Transcripts
Plains GP Holdings, L.P.'s management answers for the business every quarter. These are the exchanges that explain it best — verbatim, from the call transcripts preserved in Sources. Each link opens the full transcript at that page in a new tab.
Q1 2026 Earnings Call — Q1 2026
The current state of the business: guidance raised on a war-shocked oil market, Cactus III synergies, and the capital allocation plan once the NGL sale closes. · Open the full transcript →
The macro case management underwrites: a war-driven destock now, an SPR restock later, scarcity value for pipe in the ground.
Willie Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): Recent geopolitical events have reiterated the importance of reliable, secure, and responsibly produced energy. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has significantly disrupted global shipping channels and Middle East supply, contributing to stronger commodity prices over the past couple of months. In response, excess floating storage has been drawn down, and strategic petroleum reserves are being released globally. While this helps balance the market deficit on a short-term basis, we are seeing a more constructive oil market developing on a longer-term basis. We expect this destocking environment to continue over the next number of months and ultimately drive a restocking phenomenon longer term as countries replenish depleted strategic petroleum reserves globally. Postwar, we would not be surprised to see several countries restock their SPRs above prewar levels, essentially creating an additional layer of demand into the future, which should support prices and incent producer activity. […] Against this backdrop, North America, including the Permian, remains well positioned to play a critical role in meeting global demand. As this occurs, the value of existing infrastructure in the ground should continue to increase over time.
p. 1 · Read in context →
Why the published crude-price sensitivity overstates the upside: the year was hedged before prices moved.
Brandon B. Bingham (Scotiabank); Al Swanson (Executive Vice President and CFO): Just wanted to ask on the new guide. If I look at your sensitivity and the new crude price expectations, it would imply that, at least on price movements alone, the crude contribution should probably be higher than what is currently shown. Could you just walk us through what is baked into the new guide and maybe the embedded outlook in there? […] Sure, Brandon. Yes, our original guidance for the year assumed a $60 to $65 environment for 2026, call it a $62 average. We came into the year highly hedged at roughly those levels. The $85 environment that we are talking about for the future is roughly the strip from June through December when we looked at it. So there would be some benefit based on crude prices on our PLA, but we had hedged quite a bit before entering the year. That sensitivity we give is just a raw sensitivity; in order to make it more meaningful, we would have had to have disclosed the hedge position at the beginning of the year, which we have not historically done. So what I would say is that the first quarter performance and the nine months of our guide are very minimally impacted by actual PLA pricing.
p. 3 · Read in context →
Where marketing margin actually comes from — time, location and quality spreads — and the 200-300 kb/d of Permian oil sitting behind pipe.
Jeremy L. Goebel (Chief Commercial Officer): Gabe, without getting into specific strategies—time, location, quality spreads and volatility —we benefit from all of those because we have the assets, the supply position, and the trading function to capture those opportunities. While it is hard to forecast those, when they arrive we can take advantage by, for example, selling a barrel now and buying it back later by emptying a tank, or capturing differences in grades between Canada and the United States and across Gulf Coast grades. We are excited about those opportunities. What we have put in the forecast has been substantially captured. It is a very volatile time period; we have only been in this 60 to 70 days, so it is hard to forecast that to continue. […] We also estimate there is close to 200,000 to 300,000 barrels per day of oil behind pipe in the Permian Basin. That flush production is substantial, and a lot of that is in the more constrained areas of the Delaware Basin, where we have a broader footprint, including New Mexico and other places. If you look at the Waha spread, flat price in Waha has been largely negative since last September; that is what is accumulating all of this behind pipe. As gas prices recover, productive capacity is already there to add. As you add more, that puts more pressure on potentially long-haul spreads and the ability to term up contracts at greater rates. We are seeing more demand from new customers, and we are seeing potentially flushed production. Those should all help convert short-term opportunities into longer-term opportunities.
p. 4 · Read in context →
Weather volumes are gone for good; minimum-volume-commitment shortfalls are only a timing item that reverses.
