Tag Archives: utility

Gas Natural’s (EGAS) CEO Gregory Osborne on Q4 2014 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Gas Natural Inc. (NYSEMKT: EGAS ) Q4 2014 Results Earnings Conference Call March 13, 2015, 10:00 AM ET Executives Karen Howard – Kei Advisors LLC Gregory Osborne – President and CEO Jim Sprague – VP and CFO Kevin Degenstein – COO and CCO Analysts Jay Dobson – Wunderlich Securities George Walsh – Gilford Securities Operator Greetings and welcome to the Gas Natural Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2014 Financial Results Conference Call. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Ms. Karen Howard, Investor Relations for Gas Natural. Thank you, you may begin. Karen Howard Thank you, Christine, and good morning everyone. Welcome to our fourth quarter 2014 earnings teleconference call. We appreciate your interest in Gas Natural. On the call with me today I have Gregory Osborne, President and Chief Executive Officer; Jim Sprague, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Kevin Degenstein, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Compliance Officer. Gregory and Jim will review the fourth quarter and 2014 result and also give an update on the company’s outlook and strategic progress. You should have a copy of the financial results that were released yesterday evening and if not you can access it at the company’s website at www.egas.net. Before Gregory and Jim get started, I want to bring to your attention to our Safe Harbor statement, which is shown on page three of our release. As you are aware, we may make forward-looking statements during the formal discussion, as well as during the Q&A. These statements apply to future events that are subject to risks and uncertainties, as well as other factors that could cause actual results to differ from what is stated in today’s call. These risks and uncertainties and other factors are provided in the earnings release as well as with other documents filed by the company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These documents can be found on the company’s website or at www.sec.gov. And with that let me turn it over to you, Gregory. Gregory Osborne Thanks, Karen and good morning everyone. I appreciate your time today and your interest in Gas Natural. I can certainly say we remain encouraged by our by our progress and excited about our future. The excitement of the changes will affect in the organization, the direction we’re heading, and the opportunities in front of us are permitting throughout the company. Our whole team is onboard with our strategic plan and direction. First let me review our operational results for the quarter and year end. Then I’ll hand it over to Jim to review the detailed results. Note that we’re reporting continuing operations which excludes our Wyoming operations that are in the process of being sold to Blackhills. The sale is progressing and we expect to close on that transaction by late in the second quarter. Just a little refresher, the agreement to sell the operation for approximately $17 million, we believe there is opportunity as well to monetize other assets that are less critical to our strategy. I should also point out that there are some noise in our financials with unusual or non-recurring cost this quarter that we have identified for your convenience. We think our two operating performance is better understood by isolating those costs. For the fourth quarter of 2014 on an adjusted basis, income from continuing operations was $3 million or $0.28 per share. For the year on an adjusted basis, income from continuing operations was $5.7 million or $0.55 per share. We believe we’re making solid progress as we advance Gas Natural to the issue this management team inherited last year we also continue to demonstrate growth. In 2014, we once grew our customer base by nearly 5% to approximately 68,000 customers driven by emerging markets of Maine, North Carolina and are still growing Ohio market. In fact, since 2009 we’ve had 65,000 customers. We have grown the customer count by comp on annual growth rate of almost 4.5%. The growth has been driven by the investments we’ve made in expanding our distribution systems. We believe our target of 4% to 5% customer growth per year remains achievable. Companywide we increased our full service distribution throughput by over 12% during 2014. As noted in the release, our key milestone this year was activation of Phase 1 of our Loring Pipeline in Lincoln Maine and the initiation of service to Lincoln Paper and Tissue our industrial customer. The first phase represents 60 miles of the 189 mile pipeline and we’re currently working on Phase 2 which comprises the next 30 miles. We made progress as well on the governance front. We added a new independent Director in 2014 and another just last month. I’m confident that Mike Winter and Michael Bender will be viable contributors to the Board offering strategic insight, industry experience, and direction to help guide us forward. Those additions as well as the voluntary resignation of three other Directors, our Board now consists of seven Directors, six of whom are independent a measurable improvement in independents. We’ve also carefully examined all our business deals to make sure we have the right people on the right position to make changes where necessary. Through the year we reduced our overall employee count by approximately 12%. At December 31, we had 229 employees, which we believe is about the right level for the business as we currently stand. As expected, we will see the results and the investigate audit required by Public Utility Commission of Ohio or PUCO in January of 2015 known as the ramming report. The audit which was conducted throughout 2014 revealed many opportunities for improvement of historical practices and record keeping. During the course of the audit we were closely with the commission and