Fri, Jul 25, 2014, 9:40 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Inergy, L.P. Message Board

moneyonomics 109 posts  |  Last Activity: 5 hours ago Member since: Jan 16, 2010
  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 20, 2014 8:53 PM Flag

    jpm believe B&W almost died a year or so ago if I understood correctly

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 20, 2014 3:46 PM Flag

    Exec: Chesapeake could make Utica play's "oil window" viable
    Chesapeake Energy can use its edge on production costs and technical skills to exploit the potential of the Utica Shale's hard-to-reach "oil window" and make it a more viable asset, said Chris Doyle, senior vice president of operations for the company's northern division. "Who thought I would talk about the oil window today? Nobody. This is largely forgotten by the entire investment community, written off as unworkable," he said. Chesapeake also considers the Utica its "newest world-class asset," holding over 4 billion barrels of oil reserves, and the company expects its production in the play to average 1,360 barrels of oil equivalent per day this year.

    "...Utica’s oil window

    Even the Utica’s skinny “oil window,” the hard-to-reach chunk that turned out to be a lot smaller than the industry had first believed, holds plenty of potential value, a Chesapeake executive said during a meeting with analysts in Oklahoma City last week.

    “We are believers in the Utica,” said Chris Doyle, Chesapeake’s senior vice president of operations for its northern division. “Who thought I would talk about the oil window today? Nobody. This is largely forgotten by the entire investment community, written off as unworkable.”

    But Chesapeake, Doyle said, has the technical expertise and an advantage on production costs that could turn the oil window into a much more viable piece of its portfolio.

    Doyle said most companies spend an average $11.8 million on Utica wells. Chesapeake spends $6.7 million, and is looking at ways to cut costs further. The company also lifted its oil-well production from 500 to 1,000 barrels per day under new post-drilling completion models...."

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 19, 2014 1:26 PM Flag

    sorry for post under klaimr-also did anyone notice from 10- k-looks like going to have maintenance costs for earth management in the area. "On February 11, 2013, MarkWest Liberty Midstream entered into a Consent Order with the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection ("WVDEP") relating to alleged violations of West

    Virginia's storm water and erosion and sediment control regulations in connection with slips and landsides encountered during the construction of MarkWest Liberty Midstream's Mobley Complex in Wetzel County, West Virginia. Under the Consent Order, MarkWest Liberty Midstream agreed to pay a civil administrative penalty in the amount of $306,210 and to submit corrective action and stream restoration plans. Pursuant to WVDEP's rules and regulations, the Consent Order was subject to a thirty day public notice period, which ended on March 22, 2013. As a result, the Consent Order is final. MarkWest Liberty Midstream has paid the administrative penalty and has submitted the plans required by the Consent Order, which have been approved by the WVDEP.

    In connection with construction activities in eastern Ohio, MarkWest Utica EMG has experienced, and continues to experience, incidents of inadvertent returns of a bentonite clay solution during construction of borings under areas primarily involving reclaimed strip coal mine lands. MarkWest Utica EMG self-reported these incidents to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency ("OEPA") and has remediated any impacts from these bentonite-clay inadvertent returns. There was no adverse impact on human health from these incidents and the impact to the receiving areas was a temporary physical sedimentation impact, without any chemicals or additives involved. OEPA has initiated an administration enforcement action, although the amount of penalties or other administrative remedies has not yet been determined.". Looks like they are going to have main

  • Reply to

    where are earnings...

    by plclifton May 5, 2014 6:28 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 18, 2014 11:12 PM Flag

    jrad just noticed your response. sorry for being so late. your view of mwe is correct. on apl I need to review further on what you said in last paragraph compared to your original coverage point

  • will have to go there to get web addresses

    Re: ARP @ 19.xx-for those looking at ARP-two critical pieces of information on ARP's cmb (raton in particular)
    1-pioneer has been fracing raton with very good results on old wells, so affords arp same advantage in raton with 605,000 net acres and could on new gomet 74,000 net acres acquisition also with cbm properties in black warrior, etc.

