Recent

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

MarkWest Energy Partners, L.P. Message Board

moneyonomics 59 posts  |  Last Activity: May 21, 2015 10:51 PM Member since: Jan 16, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 21, 2015 10:51 PM Flag

    thanks chrx-frank mentioned something along that line also

  • Reply to

    NEW

    by racehorse9 May 19, 2015 4:53 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 21, 2015 5:02 PM Flag

    agree-

  • ahead for both companies as both are very soundly managed and very focused on economic growth as they primarily compete in different areas except mid con

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 21, 2015 1:58 PM Flag

    thanks found the quote

    "We are the largest processor and fractionator in the southern portion of the Appalachian Basin

    Our existing infrastructure in Kentucky and West Virginia is strategically positioned to support the development of the emerging Rogersville Shale"

  • at 5,000 to10,000 ft lying in Kentucky (700 ft to 1100 ft thick zone) but extending at deeper depths up to 14,000 ft into WV (100 ft to 200 ft thick zone)

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 17, 2015 12:08 PM Flag

    yes some cool day and night pictures of the flare with grey-soot

  • moneyonomics moneyonomics May 16, 2015 6:45 PM Flag

    PITTSBURGH and DENVER, Jan. 4, 2011—EQT...and MarkWest...today announced that MarkWest is acquiring EQT’s natural gas processing complex in Langley, Kentucky and an associated natural gas liquids (NGL) pipeline for $230 million. The transaction is expected to close during the first quarter 2011.

    The Langley processing complex includes a 100 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d) cryogenic processing plant, a 75 MMcf/d refrigeration processing plant, and approximately 28,000 horsepower of compression. Immediately following the closing of the acquisition, MarkWest will commence the installation of a new 60 MMcf/d cryogenic processing plant to expand the Langley cryogenic processing capacity. In conjunction with the closing of the sale of the Langley plant, EQT will execute a long-term agreement with MarkWest to provide processing services for its Kentucky Huron/Berea shale gas and to extend its existing agreement with MarkWest for NGL transportation, fractionation, and marketing services until 2022.

    MarkWest will also complete the Ranger NGL pipeline, which is currently under construction, to allow NGLs recovered at the Langley processing complex to be delivered to MarkWest’s Siloam fractionation, storage, and marketing complex in South Shore, Kentucky. In 2008, MarkWest significantly expanded the Siloam fractionator to a capacity of 24,000 barrels per day, in part to support the continued growth of EQT’s Huron/Berea shale development in Kentucky and West Virginia. MarkWest will also process EQT’s liquids-rich Marcellus gas in West Virginia.

    "The sale of these valuable Kentucky assets is the first step in our commitment to prioritize our capital to our most profitable investment opportunities, which for us means development activities, primarily in the Marcellus and also in the Huron/Berea, rather than processing activities," said David Porges, President and Chief Executive Officer of EQT.....we are pleased to expand EQT's long-standing relationship with MarkWest .."

  • ROGERSVILLE SHALE ACREAGE BRINGS $1,250 PER ACRE FOR 85%WI =$1,470.00/NET ACRE
    Chesapeake and EQT in Rogersville test phase
    Duo drilling wildcats on emerging Kentucky shale play originally considered too old and deep
    By NOAH BRENNER, Upstream – The International Oil and Gas Newspaper
    27 February 2015

    Notable excerpts:

    APPALACHIAN giants EQT and Chesapeake Energy are drilling ahead on closely watched wildcats testing the emerging Rogersville shale play in eastern Kentucky.

    EQT has asked state regulators for permission to drill the first horizontal test of the formation. The Pittsburgh-based company spud its stratigraphic test in Johnson County, Kentucky in late January and is currently drilling the well, according to local sources.

    Chesapeake Energy also spud its Rogersville wildcat in late January to the north of EQT in Lawrence County KY, along the Kentucky-West Virginia border.

    The company filed the permit under the name of a shell company — Horizontal Technology Energy Company — to conceal their involvement, according to local reports.

    Duo drilling wildcats on emerging Kentucky shale play originally considered too old and deep
    By NOAH BRENNER, Upstream – The International Oil and Gas Newspaper
    27 February 2015

    Notable excerpts:

    APPALACHIAN giants EQT and Chesapeake Energy are drilling ahead on closely watched wildcats testing the emerging Rogersville shale play in eastern Kentucky.

    EQT has asked state regulators for permission to drill the first horizontal test of the formation. The Pittsburgh-based company spud its stratigraphic test in Johnson County, Kentucky in late January and is currently drilling the well, according to local sources.

    Chesapeake Energy also spud its Rogersville wildcat in late January to the north of EQT in Lawrence County KY, along the Kentucky-West Virginia border.

    The company filed the permit under the name of a shell company — Horizontal Technology Energy Company — to conceal their involvement, according to local reports.

