Bengazi: "What difference does it make...?" Your teacher?

    My position in NRF is irrelevant to the junk you posted to this thread. Another Clintonism.

    Since you took so much time to post incorrect junk and then try to deflect away from YOUR trash post, why don't you take the time to post the correct fee structure, or don't you know how?

    BTW, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're" and then practice proper usage before using either term here again.

    I am having difficulty believing you are as stupid as your posts here indicate and am now leaning toward malevolent intent.

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 2:39 PM Flag

    And page 40 pdf page 45 is also more than 1.5 years old. Do you not understand what "AMENDED" means or is this a continued deflection away from the junk you posted in the opening post to this thread?

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 2:07 PM Flag

    Why don't you try the amended management contract executed just before the NRE spinoff instead of a prospectus summary which is more than 1.5 years old?

    GI-GO (look it up).

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 10:32 AM Flag

    I get offended by you posting erroneous junk as if it were fact. When called on your errors, you do not correct them, instead referring to a document of unknown date. You go to the Clinton School of Deflection?

    Deflect, attack the messenger because you can't attack the message, deflect again. THAT's what offends me.

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 17, 2016 9:46 AM Flag

    Well, you and many in your office should take a reading comprehension course. After all of you complete that, take a composition course. If you comprehend what you read, then you cannot write well enough to transcribe facts correctly.

    Learn the difference between cad and undistributed cad. Since when does NRF pay a 10 million fee TO Aerium?

    Read the facts as many times as you have to in order to comprehend. Then practice your writing skills until I tell you it is written correctly.

    Until then, your recitation of nrf management fees to nsam is trash.

  • Reply to

    Management fee

    by hanakookie Feb 16, 2016 2:58 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 16, 2016 3:56 PM Flag

    Wrong!

    Try reading it carefully next time.

ETP
35.43+1.27(+3.72%)Apr 29 4:03 PMEDT