This document contains the prepared remarks and Q&A from Duke Energy Corporation's earnings conference call for the second quarter of 2006. Key points:
- Duke Energy reported ongoing EPS of $0.43 compared to consensus of $0.38.
- Financial results were impacted by mild weather, lower bulk power sales, and purchase accounting charges from the Cinergy merger.
- The company achieved several strategic objectives in the quarter including closing the Cinergy merger early and announcing the sale of the Commercial Marketing and Trading business.
- While some business units are performing ahead of plan, overall the company is on track to achieve its $1.90 EPS target for 2006.
This document summarizes Duke Energy's and Cinergy's first quarter 2006 earnings conference call. David Hauser, Duke Energy's CFO, discussed the financial results of both companies. For Duke Energy, earnings per share were $0.48, up from the prior year. Segment EBIT increased across most business units due to factors like customer and volume growth. For Cinergy, ongoing earnings per share were $0.62, up slightly from the prior year, while reported earnings were $0.39 due to merger costs. Hauser provided an overview of key financial metrics and outlook for both companies.
- Duke Energy held a conference call to discuss its Q4 2006 earnings. The call included the Chairman & CEO, CFO, and other executives.
- Q4 2006 ongoing diluted EPS was $0.43, flat compared to Q4 2005. Full year 2006 ongoing diluted EPS increased 5% to $1.81.
- Results were driven by additions from the Cinergy merger, partially offset by lower results at Crescent Resources.
- Going forward, Duke Energy expects ongoing EBIT of $200 million from its Commercial Power business in 2007. Regulated capital expenditures will primarily focus on the Carolinas and Indiana jurisdictions.
This document contains the prepared remarks and Q&A from Duke Energy's third quarter 2005 earnings conference call on November 2, 2005. The call covered Duke Energy's financial results for the third quarter of 2005, including segment results for franchised electric, natural gas transmission, field services, international energy, and Crescent resources. It also provided updates on Duke Energy's plans to exit its DENA business and its proposed merger with Cinergy. Key executives discussed drivers of earnings growth or declines across business segments and provided earnings guidance for the remainder of 2005.
Duke Energy held an earnings conference call to discuss its third quarter 2006 results. The call included prepared remarks from Jim Rogers, President and CEO, and David Hauser, CFO. Rogers noted results were below expectations due to weaker performance across most business segments compared to the prior year third quarter. Hauser provided more details on financial results, noting lower earnings in franchised electric and gas, natural gas transmission, international, and Crescent Resources segments. However, commercial power results improved due to the addition of Cinergy's nonregulated operations. Overall, Duke Energy expects to achieve its revised 2006 employee incentive target of $1.86 per share.
This transcript summarizes a Duke Energy earnings call for the third quarter of 2007:
[1] Duke Energy reported ongoing diluted EPS of $0.48 for Q3 2007, an improvement over $0.29 for the same period last year, driven by higher EBIT from its major business segments.
[2] The US Franchised Electric and Gas segment saw an $82 million increase in EBIT year-over-year due to favorable weather, rate reductions ending, and higher wholesale volumes, partially offset by higher costs.
[3] Commercial Power reported higher EBIT of $121 million compared to $57 million last year, from improved margins and Midwest gas plant performance.
[4
The document is the transcript from Duke Energy Corporation's Q4 2005 earnings conference call and outlook for 2006. It includes an introduction by Julie Dill, VP of Investor Relations. Paul Anderson, Chairman and CEO, provides an overview of Duke Energy's 2005 results and progress on the merger with Cinergy. Fred Fowler, President and COO, then reviews the outlook and earnings expectations for each of Duke Energy's business units for 2006.
Progress Energy reported third-quarter 2006 earnings of $1.27 per share compared to $1.82 per share for the same period last year. Core ongoing earnings were $0.89 per share compared to $1.05 per share last year, with unfavorable impacts from weather and mark-to-market losses. The company reaffirmed 2006 core ongoing earnings guidance of $2.45 to $2.65 per share and expects ongoing earnings growth of over 3-5% in 2007-2008 driven by debt reduction, cost management and increased investment.
Duke Energy reported third quarter 2006 results, with ongoing diluted EPS of 48 cents, down from 56 cents in the prior year's quarter. Reported diluted EPS was 60 cents, up from 4 cents in 2005. The company remains on track to meet its 2006 ongoing EPS target after adjusting for the sale of its Commercial Marketing and Trading business. During the quarter, Duke Energy created a joint venture for its Crescent Resources business, yielding $1.4 billion in after-tax cash proceeds. Business unit results were mixed compared to the prior year, with the Franchised Electric & Gas unit up but other units such as Natural Gas Transmission down due to various factors including costs and weather.
This document summarizes Duke Energy's and Cinergy's first quarter 2006 earnings conference call. David Hauser, Duke Energy's CFO, discussed the financial results of both companies. For Duke Energy, earnings per share were $0.48, up from the prior year. Segment EBIT increased across most business units due to factors like customer and volume growth. For Cinergy, ongoing earnings per share were $0.62, up slightly from the prior year, while reported earnings were $0.39 due to merger costs. Hauser provided an overview of key financial metrics and outlook for both companies.
- Duke Energy held a conference call to discuss its Q4 2006 earnings. The call included the Chairman & CEO, CFO, and other executives.
- Q4 2006 ongoing diluted EPS was $0.43, flat compared to Q4 2005. Full year 2006 ongoing diluted EPS increased 5% to $1.81.
- Results were driven by additions from the Cinergy merger, partially offset by lower results at Crescent Resources.
- Going forward, Duke Energy expects ongoing EBIT of $200 million from its Commercial Power business in 2007. Regulated capital expenditures will primarily focus on the Carolinas and Indiana jurisdictions.
This document contains the prepared remarks and Q&A from Duke Energy's third quarter 2005 earnings conference call on November 2, 2005. The call covered Duke Energy's financial results for the third quarter of 2005, including segment results for franchised electric, natural gas transmission, field services, international energy, and Crescent resources. It also provided updates on Duke Energy's plans to exit its DENA business and its proposed merger with Cinergy. Key executives discussed drivers of earnings growth or declines across business segments and provided earnings guidance for the remainder of 2005.
Duke Energy held an earnings conference call to discuss its third quarter 2006 results. The call included prepared remarks from Jim Rogers, President and CEO, and David Hauser, CFO. Rogers noted results were below expectations due to weaker performance across most business segments compared to the prior year third quarter. Hauser provided more details on financial results, noting lower earnings in franchised electric and gas, natural gas transmission, international, and Crescent Resources segments. However, commercial power results improved due to the addition of Cinergy's nonregulated operations. Overall, Duke Energy expects to achieve its revised 2006 employee incentive target of $1.86 per share.
This transcript summarizes a Duke Energy earnings call for the third quarter of 2007:
[1] Duke Energy reported ongoing diluted EPS of $0.48 for Q3 2007, an improvement over $0.29 for the same period last year, driven by higher EBIT from its major business segments.
[2] The US Franchised Electric and Gas segment saw an $82 million increase in EBIT year-over-year due to favorable weather, rate reductions ending, and higher wholesale volumes, partially offset by higher costs.
[3] Commercial Power reported higher EBIT of $121 million compared to $57 million last year, from improved margins and Midwest gas plant performance.
[4
The document is the transcript from Duke Energy Corporation's Q4 2005 earnings conference call and outlook for 2006. It includes an introduction by Julie Dill, VP of Investor Relations. Paul Anderson, Chairman and CEO, provides an overview of Duke Energy's 2005 results and progress on the merger with Cinergy. Fred Fowler, President and COO, then reviews the outlook and earnings expectations for each of Duke Energy's business units for 2006.
Progress Energy reported third-quarter 2006 earnings of $1.27 per share compared to $1.82 per share for the same period last year. Core ongoing earnings were $0.89 per share compared to $1.05 per share last year, with unfavorable impacts from weather and mark-to-market losses. The company reaffirmed 2006 core ongoing earnings guidance of $2.45 to $2.65 per share and expects ongoing earnings growth of over 3-5% in 2007-2008 driven by debt reduction, cost management and increased investment.
Duke Energy reported third quarter 2006 results, with ongoing diluted EPS of 48 cents, down from 56 cents in the prior year's quarter. Reported diluted EPS was 60 cents, up from 4 cents in 2005. The company remains on track to meet its 2006 ongoing EPS target after adjusting for the sale of its Commercial Marketing and Trading business. During the quarter, Duke Energy created a joint venture for its Crescent Resources business, yielding $1.4 billion in after-tax cash proceeds. Business unit results were mixed compared to the prior year, with the Franchised Electric & Gas unit up but other units such as Natural Gas Transmission down due to various factors including costs and weather.
The document is a transcript from Duke Energy's first quarter 2007 earnings conference call.
- Duke Energy reported first quarter 2007 ongoing diluted EPS of $0.30, up from $0.21 in the prior year quarter. Results exceeded internal plans.
- Key drivers included the addition of Cinergy's regulated Midwest assets, improved results at Duke Energy International, and continued strong performance from core regulated businesses.
- Segment results were positively impacted by customer growth, favorable weather, a DOE settlement, and synergies from the Cinergy merger, partially offset by rate reductions related to merger approval requirements.
05 08-17 first quarter 2017 financial review finalAES_BigSky
- The AES Corporation released its first quarter 2017 financial review, which contained forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures with required reconciliations.
- Key highlights included progress on major construction projects, cost savings initiatives, and plans to reduce merchant coal exposure and carbon intensity.
- AES reaffirmed its 2017 guidance targets and average annual 8-10% growth rate through 2020.
The document is Origin Energy's 2013 Annual Report. It provides an overview of Origin Energy's financial performance for the 2013 fiscal year, including a decrease in statutory profit to $378 million due to factors such as losses on financial instruments and increased retail transformation expenditures. Underlying profit decreased 15% to $760 million. Key highlights included sufficient liquidity to fund Australia Pacific LNG requirements, underlying business performance, and operating effectiveness improving in Energy Markets. The report discusses future prospects such as delivering the Australia Pacific LNG project on schedule and improving performance across existing businesses.
The document summarizes Spectra Energy's first quarter 2007 earnings call. It discusses positive first quarter results overall, with solid performance from the U.S. Transmission and Distribution segments. Field Services results were lower due to severe winter weather impacts. The call highlights several major capital projects underway, including doubling capacity on the Maritimes pipeline to connect to a new LNG terminal, and a new offshore pipeline project in Massachusetts Bay on track for a late 2007 in-service date.
Progress Energy announces its 2006 fourth-quarter and full-year financial results. For the fourth quarter, it reports GAAP earnings of $1.01 per share compared to $0.62 per share the previous year, driven by gains from selling natural gas assets offset by asset impairments. Ongoing earnings were $0.65 per share compared to $0.72 the previous year due to lower synthetic fuel production and mild weather. For the full year, GAAP earnings were $2.28 per share compared to $2.82 the previous year, while ongoing earnings were $2.58 per share, in line with guidance. The company provides 2007 ongoing earnings guidance of $2.70-$2.90
DTE Energy announced its first quarter 2007 earnings. Reported earnings were $134 million compared to $136 million in the first quarter of 2006. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were $149 million compared to $171 million in the prior year. The primary drivers of the decline were a temporary rate reduction at Detroit Edison and increased costs from a January ice storm. DTE Energy maintained its 2007 earnings guidance and cash flow from operations increased 8% from the prior year.
Progress Energy reported 2004 ongoing earnings of $3.06 per share and GAAP earnings of $3.13 per share. For the fourth quarter, ongoing earnings were $0.62 per share and GAAP earnings were $0.80 per share. For 2005, ongoing earnings guidance was set at $2.90 to $3.20 per share. Key drivers for 2005 earnings included customer growth and usage offset by higher O&M costs and the sale of Progress Rail. Significant events in 2004 included hurricane impacts, regulatory filings, and asset sales.
