Tag Archives: contracts

Value And Momentum In Sports Betting

By Jack Vogel As noted through our previous posts, we are big proponents of Value investing and Momentum investing strategies. We even highlight the best way to combine value and momentum . However, there is a new paper by Toby Moskowitz, titled “ Asset Pricing and Sports Betting ,” which examines how size, value and momentum affect sports betting contracts: I use sports betting markets as a laboratory to test behavioral theories of cross-sectional asset pricing anomalies. Two unique features of these markets provide a distinguishing test of behavioral theories: 1) the bets are completely idiosyncratic and therefore not confounded by rational theories; 2) the contracts have a known and short termination date where uncertainty is resolved that allows any mispricing to be detected. Analyzing more than a hundred thousand contracts spanning two decades across four major professional sports (NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL), I find momentum and value effects that move betting prices from the open to the close of betting, that are then completely reversed by the game outcome. These findings are consistent with delayed overreaction theories of asset pricing. In addition, a novel implication of overreaction uncovered in sports betting markets is shown to also predict momentum and value returns in financial markets. Finally, momentum and value effects in betting markets appear smaller than in financial markets and are not large enough to overcome trading costs, limiting the ability to arbitrage them away. Some Interesting Points The figure below explains the different price movements which are studied in the paper: The results are hypothetical results and are NOT an indicator of future results and do NOT represent returns that any investor actually attained. Indexes are unmanaged, do not reflect management or trading fees, and one cannot invest directly in an index. Additional information regarding the construction of these results is available upon request. Here are the T-stats for the momentum betas in the figure below: (click to enlarge) The results are hypothetical results and are NOT an indicator of future results and do NOT represent returns that any investor actually attained. Indexes are unmanaged, do not reflect management or trading fees, and one cannot invest directly in an index. Additional information regarding the construction of these results is available upon request. Analysis from the paper: A consistent pattern emerges for the Spread and Over/under contracts in every sport, where the momentum betas exhibit a tent-like shape over the three horizons—near zero from open-to-end, significantly positive from open-to-close, and significantly negative from close-to-end, with the initial price movement from open-to-close related to momentum being fully reversed by the game outcome. The patterns for the Moneyline contracts exhibit the same tent-like shape, but are less pronounced, consistent with the Moneyline perhaps being less affected by “dumb” money and more dominated by “smart” money. Then the paper shows the T-stats for the value betas in the figure below: (click to enlarge) The results are hypothetical results and are NOT an indicator of future results and do NOT represent returns that any investor actually attained. Indexes are unmanaged, do not reflect management or trading fees, and one cannot invest directly in an index. Additional information regarding the construction of these results is available upon request. Analysis from the paper: A consistent pattern is evident from the plots: a value contract’s betting line declines between the open and close and then rebounds between the close and game end, reaching the same level it started at the open. These patterns are consistent with an overreaction story for value, where value contracts, which measure “cheapness”, continue to get cheaper between the open and the close, becoming too cheap and thus rebounding positively when the game ends. This picture is the mirror image of momentum, where value or cheapness is negatively related to past performance, and hence the pictures for momentum and value tell the same story. (Though, recall the measures for value and momentum were only mildly negatively correlated.) Conclusion from the paper: Examining momentum, value, and size characteristics of these contracts, analogous to those used to predict financial market security returns, I find that momentum exhibits significant predictability for returns, value exhibits significant but weaker predictability, and size exhibits no return predictability. The patterns of return predictability over the life of the betting contracts—from opening to closing prices to game outcomes—matches those from models of investor overreaction. The results suggest that at least part of the momentum and value patterns observed in capital markets could be related to similar investor behavior. The magnitude of return predictability in the sports betting market is about one-fifth that found in financial markets, where trading costs associated with sports betting contracts are too large to generate profitable trading strategies, possibly preventing arbitrage from eliminating the mispricing. Our Thoughts: An interesting paper, showing that Value and Momentum work within the sports betting market, but the cost of trading on the signals is too large for profitable trades. This is probably why the “house always wins.” It’s a good thing I watch countless hours of sports to form my own “expert” opinions! Original post

Vectren’s (VVC) CEO Carl Chapman on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Vectren Corp (NYSE: VVC ) Q2 2015 Results Earnings Conference Call August 06, 2015, 11:00 AM ET Executives Naveed Mughal – IR, Treasurer Carl Chapman – CEO Susan Hardwick – CFO Analysts Matt Tucker – KeyBanc Capital Markets Paul Patterson – Glenrock Associates Operator Good morning. My name is Jessica and I’ll be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Vectren Corporation’s Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers’ remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the call over to Naveed Mughal, Treasurer and Vice President of Investor Relations. Mr. Mughal, you may begin your conference. Naveed Mughal Thank you, Operator. Good morning and thank you for joining us on today’s call to review Vectren’s 2015 second quarter results. This call is being webcast and shortly following its conclusion, a replay will be available on our website at www.vectren.com under the Investors link at the top of the page. Yesterday, we released our second quarter results and this morning we filed our Form 10-Q with the SEC. Under the Investors link on our website, you can find copies of the earnings release, today’s slide presentation and the 10-Q. As further described on Slide 2, I would like to remind you that many of the statements we make on this call are forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those discussed in this presentation. Carl Chapman, Vectren’s Chairman, President and CEO, will provide opening comments on the quarter’s financial results and our outlook for the remainder of the year. He will then turn it over to Susan Hardwick, Senior Vice President and CFO, who will discuss in more detail our utility and non-utility results. Lastly, joining us on today’s call is Ron Christian, Executive Vice President and Chief Legal and External Affairs Officer. Following our prepared remarks, we will be glad to answer questions you may have. With that, I’ll turn it over to Carl. Carl Chapman Thank you, Naveed. And before we go further, I’d like to officially welcome Naveed to Vectren and our management team since this is his first earnings call with us. For those of you who don’t know, Naveed joined as our new Treasurer and Vice President of Investor Relation just a few weeks ago. He comes to us from NV Energy, where he most recently held the Treasurer position. Naveed’s recent utility industry experience combined with his extensive treasury experience adding prior to NV Energy should make for a smooth transition. Naveed, welcome. I’d also like to wish our outgoing Treasurer and colleague, Robert Goocher, the best in his recent retirement, which began just a few days ago. Robert was an integral part of our successful navigation of the capital markets over the past 13 years. We thank Robert for all he has done for Vectren. With that, let’s turn to Slides 4 and 5 as we begin our review of second quarter results. I’d like to remind everyone we have excluded the 2014 results of coal mining, specifically the $0.23 loss in the 2014 second quarter results related to the exit. You will find a reconciliation of GAAP and non-GAAP measures at the end of the appendix. 