I already followed up this initial post with another (above) in which I corrected myself as I hadn't at first noticed he said this was an IRA.
"For whatever reason IRS has contacted a lot of CEP holders."
What is your source for that statement?
Distributions by MLPs to foreign owners will be taxed at full ordinary income rates. He can probably get it back (if that's his only US income) by filing a US income tax return. That's why they withhold the tax - to make people like him file a US tax return.
"The distributions (dividends) that you received have nothing to do with cost basis. Distributions are taxed as income for the year they are received (unless they are received in a tax sheltered account such as IRA). The only exception is if you reinvested those distribution into additional shares. Otherwise you just subtract the net received from the sale from the net price you paid"
Wow, all completely wrong - didn't even get a single point correct. Don't try doing your own taxes will you.
jrad above gives the correct story and of course knows what he is talking about being a tax professional himself.
stupid, lame excuse for your losses. The fact is, as everyone can see, that I have been warning and I have been right. Or don't you consider 70% losses in a year with no hope of recovery as significant? Was I lying when I warned everyone over the last year that there would be steep losses coming? Those who listened saved themselves losses and some have publicly thanked me for it on this board.
You, on the other hand, have been telling brazen lies in an attempt to sucker naive people in. For example, your claim on the EROC board of "massive insider buying" when in fact the SEC filings showed only insider sales. That was a clear LIE. Or your attempts to convince people there will still be drilling at ECT when the trust itself has issued press releases stating there will not. WHY the lies? Why try to trick people? What is your motive for making demonstrably false statements (ie. lies).
P.S. The idea that anyone is paid to write negative comments on yahoo is pathetic and a lame attempt to justify to yourself your huge losses which you could have avoided had you not been too stubborn to listen to me. Nothing you or I or anyone writes on this board has the slightest impact on the price and you know it. But at least I can say I have helped a few avoid big losses that would never have been recovered. You even lie to yourself to avoid taking blame for your avoidable losses. Much easier to blame it on mysterious bashers and conspiracies than admit to yourself you didn't bother to do due diligence and so threw your money away.
Those who listened to me saved themselves a lot of money.
Those like oroplata68/vattars (same poster, different handle) lost 70% on ECT and 50% on EROC over the last year or so.
The dumbest are the ones who don't want to learn and refuse to believe even what the trust itself goes to pains to point out in the prospectus and press releases.
P.S. I will probably buy some ECT below $7 and EROC below $5 as the potential return becomes positive down there. EROC can recover in time if they get some better management although they may have to dilute unitholders yet again. ECT will never recover but will still pay declining distributions for a number more years so you can make money IF you buy at a low enough price (that price going lower with every distribution paid out as every distribution reduces the future income stream and hence the value of the units).
Work? I'm not trying to make anything work, simply explaining to a few dullards what most in the market already know. How did they know? Because the trust's own press releases explained it - that there is no more drilling and production (and therefore distributions) will decline steeply. And I've been saying it since the price was close to $20. People who didn't listen have lost almost 70% of their principal since then, so what is it that's not working? Anyone with half a brain can see who has been correct and who has been hopelessly and catastrophically wrong. Similar story on EROC where you have lost 50% of your principal over the last year, a loss you would have saved if you'd listened to me and others. Don't you think a little self examination is in order as to why you are still disputing what is clear to everyone now with the market value reflecting it?
Actually I only posted this idea for the first time today. But people here seem much more interested in debating who said what and when (what did the CEO say in the CC?, what did liza say the price might be?, is liza really a CS analyst posting incognito?) than actually discussing topics which could be of import for their investment returns. The board loves squabbling and bickering much more than they are interested in discussing things relevant to the investment.
You are being ridiculous with this "he said, she said" stuff.
If you're dead set on debating what was said you need to locate the post in question as I post a lot and can't remember everything I ever said. I am pretty sure though that I never suggested ALDW was going down anywhere near that level imminently. In fact I seel to recall suggesting that the no distribution may already be priced in and there might be little further downside. So I really don't think I said what you claim I did. Perhaps you are confusing me with another poster. If you can't locate the specific post, then forget it.
But, think about this. The price has rebounded for now. But there are credible forecasts of up to 3 zero (or very low) distributions in a row. One already declared, Q4 may be non-zero but still much lower than many are expecting (see my post on the WTI-LLS spread) and the following one may be zero due to a major planned downtime. Fast forward to May and say distributions for the last 3 quarters have been say, zero, 8c and zero. What do you think the price might be then? Do you think it will have maintained the recent uptrend, or will many investors have given up and sold? It may be exactly the wrong time to be selling then as the period of stronger distributions may follow, but many retail unitholders won't be following the details. For them it will be 3 strikes and they are out. So I am not making a prediction, but I could easily imagine a scenario where 3 weak distributions in a row results in significant downside to the unit price. Do you disagree?
I didn't listen to that call so didn't hear the comment. But I would suggest that anyone who heard it should have been sceptical because it runs counter to the terms outlined in the prospectus. This is a variable distribution MLP and the prospectus clearly stated that in some quarters there might be no cash available for distribution.