Duke Energy reported higher ongoing diluted EPS of $0.43 per share compared to $0.32 in the prior year's quarter. Revenues were lower at $4.04 billion compared to $5.27 billion due to the deconsolidation of DEFS, but this was partially offset by the addition of Cinergy's operations. Strong performances from Gas Transmission, Field Services and Crescent helped deliver solid results, and the company remains on track to achieve its 2006 EPS target.
The document summarizes Duke Energy's first quarter 2006 earnings review presentation. It discusses Duke Energy and Cinergy's first quarter results, including higher ongoing earnings compared to the previous year for most business segments. It also discusses the companies' commitments to investors around growing earnings, achieving full portfolio value, and transparent communication. Key highlights are Duke Energy's continued progress exiting the DENA business and confidence in Cinergy contributing $800 million in ongoing EBIT for the remaining year.
DTE Energy announced its 2007 financial results. Reported earnings were $971 million or $5.70 per share, up from $433 million or $2.43 per share in 2006. This was largely driven by asset sales. Operating earnings, which exclude asset sales, were $2.82 per share, down slightly from $2.89 per share in 2006. For 2008, DTE Energy expects operating earnings between $2.70 to $3.10 per share and continues its focus on investments in its utility businesses.
DTE Energy announced its third quarter 2007 earnings. Operating earnings were $181 million compared to $255 million in third quarter 2006, primarily due to one-time gains in 2006 and startup costs for new systems in 2007. For the first nine months, operating earnings were $317 million compared to $377 million in 2006, mainly due to onetime costs at Detroit Edison including new system startup. The company expects to meet its annual operating earnings guidance and sees underlying business performing well despite some one-time items.
08 08-17 second quarter 2017 financial review finalAES_BigSky
- The AES Corporation released its Second Quarter 2017 Financial Review, which contained forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures.
- Key highlights included adjusted EPS increasing $0.08 to $0.25 driven by higher availability in MCAC and Argentina, and reaffirming 2017 guidance and expectations through 2020.
- Projects totaling 4,659 MW are under construction and expected to come online through 2020, and AES acquired or has agreements for 1.8 GW of wind and solar to be added through 2020.
air products & chemicals fy 08 q2 earningsfinance26
- Air Products reported a 40% increase in quarterly EPS to $1.43 per share and a 38% increase in net income to $314 million for its fiscal second quarter.
- Revenues increased 13% to $2.6 billion due to higher volumes in Tonnage Gases and Electronics and Performance Materials as well as higher pricing in Merchant Gases.
- Based on strong first half performance, Air Products raised its full year EPS guidance to a range of $4.95 to $5.05 per share, representing 18-20% annual growth.
Cinergy Corp. reported second quarter 2005 earnings of $51 million, or $0.25 per share, compared to $59 million, or $0.32 per share in the second quarter of 2004. Earnings were negatively impacted by $0.04 per share from mark-to-market losses on hedging contracts and $0.07 per share for merger-related costs. Excluding these impacts, adjusted earnings were $0.36 per share. Cinergy also announced it was lowering its 2005 earnings guidance to $2.50 to $2.65 per share due to weaker-than-expected performance from its commercial gas operations.
DTE Energy reported strong third quarter 2006 earnings of $188 million compared to $4 million in third quarter 2005. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were $255 million in third quarter 2006 compared to $5 million in third quarter 2005. All of DTE Energy's business segments experienced increased operating earnings except for Gas Utility which typically has a seasonal loss in the third quarter. DTE Energy tightened its full year 2006 operating earnings guidance excluding synthetic fuels to be between $2.42 to $2.53 per share.
Aes barclays ceo energy-power conference finalAES_BigSky
This document provides an overview of The AES Corporation and its business strategy and outlook. Some key points:
- AES operates in several strategic business units globally, with the largest portions of its business in the US, Andes region, and Mexico/Central America/Caribbean.
- It has a portfolio of long-term contracted generation assets that is approximately 80% US dollar denominated.
- AES has several large construction projects underway that will come online between 2018-2020, increasing its contracted portfolio.
- The company aims to strengthen its balance sheet, grow key metrics like free cash flow by 8-10% annually through 2020, and reshape its business mix toward gas and renewables.
progress energy 2Q 02earnings release Finalfinance25
Progress Energy reported second quarter 2002 earnings per share of $0.56, or $0.83 excluding non-operating items. This was in line with guidance. Key highlights included reaching long-term rate agreements in Florida and North Carolina that stabilize rates through 2005 and 2007 respectively. For 2002, the company expects ongoing earnings between $3.90-$4.00 per share, within previous guidance despite industrial slowdowns impacting some regions.
Progress Energy reported first quarter 2006 earnings of $0.18 per share, down from $0.38 per share in the first quarter of 2005. Core ongoing earnings were $0.45 per share, lower than the $0.53 per share in the prior year due to unfavorable weather and higher costs, partially offset by increased sales. Non-core ongoing earnings increased to $0.06 per share due to prior year reversals and gains on sales. The company reaffirmed 2006 core ongoing earnings guidance of $2.45 to $2.65 per share but did not provide guidance for non-core earnings due to uncertainty around synthetic fuel tax credits. Recent developments included the successful resolution of an IRS audit and
The document reviews Duke Energy's 2005 financial results, provides an outlook for 2006 earnings per share of $1.90, and details expected 2006 capital expenditures of $4.325 billion as the company integrates Cinergy operations following their planned merger. Key assumptions for 2006 include normal weather, sales growth, and $140 million in annual merger savings beginning in mid-2006.
This transcript summarizes the Q1 2008 earnings call for Spectra Energy Corp. In the call, Fred Fowler, the President and CEO, and Greg Ebel, the CFO, discussed Spectra Energy's strong financial results for Q1 2008. They announced two value-enhancing initiatives - a plan to repurchase up to $600 million of Spectra Energy shares, and a recommendation to increase the quarterly dividend from $0.23 to $0.25 per share. Fowler and Ebel believe these moves will reward investors and illustrate the company's underlying value and earnings potential. They also discussed segment results, capital expansion plans, credit metrics, and an outlook for continued strong performance in 2008.
duke energy 2Q/07_Earnings_Call_Transcript_-_Finalfinance21
This transcript summarizes a Duke Energy earnings call for the second quarter of 2007:
1) Duke Energy reported ongoing diluted earnings per share of $0.25 for Q2 2007, up from $0.24 in Q2 2006, driven by improved results across its major business segments.
2) The U.S. Franchised Electric and Gas segment saw higher earnings due to favorable weather and increased wholesale volumes, partially offset by higher costs and rate reductions.
3) Duke Energy is on track to exceed its 2007 employee earnings target of $1.15 per share and expects Q3 to be its strongest quarter due to seasonal factors.
DTE Energy reported a loss for the second quarter of 2006 compared to a profit in the same period in 2005. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were down slightly from the prior year. The company maintained its full-year 2006 earnings guidance despite pressure from high oil prices impacting its synfuel operations. Capital investment projects across its utility and non-utility businesses remained on track.
The document is a transcript from Duke Energy's first quarter 2007 earnings conference call.
- Duke Energy reported first quarter 2007 ongoing diluted EPS of $0.30, up from $0.21 in the prior year quarter. Results exceeded internal plans.
- Key drivers included the addition of Cinergy's regulated Midwest assets, improved results at Duke Energy International, and continued strong performance from core regulated businesses.
- Segment results were positively impacted by customer growth, favorable weather, a DOE settlement, and synergies from the Cinergy merger, partially offset by rate reductions related to merger approval requirements.
05 08-17 first quarter 2017 financial review finalAES_BigSky
- The AES Corporation released its first quarter 2017 financial review, which contained forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures with required reconciliations.
- Key highlights included progress on major construction projects, cost savings initiatives, and plans to reduce merchant coal exposure and carbon intensity.
- AES reaffirmed its 2017 guidance targets and average annual 8-10% growth rate through 2020.
The document is Origin Energy's 2013 Annual Report. It provides an overview of Origin Energy's financial performance for the 2013 fiscal year, including a decrease in statutory profit to $378 million due to factors such as losses on financial instruments and increased retail transformation expenditures. Underlying profit decreased 15% to $760 million. Key highlights included sufficient liquidity to fund Australia Pacific LNG requirements, underlying business performance, and operating effectiveness improving in Energy Markets. The report discusses future prospects such as delivering the Australia Pacific LNG project on schedule and improving performance across existing businesses.
The document summarizes Spectra Energy's first quarter 2007 earnings call. It discusses positive first quarter results overall, with solid performance from the U.S. Transmission and Distribution segments. Field Services results were lower due to severe winter weather impacts. The call highlights several major capital projects underway, including doubling capacity on the Maritimes pipeline to connect to a new LNG terminal, and a new offshore pipeline project in Massachusetts Bay on track for a late 2007 in-service date.
Progress Energy announces its 2006 fourth-quarter and full-year financial results. For the fourth quarter, it reports GAAP earnings of $1.01 per share compared to $0.62 per share the previous year, driven by gains from selling natural gas assets offset by asset impairments. Ongoing earnings were $0.65 per share compared to $0.72 the previous year due to lower synthetic fuel production and mild weather. For the full year, GAAP earnings were $2.28 per share compared to $2.82 the previous year, while ongoing earnings were $2.58 per share, in line with guidance. The company provides 2007 ongoing earnings guidance of $2.70-$2.90
DTE Energy announced its first quarter 2007 earnings. Reported earnings were $134 million compared to $136 million in the first quarter of 2006. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were $149 million compared to $171 million in the prior year. The primary drivers of the decline were a temporary rate reduction at Detroit Edison and increased costs from a January ice storm. DTE Energy maintained its 2007 earnings guidance and cash flow from operations increased 8% from the prior year.
Progress Energy reported 2004 ongoing earnings of $3.06 per share and GAAP earnings of $3.13 per share. For the fourth quarter, ongoing earnings were $0.62 per share and GAAP earnings were $0.80 per share. For 2005, ongoing earnings guidance was set at $2.90 to $3.20 per share. Key drivers for 2005 earnings included customer growth and usage offset by higher O&M costs and the sale of Progress Rail. Significant events in 2004 included hurricane impacts, regulatory filings, and asset sales.
Duke Energy reported higher ongoing diluted EPS of $0.43 per share compared to $0.32 in the prior year's quarter. Revenues were lower at $4.04 billion compared to $5.27 billion due to the deconsolidation of DEFS, but this was partially offset by the addition of Cinergy's operations. Strong performances from Gas Transmission, Field Services and Crescent helped deliver solid results, and the company remains on track to achieve its 2006 EPS target.
The document summarizes Duke Energy's first quarter 2006 earnings review presentation. It discusses Duke Energy and Cinergy's first quarter results, including higher ongoing earnings compared to the previous year for most business segments. It also discusses the companies' commitments to investors around growing earnings, achieving full portfolio value, and transparent communication. Key highlights are Duke Energy's continued progress exiting the DENA business and confidence in Cinergy contributing $800 million in ongoing EBIT for the remaining year.
DTE Energy announced its 2007 financial results. Reported earnings were $971 million or $5.70 per share, up from $433 million or $2.43 per share in 2006. This was largely driven by asset sales. Operating earnings, which exclude asset sales, were $2.82 per share, down slightly from $2.89 per share in 2006. For 2008, DTE Energy expects operating earnings between $2.70 to $3.10 per share and continues its focus on investments in its utility businesses.