    2-Also note the Raton Basin is an elongate, asymmetric basin analogous to other Rocky Mountain structural stratigraphic basins associated with the Rocky Mountain orogenic belts with geological structures such as the niobrara (some shallower vertical wells have produced oil in parts of the basin). In the San Jaun and Powder River there have been recent oil announcements (knew it was there all along but fracing makes it now possible to produce). Not saying raton will work out like San Jaun or Powder River but 600,000 net acres is a lot of potential posterity . Also there is CO2 in Raton and I seem to recall San Jaun

  • Reply to

    3.5X? News to me.

    by coochy.cooty May 14, 2014 10:19 AM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 14, 2014 10:45 AM Flag

    thanks for two posts. i think coverage is dampened by the preferreds which was a wise way to go

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 14, 2014 10:41 AM Flag

    thanks ny. aslo saw where they are looking at the large utica dry potential. what remains to be seen is how dry is dry and how the wet and dry are managed between the take away options, ie blending for methane vs liquids

  • go to investorvillage bry board to read article-do not need to be a member to read

    "...It is too soon to say if regulators, who say all options are on the table, will end up requiring Bakken crude to be stripped of flammable natural gas liquids (NGLs) before it moves by rail.

    But degassing Bakken crude for rail would be costly.

    Companies would need to spend potentially billions of dollars on small processing towers known as stabilizers that shave off NGLs from crude and build pipelines to carry the NGLs to a viable market.

    Right now, little of that infrastructure exists in the Bakken, which produces about 950,000 barrels of crude per day for thirsty coastal refineries, with some 67 percent of that moving by rail...."

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 12, 2014 6:10 PM Flag

    bjf what kmp jv was stopped?

  • projects soonest Shell NE cracker on line would now be 2020. go to inv mlp board to access article

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 9, 2014 12:29 AM Flag

    Fute meant Future

  • John D. Edwards - Okay. That's really helpful. And are you seeing more interest in the joint venture pipeline proposal with Kinder, since the suspension of funding from the competing NGL pipeline?

    Frank M. Semple - Well, really, John, the interest level is really more a function of what I discussed earlier. Is -- with both projects, when there were 2 projects in the market being evaluated by us and our producer customers, it was a more complex analysis for our producer customers. But the level of interest, if you will, in terms of really getting to a final agreements on the project, really, has not really changed that much, with the recent announcements by the Bluegrass Project sponsors. The producers really have -- they get it, they understand the balance in the Northeast for purity products and the need for Y-grade project. And so, really, it's just been a continuation of that evaluation, much more on a physical standpoint in terms of really what it means to them from the production standpoint as well as additional fractionation facilities built by us and other midstream providers in the Northeast. So, and Randy is here

    Randy S. Nickerson -
    Yes. Absolutely. They way you'd articulated, I agree 100%, they've never had a lack of interest or necessarily have more now. It's -- as we build more plants, and as we're developing the area, most of the producers understand that, they -- we all want optionality. And so integrating sort of our fractionation with the pipeline has been a key part of discussion for more than a year obviously, with most of the producers. And so that the interest was high, and it remains high. And it does simplify that Bluegrass is not funding anymore. And so we'll see whether there's enough support and it matches all the producers to -- over the next several months to see if we can make some significant progress.

    Frank M. Semple -
    John, you and I talked about this before, but the fact is that there's -- there are a lot of considerations and a lot of analysis going on by our producer customers. And we're trying to help them with that. But there's just, frankly, a lot of things they need to consider and evaluate and a great example is the recent focus around the residue capacity. And that's just another piece of the complexity that's -- that they're dealing with. So the Y grade is one of the many projects they're looking at. And again our job is to continue to help them evaluate the different options that Randy mentioned.

