Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message| ()  

Executives

Michael Bernstein - CEO

Michael Smerdon - CFO

Sarah Borg-Olivier - VP, Communications

Analysts

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

Ben Pham - BMO Capital Markets

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

Jared Alexander - Canaccord Genuity

Robert Catellier - Macquarie

Sean Steuart - TD Securities

Ian Tharp - CIBC World Markets

Capstone Infrastructure (OTCPK:MCQPF) Q4 2012 Results Earnings Call March 8, 2013 8:30 AM ET

Operator

Welcome to the Capstone Infrastructure Corporation’s fiscal 2012 year-end results conference call and webcast. [Operator instructions.] At this time, I’d like to turn the conference over to Sarah Borg-Olivier, vice president, communications. Please go ahead.

Sarah Borg-Olivier

Good morning. Thank you very much, Operator, and good morning everyone. Thank you for joining us to discuss Capstone Infrastructure Corporation’s financial results for the quarter and year ended December 31, 2012.

Today’s call will be hosted by Michael Bernstein, our chief executive officer. Also on the call is Michael Smerdon, our chief financial officer. Our news release was issued yesterday after market close, and is available on our website at www.capstooneinfrastructure.com. Today’s conference call is also being webcast live with accompanying slides, and will be archived on our website, along with a transcript of the event.

Before we get started, I would like to remind everyone that during the course of this conference call, we may make various forward looking statements that involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially.

For information about such risks and uncertainties, I’ll refer you to the MD&A in our 2012 annual report, which was filed yesterday, and is available on our website, and to our most recent annual information form, which was filed on March 21, 2012, also available on our website.

With that, I will turn the call over to Mike Bernstein.

Michael Bernstein

Thank you, Sarah. Good morning everyone. Fiscal 2012 was a solid year for Capstone, during which we improved our financial position, achieved strong operational performance, and established a new power development subsidiary, which further broadens Capstone’s capabilities and growth potential. In addition, we delivered adjusted EBITDA of $120.7 million, which was slightly ahead of our expectation, and reflects the quality and predictability of our businesses.

At the start of 2012, we set five priorities for ourselves and successfully delivered on four of them. First, we refinanced nearly $200 million of debt at the corporate level and at our power assets through a variety of initiatives, including the recapitalization of Varmevarden, the refinancing of our hydropower facilities, the sale of a 20% interest in Bristol Water to Itochu Corporation at an attractive premium, and the establishment of a new corporate credit facility. As a result, we have eliminated significant risk from our balance sheet and renewed our ability to grow. Mike will say more about our financial position later on.

The second priority was to set a new dividend, which we did in June. Our new dividend of $0.30 per common share annually reflects our view on the long term cash flow profile of our current portfolio following the expiry of Cardinal’s PPA at the end of 2014. It will also allow us to retain cash that can be reinvested in new businesses that will improve the value, quality, and cash generating potential of our portfolio.

A third priority was to enhance the value of our businesses, which we did a number of ways, including achieving a record 97.9% availability at Erie Shores following the internalization of operations and maintenance at the facility two years ago, selling renewable energy credits at Whitecourt, working with Bristol Water to advance the company’s capital investment program, and working with Varmevarden to increase plant availability and the use of lower-cost fuels, which are both key performance drivers for the business.

As Mike will discuss in a minute, overall, our portfolio performed strongly during the year, reflecting a full year contribution from Bristol Water, Amherstburg Solar Park, and Varmevarden that was partially offset by lower overall power production. We are pleased with the quality of our portfolio, and believe it forms a strong platform from which to grow.

That leads to our fourth priority in 2012, which was to pursue continuing growth and diversification. While our focus in the first half of the year was on refinancing our debt, in late 2012 we established Capstone Power Development. This is a wholly-owned subsidiary focused on developing, acquiring, and repowering clean energy generation projects in North America, with an emphasis on western Canada and the United States.

By getting more involved in early stage development projects, we have the potential to deliver greater returns to our shareholders and to create a pipeline of new growth opportunities for Capstone. Together, these accomplishments bolster our company’s strong fundamentals and position Capstone to create value for shareholders.

While we are pleased with our financial and operational performance in 2012, on our fifth priority, a new contract with Cardinal, we fell short. On the positive side, we made steady progress in our discussions with the Ontario Power Authority and various government ministries, and continued to broaden stakeholder support for a new contract. However, both the Ministry of Energy and the OPA had a number of other priorities and challenges to manage in 2012, which meant that NUG contract renewals were not at the top of their list.

We continue to believe that Cardinal has significant long term value from industrial, economic, and community perspectives and a vital role to play in Ontario’s electricity system. We know that the uncertainty related to Cardinal’s future is concerning for shareholders, and securing a new contract remains our top priority for 2013. I’ll say more about Cardinal later.

Overall, I believe Capstone is well-positioned for the next phase of its evolution. Over the past two years, we have significantly diversified our portfolio with perpetual businesses that offer an organic growth profile, broadened our international reach and partnerships, and substantially lowered our risk profile.

We are also refocused on growth, and believe that Capstone has the access to capital and deal flow to allow us to be successful in expanding our portfolio. I’ll say more later about our value creation strategy in a moment. First, Mike will provide a financial review.

Michael Smerdon

Thank you, Mike. In 2012, we achieved a 65.6% increase in revenue, primarily reflecting a full year of contribution from Bristol Water and Amherstburg Solar Park. These positive drivers were partially offset by slightly lower power production compared with 2011.

Adjusted EBITDA, excluding 2011 internalization costs, increased by 60.1%, driven primarily by full year contributions from Bristol Water, Amherstburg Solar Park, and Varmevarden. Adjusted funds from operation increased by 1.9%, due to positive contributions from the utility segment. These contributions were partially offset by lower AFFO from the power segment, reflecting higher maintenance capital expenditures at Cardinal and the impact of amortizing debt, which was higher in 2012 than in 2011.

A scheduled repayment of debt principal at the power assets and corporate increased by $7.9 million, or 168%, over 2011, due to a full year of higher debt service payments at Amherstburg, the new debt at the hydro facilities, and a full year of debt amortization of the tranche C debt at Erie Shores. In 2011, our debt was largely non-amortizing in nature, but starting in 2012, with each amortization payment we are building up our equity value and reducing future interest expense.