DTE Energy announced its third quarter 2007 earnings. Operating earnings were $181 million compared to $255 million in third quarter 2006, primarily due to one-time gains in 2006 and startup costs for new systems in 2007. For the first nine months, operating earnings were $317 million compared to $377 million in 2006, mainly due to onetime costs at Detroit Edison including new system startup. The company expects to meet its annual operating earnings guidance and sees underlying business performing well despite some one-time items.
08 08-17 second quarter 2017 financial review finalAES_BigSky
- The AES Corporation released its Second Quarter 2017 Financial Review, which contained forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures.
- Key highlights included adjusted EPS increasing $0.08 to $0.25 driven by higher availability in MCAC and Argentina, and reaffirming 2017 guidance and expectations through 2020.
- Projects totaling 4,659 MW are under construction and expected to come online through 2020, and AES acquired or has agreements for 1.8 GW of wind and solar to be added through 2020.
air products & chemicals fy 08 q2 earningsfinance26
- Air Products reported a 40% increase in quarterly EPS to $1.43 per share and a 38% increase in net income to $314 million for its fiscal second quarter.
- Revenues increased 13% to $2.6 billion due to higher volumes in Tonnage Gases and Electronics and Performance Materials as well as higher pricing in Merchant Gases.
- Based on strong first half performance, Air Products raised its full year EPS guidance to a range of $4.95 to $5.05 per share, representing 18-20% annual growth.
Cinergy Corp. reported second quarter 2005 earnings of $51 million, or $0.25 per share, compared to $59 million, or $0.32 per share in the second quarter of 2004. Earnings were negatively impacted by $0.04 per share from mark-to-market losses on hedging contracts and $0.07 per share for merger-related costs. Excluding these impacts, adjusted earnings were $0.36 per share. Cinergy also announced it was lowering its 2005 earnings guidance to $2.50 to $2.65 per share due to weaker-than-expected performance from its commercial gas operations.
DTE Energy reported strong third quarter 2006 earnings of $188 million compared to $4 million in third quarter 2005. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were $255 million in third quarter 2006 compared to $5 million in third quarter 2005. All of DTE Energy's business segments experienced increased operating earnings except for Gas Utility which typically has a seasonal loss in the third quarter. DTE Energy tightened its full year 2006 operating earnings guidance excluding synthetic fuels to be between $2.42 to $2.53 per share.
Aes barclays ceo energy-power conference finalAES_BigSky
This document provides an overview of The AES Corporation and its business strategy and outlook. Some key points:
- AES operates in several strategic business units globally, with the largest portions of its business in the US, Andes region, and Mexico/Central America/Caribbean.
- It has a portfolio of long-term contracted generation assets that is approximately 80% US dollar denominated.
- AES has several large construction projects underway that will come online between 2018-2020, increasing its contracted portfolio.
- The company aims to strengthen its balance sheet, grow key metrics like free cash flow by 8-10% annually through 2020, and reshape its business mix toward gas and renewables.
progress energy 2Q 02earnings release Finalfinance25
Progress Energy reported second quarter 2002 earnings per share of $0.56, or $0.83 excluding non-operating items. This was in line with guidance. Key highlights included reaching long-term rate agreements in Florida and North Carolina that stabilize rates through 2005 and 2007 respectively. For 2002, the company expects ongoing earnings between $3.90-$4.00 per share, within previous guidance despite industrial slowdowns impacting some regions.
Progress Energy reported first quarter 2006 earnings of $0.18 per share, down from $0.38 per share in the first quarter of 2005. Core ongoing earnings were $0.45 per share, lower than the $0.53 per share in the prior year due to unfavorable weather and higher costs, partially offset by increased sales. Non-core ongoing earnings increased to $0.06 per share due to prior year reversals and gains on sales. The company reaffirmed 2006 core ongoing earnings guidance of $2.45 to $2.65 per share but did not provide guidance for non-core earnings due to uncertainty around synthetic fuel tax credits. Recent developments included the successful resolution of an IRS audit and
The document reviews Duke Energy's 2005 financial results, provides an outlook for 2006 earnings per share of $1.90, and details expected 2006 capital expenditures of $4.325 billion as the company integrates Cinergy operations following their planned merger. Key assumptions for 2006 include normal weather, sales growth, and $140 million in annual merger savings beginning in mid-2006.
This transcript summarizes the Q1 2008 earnings call for Spectra Energy Corp. In the call, Fred Fowler, the President and CEO, and Greg Ebel, the CFO, discussed Spectra Energy's strong financial results for Q1 2008. They announced two value-enhancing initiatives - a plan to repurchase up to $600 million of Spectra Energy shares, and a recommendation to increase the quarterly dividend from $0.23 to $0.25 per share. Fowler and Ebel believe these moves will reward investors and illustrate the company's underlying value and earnings potential. They also discussed segment results, capital expansion plans, credit metrics, and an outlook for continued strong performance in 2008.
duke energy 2Q/07_Earnings_Call_Transcript_-_Finalfinance21
This transcript summarizes a Duke Energy earnings call for the second quarter of 2007:
1) Duke Energy reported ongoing diluted earnings per share of $0.25 for Q2 2007, up from $0.24 in Q2 2006, driven by improved results across its major business segments.
2) The U.S. Franchised Electric and Gas segment saw higher earnings due to favorable weather and increased wholesale volumes, partially offset by higher costs and rate reductions.
3) Duke Energy is on track to exceed its 2007 employee earnings target of $1.15 per share and expects Q3 to be its strongest quarter due to seasonal factors.
DTE Energy reported a loss for the second quarter of 2006 compared to a profit in the same period in 2005. Operating earnings, which exclude non-recurring items, were down slightly from the prior year. The company maintained its full-year 2006 earnings guidance despite pressure from high oil prices impacting its synfuel operations. Capital investment projects across its utility and non-utility businesses remained on track.
DTE Energy reported a loss for the second quarter of 2006 compared to earnings in the same period in 2005. Operating earnings excluding special items were nearly break-even, with higher earnings from the electric utility offset by losses in other segments due to oil hedging costs and falling natural gas prices. Despite the quarterly loss, DTE maintained its full-year 2006 earnings guidance. Capital investment continued across all business segments to improve operations and support growth.
Progress Energy reported 2005 ongoing earnings per share of $3.33, exceeding guidance. Fourth quarter ongoing earnings were $0.71 per share. Key highlights included resolving an IRS issue regarding synthetic fuel tax credits and providing 2006 ongoing earnings guidance of $3.15 to $3.35 per share. Both regulated utility segments benefited from higher margins though also incurred higher operating costs. Progress Ventures saw lower commercial operations margins.
Cinergy Corp. reported strong earnings for the third quarter of 2005, with adjusted earnings per share reaching a record high of $0.97. Earnings were driven by favorable weather conditions, cost reductions across the company, and contributions from commercial businesses capitalizing on commodity market movements. Cinergy increased its full-year 2005 adjusted earnings guidance to a range of $2.60 to $2.75 per share. The company also continues to make progress on regulatory approvals for its proposed merger with Duke Energy.
Cinergy Corp. reported strong financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2005. Net income for Q4 2005 was $190 million compared to $146 million for Q4 2004. For the full year, net income was $490 million compared to $401 million in 2004. Earnings per share on a diluted basis were $0.95 for Q4 2005 and $2.46 for the full year, up from $0.79 and $2.18 respectively in the previous year. The improved results were driven by higher demand, solid performance in commercial businesses, and constructive regulatory recovery.
Progress Energy reported third-quarter ongoing earnings of $1.44 per share, up 50% from the prior year, and GAAP earnings of $1.82 per share. Core regulated utility earnings grew due to higher retail margins from customer growth, usage, and weather, partially offset by higher operating costs. Synthetic fuel earnings increased significantly due to higher sales volumes and tax credit recognition. The company reaffirmed its 2005 ongoing earnings guidance range of $2.90 to $3.20 per share.
fpl group library.corporate-4Q08%20 Script_FINAL%20_APfinance17
FPL Group held a conference call to discuss its financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2008. The call began with introductions from senior management. Lew Hay, the CEO, then provided an overview of FPL Group's performance in 2008, highlighting record adjusted earnings of over $1.5 billion. Armando Pimentel, the CFO, discussed the financial results in more detail, noting lower than expected earnings for Florida Power & Light due to the economic downturn. Pimentel provided analysis of FPL's customer growth, usage, and other key operating metrics for the quarter and year.
Progress Energy announces third quarter 2007 results. Core ongoing earnings per share were $1.21 compared to $1.06 for the same period last year due to favorable weather, lower taxes, and increased wholesale sales. Non-core ongoing losses were $0.07 per share compared to earnings of $0.03 last year. The company reaffirms 2007 core ongoing earnings guidance of $2.70 to $2.90 per share.
The document is the 2005 annual report and proxy statement from PHI (Pepco Holdings Inc.). It discusses PHI's strategy of focusing on stable power delivery and growing energy businesses. In 2005, PHI achieved earnings of $371.2 million and strengthened its balance sheet by paying down over $1 billion in debt. Rising energy prices present challenges for PHI and its customers. The proxy statement announces the annual meeting to elect directors and ratify the independent auditor.
The document is the 2005 annual report and proxy statement from PHI (Pepco Holdings Inc.). It discusses PHI's strategy of focusing on stable power delivery and growing energy businesses. In 2005, PHI achieved earnings of $371.2 million and strengthened its balance sheet by paying down over $1 billion in debt. Rising energy prices present challenges for PHI and its customers. The proxy statement announces the annual meeting to elect directors and ratify the independent auditor.
Progress Energy reported a net loss of $0.19 per share for Q2 2006, compared to a net loss of $0.01 per share in Q2 2005. Ongoing earnings were $0.32 per share in Q2 2006, down from $0.63 per share in Q2 2005. Core ongoing earnings were $0.43 per share in Q2 2006, down from $0.53 per share in Q2 2005. Progress Energy also announced the sale of its natural gas assets for $1.2 billion and reaffirmed its 2006 ongoing earnings guidance.
Southern Company reported strong full-year 2006 earnings of $1.57 billion, bolstered by continued economic growth and customer base expansion in the Southeast. Fourth quarter earnings were $188.4 million, up from $158.9 million in the prior year. Key drivers were the addition of over 70,000 new customers and growth in the competitive wholesale generation business through new capacity and contract extensions. However, earnings were offset by a reduction in synthetic fuels tax credits and higher interest and operating expenses. Looking forward, Southern Company expects 2007 earnings per share of $2.13 to $2.18 excluding synthetic fuels impacts.
Southern Company reported second quarter earnings of $385.2 million, or 52 cents per share, driven by increased electricity usage from warm weather and customer growth. Total revenues for the quarter increased 15.1% year-over-year to $3.59 billion. However, earnings were partially offset by higher operations and maintenance expenses and the negative impact of rising oil prices on Southern Company's synthetic fuels investments. Looking forward, Southern Company expects earnings per share growth of 5% annually and has set a goal of earning at least $300 million annually from its competitive wholesale generation business by 2007.
The document is the annual report for Energy East Corporation for the year 2004. It provides the following key information:
- Energy East saw increases in earnings per share and dividends paid to shareholders in 2004 compared to 2003.
- The company realized cost savings from consolidation efforts and improved its corporate governance practices.
- Regulatory agreements for the company's utilities, including multi-year rate plans, were important for providing stable rates and earnings. A new rate agreement for Rochester Gas & Electric was approved in 2004.
- The company continued investing in infrastructure projects while exiting non-core businesses, including the sale of a nuclear power plant. Management focused on efficient operations and regulatory certainty going forward.
The document is the annual report for Energy East Corporation for the year 2004. It provides the following key information:
- Energy East achieved 8% growth in both basic and diluted earnings per share compared to 2003. It also increased its common stock dividend by 6%.