2015 second quarter consolidated net income was $35.8 million or $0.43 per share compared to $30.1 million or $0.37 per share in 2014. In the quarter, we continued to see earnings growth anchored by solid utility results that achieved second quarter earnings per share of $0.29, an increase of $0.01 over 2014. In addition, improved results from both Vectren Infrastructure Services and Vectren Energy Services, which were both slightly better than expected, allowed the non-utility group to earn $0.14 per share in the second quarter, up $0.05 compared to the prior year. Utility performance year-to-date and for the quarter has been strong and the outlook is positive for the remainder of the year as return on the investment in new gas infrastructure continues to grow. In addition, the economic environment in Indiana and Ohio remains positive with June unemployment rates of 4.9% in Indiana and 5.2% in Ohio, both below the national rate of 5.3%. At Vectren Energy Services results for the quarter, while a slight loss, were improved over the prior year. Revenues for the quarter were $44 million compared to $33 million in the same period last year and $23 million in the first quarter of 2015. For the quarter, VESCO saw new contract signings totaling $53 million compared to $34 million in the prior year. In addition, on August 5, a large contract with NASA’s Johnson Space Center was signed, which as expected will be significant to VESCO’s third quarter and second half results. Also in the second quarter, Vectren Infrastructure Services achieved improved results that were up $2.9 million over the prior year driven by very strong demand for construction work in the gas distribution market. However, competition in the transmission market has put some margin pressure on VISCO’s expected second half results, which Susan will describe in greater detail. Overall, based on the continued strength of our utility outlook, we are affirming our 2015 consolidated earnings per share guidance of $2.40 to $2.55, while there are headwinds facing VISCO over the remainder of the year that could pressure us toward the lower end of the guidance range. We have full confidence in VISCO’s leadership team and therefore our ability to manage through these market conditions. Turning to Slide 6. I’d like to reiterate our long-term targets that we announced last November. We have been executing on our strategy for several years now which has led to a track record of earnings growth that we believe will continue into the future. On the utility side, we have approvals in place for gas utility infrastructure investments and a framework for current recovery of those investments. Company-wide, we’ve created a culture of performance management that focuses on limiting operating cost increases. And on the non-utility side, we have concentrated our efforts on our strategic investments in VISCO and VESCO. In the graph on the bottom left, one I’m sure you’ve seen before and we’ll see again as we’re quite proud of it. You can see over the past several years, we’ve put Vectren in a position to have achieved higher, more reliable and consistent consolidated earnings growth. As we work through the exit of nonstrategic businesses and kept our annual dividend increases modest, we were able to drive the payout ratio down from roughly 80% toward our new target of 60%. All this positioned us to roll out new long-term targets last November that are shown on the right, the primary ones being the consolidated earnings and dividend growth targets of 5% to 7%. Of course aligning the two provides the foundation to deliver the shareholders of total return target of 9% to 11%. In conjunction with the lower payout ratio and these new growth targets, last November we announced a dividend increase of $0.02 per share or 5.6%. This was the largest dividend increase for Vectren or its predecessor since the early 1990s and extended our streak to 55 consecutive years of increasing the dividends paid. And as we said in November and I want to make clear, we expect the annual dividend to grow with our earnings also at 5% to 7%. With that review of the overall story of Vectren which, we believe, compares very favorably to our peers, I’ll turn it over to Susan who will provide more detail on each of our business’ results for the quarter and outlook for the rest of the year before we open it up for questions. Susan? Susan Hardwick Thanks, Carl. Let’s turn to Slide 7 where we’ll start with the utility. Improved utility results for the quarter were driven by higher returns from gas infrastructure investments in both the Indiana and Ohio and lower O&M related to performance-based compensation expense. These were partially offset by decreased margin from wholesale power sales. On the regulatory front, we continue to see support for our approach to infrastructure investments and recovery. In June, the Indiana Court of Appeals found in our favor on the appeal by the Utility Consumer Counselor to the single item in the Commission’s order issued in August 2014 approving Vectren’s initial infrastructure plan under Senate Bills 560 and 251. On April 1, Vectren filed its second request for recovery of investment related to our gas infrastructure plan in Indiana, something we’ll do semi-annually throughout the seven-year plan period. And then in June, we amended our case to delay the recovery of a portion of the investment made in the second half of 2014 related to approval through Senate Bill 560 under our next filing in October — until our next filing in October of this year. We did that because of the recent activity around these types of filings in the state and to ensure that we had sufficient opportunity to include the appropriate level of detail regarding the projects in our filings, which will expedite the Commission’s and other party’s review. In July, the Commission issued an order that substantially approved our approach to rate recovery of our investments. The Commission also agreed with our approach to address in our October filing the consideration of whether enhancements to our seven-year plan relating to the sufficiency of the project and cost details will be appropriate. The Commission did make one modification in this order requiring that we use an updated weighted cost of capital in each filing. We do not view this as a material change and to be expected the Commission continue to work through implementation of this new law. With these Commission orders in place, Vectren expects to continue with this gas infrastructure program and investments as planned. Finally, as you all know, on August 3, EPA issued the final rule under the clean power plan. We’re currently evaluating the rule including the reduction goals and how the plan might impact our customers and we’ll work with the State of Indiana on its response to this action. For any investments required to comply with these goals, as always, we will consider the cost implications for our customers since we would expect timely recovery under Senate Bill 251 related to federal mandates or Senate Bill 29 related to clean coal. Turning to Slide 8. As Karl mentioned, Vectren Energy Services’ second quarter results were improved over the prior year, of $0.4 million. This included solid increases in revenues and new contracts signed versus the 2014 period reflecting continued positive momentum. I’m also pleased to report that VESCO has now signed contracts for the three major projects we referenced in May totaling nearly $80 million, one of which I’ll describe further in just a minute. Because of VESCO’S continued success with contract signings in the quarter, backlog has again increased versus the prior quarter end. At June 30, backlog was $175 million compared to $161 million at March 31 and $144 million at December 31, 2014. In addition, as Carl mentioned earlier, VESCO secured a large contract with NASA’s Johnson Space Center just yesterday. The project’s objective is to maximize energy cost savings by constructing a new combined