Al Swanson (Executive Vice President and CFO): Yes, Manav. Those are two different things. First, with regard to weather, weather is just production shut in for a period. You cannot make that back, but the flush production does come back. With regard to the timing of MVCs, that is continuous in our process. If you look at some of the earnings calls from others about their dock performance or other things in the first quarter, freight was really expensive and margins did not have people moving, so longhaul volumes were down across the industry. But that has completely reversed in timing, so you would absolutely expect that to be recovered. It is just a question of those MVCs accrued versus when they are paid. All the pipelines are full again, and the MVCs are being reversed. If you are referring to slide five, there are a bunch of one-time events in that negative $49 million that will not occur again as we go forward.
p. 5 · Read in context →
Cactus III expansion is phased against contracted demand rather than one binary capital decision.
Willie Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): On Cactus III, we have expansion capacity. As we have always said, we will pace that with market demand and commercial contracts. As we have gotten to know the project and assessed it, we have the ability to do that in a phased approach. It is fairly flexible for us to get additional volumes; it is not a binary big expansion. There are ways to do it in phases which should match customer demand. Generally speaking, in a higher price environment, there are more opportunities because there is a pull on the whole system. In that kind of market, market and optimization opportunities become more prevalent versus a lower price environment where less is moving and there are fewer opportunities.
p. 6 · Read in context →
The post-divestiture capital allocation stack, in priority order, and the debt paydown that precedes it.
Al Swanson (Executive Vice President and CFO): On capital allocation, with the proceeds from NGL, we anticipate paying down a little over $3 billion of debt, which would be the term loan, the outstanding CP we have, and a $750 million note that matures later this year. Post that, we expect to be right at the midpoint of our leverage range, about 3.5x, and expect that to migrate down toward the low end, which will put us back where we were for several years prior to the EPIC acquisition—leverage toward the low end of our range. Our capital allocation priorities remain: maintaining distribution growth; funding investments, whether organic or M&A-related; taking out preferreds should leverage remain at or below the bottom end of the range; and opportunistic share repurchases. So once we get through the NGL sale and deploy the proceeds, we return to the framework we have been operating under for the last several years.
p. 7 · Read in context →
Q4 2025 Earnings Call — Q4 2025
The strategy-setting call: 2026 guidance, the coverage-ratio reset to 150%, the $100 million self-help program, and a walk through the non-Permian half of the asset base. · Open the full transcript →
The three-part 2026 plan — close the NGL sale, integrate Cactus III, take out $100 million of cost — stated as the whole strategy.
Wilfred C.W. Chiang (Chairman and CEO): 2025 was a pivotal year for Plains. The market environment presented multiple challenges, including geopolitical unrest, actions from OPEC to increase oil supply, and uncertainty on the economic impact from tariffs. As highlighted on Slide four, despite these distractions, we remain focused on transitioning to a pure-play crude company, which also serves as a catalyst to streamline our operations and better position Plains for the future. This transition is accelerated through the sale of our NGL business, along with the recent acquisition of the EPIC pipeline, now renamed Cactus III. These transactions enhance the quality and durability of our cash flow stream while improving distributable cash flow and positioning us well for future market cycles. 2026 will be a year of execution and self-help, with a focus on three initiatives. First, we remain on schedule to close the NGL divestiture near the end of the first quarter, pending Canadian Competition Bureau approval. Second, we are integrating the recently acquired Cactus III pipeline and expect to drive synergies related to that system to improve EBITDA. And third, we are streamlining the organization with a focus on efficiency, improving our cost structure. […] Over the past several months, we have advanced our streamlining initiatives and are targeting $100 million of identified annual savings through 2027, with approximately 50% expected to be realized in 2026.
p. 1 · Read in context →
Selling the NGL segment lowers EBITDA but raises distributable cash flow — the distinction that drives the distribution.
Al P. Swanson (Executive Vice President and CFO): Importantly, I would note that while headline EBITDA will decline slightly from the divestiture, distributable cash flow is expected to increase approximately 1% driven by lower corporate taxes and maintenance capital. As illustrated on Slide 11, we remain committed to generating significant free cash flow and returning capital to unitholders while maintaining financial flexibility. For 2026, we expect to generate approximately $1.8 billion of adjusted free cash flow, excluding changes in assets and liabilities, and excluding sales proceeds from the NGL divestiture.
p. 2 · Read in context →
The $50 million of Cactus III synergies broken into cost removal versus filling the pipe, with timing for each.
