RE:RE:Pipeline SaleSome of these statements crack me up. What a mess, glad it's not my job to make sense of this stuff. Yeesh.
WEG agrees with the UCA that risk exists in the long-term (beyond year 15). Committed loads on the Pioneer Pipeline comprise less than one-quarter of the investment lifetime of the Pioneer Pipeline. The gas usage underlying the contracts (outside of potentially Sundance 5) are either uncertain at this time, or supply infrastructure with questionable long-term viability considering carbon reduction requirements and technologies.
AP takes the position that the Pioneer Pipeline will be used and useful, but AP’s position is subject to approval of all of the acquisition costs of the Pioneer Pipeline. In other words, AP takes the position that the Pioneer Pipeline can only be used and useful if acquired at the premium preferred by AP and thus if the Pioneer Pipeline cannot be acquired at the costs it proposes, the Pioneer Pipeline is not needed. Who really needs the Pioneer Pipeline and for what purpose?