What is the statutory interest rate that will apply to this judgment while under appeal and if ETP wins the appeal process, are they allowed to recover legal costs accumulated during the appeal from EPD?
So, if there was just one question to the jury, then it would seem that this question would have asked the jury to decide if EPD broke off their partnership with ETP and how much ETP should get in actual and punitive damages.
Is that pretty much so??
As an aside, seems with just one question to answer, it should not take long for the jury to come down with their finding. It would seem that ought to take a day or so.
With jury deliberations to start today, March 3, 2014 - one would have to wonder if the combatants took advantage of the weekend break to settle this lawsuit.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Perhaps you may not have seen the article on this topic in the Dallas Morning News.
Judging from this article, it would seem to me that the defendants, Enterprise and Enbridge, would want to settle with ETP over the week end before the jury commences deliberation.
Since Yahoo will not let us post a link, here is the whole story: What are your thoughts on this.
Multibillion-dollar pipeline fight between energy giants goes to jury Monday
By MARK CURRIDEN and NATALIE POSGATE
The Texas Lawbook
Published: 27 February 2014 09:10 PM
Updated: 28 February 2014 10:25 AM
Two energy giants “secretly and cold-bloodedly” conspired to exclude Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners from a multibillion-dollar partnership to build an oil pipeline from Cushing, Okla., to Houston in 2011, lawyers for ETP told Dallas jurors.
“They stole something. They did it intentionally. They did it maliciously and they did it because they are greedy,” ETP lead lawyer Mike Lynn said in closing arguments.
But David Beck, the lead lawyer for Houston-based Enterprise Products, told jurors that ETP’s lawsuit is “nothing more than a partnership by ambush.”
Thursday’s closing arguments capped an intense four-week trial that featured two dozen witnesses and thousands of internal documents from the three huge oil and gas corporations.
The key technical question for jurors is whether ETP and Enterprise legally formed a partnership or joint venture in 2011 when they teamed up to consider building the oil pipeline.
Enterprise subsequently formed a similar deal with the Houston unit of Canada-based Enbridge.
Enterprise contends it had no legal partnership with ETP and points to four documents issued by the two companies that state there wasn’t. For example, an April 27, 2011, agreement signed by ETP and Enterprise reads, “Nothing shall be deemed to create or constitute a joint ve
Sentiment: Strong Buy
When I checked with the court coordinator on this case, I was told that the case has not gone to the jury yet. Am I missing something here or do you have a more reliable source?
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Way too much volatility in ETP stock on puny volume action. Time to increase the available units to attract more retail investors. No doubt in my mind that much/most of the crazy ups and downs on ETP are due to the institutional investors and ETF's.
ETE now has 560 million units, post split. ETP has only 380 million units. With a 2 for 1 split, that would increase to 760 million units. More importantly it would open up the market to more retail investors, who would want to buy ETP in 100 share blocks. With the 100 share blocks it makes it easier to sell covered calls.
There are a lot of retail investors who like the high yield coming from ETP, so it makes sense to open it up to more retail investors. The institutional investors don't care - that is why they are selling ETP whenever they can, hence the inexplicable downdraft this morning.
In any case, it is high time for Kelsy Warren and gang to do what worked well at ETE and that is announcing a 2 for 1 split.
FWIW, I would like to see the sale of the entire Sunoco retail gasoline / convenience store business. Then, take the proceeds from this sale - pay down the debt and increase the cash holding for future distributions.
No, I did not forget about Regency - RGP went up 0.6% yesterday. Bottom line; same issue - the main underlying assets of ETE - that is ETP and RGP barely went positive while ETE went up 3.84%. Perhaps that is not a divergence to some - but it is to me.
Given that ETE actually owns ETP, it would seem odd that ETE would go up 3.84% today, while our ETP finished up 0.03 or virtually unchanged.
Is there any logic to that?
Thanks for the clarification on ETP's hedging. However, it would seem that management would not have contracted for ( hedged ) all of their capacity. Seems that they would give themselves some wiggle room. Thus, when additional flows are required, then they could make more $'s.
The gas in storage still needs to be transported to the LDC's when needed, which seems to benefit ETP.
Thanks for correcting my error. When i looked at last year's 10k filing, I assumed that is when they reported their earnings. Then, upon looking at the ETP web site, yes the Q4-2013 earnings report will come out on Wednesday Feb 19, 2014.
On the issue of nat gas pricing etc - it was my impression that ETP gets primarily paid for transporting and treating the gas. So, it seems to me that they would need high nat gas flows - which is what we have been seeing for a while now.
The analyst consensus is for an eps of 0.60 vs. last year's 0.62. My guess is that they will beat that. I guess more importantly will be the distributable cash flow coverage - and of course their guidance for Q1-2014, which ought to be about 80% done by then. With the brutal winter and huge gas consumption so far, Q1-2014 should be really good.