CBO: The Economic and Budgetary Effects of Producing Oil and Natural Gas from...
Krause Fund
1. Analysts
Stephen Poe
stephen-poe@uiowa.edu
Sagar Taurani
sagar-taurani@uiowa.edu
Company Overview
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. provides midstream energy
services to producers and consumers of natural gas, natural gas
liquids (NGLs), crude oil, petrochemicals, and refined products in
the United States and internationally. Their 5 main business
segments include: NGL pipelines and services, onshore natural gas
pipelines and services, onshore crude oil pipelines and services,
offshore pipelines and services, and petrochemical and refined
products services. They currently operate 51,000 miles of natural
gas, NGL, crude oil, refined products, and petrochemical pipelines.
For the fiscal year ended 12/31/13, total revenues rose 12.08% to
$47.73B.
Stock Performance Highlights
52 week High $41.38
52 week Low $15.19
Beta Value (Yahoo!) 0.83
Average Daily Volume (3m) 3.02M
Share Highlights
Market Capitalization $70.16B
Shares Outstanding 1.88B
Book Value per share $8.40
EPS (ttm) $1.51
P/E Ratio (ttm) 24.75
Dividend Yield 3.90%
Dividend Payout Ratio 93%
Company Performance Highlights
ROA (ttm) 5.31%
ROE (ttm) 18.64%
Sales (ttm) $50.86B
0.93
Financial Ratios
Current Ratio (mrq)
Debt to Equity (mrq) 122.93
Current Price $37.40
Target Price $41.43-43.71
EPD Exhibits Strong Growth
• Domestic production of both crude oil and natural gas have
increased steadily for five years up to 2014. Given EIA
estimates and new drilling techniques, production of these
energy products show no signs of contraction in the short-
term. With increased production comes substantial demand
for midstream infrastructure. As the largest publicly traded
energy partnership, EPD has significant opportunity to
capitalize on this increase in midstream demand.
• The emergence of the United States as an international
supplier of liquid natural gas gives EPD a competitive
advantage, given its existing natural gas assets. Their
existing NGL assets include 19,400 miles of NGL pipelines,
15 NGL fractionators, NGL storage facilities with 160
MMBbls capacity, and 24 NGL processing plants. These
assets coupled with planned NGL capital projects will allow
them to further increase market share.
• The recent $6B acquisition of Oiltanking Partners has given
them a much larger export asset base, specifically with NGLs.
• 2014 Q3 report showed record levels of transport volume and
an increase in quarterly distributions of 5.8%.
• For the 9 months ended 9/30/14, capital expenditures were
$2.7B. With the announced Bakken-Cushing and Delaware
Basin projects and opportunities in Rocky Mountains and US
Gulf Coast regions, EPD exhibits strong potential growth.
One Year Stock Performance
Important disclosures appear on the last page of this report.
2. Enterprise Products Partners L.P. (NYSE: EPD) is the
largest publicly traded energy partnership in the United
States. We expect them to be the primary beneficiary in the
midstream sector from increased domestic production of
crude oil and natural gas. Also, with substantial and
consistent capital growth projects in place, we believe cash
flows will increase into the foreseeable future. Utilizing the
Discounted Cash Flow valuation method, we have valued
EPD shares at $41.43. Because EPD is currently trading at
$37.40, we suggest that it is undervalued. We have placed a
BUY rating on EPD stock.
Inflation
The relationship between inflation and oil prices has a cause
and effect phenomenon built in. As oil falls down in prices,
inflation rates tend to decrease with it. Similarly, inflation
rates tend to increase when oil prices are high. The reason as
to why this happens is because oil is used many industries
and when companies are able to purchase oil at a low price,
their cost goes down and as a result, the companies can sell
their products at a low price, thus lowering inflation rates.
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of inflation
and historically, the CPI has doubled when oil prices went
up drastically. This was evident during the 1979 oil crises1
.
In recent years, we don’t see a high correlation between the
oil prices and inflation rate. After the tech boom in the 1900s,
most companies now rely less on oil as the service industries
started to boom. As a result, shocks in oil prices now do not
affect the inflation rates.
Source: Macro Trends 2
Interest Rates
Energy midstream companies provide services to oil and gas
producers by storing and transporting oil, natural gas, and
refined products. Such companies distribute onshore and
offshore products both nationally and internationally, which
requires a large amount of capital. As an industry having a
total debt-to-equity ratio of 49.6%3
, most of the companies
in this industry sector are heavily in debt. Companies in this
sector are greatly affected by the fluctuations in interest
rates. A decreasing interest rate would lower the cost of
borrowing for the borrowers and allow them to present a
stronger financial position.
Oil price shocks can affect the US treasury bonds yield. As
of November 13, 2014, the T-bond yields strengthened as
crude oil price reached its lowest point since 2010.
The current 10-year Treasury bond is 2.345%4
. When the
price of oil falls down, the demand of oil goes up and
companies are willing to borrow money in order to increase
their inventory with low-priced oil. As a result, the interest
rates go up.
US Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
Real GDP is widely regarded as an indicator to gauge the
overall well-being of the economy and we expect the energy
sector to rise and fall with the changes in Real GDP. After
decreasing by 2.1% in the first quarter, the US Real GDP
grew by 4.6% in the second quarter and 3.5% in the third
quarter5
. We attest that consumer spending and exports will
continue to increase into the upcoming economic future.
More specifically, we forecast that the US economy is self-
sustaining and will produce a 2.2% annualized growth in
Real GDP in 2014. Overall, we believe an increase in real
GDP will benefit companies in all sectors, including the
energy sector. Increased consumer confidence and business
investment will lead to increased company profits and
capital market investment.