heating power plant and making improvements to a chilled water plant. The contract includes the construction cost of approximately $47 million that will be added to backlog now that the contract is fully executed. The contract also includes a 22-year operations and maintenance agreement. The sales funnel, which includes contracts that have been awarded, but are not yet signed, remains very high at over $360 million as of June 30 even with the significant project signings in the second quarter. As we described previously, one of the biggest obstacles VESCO faces is the length of time it takes customers to sign contracts on projects that have already been awarded. VESCO continues to work to improve the sales cycle process including the standardization of procedures and timelines for project procurement, documentation and implementation. In June of this year, the Energy Services Coalition, which is one of the two primary trade associations for the energy services industry and has been led by one of our colleagues here at Vectren, was awarded a three-year contract with the US Department of Energy that includes funding for multiple initiatives to help accelerate the successful implementation of energy savings performance contracting, including sales cycle efficiency improvement. The DOE’s aim for funding the Energy Services Coalition is to have it lead outreach programs and provide technical assistance to states helping them build capacity for performance contracting initiatives and improve project procurement processes and timeline. We think this is yet another step in helping to improve the timeliness of this process. Let’s move onto Slide 9. Vectren Infrastructure Services had an excellent second quarter, improving earnings $2.9 million over the prior year. Year-to-date results are up more than $5.5 million compared to last year. And similar to the first quarter, demand for construction services was strong as VISCO achieved record second quarter revenue levels, which were $53 million higher than the same period in 2014. Earnings from operations in the second quarter were up more than $5 million over last year, driven largely by working the distribution market including work done by A&B Trenching. As you recall, A&B was acquired in May of this year and has performed well and as planned. The outlook for VISCO, second half of the year looks promising from a demand and revenue standpoint. Estimated backlog remains strong at approximately $575 million as of June 30, down slightly compared to $610 million at March 31. On the distribution side of the business, we have continued to add workers and expect to continue to significantly outpace 2014 revenues this year, as demand from utilities continues to grow. The record second quarter revenues contributed somewhat to the decline in June 30 backlog, but also VISCO was unsuccessful in a bid for significant transmission maintenance work that was included in the recent backlog. They had expected to perform this work in the second half of 2015. The VISCO team is diligently working to replace this loss of business and the prospects to do so are very good, but it is possible the margins for new projects may be lower than the maintenance work that was planned and therefore may result in pressure towards the lower end of our original 2015 earnings expectations for VISCO. However with significant projects announced and plans to start in mid-2016, our ability to grow the transmission business in 2016 and beyond should not be significantly impacted as market demand is expected to be very high over the next few years. Turning to Slide 10, here are just a few key drivers of our positive outlook. First, utility earnings will continue to grow as we execute detailed investment plans with approved recovery mechanisms in both Indiana and Ohio. Vectren Energy Services’ earnings prospects continue to strengthen as the national focus on energy conservation, renewable energy and sustainability expands given the widespread attention and expected rise in power prices across the country. VESCO is well-positioned to compete in all three market segments; federal, public sector and sustainable infrastructure. And finally, Vectren Infrastructure Services is well-positioned to compete for market share demand continues to grow from the newly announced distribution replacement programs, additional federal pipeline regulations likely to come, and while we and others expect to be very high market demand for transmission projects for which construction will begin in mid-2016 through 2018. Concluding on Slide 11. I want to reiterate our belief that Vectren merits premium valuation consideration. We have worked to position the Company to deliver greater stability and higher consistent earnings growth. The utility remains our core business having demonstrated a very strong track record of earnings has allowed returns. Gas infrastructure investments backed by approved recovery plans will continue to be the growth engine, driving utility earnings growth targeted at 4% to 6%. These investments will also drive it in the relatively near-term to being a predominantly gas utility from an earnings perspective and therefore deserving a more gas-like multiples. And complementing our premier utility operations is our high-quality, non-utility business mix with the growth driven by long-term demand for infrastructure investments, energy efficiency and sustainable infrastructure across the nation. Based on our EPS guidance and expectations, our streak of several years of consistent earnings growth should continue in 2015. While we fully expect to be in the range even at the very low end of our EPS guidance range of $2.40 per share, we would still see growth of 5.3% compared to 2014. So, in conclusion, our 5% to 7% earnings and dividend growth targets, coupled with our 60% payout target and a 55-year history of growing dividends, serve us strong anchors for our annual total shareholder return target of 9% to 11%. We are very confident in our ability to deliver on all of these targets. And with that, operator, we are now ready for questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Matt Tucker with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Your line is now open. Matt Tucker Good morning and nice quarter. Few questions, first on VISCO, could you give us a sense of how much transmission represents right now in terms of your revenue or backlog mix? Carl Chapman Yes, Matt, as you know, we really don’t give a split on distribution and transmission. We certainly have indicated the distribution has been growing very nicely and we did have the one maintenance work that we didn’t retain. So, that put it in a perspective for you, but in terms of a split, this is not something that we provide. Matt Tucker Fair enough. And when you talk about transmission, is that mostly with non-utility customers, non LDCs? Carl Chapman Yes. I think that when we talk about distribution, that’s really the LDCs. And as we suggested, that actually has been growing faster than we expected. And so when we talk about transmission, it is going to be either big pie first of all gas or oil. It could be liquids, you know, other kinds of liquids, but it’s mostly going to be gas or oil. Matt Tucker Got it. So, looking at your current backlog now, how much, if any, do you view as being at risk due to competition like what you saw with this [indiscernible]? Carl Chapman Well, obviously, we would not describe it as backlog if we had great concern about it. We try to always acknowledge that our backlog numbers are estimates, we describe in our appendix with our metrics, we describe how we come up with the backlog, and so we always want to make sure that everyone understand that is an estimate, but on the other hand, it is a well thought-out estimate and we feel very good about the numbers we are sharing. Matt Tucker One other follow-up to that. I noticed the mix shift in the backlog moved fairly significantly toward bid work away from blanket contracts more than just at $35 million that you mentioned. Any color you can provide on what’s going on with that mix shift? Carl Chapman I don’t think there is a whole lot to add. We tried to share in our discussion and in our comments that we are seeing by our customers a greater desire for bid kind of contracts, so I think there’s just a bit of a change in the market right now. We’re not prepared