RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:18th Annual Whistler Conference...
phoenix_trader wrote: "The softness in the chemical side due to reduced drilling activity I don't believe is fully priced in until we get some earning info" " Add in the softness in Chem side to oil and gas customers". Can you help me here, Canexus says the Chemical products are mostly used in the paper, pulp and water treatment industries, in fact no mention of oil and gas customers. You sure were talking about Canexus .
phoenix; Have a look at p. 6 of the Jan. 2015 Investors Presentation. The potential effect of the downturn in the Oil and Gas Industry are mentioned in the Whistler Presentation. If you haven’t listened to it you can find it here;
https://canexus.ca/investors/presentations-events
slewfoot;Your statement that the current value of NATO is “less than zero” is ludicrous. During the Whistler Presentation Doug Wonnacott was asked about the contracting and potential sale of NATO. His answer was that there were two types of potential purchasers, Producers who would want the capacity for themselves and Midstream Shippers that would like the capacity to be already contracted. To keep their options open a balance had to be found which was why they hadn’t been aggressively contracting the capacity. He also said that NATO had high fixed costs. As I mentioned in a previous post in Q2/14 NATO was cash flow positive. Unfortunately the number of Unit Trains loaded in Q2 wasn’t reported but they did say that 3,803 cars were loaded. If we assume 100 cars per train that would be abt. 3.2 Unit Trains per week. I believe that currently they have 4.5 contracted (take or pay) that will increase to 5.5 – 6 in the last half of the year. He also said that NATO was currently just barley cash flow positive. Is this an “accident” or part of the sale “strategy”? Don’t forget that every Unit Train over and above the level that covers the “fixed costs” has a very positive effect on the bottom line.
Your statement that some posters on this board are expecting a “home run” is a bit exaggerated to say the least. The positive posts that I have seen recognize the problems and challenges facing Canexus. In my opinion if the problems can be identified the potential solutions can be identified. Then it’s possible to assess the probability of the solutions being executed. When Doug was asked about the NATO fiasco he replied that it was history and he couldn’t change that. He did say that he saw some “cultural” problems within the organization. The different departments hadn’t been communicating well with each other and the person in charge of the NATO project (I wonder if there was actually anybody). It seems to me the first and most important step in solving a problem is recognizing it.
One of the reasons for the current weakness in the SP is a well-earned lack of confidence in the Canexus management under the former CEO. Doug Wonnacott is the new guy and he hasn’t been there long enough to change that. If he can restore some confidence it will eventually be reflected in the SP. The ball is in his court and it will take some time.
It can be difficult to do but when I assess my holdings regardless of whether I am under water or in the money I ask myself a simple question. Would I buy it at the current price? Along with all the other considerations I think that is a very important part of the decision.
As for Kherson when his “investment decisions” go south which seems to happen regularly he “very selectively” reposts his old posts. He also has a propensity to repost the “opinions” of some very credible people that were made several months or years ago that were based on excellent analysis of the facts known at the time. Apparently Kherson can change his “opinion” when the facts change but others can’t. It looks to me that he attempts to make himself look good by making others look bad. PATHETIC would be an understatement!
As Always; Do Your Own Due Diligence; It’s Your Money !!