Our hydro bond financing, which we completed in June, includes amortization that was $3.3 million in 2012 and will average just over $4 million annually in the 2013 to 2016 period. The amortization is weighted to Q2 and Q4 each year to coincide with the seasonal hydrology and revenue peaks. At Erie Shores, debt repayment in 2012 amounts to $5.2 million compared with $4.1 million last year. At Amherstburg debt repayment was $3.7 million, compared with $1.5 million in 2011.

We also paid a full year of dividends and applicable taxes on our preferred shares, which were issued on June 30, 2011. Overall, our total expenses, once again excluding internalization costs in 2011, increased by 47.2% over 2011. The increase was due to the addition of Bristol Water, higher gas transportation costs at Cardinal, and a full year of staffing expenses following internalization in April of 2011. These factors were partially offset by lower business development expenses.

Looking briefly at our performance on a segment basis, we had a 4% increase in revenue in the power segment. This reflected an additional six months of operation at Amherstburg and higher revenue from Whitecourt, mostly due to the sale of renewable energy credits, which is a new revenue source for us.

These drivers were offset by a 1.9% decrease in production at Cardinal, mostly resulting from a scheduled maintenance outage in the second quarter of the year, as well as production declines of 1.4% at Erie Shores and 2.5% at hydropower facilities due to [unintelligible] and water flows respectively.

Adjusted EBITDA from this segment increased by 8.4% due to Amherstburg and Whitecourt while AFFO from this segment declined by 12.4%, reflecting the higher debt service costs and higher maintenance capex I mentioned a moment ago.

Turning now to the utilities segment, Bristol Water represented 49.8% of Capstone’s revenue and 40.2% of our adjusted EBITDA. Bristol Water completed over $140 million in capital expenditures in 2012. The total capital expenditure plan for the current regulatory period is the equivalent of about $440 million Canadian dollars.

The total capital expenditures to date in the regulatory period is $224 million, which is about $50 million less than planned in the [unintelligible] regulatory determination. Bristol Water started closing this gap in 2012 and based on the business capex plans and the 2012 run rate of capital deployment, we are comfortable that it will achieve the cumulative approved capital expenditure by March 2015, which is the end of the regulatory period.

During the year, we received $8.1 million in dividends from Bristol Water, compared with $4 million in 2011. The 2012 dividend reflects that we held a 70% interest in the business until early May, when our ownership interest reduced to 50%.

At Varmevarden, we continued to see good operational performance and better management of fuel costs, which is a key driver for the business. The Varmevarden contributed about $3.4 million in interest income to Capstone, compared with $5 million in 2011, reflecting the lower shareholder loan balance outstanding after we repatriated about $50 million of capital in March. The Varmevarden also paid $2 million in dividends in 2012, compared with none in 2011.

At year-end, we had cash and cash equivalents of $46.9 million. This amount included $20.9 million from the power segment and $25.3 million from Bristol Water. Bristol Water will fully fund its capital investment program with its internally generated cash flow and existing credit capacity while continuing to pay dividends to its shareholders.

About $15.9 million of our total cash and equivalents is available for general corporate purposes, including $12.6 million held in the power segment. Our long term debt as of December 31, 2012 was approximately $600 million. This reflects debt at corporate and our power assets, as well as our 50% proportionate share of Bristol Water’s bank loans, term loans, debentures, and preferred shares.

This debt level represents a debt to capitalization ratio of about 62.7%. I should note that the debt associated with Bristol Water and our power facilities is at the asset level and is non-recourse to Capstone. Our continuing goal will be to maintain a capital structure that suits the quality and cash flow profile of our businesses.

It is also important to note that our outstanding debt is largely fixed rate or linked to inflation. In our power segment, approximately 95% of debt is scheduled to amortize over the various PPA terms. Of Capstone’s consolidated debt, approximately 88% is either scheduled to amortize during the PPA term or has a maturity longer than 10 years.

Looking now at 2013, for the power segment, we’re expecting slightly higher adjusted EBITDA than in 2012. Power production should be higher due to less maintenance downtime at Cardinal and consistent performance across the power facilities in line with long term average production. That’s subject to wind variability, water flows, temperature, and sunlight.

At Cardinal, we currently expect lower [unintelligible] transportation costs and that the effective gas transportation toll for 2013 will be $1.76 per gigajoule, compared with the $2.24 for gigajoule we’re paying in 2012.

This assumption is subject to the National Energy Board’s final determination on rates, which is expected to be announced in late Q1 or in Q2. We expect the performance of this segment to be partially offset by increased development costs from our new power development team as they pursue new business opportunities.

At Bristol Water, we’ll see lower adjusted EBITDA in 2013 compared with 2012, due to holding our 50% interest for a full year, compared with the partial year in 2012. Bristol Water expects higher revenue in 2013 due to an approximately 6.9% increase in the regulated water tariff, which will start on April 1, 2013. We expect Bristol Water to complete about $115 million in capital expenditures during the year, and that regulated capital value will grow by 5% to 6% this year.

These drivers will be partially offset by additional expenses related to preparing for the upcoming regulatory price review in 2014, which will set the stage for the next asset management plan period starting in 2015. I should also note that in 2013, Bristol Water will begin paying dividends to its three shareholders on a quarterly basis, rather than semiannually, which will help to smooth out its contributions to Capstone’s AFFO.

Turning to Varmevarden, we expect this business to contribute less adjusted EBITDA to Capstone, because we repatriated a portion of our shareholder loan in 2012. As a result, we will receive lower interest income from this business. We do expect to receive dividends from Varmevarden in the second and fourth quarters of 2013.

Overall, we expect adjusted EBITDA in 2013 to be approximately $110 million to $120 million. While this is consistent with our 2012 performance, it actually represents about a $6 million, or 4-5%, increase in adjusted EBITDA over 2012 on a pro forma basis if we had held 50% of Bristol Water for the full 2012 year.

Importantly, the performance we expect from our portfolio will support our dividend as well as allowing us to retain cash. At the same time, we now have a much stronger balance sheet to support our growth strategy.

