ny as always thanks for taking the time to share. I have no strong conviction to share as I currently see most all of the infrastructure mlps as too rich to start a new or increased position except maybe etp/ete/rgp group (my question on mmlp and I did restart a position in rgp and added a little to etp). I do think ARP (E&P MLP) yield is priced too high in the 11% range and could possibly see a 15-20% price gain in price in next 12 months if they meet their started targets in production/distribution growth, energy prices stay reasonably consistent, etc. and no world calamity
chrx per your post on RRC results
"This resulted in liquids-rich production being shut in which negatively impacted condensate and NGL production. The second issue was extensive operational down time on Sunoco's Mariner West line which negatively impacted ethane netbacks."
sin, do you really believe they can pay .60 distribution for next 2-3 years and and concurrently fund reserves growth using debt and equity?
Cox v. Sunoco Pipeline
By Eminent Domain PA on July 24, 2014 in Pipeline Construction
sun_update: The Washington County Judge has provided an additional stay, or delay, in the consolidation cases to allow for the parties to resolve the cases. The involved four cases with property owner representation by Attorney Mike Faherty have progressed to written resolutions. The property owners agreed to modified and restricted easement language with large financial settlements. Cox v. Sunoco is expected to be fully resolved, without a decision on eminent domain power, by September of 2014
going to continue to target 1.1 to 1.2 distribution coverage ratio going forward with qre merger and volatility of .86 vs 1.4 several quarters ago is not unexpected
gp class b units will convert at closing. class b gp units will convert at a 44% discount to the 12 mm units (convert at approx 6.72 mm units my calculation) and was included in 72 mm units. this was around 44 ot 46 minutes into 2nd quarter cc and in joint press release. class c preferred will settled in cash for $350 mm.
-there is approx $80 mm break fee
-goal is to maintain a 4 to 5% annual distribution growth over and above the 2.08 target
also I forgot to point out a Florida oil lifting slipped into 3rd quarter, this has happened before and allows them to transport a full load which reduces incremental costs
not good. in 1st half 2014 I found this interesting
"...first quarter of 2014 (ebitda). The decrease was primarily due to higher commodity derivative settlement payments..." also looks like as you noted Permian issue of production in 1st half.
still have net realized oil prices problems projected for second half due to transportation constraints from Permian to gc whihc will not be materially relieved until mid 2015 but will have some partial relief in last half of 2014. Could not see the postle issue except for higher purchased co2 costs they already mentioned
excludes UMTP project and any new projects. remaining current projects at this time in 2015 will be keystone 200 mm cyro and mobley 10,000 de eth (both last half 2015) and majorsville 200 mm cyro (2016)
March 2014, QRE announced the
acquisition of its General Partner (“GP”)
- The GP has the right to earn 11.6MM Class
B units in exchange for economic interest
and Management Incentive Fee (“MIF”)
- The consideration is conditional on QRE
meeting the following conditions:
• Cash distribution greater than $0.4744/unit per quarter
• Distribution coverage at or above 1.0x annually
• Leverage ratio under 4.0x quarterly
- Assuming performance conditions are met,
one quarter of the units will be issued
- The transaction is expected to result in
immediate accretion to QRE’s distributable
cash flow per unit of approximately 7% in
(1) Assuming (a) 2013 distributable cash flow and MIF held constant during
2014 and (b) QR Energy had paid sufficient cash distributions and earned
sufficient operating surplus to pay the full amount of the MIF in 2014.
cheapstk i would not venture a guess on coverage till i see financial results and what exactly made up this quarters shortfall other than gas price. i am speculating some of the short fall came from buying co2 from third party for the short term and if the volume shortfall is also attributable to the delayed co2 project, but will have to see
yes bbep produces ubti-the question should be is it negative or positive and that depends how you handle idc amortization and depletion in your allocations
details on investorvillage mlp board
Msg 39749 of 39802 at 7/23/2014 12:04:38 PM mlp iv board by
The following message was updated on 7/23/2014 12:52:03 PM.
In response to msg 39747 by crashcardigan
mailbagman2000 in a response to the target rise posted in Ratings/Target Price Changes Log 07/23 wrote "LOL that was a great call by them, NMM is already there."
crashcardigan in a response to the target rise and ratings fall of MWE in Ratings/Target Price Changes Log 07/23 (II) wrote "They Downgrade MWE from BUY while raising the price target from $70, which it blew past recently to $79. Gotta hand it to those guys. They really know how to ANALyze."
I should note that none of those posts received a "recommend" - so there is evidence that the board "get's it".
Target prices from the analysts comes from the use of the (multi-staged) dividend discount model (DDM) along with a Price at a logical Price/DCF Ratio model. Both use a RRR and CAGR metric in their calculation. I would guesstimate that 90% of us know that CAGR projections can widely vary for the smaller stocks. I would guesstimate that less than 10% of us track RRRs - and know that they vary, too. The curent price is not a metric that goes into the DDM (or the other model). Having an analyst valuation assessment that the target is lower than the current price should not be a surprise. And it is not aways the case that next year's price should be higher than the current price. But you already know that.
It is the second comment from crashcardigan that has merit "on the surface". Why did the price target for MWE rise substantially while the rating fell? I do not have access to the full report from Global Hunter Securities - so what follows is logic based speculation. While distribution growth for MWE has been guided lower by the company, the analyst community have higher expectations for 2015. If you have CAGR projection awareness - you already know that. part 1