- The company realized cost savings through consolidation efforts and received improved credit ratings after selling its Ginna nuclear power plant.
- Regulatory agreements for Energy East's utilities, including Rochester Gas & Electric and Central Maine Power, provided stable rates for customers through 2008 while allowing the company to recover costs and earn a fair return.
This document contains the prepared remarks from Duke Energy's Q1 2004 earnings conference call. The key points are:
1) Duke Energy reported earnings of 36 cents per share including special items, and ongoing earnings of 32 cents, which met expectations despite $6 cents of MTM losses during the quarter.
2) Several business segments performed well, including franchised electric and gas transmission. Field services benefited from higher frac spreads and hedging gains.
3) Challenges included a disappointing quarter for DENA due to inability to capture optionality. However, DENA expects to realize its full-year budget.
4) Duke Energy continues reducing debt and increasing cash, made progress on legal issues,
ConAgra Foods is selling its chicken business to focus on branded and value-added food items. The sale includes chicken processing operations and will generate cash for ConAgra to reinvest. ConAgra will receive Class A shares in Pilgrim's Pride, the chicken company acquiring its business, representing 7% of voting shares and 49% of equity. It can sell up to 1/3 of these shares annually but expects to reduce ownership over time based on market conditions. ConAgra will also receive notes from Pilgrim's Pride due in 2011 with a 10.5% interest rate to be paid semi-annually.
This document summarizes the Q1 FY2004 earnings results of a large packaged foods company. Key points include:
- Q1 EPS was $0.37 compared to $0.43 in Q1 FY2003, impacted by various one-time gains and losses.
- Packaged foods sales were down $168M excluding divested businesses, with a 5% volume decline.
- Several major brands saw growth, while others like Butterball declined.
- Corporate expenses increased due to litigation expenses from a past joint venture.
- The effective tax rate for FY2004 is estimated at 38%.
ConAgra Foods is selling its United Agri Products business to focus on branded and value-added products, as part of a broader strategy of divesting non-core businesses over the past year including fresh beef/pork, canned seafood, and cheese operations. The sale is expected to close by December 31, 2003 for cash and $60-75 million in preferred stock. ConAgra will retain some international UAP operations generating $250 million in annual sales, concentrated in several countries. Proceeds will be used for debt paydown and general corporate purposes including acquisitions and stock buybacks.
ConAgra Foods divested its poultry business to focus on branded, value-added foods with strong margins and growth. The $300 million cash and 25 million Pilgrim's Pride shares valued at $245 million totaled less than the poultry business' estimated $545 million book value due to the shares being valued based on past prices, not current prices. ConAgra Foods can sell up to 1/3 of the shares each year and account for shares eligible for resale within a year as securities, and other shares using cost accounting. The poultry business was previously reported in Meat Processing but is now in Discontinued Operations.
ConAgra Foods completed the divestiture of its chicken processing and crop inputs businesses, finalizing its strategy to focus on branded, value-added food opportunities. The company received $300 million in cash and 25 million shares of Pilgrim's Pride stock worth $245 million for the chicken business. ConAgra can sell up to 1/3 of the Pilgrim's Pride shares per year and will account for the shares as securities held for resale within one year or using the cost method if the eligibility for resale is over one year away. The chicken business was previously reported as part of ConAgra's Meat Processing segment but is now in Discontinued Operations.
ConAgra Foods has divested several commodity businesses and acquired branded and value-added food products to focus on higher margin businesses. The company is planning a share repurchase program using cash from strong operating cash flows and recent divestitures. ConAgra expects to continue investing in growth through acquisitions and paying down debt while deploying cash to dividends, debt repayment, and share repurchases as appropriate.
The document provides a Q&A summary of ConAgra Foods' financial results for Q2 FY04 compared to Q2 FY03. Key points include:
- Q2 FY04 diluted EPS was $0.51 compared to $0.44 in Q2 FY03, impacted by $0.04 in discontinued operations in FY04 and $0.03 in divestiture expenses in FY03.
- Sales comparability was impacted by $506M in divested fresh meat businesses in FY03 and $154M in divested canned food businesses in FY03.
- Examples of brand sales growth included Banquet, Chef Boyardee, Egg Beaters
Packaged Foods sales increased 4% excluding divestitures, with 2% volume growth. Several brands posted sales growth including Armour, Banquet, and Blue Bonnet, while others like ACT II and Butterball declined. Sales comparability was affected by $155 million in divested businesses last year. Operating profit grew 5% in Packaged Foods and 10% overall when adjusting for divested businesses and cost savings initiatives. The company is implementing cost cutting measures expected to save more than implementation costs in the future.
The document provides the quarterly and annual financial results for a company. Some key highlights include:
- Several consumer brands posted sales growth for the quarter including Banquet, Blue Bonnet, and Chef Boyardee, while others like ACT II and Eckrich saw declines.
- Total depreciation and amortization was around $93 million for the quarter and $352 million for the fiscal year.
- Capital expenditures were around $106 million for the quarter and $352 million for the fiscal year.
- Net interest expense was $80 million for the quarter and $275 million for the fiscal year.
- Corporate expenses were around $95 million for the quarter and $342 million
- Major brands in the Retail Products segment that posted sales growth included ACT II, Armour, Banquet, and Blue Bonnet. Brands that posted sales declines included Healthy Choice, Slim Jim, and Snack Pack.
- Retail volume increased 8% while foodservice volume was flat excluding divested businesses.
- Increased input costs negatively impacted operating profits in the Retail Products segment by approximately $45 million.
- Capital expenditures were approximately $105 million, reflecting increased investment in information systems.
This document contains the questions and answers from ConAgra Foods' Q2 FY2005 earnings call. Some key details include:
- Several major brands in the Retail Products segment posted sales growth, while others saw declines.
- Retail volume increased 7% and Foodservice volume decreased 1% excluding divested businesses.
- Capital expenditures increased significantly year-over-year due to investments in information systems.
- The company received proceeds from the sale of its minority interest in Swift Foods and shares of Pilgrim's Pride stock.
This document summarizes the Q3 2005 earnings results of a major food company. Some key highlights include: 1) Major brands in the Retail Products segment saw mixed sales results, with growth for brands like Chef Boyardee but declines for brands like Butterball. 2) Unit volumes declined 3% for Retail Products but increased 4% for Foodservice Products. 3) The packaged meats operations were slightly profitable but profits were over $45 million lower than the previous year. The company expects some improvement but not year-over-year profit gains for packaged meats in Q4.
This document summarizes ConAgra Foods' earnings results for fiscal year 2005 (FY05) in a question and answer format. Some key details include:
- FY05 diluted EPS was $1.23, including $0.12 in expenses that impacted comparability.
- Major brands in the Retail Products segment that saw sales growth included ACT II, Banquet, and Blue Bonnet. Brands that saw declines included Armour and Butterball.
- Retail Products volume increased 2% while Foodservice Products volume decreased 2% in Q4.
- Total depreciation and amortization was approximately $351 million for FY05 and $90 million for Q4. Capital expenditures
The document provides the questions and answers from the Q1 FY06 earnings call for ConAgra Foods. Some key details from the summary include:
- Sales grew for major brands like Butterball but declined for brands like ACT II. Retail Products volume declined 3% while Foodservice increased 4%.
- Depreciation and amortization was $89 million. Capital expenditures were $71 million and net interest expense was $68 million. Corporate expense was $73 million.
- Gross margin was 21.6% and operating margin was 10.9%. The effective tax rate for FY06 is estimated to be 36%.
Major brands in the Retail Products segment that posted sales growth included ACT II, Blue Bonnet, Butterball, Kid Cuisine, Marie Callender's, Reddi-wip and Ro*Tel. Brands that posted sales declines included Armour, Banquet, Cook's, DAVID, Eckrich, Egg Beaters, Healthy Choice, Hebrew National, Hunt's, LaChoy, Orville Redenbacher, PAM, Parkay, Peter Pan, Slim Jim, Snack Pack, Swiss Miss, Van Camp's and Wesson. Retail Products volume declined 5% for the quarter while Foodservice Products volume increased 2%. Corporate expense for the quarter was approximately $103 million
The document provides financial information from ConAgra Foods' Q3 FY06 quarterly earnings call. Some key details include:
- Retail segment sales grew 4% and Foodservice grew 1% over the prior year. Several major brands posted sales growth while others declined.
- Gross margin was 24.8% and operating margin was 12.5% for the quarter.
- Net debt was $3.6 billion, down from $4.5 billion a year prior due to debt repayment of $500 million during the quarter.
- Capital expenditures for the quarter and fiscal year-to-date were below prior year levels. Projected fiscal year expenditures are up to $400
- Major brands in the Consumer Foods segment that posted sales growth in Q4 FY06 included Blue Bonnet, Chef Boyardee, DAVID, Egg Beaters, Hebrew National, and Hunt's. Brands that posted sales declines included ACT II, Banquet, Healthy Choice, Peter Pan, Slim Jim, Snack Pack, and Van Camp's.
- Consumer Foods volume declined 2% in Q4 while Food and Ingredients volume increased 1%.
- Total depreciation and amortization for Q4 was approximately $85 million and approximately $353 million for all of FY06. Capital expenditures were approximately $92 million for Q4 and $288 million for FY
This document summarizes the Q1 FY07 financial results of ConAgra Foods. Some key highlights include:
- Consumer Foods volume increased 1% and Food and Ingredients volume increased 2% in Q1.
- Gross margin was 24.7% and operating margin was 11.7% for the quarter.
- Net debt decreased to $2.88 billion from $3.97 billion in Q1 FY06.
- Restructuring charges totaled $39 million pre-tax, impacting costs in Consumer Foods and corporate expenses.
Major brands in the Consumer Foods segment that posted sales growth included Egg Beaters, Healthy Choice, and Slim Jim. Brands that posted sales declines included ACT II and Blue Bonnet. Total depreciation and amortization from continuing operations was $88 million for the quarter and $177 million year-to-date. Capital expenditures were $66 million for the quarter and $111 million year-to-date. Net interest expense was $52 million for the quarter and $110 million year-to-date.
1) Several major brands in the Consumer Foods segment posted sales growth for the quarter, while others like ACT II and Banquet saw declines. Overall, Consumer Foods volume declined 1% excluding divested businesses.
2) Total depreciation and amortization from continuing operations was around $91 million for the quarter and $268 million year-to-date. Capital expenditures were around $147 million for the quarter and $258 million year-to-date.
3) The company's net debt at the end of the quarter was around $3 billion, with a net debt to total capital ratio of 39%.
2. Elemental Economics - Mineral demand.pdfNeal Brewster
After this second you should be able to: Explain the main determinants of demand for any mineral product, and their relative importance; recognise and explain how demand for any product is likely to change with economic activity; recognise and explain the roles of technology and relative prices in influencing demand; be able to explain the differences between the rates of growth of demand for different products.
Understanding how timely GST payments influence a lender's decision to approve loans, this topic explores the correlation between GST compliance and creditworthiness. It highlights how consistent GST payments can enhance a business's financial credibility, potentially leading to higher chances of loan approval.
Abhay Bhutada, the Managing Director of Poonawalla Fincorp Limited, is an accomplished leader with over 15 years of experience in commercial and retail lending. A Qualified Chartered Accountant, he has been pivotal in leveraging technology to enhance financial services. Starting his career at Bank of India, he later founded TAB Capital Limited and co-founded Poonawalla Finance Private Limited, emphasizing digital lending. Under his leadership, Poonawalla Fincorp achieved a 'AAA' credit rating, integrating acquisitions and emphasizing corporate governance. Actively involved in industry forums and CSR initiatives, Abhay has been recognized with awards like "Young Entrepreneur of India 2017" and "40 under 40 Most Influential Leader for 2020-21." Personally, he values mindfulness, enjoys gardening, yoga, and sees every day as an opportunity for growth and improvement.
