Categories
Berkshire Hathaway Energy

No Oncor for Berkshire Hathaway Energy

(BRK.A), (BRK.B)

NextEra Energy is the winner in the bidding for Oncor Electric Delivery Company, a regulated electric transmission and distribution service provider that serves 10 million customers across Texas. NextEra Energy will pay $18.4 billion in cash and stock.

Berkshire Hathaway Energy was one of the other bidders considered to be in the lead for the prized energy distribution asset.

Oncor has been in and out of auction ever since the April 2014 bankruptcy of its biggest shareholder, Energy Future Holdings. The company went under after being burdened with $40 billion in debt from a 2007 leveraged buyout.

A Texas-Sized Asset

Oncor is a quite a prize. The company has the largest distribution and transmission system in Texas; with approximately 119,000 miles of lines and more than 3 million meters across the state.

Energy Transmission is Great ROE

Back in June 2014, Warren Buffett proclaimed he was ready to put at least $15 billion into energy generation and transmission assets, and at that time Oncor, with a value of roughly $17.5 billion looked like a good fit.

Transmission lines have been high on Berkshire Hathaway Energy’s wish list of late because they are a great way to put Berkshire’s huge insurance float to work for a high return with very low risk.

The AltaLink Example

In April 2014, BHE made a $2.9 billion purchase of Canadian company AltaLink from SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. The acquisition got the company the transmission lines for Calgary, Alberta, and gives it an 8.75-percent after-tax return on equity, with consumers picking up 100-percent of the tab for any new transmission lines.

Like AltaLink, the acquisition of Oncor would have been a perfect fit for Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which currently has $70 billion in assets, including one of the largest portfolios of renewable energy in the world.

© 2016 David Mazor

Disclosure: David Mazor is a freelance writer focusing on Berkshire Hathaway. The author is long in Berkshire Hathaway, and this article is not a recommendation on whether to buy or sell the stock. The information contained in this article should not be construed as personalized or individualized investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Categories
Commentary NetJets

Commentary: Supersonic Business Jets Will Boost Fractional Jet Ownership

(BRK.A), (BRK.B)

It’s no secret that the fractional jet ownership business has struggled in recent years, with several competitors leaving the market, and the merger of Flexjet and Flight Options. While Berkshire Hathaway’s NetJets is healthy, NetJets Executive Vice President, Sales & Marketing, Patrick Gallagher, noted on AINonline that “We’re growing our market share of a shrinking pie.”

All that may soon change with the coming of a new generation of supersonic business jets, produced by companies such as the Aerion Corporation. The planes will cruise at Mach 1.4, cutting three hours off New York City to Europe, and six hours or more off long Pacific routes.

The planes will give corporate leaders and other high-end travelers a compelling reason to consider fractional ownership.

Even cross-country travel, which draws additional concerns about sonic booms, will be faster. Aerion claims that its Boomless Cruise(sm) flight is feasible at speeds up to Mach 1.2, depending on atmospheric conditions, principally temperature and wind.

The company hopes that the U.S. will adopt International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards, permitting supersonic speeds over the U.S. Supersonic flights are currently prohibited.

Aerion claims that at speeds around Mach 1.2 a “sonic boom would, essentially, dissipate before reaching the ground.”

Another fledgling supersonic business jet manufacturer, Boston-based Spike Aerospace, calls no sonic booms the “holy grail of the next generation of aircraft.” It hopes to have its 18-passenger jets in the market by the early 2020s.

Even before these jets debut, NetJets is focusing on the growth potential of its long-haul business.

NetJets is looking to expand its long-haul business by offering new pricing incentive programs developed for Challenger 350 and Global shareowners.

NetJets hopes to capture a portion of the business that is currently going on commercial airlines or ad hoc charter by providing operational savings on 3.5-plus-hour flights for Challenger 350 shareholders who have purchased a minimum of 50-plus hours (1/16th of a share).

NetJets’ cross-country program is aimed at flyers travelling cross-country or to Europe on a super-midsize airplane like the Challenger 350. Currently, the average NetJets flight time is two hours, and the goal is to increase the number of hours of flight time.

NetJets and the Supersonic Market

The new supersonic business jets will fall into an interesting category of jets that will have a decided advantage over other private jets, but will be too expensive for most people to own outright.