at staff to make significant changes to our past practices and procedures and we continue to do so. Some of the key actions we have taken before during and since completion on the audit includes the following; we engage Freed Maxick CPAs to assist with designing and implementing a complete system of total controls and procedures. As a result, we established a solid and documented system to better ensure effective and consistent processing of transactions and controls and to improve decision making. We eliminated related party transactions other than those where we had contractual obligations. We have established transfer and relationship throughout the regulatory bodies and all of our jurisdictions. This includes increased communications with PUCO staff to ensure compliance with gas cost recover filings. We segregated our corporate offices from our utility offices as required by the PUCO to maintain proper segregation of duties. We are in the early stages of establishing in internal audit department that will report directly to the audit community of our board. Also in December, our Board approved a change or dividend payment schedule to a more typical quarterly payment beginning in the first quarter of 2015. Many investors have suggested this and it also reduced the costs. For 2015, we will continue to advance our strategic initiatives, as changes we’ve made last year should be demonstrated. We have a new culture here on focused on driving transparency, individual responsibility, safety and reliability and faster decision making. And we continue to remain focused on building a value driven transparent and growing natural gas utility. With that, I will turn it over to Jim to summarize our financial results. Jim? Jim Sprague Thank you, Gregory, and good morning everyone. Thank you for joining us today. Our 2014 results are an early demonstration of our focus on cost discipline, the effects of strategic investment to drive shareholder growth, and overall strengthening of our natural gas utility operations. There were a number of unusual items that impacted our results for the quarter and the year so we will speak to both GAAP and adjusted non-GAAP results. Let me start by talking through the quarter. Revenue grew modestly to approximately $40 million up about 2%. Revenue from our natural gas operation segment improved $2.3 million or 7% due to growth in our customer base, increased natural gas prices and higher sales volumes. As you may know, increases in our cost of natural gas are a direct pass-through to our customers without offering opportunity for margin expansion. Consolidated gross margin was $12 million in the quarter down from $13.5 million in 2013 fourth quarter. Warmer than average temperatures in our markets during the 2014 quarter compared with the year ago was a primary reason for the decline. Our operating expenses for the fourth quarter grew by $500,000 or about 6% over the prior year quarter to $8.9 million. Higher expenses were mostly the result of a couple of factors that totaled about $2.9 million. These were as follows; first, professional and legal fees related to increase regulatory and legal proceedings of which $2.5 million is non-recurring in nature. And also, a business combination adjustment of $400,000 which we also consider non-recurring. Operating income for the fourth quarter was $3.1 million down $2 million from the prior period. Let me now turn to adjusted EBITDA and bottom line GAAP and adjusted results. We feel that when used in conjunction with GAAP measures, adjusted income from continuing operations and adjusted EBITDA or earnings before interest taxes, depreciation, amortization and accretion, and non-recurring charges, allow investors to view our operating performance in a manner similar to the methods we use and provide additional insight into the company’s operating result. Reconciliations of GAAP to adjusted non-GAAP numbers can be found in the tables in our press release. For the quarter, adjusted EBITDA increased 20% to $7.1 million. Adjusted income from continuing operations, a non-GAAP measure was $3 million improved 20% over the prior year period. Adjusted income on a per share diluted basis, adjusted income from operations was up $0.04 to $0.28 a share, a 16% improvement. On a per share basis, the non-recurring professional and legal fees amounted to approximately $0.15 per share and business combination adjustments were $0.02. On a GAAP basis income from continuing operations was $1.2 million or $0.11 per share. Let’s look briefly as well at the full year. 2014 revenue grew by $23.2 million or 21% to $132.6 million, mostly as a result of customer growth, further magnified by colder weather and higher prices for natural gas. These increases were offset by a reduction from the loss of our LNG customer to pipeline competition. On a full year basis, gross margin grew $1.5 million to $44.9 million. The full year margin benefited from a larger customer base and colder than normal temperatures in all markets, although it was somewhat offset by the loss of our LNG customer as I mentioned previously and higher cost of natural gas used to supply of fixed price contracts. Over the year, operating expenses grew by $6.1 million to $37.8 million. Of that increase, $1.1 million was for higher depreciation, amortization and accretion. There was also $5.2 million of non-recurring costs. These included the following. First, there were non-recurring legal and professional and other expenses of $3.7 million. Second, 2014 was impacted by a specific $1.1 million non-recurring bad debt charge that was incurred in the second quarter. Third, we wrote off 300,000 relating to a software conversion project that was terminated. And finally, we also recorded a net unrealized holding loss, a $100,000 related to the earn-out provision in the JDOG marketing purchase compared to a net unrealized holding gain of nearly $1.6 million in 2013. With these unusual costs, 2014 operating income was down about $4.7 million to $7.1 million. For the year, adjusted EBITDA was up about $400,000 or 2% to $19.1 million. Adjusted income from continuing operations in 2014 was $5.7 million or $0.55 per share compared with $6.5 million or $0.70 per share in 2013. On a per share basis, the non-recurring professional and legal fees amounted to approximately $0.21, the bad debt charge amounted to $0.06 and business combination adjustments were $0.02. GAAP income from continuing operations for the year was $2.7 million or $0.26 per share. Turning to the balance sheet and looking at our capital requirements, at year end we had $1.6 million of cash and cash equivalent. We have several initiatives going on with regard to our capital structure. We are investigating bridge financing until we realize the cash from our Wyoming divestiture. Even though our existing debt is not due until 2017, we are also looking at recapitalization of our debt at the parent company level. Revolution of outstanding regulatory issues in Ohio and Montano are critical to execution of the recapitalization. Finally, this is one of our strongest cash flow quarters especially strong this year with the cold weather we have been realizing in the majority of our markets. Our notes payable at December 31 2104 amounted to $40.3 million or 42% of equity compared with the ratio of 45% at the end of 2013. Capital expenditures in 2014 were $21.6 million, down slightly from $23.5 million in 2013. For 2015, we expect full year CapEx to be approximately $8 million to $9 million. We have done a great deal analysis on the projects we have in our pipeline and have weeded out a great number whose return is not reach our expectation. In addition, we will be filing in Maine where needed in order to systematically expand our systems in our various territories. We will have a greater amount of discipline in our project selection and management, focusing our resources where we can execute effectively to drive earnings. As a result of this review, our 2015 CapEx is lower than recent years. We continue to be focused on the growth of our natural gas operation segments in markets that we consider to be underserved. Safety remains our number one priority, so maintenance CapEx requires for reinforcing the infrastructure in all of our utility service areas as critical to our planning. And with that summary, let me turn the call back to Gregory. Gregory Osborne Thank you, Jim. We’re continuing to execute our strategy of transforming Gas Natural into a more transparent organization based on trust and credibility with employees, regulators and shareholders as well as continuing strategic involvement in our key markets. Now let’s open it up for line of questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Jay Dobson with Wunderlich Securities. Please proceed with your question. Jay Dobson Greg, its Jay Dobson. How are you? Gregory Osborne Hey how are you? Jay Dobson Very well thanks. Hey I am very sorry, I joined late in the middle, I’ve been multitasking here a little bit, but I was hoping if you can give us some insight into sort of where we are. I know you got an order out of the Ohio Commission and sort of where you stand in sort of correcting the number of items identified in the management audit. I know you talked a little bit about this, but I was wondering if you could elaborate as to specifically where we are? Gregory Osborne Absolutely. I am going to shoot that over to Jim and Jim go ahead. Jim Sprague Good morning, Jay. How are you? Jay Dobson Great, thanks Jim. Jim Sprague As far as the progress where we’re at with the Raymond report, the report as you know has been filed and we’re in the process now of working with the PUCO the staff and the Ohio Consumers Counsel to come up with a stipulation that would follow the recommendations that are embedded in the report and recognizing that we’ve already implemented or in the process of implementing another — a number of the initiatives that are in there. We’re looking to just cement that down and we’re hoping that we have resolution of that in short order. But at this point, we’re pleased with the progress we’ve been making and conversations we’ve had with them and expect resolution and short order. Jay Dobson And then as far as process goes on that, as you have these discussions, how does the process or proceeding play out from here? Will you have to commit to doing certain things and then the proceeding will be closed or will it remain open for a period of time as they watch your actions? Jim Sprague Well the process hasn’t been completed yet Jay, but the reaction is going as is going to be one that we enter into a stipulation to work hand in hand with the Commission to make sure that we’re implementing the recommendations and then there will be a monitoring of those on a going forward basis. Ultimately the resolution will be based on a final agreement between all the parties, but we’re confident that the focus of the attention will be more on management and the utilities progress going forward as opposed to going backwards? Jay Dobson Got you and then lastly on that same element, I know just given some of the cost and the like you had taken reserves, do you feel as though you’re adequately reserved for cost that will come out of this given that as you said the proceeding is still ongoing? Jim Sprague We are. Jay Dobson Great. Thank you so very much. Really appreciated. Looking forward to speaking soon. Jim Sprague You’re welcome Jay. Take care. Operator Our next question comes from the line of [John Bear] [ph] Ascend Wealth Management. Please proceed with your question. Unidentified Analyst Good morning, Greg. How are you doing today? Gregory Osborne Good. How are you? Unidentified Analyst Good. Got just a general question and looking to very good capital expenditures look like