  • from clambo on iv bry board and you can follow prior posts on this yahoo board and iv mlp and bry boards on this topic

    "The Rogersville could be the biggest in Appalachia , maybe North America '

    Quote from owner of Wilson Oil & Gas . "

    And again who sits over and around it

  • Reply to

    Present and near term outlook

    by nymarv10956 May 14, 2015 12:53 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 15, 2015 1:41 PM Flag

    I owned CLMT and sold when it reached in mid-high 30s a while back

    CLMT recently cut the nepotism cord. not saying it was bad as ity appeared they made some nice growth moves during this period just referencing the change

    Former President is daughter of prior ceo and thru late 2014 she was president


    Jennifer G. Straumins has served as president and chief operating officer of our general partner since January 2011. From December 2009 through December 2010, Ms. Straumins served as executive vice president and chief operating officer of our general partner. From February 2007 through December 2009, Ms. Straumins served as senior vice president of our general partner. From January 2006 through February 2007, Ms. Straumins served as vice president — investor relations of our general partner. Ms. Straumins served in various capacities in financial planning and economics for our Predecessor from 2002 until our initial public offering. Prior to joining our Predecessor, Ms. Straumins held financial planning positions with Great Lakes Chemical Company and Exxon Chemical Company. Ms. Straumins received a B.E. in Chemical Engineering from Vanderbilt University and her M.B.A. from the University of Kansas. Ms. Straumins is the daughter of F. William Grube, the chief executive officer and vice chairman of the board of our general partner.

    then in late 2014 she was appointed executive vice president - strategy and development effective October 28, 2014 and resigned this spring of 2015.

  • Reply to

    Falling out of bed with uncertainty

    by lessbs May 7, 2015 1:06 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 12, 2015 6:55 PM Flag

    less thanks for reply. no impact I can see. look at their history. check it out, when they first started jv they had routine rotation plans. some of the retirees have been around one company or the other for many years and some rotated back to their parents

  • Reply to

    Falling out of bed with uncertainty

    by lessbs May 7, 2015 1:06 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 9, 2015 2:10 PM Flag

    when you invest in a company you invest in a management and who it is ion its core beliefs and actions and I feel very confident in saying P66 and SE are not KMI

  • Reply to

    Falling out of bed with uncertainty

    by lessbs May 7, 2015 1:06 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 9, 2015 2:03 PM Flag

    now that i can post under money again instead of family id of kliamr, less why do you think P66-SE-DCP would harm DPM holders?

    "We have seen MLPs being restructured for the benefit of major owners to the detriment of small "partners" during this tough time and there is little reason to not expect that to happen here"

    I see nothing in their far past actions all the way back to P and Duke that would even suggest that. As examples when COP and P66 split they did not harm their owners and another example during the dark days of mid 1980's P kept paying their dividends

  • Reply to

    Very negative report from NRP management

    by ayscuew May 8, 2015 7:56 AM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 9, 2015 1:53 PM Flag

    punctuation went bye bye

  • Reply to

    Very negative report from NRP management

    by ayscuew May 8, 2015 7:56 AM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics May 9, 2015 1:51 PM Flag

    jrad why I compare dcf coverage and OCF coverage it is surprising how many mlps do no sync up in direction or even relative magnitude ie obviously I do not expect same numbers but similar direction yes over a 12 month period and nrp to best of my recollection never does syn up which says they also balance sheet extensively to manage dcf as you noted here but many uninformed investors would not pick up on

  • read RRC transcript for details but a excerpt.
    We're simply trying to produce those wells of what we believe is the optimum performance that will generate the best economics for the project at the end of the day. It's a long-term look that we take at it. Initial production rates are great. They're fun to talk about. It's kind of a yardstick to compare wells. And these -- in a case like these 2 monster pads, you had a lot of facilities there for maybe 3 wells or 5 wells, depending on how many wells were on each pad. And what you end up doing is bring one well on and just let it produce through the facilities that all 5 wells might use to see what it's capable of. In actuality, we'll probably choke that well back and then start opening up the other wells and try to get them online. They'll all be produced or constrained conditions for quite a while in that case. But that's the way we designed it going forward. And we think that keeps our cost structure down. It's better planning with MarkWest, which allows them to keep their cost structure down, which in turn gets us lower gathering fees. And again, we're really focused on the years ahead and watching that gathering fee fall off as we go back in and fill in on these areas. We think that's the most efficient way to develop this project long term. Because again, we've only touched a very small portion of the total number of locations that we can drill going forward just in the Marcellus. On the Utica and places like that, the other stack-pay potential, we've got a long ways to go on that also. As for as the Utica well, when we get the permanent facilities online in the middle of the summer, those wells will be put online, and they will be uninterruptible. In other words, we'll be able to hold them at a constant rate. And these production facilities are designed to limit those wells at 20 million a day...as much as it is trying to optimize the cost for those facilities in that gathering system that we're putting in play

  • Reply to

    Distributions up to today

    by nymarv10956 Apr 21, 2015 4:50 PM
    moneyonomics moneyonomics Apr 22, 2015 10:20 PM Flag

    I would say that any company including MWE is for sale, at the right price; which would be based on their view of their future value creation which I imagine is quite justifiably high for MWE after they cement domination of NE liquids and added some dry gas and possibly a split and rebound to around current price precluding any more major oil price catastrophes, repeat gas price catastrophes after 2017, loss of assets, major wars, world ending events, etc. In fact for MWE they may not be in play after they have conquered the NE, but may very well see them with all their resources being the major the acquirer/consolidator or at a minimum a merger of very large equals

MWE
65.63+0.19(+0.29%)May 22 4:01 PMEDT