1 / 8

IPAA 2008 Private Capital Conference “How Private Equity Views the E&P MLP Model” January 16, 2008

QUANTUM ENERGY PARTNERS SM. IPAA 2008 Private Capital Conference “How Private Equity Views the E&P MLP Model” January 16, 2008. www.quantumep.com. Firm Overview.

luke
Download Presentation

IPAA 2008 Private Capital Conference “How Private Equity Views the E&P MLP Model” January 16, 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. QUANTUMENERGY PARTNERSSM IPAA 2008 Private Capital Conference “How Private Equity Views the E&P MLP Model” January 16, 2008 www.quantumep.com

  2. Firm Overview • Family of energy-focused private equity and direct property acquisition funds with primary emphasis in oil and gas sector and secondary emphasis in midstream, oil field services, coal, power, and alternative energy sectors. • Currently manage $3.2 billion; latest fund $1.32 billion in commitments. • Quantum Energy Partners: • Private equity fund. • Investment size: $25 - $150 million. • Multidisciplinary investment team with complimentary expertise in finance, engineering, geology, geophysics, operations, tax, and law. • Quantum Resources: • Direct property acquisition fund. • Investment size: > $200 million. • Partnership w/ Aspect Energy.

  3. Market Update On E&P MLPs • Currently there are nine E&P MLPs with a collective market cap of > $8.8 billion. Four E&P MLPs currently in registration process and multiple others have discussed potential plans for an offering. • E&P MLP trading metrics include a median yield today of 8.0% (vs. 5.1% six months ago). Despite recent weakness, majority of E&P MLPs outperformed broader MLP index in 2007. • Valuation gap between E&P MLPs and C-corps has tightened. • Public market valuations – Recent E&P MLP offerings (Quest and Vanguard) have traded below their initial pricing, with current yields above 10.0%. • Asset deals – Significant competition in the A&D market, partly driven by MLPs, has lifted valuation metrics on upstream asset transactions. • Two clear strategies have emerged: • Drop-Down Strategy – Parent entity contributes assets to its MLP over time providing visibility on future growth. • Acquisition Strategy – The MLP looks to replace and grow production through the A&D market. • Significant “quick” equity capital available via PIPE transactions (> $8.5 billion raised for all MLPs in last 12 months). However, widening PIPE discounts have forced some MLPs back to conventional equity offerings.

  4. Will E&P MLPs Become Mainstream? • There is plenty of precedence. >30 U.S. E&P MLPs in early 80s; >40 Canadian royalty trusts with market cap peaking >$60 billion; >40 current midstream MLPs with market cap ~$100 billion. • Pool of mature assets with limited ability to grow production (i.e. assets that are candidates for E&P MLP ownership) is significant. We estimate that ≈ $250 to $300 billion of assets in the U.S. fit the MLP profile. • Significant supply of capital from Baby Boomers seeking both current income as well as growth and institutional investors entering the MLP space. • Arbitrage still exists between MLP valuations on one hand and C-corps and asset deals on the other. Although this valuation gap has tightened recently.

  5. Private Equity And E&P MLPs • Private equity firms primarily employ two different strategies in the upstream oil and gas space: • Acquire, exploit and improve the cost structure of mature, often under-capitalized, assets; and • Aggregate acreage and pursue moderate risk exploitation/exploration opportunities. • In both strategies, the overriding goals remain constant: • Economically grow production; • Lower costs; • Generate inventory; and • Identify value-maximizing exit strategies. • The advent of E&P MLPs has several implications (good and bad) for energy private equity firms. • Good – fundamental valuation shift in existing assets. • Bad – significant competitor with a superior cost-of-capital.

  6. “Management Team Risks” To The E&P MLP Model • To be competitive, MLPs will be tempted to make aggressive assumptions about decline curves, production and capital costs and exploitation opportunities. Many will fail to execute their plans. • Some MLPs don’t understand their cost-of-capital. Management teams often mistake a stock’s distribution yield for their cost-of-capital. It is not. There is a significant implied distribution growth rate and GP IDRs (if applicable) that must be included in determining an MLPs cost-of-capital. • MLPs can create the false sense of distribution growth by purchasing higher-decline, lower-RLI properties. This happened in Canada. • Commodity price and interest rate volatility can have a devastating affect when they go the wrong way for an MLP that isn’t sufficiently hedged.

  7. “Market Risks” To The E&P MLP Model • Acquisition prices are getting bid up. An increasing number of MLPs will escalate the competition for assets and erode the valuation arbitrage. • Will the larger companies continue divesting their assets to MLPs that are arbitraging an immediate and significant gain or will they set up their own “drop-down” MLPs? • Publicly traded partnerships are being targeted by Congress for taxation. A rewrite of the tax code and partnership law would be a mess, but the risk is higher now than at anytime in the past 20 years. • Interest rates and the market’s expected spread to Treasuries could increase. A 100 basis point increase in average yields would lower unit prices on average 10-15%.

  8. A Blueprint For Building A Successful E&P MLP • To the extent possible, avoid the “Risks” described on the prior two slides. • Get behind a great management team. • Acquisition-driven businesses depend on a management team’s ability to asses risk and allocate capital accordingly, not over-pay, control costs, identify additional by-passed opportunities, and execute according to plan. • Purchase assets that truly fit the MLP model. • High PDP component, ideally > 80%; • Low decline rates, ideally < 10%; • High RLI, ideally > 15 years; and • Low maintenance capital requirements to keep production flat, ideally < 25%. • Hedge aggressively. Remember, you are no longer an oil and gas company but rather a bond with a growth component. You are paid to never miss a distribution target and penalized severely when you do.

More Related