Jeremy L. Goebel (Executive Vice President): Manav, good morning. It is Jeremy. First, on the synergies question, the $50 million of synergies we disclosed, we believe we are already on run rate for that now. Roughly half of that was associated with G&A and OpEx reductions as well as removing things like insurance and other things that the pipeline had to maintain because it was a private equity-backed entity. Those are gone. So half the synergies were achieved in the fourth quarter as we shed those costs. The other 25% are associated with filling the pipeline with supply that we have, doing shorter-term deals just to fill that available capacity associated with quality management. Those were ramping up now. So we would imagine during the first quarter, we will be substantially there on the run rate for the $50 million, and we should hit that number this year.
p. 3 · Read in context →
Pressed on why coverage lands at 1.5x rather than 1.3x, management defends it as a deliberate reset, not a formula.
Michael Jacob Blum (Wells Fargo); Wilfred C.W. Chiang (Chairman and CEO): Maybe you could stay on the distribution coverage conversation. I am really just wanting to get a little more of your thought process on how you landed at 1.5 and not 1.4 or 1.3, just exactly there any kind of formulaic way we should be thinking about this? You know, you mentioned some of your peers, but, you know, I could take one peer off the top of my head that, you know, says 1.3 is the right coverage. So just trying to get a little more insight into your thinking on that. […] Willie, this is Willie, Michael. You know, when you think about how we came up with the one sixty, right, that was in November '22. And it was intended to be a coverage threshold that was conservative, reflecting in our focus on the balance sheet. I would not try to read too much into the delta. Other than at one fifty, it is still a conservative approach to distribution. And for us, it sets a nice balance for us as we look forward on the ability for multiyear distribution growth.
p. 5 · Read in context →
An analyst does the math on multiyear 15-cent raises; management confirms the growth that has to show up to fund them.
Keith Stanley (Wolfe Research); Wilfred C.W. Chiang (Chairman and CEO): I want to confirm, should we interpret that as the plan would be 15¢ increases for at least two more years? And if that is right, it implies a fair amount of growth. Since, you know, you would have to stay above that 150%. Can you just talk to some of the growth drivers you see in the next twenty-seven and twenty-eight that would support that? […] Yeah, Keith. This is Willie. You are very astute as you did your calculations. The message we wanted to send is we have the ability to continue to grow beyond 2026. If you think of our EBITDA this year, we have got a $100 million of NGL contribution. And if you think about '27 plus, we have got self-help that chews up easily half of that. Our comments earlier about additional growth in the Permian gives us confidence in that. And, we know we are going to be able to extract additional efficient growth synergies out of that. So out of our asset base. So we are telegraphing that we think we can grow beyond 2026.
p. 7 · Read in context →
A tour of the 40% of the business outside the Permian, asset by asset, and what each is expected to do.
Jeremy L. Goebel (Executive Vice President): Jeremy, good morning. What I would say is let us start from the North. Excited about Canada. As Chris mentioned, opportunities around our rainbow system to expand our rangeland system, more activity. The rest of the business is largely flat in Canada. So if you take our Rockies position, everything North of Cushing and West of Cushing, that is relatively stable and contracted, so flattish would be the view of that position. Cushing throughput continues at all-time highs year over year for us. So we think that those assets in Cushing and the refinery feed assets consistent with the refiners' performance should perform well this year. The South Texas is really somewhat of an extension of the Permian Basin business. It is a wellhead gathering business with trucking to support it. And so that step down from the Cactus contract did impact that business as well. As far as volumes and opportunity set following Ironwood, Cactus, three, and the integration with our legacy system, we are excited about what we see in South Texas. Now East of Cushing, the cap line system and Liberty in Mississippi, those are assets we are looking to fill longer-term and working on some longerterm contracting. And St. James continues to perform and with the expectation of growth in the Uinta Basin over the next eighteen months to continue to come through to our St. James facility. So think we have got exciting things across that platform. It is not as volatile, and it is not much growth on the other, but you will see some potential capital investment there as we get contracts to support it.
p. 10 · Read in context →
Q3 2025 Earnings Call — Q3 2025
The call where the NGL proceeds got redeployed: full ownership of EPIC Crude, its purchase economics, and the leverage bridge between the two deals (source capture carries stray web-page text around the transcript). · Open the full transcript →
What Plains paid for EPIC and what it expects back: mid-teens unlevered return, ~10x 2026 EBITDA, plus an expansion earn-out.