to say that’s a permanent change, particularly when we see the additional work, but we’d just have to monitor and see how that unfolds. There’s still a lot of work being done under blanket. Matt Tucker Okay, thanks. And then just one more from me. I noticed in your first quarter slides, you provided the guidance metrics for the non-utility businesses that you provided earlier in the year, I don’t see that in the slides today, should we consider that guidance stale at this point or do they just like not have space to put it on the slide or something? Carl Chapman I think that what we did say is we focused on the consolidated, I don’t know that we consider it stale, we just don’t have any reason to provide it again, but we feel pretty good again by acknowledging and confirming our original guidance, we feel pretty good about the pieces of it. Matt Tucker Okay. Thanks, Carl. Carl Chapman Thank you. Operator [Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates. Your line is now open. Paul Patterson Good morning. So, just to follow up on Matt’s question on the backlog. What would happen if you would just for accounting backlog from contracts that were actually awarded versus your estimation of bid. I mean, is that a possibility to serve the idea of just maybe estimating your backlog on what exactly was awarded as opposed to your estimation of what was bid and what, you think, will be awarded? Carl Chapman Yes, I think we covered this in prior calls and even when we came out with the backlog, the reality is that you never can do that with blankets and there’s a pretty significant portion of the backlog, or it could be in blanket, it may vary quarter-by-quarter or at any point of time how much is the bid approach versus the blanket approach, but I think that you know it’s going to always be an estimate. So, I don’t think that we have a need to provide any more detail in that regard because what we’re trying to do with backlog is give you a sense of what’s going on out there in terms of what’s the business look like and clearly there’s lots of bidding going on. So, there’s plenty of opportunity, which we tried to share, we’ve seen no slowdown in the opportunities and so we feel like it’s the best backlog approach that we can provide. We certainly have debated that over time. I think we’re pretty comfortable. This is the best approach to give you a real sense where the business is going. Paul Patterson Okay. And then just in terms of the competitive environment that you guys described, any outlook on that and how that might work, do you see any potential shakeout or do you see it increasing, due you see more accompanying, do you see potential for the competitive levels to increase or just any outlook you might have with respect to that? Carl Chapman Sure. Well, the first thing I’d say is that we really are sitting here and talking about this because we lost a certain amount of work. We are not seeing tons of changes, but what happens is that it’s a mix of work issue. So, now we are looking at additional mix of work, we’re not going to change our risk profile what we’re willing to look at, in anyway, we won’t take additional risk if you will, but there is a change in the mix of the work and that really drives this margin issue as much as anything. And I also believe that because the industry does see such a strong, call it, the mid-2016, but sometime in 2016 to 2018 see such a strong amount of work that’s been announced, I think you see a lot of people making sure that they’re positioned well for that and that has an impact on margin as you try to make sure that you’ve got your people and make sure you’re positioned when that pick-up occurs in a very big way. Paul Patterson So in other words, you will see margins improving in 2016. Carl Chapman Well, I don’t know that we’re prepared to say they’re going to improve. We’ll have to monitor them and see. I certainly think they have the potential to do that, but we’ll have to see how the competition reacts. Paul Patterson Okay. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Operator [Operator Instructions] And your next question comes from Matt Tucker with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Your line is now open. Matt Tucker Just a couple of questions on VESCO now, congrats on the NASA contract by the way, of the $80 million large contracts you mentioned that have now been booked and I assume the NASA was part of that, was the rest booked in the second quarter? Carl Chapman Yes. What we did there is we would’ve loved it if NASA had gotten signed on June 30, just a little bit later than that, but what we shared at the end of the last quarter was those three contracts totaling $80 million would get signed and they now are signed. Yes, NASA was just a little later than we would have preferred, so the other two were signed as well as other contracts of course, but what we really wanted to demonstrate there was the business is doing what we said it would do, and those contracts were signed and they are working on. Matt Tucker And then with respect to the sales funnel and like the $360 million, are there other large projects in a similar size to this, and then it was thought that or have you seen any change in the duration of the sales cycle? Carl Chapman Well, I think Susan went through in some detail, some of the work that’s being done and I think that we do feel better about the sales cycle, what will happen to us at times, particularly in a large contract, it’s that one contract we want to try to give some transparency on and it may turn out to be much longer timeframe. That obviously happened with the NASA contract, but I think we are seeing some positive signs in terms of the sales cycle. And I think we’ll continue to focus on that. As Susan described, we had some deal with E-dollars provided to one of the trade agencies. In terms of the funnel itself, I don’t think that the funnel is unusual at all in its make-up right now. There certainly are some large contracts and a lot of small contracts and we feel pretty good about where that funnel is at this point as we try to move those to signing. Matt Tucker Thanks, Carl, that’s helpful. And then actually just one more on VISCO. You mentioned the PHMSA rules potentially driving increased customer spending. Could you expand a little bit on that? Susan Hardwick Yes. I think, Matt, let me make just a couple of comments and Carl certainly can way in here too. We think the rules that have been finalized in 2015 really were more administrative in nature, didn’t have a whole lot of impact on us. We do believe there are some additional rules yet to come around operating pressures and vales and inline inspection work. There could very well be some implications for everybody that does this type of work, but in our particular case, we feel like we again are well-positioned. We’ve been doing a number of these procedures for some time and have many of those proposed or expected requirements built in our plans already. So, again, the expected implications to us should be hopefully pretty insignificant once the rules come out. Again, that’s based on our current view of what those rules are likely to evolve into and again that could change, but we, again, feel pretty strongly about our plans and how we’ve developed our plans around those expected requirements. Carl Chapman And as Susan mentioned, if those opportunities are to be greater, obviously we’ll work with our regulators and have opportunity in our utility, but also of course that’s a real positive for Miller and I don’t mean related to our utilities, but across the country, other utilities would be doing that additional work if it turns out that way. Matt Tucker Makes sense. Thanks, Carl. Thanks, Susan. That’s all I had. Carl Chapman Thank you. Operator Now, we have no further questions at this time. I’ll turn the call back over to the presenters. Naveed Mughal I’d like to thank everyone for joining us on the call today. I look forward to meeting many of you over the coming months. On behalf of our entire team, we appreciate your continued interest in Vectren. With that, we’ll conclude our call for today. Thanks again for your participation. Operator This concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect. Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS. If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com . Thank you!