Falcon stands out as a top-tier P2P Invoice Discounting platform in India, bridging esteemed blue-chip companies and eager investors. Our goal is to transform the investment landscape in India by establishing a comprehensive destination for borrowers and investors with diverse profiles and needs, all while minimizing risk. What sets Falcon apart is the elimination of intermediaries such as commercial banks and depository institutions, allowing investors to enjoy higher yields.
[4:55 p.m.] Bryan Oates
OJPs are becoming a critical resource for policy-makers and researchers who study the labour market. LMIC continues to work with Vicinity Jobs’ data on OJPs, which can be explored in our Canadian Job Trends Dashboard. Valuable insights have been gained through our analysis of OJP data, including LMIC research lead
Suzanne Spiteri’s recent report on improving the quality and accessibility of job postings to reduce employment barriers for neurodivergent people.
Decoding job postings: Improving accessibility for neurodivergent job seekers
Improving the quality and accessibility of job postings is one way to reduce employment barriers for neurodivergent people.
In a tight labour market, job-seekers gain bargaining power and leverage it into greater job quality—at least, that’s the conventional wisdom.
Michael, LMIC Economist, presented findings that reveal a weakened relationship between labour market tightness and job quality indicators following the pandemic. Labour market tightness coincided with growth in real wages for only a portion of workers: those in low-wage jobs requiring little education. Several factors—including labour market composition, worker and employer behaviour, and labour market practices—have contributed to the absence of worker benefits. These will be investigated further in future work.
Independent Study - College of Wooster Research (2023-2024) FDI, Culture, Glo...AntoniaOwensDetwiler
"Does Foreign Direct Investment Negatively Affect Preservation of Culture in the Global South? Case Studies in Thailand and Cambodia."
Do elements of globalization, such as Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), negatively affect the ability of countries in the Global South to preserve their culture? This research aims to answer this question by employing a cross-sectional comparative case study analysis utilizing methods of difference. Thailand and Cambodia are compared as they are in the same region and have a similar culture. The metric of difference between Thailand and Cambodia is their ability to preserve their culture. This ability is operationalized by their respective attitudes towards FDI; Thailand imposes stringent regulations and limitations on FDI while Cambodia does not hesitate to accept most FDI and imposes fewer limitations. The evidence from this study suggests that FDI from globally influential countries with high gross domestic products (GDPs) (e.g. China, U.S.) challenges the ability of countries with lower GDPs (e.g. Cambodia) to protect their culture. Furthermore, the ability, or lack thereof, of the receiving countries to protect their culture is amplified by the existence and implementation of restrictive FDI policies imposed by their governments.
My study abroad in Bali, Indonesia, inspired this research topic as I noticed how globalization is changing the culture of its people. I learned their language and way of life which helped me understand the beauty and importance of cultural preservation. I believe we could all benefit from learning new perspectives as they could help us ideate solutions to contemporary issues and empathize with others.
Economic Risk Factor Update: June 2024 [SlideShare]Commonwealth
May’s reports showed signs of continued economic growth, said Sam Millette, director, fixed income, in his latest Economic Risk Factor Update.
For more market updates, subscribe to The Independent Market Observer at https://blog.commonwealth.com/independent-market-observer.
Vicinity Jobs’ data includes more than three million 2023 OJPs and thousands of skills. Most skills appear in less than 0.02% of job postings, so most postings rely on a small subset of commonly used terms, like teamwork.
Laura Adkins-Hackett, Economist, LMIC, and Sukriti Trehan, Data Scientist, LMIC, presented their research exploring trends in the skills listed in OJPs to develop a deeper understanding of in-demand skills. This research project uses pointwise mutual information and other methods to extract more information about common skills from the relationships between skills, occupations and regions.
OJP data from firms like Vicinity Jobs have emerged as a complement to traditional sources of labour demand data, such as the Job Vacancy and Wages Survey (JVWS). Ibrahim Abuallail, PhD Candidate, University of Ottawa, presented research relating to bias in OJPs and a proposed approach to effectively adjust OJP data to complement existing official data (such as from the JVWS) and improve the measurement of labour demand.
5 Tips for Creating Standard Financial ReportsEasyReports
Well-crafted financial reports serve as vital tools for decision-making and transparency within an organization. By following the undermentioned tips, you can create standardized financial reports that effectively communicate your company's financial health and performance to stakeholders.
A toxic combination of 15 years of low growth, and four decades of high inequality, has left Britain poorer and falling behind its peers. Productivity growth is weak and public investment is low, while wages today are no higher than they were before the financial crisis. Britain needs a new economic strategy to lift itself out of stagnation.
Scotland is in many ways a microcosm of this challenge. It has become a hub for creative industries, is home to several world-class universities and a thriving community of businesses – strengths that need to be harness and leveraged. But it also has high levels of deprivation, with homelessness reaching a record high and nearly half a million people living in very deep poverty last year. Scotland won’t be truly thriving unless it finds ways to ensure that all its inhabitants benefit from growth and investment. This is the central challenge facing policy makers both in Holyrood and Westminster.
What should a new national economic strategy for Scotland include? What would the pursuit of stronger economic growth mean for local, national and UK-wide policy makers? How will economic change affect the jobs we do, the places we live and the businesses we work for? And what are the prospects for cities like Glasgow, and nations like Scotland, in rising to these challenges?
1. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
CORPORATE PARTICIPANTS
Julie Dill
Duke Energy Corporation - Corporate Executive of Investor Relations and Chief Communications Officer
Jim Rogers
Duke Energy Corporation – President and Chief Executive Officer
David Hauser
Duke Energy Corporation – Group Executive and Chief Financial Officer
Fred Fowler
Duke Energy Corporation - Group Executive and President of Duke Energy Gas
CONFERENCE CALL PARTICIPANTS
Paul Fremont
Jefferies & Company - Analyst
Craig Shere
Calyon Securities - Analyst
Ashar Khan
SAC Capital - Analyst
Paul Patterson
Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Karen Taylor
BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
Nathan Judge
Atlantic Equities - Analyst
Matthew Akman
CIBC World Markets - Analyst
PRESENTATION
Operator
Good day, everyone, and welcome to the Duke Energy second-quarter earnings conference call. Today's program is being recorded. At this time
for opening remarks, I would like to turn the conference over to the Group Executive of Investor Relations and Chief Communications Officer,
Ms. Julie Dill.
Julie Dill - Duke Energy Corporation - Corporate Executive-IR, Chief Communications Officer
Thank you, Kelly, and good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. With me are Jim Rogers, President and Chief Executive
Officer, and David Hauser, Group Executive and Chief Financial Officer. Also with me today are Fred Fowler, Group Executive and President,
Duke Energy Gas; Marc Manley, Group Executive and Chief Legal Officer; Steve Young, our Controller; and Lynn Good, our Treasurer, who
will be available to take your questions.
This morning, Jim will provide a general overview of the Company's performance, with David providing more detail on the specific financial
results for the quarter. Jim will wrap up with a discussion of our commitment to investors. Following these prepared remarks, we will open the
lines for your questions.
Before we begin, let me take a moment to read the Safe Harbor statement. Some of the things we will discuss today concerning future company
performance will be forward-looking statements within the meanings of the securities laws. Actual results may materially differ from those
2. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
discussed in these forward-looking statements and you should refer to the additional information contained in Duke Energy's and Cinergy's 2005
Form 10-Ks, filed with the SEC, and other SEC filings concerning factors that could cause those results to be different than contemplated in
today's discussion.
In addition, today's discussion includes certain non-GAAP financial matters as defined under SEC Regulation G. A reconciliation of those
measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is available on our Investor Relations Web site at www.duke-energy.com. With that,
I'll turn the call over to Jim.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
Thank you, Julie, and good morning, everyone. It is hard to believe, but we are fast approaching 100 business days since we closed the merger of
Duke Energy and Cinergy. When I look back over these past four months, I am really struck with all the things this team has been able to
accomplish. We will only be able to touch on a few during this call, but suffice it to say that I am extremely pleased with the way our employees
have delivered on both the operational and strategic fronts.
I will start with the financial results for the second quarter. This morning, we reported ongoing earnings per diluted share of $0.43, compared to
$0.32 per diluted share for the same period last year. These results are $0.05 more than the latest First Call consensus of $0.38.
We did take some charges for items we have classified as “special” for the quarter. These items, along with our discontinued operations, have
been excluded from our ongoing earnings. So on a reported basis, our earnings per diluted share were down about $0.04 year-over-year. As you
would expect, almost 50% of these special charges are associated with the merger and our intention to spin the gas business. David will discuss
these items in more detail in a moment.
As we look at the year to date, some businesses are ahead of their plans and others are not. The company's results as a whole, however, are on
plan with respect to where we thought we would be at this point in the year. Franchised Electric is behind its plan, primarily due to milder than
normal weather and lower bulk power marketing sales. But other businesses are ahead, and we expect them to stay ahead. As a consequence, they
will be able to make up the shortfall we expect to see in our franchised business. There are a lot of moving pieces, but for the full year 2006, we
are on track to achieve our employee incentive target.
I'm really pleased with our financial performance this quarter, and I'm equally pleased with how the company has continued to move forward on
executing its strategic objectives.
In addition to closing the merger earlier than expected, we also announced the sale of our Commercial Marketing and Trading business. And of
course, we announced our intention to spin the gas business as well. There are other accomplishments for the quarter that I will discuss with you
later, but let me stop here and turn the call over to David to go over the specifics of our financial results.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
Thank you, Jim. Before we get started, I'd like to remind you that this is the first quarter we are reporting the combined results of Duke Energy
and Cinergy. So the 2006 numbers are combined, but the 2005 numbers represent “old” Duke Energy only.
With that, let's turn to U.S. Franchised Electric & Gas. This new segment now consists of the results of operations for the former Duke Power in
the Carolinas and the former Cinergy utilities in the Midwest – CG&E's transmission and distribution utility, PSI Energy and Union Light, Heat
& Power.
Segment EBIT for Franchised Electric & Gas was $351 million for the quarter, $77 million higher than the second quarter of 2005. As you would
expect, the addition of Cinergy's regulated Midwest operations had the greatest impact on that increase. They added approximately $90 million in
the quarter, net of $10 million in rate reductions associated with the merger approvals in Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio.
Also in the “plus” column, improved weather in our Carolinas service territory benefited the quarter by approximately $29 million. While the
weather was an improvement over the spring of 2005, it remained milder than normal. And we continued to see customer growth across our
service areas. Our average number of customers increased by more than 65,000, about 1.5% over the same period last year.
3. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
However, bulk power marketing sales were lower in the second quarter, compared to 2005, for two reasons. First, BPM was down by $17
million, primarily due to lower sales volumes. This was largely due to unplanned outages at a couple of our baseload plants.
Second, we took an $18 million charge in the quarter based on a North Carolina regulatory order, which changed the calculation for bulk power
profit sharing, retroactive to January 2005. About $11 million of the $18 million charge was related to 2005. We have requested a reconsideration
of this order with the North Carolina Utility Commission, and a hearing is scheduled for August 29.
In addition, Duke Energy Carolinas recognized a charge of approximately $15 million for community donations and rate reductions associated
with the merger approvals in North and South Carolina.