Al Swanson (Executive Vice President and CFO); Willie Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): And on Monday this week, we signed and closed the acquisition of the remaining 45% operating interest in EPIC Crude Holdings from a portfolio company of Ares private equity funds for approximately $1.3 billion, inclusive of approximately $500 million of debt. As part of the 45% transaction, Plains has also agreed to a potential earn-out payment of up to $157 million tied to the sanctioning of potential expansions of the pipeline system by year-end 2028. […] The EPIC acquisitions are summarized on Slide four. These transactions are highly synergistic and very strategic to Plains' existing footprint and are expected to generate a mid-teens unlevered return. We anticipate a 2026 adjusted EBITDA multiple of approximately 10x, which we expect to improve meaningfully over the next few years. Going forward, we intend to rename the pipeline system Cactus III.
p. 6 · Read in context →
The NGL proceeds were spent before they arrived — and management flags the leverage overshoot that creates in between.
Willie Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): Importantly, the majority of the proceeds to be received upon closing of the divestiture have effectively been redeployed through our acquisition of EPIC, which will result in an accretive and more durable cash flow stream. Due to timing differences between the closing of the transactions, we do anticipate our leverage ratio will temporarily exceed the upper end of our target range until the NGL divestiture is finalized, at which point we expect our leverage ratio to trend towards the midpoint of our target range of 3.5.
p. 7 · Read in context →
Why owning the operating interest, not just an economic stake, is what makes the synergy case credible.
Michael Blum (Wells Fargo); Willie Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): Wanted to ask on the EPIC deal. Can you give us a little more detail on the synergy capture? How much of that is going to be cost savings versus commercial synergies? And where do you see the timeline? Will you capture those synergies and then reach that mid-teens return? […] Michael, good morning. This is Willie. First thing I want to do is I want to compliment our team. If you think about these transactions, these are never perfect timing, and they're hard to do. And we were able to do the two portions, and particularly with the 45% just announced. It gives us the ability to have more control over every question that you asked. I would also refer you to slide four. If you look at the map and you see how integrated it is with the system, I think that helps illustrate the number of ways that we can win. There are a lot of ways we can do this. There's a lot of cost structure savings.
p. 9 · Read in context →
EPIC was bought at market tariffs, not above them — the reason management calls the NGL-for-crude swap accretive over time.
Jeremy Goebel (Executive Vice President): Sure, Keith. This is Jeremy. There's a substantial portion of the pipeline that's contracted for long term, and I believe that was announced in the restructuring last year that EPIC did. The balance of the pipe has medium duration contracts. We feel comfortable in our ability to work with those shippers to either extend those contracts or add new shippers to those contracts. We're just taking over this week, so it'd be premature to talk about everything associated with it. But I'd say we like where we sit. […] Like, the rates are at current market rates, that they're not meaningfully above market rates, which means longer term, we expect to be a stable and growing cash flow profile, which at least to Michael's question earlier about DCF accretion between the sale of the NGL and this business. We think that will be substantially DCF accretive over time the trade of those two assets.
p. 12 · Read in context →
Q2 2025 Earnings Call — Q2 2025
The pivot call: the $3.75 billion NGL sale to Keyera, what management intends to do with the proceeds, and the return test every deal has to clear. · Open the full transcript →
The Keyera sale announced: price, timing, and the case that a narrower portfolio is a better one.