you’re going to be down pretty significantly this year from somewhere in the $20 million down to $8 million to $9 million and hopefully that with the regulatory issues getting behind you, assuming that those costs will come down and then with selling your properties, should be a fairly dramatic change in capital demands. Am I interpreting that correctly? Gregory Osborne Yes, correct. Unidentified Analyst And so with that being said then what — with that improved cash flow and capital requirements, what’s the next step? What will you do with that, hopefully that will make life a lot easier on you to expand the business? What are you looking at doing from that point? Jim Sprague John, this is Jim Sprague. How are you this morning. Unidentified Analyst Good, very good. Thank you. Jim Sprague Yes, as I mentioned in my comments John, we’re looking to recapitalize our debt structure at the G&I level currently at a subsidiary holding company. To achieve that is going to require us to as we alluded to earlier, bring a resolution to the Ohio regulatory issues that we currently have in front of us and also to work with the Montana regulators, which I’ll defer to Kevin Degenstein to give you more detail on that. But getting those two matters concluded or at least resolved to the point that we can then proceed forward with the recapitalization. Then at that point everything is about timing at this point John. So when the Wyoming sale closes, we’re looking at a convergence of events then that would allow us to relook at our capital budgets and provide some additional direction to our General Managers as far as budgetary requirements. As we were discussing our budgets for 2015, we took a conservative approach to make sure that we prioritized our projects such that we kept our initiatives of growth moving forward without being overly aggressive until we knew the resolution of some of these events. So there is — it is a bit of a fluid situation, but we thought taking a conservative approach allows us to be nimble and flexible enough to be able to execute where we can and then be able to make revisions once we do get some resolution on these certain regulatory issues as well as our financing recap. Unidentified Analyst Okay. And which areas would you expect to focus on expansion once you got that all behind you recently into North Carolina? Is that a primary focus as opposed to Maine so much or is Maine so pretty much on — and Ohio of course your focus areas. Gregory Osborne Kevin, do you want to speak to the CapEx moving forward in some of the emerging markets? Kevin Degenstein Yes absolutely. Hi, how are you doing John? Unidentified Analyst Great. Kevin Degenstein Good. Yeah, ready to go, thank you. I appreciate that. To Greg’s point earlier when he was speaking, we really stepped back and looked at staffing adjustments and rightsizing the organization based on the environment today. We spend significant capital in previous years and we have a significant amount of infrastructure that’s been put in the ground. We’re at a point where we’re looking and stepping back and saying, the low hanging fruit is really to step away from expanding and filling in behind where we already have and so we looked and said, we’ve got a great opportunity to reduce cost, fill in behind where we’ve already got being front of the companies — customers, excuse me and take advantage of our previous investments. And then also right size in a market where pricing of propane and oil has changed a little bit, we don’t expect that to be long term, but it’s an opportunity for us to step back when maybe our competitors have pricing that is not as easy to compete with, that we still can compete — we still can convert, but we don’t have as great of an advantage. So, I think the timing worked out well. The lessons we have we could take advantage of. And then, from a regulatory front, I think to Jim’s point, putting this behind us is important. We look at the Wyoming use of proceeds and getting that close, and then look at our short-term bridge loan and dealing with the staff in Montana here puts us in a position to get back to the point where we are depending from EWI. So, we’ve got things in place that we are doing to get those things put in place. Any year we’re going to take a conservative approach to expansion. And we’ll fill-in where we already got main thing. Unidentified Analyst Yes. I’ll get back. Go ahead. Gregory Osborne No. I just think to add to that — this is Gregory — is you know, there’s new management we got together for 2015 and we’ve got with our heads of utility is in the past it was always grow, grow, grow. We realized we did — we could monetize a lot of these past investments with fill-in. So, we obviously put corporate governance and regulatory relations and things of that nature at the forefront and spend a lot of time on those. So, it’s been a transformational year; and like Kevin and Jim have mentioned, we’re focusing on some of those paths and just want to monetizing those with lot of the fill-in work, so it’s been good. Unidentified Analyst Thanks. Good luck. Gregory Osborne Thank you. Kevin Degenstein Thank you, John. Unidentified Analyst Keep going. Okay. Operator Our next question comes from the line of George Walsh with Gilford Securities. Please proceed with your question. George Walsh Thank you. Just to clarify what you’re saying on the CapEx. $8 million to $9 million seems to be the minimum and pending these transactions in Wyoming and other issues, you’re looking at a possible increase, but are we looking at something that should be back up to the $20 million in CapEx to your — you feel because of what you said that it’s going to be less than that. You don’t need to spend that much. So we’re looking at something you make it upto $15 million or something like that. Kevin Degenstein Yeah. This is Kevin. I can answer that. I think through this year looking