Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D



TSX:CUS.DB.D - Post by User

Comment by BlueCollar51on Apr 15, 2015 11:20am
261 Views
Post# 23631649

RE:RE:RE:April 2015 Investor Presentation

RE:RE:RE:April 2015 Investor Presentation
Calgaryrider wrote:

There are all kinds of misleading statements from the past coming to light.
The one below is a doozy.  They signed a deal in Q3-2014 to increase to 5.5 trains, and they failed to mention that the deal didn't commence until a year LATER?  Are you serious?
Kind of material information, don't you think.  Also, it's clear that TRAINS have nothing to do with volume.  The deals are clearly being signed without any guarantees on whether a train is full or got significantly less cars on it............that's why it says "AT FULL NOMINATIONS".   I've never heard of a take or pay contract without any firm guarantees on volumes.

Folks, watch yourselves here.  As  I said, Q1 and Q2 could be just massive duds for Canexus as NATO continues to pull down the rest of the business. 

 

At currently contracted levels (5.5 trains/week commencing in Q3 2015) we should break even (at full nominations)




Calgaryrider; I think that you may have your facts wrong.  I am not going to dig up all the NRs but if I remember correctly we were originally told that they had Take or Pay contracts with Meg and Cenovus for a combined “up to” 4 trains per week and another contract with an “un-named midstream shipper” for I forget how many trains.
 
On 23 Oct 2014 they announced the loss of the “un-named midstream shippers’” contract.
 
On 07 Jan the new contract was announced.  
 
CALGARY, AB--(Marketwired - January 07, 2015) - Canexus Corporation (TSX: CUS) (the "Corporation" or "Canexus") announces additional contracted unit train volumes at its North American Terminal Operations ("NATO") crude-by-rail facility.
"I am pleased to announce that Canexus has secured an additional unit train per week of volume at our NATO crude-by-rail facility at Bruderheim to commence mid-2015," stated Doug Wonnacott, President and CEO. "The contract term is for 28 months and contains take-or-pay provisions. The customer has the option to increase the volume commitment under the contract by a further half unit train per week commencing January 1, 2016 for the remainder of the term."
With this announcement, Canexus now has approximately 5.5 unit trains per week under contract (approximately 6.0 unit trains per week if the option is exercised).
 
That said I personally overestimated the “minimum value” of these contracts. I did not occur to me to question what “Up To” actually means. I chalk that “up to” poor Due Diligence on my part.
 
As Always; Do Your Own Due Diligence; It’s Your Money !!
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>