Now let's take a look Natural Gas Transmission. This segment reported $361 million in second quarter EBIT, compared to $304 million in the
same period in 2005. A $46 million increase in natural gas processing margins, primarily due to the addition of the Empress System, accounted
for a large portion of the EBIT growth this quarter. The Empress system, located in western Canada, was acquired from ConocoPhillips in August
of 2005. These strong processing results were driven by robust frac spreads during the quarter. On an annual basis, a $1.00 change in the frac
spread affects Empress’ EBIT by about $25 million.
Other positive drivers included the favorable resolution of ad valorem tax items for $15 million, a stronger Canadian dollar for $11 million, and
additional earnings from U.S. expansion projects which came on line over the last year. The formation of the Duke Energy Income Fund, lower
equity earnings at Gulfstream related to interest expense, as well as higher operating and depreciation costs, partially offset those increases.
Next up is Field Services. Before I review the actual results for the quarter, let me first provide some information to help you compare Field
Services' earnings on an apples-to-apples basis for the second quarter. This chart shows what the results would have been in the second quarter of
2005 if Duke Energy had owned only 50% of the business at that time. The pro-forma equity earnings would have been $116 million for the
second quarter of 2005. This compares with reported equity earnings of $148 million for this quarter, a 28% increase.
Now let's take a look at the actual results. Second-quarter ongoing equity earnings were $6 million better than the ongoing segment EBIT
reported for the same period last year. Higher results from strong commodity prices and improved NGL and gas marketing more than offset the
negative impact from the change in ownership of Duke Energy Field Services from 70% to 50% in the third quarter of 2005. Lower gathering and
processing volumes also had a negative effect on the quarter.
Reflecting its strong earnings and cash flow, Duke Energy Field Services paid dividends of $83 million and another $57 million in tax
distributions to Duke Energy during the quarter.
As for Field Services' sensitivity to crude prices, our previous estimates have not changed. On an unhedged basis, we estimate our exposure at
$15 million for each $1-per-barrel movement in crude oil prices on an annual basis. For the calendar year 2006, that will be offset by
approximately $5 million in Other EBIT related to the dedesignated hedges carried there. There is no such offset for future years.
You may recall that we used an average price of $61 per barrel in our 2006 estimates, and as you know, we are well above that price today. The
forward curve indicates we will be well above that for the rest of 2006 as well. So we expect better earnings as a result of those higher prices,
assuming that normal correlations between NGLs and crude oil hold for the balance of the year. But we do not expect the tax credits associated
with our synfuel facilities in Commercial Power will be available, so this will partially offset the upside at Field Services.
Now let me turn to Commercial Power. The Commercial Power segment is made up of the former Duke Energy North America Midwest plants,
the former CG&E non-regulated generation, and Duke Energy Generation Services, formerly Cinergy Solutions. This segment provided EBIT of
$20 million, compared to a $16 million loss in the second quarter of 2005.
Improved results were due primarily to the addition of CG&E's operations, which contributed $97 million for the quarter. That’s before the effect
of $48 million in net purchase accounting charges and a $16 million loss associated with the synfuel facilities.
Purchase accounting was a significant variance for the quarter, and it will be for the year, so let me give you some more details on that. Purchase
accounting adjustments are the result of the requirement to mark the Cinergy assets to fair value at the point of closing. For regulated assets, fair
value and book value are the same, due to the regulatory compact of cost-based regulation.
For non-regulated assets, the mark to fair value results in an impact on future earnings, largely through depreciation and amortization. When we
developed the $1.90 incentive target, we had anticipated that the purchase accounting adjustments would impact 2006 earnings positively by
4. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
$0.03. This was based on estimates as of September 30, 2005. Based on the actual purchase accounting adjustments booked at the closing date,
we expect the impact to earnings for 2006 will be a reduction of $0.08. Of the $0.08 for the year, $0.03 was in the second quarter.
The most significant change in purchase accounting from the September estimate is related to the value of the rate stabilization plan, or RSP, in
Ohio. Market conditions have changed. For example, the market price for this large block of power has declined since the previous estimate. This
decline means that while the RSP is still at below-market prices, it is closer to market than was the case last fall.
For 2007, we would expect the purchase accounting charge to be approximately $0.04. We told you back in February when we provided the
components of the $1.90, that any impact of the purchase accounting adjustment that is either above or below the $0.03 would not affect the
incentive target for employees. However, as you are looking at our ongoing diluted earnings per share for the full year, you should expect
approximately $1.79 instead of $1.90, based purely on the swing in purchase accounting.
Now let's turn to our International business. Ongoing earnings for International were $81 million for the quarter, down by $5 million compared to
the same quarter last year. This decrease was due to higher purchased-power costs resulting from an unplanned outage in Peru. Lower hydrology
in Peru and Brazil, along with higher transmission and regulatory fees in Brazil, also contributed to lower ongoing results. Favorable foreign
exchange partially offset those decreases by about $4 million.
Ongoing results exclude a $55 million impairment associated with our equity investment in the Campeche facility in Mexico. You should note
that there was no income tax impact on the Campeche impairment charge. This is because Campeche came to Duke Energy in connection with
the Westcoast acquisition and is legally owned by entities in Canada. For Canadian tax purposes, the impairment in value would be a capital loss,
as Westcoast Energy does not currently expect to have any capital gains to offset this capital loss. As a result, a deferred tax benefit was not
recorded for the impairment charge. The remaining book value of our investment at Campeche is approximately $14 million.
I'm sure you know that Bolivia's government has announced plans to nationalize its energy infrastructure. To date, the government has not issued
any laws or regulations on how they will accomplish the proposed nationalization. We believe it will take some time to sort this out, as the
government's initial focus will be on the hydrocarbon industry, with the power and other industries to follow. Current capital employed in Bolivia
amounts to approximately $70 million, and the annual EBIT contribution is not material.
Now let's turn to Crescent. Crescent Resources surpassed our expectations for the quarter, with $174 million in reported EBIT, far exceeding last
year's second quarter EBIT from continuing operations of $38 million. This increase was due to a $52 million gain on sale of land at Lake
Keowee in South Carolina, and another $81 million gain on sale of property at Potomac Yard, a commercial project in the Washington, D.C. area.
The Potomac Yard project is a great example of Crescent's business model. The project began in 2001 for an initial investment of about $128
million. Since then, Crescent has generated nearly $600 million in sales, almost $200 million in segment EBIT and a very impressive return. The
project was a success, not only financially, but environmentally as well. The building was certified “gold” by the U.S. Green Building Council,
and is the first new construction project in the Washington, D.C., metro area and the state of Virginia to achieve the “gold” designation.
The book value of Crescent's real estate portfolio at the end of the quarter was approximately $1.4 billion, up from $1.3 billion at year-end 2005.
Clearly, since Crescent is already at $216 million midway through the year, they are well on their way to once again exceeding their annual
segment EBIT expectation. Of course, if we finalize a joint venture, that would impact our share of Crescent's prospective results.
The Other category reported an EBIT loss of $174 million compared to a loss of $102 million in the prior-year quarter. On an ongoing basis, the
loss for the quarter was $92 million. This excludes $74 million in costs to achieve the Cinergy merger, primarily severance costs, and another $8
million in costs to achieve the gas spinoff. The second-quarter 2005 ongoing loss was $109 million, which excludes a $7 million gain related to
the DEFS dedesignated hedges last year.
Lower ongoing losses were largely due to a decrease in insurance reserve charges at our captive insurance company. Although not a quarterly
variance driver, embedded in this quarter's results was a $20 million charge related to the DEFS dedesignated hedges for 2006, essentially the
same as the ongoing amount recognized during the second quarter of 2005. The forward curve for crude prices used to mark these hedges as of
June 30, 2006, averaged about $75.50.
Now that we've announced the intent to spin off our gas businesses, there is a lot of work to be done over the coming months. The costs to
achieve the gas spinoff will be included in Other, and will also be considered a special item for 2006. As of June 30, we have spent $8 million in
cost to achieve.
5. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Before I turn the call over to Jim, let me wrap up by discussing a few items that may be of interest. Cash, cash equivalents, and short-term
investments on hand as of June 30 were approximately $1 billion. As you probably know, when we acquired Cinergy they had a good deal of
commercial paper. As a result, we had about $1.2 billion of total commercial paper outstanding as of June 30.
Interest expense was $339 million for the quarter, compared to $295 million for the second quarter of 2005. A little more than $80 million of this
increase was the result of bringing Cinergy's debt onto our balance sheet at the time of the merger. This was partially offset by a reduction of
slightly more than $40 million, due to the deconsolidation of Duke Energy Field Services in July 2005.
A reminder on the share buyback program. As of June 23, we had repurchased approximately 17.5 million shares at an average price of $28.57,
for a total repurchase of about $500 million. We suspended that program with the decision to separate the company. When we announced the
intent to spin off our gas businesses in June, we told you that the newly formed gas company will essentially hold what is currently included in
Duke Capital, excluding International and Crescent.
We expect the consolidated debt of the new gas company to be approximately $9 billion, based on balances at December 31, 2006, and this
includes approximately $3 billion of debt at the Duke Capital parent level. We realize there are some rumors out there about the future credit
quality of the Duke Capital debt. Let me reassure you that Duke Capital debt will be investment-grade at the time of the spin. And from
discussions with Fred Fowler and Greg Ebel, I know the entire gas company management team is committed to keeping their debt investment
grade.
As Jim said in his opening remarks, we are extremely pleased with our second-quarter results and believe we are on track to meet our 2006
employee incentive earnings target.
Now I'll turn it back over to Jim.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
Thank you, David. 2006 is proving to be a year of great transformation for our company. We believe the strategic moves we made this year will
create significant value for you overtime. I would like to discuss those in the context of what we consider our commitment to our investors. I
believe this will give you a good understanding of how we are advancing our businesses for the future.
Our first commitment is growing earnings and dividends over time. In that regard, we closed the merger with Cinergy in 11 months, and this was
the first quarter we had earnings from those operations. As planned, we have begun to harvest the merger savings. I will discuss this in greater
detail later.
Even with the merger integration actions and the significant amount of work required to spin the gas business by year-end, we remain focused on
achieving our financial goals for this year. With the strong results reported this morning, we are well on our way to achieving our earnings goals.
As for growing dividends, you saw in June that the board of directors approved an annual dividend increase of $0.04 per share effective with the
September 2006 distribution. Over the last year, the two increases in the dividend represent a total increase of 16.4%. We've gone from $1.10 to
$1.28 per share. In my judgment, these achievements represent a “tick in the box” for this commitment to you.
Our next commitment is achieving the full value of our portfolio, and we accomplished a lot last quarter. The exit of the DENA business outside
the Midwest, announced last September, was completed two months ahead of schedule. We completed the sale of the generating assets to LS
Power for approximately $1.6 billion. And in July, we finalized the sale of the last remaining contract associated with that business.
Second, we announced the sale of our Commercial Marketing and Trading business to Fortis. We expect this transaction to be completed in the
third quarter, with pretax cash proceeds of at least $350 million and at least another $200 million return of collateral. Both the DENA and CMT
transactions have lowered the risk profile for the company. Third, we announced that we are in discussions to take on a partner for Crescent
Resources. More to come on that.
Finally, we announced the decision to spin the gas business. And yesterday, we filed for an extension of the Ohio Rate Stabilization Plan, which
currently runs through 2008. This extension is for two years, through 2010, and provides for continued electric system stability. It also provides
our customers with clear price signals, while helping maintain a stable revenue stream for the company.
6. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
The components and calculations for the “price to compare” are the same in the extension filing as they are in the original order. However, the
amortization of the residential regulatory transition charge will end in '08. At this time, the potential exists for some of the former DENA plants to
be used to meet growing capacity needs. We will be working with the staff of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio and various consumer
groups over the coming months to reach an agreement on our proposed plan.