Clean Energy Fuels (CLNE) Andrew Littlefair on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (NASDAQ: CLNE ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call August 5, 2015 04:30 PM ET Executives Tony Kritzer – Director, IR Andrew Littlefair – President, CEO & Director Bob Vreeland – Senior VP, CFO & Accounting Officer Analysts Rob Brown – Lake Street Capital Laurence Alexander – Jefferies & Company, Inc. Aaron Spychalla – Craig Hallum Capital Group Operator Greetings, and welcome to the Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only-mode. A question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions].As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I’d now like to turn the conference over to your host Mr. Tony Kritzer, Director of Investor Relations. Thank you. You may begin. Tony Kritzer Thank you, operator. Earlier this afternoon, Clean Energy released financial results for the second quarter ending June 30, 2015. If you did not receive the release, it is available on the Investor Relations section of the Company’s Web site at www.cleanenergyfuels.com, where the call is also being webcast. There will be a replay available on the Web site for 30 days. Before we begin, we’d like to remind you that some of the information contained in the news release and on this conference call contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Words of expression reflecting optimism, satisfaction with current prospects, as well as words such as believe, intend, expect, plan, should, anticipate, and similar variations, identify forward-looking statements, but their absence does not mean that the statement is not forward-looking. Such forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of performance, and the Company’s actual results could differ materially from those contained in such statements. Several factors that could cause or contribute to such differences are described in detail in the Risk Factors section of Clean Energy’s Form 10-Q, filed August 5, 2015. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this release. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements or supply new information regarding the circumstances after the date of this release. The Company’s non-GAAP EPS and adjusted EBITDA will be reviewed on this call, and exclude certain expenses that the Company’s management does not believe are indicative of the Company’s core business operating results. Non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to results prepared in accordance with GAAP, and should not be considered as a substitute for, or superior to, GAAP results. The directly comparable GAAP information, reasons why management uses non-GAAP information, a definition of non-GAAP EPS and adjusted EBITDA, and a reconciliation between these non-GAAP and GAAP figures is provided in the Company’s press release, which has been furnished to the SEC on Form 8-K today. Participating on today’s call from the Company is President and Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Littlefair; and Chief Financial Officer, Bob Vreeland. And with that, I’ll turn the call over to Andrew. Andrew Littlefair Thank you, Tony. Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you for joining us. I’m pleased to review our second quarter 2015 operating results with you today. We delivered 74.4 million gallons this quarter, up 15% from 16.8 million gallons we delivered in the second quarter of 2014. Revenue was $86.9 million in the second quarter versus $98.1 million a year-ago. Revenue decreased primarily due to three factors. Our overall effective price, which is primarily driven by lower natural gas commodity prices drop by $0.10 per gallon compared to the second quarter of last year. A simple way to think about this is when applied a 74 million gallons, this affected our revenue by close to $7.5 million. And as I told you last quarter we had $9.1 million in construction projects that were essentially complete at the end of the first quarter, but we’re still unable to recognize about $6.4 million of the revenue. This particular construction projects is part of a larger facility. Our portion is complete and we’ve been paid, but we’re waiting for the completion of the remainder of the facility to be able to recognize the revenue which we anticipate in the third quarter. And lastly our Clean Energy Compression subsidiary was somewhat challenged due to the global decline in oil prices, the strength of the U.S dollar and a slowdown in China, all of which contributed to softened international sales. However, they improved their gross margin over last quarter by almost $1 million and continue to make progress on their product standardization. The first of their standardized units are in production now. The impact of these three factors affected our top line by roughly $19 million. Fortunately, because of our volume growth, we had incremental revenues from fuel sales of $8 million, which help offset that impact. In spite of lower oil prices, which have been challenging our recurring revenue model — let me back up, in spite of lower oil prices which have been challenging, our recurring revenue model continue to show growth. Our margins remain relatively intact to $0.27 and fuel volumes grew 15% year-over-year. For many of our customers, volatility is much an issue as fuel price and we still offer an economic value proposition with a cleaner fuel. Along these lines with economic and clean fuel benefits, adoption continues and we see significant investments across the entire natural gas vehicle industry and in our sectors. New vehicles and platforms are coming to market and being developed including the new commenced Westport 6.7 liter engine and the CWI 9 liter near zero NOx engine. Additionally, Quantum Fuel Systems just launched a high capacity CNG fuel module last week. We’ve also seen the incremental cost of natural gas trucks continue to come down, partly due to our tank programs with agility and chart. In trucking, in the first half of the year, we’ve began fuel 700 new trucks and open 15 truck friendly stations in 11 states and we plan to open 10 more by year-end. In total, we now have 208 truck friendly stations open across 31 states in British Columbia. These include Corridors, the I-5 and Highway 99 between northern and southern California. On the I-40 from LA to Oklahoma City, the I-10 from LA to Jacksonville, the I-20 from LA Birmingham going through Dallas and on the I-95 from Jacksonville to Richmond and CNG tractors can now go from Washington DC through Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. We now fuel close to 3,000 Class-8 heavy-duty trucks nationally. We recently our demo truck programs where we lend new CNG or LNG trucks and box trucks to potential customers. Our goal is to provide as many fleets as possible with the opportunity to test drive these natural gas trucks, if they have a positive driving experience on top of enjoying the benefits of a cheaper and cleaner fuel. The demand for these trucks has been strong and there are currently 93 fleets on the waiting list to demo the trucks in both our core and trucking