Thanks for sharing thoughts. I agree APA is above Fair Value,...

Thanks for sharing thoughts.

I agree APA is above Fair Value, and not sure how their model will work in an overseas expansion. They are "close to their customers" and technically excellent at what they do. I have had input into many of their projects over past 20 years and they have been innovative using best in class technology and alliance agreements for supply of key technologies and equipment like Gas turbine compressor packages, mostly from Solar, when APA has been involved in the purchase. Unique aspect of many of their pipelines, eg GGT and CGP is how skinny they are compared to most pipelines of similar length. Duets DBNGP asset is more large scale with big supply at one end and relatively large consumers at the other.

Looping and adding compressor stations or additional units at existing stations can greatly add to capacity of a given line, to cope with increased demand over its long life.

I see APA as a bit like Telstra who I also hold, an excellent asset base with high penetration in one market.

Have not seen DUET to be very entrepreneurial.

Back to SKI, you raise good point about the management of profits flowing from the Transgrid assets. I not too concerned about use of tax haven. But, need to better understand the agreement with their partners. Where did you learn about that Tax Haven, through formal or informal enquirer? I only skimmed the offer doc for the CR.

ps
The Kinder Morgan pipeline system, about 1/3 of US market, looks like it may collapse financially, similarly to the Enron saga from which it was birthed. While they don't have direct exposure to falling commodity price, KMI are exposed to counterparty risk on payments if their shale oil/gas customers start defaulting. Here in Oz the gas supply is more assured, from fewer, relatively larger, players who have conventional sources, even if the Coal seam reserves in Surat basin don't deliver economically against their large declared reserves in the long term, which is a risk IMHO to STO and ORG. There are increasingly complex derivatives set up on pipelines capacity for gas storage and assured deliverability versus interruptible so good governance is required to prevent surprises to APA shareholders. Very few people understand these risks adequately IMHO.

While STO and ORG were tightly squeezed forcing recent dilutive CR's , I think their deep-pocketed partners would carry on the business of getting gas to the transmission pipelines one way or another. Of course some of them like Petronas, Total, Shell, XOM, COP have interests and opportunities in many countries, so while they might not want to invest here as a default, our low sovereign risk will be attractive for a long time to come,