  • Louis Shamie . The one question I had was regarding the dry gas window in Utica. And it seems like there's been a lot of producer attention shifting to their end, it seems like from what limited data's out there that there's some monster wells there. What's MarkWest strategy for approaching that? And how much of your budget or description in -- for '14 and '15, kind of is allocated or budgeted for addressing that? Randy S. Nickerson Louis, you're right. The performance of some of the dry gas wells in the Utica have been really stellar and have -- and that dry gas window, although not nearly as big, say, as perhaps the Marcellus window, it has potential to produce an enormous amount of gas over there. Fortunately, a lot of the -- both the producers, as well as the area, sort of fit really good with what we're doing. We have lots of operations, obviously, just over the River in West Virginia side, we have lots of operations over in the rich gas side. And so this dry gas window really fits well in our overall footprint. And so, suffice to say, certainly that we've been in discussions with the vast majority of those producers about projects and still working on those projects. And they may have some, certainly impact on the '14, '15 capital but they're largely baked in to those assumptions the impact that dry gas might have. Frank on capital, I'll turn that back over to you to sort of talk about the capital forecast more. Frank M. Semple Yes. Absolutely. I think that's a great lead-in to the point I made earlier in my prepared comments. And that we had so many opportunities in the Marcellus and the Utica and dry gas in the Utica is a great example of where we need to carefully evaluate those opportunities and match capital to the opportunities. It's great to have partners like we have in the Utica, with EMG and with Summit. And so, that allows us together look at those opportunities and not only optimize the capital but also evaluate what each partner brings

  • under new ceo

    gpor Feb estimated 2014 utica boe/d production
    44,500 to 54,500
    gpor May estimated 2014 utica production
    31,500 to 36,500

  • brings a step closer to investment grade on termed debt

  • Reply to

    where are earnings...

    by plclifton May 5, 2014 6:28 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 6, 2014 11:25 AM Flag

    i do not think piks are being intentionally ignored, it is the way they are required to report units. this same issue arose with mwe and they do not include picks until triggered.

    on units coverage dcf per unit was on average units outstanding but total distributions and coverage is on actual units which would lower the coverage. if you take .62 paid times total units should be closer to 1.09

  • Reply to

    where are earnings...

    by plclifton May 5, 2014 6:28 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 6, 2014 9:39 AM Flag

    i do not think picks are being intentionally ignored, it is the way they are required to report units. this same issue arose with mwe and they do not include picks until triggered.

    on units coverage dcf per unit was on average units outstanding but total distributions and coverage is on actual units which would lower the coverage. if you take .62 paid times total units should be closer to 1.09

  • Reply to

    where are earnings...

    by plclifton May 5, 2014 6:28 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 5, 2014 9:23 PM Flag

    jrad what is misleading about dcf per unit?

    the dcf also covered the cumulative unpaid preferred for the quarter

    During the first quarter of 2014, the Partnership issued 5,060,000 of Class E Preferred Units at an offering price of $25.00 per Class E Preferred Unit. The Partnership received $122.4 million in net proceeds, which were used to pay down the revolving credit facility and to fund capital expenditures. The initial distribution on the Class E Preferred Units will be payable on July 15, 2014 to holders of record as of July 1, 2014, in an amount equal to $0.67604 per unit, or approximately $3.4 million. Thereafter, the Partnership will pay cumulative distributions in cash on the Class E Preferred Units on a quarterly basis at a rate of $0.515625 per unit, or 8.25% per year. The cumulative dividends through March 31, 2014 are included as a reduction to Distributable Cash Flow for the current quarter.

  • Msg 37884 of 37890 at 5/2/2014 8:45:27 AM from iv mlp board by

    passandshoot


    Ratings/Target Price Changes Log 05/02

    Targa Resources Partners, LP: Barclays raises price target from $60 to $65, rating Outperform

    Targa Resources Partners, LP: RBC raises price target from $63 to $69, rating Outperform

    Targa Resources Partners, LP: Raymond James raises price target from $60 to $62, rating Outperform

    Targa Resources Partners, LP: Credit Suisse raises price target from $60 to $63, rating Neutral

    Targa Resources Partners, LP: Stifel raises price target from $60 to $64, rating Buy

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.