The importation of crude oil by the United States has been
decreasing since 2007. In 2007, the number of barrels
imported annually was 4.9 billion (34% of GDP) and it
decreased to 3.6 billion (22% of GDP) in 2013. On the other
hand, oil exports started to increase in 2001 as it used to be
354 million barrels (3% of GDP). As of 2013, oil exports are
1.3 billion barrels (8% of GDP)6,7,8
. One of the main reasons
as to why change in oil demand and supply can be seen is
because of an increase in domestic production of oil. Since
the US has started to depend on its own oil reserve, it is less
reliable on other countries for oil. In addition, oil companies
have been continuously pressuring Congress to build
pipelines so that they can utilize the domestic resources of
oil. The Keystone XL pipeline has been approved by the
congress on November 14, 2014 after 6 years of political
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
2
3. conflict. With the current trend in place, the number of oil
barrels imported should decrease to being 20% in 2015 while
number of oil barrels export will increase gradually to 8.5%
in 2015.
Source: The World Bank6
,EIA7,8
Exchange Rate
The US Dollar index measures the US dollar against the
weighted average of foreign currencies, Euro being of the
highest weight (57.6%) among the major currencies9
. Some
currencies included in the index export oil to the US. These
countries include Venezuela and Saudi Arabia and their
currency weights in the index are 0.3% and 0.61%
respectively10.
Source: Bloomberg28
The US imports oil from many countries and has kept the
exchange rate fixed to the US Dollar (USD) especially to
their major suppliers of oil. The US Dollar to Venezuela
bolivar (VEF) has a fixed exchange rate that gets revalued
after a certain period of years. In the past 10 years, the rate
has fallen down from 1 USD = 2.14 VEF to 6.29 VEF11
.
With the bolivar having a weaker currency, their price of oil
will increase but the fixed exchange rate does not allow the
price to have a major impact on the imports to the US. Such
fluctuations in the exchange rate have a small effect on the
US import of oil. With Middle Eastern countries like Saudi
Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, the exchange rates are
fixed since their currencies were pegged with the US Dollar
in 2003 and 1997 respectively12,13
. This was done to reduce
the risk of changing exchange rates. With the prices being
stable, the US can continue to import oil from the Middle
Eastern countries, if and when required. Oil imports from
Saudi Arabia and Venezuela consist about 12% and 9% of
the total oil imported to the US respectively14
. This level has
been the same for at least the past 10 years because of the
fixed exchange rates.
Natural Gas Prices
Natural gas accounts for almost a quarter of US energy
consumption, and the Henry Hub Natural Gas Price is the
benchmark US pricing point. We analyze the Energy Sector
with Henry Hub Natural Gas Prices, as do economists with
the overall economy. Growth in demand for natural gas,
largely from the electric power and industrial sectors, results
in upward pressure on prices. Electric power amounts for
31.2% of the total natural gas consumption and the Industrial
consumption amounts to 21.8% of the total natural gas
consumption15
. In the short run, spot prices dropped from
$4.47/million British thermal units (MMBtu) at the
beginning of July to $3.78/MMBtu at the end of the month16
.
We expect large growth numbers in the near and far future,
with particularly greater growth from 2015-2018 due to the
utilization of the Delaware basin. We expect the spot price
to reach $4.00 by the end of the year and reach $4.75 by
2016. This growth will be attributed to high
economic growth and increased consumption of
energy products.
Source: EIA15
0%
20%
40%
60%
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2013
Barrels Imported & Exported % of
GDP
Exports % of GDP Imports % of GDP
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
2008 2010 2012
MMcf(inmillionscubicft)
Years
Natural Gas consumption
Electric Power Industrial
3
4. Energy Production, Trade and Consumption
Energy production, trade, and consumption measure the
dynamic and strength of the energy industry. The current
7-month total production of year 2014 is 49.822 quadrillion
btu (quad), which is a little higher than the 7-month total of
year 2013 (47.237 quad) and 2012 (46.011 quad). The total
consumption of primary energy products decreased steadily
during 2005 and 2013 from 100.282 quad to 97.534 quad.
After that, the consumption amount maintained at a stable
level, the 2014 7-month total is 57.906 quad17
. Based on the
trend of the data, we expect the consumption of energy
products to be stable. The production is going to increase and
the net import is going to decrease through 2014 since the 7-
month total of net imports for 2014 (6.329 quad) is lower
than that of 2013 (7.696 quad) and 2012 (9.535 quad)17
.
Monthly Natural Gas Liquids Production is a good
production indicator we can use to gauge the health of the
energy sector. Natural gas liquids production grew 20% in
June vs the prior year and reached a record high of 3 million
barrels a day, supported by higher gas supply and NGL
export demand. Exports have strengthened prices and
improved margins by 25%. NGL production has surged this
year, driven by gas production on the supply side and exports
on the demand side. In May, NGL production rose 16.4%
vs the prior year with new plants coming online in Texas and
North Dakota17. The US has now become the largest
producer of both oil and natural gas overtaking Saudi Arabia
and Russia18
. We expect this surging growth to continue in
both the short and long run. We anticipate a growth of 5.1%
in 2014 and 4.8% in 2015 for NGL production with the
introduction of a new NGL plant by the end of 2014.
Badlands NGL will build the new plant that will develop
1.5m tonne/year of polyethylene19. Overall, we expect the
rapid growth in NGL production to increase exports,
produce more energy infrastructure projects, and benefit the
entire energy sector.
Industry Description
The Oil, Gas Storage & Transportation sub-industry
includes companies that use pipelines to transport crude oil,
natural gases, and petroleum products20
. This transportation
includes moving crude oil and natural gas from the
extraction sites where they were found, to refineries, finally
to storage areas where the oil will be distributed or stored for
use21
. Along with moving energy products from production
to distribution sites, midstream companies offer export
services that are vital to the global oil trade, via oil tankers.
The current product line in this sub-industry contains crude
oil and petroleum products. Some midstream companies,
including EPD, run small upstream and downstream
operations such as exploration and refining petroleum
products.