Wilfred C.W. Chiang (Chairman, CEO and President): In June, we announced the execution of definitive agreements to sell substantially all of our NGL business to Keyera for approximately USD 3.75 billion with an expected close in the first quarter of 2026. Initial investor feedback has been positive, and we view this as a win-win transaction for both parties. […] From a Plains perspective and as highlighted on Slide 4, this transaction will result in a streamlined crude oil midstream entity, with less commodity exposure, a more durable and steady cash flow stream and substantial financial flexibility to further execute on our capital allocation framework. With approximately $3 billion of net proceeds from the sale, we expect to continue focusing on disciplined bolt-on M&A to extend and expand our crude oil-focused portfolio as well as opportunities to optimize our capital structure, including potential repurchases of Series A and B preferred units along with opportunistic common unit repurchases.
p. 1 · Read in context →
How acquisitions are underwritten: discounted cash flow across the integrated network, cleared against cost of capital plus 300-500 bps.
Jeremy L. Goebel (Chief Commercial Officer): Shneur, this is Jeremy. Here's what I would say: we take all that into consideration. And candidly, as we've said before, we're a DCF shop, and we're looking for discounted cash flow over time and contributions. You have to look at the integrated network. So take the Mid Continent, for instance, with your example, we have a lot of assets that touch a lot of other areas. So things that could impact Cushing or other downstream pipelines may have multiple touch points. So while the Permian has different resources. We look at them independently and use market fundamentals to drive an outlook of cash flows, and we use a discounted cash flow, and we have to beat our return thresholds. Our cost of capital by 300 to 500 basis points as we've said. So we take all that into consideration. We're not necessarily going to say where our target area is right now, but we do look at everything, and we've got to hit our return thresholds, and we certainly take a look at fundamentals and multiple touch points have in each area.
p. 3 · Read in context →
Why second-half 2025 looked flat: long-haul contracts rolled to lower market rates and growth had to backfill them.
Jeremy L. Goebel (Chief Commercial Officer): Spiro, it's Jeremy. Just remember, we have the contract roll-offs of Cactus II and Cactus I and Sunrise in the second half of the year, all consistent with guidance. So those roll of of the contract rates, all those volumes have been re-contracted. It's a function of rates being lower. So you had those contributions in the first half, you're going to have the growing production the FERC escalator and other pieces contributing to backfill that. So while it may look flat, you backfilled some of the roll-off of the contracts with growth.
p. 5 · Read in context →
Q1 2025 Earnings Call — Q1 2025
The thesis under stress: tariffs and OPEC supply hit mid-quarter, and management spells out the price levels, hedges and balance-sheet room that absorb it. · Open the full transcript →
The tariff-and-OPEC shock as management framed it in real time, with the guidance consequence stated plainly.
Willie Chiang (Chairman and CEO): The ongoing uncertainty on trade tariffs is weighing on economic forecasts and creating significant volatility. Additionally, the dissension among OPEC members and the prospects of incremental supply coming to market have resulted in a lower price commodity than anticipated at the beginning of the year. Nevertheless, we believe a lower price environment will ultimately reinforce the cyclical nature of the commodity markets, leading to a constructive medium to long-term outlook. […] Assuming a $60 to $65 WTI environment persists for the remainder of the year, we would expect both our 2025 EBITDA guidance and Permian growth outlook could be in the lower half of the respective ranges. Our NGL segment remains largely insulated from lower commodity prices, with approximately 80% of our estimated C3+ spec products sales hedged for 2025. In this environment, we believe it's more important than ever to remain focused on what we can control.
p. 1 · Read in context →
The price bands that actually move Permian drilling: below $55 flat to declining, above $65 back to growth.
Jeremy Goebel (Chief Commercial Officer): Sure, Michael. I'll take the 25. But what I can tell you is you've already grown over a hundred thousand barrels a day from the end of last year to now. So the 200,000 barrels a day does not seem very herculean as a growth expectation. I would say, by and large, the producers are in a very similar situation. It's a bit of a wait and see. The volatility just started a month ago. And so you don't make two or three-year plans based on one month of activity and you've seen some rebound in it. So I think in the next three months, it's a function of time and it's a function of flat price. So it's a short period of time at this price. If it sustains for a longer period of time here, you will see some flattening out. […] If it goes below $55 per barrel, you've heard from the producer community. They would start to go flat and maybe even decline. If it gets above $65 for an extended period of time, you'll see it go the other way. You'll see it back to growth. So from our standpoint, there's a bit of a wait and see at this point.
p. 4 · Read in context →
Bolt-ons are priced to a return threshold, not a headline multiple — synergies are what compress the multiple afterward.
