Sat, Dec 27, 2014, 2:20 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

Inergy, L.P. Message Board

marklibera 502 posts  |  Last Activity: Dec 22, 2014 4:09 PM Member since: Aug 14, 2007
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    SANTA CLAUSE RALLY...!

    by staggman99 Dec 10, 2014 9:48 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 5:45 PM Flag

    Stagg, the fault in your reasoning may be if you think this declines ends with the oil related sector. Everything high yield is interconnected because selling in one area causes funds to sell their stronger names to raise cash. That's how high yield spreads blow out. Then there is the double-leveraged names and closed-end funds. Could the dividend on BDCL be zero this quarter?
    If banks have losses tied to energy names, that could cause them to tighten their lending to other sectors. If high yield names can't borrow or if their borrowing costs go up, that impacts their earnings which affects their dividends. All the spending related to energy projects may be curbed, in which case we could end up with a recession. The question is when will the Fed start QE5.

  • Reply to

    O/T PSEC PURCHASE

    by huffdaland Dec 10, 2014 10:37 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 5:16 PM Flag

    bob, I have 3 responses. First, so far, few of the examples of insider purchases that have been mentioned have called the bottom. JF bought SDRL back in Sept/Oct at $22. Then there is the buys of PSEC. From several years ago, there was Aubrey McClendon's buys of CHK on margin. Yesterday the CEO of EVEP bought at $25. BTW, did anyone check to see if any of these buys are on margin or funded with a loan from the company? So if these insiders know the bottom, someone forgot to tell the market. Second, most insiders think their stock is undervalued, but the market can disagree. I admit they wouldn't be buying if they thought they were going bk, but sometimes their own bias can lead to overconfidence in their own abilities and insight. Of course, we aren't really talking about their abilities, because these declines are not really about their management (except if they bought the wrong assets or are overleveraged), but we are talking about the market's perception. In other words, when the market liked leverage, they all levered up because the market rewarded leverage and they got rewarded with bonuses and higher stock prices and management fees. Now the market has decided it doesn't like leverage in a deflationary environment. Third, they don't think they are throwing away millions of dollars because they think the market is going to respond favorably to their purchase, afterall the market used to love this stock so why shouldn't that love resume at some point. This goes to the bias thing. It is a misdiagnose of the problem. They think the problem can be solved with some insider purchases, but the robots that do the trading and the hedge funds that have to raise liquidity, don't care about insider purchases.

    Despite the real supply/demand reasons for the recent decline in energy names, I can't help wondering if the real underlying cause for these declines is the end of QE. If the rest of the market starts to decline, I guess I will know.

  • Reply to

    Wow, ole Aubrey sure did sell a fantasy on this one

    by darv222 Dec 3, 2014 12:49 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 4:52 PM Flag

    But you are assuming that the distribution is going to continue at that level for ever. This is a depleting trust.

  • Reply to

    Wow, ole Aubrey sure did sell a fantasy on this one

    by darv222 Dec 3, 2014 12:49 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 4:51 PM Flag

    Grgsvll, you are welcome. Whatever happened to all those CHK employees that you said owned CHKR bigtime? They were supposed to know about this Trust. Just goes to show you that those closest to the kool- aid can sometimes drink it.

  • Reply to

    Down 16 - Im buying here

    by voodoo_stocks Dec 1, 2014 3:06 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 4:44 PM Flag

    Update: the implied value of the spinco is now less than $1. Could it go negative?

  • Reply to

    Spinco now valued under $2

    by marklibera Dec 10, 2014 12:21 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 4:41 PM Flag

    Now the implied value is under $1. But if it could go to $1, it could also negative.

  • Reply to

    SANTA CLAUSE RALLY...!

    by staggman99 Dec 10, 2014 9:48 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 2:16 PM Flag

    Stagg, the Santa Claus rally doesn't happen every year and if we get one this year, it is not likely to be in any of your beloved high yield/high risk plays.
    I haven't put my bear hat on for a long time, but minyanville's Todd Harrison used to say that the country's sentiment plays an important role in determining the direction of the stock market. Without the Fed pumping money into the market, people are just not feeling it. Events in Ferguson and Staten Island are just reflections of the overall sentiment.

  • Reply to

    O/T PSEC PURCHASE

    by huffdaland Dec 10, 2014 10:37 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 1:42 PM Flag

    If they know something, then they are trading on inside info and it would be too big a target for the SEC since they have to report when they buy. At the risk of repeating myself, the "insider buy" as a reason for you to buy is vastly overrated when the stock is in a downdraft. Remember, they are richer than you and can afford to make up their losses faster than you can.

  • Do you finally buy ATLS when they are giving the spinco away for $0?

  • Reply to

    Can they keep dividend? I don't see it now

    by checking_here Dec 6, 2014 10:15 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 11:56 AM Flag

    Not according to Wells. You are forgetting their hedges. They are also expecting a sale of UEO.

  • Reply to

    Current Price

    by money191972 Dec 10, 2014 10:51 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 11:06 AM Flag

    Or do you just sell now? While the implied value of the spinco is under $3, unless they take it private or someone buys it out, is that value going to be realized anytime soon. They will likely have to do a reverse split once it is spun out after the merger closes.
    I have gone from a nice profit in ATLS to a loss. Need to check if my capital loss is greater than my recapture.

  • Ok, each time XOP, the ETF for the e&p sector bounces for a day, people keep thinking the bottom is in. Today, XOP is dropping again and taking all the usual suspects down with it. Previously, I said there could be support for XOP around $43, but it could also dip to $39. That's still another 10% down.