A majority of midstream players are structured as Master
Limited Partnerships (MLP) to combine the tax advantages
of a partnership with the liquidity of a publicly traded
stock38. This type of partnership is attractive to investors,
due to its consistencies in paying high and frequent
dividends.
Because the oil and gas being transported in this industry is
not owned by midstream companies, revenues are generated
from fee based haulage charges which are set by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Committee (FERC). While world oil and
gas prices do not directly affect midstream revenues, they
affect oil and gas production and consumption, a major
determinant for the supply and demand of midstream
infrastructure, therefore indirectly affecting industry
revenues.
Our long-term outlook for the Oil & Gas Transportation and
Storage industry is positive. Despite historically low crude
oil prices, we believe continued increases in crude oil and
natural gas production coupled with the emergence of shale
gas reserves in the United States will provide significant
infrastructure opportunities for companies in the midstream.
US Oil & Gas Production Growth
In the five years up to 2014, US oil and gas production has
increased at an annualized rate of 5.1%22
. Despite a recent
downward trend in crude oil prices, we expect an increase in
production and consumption due to expanding global
demand and increased drilling operations in the US. We
attribute expected growth to new drilling techniques such as
extracting crude oil from shale plays. Booming US oil
INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
4
5. production and high natural gas demands from the industrial
and power sectors provide significant investment
opportunities for the midstream sector. The EIA estimates
crude oil production to reach 9.5 million bbl/d and natural
gas production to grow 2.0% into 2015.
Source: EIA22
Because of this rise in domestic production, the EIA
estimates the net import share to decline to 20% in 2015, the
lowest level since 1968. Also, because of sharp increases in
domestic production, in June 2011, the Interstate Natural
Gas Association of America published a study that
concluded that the US and Canada will require an annual
average midstream investment of $10 billion per year over
the next 25 years to accommodate growing oil and natural
gas supply and demand infrastructure needs. The US Energy
Information Administration (EIA) expects the United States
to achieve energy independence over the next three decades
as it boosts production of crude oil, natural gas, natural gas
liquids and renewable energy24
.
Source: EIA23
Increase in Natural Gas Demand
We believe a strong demand for natural gas, specifically
from NGLs will require significant growth in the midstream
sector. Based on EIA estimates, the US will be transformed
from a natural gas importer to a net exporter over the next
three years. They attribute this to shale gas supply and
demand outside North America. This benefits midstream
companies, as means of transportation will be in high
demand.
Source: CohenSteers24
We also believe the US midstream sector will benefit from
LNG price disparities. Using estimates from the EIA and
FERC, we believe LNG export capacity could increase to 2
trillion cubic feet of gas per day by 202024.
Because of Enterprise Products Partners’ strong natural gas
fundamentals and existing natural gas asset base, we expect
them to capitalize on this global trend.
Source: CohenSteers24
5
6. Competitive Landscape
Competition in the midstream industry stems from fees
charged for transportation and quality of their services.
Because pipelines are recognized as the safest and most
efficient way of transport, competition comes from other
companies running pipelines from the same extraction sites.
The midstream industry is characterized with high barriers
to entry. Large capital requirements generally only allow for
existing midstream players to expand or for large integrated
oil companies to acquire pipeline space. Also, because of
high costs associated with pipeline infrastructure, large
contracts must be in place into the foreseeable future in order
to make investments viable. Another significant barrier to
entry comes with federal regulation. State and FERC
regulations must be met and may be multiplied due to
pipelines crossing several state lines.
The industry is highly concentrated with the 20 largest
companies accounting for over 75% of industry revenues.
Source: Sadif25
As existing midstream players compete to capitalize on the
increase in domestic production of oil and gas, capital
growth projects are key in gaining market share. As
Enterprise Products Partners has $2.7B in expenditures for
the 9 months ended 9/30/14 and estimated total expenditures
of $3.2B in 2014, we suggest that they have gained a
competitive advantage along with other companies with
expenditures greater than $3B. This is how their capital
expenditures compare across the industry:
Source: FactSet39
Overview
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is a North American
midstream energy company that provides services to
producers and consumers of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil,
petrochemicals and refined products. Their midstream
assets link producers of natural gas, NGLs and crude oil
from some of the largest supply basins in the United States,
Canada, and Gulf of Mexico with domestic consumers and
international markets26
. Their operations are separated into
five business segments. These segments include: NGL
pipelines and services, onshore natural gas pipelines and
services, onshore crude oil pipelines and services, offshore
pipelines and services, and petrochemical and refined
products services. The company's key services include the
following: Natural gas transportation, gathering, processing,
and storage, NGL storage, transportation and importing and
exporting, crude oil and refined products storage,
transportation, petrochemical transportation and storage27
.
Enterprise Products Partners corporate strategy aims to
capitalize on expected increase in the production of oil and
gas as well as the expected demand growth for natural gas,
NGLs, crude oil, petrochemicals, and refined products. This
strategy involves expansion through growth capital projects
and acquisitions of midstream assets.
Revenue
For fiscal year 2013, Enterprise Products Partners revenue
grew by 12.08% to $47.73B. The proportion of total revenue
by business segment were as follows:
COMPANY ANALYSIS
6
7. Source: EPD 10-k26
NGL Pipelines and Services26
The NGL Pipelines and Services segment includes their
natural gas processing operations, NGL marketing activities,
NGL and related product storage, NGL fractionation, and
NGL import and export terminal operations. This segment
includes 19,400 miles of NGL pipelines, 15 NGL
fractionators, storage facilities with 160 MMBbls of storage
space, and 24 processing plants located across Colorado,
Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming.
Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines and Services26
The onshore natural gas pipelines and services segment is
responsible for gathering and transporting natural gas in
Colorado, Louisiana, New Mexico, Texas, and Wyoming as
well as the related natural gas marketing activities. Onshore
natural gas assets include 19,600 miles of pipeline and leased
underground salt dome storage facilities that are essential to
their natural gas operations. These pipelines gather and
transport natural gas from major producing areas such as the
Eagle Ford Shale region.
Onshore Crude Oil Pipelines and Services26
The onshore crude oil pipeline and services segment gathers
and transports crude oil in New Mexico, Oklahoma, and
Texas to refineries as well as crude oil marketing activities.
Assets include 4,600 miles of onshore crude oil pipelines,
crude oil storage terminals in Oklahoma and Texas, and 470
tractor-trailer tank trucks.
Offshore Pipelines and Services26
The offshore pipelines and services segment serves drilling
and development regions in the northern Gulf of Mexico
offshore Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.
Assets include 2,300 miles of offshore natural gas and crude
oil pipelines and six offshore hub platforms. Because of a
Gulf of Mexico oil spill in 2010, unrelated to Enterprise
Products Partners activities, increased government
regulation has slowed offshore exploration and production,
making it difficult to expand their offshore asset base.
Petrochemical and Refined Products Services26
The petrochemical and refined products services segment
includes propylene fractionation and transportation, butane
isomerization and transportation, octane enhancement,
marine transportation, and refined products transportation.
Assets include 680 miles of propylene pipelines, 4,200 miles
of refined products pipelines, and other related production
facilities.
Enterprise Products System Map
Source: Enterprise Products Partners27
EPD’s top 5 competitors include Spectra Energy Partners
(SEP), Williams Partners (WPZ), Energy Transfer Partners
(ETP), ONEOK Partners (OKS), and Kinder Morgan Energy
Partners (KMP).
Source: Company Websites27,29,30,31,32
EPD is attempting to differentiate itself from its competitors
through the growth of their broad asset base, mainly through
pipeline acquisition. Because of the capital intensive
competitive environment, they compete to gain strategic
locations and midstream assets with existing midstream
operators and integrated energy companies.
Ticker Revenues Gross Margin Net Income EPS Miles of Pipeline
EPD 47,748 3,586 2,597 1.38 51,000
SEP 1,965 1,118 987 5.59 17,000
WPZ 6,685 1,823 611 1.45 27,203
ETP 46,339 2,734 -78 -0.19 34,974
OKS 11,867 943 528 2.35 24,700
KMP 12,550 3,978 1,569 2.42 80,000
As of 2013
7
8. SWOT Analysis
Strengths
Enterprise Products Partners is the largest publicly traded
energy partnership in the US and has a very strong
midstream asset base. Their operating assets include:-
Their total assets have grown by an average of 8.61% each
of the past 3 years. This gives them a strong market position
and the opportunity to grow. These assets are also
strategically linked to the major supply basins giving them
strong business position across the energy value chain.
Weaknesses
EPD’s capital structure has a significant amount of debt. In
FY2013, their long-term debt level was $16.2B. This large
amount of debt may increase their cost of capital and
adversely affect their financial position in the future or
hinder their plans for strategic growth projects.
Opportunities
EPD has several strategic growth projects in place. In
FY2013, they spent approximately $3.6B on energy
infrastructure projects. In order to capitalize on expected
increases in natural gas, NGL, and crude oil production we
expect EPD to invest in production development areas.
Specifically, these areas include the Rocky Mountains and
US Gulf Coast regions, including the Barnett Shale,
Haynesville Shale and Eagle Ford Shale producing regions.
The proposed Bakken-Cushing and Delaware Basin projects
present a significant opportunity for growth. In October of
2014, EPD announced its investment in the proposed
Bakken-Cushing crude pipe. The proposed pipe would be
1,200 miles and would have a capacity of more than 700,000
b/d, pending its initiation in 2016-2017. In September of
2014, EPD announced it will build a processing plant and
NGL pipe infrastructure to handle growing Delaware Basin
production. The proposed plant would have a capacity of
200 mmcf/d, doubling their current processing capacity in
the region36
. Also, the project includes 80 miles of gas
gathering lines and 75 miles of NGL transportation
pipelines. The Delaware Basin assets are expected to begin
operations in the first quarter of 2016.
Source: Bakken Shale33
Threats
Increasing environmental regulations and competition from
fully integrated oil companies present themselves as threats
to EPD’s financial well-being. With increased focus on
environmental responsibility in the US, new FERC
regulations and costs may cut into operating margins. Also,
fully integrated companies may increase their midstream
presence with the expected increases in oil and gas
production. With access to large amounts of capital,
integrated companies such as Chevron may take on their
own midstream projects in the future.
Oiltanking Partners Acquisition
On October 1, 2014, EPD announced its acquisition of
Oiltanking Partners. The two phase acquisition was made for
a total of $6B. In phase 1, EPD acquired 66% of the company
for $2.2B in EPD units, $2.2B of cash, and $0.2B of notes
receivable. They have proposed a second phase that will
include the acquisition of the remaining 34% for $1.4 in EPD
units. The Oiltanking assets have significantly increased
EPD’s export presence and will help their future export
growth due to their access to waterborne markets in the
Houston Ship Channel34.
Positive Third-Quarter 2014 Earnings
Enterprise Products Partners reported third-quarter earnings
that were in line with most estimates. Earnings of 37 cents
per limited partner unit were reported. Also, record levels of
NGL, crude oil, refined products, and petrochemical pipeline
volumes were reported. Enterprise transported 5,245 million
barrels per day of NGL, crude oil, refined products, and
petrochemical products, up 2% on a year-over-year basis35.
This upward trend provided an increase of 5.8% in quarterly
distributions per common unit.