Chris Chandler (Plains management): Let me go ahead and take that. So as opposed to multiples, both hit our return thresholds where they should. That's it. Willie mentioned capital discipline. The first was a reductio in future MVCs in exchange for taking ownership of the asset from a partner. We priced in our rates of return there, and we've done as well or better filling the pipeline after the fact. The gathering transaction, once again, our goal is to earn our base return with limited synergy allocation and then compress that multiple with synergies. So I'd say both of them fit the model of the previous 12 acquisitions.
p. 5 · Read in context →
How the leverage range is meant to be used — capacity for deals, bounded by the mid-BBB ratings.
John Mackie (Goldman Sachs); Willie Chiang (Chairman and CEO); Al Swanson (Executive Vice President CFO): You know, John, I'll start now and certainly add. But we've been very clear about our capital allocation plan. One, we're committed to returning cash to the unitholders. And we've got our targeted increase to a coverage limit that we've announced years ago. And we're going to execute on that. We are also very optimistic and continue to work on the bolt-ons. And we think that opportunity set is out there, and that is really the primary focus on the highest return options for cash. So those two are going to drive it. Our leverage is at the lower end. If there were some transactions that made sense, we've always said that we would allow the leverage to go up with the understanding that, in the planning, it doesn't stay up. So we're using that leverage range really to our benefit as we think about what we might be able to do as far as growing in a capital disciplined way. Al, anything to add? […] Yeah. The only thing I would add is it is a range, the leverage range. We don't have the stated desire to be at the bottom end or below on a sustained basis. So we do look at the ability to use some of that capacity for strategic quality investments as we look ahead. We just recently in the last year got triple B rated at all three agencies. We do not view and have no interest in putting leverage at a point that would jeopardize any of those ratings.
p. 8 · Read in context →
Q4 2024 Earnings Call — Q4 2024
The pre-transformation baseline, and the best single explanation of how the crude business earns: long-haul recontracting, scarcity of new pipe, PLA exposure and the distribution formula. · Open the full transcript →
The CEO retires his own flat-EBITDA-through-2026 guidance and explains what that guardrail was ever for.
Michael Blum (Wells Fargo); Willie Chiang (Chairman and CEO): Hey, good morning, everyone. So I wanted to ask, you previously guided flat EBITDA from 2024 to 2026. You said growth projects will offset Cactus recontracting. Here, you're up a little bit in 2025. So I just wanted to get a sense of do you now expect EBITDA is going to increase gradually from here on out? Or are there other puts and takes we should be considering over the next couple of years? […] Michael, thanks for the question. I want to move away from the flat guidance we provided for 2024 to 2026. To give some context, back then, we had long-term contracts expiring that were quite favorable and reverting to market rates as anticipated. The purpose of that guidance was to provide a snapshot of the business at that time and reassure everyone that we were not facing a significant drop-off. As we grow our business, we expect that by 2026, our performance will surpass that of 2024.
p. 5 · Read in context →
The distribution framework since November 2022, why raises have run ahead of the 15-cent baseline, and why that buffer shrinks.
Willie Chiang (Chairman and CEO): Conceptually, the answer is yes. Obviously, if you think about our business, we've got the base business growth and then we've got bolt-on. So we factor all of that as we go forward. And I mean, we've been very pleased to be able to return more back to the unitholders. In November of 2022, we came out with this framework targeting the $0.15, and we've been able to do $0.20 increases in 2023 and 2024 and now the $0.25 increase in 2025. So I think the framework works, and when we do better, more money goes back to the unitholders. But there's a lot of moving parts, but generally speaking, you're absolutely right. We have a little bit of coverage buffer over this period of time to allow us to continue to grow, even if the bolt-ons and growth may not have been there. But as we go forward and shrink some of that buffer, it's going to be more dependent upon our base business and the timeliness of some of those bolt-ons.
p. 9 · Read in context →
Why there is no grand recontracting event — uncontracted long-haul space is monetized quarter by quarter instead.