I’ll now turn it back to Mike.

Michael Bernstein

Thanks, Mike. Our top priority for 2013 is to secure a new PPA for Cardinal, a process that has been slower than we would have liked. While discussions started up again in the new year, the timing of a resolution is beyond our control. A long term solution remains a primary focus and goal of our discussion, although both parties are aware of the timing constraints we are facing with respect to procurement and construction. As a result, we are exploring the potential for a one-year extension to our current PPA as an interim measure.

Our second priority is to continue maximizing the performance of our existing businesses. That includes focusing on maintaining high availability across our power assets, achieving strong operational performance across all of our businesses, and meeting our regulatory targets at Bristol Water.

In 2012, our power facilities achieved availability in line with, or slightly ahead of, their historical five-year average availability, reflecting the quality of plant operations and our focus on preventative maintenance. We are continuing to identify improvements and opportunities at the power assets, with the ability to increase cash flow. That includes the sale of renewable energy credits at Whitecourt, as well as other initiatives aimed at increasing production or efficiencies.

At Erie Shores, for example, in 2013 we are currently conducting a pilot project with a tool called WindBOOST installed on two turbines. WindBOOST has been shown to help increase annual energy output from wind farms, so we’ll be evaluating whether it can deliver similar results for Erie Shores.

At Bristol Water, our primary focus is on executing the capital program, which is aimed at improving and expanding the company’s network of reservoirs, treatment facilities, water mains, and pipes. This capital program is what will drive growth in Bristol Water’s regulated capital volume, and accordingly value for Capstone and its shareholders.

We are focused on achieving key regulatory targets for the current [AMP] period, which Bristol Water scored well on in 2012. For 2013, these include achieving water leakage of less than 50 million liters of water per day, a top quartile ranking in Ofwat’s serviced incentive mechanism, or SIM.

Another big area of focus for us in 2013 is on preparing for Bristol Water’s regulatory submission for the price review in 2014. During this review process, which concludes in the fourth quarter of 2014, Ofwat will approve Bristol Water’s capital program and set the prices the company may charge customers at the next five-year regulatory period starting in April 2015. At Varmevarden, we’ll continue to focus on managing field costs and delivering quality, reliable service which contributes to long term customer relationships.

Our third priority is to continue to grow and diversify our portfolio by making smart acquisitions and developing power projects. With our new dividend level, we are targeting a long term payout ratio of 70-80% of adjusted funds from operations.

Our payout ratio in 2013 and 2014 will be significantly lower than this target, and may be slightly higher in 2015 and beyond, depending on the final outcome of Cardinal. This gives us the ability to retain cash that can be reinvested in new growth opportunities, so we have better flexibility to internally fund future acquisitions and development projects.

Over the near term, we’re focused on expanding our current power and utilities platform with the longer term objective of further broadening our portfolio by infrastructure category. We’re concentrating our activities primarily on Canada and the United States, with the United Kingdom and Western Europe remaining areas of interest for us.

A common theme across our target markets is the large and growing need for infrastructure investment and the potential for a greater private sector role in infrastructure renewal and expansion. Capstone is well-positioned to capitalize on these opportunities for a number of reasons.

First, we have significant expertise in infrastructure investment and management across core infrastructure categories, which equips us to offer tangible, proven knowledge and experience to governments and prospective partners.

Second, our new power development capability complements our existing skillset, and enables us to participate in earlier-stage greenfield or brownfield opportunities. Third, we have strong relationships within the infrastructure industry and with multinational partners, which enhances our ability to forge new partnerships across borders and to stimulate deal flow and access to unique opportunities.

And finally, we are flexible in how we work with prospective investment partners. This flexibility is a competitive advantage that has enabled us to effectively navigate less conventional or more complex opportunities.

A great example of this skill in action is a Bristol Water transaction where we’ve successfully acquired a control position in the business and a foothold in an attractive and competitive infrastructure category while preserving a role for a new partner and signing and closing the transaction on the very same day.

In providing our shareholders with access to the attractive infrastructure asset class, Capstone’s goal is to provide reliable income and capital appreciation. We have an exceptionally high quality portfolio, a strong balance sheet and team, and are working hard to execute our strategy to build value for shareholders.

Thank you for joining us today, and for your support as we work to execute Capstone’s strategy. We would now be pleased to take your questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

[Operator instructions.] Our first question today comes from Jeremy Mersereau of National Bank Financial. Please go ahead.

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

Just wanted to start with Cardinal. One of your peers highlighted that its NUG plant renegotiations are seeing signals that are increasingly challenging. Wondering if anything in particular changed for you in the very recent past to indicate that it’s a little bit more difficult environment for you?

Michael Bernstein

I wouldn’t say that’s the case. If we go back to the end of 2012, we were having good dialog and good discussions with the government and various ministries. At one point it looked like there was a fair amount of momentum. As you know, with the change of government and the minister of energy stepping down, discussions didn’t proceed over December or the holidays.

What’s happened most recently in the startup of the new year is that the OPA has ramped up their efforts, so we have a new senior person on the file working with us. We understand that they’ve kind of got their legal team and technical advisors ramping up, and now, as there has been a fair amount of turnover within the various ministries, including in energy, with the new minister, everyone getting reeducated on the benefits.

I can’t speak for all NUGs, but certainly of Cardinal, and we’re hopeful that some meaningful dialog will progress. And as we mentioned, there is an understanding, I think, within government, that there is timing constraints. So as potentially an interim measure, there is a concept of a potential extension. Again, no guarantees, but that idea is now one that both sides are talking about.

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

And is this a high likelihood event, that it would be extended?

Michael Bernstein

Who knows? We started this process several years ago. If you would have listened to Duncan Hawthorne’s speech yesterday talking about nuclear refurbishment taking probably from 2016 all the way out to 2032, most of the industry having serious concerns about newbuild nuclear, we’re still in a scenario that, after going through some of the surplus baseload generation we have over the next couple of years, there’s going to be a period of a decade or more where a facility like Cardinal will be very useful for the system.

So I think from a macro perspective, that’s still a key driver, as is the industrial and community benefits, which are still important to government. But just to balance that, we do have a situation right now where government is concerned about costs. We do have surplus baseload generation. So we can’t overlook that factor as part of the discussions and dynamics.