at fill-ins and competitive projects and getting the rate of return we want, we will not hit the $20 million mark. $8 million to $9 million is our target. If we adjust it may be by $1 million or $2 million, I don’t anticipate we would be at $15 million. I think this is the good year to step back and take advantage of previous investments. And then, we’ll watch the competitive market, specifically in Maine in North Carolina, and we’ll continue to grow in Ohio. But no, I do not anticipate we would be significantly above $8 million, $9 million. George Walsh Okay. That’s good. The — could you just speak to with the changes on the Board, who we have on the audit committee right now? Well, well beyond the audit committee? Gregory Osborne Currently we have Rich Greaves. Kevin Degenstein Chairman. Gregory Osborne As a Chairman, we have Michael Winner who is a new Board member, former Price Waterhouse… Kevin Degenstein Partner. Gregory Osborne Partner. And lastly we have Wade Brooksby. George Walsh Okay. But not Michael Bender. Gregory Osborne Currently, Michael Bender is on the nominating committee. George Walsh Got it. Okay. Jim Sprague Corporate governance. George Walsh And could you speak a little bit more to that appointment that was the — they’ve taken the significant interest in the company, and they’ve taken the speed on the Board. And it seems to be a stabilizing influence of somebody within InterTech Group coming in there. And just if you could give us a little more detail about the relationship there and the role they seek to play. Gregory Osborne Absolutely. Throughout this past year, the Board, myself as we’ve continue to evaluate the structural requirements of the Board, and I’ve always wanted to evolve the Board. So I think by bringing Michel Winner and Michael Bender we’ve done just that. So — and speaking to InterTech, as you know, or as you may now that they have investments and a lot of our peers in Delta and Corning, Chesapeake, other utilities. So to understand the utility business they have Board representation on Corning Natural Gas. So we felt by them owning a large percentage in our company, they support management by bringing them on with their industry experience, their network in the finance community. It’s a great benefit to Gas Natural and its shareholders moving forward. So, I couldn’t be more excited about both Michael Winner and Michael Bender and their new involvement with Gas Natural. So what role they played, they’ll just do what they can to better Gas Natural, and we’re excited about it. And they both bring different aspects from their past carriers or current carries. So, again it’s really excited to have them on board and we’re excited about things to come. George Walsh Okay. Great. That sounds good. It sounds like given what we’re looking at if these non-recurring items are less recurring. Well, could you just speak to that? How you see the non-recurring items that have been recurring the last couple of years. What your best guess is that how those will speak in 2015? Gregory Osborne Yeah. I might have Jim speak to that please, Jim? Jim Sprague Yeah, George. The issues that we have, clearly from the regulatory front, we had quite a bit of increased cost as a result of issues in Maine and North Carolina, basically all are jurisdictions. And we’ve stabilized relationships in both Maine and North Carolina. We would expect those cost to get more to normal levels. There is always going to be relative compliance, but not at the level that we needed in those jurisdictions. Ohio and Montana, as we’ve alluded to in several instances during this call, we’re looking for resolution of those. I would hope we could get the Ohio issues resolved by the end of Q2 of 2015. Montana, Kevin could give you a little bit more on the timing and more specifics, but I believe we’re looking at resolution of that and about the same timeframe as well. Again, a lot of these events are converging that we have coming up here in 2015. But we would see a lot of those regulatory costs to be ramping down back to more normal levels at the very latest by the second quarter of ’15. On the legal front from a legal cost standpoint, non-regulatory issues are ongoing. There were certain aspects that require more involvement in the early phases. So, while those issues continue, we wouldn’t anticipate those to be at the levels that they had been historically or at least in the year 2014. So, we do see a lot of these particular issues I don’t want to say winding down, but not being at the levels that they were in ’14 for this current year. George Walsh And are they more about regulatory operational compliance with procedures as oppose to any — you’re still be dealing with bonds, or I don’t know if there’s customer rebate involved something like that. Jim Sprague No. We’re not dealing with those at this point in time. I mean, we clearly have gas cost recovery, audits that take place on an ongoing basis that would result in upward or downward adjustments, but nothing that would be considered out of the ordinary. George Walsh Okay. Okay. That’s it for me. Thank you. Gregory Osborne Thank you. Operator Thank you. We have reached the end of the question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn the floor back over to management for closing comments. Gregory Osborne Thank you, Christine. At close, I’d like to thank you all for joining us this morning on our 2014 fourth quarter earnings teleconference. This is exciting time for Gas Natural as we continue to execute our strategy of investing in key growth markets. Despite several challenges this quarter, we continue to execute our strategy and we remain excited for the future. Thank you for joining us today. We look forward to sharing 2015 progress with our first quarter results in May. Have a great day. Operator Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation, and have a wonderful day.

