seems high to me G0. I have 50% based on last prez....maybe they added hedges in Q3. Hedged spread is similar to what they got in Q3 so does not look like they hedged at economically favorable levels. I wouldn't make a big deal on Q2 outage. They sold plenty of product (inventory built up prior) so only turnaround costs decline. Looks like Q3 will be ho hum with DCR in the 25% range. Q4 not shaping up pretty at the moment. Look forward to 2016 when montana refines 10+ more and 140 in ebitda....
i understand these things are hard for you to grasp...maybe its just easier for you to look at change in cash balance last quarter -50mn...still not get it?
ok cause i don't think you'll get it without some help
lets ignore adjustments and working capital changes
so operating cash flow was 75.5mn
MINUS 101.2 in drilling expenses (capex, if u like)
that is a negative number in case you didn't notice
want to look at Q1 - DOH - same answer
and all the while production is actually lower.
i'll bet a decent number of shorts are against credit positions. Bonds got hit again today with announcement. They just got a royal.
no this co. is not much different. yes, they've added some specialty products but once the new refineries come on line its back to pretty much a crack spread co.
If CS is right, then no way EVEP will sell wet-gas acres. They are looking for high-teens. So is they are right then yes another share sale is possible as they wait it out.
impact on pps...they lowered credit line and now its going to be a secured loan so they can buy back shares using CF from inventory wind down....interesting indeed!
more likely the tap is open on the ATM
does anyone know if they have to file a report when they issue shares under the ATM or is it just when 10-q comes out?
next Q likely zero DCF and gas cracks do not look good into end of year. So after a decent Q1 looks like, coverage for the year going to be at 30% ish.
I know we like to say we aren't just crack spreads but that's where the bulk of revs, ebitda...comes from....
now how that gets priced (on delivery?) or based on production date(?) is the Q. I recall hearing on the CC that it varies by contract which means to me its mostly the former. That said, should see a nice WC adjustment of 150-200mn in Q3 +/-. Somehow that # rings a bell....they are not going to pay off credit line and buyback shares instead?...but then what happens next winter when u need to rebuild? Add another 250 to credit line (500 out vs 1.25?) or maybe the plan is we ain't gonna produce?
i think it goes into inventory but probably need to look at Q1 and 2 combined because there are probably "booking" effects. So e.g., Q1+Q2 show production over sales of 3.268 mT. * this against COGS and you get close to the $252mn shown in CF statement on pg 6
the best I can tell u (and lets stick with USIO Q2 #s) is that
the revenue they show in segment information table (pg, 45; 514.6) includes the rebate but the realized rate (106.8) does not. The pre-rebate revenue was 463.19 and rebate was 51.41. If you do this across all segments and add up you will see that total pre-rebate revenue shows up (1018.59) on line 1 of income statement (page 2) and rebate is line 2 (51.41 USIO + 30.80 NAC). So net we can compute the actual realized rate of $118.65/mT (514.6/4.337). This is the price per mT they received on their sales including rebates. (Note this was down 7% from Q1 and at a decent discount to TTM pellet and Fines prices.).
On the COGS side, they similarly show a rate that is "too low." If you take their published rate (72.86) and sales tons (4.337) you only get 315.99 but actual COGS shown in table (367.4). If you add up these larger #s across the segments you get 1,008.8 which shows up line 4 in income statement. If you take the actual COGS against sales tons, then you get 84.71/mT. So it is like they took the rebate and instead of adding it to the realized rate, they subtracted it from the COGs rate. Either way, the spread is the same (33.94).
My understanding is that inventory is a cash flow effect but not an income effect. The cost of producing that inventory (1.468) is included in the inventory line item in cash flow statement. Someone correct my GAAP knowledge if I am wrong.
So, in a nutshell the revenue and COGS #s you see in the table include the rebate as well as cost to produce rebated product but the rates are adjusted. As long as you are consistent, should be fine.
say a prayer today.
Is asia on the books for ~1bn - that is what i read in some post but have not verified. If so, a 33% haircut applied across all assets makes the buybacks much less attractive especially given current leverage.
do you think some of the shorts are credit holders? Also, do those short numbers include options? Like a dealer whose short a put and hedges?