Submitted by Ron Hiram of
Wise Analysis
using our
Trefis Contributors
tool.
Suburban Propane Partners LP (
SPH
) markets and distributes fuel oil, kerosene, diesel fuel and
gasoline to residential and commercial customers, and is now the
third largest retail marketer of propane in the United States,
measured by retail gallons sold.
On August 1, 2012, SPH consummated its transformative
acquisition of the retail propane business of Inergy L.P. (
NRGY
), effectively doubling the size of its customer base and expanding
its geographic reach into 11 more states, including a new presence
in portions of the Midwest.
Acquisition consideration consisted of ~$1.9 billion, the
principal components of which were (i) ~$1.075 billion in newly
issued notes; (ii) ~$185 million in cash to NRGY note holders; and
(iii) 14.2 million new SPH units (valued at ~$590 million)
distributed to NRGY unit holders. The notes and cash were issued
and paid to holders of ~$1.2 billion NRGY notes. In addition, SPH
paid ~$65 million to these note holders as a consent payment.
Goodwill and other intangible assets totaling ~$1.5 billion were
added to the balance sheet following the acquisition, so tangible
book value is now negative.
SPH typically sells ~ 2/3 of its retail propane volume and ~ 3/4
of its retail fuel oil volume during the peak heating season of
October through March. In an
article dated 4/21/12
, I noted that fiscal 2012 will not look good compared to fiscal
2011. On November 28, 2012, SPH issued its annual report on Form
10-K for fiscal 2012 (ended September 30, 2012) which includes
results of operations of the NRGY retail propane business from
August 1, 2012. A review of the numbers illustrates the difficult
business environment faced by SPH in fiscal 2012:
|
Fiscal Year ended
: |
9/30/12
|
9/30/11
|
9/30/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Propane |
844 |
929 |
885 |
| Fuel oil and refined fuels |
114 |
140 |
135 |
| Natural gas and electricity |
67 |
85 |
78 |
| All other |
38 |
37 |
39 |
|
Total Revenues
|
1,063
|
1,191
|
1,137
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Cost of products sold |
599 |
679 |
598 |
| Operating expenses |
299 |
279 |
290 |
| General and administrative |
59 |
52 |
62 |
| Acquisition related costs |
18 |
|
|
| Restructuring, severance & pension
settlement charges |
|
2 |
3 |
| Depreciation and amortization |
46 |
36 |
31 |
|
Total Costs and expenses
|
1,021
|
1,047
|
983
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
43
|
143
|
153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
2
|
115
|
115
|
|
EBITDA
|
86
|
179
|
175
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
109
|
179
|
192
|
|
Distributable Cash Flow
|
42
|
142
|
160
|
Table 1: Figures in $ Millions; fiscal year ends Sep 30.
Record warm temperatures across the SPH's service territories
were the most significant factors cited by management as impacting
volumes sold and overall profitability in fiscal 2012. Management
reported that retail propane gallons sold for fiscal 2012 decreased
15.1 million gallons, or 5.1%, to 283.8 million gallons from 298.9
million gallons in fiscal 2011, and that sales of fuel oil and
other refined fuels decreased 8.7 million gallons, or 23.4%, to
28.5 million gallons compared to 37.2 million gallons in the prior
year. While average posted prices for fuel oil were 7.4% higher
than the prior year, average posted prices for propane during
fiscal 2012 were 19.7% lower than the prior year and, at the end of
September 2012, Mont Belvieu, TX propane spot price was ~ $0.92 per
gallon compared to $1.51 a year earlier.
Propane prices increased from August 2010 to August 2011 and
then declined sharply in the following 12 months, as shown
below:
Figure 1: Propane Spot Price-5 year history (Source: US
Energy Information Administration)
Distributable cash flow ("DCF") is a quantitative standard
viewed by investors, analysts and the general partners of many
master limited partnerships ("MLPs") as an indicator of the MLP's
ability to generate cash flow at a level that can sustain or
support an increase in quarterly distribution rates. Since DCF is
not a Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") measure,
its definition is not standardized. In fact, as shown in a
prior article
, each MLP may define DCF differently. SPH reports earnings before
taxes, depreciations & amortization ("EBITDA") but not DCF. The
only non-GAAP measure it reports is Adjusted EBITDA which adds back
to EBITDA items such as acquisition-related costs ($18 million in
2012), losses on asset disposals ($2.1 million in 2012), legal
settlements ($4.5 million in 2012), debt extinguishment ($2.2
million in 2012) and derivatives (a
gain
of $4.6 million in 2012).
