It’s always hard to know why a market or a sector moves or doesn’t move on a particular day in response to particular news. Midstream MLPs have certainly lagged behind energy stocks and the broader market of late, but with 2017 drilling plans ramping up following the OPEC meeting I still expect that to change sooner than later.

I still like the merged entity so would not recommend this. If you plan to re-establish a position later you might well end up increasing your near-term tax liability by selling now, rather than swapping into the “new” ETP (SXL) without surrendering any tax deferral benefits by standing pat. And I think selling the Energy Transfer complex right now would mean selling low.

We never recommended MPLX because we knew the incentive rights held by MPC would become a big immediate drag after the acquisition, and of course the subsequent slump in natural gas prices had something to do with the change of distribution plans as well. The question always with rapid distribution growth is, at what price in terms of debt, sustainability, etc. With MPC being pressured by activist investors to cram a lot of dropdowns into MPLX quickly, I’d rather see how that shakes out for MPLX LPs from the sidelines. But it’s not a terrible no-hope investment, either.

I don’t think it’s a better play by a long shot, with a serious tax drag and a yield far in excess of the underlying yield of the securities in its portfolio. As for MLPZ’s liquidity, from what I’ve seen the bid/ask is reasonably close. And at least it’s upfront about using leverage, without the same tax issues as that other thing.

Well, it’s closer than it was when you asked the question. The high (just last year!) was quite high, so we’re still 88% away and that will likely take more than a couple of years. But then again commodities are a volatile space and if crude is at $90/bbl in 2018 all bets are off, or perhaps on.

I would actually choose EEQ, which is like owning a non-MLP EEP with an automatic dividend reinvestment plan attached. Between EEP and SEP, I like EEP’s higher yield for as long as it lasts. I think that ultimately EEP will likely be folded into SEP to save on the distributions.

I’m not concerned that a lawsuit (any lawsuit, since I’m not sure which one you’re referring to) would somehow strip the value from TERP’s assets. And Reuters ratings are even less meaningful than sellside ones, if that’s possible.

I’m sorry I missed my chance to pour cold water on this rumor; I don’t think ETE needs Blackstone though; not like those guys are a charity, either

“I like you but 3 out of 5 correct is not almost .800. It’s exactly .600. With all due respect, $54 is not close to $60 in anyone’s book. We don’t play close but not quite in the real world.”

Well, you would be correct had I not noted at the time of this prediction that it was very aggressive, and therefore I would grade it on a curve. This was not a binary prediction. I specifically noted that $50 would be the cutoff, and that anything below that I would grade as a failure, and anything above that a partial success. Since those caveats were clearly stated at the time of the prediction, I can’t agree with your assessment.

And in fact, oil prices rose by 52% from the time I made the prediction. Had they reached $60 it would have been 66%. If you think 52% out of 66% is a complete fail — given what I specifically said when I made the prediction — we can just agree to disagree. “Close but not quite” would have still made you tremendous money.