Michael Smerdon

And Jeremy, it’s probably worth point out that all of the reasons why government chose to put Cardinal on the list of the first ones to negotiate with still hold true. It’s near load centers, it’s well-sited, it’s got a group that’s well prepared to negotiate and do the necessary conversion work, and it’s got all the ancillary benefits that go along with it in terms of employment and agriculture and grid stability and things like that.

Michael Bernstein

And community support is absolutely critical. If we think about that, we eventually will need some new generation in this province, as we’ve seen from Oakville Mississauga as well as Premier Winds’ announcement that we’re going to need more community support and engagement. We have that in spades at Cardinal.

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

And I would imagine, if you’re negotiating with them now, it would be in your best interest to maybe wait a little while longer for them to get to their senses.

Michael Bernstein

No comment there. I think the reality is that there is an understanding broadly that Cardinal makes sense, and it’s to come and get all the parties now - particularly since some of the other priorities of 2012 have been put aside - to focus on what the right thing for the province, for rate payers, and for taxpayers, for the next 10 or 20 years, and we think Cardinal is part of the answer to that.

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

Next, I just wanted to touch on Varmevarden. You got a $1 million distribution from them in the quarter, or dividend. Just wondering, what triggered that? It seemed a little bit early. And I’m wondering when we should see the next one.

Michael Smerdon

It was definitely not part of our original plan going into 2012 to have semiannual distributions out of Varmevarden. But consistent with the approach that we’re taking at Bristol, where we’ve moved from, with the support of the other shareholders and our fellow board members at Bristol, semiannual there to quarterly. At Varmevarden, we’ve moved from the intention of paying out an annual distribution in the first half of the year to semiannual distributions in addition to the semiannual interest payments. So it’s really all about smoothing out the cash flow that we get from the businesses over the course of the year, and the business is able to, and supportive of, making that change.

Jeremy Mersereau - National Bank Financial

Can you say that one more time? Who is semiannual and who is quarterly?

Michael Smerdon

Varmevarden is semiannual interest and semiannual dividends, Bristol is now quarterly. Last year it was semiannual.

Operator

The next question comes from Ben Pham of BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Ben Pham - BMO Capital Markets

My first question is on the sub that you created to focus on western North America and I’m guessing the angle there is party the LNG potential you see there. If that’s the case, these projects could be potentially quite large in scale, so can you talk about just the degree to which you might consider a partnership, possibly with a larger player, and similar to what TransAlta did with MidAmerican and just provide a better value proposition. And even just to take it a step further, maybe there’s some equity offered such as what [unintelligible] did with [unintelligible].

Michael Bernstein

We do think the LNG is potentially an opportunity. Have had some discussions with partners on that, but for us, we’re not putting it as a high priority at this stage, partly because of the timelines, and as you say, the quantums could be quite large. So when we thought about navigating what might be a 3-5 year cycle, working through regulatory, that there are various projects being proposed, although your thesis is right, it being an opportunity, it’s one that [unintelligible] is not actively focusing on right now.

I think where we see the larger opportunities is still on some renewables. We do still have standards that are needing to be fulfilled in parts of the western U.S. And brownfield opportunities, which are converting existing facilities, particularly as some of them are being shut down from coal to clean running gas. And a little bit of what we’re doing, and the work we’ve done on Cardinal, is taking some of what were previously [unintelligible] facilities and potentially shifting them to peaking, but again under contract. So all this is with long term contracts with utility off-takes.

Ben Pham - BMO Capital Markets

At this stage, those have opportunities, this is more you want to do everything yourself, then, rather than bring somebody in?

Michael Bernstein

Well, it depends on the opportunity. I think we’ve shown that we’re quite ready, and we’re quite good at partnering, and bringing various skillsets together. Mike Chapin, who’s head of our business, has a long history, 30 years’ experience, in the business, and a ton of relationships, which is what we think is advantageous. So some of those opportunities are in fact looking at partnering, including with some larger players. So it depends if there’s merits in the size, whether it’s something we do solo or something we do in partnership, but as we mentioned, we’re flexible on that approach as long as we have the right partner and the right covenants.

Operator

The next question comes from Nelson Ng of RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

In terms of the Whitecourt facility that has a [PPA] expiration of sometime next year, what’s the plan going forward? Are you looking to hedge or sell into the merchant market? Can you just tell me what the economics are, and what your plans are for that facility?

Michael Bernstein

You’re correct that Whitecourt does have PPA expiring in 2014. At least two things going in Whitecourt’s favor. Number one, we still have our fuel supply agreement that goes two years beyond that, into 2016. So we continue to receive subsidized fuel for Whitecourt for an extra two years.

The other thing is that it’s fortunate that we’re in Alberta, where there’s a real market into which we can sell. Our preference overall is not to run our facilities merchant. We tend to like the lower-risk, lower volatility types of businesses, so what we’ll be working with, both with the team at Whitecourt, with other industry participants, as well as our partners at Miller Western, is working on a solution that allows Whitecourt to continue to run with the stability and certainty that we expect out of our assets. So stable fuel supply, stable economics, both in terms of costs as well as uptake. But the structure of that is still something that we’re contemplating and designing.

Michael Smerdon

And even right now, I think, what, 3 megawatts of the 25 is effectively merchant, so we have entered into hedging arrangements to lock in the small merchant component of the facility now.

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

Just moving on to admin expenses, for 2012 it was roughly $11 million. How much will this increase in 2013 given the addition of the development team in Vancouver?

Michael Bernstein

The development team is actually going to be part of the power segment, so when you see it start coming into our Q1 2013 and after that financial statements, the Capstone power development costs will actually be in the power segment. The costs will largely be driven by the activity leverage that the business out there has. The run rate cost is not material to Capstone overall, but we hope that they start spending more, because that means that there are more and more projects that they are bringing closer and closer to delivery for us.

So two things out of that. Number one is on a current run rate, it’s not material to Capstone’s overall economics. Number two, it’s at the power corp level. And number three, we hope it increases over the course of the year to get something material when we’ll be reporting both on how much we’ve spent, but also on the projects that that relates to.