A review of its cash flows and the sustainability of SPH's
distributions can still be performed, albeit without a comparison
to reported DCF (as mentioned above, SPH does not provide this
metric). Comparing sustainable cash flow to partnership
distributions is a good starting point to ascertaining whether
distributions are sustainable DCF and whether they were funded by
additional debt, by issuing additional units or other sources of
cash that I consider non-sustainable:
|
Fiscal Year ended
: |
9/30/12
|
9/30/11
|
9/30/10
|
| Net cash provided by operating
activities |
111 |
133 |
156 |
| Less: Maintenance capital
expenditures |
(9) |
(10) |
(10) |
| Less: Working capital (generated) |
(55) |
- |
|
|
Sustainable DCF
|
47
|
123
|
146
|
|
Partnership distributions
|
121
|
121
|
118
|
|
Distribution Coverage
|
0.39
|
1.02
|
1.24
|
Table 2: Figures in $ Millions except Distribution Coverage;
fiscal year ends Sep 30.
I generally do not include working capital generated in the
definition of sustainable DCF because I do not regard it as a
sustainable source. Over reasonably lengthy measurement periods,
working capital generated tends to be offset by needs to invest in
working capital. Therefore I ignore $55 million of the net cash
provided by operating activities in calculating sustainable DCF as
it was generated primarily by a reduction in accounts receivable
and inventories due to the decline in sales volumes.
Table 2 indicates that for the fiscal 2012 sustainable DCF fell
significantly short of covering distributions. A simplified cash
flow statement is provided in Table 3 below.
Simplified Sources and Uses of Funds:
|
Fiscal Year ended
: |
9/30/12
|
9/30/11
|
9/30/10
|
| Net cash from operations, less
maintenance capex, less distributions |
(19) |
- |
- |
| Capital expenditures ex maintenance, net
of proceeds from sale of PP&E |
(7) |
(6) |
(6) |
| Acquisitions, investments (net of sale
proceeds) |
(224) |
(3) |
(15) |
| Debt incurred (repaid) |
(25) |
- |
(14) |
|
|
(275)
|
(9)
|
(34)
|
|
|
- |
- |
- |
| Net cash from operations, less
maintenance capex, less net income from non-controlling
interests, less distributions |
- |
2 |
28 |
| Partnership units issued |
260 |
- |
- |
|
|
260
|
2
|
28
|
| Net change in cash |
(15) |
(7) |
(6) |
Table 3: Figures in $ Millions; fiscal year ends Sep 30.
Table 3 indicates that in fiscal 2012, unlike prior years, SPH
funded distributions partially through issuance of additional
partnership units (in August 7.245 million units were issued in a
public offering at a price per unit of $37.61 realizing net
proceeds of ~$260 million). SPH has maintained its distribution per
unit at $3.41 ($0.8525 per quarter) for the last 8 consecutive
quarters despite deteriorating business fundamentals. At 8.7%, SPH
offers an enticing distribution yield. However, investors
should review SPH's results of operations in fiscal 2012, and the
implications of its $1.9 billion acquisition of NRGY's propane
business consummated on 8/1/12, in attempting to ascertain whether
the distribution is sustainable.
Management anticipates greater cash requirements in fiscal 2013
as result of this acquisition. Specifically, ~$51 million (~$48
million more than in fiscal 2012) on maintenance and growth capital
expenditures, ~$100 million (~$60 million more than in fiscal 2012)
on interest and income tax payments; and (iii) ~$198 million
($77 million more than in fiscal 2012) more on distributions
as a result of the larger number of units outstanding (currently
~57 million) and the previously announced intent to raise
distributions from $3.41 to a $3.50 annualized rate beginning with
1QFY2013 (quarter ending 12/31/12). Based on resources available as
of 9/30/12 (cash of ~$134 million and unused borrowing capacity of
~$253 million under the Revolving Credit Facility), SPH should have
sufficient funds. However, these do not constitute sustainable
sources of DCF.
