Permian Basin: Takeaway Capacity and Differentials
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:14 am
Report on this topic from Credit Suisse:
"Permian takeaway concerns have increased since early April as the Midland-MEH
differential has widened to a peak of $20/Bbl currently. Given the uncertainty, Permian focused
E&Ps have underperformed the group while oil prices and XOP rallied, as
widening basis has left Midland prices essentially flat over the past couple months. As all
the Permian operators have provided promises of flow assurance through either firm
transport agreements (FT) or firm sales agreements with 3rd party markers, we’ve seen
questions from investors shifting from “who’s best/worst positioned?” to “what’s baked in?”
"As operators uniformly claim flow assurance, it’s difficult to assess whose barrels
are more likely to face physical constraint and which companies are more willing to
slowdown for economic reasons. Until proven otherwise, investors seem skeptical of
existing 2H18-2019 growth estimates for most Permian E&Ps except for those with true
firm transport agreements (OXY, PXD, WPX best positioned, followed by APC, DVN, EOG
that have FT on a portion of Permian volumes). Companies with Gulf Coast linked firm
sales agreements (PE, PDCE, and QEP) are also relatively better positioned."
If you'd like to see the full report, send an email to me at dmsteffens@comcast.net.
"Permian takeaway concerns have increased since early April as the Midland-MEH
differential has widened to a peak of $20/Bbl currently. Given the uncertainty, Permian focused
E&Ps have underperformed the group while oil prices and XOP rallied, as
widening basis has left Midland prices essentially flat over the past couple months. As all
the Permian operators have provided promises of flow assurance through either firm
transport agreements (FT) or firm sales agreements with 3rd party markers, we’ve seen
questions from investors shifting from “who’s best/worst positioned?” to “what’s baked in?”
"As operators uniformly claim flow assurance, it’s difficult to assess whose barrels
are more likely to face physical constraint and which companies are more willing to
slowdown for economic reasons. Until proven otherwise, investors seem skeptical of
existing 2H18-2019 growth estimates for most Permian E&Ps except for those with true
firm transport agreements (OXY, PXD, WPX best positioned, followed by APC, DVN, EOG
that have FT on a portion of Permian volumes). Companies with Gulf Coast linked firm
sales agreements (PE, PDCE, and QEP) are also relatively better positioned."
If you'd like to see the full report, send an email to me at dmsteffens@comcast.net.