Michael Smerdon

Overall, if we think about business development also ramping up, what we’ve said is that 2012 was lower than normal, and we should be returning to kind of more historical norms, if you add the two together.

Michael Bernstein

That’s right. And when you look at our outlook statement in terms of adjusted EBITDA of $110 million to $120 million, in terms of business development costs that we’ve got embedded in that, business development and project development, which includes Capstone power development guys, if you roll all that up, it will be about $2.5 million between those two.

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

Okay, got it. And then just moving to Bristol Water, the 6.9% increase in revenues, is that mainly due to inflation?

Michael Bernstein

It’s 3.9% real, and 3% inflation, using the November 2012 RPI indexation. So that increase will be going through April 1. So we’re only a couple of weeks from that.

Michael Smerdon

So if you’ll recall, under the existing [end] period, we have a K factor, which is what it’s called, which is that 3.9% real increase, and then every November, whatever inflation is for that year gets added to it.

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

And then just finally on Bristol Water, when are your dividends determined? Is it in the beginning of your fiscal year, or could it change every quarter?

Michael Smerdon

No, we set a budget with the company. They’re actually on a March 31 year end, because that’s the required regulatory year end for water utilities in the U.K. But they work with us on setting a budget for our purposes in December of the calendar year. So we have fairly good visibility over what the dividend will be throughout 2013. It will be subject to changes in inflation, changes in capital delivery program, operating cost savings, or maybe - we haven’t experienced it, but - the potential exist for operating costs to be more than planned. So it will be subject to those, but we do have a pretty good visibility about what the dividend will be in 2013.

Nelson Ng - RBC Capital Markets

And did you want to clarify what your expectation is?

Michael Bernstein

[laughter] I won’t give a specific number, but you should expect that it will be less than what we have in 2012, only because we had a 70% interest for the first part of the year.

Operator

The next question comes from John Safrance of Cantor Fitzgerald. Please go ahead.

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

Could you maybe give us your confidence level in your main line total forecast? And how did you come by the number?

Michael Smerdon

On the main line, what we’ve got assumed is $1.76 blended for 2013. We’re currently paying the higher $2.24 rate, and then what we expect is that by the end of this quarter or into Q2, we’ll find out what the final rate for 2013 will be, and then for the balance of 2013, we’ll pay a lower rate, such that the blended ends up being $1.76.

Now, having said that, I think what many would acknowledge is that $1.76 is still not a competitive rate for the main line, because there are alternatives that people can use and get lower cost transportation from Alberta to Ontario.

So clearly whether it’s the right business decision for those who make it to put in $1.76 rate, because it may not stem the decline in volumes going through the main line and fix that problem, but that’s not a decision that we can make on their behalf.

But we’ve used $1.76. It comes from a combination of external suppliers of information who’ve been involved in the regulatory process. It involves a little bit of what we hope is conservatism on our part, because of those factors I mentioned that even at $1.76, it’s still not what we believe is the right rate for that pipeline, from a competitive perspective.

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

And in terms of the EBITDA guidance on the power side, you’re seeing a slight year over year improvement, but given the [quantum], that’s a good $0.50 that you’re saving, or I guess around $5 million in terms of impact on EBITDA, at Cardinal. Why don’t you see a larger improvement year over year?

Michael Smerdon

I don’t know that it will be a $5 million savings at Cardinal. We’ll have less capex in 2013, because we had a longer outage in 2012, which was scheduled. The scheduled outage for 2013 is shorter, which means lower capex as well as higher production. Having said that, at the hydros, we will have a full year of interest and principal amortization on the hydro bonds, whereas in 2012 it was only a part year. So there are a variety of factors that go into it. In addition, in the power segment, as I mentioned on a previous question, we will have a full year of costs related to Capstone Development Corporation, which is part of the power segment, whereas in 2012 it was only a very, very short two-week period [unintelligible] the costs related to that.

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

I’d have to imagine that it would be mostly related to that, since I think you’re speaking more to the AFFO side, talking about the principal repayments and interest. And do you have any progress updates, or is there anything going on with AGBAR with respect to co-investments going forward?

Michael Bernstein

I’ve got a call with them next week, so maybe at the next quarter we’ll let you know. We do have a running dialog with them about various opportunities, but as part of our relationship, we’re comparing notes shortly, but nothing imminent.

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

Can you maybe give us a quantum with respect to the capital investment required for a full deployment of your WindBOOST, and what the impact might be based on what other facilities have experienced in the past?

Michael Bernstein

I think it’s a bit preliminary to give that figure, partly because I don’t have them yet. Mike and I are supposed to review the business case in the next couple of days, so I think on a preliminary basis, it looks like it’s something that’s worthwhile pursuing. It’s not a huge capital undertaking, but even if you pick up a point or so in output, then you can justify making a small investment. But hopefully at our next update we’ll know exactly what we’re doing on that front.

John Safrance - Cantor Fitzgerald

If you’re speaking with the OPA with respect to a one-year extension to Cardinal, should we infer from that that it looks like there’s a lower probability of having some sort of contract in place post-[PPA] this year?

Michael Bernstein

I wouldn’t say that’s the case. I think the way we’ve approached it, because we started having those dialogs with the government in transition, so I think the positive aspect is that the OPA recognizes that there are some timing constraints? So without them getting direction or understanding what the new minister and premier wanted to do, that we were thinking about a safety net and backup plan. But the primary objective and the intention, if we can still get this wrapped up over the next several months, is a long term contract. That’s in everyone’s best interest. So we highlighted, because we knew we’d be asked the question like what’s happening, what are some of our plans, so wanted to mention that there are alternatives being considered, but at this stage, the focus is still on the long term contract.

Operator

The next question comes from James Morrison of Cormark Securities. Please go ahead.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

Can you just give us a little overview of how the progress of the Capstone Power Development team has come along, and what activities they’ve been doing so far, since you announced the formation of that unit?

Michael Bernstein

How far back do you want to go? I guess with Mike and Dan, there’s probably knowledge and relationships that go back over 10 years, particularly with Dan being over at - you know, personal relationships with the team since his time at [unintelligible]. And with Mike at [Greenwing]. When he was at Greenwing, we explored a couple of opportunities together, and maintained a dialog. We, as you know, have stated, probably two-plus years ago, that we think there was benefits moving at the earlier stage and Amherstburg was a first step in that direction.