20% Dividend Raise And Recent Pullback Make My Favorite Utility Northwestern Corp. Attractive

NWE raised its dividend 20% for Q1 2015 to $0.48 per common share (3.67% annually). Q4 2014 adjusted earnings were $2.68 per share (at the midpoint of guidance of $2.60-$2.75) a +7.2% improvement over Q4 2013. Total revenues were about $312.95 million. This was a miss of -$37.14 million. Revenues were down year over year about -1.9%. Northwestern Corp. (NYSE: NWE ) does business under the name Northwestern Energy. On February 15, 2002 Northwestern Corp. acquired the energy distribution and transmission business of Montana Power to form Northwestern Energy (still Northwestern Corp. though). It is a leading energy delivery company with business in Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Wyoming, especially the first two states. It recently raised its dividend by 20% to $0.48 per common share per quarter for a 3.67% annual yield. The long term chart of NWE below shows it to be in a strong upward trend long term. (click to enlarge) Essentially NWE has gone straight upward since the low of the Great Recession. Perhaps as significantly, it had recovered fully from the Great Recession by April 1, 2010. Such stalwarts as Chevron and Johnson & Johnson took much longer — until early 2011 and late 2012 respectively. Even stalwart utility companies such as Southern Company (NYSE: SO ) and Consolidated Edison (NYSE: ED ) took until early 2011 to recover to their 2007 highs. NWE has a past as an outperformer; and its future will likely be equally as bright. To understand the latest stock price movements, it may be best to look at the charts of the 10 year US Treasury Note yield and the one year chart of NWE . (click to enlarge) The yellow line in the NWE chart above demarks January 30, 2015, which was the recent yield nadir for the 10 year US Treasury Note. As the yield for the 10 year US Treasury Note rose from 1.64% on January 30, 2015 to 2.24% on March 6, 2015, the price of NWE stock fell. This is the normal scenario for utilities when interest rates rise because the utilities’ dividend rates are normally remaining unchanged. This high correlation also likely tells investors that this is a good time to buy NWE (and utilities in general), if you believe the yield on the 10 year US Treasury Note is resuming its downtrend. There are many reasons to believe this: Most EU bonds have been trending downward due to the €1.1 trillion ECB QE program in 2015. Many bonds that are generally viewed as riskier and less stable than US Treasuries currently have much lower yields (and are much more expensive) than US Treasuries. For example, the Spanish 10 year bond yield is 1.15% and the Italian 10 year bond yield is 1.13% . These low yields on “riskier” bonds should push the yields of the “less risky” 10 year US Treasury bonds downward. The 10 year US Treasury Note yield is 2.12% as of this writing March 13, 2015. The USD has risen dramatically against the Euro and other currencies in the last year. For instance, the Euro has fallen from 1.39 USD per Euro on May 6, 2014 to 1.06 USD per Euro as of the close on March 12, 2015 (almost a -24% drop). If the USD is appreciating against other currencies, that makes US Treasuries that much more attractive to foreign investors. After all a European could have made fantastic money just on the appreciation of the USD since May 6, 2014, if the European had owned US Treasuries. He/she would also have gotten the yield on the Treasuries. Plus since US Treasury yields have been going down, the European investor would have gotten appreciation on the price of the US Treasuries. Since many people think the devaluation of the Euro versus the USD is likely to continue as the ECB dispenses more QE in 2015, many Europeans seem likely to invest in US Treasuries. This should act to increase the prices (decrease the yields) of US Treasuries. That in turn is also motivation for investors (including Europeans and Japanese) to buy US utility stocks, which will likely have stable to increasing yields. All of the major economies other than the US have been increasing easing actions. The BOJ has a huge QE program . The PBOC has recently been announcing new easing programs . If there is a lot of extra liquidity around, people will not want to pay very much in interest rates to borrow money. Foreign investors will also be happy to keep their money in Treasuries of the one country with an appreciating currency (the one that is not doing more easing currently). The US Fed has talked about raising its rates, especially the Fed Funds rate. If it did this, that would likely lead to higher US Treasuries yields. However, this is increasingly unlikely. The US inflation rate was -0.1% in January 2015; and the overall trend has been strongly downward in recent months. If the US Fed tries to raise rates in that environment, it will only cause STAGFLATION. Further a raise in rates would cause the USD to appreciate that much faster; and the appreciation we have seen just since May 6, 2015 is already hurting US exports. It is also spurring foreign imports. Both of these items will tend to act to destroy US jobs, although there may be a lag in the effect. This would act directly against the Fed’s mandate on full employment. Plus it clearly doesn’t need to control inflation through a rate increase at