segments. In our refuse market, the momentum continues. We have completed 17 station projects to date and we anticipate we will complete 36 refuse station projects by the end of the year. We’ve added nine new contracted projects to our refuse pipeline in last month alone. It become almost a requirement for refuse companies to convert at least part of their fleets to natural gas in order to stay economically and environmentally competitive. We currently fuel over 9,000 refuse trucks daily. In our transit market, in the second quarter, our customers ordered or added 224 buses to their fleets. This equates to over 3 million gallons annually. We announced the Big Blue Bus of Santa Monica has become one of the country’s first municipal transit authorities to convert its entire fleet to our Redeemed branded renewable natural gas that is 90% cleaner than diesel and is the cleanest transportation fuel commercially available. In addition, to Big Blue Bus, UPS previously committed to fueling which Redeem for a portion of its heavy duty fleet as part of their plan to drive one billion miles using alternative fuel by the end of 2017. We comment Big Blue Bus and UPS for their commitment to using cleaner fuel and we look forward to working with other major companies and fleets who value that same commitment to sustainability. For the first six months of the year, we saw a 21 million gallons of Redeem and we’re on track to double what we delivered in 2014. Across all our markets, we’re working with over 950 fleet customers representing close to 42,000 vehicles that we fuel on a daily basis. On NG Advantage, we’re pleased with the volume growth, having delivered over 10 million gallons in the first two quarters. We are expanding our station in Milton, Vermont to add 30% more contracted capacity. This is the second significant upgrade of that station in the past year to meet demand of contracted volumes. On the policy front last week, the Highway Trust Fund Legislation was passed by both houses of Congress and was signed by the President. Within the bill is a provision to equalize the federal tax in LNG to an energy equivalent basis with diesel and gasoline. The result will lower the tax in LNG by $0.17 per diesel gallon equivalent effective January 1, 2016. Additionally, 26 state legislatures have already taken similar action to equalize transportation fuel taxes. Across the country we’re seeing the development of robust grant programs to support fleets to dock natural gas. Here in California, Prop 1B funding will provide $65,000 per truck for fleets to qualify. The Prop 1B funds totaled over $260 million, which will become available later this year and will be allocated throughout 2016. So far this year, we’ve received $40 million in grant funding for 17 stations and 546 natural gas vehicles in 25 states. Regarding our balance sheet, at the end of the second quarter, we had a $182 million of cash and investments and we’re on track with reduced CapEx program of $59 million. We are focused on the 2016 convertible notes which are due at the end of August of next year. We have flexibility with different options including cash, stock, or a combination of both and we’re in regular communication with the noteholders. We plan to file a universal shelf registration statement of $500 million in the coming days to replace our expired shelf. We don’t have any immediate plans to use the shelf, but we think this is good corporate practice and gives us the tools and flexibility should we needed. And with that, I’ll turn the call over to Bob. Bob Vreeland Thank you, Andrew, and good afternoon to everyone. It’s my pleasure to go over our financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2015. Overall, we made progress in the second quarter, mainly our adjusted EBITDA improved by $3 million from negative $5.6 million in the first quarter of 2015 to negative $2.6 million in the second quarter of 2015, and slightly less volume in the second quarter. And we improved our adjusted EBITDA by $2 million over the second quarter of 2014, despite lower revenues in 2015 compared to 2014. Now I’ll go over some specifics for the second quarter of 2015. Starting with volume, compared to the second quarter of 2014, as we reported, volumes grew by 9.5 million gallons or 15% over the second quarter of 2014. Refused increased 27%, trucking increased 19%, together transit and fleet services increased around 5% and our industrial sector more than doubled to a little over 6 million gallons. When compared to the first quarter of 2015, I want to point out that volumes were down in the second quarter of 2015 by a net 2.7 million gallons as a result of fully finishing our involvement with our former biomethane plant in Dallas, effective mid April of 2015. On a year-to-date basis, through June 30, our volumes are up 20% or 25.4 million gallons over 2014. Our revenues of $86.9 million or $11.2 million last — then a year-ago which is principally a function of lower fuel prices driven by lower commodity costs, the timing of station sales and our compressor business. Lower fuel prices represented about $5.6 million of the decline in revenue. Fewer stations completed and recognized represented about $5.2 million of the decline. As Andrew mentioned, we still have one large station being deferred to the third quarter from the first quarter. Lower revenue at Clean Energy Compression Corp of about $8.1 million, reflects the general softness in the international marketplace as previously mentioned. These declines in revenue were partially offset by 7.9 million in higher revenues from the 9.5 million incremental gallons in 2015 over 2014. It’s important to note that our effective price per gallon declined $0.10 per gallon from a year-ago, while our effective costs per gallon declined $0.08 for a net impact of $0.02 on margin per gallon. So this has a fairly significant impact on revenues at $0.10 a gallon and less of an impact to our margin. Now moving on to margin, our gross margin per gasoline gallon equivalent was $0.27 in the second quarter of 2015 compared to $0.29 in the second quarter of 2014, and $0.28 in the first quarter of 2015. The decline of $0.02 from 2014 was attributed to a volume mix, a higher concentration of incentive programs that are tied to fuel deals in 2015 and some pricing squeeze from today’s low price environment. Offsetting these margin pressure was another solid quarter of our RIN credits at $2.9 million associated with our sales of Redeem, our renewal natural gas. All in all, we’re holding steady on our gross margin per gallon and are rather fluid pricing environment. As Andrew mentioned, we saw gross margin improvement of around $1 million from our Compression Corp in the second quarter when compared to the first quarter of 2015. This was mainly from cost controls and a focus on selling core products versus larger custom build projects. However, the challenge remains due to a soft demand internationally as we’ve mentioned. Our SG&A spending remain under control at approximately $29 million for the quarter, a decline of 16% from a year-ago and a 4% decline from our most recent quarter. Our cash