So continuing to dialog with participants and thinking that there is potentially value-added projects, we decided to bring them onboard in 2012, and by the time we got everything done, we thought the team established, as Mike mentioned, in December, with him bringing on a couple of VPs in January.

So that’s sort of the background of it. I think what we’ve seen to date is he’s been helpful, and his team’s been helpful, with our teams here at head office, looking at some M&A opportunities for even existing assets, because of their background. So they’re helping us look at and evaluated some operating or late-stage development projects, and then pursuing their own pipeline. But at this stage, it’s too early. We’re going to assess the pipeline they’ve got, and try prioritizing which ones we think are the ones to focus extremely heavily on.

Michael Smerdon

Mike [Chaplin] came on board in December. We spent probably December and a bit of January just getting him set up out in Vancouver, an office space and IT equipment and things like that. The mundane stuff that has to be there, but nobody wants to think about. And then I think in mid-January, he brought on his two associates.

And then I think they’ve been extremely active getting the name out, letting people know that they’re open for business, and that they’ve got good financial backing from Capstone. And we’ve been quite pleased with the volume of opportunities that they’ve been looking at, but it’s all still early stage. Like Mike said, the next stage that we’re going through is sort of helping them filter and triage the long list of opportunities and making sure that what they’re focusing on

are the types of projects that will fit well within Capstone.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

And can you characterize that list of opportunities into, like, the stage of development, the geography, and the class of infrastructure?

Michael Bernstein

Class of infrastructure, it’s all power. It’s a mix of thermal, being gas, and renewable. It’s in Canada and the U.S., I’d say, with more of it being from the U.S. And in terms of stage, there’s a big mix. Early stage to operating.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

And are you looking in RFP zones?

Michael Bernstein

Not as much. That may be part of the mix, but right now most of the list is, in fact, sort of bilateral discussions and relationships and kind of back to Mike’s 30 year background and his people that he knows, where there are opportunities to kind of sit down with utilities or off-takers, and saying what you need and here’s how we can get there. The ability to do bilateral agreements, and that’s part of the reason why we bought CPD onboard and Mike onboard, is significantly greater in the U.S. than it is in Canada. Pretty much everything here is done through RFP.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

So would it be fair to say that the most probable deliverable from them would be a U.S. gas project for an investment of like $30-50 million of equity?

Michael Smerdon

I think you’re ahead of us on being able to use your crystal ball. But those things are possible. There’s renewables. And I don’t want to discount either the fact that from our perspective, particularly since in the second half of 2012 we have kind of focused, again, on business development, that their first impact in fact may help us land something on the East Coast, or in our jurisdictions, because there’s activity there.

Michael Bernstein

Yeah, and then that’s not so much them [unintelligible] the opportunity, but it could be an opportunity sourced from here and corporate, where they either know the existing assets that are in a different part of the country, or a different part of the continent, and they bring their significant experience and expertise and knowledge about those assets to bear. So it may not actually be the first asset they’re involved with, it may not actually be one that they originate themselves.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

And then quickly just switching over to Bristol Water, can you give us an idea of the increased level of costs that you expect to incur there as a result of preparing for your PR14?

Michael Smerdon

It’s low single digit million pounds. But because it’s a seven-figure number, it will be noticeable. That’s why we highlighted it.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

As an increase?

Michael Smerdon

As an increase, yeah.

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

Okay, and then on your [SIM] ranking, can you give us just an update of where you sit there right now?

Michael Bernstein

SIM ranking?

James Morrison - Cormark Securities

Yeah, I think last quarter you said you were seventh. Before that you were second. Has it moved?

Michael Bernstein

Yeah, it doesn’t get updated as frequently as you might want. Most of the stuff related to the water sector over in the U.K. is on a semiannual basis. So please don’t expect us to be giving quarterly or more frequent [unintelligible] from things like SIM ranking.

Michael Smerdon

I think from our last update, we’ve been pleasantly surprised with the amount of work done, which creates disruptions, when you’re replacing so many pipes, that our customer feedback has remained frankly higher than we thought it would.

Operator

The next question comes from Jared Alexander of Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead.

Jared Alexander - Canaccord Genuity

I want to start with a quick question about Bristol, and that’s on the quarterly dividend. Just wanted to make sure I heard you right and confirm that it does start in this current quarter? Is that right?

Michael Smerdon

That’s correct.

Jared Alexander - Canaccord Genuity

Great. Now, moving to the hydros, I was a little surprised to see the revenue that came out of that given the production. And I think when I look at my numbers, the Q4 realized price is something north of $100, which seems a little high relative to recent history. Is there any color you can kind of provide on that?

Michael Smerdon

There’s four very different assets within that power portfolio. The biggest two are obviously from a production perspective Wawatay and Sechelt, which have decent PPA rates, definitely not over 100. And the only one I think we’ve got over 100 is the one at Hluey Lakes, which is one of the smaller 3-3.5 megawatt facilities. And that one, because of the very unusual contract structure there, where it’s basically the only power supplier to a small town, it gets a significantly higher rate. From memory, I think it’s north of $300 a megawatt hour.

Jared Alexander - Canaccord Genuity

Okay, so is Q4 an anomaly at all? Or should we expect that type of price performance going forward?

Michael Smerdon

Q4 was a good quarter from the perspective that we had pretty good hydrology. So there are definite seasonal ebbs and flows to our hydros portfolio with normally Q2 and Q4 being the highest.

Jared Alexander - Canaccord Genuity

Now, if I can just quickly move to Amherstburg, I noticed over the course of the year that the debt amortization changes quite a bit. It looks like heavily weighted towards Q2 and Q3 with Q1 and Q4 being a lot lighter. Can you maybe just provide a little detail on how that amortization works, and whether we should expect quarterly for it to be like that going forward or more level?