this time, which is the Fed’s main mandate. On top of all of the above, NWE is a well run company that has seen steady growth. Adjusted EPS for Q4 2014 were $2.68 per common share (a +7.2% improvement over Q4 2013). For FY2014 GAAP Net Income was $120.7 million (or $2.99 per diluted share) compared to $94.0 million of $2.46 per diluted share for FY2013 — a 22% improvement. GAAP Net Income guidance for FY2015 is for $3.10-$3.30 per diluted share — a midpoint 7% improvement. This is good growth for a utility. A key factor in NWE’s growth will be the new Hydro facilities purchased from PPL Montana in late 2014. These are eleven hydroelectric generating facilities ( 633 Megawatts ). They were obtained for $900 million. $870 million of that purchase price was added to the rate base with a 50-year life. Return on equity is expected to be 9.8%. The capital structure is 52% debt and 48% equity. This resulted in $400 million in issued equity (7.767 million shares issued at $51.50 per share) and $450 in new debt. The resulting first year annual retail revenue requirement is approximately $117 million. The debt is 30-year first mortgage bonds with a coupon of 4.176%. The all-in cost of the debt was 4.353%. Of this 4.25% is recoverable under the hydro approval granted by the Montana PSC. The transaction closed November 18, 2014. This should be a good new revenue source for FY2015. It should help NWE meet or exceed its guidance. The chart below shows NWE’s recent history of meeting or exceeding its guidance. (click to enlarge) As investors can see, there is a high likelihood that NWE will beat its initial FY2015 guidance. Any upward revisions during the year should help the stock rise. With a 3.67% dividend and an uptrend in the stock price that is almost unshakeable, NWE appears to be about as much of a sure thing as investors can find. When you add the quick recovery it showed from the Great Recession, it makes it even more attractive in a very uncertain market. We have already had six plus years of the current bull market. A bear market may be on the near horizon. If so, NWE may be a relatively good place to be. It will pay you a nice dividend to wait for a recovery in any stock price fall. Another point in NWE’s favor is that Fitch upgraded NWE’s Issuer Default Rating to BBB+ on November 5, 2014. Fitch gave as reasons: The acquisition of the hydroelectric portfolio. The low risk, regulated utility business model. The improved financial and business profile. Its moderating CapEx budget. From a metrics standpoint, the PE of 17.49 and the FPE of 15.34 indicate a currently reasonable price of $52.30 per share as of the close March 12, 2015. The average analysts’ one year price target is only $57.46 per share, but this could easily rise significantly if the new hydro facilities provide a bit more income than has likely been conservatively estimated. The Beta of 0.52 is also a positive in an uncertain market. NWE is a buy with an average analysts’ next five years EPS growth per annum forecast of 7.60%. This is outperformance in the utility industry. The comparable numbers for a few other major utilities are: Consolidated Edison — 2.77% EPS growth, Southern Company — 3.30% EPS growth, and Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK ) — 4.52% EPS growth. There has been no insider selling on NWE. NOTE: Some of the fundamental fiscal data above is from Yahoo Finance. Good Luck Trading/Investing. Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, but may initiate a long position in NWE over the next 72 hours. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Construction Delayed, Bringing Down Southern Company’s Rating From Buy To Hold

Summary SO’s near-term performance will be pressurized due to construction delays in two main projects. Completion of ongoing construction projects will improve business risk profile and portend well for stock valuation. SO’s ongoing robust investments in several solar projects will also add towards growth of long-term earnings trajectory. Challenges faced by the company due to construction delays and cost overruns will keep pressure on stock valuation. I am downgrading Southern Company (NYSE: SO ) to a ‘hold’ from ‘ buy ‘, due to challenges faced by the company in its construction projects. Despite the fact that the company’s healthy rate base earned from its strong capital investments towards growing operations in a stable and growing industry has been helping its top-line numbers grow, the ongoing construction growth remains a risk to its performance in the near term. I recommend investors to keep track of the ongoing construction projects, as in the near term, ongoing construction delays of the Kemper and Vogtle projects could hurt the company’s stock price performance. Cost overruns and delays in the ongoing projects weighed on the company’s Q4’14 results. Moreover, the ongoing construction challenges will keep pressure on stock valuations, as the company’s business risk profile has inflated due to construction delays and cost overruns. During the Q4’14 conference call, the company introduced its 2015 guidance and lowered its EPS growth range due to construction challenges. Construction Remains a Concern The company’s recent financial performance was adversely affected by cost overruns and delays. In Q4’14, the company registered an after-tax impairment