Recent

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

Black Diamond, Inc. Message Board

tex7779 190 posts  |  Last Activity: May 24, 2016 5:31 AM Member since: Apr 9, 2001
  • Reply to

    Thoughts

    by tellytubby289 Apr 20, 2016 9:05 AM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 20, 2016 6:09 PM Flag

    Hornsby:
    1. It needs to be understood that SXE is an MLP; thus any of these " estimates " for eps put forth by the litany of " analysts " are basically hogwash, totally meaningless.
    2. When the Tres Amigos filed the 8-K letting us know of the pending ch11 for Holdings, they also said that on Friday this week, April 22, 2016 - they will provide guidance as to the performance of Q1-2016. Thus, Telly is absolutely correct.

  • Reply to

    HOLDING 145K SHARES FROM $1'ISH

    by bulltard Apr 20, 2016 12:52 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 20, 2016 5:55 PM Flag

    Yep, that is what I thought as well.

  • Reply to

    Neuberger has virtually bailed on SXE now

    by tex7779 Apr 18, 2016 9:16 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 19, 2016 5:27 AM Flag

    Pete:
    Thanks for straighten me out. Can't figure out why you would get a thumbs down on your comment, nor for that matter on my initial post as I simply presented the facts of Neuberger dumping SXE.

    All that aside, consider though that Neuberger is a $ 77 Billion fund family, that is individuals and pension funds have given them $ 77 Billion to invest. One would hope that Neuberger has more winners then losers.

  • The Form 13G/A has been filed for Q1-2016 by Neuberger on which they show owning 9,200 common units of SXE.
    Compare that to the 2.585 million at EOY 2015, but which was a cut of 1.119 million or total ownership at Q3-2015 of about 3.7 million units. If memory serves me correctly, Neuberger owned about 4.5 million or so back at the end of Q2-2015.

    Neuberger is a large family of different funds, collectively about $ 77 Billion in assets, so the fact that they were tracking our little SXE is interesting.

    Clearly, after the distribution cut and the ch 11 of Holdings, Neuberger did not have much faith in the Tres Amigos.

  • tex7779 tex7779 Apr 18, 2016 6:19 PM Flag

    So totally agree.

  • Reply to

    DOHA meeting

    by matthewshandy Apr 17, 2016 6:54 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 18, 2016 5:21 AM Flag

    BINGO! That is the part that OPEC and Saudi Arabia in particular do not understand, these shale E&Ps will exit ch11, debt removed and keep on pumping with a much lower cost basis.

  • Reply to

    ot: Tex what other mlp's do you have?

    by wallstpirate Apr 17, 2016 8:25 AM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 17, 2016 3:26 PM Flag

    Since I like ( and understand ) the energy sector more than others, here is the list of MLPs - and their C-Corp GPs and others, that I have:

    Currently, my biggest MLP holding is SXE, mostly due to buying a ton when it was sub $ 1, much of which I intent on selling around $ 5 or so.

    The important thing also is whether these are held in a tax deferred account or taxable account. Case in point, I have the LGCYO and VNRPP preferreds in an IRA. Everything else is in a taxable account.

    LGCYO - the preferred
    VNRPP - the preferred

    KMI - the Preferred and the common
    TRGP
    OKE
    OKS
    DPM
    CEQP

    Since I like dividend income stocks, I also have the following:

    GE
    CAT
    F
    SO
    AAPL
    OHI
    EMR

  • Reply to

    10K

    by tellytubby289 Apr 15, 2016 9:26 AM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 17, 2016 10:10 AM Flag

    In fact, and per the 10K, the receivable on $ 48.5 million plus the equity cure of $ 11.8 million - have been paid by Holdings and their PE sponsors.
    That was a very key issue to be resolved prior to the release of the 10K, so that the 10K could be released without the independent auditors attaching a cautionary statement about going concern.
    Bottom line; that is all behind us now.

  • Reply to

    10K

    by tellytubby289 Apr 15, 2016 9:26 AM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 17, 2016 8:02 AM Flag

    Actually on that point, it is understandable why you are confused. On the issue of assets and liabilities, there was the very key issue of Holdings paying the $ 48.5 million that they owed to SXE. Plus, the sponsor PE firms needed to pony up on their Aug 2015 pledge to provide cash for equity cures - when needed, which it was now to the tune of $ 11.8 million.