Michael Smerdon

No, it’s exactly as you pointed out. What we try to do with these assets, and we did the same on the hydros, is we have an amortization schedule pre-agreed with lenders when we go into the debt facility that has amortization sculpted for the seasonality of the business. Clearly with Amherstburg being a solar project, when the hours of sunlight and the intensity of the sunlight are at their peak, being in Q2 and Q3, that’s when the revenue will be highest, and that’s when the scheduled amortization is highest for that asset. In the hydros, it’s Q2 and Q4. So you should expect to see Q2 and Q3 amortization at Amherstburg above Q1 and Q4.

Operator

The next question comes from Robert Catellier of Macquarie. Please go ahead.

Robert Catellier - Macquarie

Just wanted to dig down a little bit more in the Capstone. Some of your prepared remarks caught my attention. In terms of the timing and the turnover at the government and the OPA, and the impact that’s had on the negotiations, it sounds a bit like it’s been a complete reset of the process in terms of your having to reeducate the various parties, etc. And so I’m wondering if in fact that’s the case, and whether or not that’s caused you to have to go back and basically start from zero on negotiating terms and conditions.

Michael Smerdon

No, there’s been a process in place for a couple of years within the OPA. The senior person [unintelligible] is still there. The new person who’s in charge of it has got a long procurement background, so that’s been a very smooth transition and a fair amount of continuity. Within the various other departments, Ministry of Economic Development, Agriculture, Rural Affairs, and even within Energy. Quite a bit of the staff are still there. Where there’s been the biggest turnover, obviously, is the new Minister of Energy, and his senior staff, and that’s what’s happening right now, is just making sure that on the energy side, that the full briefing and education is taking place. But that’s happening real time over the next several weeks.

Robert Catellier - Macquarie

And then just on the timing, the idea of an extension, it seems evident from the outside that some of the turnover that they’ve had has slowed things down, and I’m wondering if they’re feeling any onus one way or the other because of that to either issue the extension or to accelerate the negotiations so everybody has an early resolution, which I concur with your comments, definitely better to get this resolved, even if a one-year extension might be at a higher rate. I think you’re far better off getting resolution.

Michael Bernstein

I can’t comment regarding their motivations. The signals that I got was when even without knowing who the new minister was, or when the government was in flux after McGinty’s resignation, the OPA themselves kind of realized that they had to be ready because there are some decisions and some timelines to be met, and presumably recognizing that there are some facilities that should be re-contracted.

So that’s probably the best I can share with you, is what we’ve seen on our side, which is that there is a realization that stuff should get done, and there is a timetable to have it achieved, and therefore I think on both sides people are trying to put everything in place to be able to come to a hopefully successful and happy conclusion as quickly as possible.

Robert Catellier - Macquarie

And then your public documents allude to that you weren’t able to achieve a resolution to recognize the value of Cardinal. So that points to a discrepancy somewhere in the terms and conditions obviously. One of them could be price, but I’m wondering which, of price, term of the contract, risk transfer, is the biggest bottleneck or gating factor at this point?

Michael Bernstein

I think particularly where things stood at the end of last year, there was a lot of items on the table, including frankly a minister who was concerned about signing any new contracts, regardless of price or term, with all the things happening with the other gas plants.

So at this stage, and hopefully you recognize we are under a CA, so there’s only a certain amount of detail we can give, but there are many ways to adjust certain things. If price doesn’t work, then you can look at term, you can look at risk transfer. There are different mechanisms and tools to come to an agreement that can work for all parties. So all I can say is that all the various levers that could help come to a satisfactory conclusion are ones that are being discussed.

Robert Catellier - Macquarie

If you look at the current situation and the turnover, I interpret from your response here that whatever offers were the best offers at the time, before all the turnover, are those offers still on the table? Or have they been rescinded? And continuation of that question, would the current offer by the OPA, even if it’s not to your complete satisfaction, if it were accepted, would you be able to maintain the current dividend level?

Michael Bernstein

As we’ve previously mentioned, we set up our dividend assuming what we think is a reasonable outcome. We also stated that we’ve given ourselves flexibility for a different outcome. If I say more than that, I’m concerned about being outside our CA on where negotiations are.

Operator

The next question comes from Sean Steuart of TD Securities. Please go ahead.

Sean Steuart - TD Securities

I’m wondering if you can talk about any other levers you can pull in terms of building up liquidity beyond just the lower payout ratio, and hoarding cash. Are there any other refinancing opportunities available to build up liquidity at all?

Michael Smerdon

There are. You pointed out one, which is the payout ratio. We also recently had good take-up of our DRIP program, which we’re pleased with. It’s been running at around 20% participation since the middle of last year. So that’s another source. In terms of things that will make a meaningful difference, those are [unintelligible], and they’ll build up over time.

In terms of meaningful differences we can make in the short term, clearly we’re a company with three different types of listed securities. So that’s always an alternative available to us, be it [press], converts, or common equity, but of a less-public nature.

We do have credit capacity at the corporate level, and we have continued discussions with some of our relationship banks in terms of setting up a facility that is flexibility and consistent with our growth needs. So those discussions continue. The real work on that is ongoing. It doesn’t necessarily have to be tied to a use of proceeds, but we’re working on that to make sure it’s available when we do have a use of proceeds.

In addition, there have been some recent transactions in the solar space, where people have done reasonably attractive long term financings on solar projects, preconstruction and operating, which confirm what we believed to be the case, which is there’s additional opportunity to extract value out of Amherstburg Solar Park through a refinancing of that asset.

As we mentioned in the past, the financing for that transaction, we believe, was pretty darn good at the time, when it was put in place, so we managed to secure project financing for a preconstruction solar project during the depths of the financial crisis back in ’08-’09. Market is different now. The market is more attractive. It’s also an operating project that has exceeded expectations, so we do think there’s opportunity to extract additional capital and increase our liquidity through that asset.

Sean Steuart - TD Securities

And just conceptually, as you look at growth opportunities, whether it’s through the development group or otherwise, do you guys want resolution, at least on an extension at Cardinal before you move ahead with anything at this point? Is that a prerequisite to moving ahead? Just a little bit of context around your thinking on that front?

Michael Bernstein

No, I think the reality is we’ve set ourselves up with a dividend, we’ve set ourselves up, including selling a portion of Bristol Water to give ourselves the balance sheet capacity. We’ve put the team at TPD together, so we don’t have the ball and chain of Cardinal holding us back regarding the uncertainty on timing, holding us back from future strategy and growth. So that is not the case.