Jeremy Goebel (Chief Commercial Officer): I think it's just going to be gradual overtime. This is also part of the continuous improvement mindset that Willie outlined. This is something we don't have to rush on. Current differentials wouldn't support it. So we would sign shorter-term contracts. So we'll let you know if there's to talk about, otherwise, we'll continue to optimize the space. And just because it's not contracted, it doesn't mean we're not filling in or finding ways to do shorter-term deals and generate revenue from it. So I look at it as we are absolutely trying to generate as much margin and revenue as we can. And we'll optimize the value of that space. But I wouldn't expect any grand unveil of re-contracting for that asset.
p. 12 · Read in context →
Capacity versus economic capacity: why a new Gulf Coast long-haul line is hard to build, and what that scarcity is worth.
Willie Chiang (Chairman and CEO): And John, this is Willie. The way I think about it from a macro standpoint. You've got the capacity and you've got economic capacity. It's going to be hard to build a new long-haul pipeline to the Gulf Coast. If you think about commercial commitments it takes, the permitting/supply chain issues. So I think our view is, you have to balance what you think ultimately Permian growth is going to be. So my guess is we're going to get to this point where it is going to get tighter capacity. And we're probably going to live in that space for a while. And whether or not a new long-haul line gets built, it's really going to be dependent upon kind of a broader view of, can the Permian go the next step. So I think we're going to be in pretty good place in the next number of years. We certainly have struggled in the overcapacity years in the past number of years.
p. 12 · Read in context →
The commodity-price exposure quantified: roughly 4 million PLA barrels a year, so a $10 move is about $40 million of EBITDA.
Theresa Chen (Barclays); Blake Fernandez (Vice President of Investor Relations): Would you mind reminding us what your PLA volumetric exposure is at this point, just as we try to frame up the sensitivity to the $75 to EBITDA assumption within your 2025 guidance? […] Hey Teresa, it's Blake. The last update we've given is four million barrels a year. So cal it, a $10 move equates to roughly $40 million of EBITDA.
p. 13 · Read in context →
More calls
Q3 2024 Earnings Call — Q3 2024 · 8 pages · Where the 2015 Line 901 spill liability was finally settled and Moody’s completed the mid-BBB ratings set at all three agencies. · Open →
Q2 2024 Earnings Call — Q2 2024 · 12 pages · The clearest tally of the bolt-on programme itself — eight deals for roughly $535 million since mid-2022 — and how joint-venture stakes generate that opportunity set. · Open →
Q1 2024 Earnings Call — Q1 2024 · 9 pages · The Permian long-haul recontracting was settled here with real numbers: about five years weighted-average duration through 2028 and 200,000 b/d of Cactus I at $1.25–$1.50 per barrel. · Open →
Q4 2023 Earnings Call — Q4 2023 · 24 pages · Go here for the 2023 scorecard that funded the pivot to offence — 3.1x leverage, two ratings upgrades and the first $0.20 distribution step-up. · Open →
Q3 2023 Earnings Call — Q3 2023 · 22 pages · The call that lowered the long-term leverage target to 3.25–3.75x and pulled the annual distribution increase forward from May to February. · Open →
Q2 2022 Earnings Call — Q2 2022 · 31 pages · The upcycle counterpoint: repeated guidance raises, and management explaining why it would not term up Corpus contracts while spot economics were strong. · Open →
Q4 2021 Earnings Call — Q4 2021 · 39 pages · The deleveraging-era Plains — $1.65 billion of free cash flow, $1 billion of debt repaid, asset sales and a Moody’s return to investment grade — the base the current framework was built on. · Open →
Q2 2021 Earnings Call — Q2 2021 · 29 pages · Where the Plains Oryx Permian joint venture was announced, the transaction that shaped today’s gathering footprint and its dedicated-acreage economics. · Open →