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

AmeriGas Partners LP Message Board

dar200 174 posts  |  Last Activity: 8 minutes ago Member since: Nov 16, 1998
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Thoughts on Preferreds

    by mysonchino 21 hours ago

    All of the factors cited as warranting a discount to the stock prices (nrf & nsam) are the same now as not quite a year ago when both hit record highs.

    Yeah, macro market factors have changed to the negative, so one would expect declines in line with peers.
    But both have declined far, far more than peers. Why the excessive decline? To me, it's the stink. Tutes are still voting with their feet, big time.

  • Reply to

    Thoughts on Preferreds

    by mysonchino 21 hours ago
    dar200 dar200 2 hours 30 minutes ago Flag

    "Anyone have a credible explanation for such a drastic decline?"

    The stink.

  • Reply to


    by octopusink Feb 3, 2016 10:36 AM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 11:48 AM Flag

    Here's a clip from a Reuters article:

    W YORK (Reuters) - Orange Capital, the activist hedge fund firm led by New York-based real estate investment manager Daniel Lewis, is shutting down after a year of poor performance, according to people familiar with the situation.

    Its main hedge fund was down 7.4 percent net of fees in 2015 through November, according to investor information seen by Reuters. Performance for December and January was not available.
    A group of stocks in Orange’s portfolio, worth about $1.3 billion as of September 30, according to a public filing, declined substantially over 2015.
    Bellatrix Exploration, a Canadian oil and gas company where Lewis is a director and had pushed for change, saw its stock drop about 60 percent. NorthStar Asset Management Group, a New York-based real estate and investment manager, fell 46 percent. And Amaya Inc., a Canadian entertainment technology company, declined nearly 40 percent.

  • Reply to

    townsend closed

    by octopusink Feb 2, 2016 6:56 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 11:08 AM Flag

    The face of the 8-K does not disclose the 10 cent limitation. That comes from the loan agreement which is Exhibit 10.2 attached to the 8-K. I pasted the provision on the IV board this morning.

    The loan agreement also limits buybacks to 100 million worth for 2016 (post-loan) and 2017 combined. That too is pasted on the IV board as a reply to "NSAM 8-K"

  • Reply to

    NSAM 8-K

    by dar200 Feb 2, 2016 9:11 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 10:08 AM Flag

    Two follow-up posts on IV board with copy & pastes from loan agreement. This shows you can get useful info from reading documents filed with the SEC.

  • Reply to

    2015 Tax Info

    by empire29_lake Feb 2, 2016 10:52 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 3, 2016 9:43 AM Flag

    2015 common dividend = 99.923% ROC. Whoopee!!! I overpaid my estimated taxes. No estimated tax payment in April.

    Preferred dividends = 100% taxable, BUT 53.781% are qualified for special tax rate.

    Here is an example of why preferred stock is good for common stock tax-wise. Preferred carries out taxable income first. Preferred dividends are 100% taxable before the first penny of common dividend is taxable.

  • dar200 by dar200 Feb 2, 2016 9:11 PM Flag

    Preliminary tidbits on IV board.

  • Reply to

    VNQ up 4%, NRF down 3%

    by mattmateuchi Feb 1, 2016 1:43 PM
    dar200 dar200 Feb 1, 2016 3:07 PM Flag

    I think you misplaced a decimal point on up .7% and near its hod. Happens to the best of us, including me a short while ago.

    Your point is valid though. NRF underperforms its peers again and again and again. It's the stink.

  • Reply to

    New Land and Buildings letter

    by dar200 Jan 29, 2016 9:13 AM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 29, 2016 2:01 PM Flag

    I think Land and Buildings is fishing for some greenmail. After their first letter I looked at the nasdaq site for their 9/30 holdings of nsam. They owned none. Now nsam says they recently acquired less than 1% of the stock. If 194 million outstanding is correct, L&B owns less than 1.94 million.

    Buybacks can be done in "privately negotiated transactions". This is what I think L&B is fishing for.
    "Take us out for a fast 25% (or whatever their target is) profit and we go away." Proxy fights are expensive. A fast profit to go away takes cost and risk out of the process.

    I suppose we'll see how this plays out.

  • 1/28 press release announcing paltry 3 cent dividend says scco 88.8% owned by grupo vs 87.5% in 10/22/15 press release announcing 3Q dividend. Grupo using dividend money to buy out non grupo shareholders without paying a take-out premium.

    I predict grupo forces all out before end of 2016 for no more than a 15% premium.

  • Posted on IV board where they allow a post to be comprised of nothing but a copy & paste.

  • Short interest at 1/15 settlement
    Short interest from 12/31/15 settlement date to 1/15/16 settlement (1/12 trade date)

    NRF.......8.139 million at 12/31 to 5.984 million at 1/15, down 26.5%

    NSAM.....6.263 to 7.154 million, up 14.2%

    NRE.....1.310 million to .558 million, down 57.4%

    Of course, during the first 7 trading days in Jan (thru 1/12) NRF and NRE got creamed much worse than NSAM.
    Shorts cashed in big profits in nrf and nre. It might be a sign that shorts sensed a bottom in both so they covered extensively.