investments totaled $182 million at June 30, 2015. We continue to control capital expenditures as planned. We spent $26 million on CapEx in the first six months of 2015 compared to $62 million spent on CapEx for the first six months in 2014. NG Advantage is about $10 million of the $26 million spent in 2015. So on a comparative basis; you’re really comparing $16 million to $62 million or a $46 million reduction while volumes are growing. As I mentioned, our adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter of 2015 was negative $2.6 million. The improvement of $3 million over our first quarter of 2015 was primarily from improved margins at the Compression Corp, station sales and lower SG&A spending. We improved by $2.1 million compared to 2014, despite a $11.2 million less in revenue in the second quarter of 2015 versus 2014. In comparing to the second quarter of 2014, our adjusted EBITDA was negatively impacted by lower station sales and Compression Corp revenue in 2015 that positively impacted by our increased volumes between the periods as well as our reduced spending on SG&A. Now we’ve seen improvement in our quarterly adjusted EBITDA and we expect to continue to leverage our station and cost infrastructure and grow volume such that we expect these improvements to adjusted EBITDA to continue. It is unlikely we will get a positive adjusted EBITDA for the full-year, but it is still possible. However, we anticipate getting to positive quarterly adjusted EBITDA by the end of this year as we make steady progress, growing volumes, and leverage the infrastructure of our business. And with that, operator, we will open the call to questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator At this time, we will be conducting a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Rob Brown from Lake Street Capital Markets. Please go ahead with your question. Rob Brown Good afternoon. Andrew Littlefair Hi, Rob. Bob Vreeland Hi, Rob. Rob Brown Could you just give us little more color on the pipeline of sort of new fleets or just in fleets expanding to natural gas? I know a number have been testing it, but where is that at with oil, it’s obviously slowed down but has — are people still moving forward, are they evaluating it? Where are things at with the lower oil price in the pipeline? Andrew Littlefair Yes, Rob I’m glad you asked that question, because we haven’t had any current customers leave the program or turn back the keys with their natural gas truck. Let’s face it, lower, lower diesel price and oil prices, those customers that are on the fence has given them even more to think about. However there is still lots of new fleets coming to the program. We just this last week, we — and I can’t go through all their names with you right now, but we’ve had about eight or nine new fleets, field more trucks. I think our demo truck program where we got really 90 some odd fleets in the queue to test those vehicles. I think it’s very encouraging. So we have seen good examples of our current customers UPS and Waste Managements and others continue to order vehicles and that really hasn’t slowed. We just have to put more in the pipeline and get more people exposed. We still have, I think it’s important to remember, we still have an economic offering. And in this last nine months or so since the oil has done what’s its done, the incremental cost has come down significantly on these trucks, as I mentioned in my remarks. But we’ve seen concrete examples of the incremental cost on the 12 liter truck going from somewhere around $40,000 somewhat to $22,000 to $25,000 and so that’s been very helpful. So we’re still able to save customers and we’re between $0.75 to over $1 a gallon. So the economic proposition is still there. We’re still getting new people to sign up. Rob Brown Okay, good. And then it sounds like refuse has become sort of the standard to having natural gas. What’s sort of the thinking on when that can happen in trucking, is that — I know its hard to predict, but are you still in a path to having that ultimately be the case in trucking where everybody [multiple speakers]? Andrew Littlefair Yes, I haven’t lost any optimism for what I think is going to happen. To me it’s impressive that UPS hasn’t bought a diesel truck in two years. I mean look, this is the one world leader in terms of logistics and has one of the largest fleets, and haven’t bought a diesel truck in two years. So to me that’s very telling. We’re still having some of our big shipper friends, Unilever, MillerCoors, Procter & Gamble and others requiring their contracted carriers to move to natural gas. This year you’ll probably feel about as many new heavy duty Class A trucks on natural gas as you will refuse trucks, and so — but it’s a much larger market. And so I still remain very optimistic that we’ll get on a much higher penetration rate, of course having fuel at higher price is the delta one, the delta increases, it will make it that much more compelling for fleets. But I don’t know, I can’t give you a time Rob, but we’re still saving these guys money and its still pretty impressive. As I mentioned in my remarks there’s still a lot happening in the business, there’s new models coming to market, there’s new engines coming to market. I quickly went over it, but the Cummins 9 liter and next year sometime the 12 liter of low NOx engine, I think that’s a game changer. Now you’re talking about an engine that’s almost 10 times cleaner now and the future of the low NOx has occurred. And so that really makes us competitive when we put it that with the renewable fuel. Its one of the cleanest vehicles on the road in the world. And so investments continue to be made, our customers are building stations and ordering vehicles. Rob Brown Excellent. That was a great review. Thank you. Andrew Littlefair Thank you. Operator Our next question comes from the line of Laurence Alexander from Jefferies. Please proceed with your question. Laurence Alexander Good afternoon. Could you help with a couple of things. First, I think was a quarter or two ago you mentioned that seeing some competitors likely being forced to shut capacity or slowdown their project build out. Have you actually seen that play out, and how are you seeing the competitor dynamics right now? Andrew Littlefair Well, as we talked I think before Laurence, well there is a lot of people that are in “fueling business” as we’ve reviewed before some of them are regional, some of them are partnerships with utilities, some of them are relatively small compared to us. Yes, I mean we’ve seen just recently in the last couple of weeks, we’ve seen few different smaller competitors either out searching funds or being put up for sale. Look, this is a difficult business and if you only have four fueling stations at light duty convenient stores, this is tough. Because now you’re going up against really small fleets and light duty gasoline vehicles, so it’s difficult. So I would say yes, we’re seeing a consolidation. You go back with me Laurence and think, I don’t know six months ago, boy there was a lot of companies talking about building — getting ready to launch 100 