charge of approximately $44 billion. SO reported an EPS of $0.38 for Q4’14, down from $0.48 in Q4’13. The company’s major growth investments in its keynote power plant projects, Kemper and Vogtle, are facing construction delays. The Kemper project is delayed, and is now expected to be in service in 1H’16. Also, the Vogtle project is delayed by 18 months. In fact, the cost overruns on SO’s 582MW coal plant Kemper prevailed in 2014. With a cost increase of $330 million, Kemper’s total construction cost escalated to almost $6.2 billion , as compared to initial estimates of $2.2 billion. As far as the construction of two nuclear plants in Vogtle is concerned, analysts have projected that if the construction of these new nuclear reactors at the Vogtle plant will be delayed just short of three years, the company might spend $8 billion to complete the construction of reactors. Along with the $8 billion construction delay costs, SO might be asked to pay $240 million in damages for falling behind schedule. I believe that in the near term, construction delays on both Kemper and Vogtle projects will weigh on its performance. But in the long run, the completion of these projects will improve SO’s production capacity and will optimize its generation portfolio. Along with its increased investments in competitive business, SO is also investing heavily to expand the generation capacity of its renewable energy generation business. As part of this plan, the company has started building a 131MW solar electricity generating plant in Georgia, which will begin its operation in 2016. This 131MW utility facility will sell electricity to three Georgia Electricity generation companies under a 25-year agreement. Owing to the longevity of the purchase power agreement done by the company, I believe the 131MW facility will deliver a significant upside to the company’s earnings base, upon completion. Moreover, SO has recently acquired two solar projects totaling 99MW from TradeWind Energy in Georgia, which include an 80MW Decatur Parkway Solar Project and a 19MW Decatur Country Solar project. The 80MW generation project, which is planned to commence this month, will sell electricity under the 25-year PPA with Georgia Power. As the projects are covered by long-term contracts, I believe that upon their commencement, both projects will add well towards growing the company’s long-term earnings trajectory. During the Q4’14 conference call, the company’s management provided the 2015 earnings guidance; SO expects the EPS for 2015 to be in a range of $2.72-$2.80/share . Due to cost overruns and delays, the company lowered its earnings growth target range to 3%-4% from 4%-5% for the future. Analysts have anticipated that SO’s earnings will grow by approximately 3.61% over the next 5 years. Along with current investments in long-term growth generating projects, the company will continue to look into all possible opportunities to make more capital investments in several growth generating projects. Also, SO, in the recent Q4’14 conference call, provided its planned 2017 capital expenditures. The company has projected a CAPEX of $16.6 billion for a three-year period from 2015 to 2017, as shown in the chart below. (click to enlarge) Source: Quarterly Earnings Reports Cash Returns SO has a strong history of making healthy cash returns to its shareholders by paying hefty dividends. In fact, due to the company’s hefty dividend payment policy, the stock has earned an attractive dividend yield of 4.60% . Moreover, SO is fully committed to following its healthy dividend payment formula in the years ahead; in the Q4’14 earnings conference call, the company’s Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Arthur Bettie, said : We feel very confident in our ability to deliver sustainable dividend policy as we have in the past into the future. Owing to the management’s commitment towards making healthy dividend payments and due to its strong strategic growth initiatives directed at improving the company’s cash flow base, I believe that SO’s dividends remain secure. Risks The ongoing increase in construction costs due to delays occurring at both Kemper and Vogtle projects will continue to pressurize the company’s cost base in upcoming years. Moreover, increased environmental expenditure due to regulatory restrictions and decline in power demand due to weather changes are key risks hovering over SO’s future stock price performance. Conclusion I am downgrading SO from a ‘buy’ to ‘hold’ due to ongoing construction challenges. The company’s near-term performance will be pressurized due to construction delays in its two main projects. However, as the company will complete its ongoing construction projects, its business risk profile will improve and portend well for the stock valuation. The company’s ongoing robust investments in several solar projects will also add towards the growth of its long-term earnings trajectory. The ongoing challenges faced by the company due to construction delays and cost overruns will keep pressure on the stock valuation. The stock is currently trading at a lower forward P/E of 15x, as compared to the utility sector’s forward P/E of 16.8x , which I believe is justified due to ongoing construction challenges and an increase in its business risk profile. Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.