For the balance of the year, we have three primary objectives. First, deliver on our financial goals. Second, deliver on the promise of the merger.
Third, execute on the spin of the gas business by year-end.
When we announced the spin, we touched on the gas company's intention to form a master limited partnership. As we said then, the gas company
is committed to structuring another MLP for certain gas transmission assets. This MLP will be independent of and not in competition with the
Field Services MLP. DCP Midstream Partners is focused on midstream assets, while the new MLP will be focused primarily on interstate
pipeline assets. We are not ready to talk today about specific assets that we would put into this MLP, but we anticipate having the structure
determined early in '07.
The next commitment is reinvesting in the business. On average over the next several years, Duke Energy sees a CapEx spend of between $2.5
billion and $3.5 billion per year.
During the second quarter:
• We signed an agreement to acquire an 825-MW power plant in Rockingham County, N.C., for approximately $195 million. Last
month, we received approval for the acquisition from the North Carolina Utilities Commission. Additionally, early termination of
antitrust review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act was received. We have a request for FERC approval pending. We are on track to
complete this transaction by year's end.
• We also received approval from the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission for cost recovery, including financing, O&M, and
depreciation expense, on approximately $1.1 billion of pollution control equipment required to comply with new federal
environmental rules. The approval also included cost recovery for mercury emission allowances through our existing emission
allowance tracker. Timely cost recovery mechanisms such as this one in Indiana allow is to deliver service at the lowest cost to our
customers, as well as reduce the risk of regulatory lag for our investors. It is these types of mechanisms that we hope to implement in
other states, where we're making significant capital investments in infrastructure.
• With that in mind, we filed testimony with the North Carolina Commission in support of the Cliffside coal plant expansion. The
project includes two state-of-the-art and highly efficient 800-MW baseload coal plants. This is approximately a $2 billion investment,
and the first of these new units is expected to come online by mid-2011.
• Our Marshall plant in North Carolina is also having the first of three scrubbers installed to remove SOx at a cost of approximately
$450 million. We are continuing to install scrubbers on our largest coal units to comply with more stringent limits on SOx, NOx and
mercury. Our environmental compliance plan will see 25 of our coal-fired units scrubbed by the end of 2010.
• As you know, we are developing a state-of-the-art 600-MW integrated gasification combined cycle, or IGCC, plant in Indiana. This is
a total investment of approximately $1.2 billion. Last week, the Indiana Commission issued an order that allows us to defer and
capitalize 100% of the front-end engineering and design study costs if the plant is built.
With the completion of our environmental program, we will be on track to achieve our aspiration of having one of the cleanest coal fleets in the
U.S. by the end of the decade.
Let me turn to the gas side. On the gas side, on average, over the next five years, DEGT sees a CapEx spend of about $1.5 billion each year, with
over $1 billion of that being expansion capital. This map illustrates the more than two dozen projects we have in the business. Some of these are
under construction, and others are in various stages of the open season process.
In the second quarter, we announced nine major pipeline and storage projects. Fred Fowler and his team did a terrific job developing these
opportunities. These projects include:
• An incremental capacity expansion of the Texas Eastern system from Lebanon, Ohio, to New Jersey. And late last month, we
announced the Lebanon Connector project.
7. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
• Second, an expansion on the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline to connect with the planned Canaport LNG terminal in Saint John, New
Brunswick.
• Third, we also announced the expansion of the Algonquin Gas Transmission system.
• Additionally, Gulfstream pipeline, our 50-50 joint venture with Williams, announced the first major expansion of its Florida pipeline
to serve Progress Energy's Bartow power plant.
• And Union Gas received approval from the Ontario Energy Board for a $100 million expansion of its Dawn to Trafalgar gas pipeline
system.
We also announced:
• An open season for three salt cavern storage facilities
• An open season by Texas Eastern to determine interest in moving natural gas from emerging Western North American supply basins
to premium markets in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions
• And an open season ended Monday for the Mid-Continent Crossing pipeline, a collaboration of DEGT and CenterPoint Energy Gas
Transmission. Preliminary results indicate strong interest in the project.
Taken together, the significant investment in these existing and new projects supports our future growth expectations for this business. And there
are many more opportunities currently being reviewed for new projects in the post-2008 period.
DEGT has done a terrific job of finding and creating opportunities to expand and grow its business. They do understand that over time, the
markets, customers and competitive landscape will change. We recognize that not every one of the projects currently proposed is likely to come
in exactly as anticipated. We will continue to pursue all opportunities that make sense in the long term for the company, both strategically and
financially.
The next commitment is developing a strong leadership team with a deep bench. As we look at spinning the gas company, clearly we’ve put a
strong leadership team in place, with Paul Anderson as Chairman and Fred Fowler as President and CEO, as well as Fred's direct reports. We are
working together to fill out the rest of the organization.
For Duke Energy, as a power pure-play following the separation, we are rethinking the organization, especially the corporate center and shared
services areas. Our goal is to take the momentum we have built from the merger integration and push it further for the power company. We
expect to have the organization determined by the end of the third quarter.
Lastly, we are committed to delivering clear and transparent communications. As you all know, we intend to share our merger scorecard with you
when we release earnings in the third quarter. However, I want to give you a sense of how we're doing so far. To date, we look to be in pretty
good shape. We’re on target for the majority of the items we are tracking, most significantly the headcount reductions we have targeted for this
year, and also for our merger costs to achieve.
We do have work to do, however, in other areas. For example, we’re slightly behind where we’d like to be in system reliability. But in general,
I’m very pleased with our results to date and will look forward to sharing the full results with you in November.
We are on track to achieve the approximately $140 million of merger synergies we forecast for this year. But don't forget that virtually all those
savings will be offset by rate reductions we agreed to with the states. We agreed to give our customers their share of five years' worth of savings
in the first 12 months. That translates into approximately $140 million this year and about $110 million next year. This means the benefits of the
merger will be accruing to investors in the second half of 2007.
For the gas spin, we filed our request for a Private Letter Ruling with the IRS last week. We expect to file our Form 10 with the SEC in the third
quarter. It will provide you with the pro-forma financial information for the gas company. At the same time, we will provide you with the pro-
forma financial information for the remaining Duke Energy. We will use the time following the Form 10 filing to develop a road show for both
companies that we will present later this year.
8. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Finally, we are beginning to work on the specific budgets for '07 in light of the decision to spin the gas business. We will be providing targets for
both the power company and the gas company once we begin the road shows in early December.
I would like to leave you this morning with three key points that represent our value proposition for the future. First, we are committed to
growing earnings. We expect future annual ongoing earnings growth for Duke Energy of 4% to 6%. For the gas company, we expect 5% to 7%
growth over the next five years.
Second, we are committed to increasing the dividend. We will grow dividends in the future consistent with our assumptions for a 70% to 75%
payout target for Duke Energy and 60% for the gas company. Third, we are committed to continuing to improve the overall risk profile of our
portfolio, which will further improve our credit metrics.
As I said earlier, we’re extremely pleased with how our businesses performed on a combined basis this last quarter. We are realizing the promise
of our merger. We are committed to delivering on our financial goals for the year. And we are energized about the future, especially the
opportunity to maximize shareholder value through the spin of the gas business.
With that, let's open up the lines for your questions.
QUESTION AND ANSWER
Operator
(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS) Paul Fremont, Jefferies.
Paul Fremont - Jefferies & Company - Analyst
Really two questions. The first has to do with the Crescent outperformance. That seems to roughly offset the change in purchase accounting.
Should we view those two for the year roughly as offsetting items?
The second is on the Ohio plan. Do you believe, given, I guess, Tony Alexander's comments on the First Energy conference call, that existing
Ohio law basically provides for the state to go to market at the end of the transition plans? Do you believe that a change in state law is going to be
required in order for your extended plan to be adopted by the Commission?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
This is David. Let me deal with the Crescent one, and Jim will deal with the Ohio one. With regard to Crescent, they clearly outperformed our
expectations. But there is an important dynamic there. First of all, they pretty consistently have outperformed, if you look over the last few years.
And secondly, of the outperformance, a substantial piece of it, about $65 million, was in the plan, but was in the plan for the third quarter, so it
was reflected in the $1.90 per share. You should assume that Crescent will outperform for the year, compared to what we were planning and what
we laid out as their EBIT goals. But $65 million of that is a shift from the third quarter into the second quarter.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
Paul, from the RSP perspective, we are pursuing two tracks in Ohio. One is the extension of the RSP as we've discussed today. The second is a
legislative route. I think arguments can be made that, in the same way they extended the RSP before, they have the same authority to extend it
another two years in this transition period. But there is kind of a difference of view on that.
So we think the more prudent thing for us to do is to file, as we have, for this extension, and at the same time pursue legislative alternatives.
9. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Paul Fremont - Jefferies & Company - Analyst
Thank you.
Operator
Lance Ettus, Calyon Securities.
Craig Shere - Calyon Securities - Analyst
Actually, it is Craig Shere. Good quarter. Two quick questions, and I apologize if I missed something; I was off the line temporarily. David,
maybe could you clarify the comps in terms of equity income versus the EBIT for DEFS, because we have different ownership percentages –
one’s after interest expense and things like that. And if it is too complicated, maybe you could just explain what DEFS did as a 100% independent
operation year-over-year.
The second question: Jim, do you envision Crescent being a minority interest position after finding a partner?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
Let me go back on DEFS for a minute. We laid out a chart, Craig, that it would be worthwhile for you to go to look at, that I think explains that.
But basically if you looked at the chart, at DEFS' net income this year, ongoing equity earnings was $148 (million). If you took 50% of last year,
it was $116 (million), so a 28% increase on an apples-to-apples basis on DEFS. So I think that probably answers that question. What was the
second one?
Craig Shere - Calyon Securities - Analyst
The second was on Crescent, in terms of looking for a minority interest.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
Oh. I think if we end up with a Crescent deal, it would be something along the lines of a 50-50 type partnership, where if you decided to do
projects at Crescent where you levered it up, that that would be off the balance sheet of Duke Energy.
Craig Shere - Calyon Securities - Analyst
Okay. And do you see that kind of partnership being a net growth in the business, such that you contribute what you have and then the whole
business is bigger going forward? Or would that kind of be more like a cashing out type thing?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I would say it is more towards the latter, where cash comes in the door as a result of this deal.
Craig Shere - Calyon Securities - Analyst
Okay, thank you.
Operator
10. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Ashar Khan, SAC Capital.
Ashar Khan - SAC Capital - Analyst
Jim, could you just mention to us on this Ohio plan, what the impact on the investors of the net income line is, going from '08 to '09?
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
I think we are really at this point not prepared to talk about that.
Ashar Khan - SAC Capital - Analyst
Okay. Could you just elaborate a little bit more, I guess, what riders are you seeing extensions of? I'm just trying to get a little bit more color as
to what the plan is doing.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
Sure. I can do that. What we think we are trying to achieve with this, the extension request provides price clarity for our customers in '09 and '10
as well as a simplified rate structure. As you remember, the way we structure this, in '09 residential customers will receive a decrease of
approximately 4% to their total bill, and nonresidential bills will increase by 2%. Both classes will receive an additional 1% increase in 2010.
And the thing that drives this, as you would remember, is the regulatory transition charge (RTC) for residential customers ends 12/31/08, and that
is coincident with the end of the transition amortization. But the RTC continues for the nonresidential customers.
So all the mechanisms, the AAC, the RSC, the SRT, the IMF, all of those mechanisms will still be in place, including the ability to track our
purchase power through the FPP, as well as our transmission cost recovery through the TCR.
So for all those that don't know that alphabet of provisions, but it is identical -- but it reflects the full amortization of the RTC. And that is one of
the important drivers. How all of that rolls off and the rate reductions associated with it is the way to go, after figuring out exactly what the EBIT
will be post-'08.