If someone makes an off the cuff comment in a CC which directly contradicts the prospectus, you should have the sense to wonder if that is really what he meant. Even a CEO can say something he didn't mean to.
Now if they put out a press release saying they will definitely pay a distribution even if there is no dcf, then I'd listen. However that might be a signal to sell the units as they would not be managing the company prudently.
Just before I head home and probably won't check in here again for a few days, I posted my idea on why you guys might be too optimistic based on the widening WTI-Brent spread to the IV MLP board and solicited feedback. So far, I got one response.
Here's what I posted there:
"Posters on the MLP refinery boards (NTI, ALDW, CVRR, CLMT) are getting all giddy due to the re-widening of the Brent-WTI spreads). I understand the idea of using that spread as an approximator for refinery margins given that crude input costs will be correlated with WTI (depending on refinery location) and that refined products can be sold at world prices (Brent).
However, the last time we has a WTI-Brent spread in this range, LLS was tracking Brent whereas it is now highly correlated with WTI. Earlier in 2013 when we had WTI-Brent spreads $15, WTI-LLS was also $15. Now WTI-LLS is at most a few dollars. Considering especially refineries located in the Gulf region or Texas, I would think that WTI-LLS might be a better indicator as refined product prices will tend to track the prices of imported product which is now lower because we don't have as high import demand.
So, am I correct in thinking that the people hyping the refiners based on a widening WTI-Brent spread are over optimistic and perhaps they should be instead noting that WTI-LLS is only a few dollars and so maybe margins really aren't that much better than Q3 after all?"
and here's the single response so far:
"The answer is...it depends. It depends on the refinery product mix, where it sources feedstocks, where it refineries are located, and where it markets its product.
But as a general comment, you are pointing in the right direction."
Feel free to discuss, I'll check in again in a few days.
and not I'm heading off and probably won't check in for a few days. So you can read what you want into my lack of response. All it really means is that I'm trying to cut down message board activity to twice a week.
If I say "If the sun explodes, we will all die", does that mean that I'm predicting we will all die tomorrow?
See, the clause that begins with 'if' is important.
And in the context of investments, it is important to consider what could happen, if only to ensure you won't be wiped out in the unlikely event that it does. It's called risk assessment.
for once walrath is defending me.
Is this the real walrath or the fake one?
Yes, even CEO's can misspeak occasionally and say something they didn't intend to convey.
" She has said in the past that she has a following on this board."
I don't remember ever claiming that either.
As for timing, you should know that I post on almost all the MLP boards all the time. I've been positing on all these refinery boards (NTI, CVRR, ALDW) since the boards were created (and commenting on other boards about them before the boards were open). I haven't really changed my stance in that whole time which is years. So your comments about timing are way off. Ever since they IPO's I have been on record saying that the refinery cycle was at a historic peak (no coincidence they all came out in such a short space of time) and that soon margins and hence distributions would be dropping and significantly so. I had been saying that for years as walrath can verify because we had the debate on the WHZ board before NTI or ALDW had their own boards. You probably only think I just started saying it because you haven't been here long.
":Never used the word "basher." And I never claimed you were a "short seller."
It's hard to keep track of who is whom. I do get called those names a lot and it is always false. I have never been short shares/units on anything ever. On the other hand I am short puts on a whole bunch of securities all the time as I have explained elsewhere.
Well, I don't recall precisely what I have posted and when, but I don't believe I would ever have suggested a $5 price target except in the context of extended period of no distributions (like in the case of a refinery accident). It is you and others who seem to be raising the topic of $5 price, not me - my main focus today was questioning whether WTI-Brent is really a bad indicator now and we should be looking at WTI-LLS which is painting quite a different picture.
Well, when I post almost any little thing on the NTI board about my trades and then come back a few days later, I typically see the thread has about 75 responses. So people are following whether they agree with me or not.
Oh, I have disclosed that I am short puts many times and long before 3 weeks ago. However I am using them a little different than you probably imagine. I am not using them to "go long". I roll the puts forward every 3 months indefinitely for additional premium. I have no intention of ever being assigned units. So in that sense it is a neutral position for me - my strategy will continue whether the price goes up or down. The premiums are good on these refinder MLPs because they are so volatile.
You are being silly about me being a CS analyst. The reason I was gloating on the NTI board was because I had maintained that CS were likely going to be close with their estimate because (blah blah blah) and that hardly anyone believed it. So I was simply gloating about being proven correct once again. I had no stake in whether they were correct or not (except that I am also short puts on NTI as I have written extensively on that board).
Really is a bit silly to accuse people of being CS analysts. I might like to be, but I'm just a retail investor focussed on the MLP sector. I have no other forum beyond yahoo and IV message boards.
Either that or they hit the volume limit and then mysteriously production suddenly slows to a trickle for the remainder of the trust lifetime.
Don't expect WLL to make a gift to unitholders.
"Fortunately this is volume or Date whichever is LATER. Therefore it is 33 distributions
as it is expected to top volume probably couple years before date. "
Correct, however I expect WLL will manage the production such that the two events occur close to simultaneously. WLL disadvantages themselves by producing the production limit well in advance of the time threshold. Therefore I expect production to slow down and mysteriously both conditions happen to coincide in the same quarter.