Piplines 51,000 miles of pipelines
Storage 200 million barrels of NGL, refined products, crude oil storage capacity
14 billion cubic feet of natural gas storage capacity
Natural Gas Processing 24 natural gas processing plants
Marine Services 55 tow boats, 176 barges
Fractionation 22 NGL and propylene fractionators
Platforms 6 offshore hub platforms
NGL Import/Export 14 MBbls/hr import capacity
14 MBbls/hr export capacity
8
9. Our valuation of Enterprise Products Partners employed the
Discounted Cash Flow (DCF), Economic Profit (EP),
Dividend Discount Model (DDM), and Relative P/E
valuation methods. Using the DCF and EP methods, we
arrived at a price of $41.43. The Dividend Discount
valuation approach produced an intrinsic value of $43.71.
We attribute the price spread to our assumption of a 100%
payout ratio, which increases the value given by discounted
dividends. Last, our Relative P/E model produced a stock
value of $49.52 in comparison to its top 5 competitors. EPD
is currently trading at $37.40, which is near our target price
range of $41.43 – 43.71.
Revenue Decomposition
We decomposed our revenue into 5 business segments that
Enterprise Products Partners currently operates under in
order to more accurately forecast total revenues. These
business segments include: NGL Pipelines and Services,
Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines and Services, Onshore Crude
Oil Pipelines and Services, Offshore Pipelines and Services,
and Petrochemical and Refined Products and Services.
Accounting for each segments weight in total revenues, we
forecasted revenue growth using acquisition information,
current and projected growth projects, along with industry
analysis.
With high focus on years 2014-2016, we forecasted revenues
and selected volumes simultaneously using acquisition and
growth project data. More specifically, the Oiltanking
Partners acquisition, Bakken-Cushing pipeline, and
Delaware Basin projects guided our revenue estimates. We
estimate $10.2B to be spent on projects going online during
this time period. We attribute 10% growth for Onshore
Crude Oil Pipeline revenue in 2015 to the Bakken-Cushing
project and high growth in the NGL pipeline business
segment to the Delaware Basin project. Last, the Oiltanking
Partners acquisition expanded EPD’s export presence
severely which is the reason we assume 48.10% growth in
the Offshore Pipelines and Services segment for 2014.
Capital Expenditures
Using the first three quarterly reports released in 2014, we
assume capital expenditures of $3.2B in 2014. Because of
the large demand for midstream infrastructure and growing
domestic oil and gas production, we have included
significant capital expenditures in our forecast horizon. In
2015, we assume an investment of $3.8B and reduce this
number over our horizon to $1.9B in 2023. Our model
assumes these expenditures are financed through a
combination of long-term debt, equity issuance, and cash.
Dividends/Payout Ratio
Enterprise Products Partners has the obligation to distribute
most of their earnings under its Master Limited Partnership
structure. Historically, they have kept a payout ratio
between 93-96% for the past three years because of this.
Because of historical payout ratios and their MLP structure,
we assume a payout ratio of 100%. Therefore, our earnings
per share is equivalent to our dividends per share throughout
our forecast horizon.
Share Issuance
In our model, we assumed equity issuances were made to
finance the acquisition of Oiltanking Partners and capital
expenditures. For the acquisition of Oiltanking Partners,
Enterprise Products Partners paid them $2.2B in common
units during 2014, and will pay $1.4B common units during
2015. In order to have sufficient capital for growth projects
in 2014-2018, we assume issuance of common units,
depending on capital expenditure projections and available
cash balances. We assume an issuance of $1B in common
units during 2014 and $0.2B in years 2015-2018.
Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC)
We calculated the weighted average cost of capital (WACC)
using cost of equity and cost of debt components. The
market value weights we used were 81% for equity and 19%
for debt.
For the cost of equity calculation, we used the 30 year US
Treasury Yield of 3.07%. We selected a risk premium of
4.64% which is a geometric average of the market returns
less US T-Bond yields from 1928-2013. Our beta of 0.77
was calculated by averaging out the betas estimated by
Yahoo, Google, and NASDAQ. The resulting cost of equity
is 6.63%. Enterprise Products Partners’ COGS comprises
mostly of variable costs and as a result, its beta is also low
when compared to the market beta of 1.
We used Standard and Poor’s credit rating of BBB+ to proxy
our calculated cost of debt. The yield-to-maturity of a
10-year Enterprise Products Partners bond is 3.594%, which
was used as our pre-tax cost of debt. The tax rate of 2.00%
used in our calculation was found by finding an average of
income taxes paid divided by taxable income. This
assumption was made because of their MLP tax benefits and
lack of clear marginal tax rate. As a result, we calculated an
after-tax cost of debt of 3.52%.
The market value of equity we used was calculated by taking
the current stock price multiplied by shares outstanding. The
VALUATION DISCUSSION
9
10. market value of debt is equal to the total of short-term debt,
current portion of long-term debt, long-term debt, and
operating leases. Using the total market values of equity and
debt, we found the appropriate weights used in the WACC
calculation. Our resulting WACC is 6.03%.
Relative Valuation
We used Enterprise Products Partners top competitors to
construct a relative valuation model. These companies
include: Spectra Energy Partners, Williams Partners,
Energy Transfer Partners, ONEOK Partners, and Kinder
Morgan Energy Partners. We selected these companies
because they not only are EPD’s main competitors, but they
also have the same master limited partnership structure and
provide the same services. Using earnings per share
estimates for 2014 and 2015, our relative valuation model
produces an implied relative price to earnings value of
$49.52 for 2014 and $42.29 for 2015.
DCF and EP Valuation
Our DCF and EP models yielded an intrinsic value of
$41.43. Key inputs in this valuation include continuing
value growth, continuing value return on invested capital,
weighted average cost of capital, and the cost of equity. We
assume a CV growth rate of 2% using historical real GDP
data. The 2% growth rate coincides with the steady state we
believe Enterprise Products Partners will achieve in 2023.