  • Reply to

    NSAM Up 2%.nrf down 5%

    by mattmateuchi Jan 25, 2016 3:26 PM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 25, 2016 4:27 PM Flag

    And where in that post was I "...... speculating a bump in divi to possibly $.82" ?? Where in that post did I even mention the dividend?

    BTW, "suppose" in an illustration = "assume", not speculate.

  • Reply to

    NSAM Up 2%.nrf down 5%

    by mattmateuchi Jan 25, 2016 3:26 PM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 25, 2016 3:42 PM Flag

    I suggest you read it again, slowly this time, to increase comprehension. Before you do, please learn the difference between "illustrate" and "speculate".

  • Reply to

    todays sec filing- tea leaves

    by octopusink Jan 22, 2016 5:38 PM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 23, 2016 10:48 AM Flag

    191 million includes assumed conversion of partnership units and vested RSUs into common on a 1 for 1 basis. 183.4 million common stock outstanding in yesterday's SEC filing does NOT include assumed conversions of common stock equivalents.

    Rounding to the nearest 10th of a million, there were 181.8 million common shares outstanding at 9/30/15 (from face of balance sheet in 3Q earnings release). They subsequently issued the last 7.1 million shares under the forward sales agreement. So, 181.8 + 7.1 = 188.9 minus 183.4 as of 1/21/16 = about 5.5 million shares bought back between 11/11 or 12 (couple of days after earnings release) and 1/21/16. Don't know when purchases were made but it doesn't look like buybacks will have more than a 1 million or so decrease in 4Q weighted average shares outstanding.

    However, for 1Q 2016, 5.5 million shares bought back will have at least a 5 million decrease in 1Q weighted average. To illustrate, assume 191 million diluted shares out for 1Q earning 80 cents. That results in aggregate cad of 152.8 million. Now divide 152.8 million by 186 million and cad per share = 82.15 cents. A 75 cent dividend = 93.75% of 80 cents. It is 91.30% of 82.15 cents.

    5.5 million shares x 3.00 annualized dividend = 16.5 million of cad which can be used to buy back more stock.
    At 13.00 per share, 16.5 million buys back another 1.269 million shares.

    Yup, yesterday's filing had a big tea leaf in it.

  • Reply to

    land and buildings

    by octopusink Jan 22, 2016 9:35 AM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 22, 2016 1:30 PM Flag

    Yes. You are leaving out the revenues from the nontraded reits including those not yet selling and the income from their unconsolidated joint ventures. Yes, nsam has expenses, but another owner could probably run the book with much less compensation expense, mainly in the executive ranks.

  • Reply to

    land and buildings

    by octopusink Jan 22, 2016 9:35 AM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 22, 2016 11:29 AM Flag

    Had you kept your nsam stock (right pocket), 1.00 out of your left pocket (nrf) becomes 96 cents in your right pocket. 4 cents is lost to the cost of carrying a second public company.

    The left pocket trades at 10 times cad so losing a buck takes 10.00 off the price. The right pocket trades at 15 times cad so 96 cents adds 14.40 to your right pocket. Netting the change in both pockets adds 4.40 to your paper wealth. This is the reason for a separate nsam. Europe was supposed to trade at European multiples, an erroneous (so far) assumption.

    Unfortunately, management pigged-out with the share compensation, probably thinking they could get away with it due to the increase in combined market cap (as of last December). The issuance of so many shares to an excessively greedy management diluted the 96 cents in your right pocket to 80 cents. (Numbers are just illustrative, not actual). Still a winner, but not what it should have been due to management greed.

  • Reply to

    land and buildings

    by octopusink Jan 22, 2016 9:35 AM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 22, 2016 10:07 AM Flag

    I disagree with recombination. That just gets nsam earnings trading at nrf's low multiples.

    It ain't hate for external management. If external management were hated so much, why did nsam hit 24.91 per share in early March 2015 shortly after reporting 27 cents of cad for 4Q 2014?

    While external management does cause a discount in the managed's multiple because the manager's profit is subtracted from the managed's profit, that's not the reason for the price collapse, imo.
    The dive started the Monday after the Friday night filing of the proxy statements disclosing obscenely excessive compensation and the dive accelerated the Monday after the Friday night filing of the prior Wednesday's shareholder votes on compensation. While it was already suspected that this management was being sneaky with the Friday night filings, the delay in reporting the shareholder votes on compensation proved the management was trying to hide things and could no longer be trusted.

    The stink of this management is the cause of tutes voting with their feet and that's what caused the price collapse.

  • Reply to

    Something new today

    by dar200 Jan 21, 2016 12:08 PM
    dar200 dar200 Jan 21, 2016 4:02 PM Flag

    So much for that theory. None bounced from last smackdown, especially NSAM. Pathetic.

  • Recoveries from multiple smackdowns. We finally have some bargain hunters.

    So far today, NRF has had 3 smackdowns and recovered from all. NRE 2 and NSAM 4 with the same result.

    Nice to see for a change. Getting very tired of smackdown = staydown.

38.01-0.48(-1.25%)4:02 PMEST