Ashar Khan - SAC Capital - Analyst
Okay. So in essence, can I assume it is like trying to maintain the same EBIT line going forward from '08 to '09? Of course, you have customer
growth and all that, but the issue is trying to maintain the same margins going forward?
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
I think the way to say it is that -- and this is a general statement -- and that is, the plan allows us to maintain EBIT and maybe slightly grow it
over time.
Ashar Khan - SAC Capital - Analyst
Okay, thank you.
Operator
Paul Patterson, Glenrock Associates.
11. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
I wanted to ask a question. First of all, it sounded like you might be changing guidance when I heard the comments on the purchase accounting
to $1.79. Is that correct?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I think I'd phrase it this way. What we said before was that $1.90 was the employee incentive target, and that included a positive $0.03 for the
purchase accounting. The purchase accounting has come in at a negative $0.08, so all of that gets excluded for the employee incentive goal. But
everything else being equal, if you look at earnings for the year, it would be $1.79 instead of $1.90.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
Again, that is not in the context of guidance. That is in the context of our employee target.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Okay, but I guess what I'm wondering is that in terms of guidance, are you excluding this purchase accounting activity because it is so -- it could
change, I guess, depending on what prices are and what have you. Does it make sense to have it in there at all?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
We don't really give guidance, so that is why we are laying out as clearly as we can what happens from the purchase accounting. And that is why
we have given you the swing from positive $0.03 to negative $0.08.
Now, you said it would change in the future. It is certainly true over the first 12 months there could be true-ups in purchase accounting, but I
would be surprised if there's anything very large in that.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Okay. So we're not going to see a big -- I see what you're saying. Let me ask you this. The commercial power, it sounded like you had a $36
million change, but there was a $97 million benefit from the addition of Cinergy's assets. And I'm just wondering what happened to the other $61
million? Because it appears to be before the purchase accounting activity, if I read that correctly.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I'm not sure I've got that -- the math you just did -- straight in my head. But we clearly added the CG&E assets, and that was a positive. And then
we came along and we deducted the purchase accounting, and that was $48 (million). And then we deducted a loss on synfuel, and that was -- I
think -- $16 (million).
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Okay, so in other words, the $36 million change has the impact of the synfuel and the purchase accounting? Maybe I just read it wrong.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
Yes, it does.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
12. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Okay. I think I just read that wrong. Then the income tax benefit of $40 million and the 29% effective tax rate, how should we look at that going
forward? Is that a normal number? It seems like there might be some unusual items there. I wasn't completely clear on that.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
That is because Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky are not unitary tax states; so when you put those into the total mix, you have less income allocated
to the unitary tax states. So it was a reversal of deferred income taxes associated with that lower tax, due to the unitary tax.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Okay. So should that happen going forward?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
No, it shouldn’t be -- the big piece of that was just this quarter.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Was just this quarter, okay. And we probably won't see that in 2007, or that is just a very unusual item.
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
Yes, that's right.
Paul Patterson - Glenrock Associates - Analyst
Okay. Then finally, on the BPM, just to understand this, what is the ongoing impact if -- just what is the ongoing impact of this new thing that
the North Carolina Commission came up with? I know you guys are asking for reconsideration and it sounds like you have a pretty good case.
But what is the variance that we might see on an ongoing basis? Because a lot of this seems like it's a catch-up, if I understand it correctly, from
1/1/2005.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
I think you'd look at that as about $10 million a year.
Operator
Karen Taylor, BMO Capital Markets.
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
I just want to come back to Paul's first question and make sure I completely understand it. The $1.90 of incentive target included $0.03. So for
the incentive target for 2006, effectively now we are down to $1.79. Is that correct?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I think that is the way to look at the math. I think that would give you the same answer that we talked about.
13. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
So not notwithstanding the fact that we've got outperformance at Crescent and Field Services, we will not be able to offset the delta of $0.11
from the change in purchase accounting, yes?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
No, when I talked about the $1.90 down to the $1.79, I was giving you purely the impact of purchase accounting. We clearly will have some
business units that outperform for the year, and I don't know where we will end up for the year. We don't give that kind of guidance.
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
Well, let me ask the question a different way then. Given the performance we've seen in Field Services, is that incremental to the assumptions in
the $1.90?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
We would expect Field Services to do better than what we had in the $1.90 over the balance of the year, if the forward curve stays where it is.
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
Okay, and just one very minor question on the weather. It was in fact better than Q2 '05, but still less than normal. How much was the effect on
the Carolinas business in particular from warmer than normal weather?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I believe the weather impact was $29 million. (Note: This is the variance over the prior year’s quarter, but weather was below normal for both
quarters.)
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
Perhaps I just missed this, but on DEFS, we've traditionally seen a sheet with volumes, different revenue types by contract. Will we be
discontinuing that information with this quarter?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
That will be posted on the Web site. Isn't that how we normally do that, put it on the Web site?
Julie Dill - Duke Energy Corporation - Corporate Executive-IR, Chief Communications Officer
Yes, Karen, it will be out on the Web site once DCP Midstream posts their earnings, and that will come out about August 10.
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
Okay. Just lastly, the Empress facility, I'm assuming there is no ethane in the frac margin on that facility. Is that right?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
14. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Fred?
Fred Fowler - Duke Energy Corporation - Group Executive & President-Duke Energy Gas
No, there is.
Karen Taylor - BMO Capital Markets - Analyst
There is? Okay. Thanks. That was all my questions.
Operator
Nathan Judge, Atlantic Equities.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
I just wanted to follow up on a couple of things. Clearly, there's a lot of moving parts here, but just on Field Services and Gas Transmission.
Now that Empress is in the Gas Transmission business, you gave us the sensitivity of $1 or $25 million per $1 in frac spread, if I recall correctly.
Is that going to be coming from the current strip price as of the second quarter, or will that be from the $61 benchmark price that you were using?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I would say it this way. We had -- when we forecast this -- if you look at the history of Empress, it has averaged about $30 million a year over
the last three years, with a lot of volatility. Of course, we didn't own it all that time, but that is about what it has averaged.
When we were forecasting this year, frac spreads were very narrow and we looked at it as a number that looked like $10 million. I would say
now, with frac spreads where they are, assuming a continuation, you'll be looking at a much larger number, maybe a $90 million kind of number
would be the order of magnitude.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
But it is safe to assume that the impact from $1 change in frac spread is $25 million for the Empress EBIT, and that should be considered from
what the frac spread was in the second quarter, not from your $61 oil assumption that you had at the beginning of the year?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I think that's fair.
Fred Fowler - Duke Energy Corporation - Group Executive & President-Duke Energy Gas
The oil assumption is only part of the equation. It's the oil and gas assumption.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
Sure. I absolutely understand. I'm just trying to get to where we are on a relative basis from the second quarter. Just could we talk about the
Crescent joint venture? I know in the past you had been reluctant to look at perhaps the opportunity to divest that business, as some of the offers
given were not really what you thought was a fair value for the company.
15. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Is the offer changed now that you are considering doing a joint venture, or is there something in the mechanics of this joint venture that is
appealing to you?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I would say it is the fact that if we sell a piece of Crescent, it will be because we believe we got fair value for it.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
Would that joint venture also consolidate the debt associated with Crescent off the books?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
The answer is yes, but the debt associated with Crescent is very, very small today. Now, it could give you the opportunity to leverage Crescent
going forward, and that debt would not be on the books.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
Okay. Why wouldn't you -- if you believed you got fair value for half, why wouldn't you just monetize the entire investment?
David Hauser - Duke Energy Corporation - CFO
I think that is an option you would have down the road. We think the Crescent name is important in our service territory, and we want to make
sure it is well protected. But that is an option we could have down the road if we wanted to.
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
It is also, Nathan, tied to the -- as you monetize these positions, you have to have places to reinvest the money. And so it is a little more about
getting the timing right with respect to future reinvestment opportunities.
Nathan Judge - Atlantic Equities - Analyst
Okay, fair enough. Just actually, which leads me to my next question on International. I know that there is quite a bit of change going on at the
company currently, but could you just update us on what you perceive as the future strategy for International, and where that fits in your
portfolio?
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
We have had an opportunity to review that business, and I think several conclusions that I have reached in the review. One is these are very good
assets, terrific assets, primarily in Brazil and Peru. They are low-risk assets. They are contracted for. And when I compare it to the stability of the
cash from that, it is very good stability.
So the bottom line is, we think this fits well into our existing portfolio of businesses. And I think one of the things -- one of the challenges that we
have -- is do we continue to improve the operations of the existing assets, or do we add to assets? And I think we are in the process of thinking
our way through that.
But our current thinking is that these are great assets. They are low-risk and are consistent with the types of investments we have here in our
Franchised Electric & Gas, and that this is a business that over time we want to find a way to grow the business.
16. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
Operator
Matthew Akman, CIBC World Markets.
Matthew Akman - CIBC World Markets - Analyst
I guess my question is for Fred, and it comes back to Empress and the strategy of the gas company going forward, we can start to look at that.
The $10 million versus $90 million swing on expectations for Empress is significant for Duke, and it will be, I guess, even more significant for a
smaller company split off.
I'm wondering whether you have thought about your strategy on hedging -- most of the Empress owners do a lot of hedging on that asset -- and
whether that is more appropriate for a pipeline company like you'll have going forward, and if you've made any progress on that, if that is your
direction.
Fred Fowler - Duke Energy Corporation - Group Executive & President-Duke Energy Gas
That is definitely a part of our thought process, but we have not made a decision as to what we will do. But clearly your point is very valid. It is
something we do have to think about, because that is a pretty big swing for the size of company that the gas company will be.
Matthew Akman - CIBC World Markets - Analyst
Are you working on that now, or have you made any progress on that?
Fred Fowler - Duke Energy Corporation - Group Executive & President-Duke Energy Gas
No, we don't see a real urgency to do it at the moment.
Matthew Akman - CIBC World Markets - Analyst
Okay, thanks. Then I guess another follow-up on the pipeline company going forward. There is a lot of activity in oil pipelining and liquid
pipelining and announcements regularly out of that. Is that part of the potential strategy -- if I can get a peek at maybe what the strategic plan of
this entity is going to look like -- or are we going to stick to just gas? Is there any plan to look at the liquids side of the business as well?
Jim Rogers - Duke Energy Corporation - President, CEO
I think if it was the right opportunity and made sense to us. What we have found -- we have been in that business in the past and that business is
quite consolidated at this point, and that was one of the reasons that we found ourselves, when we had TEPPCO, which was basically started as a
liquids pipeline, that just for growth we had to venture over into both crude oil and into gas gathering and gas transportation, really, for growth
opportunities.
So while it isn't -- if the right deal came along and the right opportunity, we would definitely take a look at it. But as I said, we found very few
opportunities springing up in that part of the business.
Matthew Akman - CIBC World Markets - Analyst
Okay, thanks very much.
Operator
17. PREPARED REMARKS AND Q&A
Duke Energy Corporation Earnings Conference Call, 2nd Quarter Aug. 3, 2006
It appears that is all the time we have left for questions. I'll turn it back to you all for closing remarks.
Julie Dill - Duke Energy Corporation - Corporate Executive-IR, Chief Communications Officer
Thank you, Kelly. Thank you all for joining us today. I know we left a few of you in the queue, and so we will be contacting each of you here in
a little bit to make sure that we get your questions answered.
As always, though, anyone else that does have a question, don't hesitate to give myself or the rest of the IR team a ring, and we will be back in
touch. Thank you all very much.
Operator
That concludes today's conference. You may now disconnect, and have a pleasant day.