Ideally, arguably from a common equity perspective, it would be great to have that uncertainty done, but as Mike mentioned, we’ve set ourselves up to have other capital resources including, now, building up a reasonable sizable cash position that if we find an attractive acquisition or growth opportunity we’ll proceed.

Michael Smerdon

Don’t get us wrong, we are working as hard as we can to get resolution on Cardinal as quickly as we can with the constraint, obviously, that we won’t do a below-market transaction on Cardinal. We know that one of the best things that we can do for Capstone is to get certainty on Cardinal as quickly as possible.

Having said that, we won’t let continued uncertainty around Cardinal dictate what the rest of the business does. We still have to manage this business, to grow it and to deploy the capital that we have coming in, and continue to expand and diversify the way people expect. So the ongoing uncertainty around Cardinal is a concern. It’s a top priority for us, but it’s not dictating what we do in the rest of the business.

Operator

[Operator instructions.] The next question comes from Ian Tharp of CIBC World Markets. Please go ahead.

Ian Tharp - CIBC World Markets

Many questions have been asked and answered. I’ll just go quickly back to TransCanada. Recall back in 2011, you revised some guidance regarding 2012. A lot of that had to do with revised expectations around TCPL rates. So just wanted to go back to your confidence around the revised estimate for 2013 of $1.76. And then secondly, how does that manifest itself in terms of quarterly payments to TCPL? Is there some kind of continuation at the current higher level, and then some accrual? Or is it just simply a lower rate that’s paid once they make the decision?

Michael Bernstein

Way back when, we used to pay about $1 per gigajoule, and that used to be what was viewed as a pretty stable rate. And then over time, it moved up to $2.24. In 2011, TranCanada, as part of its admission to the [NAB], asked for a long term rate, a new rate, at $1.64. And we set some forecasts assuming, if that’s what TransCanada said they needed, then that would be a reasonable rate to go forward.

We obviously then updated our forecast when they asked for an interim rate of $2.24 instead of the long term rate of $1.64, and as Mike mentioned, when you’re setting the rate to be competitive, and then you have to ask for something that’s almost 50% higher, we were surprised by that ask, but that’s what we ended up paying for 2012.

What we’re expecting now, and on a blended rate, that it will be higher than the $1.64 they originally went in with, and party it’s because volumes have continued to shrink. Arguably it could be because they have kept the rate higher than they should have for longer than they should have. But the $1.76 as a long term rate is what we’re currently assuming.

The way we see that playing out is that we will continue, and as we have been paying the $2.24 up until the new decision was done, and that could go until May, and then on a blended basis, for the year, it will be $1.76. So therefore, I don’t know the exact date that we’ve got assumed, but I don’t think it really matters, because from an overall basis, it’s $1.76, but up until the change, we will be paying $2.24.

Michael Smerdon

Just in terms of forecasting mechanics, we’ve assumed that it happens midyear. That’s not based on any particular knowledge that we’ve got about what the NAB will say, or how it will be implemented. It’s just an assumption that we’ve got. But as Mike points out, for the full year it’s sort of irrelevant, because we’ve assumed a blended $1.76.

But in relation to the first part of your question, we’ve learned from past practice and past experience, and clearly with our current dividend level, we have significantly more flexibility and buffer to absorb a different outcome on TCPL this time than we had in 2011. So even if it stays at $2.24, which we don’t expect, that would clearly have an impact on our EBITDA forecast and our payout ratio, but it should not have an impact on the dividend.

Michael Bernstein

And worth mentioning that we are not assuming that there will be any credit for the 2012 rate of $2.24, even though in previous regulatory practice, quite often you would get a credit for the difference between an interim rate and the final rate. I think because of the situation, including the gas flows that we’re assuming, that there will be zero credit for anything for the higher rate paid throughout 2012. If we get it, then we’d obviously be quite pleased.

Ian Tharp - CIBC World Markets

And then very quickly on the [SIM], your MD&A actually lists the first nine months of this period, which ended December 31. You’re ranked eighth. So it’s a bit of a drop from number two at the end of March 2012. And you’re in a pretty high capex period, so I assume there’s a lot of brown water in the system. So I guess the main issue, moving from two to eight, and maybe that takes you out of the first quartile, what does that really mean in terms of a difference in ROE or how it manifests itself in terms of your revenue there?

Michael Bernstein

Not much. Obviously the key output of the SIM is the stature you’re held in when you go to the regulator. We like to have a high SIM, partly because of the small economic benefits, but more importantly is our ability to point to that when we go to the regulator and say, look, we delivered the largest capex program in this company’s history, and we maintained a very high SIM level, which means that the regulators should be more comfortable giving us a good capex program for the next [AMP] period. That’s where it comes into play.

Having said that, our objective at Bristol Water is to deliver extremely high-quality water and customer service to our customers in Bristol. We continue to do that. Even through an extremely high capex period. So that is the focus, and we’ll continue to deliver high-quality service, and high-quality water.

Ian Tharp - CIBC World Markets

I think I recall Mike B saying that there was a positive trend showing part of this year.

Michael Bernstein

Yeah. We’re focused on trying to maintain it as best we can, but as we say, when you dig up pipes, customers, sometimes there is an impact to it, including pedestrians and drivers not happy about roads being closed, and they will call our lines, and that’s also part of this process.

Michael Smerdon

There’s some interesting things that management are doing to get ahead on the front foot and be proactive, such as looking for ways to reduce the call volumes, which impact your SIM score, by proactively letting people know that we already know about the water leak, or things that may generate calls. If we communicate to people we already know about it, they won’t call. And there are a variety of ways, through text messaging and using the website and other means, that we’re implementing things like that.

Operator

There are no further questions at this time. I’ll now hand the conference back over to Mr. Bernstein for any closing comments.

Michael Bernstein

Thank you everyone for joining us today, and for those of you who are enjoying the March break, a happy and healthy March break.

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!

Source: Capstone Infrastructure's CEO Discusses Q4 2012 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
This Transcript
All Transcripts