stations and those kind of thing, but you don’t hear anything about that anymore. So there are some larger competitors that are still proceeding that we will. We’ll build more station projects this year than we did last year close to 70 and some of our other larger competitors [indiscernible] gain and a few of these others, they’re continuing. But I think for some of the smaller companies this is a difficult environment. Laurence Alexander And then with the tax changes that have been passed and also the draw up in the truck premium back with the envelop it looks as if the truckers are getting about one and half year payback. Andrew Littlefair I think that’s fair. Laurence Alexander Are you hearing that from your customers as well? Andrew Littlefair Yes, I think that’s fair. I mean it depends on exactly the price that they’re paying. But there was a time we’re even a little bit better than that. Of course it all depends on how much fuel. I was kind of figured you’re using a 20,000 gallon annual truck. We have some customers right now, one that’s taking delivery of 12 trucks as we speak; they use 37,000 gallons annually — a year per truck. But if you use that 20,000 one, we’re still able to save these guys close to $1 a gallon, and so you’re somewhere around a year and a half. That depends on the tank pack as you’re putting in place, but we’ve seen significant reductions in the price of these trucks. So anywhere in the less than two years, year and a half area, I think this still makes a lot of economic sense. Laurence Alexander And then just one last one if I may, if you had 100% conversion of your pipeline, do you have any sense for what the gallon opportunity is that’s embedded in your existing target? Andrew Littlefair Wow, it would be a big number, right? So I don’t know that you want me to quote that. But I mean its — well… Laurence Alexander Yes, actually I just got a sense for, without changing anymore minds if you just change the … Andrew Littlefair Yes, well if we just got the 200 or so fleets that we’re working with and that began to really kind of do what the refuse guys have done over time and go from 10 to 100. I mean you’re talking about 10s of 1000s of trucks. So we’re working with very large customers and they have the ability to take big numbers of vehicles. That’s why I like, when I mentioned these 950 fleets and that business sound like a very big number, but that 950 fleets, I’m just kind of guessing on top of my head, that probably deals with — that probably would get you into a million or couple of million vehicles at that 950 fleets. So we’re dealing with the right people and it’s just the matter of getting them comfortable with the experience, matching that up with the infrastructure and that’s happening. I went through that in my remarks, when you begin to look and we have these maps and if you ever want to have those, you can let us know. But we have these maps that show coverage across the country and its pretty impressive now that the coverage you get 300 miles away from our stations these are overlapping umbrellas if you will and you’ve covered most of the country. So you’re able now to deal with lots of corridors, lots of trucking where there’s an off a lot of regional trucking that happens in the country that go from Houston to Dallas and places like that, and so we’ve got that infrastructure in place today. Laurence Alexander Okay. Thank you. Andrew Littlefair Yes, you bet. Operator Our next question comes from the line of Eric Stine from Craig Hallum. Please proceed with your question. Aaron Spychalla Hi. Good afternoon, it’s Aaron Spychalla. Thanks for taking the questions. Andrew Littlefair Sure. Aaron Spychalla Maybe first on Mansfield, can you give us an update there and the JV for bulk fuel hauling. How many stations do you guys have inside the fence now and what does the pipeline look like there? Andrew Littlefair Okay, well now you know that our Mansfield joint venture ride is the bulk fuel hauling joint venture. So that’s really targeted at people that are — the trucks that are going in and out of terminals. So we just got started with that. Our first station opened in Doraville, Georgia in November and I’m pleased to report its now doing 40,000 gallons a month which is a nice start. We’ve got two other locations that we can’t — I can’t mention the names right now but two other locations where we’re just finishing up the contracts with other fleets where they’ve committed to go. Now I will say this, that particular segment bulk fuel hauling. Now as you’re dealing with people that are hauling gasoline and diesel and in some places in the country, diesel has dropped significantly. So we’re having to work very hard and being very aggressive on pricing to make sure that those still will happen. But I think what we’ve seen is we proved out the model, it’s a good segment for us, we’re with the best in the business which is Mansfield and those — we’ve always figured that we would build a few more this year and I hope that we get those things launched too shortly — those new stations. Aaron Spychalla Right. Thanks. And then, could you maybe provide some color on the AB 857 legislation and what that might mean for your business if we continue to see that move forward? Andrew Littlefair Right. Well for those on the phone, it’s the piece of California legislation. So when it gets tied into the cap and trade funds, there’s a big part of money now in California and its getting to be I mean large, I mean we’re now talking as much as a couple of billion dollars, AB 857 would, starting in 2018 to 2023 would make available $100 million a year for natural gas heavy duty trucks. So it’s significant for us. We like — we’re working hard on that now. We’ve got very good support in legislature. We get up to $100,000 of grant money per truck when we have that low NOx truck, that’s why I’m so excited about the potential of what Cummins Westport is doing on that low NOx truck that really puts us way ahead of what diesel can do and other fuels can do. So we’re excited about it. It’s not done yet, but it’s significant. That does bring me to just highlight that Prop 1B, I mean the Prop 1B money is slopping around right now. Its $260 million, it gets [indiscernible] out to the air districts in California, San Joaquin, the Bay Area, the South Coast. We have our sales people working with fleets right now. That money was being coordinated by their resources board and I think maybe the California Energy Commission, that money will get distributed out to the air districts and then the fleets submit for it, and that is underway and it’s significant for us. Aaron Spychalla Good. Thanks for taking the questions. Andrew Littlefair Okay. Thank you Operator Mr. Littlefair, there are no further questions at this time. Would you like to have any closing remarks? Andrew Littlefair Sure, operator and everybody on the call, thank you for dialing in this afternoon. We look forward to updating you on our progress in the next quarter. Thank you. Operator This concludes today’s teleconference. Thank you for your participation. You may disconnect your lines at this time.