This rate is relatively low, due to a shift towards more
sustainable energy sources after our forecasted horizon. We
suggest that the DCF and EP models produce a more
effective stock price because they take into changes in
income statement accounts, capital expenditures, and
sources of growth financing.
Dividend Discount Model
The Dividend Discount Model yielded an intrinsic value of
$43.71 for Enterprise Products Partners shares. The DDM
approach produces a share price that is slightly higher than
our DCF and EP models due to our assumed high payout
ratio. We again use our assumption of 2% continuing value
growth.
We have created six different sensitivity analysis tables to
examine the effects on the intrinsic value by changing 11 key
assumptions against each other.
Continuing Value Return on Invested Capital (CV
ROIC):
The CV ROIC depends on the operations of the company
relative to the capital expenditures made in the future. As
Enterprise Products Partners increases their capital
expenditures, their ROIC falls down as beginning invested
capital will be low, which eventually results in a lower
intrinsic value. Similarly, Enterprise Products Partners can
have more income flowing through their daily operations
and raise their NOPLAT and eventually their ROIC. As a
result, if the CV ROIC goes by 2%, the intrinsic value tends
to increase by $0.68.
WACC:
According to our calculations, Enterprise Products Partners’
WACC is at 6.03%. By changing debt and equity balances,
the WACC can be affected which will eventually create a
small effect on the intrinsic value. Enterprise Products
Partners have 81% of their funds coming from shareholders
equity. Therefore, an increase of 50% in their shares
outstanding will increase their WACC by 0.17%, causing a
decrease of $3 of intrinsic value. Since Enterprise Products
Partners majorly depends on equity to fund its projects, they
has to cautiously fund projects.
Long-Term debt and Capital Expenditure:
Our analysis shows that funding capital expenditures
through the use of long-term debt will have a small effect on
the intrinsic value. Enterprise Products Partners can choose
to fund their projects by issuing debt if the interest rates are
low. Doing so will allow them to protect the intrinsic value
from undergoing drastic changes in the intrinsic value. By
choosing to increase capital expenditures by $1 million
through the use of debt, the intrinsic value will be lower by
$1.17 which is a relatively smaller effect in comparison to
using equity to fund the same capital expenditure.
Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) as a % of Sales and Revenue
Growth:
The average COGS as a % of sales was 89.82% over the past
15 years. This percentage has been around the same value
over the years since majority of the costs are dependent on
the use of pipelines and storage facilities and these costs are
mostly variable in nature. As more of such systems are used,
the revenue and the COGS increases in a similar proportion.
Based on the sensitivity analysis, a growth in revenue tends
to increase the intrinsic value. However, raising the COGS
as a % of sales tends to decrease the intrinsic value.
Therefore, an increase or a decrease in both the variables has
a slight effect on the intrinsic value. With inefficient cost
management, the COGS could increase and thus, a 0.5%
increase in COGS as a % of sales and 1.5% growth in
revenue could potentially decrease the intrinsic value by
9.7%.
Selling, Administrative and General Expenses (SG&A)
as a % of sales:
Over the past 15 years, the SG&A has been a very small
percentage of sales. There has been a downward trend for the
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
10
11. past 15 years since energy companies are less dependent on
selling expenses and more dependent on cost of
manufacturing, transporting and storing energy products.
With the current trend, over the coming years, the SG&A as
a % of sales will decrease and this decrease will have a minor
effect on the intrinsic value.
Risk Premium and Risk-free rate:
The market risk premium depends on the risk-free rate and
the risk-free rate majorly depends on the long-term treasury
yield. Although, the fluctuations of such variable are outside
the control of the company, a small change in these variables
can have a significant impact on the intrinsic value made by
the DCF and EP models since they ultimately change the
WACC of the company. With the Fed cutting monthly asset
purchases to $35 billion, the interest rates will increase,
resulting in an increase of long-term T-bond yields37
. Based
on our analysis, an increase of 0.5% in the risk-free will
slightly increase the risk premium by 0.5% (an increase in
risk premium is also seen historically), will decrease the
intrinsic value by 19.8%.
Beta:
We calculated the beta of Enterprise Products Partners to be
0.77, which is an average of betas used by different
databases. Since the COGS is variable in nature, the beta is
smaller than 1. The 5 year monthly return of the EPD stock
is 0.74. A change of 0.1 in beta will change the intrinsic
value by 13.4% which shows how beta can significantly
affect the intrinsic value.
Continuing Value (CV) growth:
The CV growth depends on Real GDP growth. Historically,
Real GDP growth have been around 2%. By 2023, we
estimate Enterprise Products Partners to reach a steady state
and so our CV growth is assumed to be 2%. Although, we
don’t expect a change in this rate, a small change occurrence
shifts the intrinsic value for the DCF, EP and DDM models.
According to our sensitivity analysis, the intrinsic value of
DCF and EP models will change by 9.5% if CV growth rate
changes by 0.5%.
11
12. Important Disclaimer
This report was created by students enrolled in the Security
Analysis (6F:112) class at the University of Iowa. The report
was originally created to offer an internal investment
recommendation for the University of Iowa Krause Fund and
its advisory board. The report also provides potential
employers and other interested parties an example of the
students’ skills, knowledge and abilities. Members of the
Krause Fund are not registered investment advisors, brokers
or officially licensed financial professionals. The investment
advice contained in this report does not represent an offer or
solicitation to buy or sell any of the securities mentioned.
Unless otherwise noted, facts and figures included in this
report are from publicly available sources. This report is not
a complete compilation of data, and its accuracy is not
guaranteed. From time to time, the University of Iowa, its
faculty, staff, students, or the Krause Fund may hold a
financial interest in the companies mentioned in this report.
References
1 - Langager, Chad. "What Is the Relationship between Oil
Prices and Inflation?" Investopedia. Accessed November 15,
2014.