For distributions to be sustainable, operating cash flow in 2013
need to be ~$200 million. At the time of the acquisition,
management estimated the NRGY propane business could generate $185
million of incremental EBITDA and that it would realize cost
savings and other synergies of $50 million. Whether the $235
million estimate is realistic depends on the weather (the peak
heating season of October through March is critical) and on the
ability of SPH to integrate the acquired assets into its system
while extracting operating efficiencies from the combined
businesses. This will not happen overnight. Cost savings and other
synergies in the first year of combined operations are expected to
be $10-15 million and management expects the integration process to
take up to 3 years. Results for the quarter ended 12/31/12 will
provide a first real look at how this is shaping up.
In the meantime, an even more preliminary view can be obtained
by comparing 4QFY12 to 4QFY11 because the quarter ended 9/30/12
included the results of operations for NRGY's propane business for
the two months since the date of acquisition. Note that it
also included 14 weeks of operations compared to 13 weeks in the
prior-year period and that consistent with the seasonal nature of
its business, SPH typically reports losses for its fiscal fourth
quarter. A comparison of some of the key parameters is set forth in
Table 4 below:
|
3 months ended
: |
9/30/12
|
9/30/11
|
|
|
|
|
| Propane |
177 |
143 |
| Fuel oil and refined fuels |
22 |
15 |
| Natural gas and electricity |
16 |
16 |
| All other |
12 |
8 |
|
Total Revenues
|
226
|
182
|
|
|
|
|
| Cost of products sold |
118 |
107 |
| Operating expenses |
96 |
65 |
| General and administrative |
19 |
14 |
| Depreciation and amortization |
22 |
9 |
|
Total Costs (excluding $12m acquisition related
charge)
|
255
|
196
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (excluding $12m acquisition
related charge)
|
(29)
|
(14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
0
|
(3)
|
Table 4: Figures in $ Millions
SPH's current yield is at the high end of the MLP universe.
Table 5 below compares SPH's current yield of some of the other
MLPs I follow:
| As of 11/30/12: |
Price |
Quarterly Distribution |
Yield |
| Magellan Midstream Partners (
MMP
) |
$44.48 |
$0.48500 |
4.36% |
| Plains All American Pipeline (
PAA
) |
$46.58 |
$0.54250 |
4.66% |
| Enterprise Products Partners (
EPD
) |
$51.83 |
$0.65000 |
5.02% |
| Inergy (
NRGY
) |
$18.87 |
$0.29000 |
6.15% |
| Kinder Morgan Energy Partners (KMP) |
$81.51 |
$1.26000 |
6.18% |
| El Paso Pipeline Partners (EPB) |
$37.33 |
$0.58000 |
6.21% |
| Williams Partners (WPZ) |
$50.91 |
$0.80750 |
6.34% |
| Targa Resources Partners (NGLS) |
$37.67 |
$0.66250 |
7.03% |
| Energy Transfer Partners (ETP) |
$43.89 |
$0.89375 |
8.15% |
| Boardwalk Pipeline Partners (BWP) |
$25.90 |
$0.53250 |
8.22% |
| Regency Energy Partners (RGP) |
$22.37 |
$0.46000 |
8.23% |
| Buckeye Partners (BPL) |
$50.26 |
$1.03750 |
8.26% |
|
Suburban Propane Partners
|
$39.39
|
$0.85250
|
8.66%
|
Table 5
I consider my SPH position speculative. My hope is that
management scrubbed the balance sheet and that charges taken in
fiscal 2012 (acquisition-related costs, losses on asset disposals,
legal settlements, debt extinguishment) were indeed one-time. While
the very low leverage and high distribution coverage ratios
achieved in prior years (pre-acquisition) were, to an extent, due
to a much more favorable price and demand environment, they also
reflected a careful and conservative management style. I also hope
this approach was applied to the acquisition of NRGY's retail
propane business and will be reflected in the results. If it
is, SPH may provide investors significant upside potential.