While the supersonic business jet market offers opportunity, it also comes at a high cost, with the price of each jet at over $100 million.

That’s the perfect opening for fractional ownership companies to plot their growth.

Currently, Flexjet is the only company to place a firm order for the jets. In 2015, they ordered twenty of Aerion’s AS2 aircraft.

The Aerion AS2 is a three-engine jet and is larger than the originally conceived Aerion supersonic business jet. Fuselage length is 160 feet and maximum takeoff weight is 115,000 pounds. Minimum projected range is 4,750 nautical miles with the intention to achieve a range of more than 5,000 nautical miles.

The aircraft will have a 30-foot cabin in a two-lounge layout plus galley and both forward and aft lavatories, plus a baggage compartment that is accessible in-flight. Cabin dimensions widen from entryway to the aft seating area where height is six feet, two inches and cabin width is seven feet, three inches.

Carrying eight to 12 passengers, the AS2 has an intercontinental-capable range of 4,750 nautical miles at supersonic speed.

While, NetJets has yet to announce any orders, it’s clear that only the strongest of the fractional ownership companies will be able to compete in this market, giving them a clear advantage over smaller charter companies, and a major capability advantage over commercial airlines.

© 2016 David Mazor

Disclosure: David Mazor is a freelance writer focusing on Berkshire Hathaway. The author is long in Berkshire Hathaway, and this article is not a recommendation on whether to buy or sell the stock. The information contained in this article should not be construed as personalized or individualized investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.

Categories
BNSF

Judge’s Ruling Puts Future of BNSF’s Port Project in Long Beach’s Hands

(BRK.A), (BRK.B)

Will BNSF be able to build its proposed facility at the Port of Los Angeles? The answer could be in the hands of the City of Long Beach.

A new ruling by California superior court judge Barry P. Goode in favor of Long Beach and the other litigants, and against BNSF Railways, found that the environmental impact report prepared by BNSF needed to be “a more robust and accurate analysis.”

The ruling puts the $500 million rail-yard project at the Port of Los Angeles in jeopardy unless BNSF can quickly work out its differences with environmental groups and the City.

Dubbed the Southern California International Gateway (SCIG), the project would create an intermodal rail facility near the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The ports are located approximately 25 miles south of downtown Los Angeles. The port complex is composed of approximately 80 miles of waterfront, and 7,500 acres of land and water, with approximately 500 commercial berths.

In April, judge Goode put a halt to BNSF’s planned 153-acre intermodal rail facility, siding with citizens’ groups suing over environmental concerns.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, which is the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, filed the lawsuit in June 2015 in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of Harbor residents living near the proposed development that would be built on Port of Los Angeles property.

The Plaintiffs contend the proposed Southern California International Gateway rail yard project violates the California Environmental Quality Act and the state and federal Civil Rights Acts.

Specifically, they assert that the facility will increase cancer rates, chances of children developing asthma, and add to chronic air pollution plaguing the region.

The SCIG is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, a statute that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible.

BNSF has 60 days from Judge Goode’s most recent ruling to appeal, and it’s unclear whether the SCIG is salvageable.

A Call to Work Things Out

The Long Beach Press Telegram has called for all sides to resolve the issues, in order to not lose the jobs and other benefits the project would bring.

In an editorial published on July 13, the paper stated that, “The editorial board repeats its position that all sides should sit down and try to work out a solution to this issue.”

The paper went on to state: “We have said there are many positives to the project for the entire region. It will provide hundreds of jobs and help relieve congestion near the ports, and make them more competitive with rival ports.

But we’ve also said this economic development should not come at the expense of the health of students and 30,000 residents who live east of the proposed project.”

The mayor of Long Beach, Robert Garcia, noted the impact of the most recent ruling, stating in The Long Beach Press Telegram that “It certainly strengthens our hand, definitely.” Garcia added that “The city is now in a position where we have a court standing on our side.”

© 2016 David Mazor

Disclosure: David Mazor is a freelance writer focusing on Berkshire Hathaway. The author is long in Berkshire Hathaway, and this article is not a recommendation on whether to buy or sell the stock. The information contained in this article should not be construed as personalized or individualized investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.