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/oilpricesinfla
tion.asp.
2 - BLS, and EIA. "Oil Prices vs the CPI - Historical Chart."
MacroTrends. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1373/oil-prices-vs-the-cpi-
historical-chart.
3 - "Independent Oil & Gas Overview: Industry Center -
Yahoo Finance." Independent Oil & Gas Overview: Industry
Center - Yahoo Finance. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/121.html.
4 - Zeng, Min. "US Government Bonds Strengthen as Oil
Prices Tumble." The Wall Street Journal. November 13,
2014. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-government-treasury-
bonds-higher-after-jobless-claims-data-1415887458.
5 - "US Economy at a Glance: Perspective from the BEA
Accounts." US Economy at a Glance. Accessed November
17, 2014. http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/glance.htm.
6 - "GDP Growth (annual %)." The World Bank. Accessed
November 17, 2014.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.Z
G/countries/US?display=default.
7 - "US Imports of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products
(Thousand Barrels)." US Energy Information
Administration. October 30, 2013. Accessed November 17,
2014.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET
&s=MTTIMUS1&f=A.
8 - "US Exports of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products
(Thousand Barrels)." US Energy Information
Administration. October 30, 2014. Accessed November 18,
2014.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET
&s=MTTEXUS1&f=A.
9 - "What Is The Dollar Index Infographic." – Forex Useful.
Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://forexuseful.com/authors/forex-useful/what-is-the-
dollar-index-infographic.
10 - Federal Reserve. 2005. “Indexes of the Foreign
Exchange Value.” Federal Reserve Bulletin.
11 - "XE Currency Charts." XE. November 15, 2014.
Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=VEF&
view=10Y.
12 - "SAR | Saudi Riyal | OANDA." OANDA. Accessed
November 18, 2014. http://www.oanda.com/currency/iso-
currency-codes/SAR.
13 - "AED | Utd. Arab Emir. Dirham | OANDA." OANDA.
Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://www.oanda.com/currency/iso-currency-codes/AED.
14 - "US Total Crude Oil and Products Imports." US Energy
Information Administration. October 30, 2014. Accessed
November 18, 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep
00_im0_mbbl_a.htm.
15 - "US Natural Gas Consumption by End Use." US Energy
Information Administration. October 31, 2014. Accessed
November 18, 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_nus_a.htm.
16 - "Short-Term Energy Outlook." US Energy Information
Administration. January 1, 2014. Accessed November 18,
2014. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/
17 – US Energy Information Administration. 2014.
“Monthly Energy Review October 2014”
18 - "US Overtakes Saudi Arabia and Russia as Largest Oil
Producer." IER. July 10, 2014. Accessed November 18,
2014. http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/u-s-
overtakes-saudi-arabia-russia-worlds-biggest-oil-producer/.
19 - "US Badlands NGL Plans to Build $4bn PE Plant in
North Dakota." ICIS News. October 13, 2014. Accessed
November 18, 2014.
http://www.icis.com/resources/news/2014/10/13/9828601/u
s-badlands-ngl-plans-to-build-4bn-pe-plant-in-north-
dakota/.
12
13. 20 - "Oil & Gas Transportation & Storage - Industry Facts
and Trends." Oil & Gas Transportation & Storage - Industry
Facts and Trends. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.hoovers.com/industry-facts.oil-gas-
transportation-storage.1278.html.
21 - "The Oil & Gas Industry." BERA: Issue 5/6 :
Transportation & Storage (Business Reference Services,
Library of Congress). Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/business/BERA/issue5/tra
22 - "US Energy Information Administration - EIA -
Independent Statistics and Analysis." Short-Term Energy
Outlook. Accessed November 12, 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/us_oil.cfm.
23 - "US Energy Information Administration - EIA -
Independent Statistics and Analysis." Short-Term Energy
Outlook. Accessed November 15, 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/natgas.cfm.
24 - Cohen and Steers. 2014. “Listed Infrastructure: A Case
for Midstream Energy.” Investment Case Study, New York
City.
25 - Sadif Analytics. 2014. “Is There Long-Term Value in
Enterprise Products Partners L.P.?” Summary Due
Diligence Report, Ilhavo, Portugal
26 - Enterprise Products Partners L.P. 2013. "Form 10-K "
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR
15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 .
27-"Enterprise Products Partners." Enterprise Products.
Accessed November 18,
2014.http://www.enterpriseproducts.com/index.asp.
28 - "DOLLAR INDEX SPOT (DXY) Spot Chart."
Bloomberg.com. Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/DXY:CUR/chart.
29 - "Kinder Morgan - A Different Kind of Energy
Company." Kinder Morgan - A Different Kind of Energy
Company. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.kindermorgan.com/.
30 - "Spectra Energy." Spectra Energy. Accessed November
18, 2014. http://www.spectraenergy.com/about-us/at-a-
glance/.
31 - "ONEOK FIELD SERVICES COMPANY, L.L.C."
|Company Profile|Vault.com. Accessed November 18,
2014.http://www.vault.com/company-profiles/oil-
gas/oneok-field-services-company/company-
overview.aspx.
32 - "Williams Partners L.P." Williams Partners L.P. Form-
10K. Accessed November 18,
2014. http://www.williamslp.com/
33 - "Bakken Shale Maps." Bakken Shale News. Accessed
November 18, 2014. http://bakkenshale.com/maps/
34 - Barclays. 2014. "Enterprise Products Prtns LP $10B
Projects Online 2014-2016." Equity Research Report.
35 - "Enterprise Products Q3 Earnings In Line on Record
Volumes." - October 31, 2014. Accessed November 18,
2014. http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/152513/enterprise-
products-q3-earnings-in-line-on-record-volumes.
36 - "Enterprise to Build Natural Gas Processing Facility and
Pipelines to Serve Delaware Basin." Yahoo Finance.
Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/enterprise-build-natural-
gas-processing-130000777.html.
37 - Sharaf, Samantha. "Fed Cuts Monthly Asset Purchases
To $35 Billion At June Meeting, Markets Waits For Yellen
Talk." Forbes. June 18, 2014. Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/samanthasharf/2014/06/18/fed
-cuts-monthly-asset-purchases-to-35-billion-at-june-
meeting-markets-waits-for-yellen-talk/.
38 - "Master Limited Partnership (MLP)." Definition &
Example. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.investinganswers.com/financial-
dictionary/commodities-precious-metals/master-limited-
partnership-mlp-803..
39 - FactSet. 2014. Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
Financial Items.
Other Sources Used:
"Federal Energy Regulatory Commission." Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. Accessed November 17, 2014.
http://www.ferc.gov/.
"GICS Sub-Industry Summary: Oil & Gas Storage &
Transportation." S&P Capital IQ NetAdvantage. Accessed
November 17, 2014.
http://www.netadvantage.standardandpoors.com/NASApp/
NetAdvantage/cp/companyIndustryPage.do.
"US Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent
Statistics and Analysis." Short-Term Energy Outlook.
Accessed November 12, 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/us_oil.cfm.
"Oil Pipeline Transportation in the US." IBISWorld.
October 1, 2014. Accessed November 16, 2014.
http://clients1.ibisworld.com/reports/us/industry/default.asp
x?entid=1179
13
14. "MarketLine Advantage." Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
SWOT Analysis. December 1, 2013. Accessed November
16, 2014. http://www.marketresearch.com/MarketLine-
v3883/.
Oil & Gas Transportation & Storage Industry Information,
via Bloomberg LP, accessed November 2, 2014.
"Yahoo Finance - Business Finance, Stock Market, Quotes,
News." Yahoo Finance. Accessed November 18, 2014.
http://finance.yahoo.com/.
14
28. VALUATION OF OPTIONS GRANTED IN ESOP
Ticker Symbol epd
Current Stock Price 37.40
Risk Free Rate 0.14%
Current Dividend Yield 3.79%
Annualized St. Dev. of Stock Returns 20.96%
Average Average B-S Value
Range of Number Exercise Remaining Option of Options
Outstanding Options of Shares Price Life (yrs) Price Granted
Range 1 2,025,000 26.49 1.30 9.53$ 19,304,993$
Range 2
Range 3
Range 4
Total 2,025,000 26.49$ 1.30 11.18$ 19,304,993$
29. Effects of ESOP Exercise and Share Issuance on Common Stock Balance Sheet Account and Number of Shares Outstanding
Number of Options Outstanding (shares): 2,025,000
Average Time to Maturity (years): 1.30
Expected Annual Number of Options Exercised: 1,557,692
Current Average Strike Price: 26.49$
Cost of Equity: 9.00%
Current Stock Price: 37.40$
2014E 2015E 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E 2021E 2022E 2023E
Increase in Shares Outstanding: 1,557,692 467,308
Average Strike Price: 26.49$ 26.49$
Increase in Common Stock Account: 41,263,269 12,378,981
Issuance of Common Stock 3,200,000,000 1,400,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000 200,000,000
Expected Price of Repurchased Shares: 37.40$ 40.77$ 44.43$ 48.43$ 52.79$
Number of Shares Issued: 85,561,497 34,342,344 4,500,963 4,129,323 3,788,370
Shares Outstanding (beginning of the year) 1,880,410,878 1,967,530,068 2,002,339,719 2,006,840,682 2,010,970,005 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376
Plus: Shares Issued Through ESOP 1,557,692 467,308 - - - - - - - -
Plus: Shares Issued 85,561,497 34,342,344 4,500,963 4,129,323 3,788,370 - - - - -
Shares Outstanding (end of the year) 1,967,530,068 2,002,339,719 2,006,840,682 2,010,970,005 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376 2,014,758,376
30. Present Value of Operating Lease Obligations
2011 2012 2013
Operating Operating Operating
Fiscal Years Ending Leases Fiscal Years Ending Leases Fiscal Years Ending Leases
2013 58.3 2013 51.3 2013 42.4
2014 47.4 2014 44.1 2014 41.2
2015 39.7 2015 42.8 2015 38.2
2016 38.2 2016 37.5 2016 35.4
2017 32.3 2017 33.3 2017 30.7
Thereafter 170.5 Thereafter 154 Thereafter 144.9
Total Minimum Payments 386.4 Total Minimum Payments 363.0 Total Minimum Payments 332.8
Less: Interest 95.0 Less: Interest 86.9 Less: Interest 81.1
PV of Minimum Payments 291.4 PV of Minimum Payments 276.1 PV of Minimum Payments 251.7
Capitalization of Operating Leases Capitalization of Operating Leases Capitalization of Operating Leases
Pre-Tax Cost of Debt 6.00% Pre-Tax Cost of Debt 6.00% Pre-Tax Cost of Debt 6.00%
Number Years Implied by Year 6 5.3 Number Years Implied by Year 6 4.6 Number Years Implied by Year 6 4.7
Lease PV Lease Lease PV Lease Lease PV Lease
Year Commitment Payment Year Commitment Payment Year Commitment Payment
1 58.3 55.0 1 51.3 48.4 1 42.4 40.0
2 47.4 42.2 2 44.1 39.2 2 41.2 36.7
3 39.7 33.3 3 42.8 35.9 3 38.2 32.1
4 38.2 30.3 4 37.5 29.7 4 35.4 28.0
5 32.3 24.1 5 33.3 24.9 5 30.7 22.9
6 & beyond 32.3 106.5 6 & beyond 33.3 98.0 6 & beyond 30.7 91.9
PV of Minimum Payments 291.4 PV of Minimum Payments 276.1 PV of Minimum Payments 251.7