  • Reply to

    Some Perspective

    by jerseyvinny2 Dec 9, 2014 5:07 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 10:18 AM Flag

    Bob, I just skimmed Wells report on the conference. VNR mgt is taking all of their comp in stock in 2015. Now that's commitment. I have a bit of VNR but haven't really been following it too closely. VNR mentioned that they should be able to manage their base determination.

  • Reply to

    Some Perspective

    by jerseyvinny2 Dec 9, 2014 5:07 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 10, 2014 9:34 AM Flag

    Bob, I still think it may be too soon for e&p MLPs. The discussion on the i.v. board was about borrowing base re-determinations that are upcoming. One poster suggested that VNR is overleveraged. I think we have to wait to see if some companies end up cutting their distributions. That's bound to happen and it will likely take all names down another peg (as an analogy, just like SDRL's cut took down SDLP even though SDLP is in much better shape and SFL).
    The Wells conference was yesterday, so I'm interested to see what they say.
    I do agree the better midstream MLPs will hold up. Factoids made the analogy is it better to get an Italian cashmere coat at 25% off or the cheap cotton coat at 75% off.

  • Reply to

    Failed Loan?

    by davidbdc2001 Dec 7, 2014 2:50 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 3:00 PM Flag

    It was either on zero hedge or the WSJ Dealbook. The piece was about high yield loans being cancelled.

  • Reply to

    JF ,what a nice guy.

    by lakeed98 Dec 9, 2014 1:41 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 2:58 PM Flag

    lakeed, that makes no sense. JF bought back in Sept when the price was over $20 and then we had the collapse in oil prices and the elimination of SDRL's dividend. So now his timing is prescient? Then there was the PSEC buys from management before they announced a cut in their divy. How many times do you have to be fooled before you realize that insider purchases are not the best indicator, especially when the stock is already in a downdraft. SDRL may recover some day and they will reinstate the divy then, but I doubt it happens that quickly. Besides they may need the money to bail out NADL or take it private if that doesn't recover.

  • Reply to

    Failed Loan?

    by davidbdc2001 Dec 7, 2014 2:50 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 12:25 PM Flag

    They don't have to have a loan coming due in order to take out a new one. I saw the rumor that David was alluding to on a financial website.

  • Reply to

    Walker bought 70,000 more shares.

    by texx2step Dec 8, 2014 7:40 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 12:21 PM Flag

    I have seen this type of post on countless stocks that have been collapsing: SDRL where billionaire John Friedrickson bought millions at prices in the high $20's, only to have the Board eliminate the dividend after saying that it was sustainable through 2015. Then there is PSEC where management bought before trimming their dividend. Then of course there was Aubrey McClendon who bought millions of CHK several years ago on margin and then got a margin call.
    The fact is that most of management is paid so much in comp that they can risk buying their stock. A loss for them is not the same as a loss for the average retail investor who typically doesn't have a seven figure bonus coming at year-end. Some companies will even insist that cash bonuses are reinvested in the company's stock. Then there is the old trick of announcing the AUTHORIZATION of a stock buy-back without actually buying back any stock. Mostly, these are just p.r. stunts, but we want the company to "do something" to stop the stock price from continuing to slide, so they accomodate us.
    Trying to pick a bottom is difficult but somehow the process of picking bottoms has become folklore and everyone thinks they know how to do it.

  • Reply to

    Made money in Vegas...getting killed here...

    by rbgambler99 Dec 9, 2014 9:56 AM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 10:21 AM Flag

    Gambler, I am looking at covering my Yahoo Feb 65 calls and reinvesting in the Feb 55 calls. Someone said Yahoo has support at $48. It's been relatively quiet there, but in Jan, Yahoo should start moving up in expectation of the big announcement on their tax planning. But you are going to play Yahoo, I just wouldn't add all at once in case there is further slippage.
    Speaking of gambling, a play that I have been watching but haven't tested yet is the UGAZ which is a triple ETF on nat gas. Joe Bacardi from Weather Bell is predicting snow between XMAS and New Years. He has a web site that shows how the American weather models used by NOAA have been wrong compared to the European model. I read a story saying that the weather would be mild for the next week so nat gas might sell off further. Thursday is the day they announce the nat gas storage report, so the trading robots are very active starting at 10:30. Since it was mild this last week, the draw should be lower and nat gas should sell off, maybe providing a good entry point.
    I am trying to hold off on anything energy related as it may take some time for the bottom.
    I may add some more closed-end muni funds to replace my monthly pays since I sold LNCO and PSEC before they tanked.

  • Reply to

    Down 16 - Im buying here

    by voodoo_stocks Dec 1, 2014 3:06 PM
    marklibera marklibera Dec 9, 2014 10:04 AM Flag

    Interesting idea. The implied value of the ATLS stub is now less than $3. They said they could pay a distribution of $1.25, but that was before the price of oil collapsed. ARP shares have taken a beating. They were right on the cusp of the higher tier IDR level, but given the dislocation, they probably can't get to the 50% level and there could be risk that they reduce their LP distribution. ATLS is yielding more than 2x TRGP, but I don't know if the deal allowed ATLS to pay out a Q1 distribution or if it was part of the $9.12 cash contribution to the deal. Not sure how much if any of the $9 would be taxable. If you are purchasing ATLS now, you wouldn't have any recapture of past tax deferrals so maybe the tax hit would not be as great as many fear.

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Virgin America Inc.
NASDAQFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:00 PM EST
Tesla Motors, Inc.
NASDAQFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:00 PM EST
TASER International Inc.
NASDAQFri, Dec 26, 2014 4:00 PM EST