  • tex7779 tex7779 Apr 17, 2016 7:57 AM Flag

    Therein lies the big problem - the Saudis cannot be counted on to take leadership in stability in the Middle East. They are still losing lives in Yemen and now - on a more macroscopic basis - they are reneging on their earlier pledge to participate in the Doha meeting without Iran. Latest head line this morning from cnbc has that 30-year old prince ABS, throwing a tamper tantrum - now he wants Iran part of the meeting.
    Bottom line; the USA is depending on an unstable and mentally deficient character to provide stable leadership.

  • We know that for all of the prior earnings reports, they filed the report after the market closed on any day of the week, other than Friday. Then, they always had the CC the very following day in the morning.

    Now, however, it is different. They decided that they need a week to work on this.

    Here is my guess as to what they are working on.

    1. They are waiting on the outcome of the Doha meeting on Sunday April 17, 2016. If there is no consensus to freeze or cut output and instead if some countries talk about increasing output, then that will be very detrimental to the price of oil going forward. If, however, there can be found some mature and wise people, then they might just realize that they are all shooting themselves in the foot.

    2. Then, the Tres Amigos, will / should be working on a plan to resume distributions for SXE common. This will bring about an income increase to Holdings.

    3. Next, they will start to execute on their plan to sell all of Holdings ( including SXE )

    Let's face it, the fact that the employment contract expiring for the Tres Amigos, is not coincidental nor insignificant.

  • Reply to

    10K

    by tellytubby289 Apr 15, 2016 9:26 AM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 16, 2016 11:05 AM Flag

    Hornsby:

    It would appear that you are very confused. Your reference to the elimination of $ 700 million in debt pertained to the bankruptcy filing / emergence of Southcross Holdings - NOT - Southcross Energy Partners aka our SXE. SXE was not in bankruptcy - do you understand this?

    Thus, all of the debt reductions in Holdings did not get transferred to SXE, which means our debt is still as it was before Holdings filed for ch11.

    However, your confusion is shared by virtually all / most of the wall street analysts - who do not understand the difference between corporate or partnership entities.

  • Reply to

    just closed gap openning

    by forlong Apr 14, 2016 3:50 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 14, 2016 6:22 PM Flag

    Don't know about the 100-150% ascent trading day - but I truly would like to see that.

  • Seems tomorrow ought to be the time - in the morning when they ought to have the CC.

  • Reply to

    10-K Filed FINALLY

    by telix5000 Apr 14, 2016 4:44 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 14, 2016 5:33 PM Flag

    So, what does this all mean for us - long, long patient unit holders.

  • Reply to

    News out!

    by bsdriftwoodrecords Apr 13, 2016 5:37 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 13, 2016 6:32 PM Flag

    Maybe we should not be amazed - but - when Holdings filed for ch11, the news stories were all over about Holdings and being the parent of SXE.

    Now, that the news are out about Holdings emerging from Ch 11 - total silence. Even looking at the headlines listing on Yahoo - the 5th story down is the wall street journal article about Holdings filing the pre-packaged ch11. So, where is the WSJ on Holdings emerging bankruptcy - nowhere to be heard or seen.

  • As I recall, tomorrow, 13-April-2016, is supposed to be the effective date for Holdings exiting ch11.

    When will they make the receivables payment to SXE and when will SXE publish its 10K - and most importantly when will there be a CC for Q4-2015 and EOY 2015.

  • Reply to

    Explosion at Woodsboro plant

    by jimbob_2000 Apr 12, 2016 4:04 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 12, 2016 6:23 PM Flag

    Looks like gas leaked out or rather was let out accidentally from a tank or pipe. The gas was coming from a high pressure tank or pipe. The gas accumulated where the guys were, someone struck a flame or cigarette or whatever, and you get an explosion.

  • Reply to

    Explosion at Woodsboro plant

    by jimbob_2000 Apr 12, 2016 4:04 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 12, 2016 6:17 PM Flag

    Read my prior post. This looks like someone made a mistake by opening a vent valve.

  • Reply to

    Explosion at Woodsboro plant

    by jimbob_2000 Apr 12, 2016 4:04 PM
    tex7779 tex7779 Apr 12, 2016 6:03 PM Flag

    The most common reason is because someone accidentally opened a vent line. We always have flame arrestors to keep any flame from propogating into the pipe or tank.

    However, if a line is left open - NG gets out and if there is a flame nearby then that is how accidents occur.

    Truly sad about the two guys who died, though.

    The big question is: did someone erroneously open a vent valve or did a pipe or tank blow up. Judging from the short writeup - it looks like an inadvertent vent valve operation.

BDE
4.18-0.04(-0.95%)May 26 4:00 PMEDT