I own the ATLS/ARP/APL group, EPB and ETE. But full disclosure for those that hate to deal with K-1's, if you own ATLS, you have to report its holdings in APL, ARP and ArcLogistics and another entity separately, even if you also own positions in ARP and APL. So for my positions in ATLS, ARP and APL, I have to report 7 K-1's.
Similarly if you own ETE, you have to report separately its ownership in ETP, RGP, and SXL.
Is it worth it? I have over a triple in ETE, a double in each of APL and ATLS and the yield on cost basis is in double digits for each.
Why is the price appreciation part unjustified? With MLPs, the market pays for distribution growth. That's why the MLPs with the higher yields but no growth do not have much price appreciation while those with higher growth/lower yields have the best returns. You may not think it is justified, but it is what the market thinks that counts. An example of this is EPB. When KM announced that their distribution would be flat back in March, the market took 10 points off of the stock.
Sarge, I have owned the entire Atlas complex -- ARP, APL and ATLS, but they have lagged their competitors. There is certainly potential to catch up to the rest of the sector if they can execute. Either they execute or someone will come along who can bring about that execution. Seems like a no lose situation, but you can wait for a long time for either the better execution or a buyer to materialize, and there is no guarantee that either will happen. The downside is that the Cohen's are buyers instead of sellers and they overpay for acquisitions which keep them from executing (some said they overpaid for some of their acquisitions at APL).
Let's see how the market reacts to yesterday's distribution increase at ATLS.
Most of us have a limited amount of funds so these choices can get difficult especially when you see some stocks increasing at good rates while others remain stagnant waiting for a catalyst..
Keebon, I don't follow the marine MLPs, maybe because of my past bad experience with dry-bulks. I note that CPLP has had a nice chart over the last 2 years. As for the IDR deal, you can bet that the deal is to benefit the general partner but that doesn't mean that the MLP won't also benefit in the short term. The GP is going to push to get to that high IDR level which is at a quarterly distribution of 29 cents, which is some 25% higher than their current rate. The questions are how long does it take to get there and how does that compare to the distribution growth at other marine MLPs.
Well of course they are going to pay the distribution because that's what the subordination level is all about. As long as they delay finishing the amount of wells that they were supposed to drill, the subordination level stays in place. But keeping the sub level in place means that CHK continues to get a zero distribution on its subordinated units (because the old wells don't earn enough to pay the subs) which can't be what they planned when they created this trust. At some point, CHK is going to want to get some distribution, but at current production levels, they are only going to get a distribution if they finish the wells and convert to common units. Once their sub units are converted, then there are more total units and the per unit distribution amount will be less (because the new wells are not making up for the decreasing production on the old wells). Interestingly, CHK is carrying these units at a $7 value (you can find this in CHK's 10-k), but the market doesn't seem to realize this.
A possible comparison is to watch SDT. This next quarter for SDT will be the first in which its subordination level ends. They should announce their distribution today. Last quarter, they paid 42 cents on 21mm units, but will have 28 mm units to pay this quarter. If my math is correct, their distribution should be reduced to 31 cents. Let's see how the market reacts to this reduction. Maybe it's priced in.
Ed, ATLS finally resumed some distribution growth, but the increases at APL and ARP were disappointing. If ATLS was priced like the premier GPs like WGP, TRGP, ETE and WMB (i.e. sub 3% yields) it would trade over $70. I understand they had to rebuild coverage at both APL and ARP. Cooperman keeps pounding the table on ARP but it is still yielding over 11% while every other e&p MLP is heading toward 8%. Meanwhile if APL traded like MWE, it would be $50 instead of $36. One analyst on last quarter's APL call said their plants in the Permian were worth as much as the whole company. I think the Cohen's have to do something. They should be a seller instead of a buyer. I'm holding because I think a deal comes.
Meanwhile my switch of some APL for MMP resulted in a 16 point or 30% gain.
Bob, you may want to borrow Stagg's Total Return calculator to compare ETE versus ETP. Or just look at the charts. My cost on ETE is around $17 (a mere triple) while ETP is up about 30-40%. I think we bought around the same time (I bought ETE and ETP around the same time, but sold all of the ETP and held some ETE). My yield on original cost is now around 8% while the yield on your cost of ETP is about the same.
At the time I bought ETE, the yield difference between it and ETP was about 4%. Over 5 years, that's 20%, but ETE has outperformed on share price by some 300%.
Sarge, MPW and PBT are apples and oranges. I don't think you can really compare the two as they are in different sectors. PBT is a royalty trust so depletion is an issue. Some of the old royatly trusts have dates or other triggers when they terminate. it's distributions tend to fluctuate with the price of the commodity, which is good when global strife juices the price of oil. On the other hand, MPW can grow its dividend by acquiring more properties and by the increases in rents. I'm surprised the MPW hasn't rebounded more, but that may be because investors had shifted into more cyclical names like hotel and industrial REITs where a stronger economy may help. With evidence that the economy could slow, investors could shift back.
Bob, the MLP announcements are rolling in. Here are some:
APL raised 1 cent.
ETE raised 2 cents.
Huge percentage increases at WGP, TRGP, PAGP and MMP.
Just to give an idea of the leverage associated with GPs. ETP's increase was 2 cents on a 93 cent base, while its gp, ETE raised 2 cents on a 36 cent base.
The previous posts that you mention that talked about "Capital Losses" were basically an attempt to determine what an investor's Total Return was if they had purchased the stock at the IPO. They tried to measure the dividends received over this time against the appreciation/depreciation in the stock price (i.e. capital gain or capital loss).
You might want to take a look at the charts to see how MMP has compared to KMP over any period. I think the difference over 5 years is some 300% (based on Yahoo charts). That 4% difference in yield (which by the way is the difference today and not a difference in original cost basis if one had purchased 5 years ago) doesn't seem to make up for the difference in stock price performance.
The better run MLPs are able to put together business plans that lead to distribution increases which lead to stock price increases. So far CMLP has not been able to deliver on the distribution increases. They just announced another flat quarter of no increase.
You are wrong. Never trust Yahoo Finance info. Look at the EPD website where they show that in fact the distribution was adjusted for the 2-1 stock split back in 2002.
Upstream: ARP, EVEP, BBEP, VNR, LNCO, AR(not an MLP), warrants and preferred on MHR (not an MLP)
Midstream: APL, MWE, EPD, EPB, WPZ, MMP CMLP
GPs: ATLS, TRGP, WGP PAGP
Frac sand: HCLP
stagg, I haven't heard much about NSLP. There's been a ton of MLPs that have come public in the last year and the sector has really caught fire. I'm not sure it's because investors are on board with the energy boom or if they are just chasing anything with yield that is not related to mortgages or lending where a surprise hike in interest rates (like last year's taper tantrum) may have scared some away. Doing a quick look, it looks like NSLP's fields are mostly in OK and not in one of the "hot" shale plays like the Permian, Eagle Ford, Bakken or Marcellus/Utica. However, one of their presentations mentioned a high % of liquids in one of their recent acquisitions. It is the high liquids concentrations that are benefiting explorers.
I have so many MLPs and so many e&p MLPs that it would take a lot for me to invest in another unless I got rid of one of the ones that I own (BBEP, VNR, EVEP -- I also own some LNCO). Some have commented that prices are getting a bit lofty in the space, so that may mean that NSLP has some room to catch up.
Good luck if you invest in NSLP. I'll have to keep an eye on it.