JotCast | March 2026 Capitalist Times Live Chat | 3/31/2026

Return to

March 2026 Capitalist Times Live Chat

powered by

Prev Page View Full Chat Next Page

Roger Conrad

2:25

As for local resistance to building data centers, that will probably keep some of them from getting built in some regions. I would consider that bullish to the overall boom, however, by reducing potential supply.

Thomas C

2:26

Hi Roger/Elliot: when do you expect your Natural Gas thesis to work out for stocks like EXE? What level do you expect oil to trade at after this war is settled? Thank you

Elliott Gue

2:26

Right now US natural gas prices are low. Sub$2.90/MMBtu front month, under $3.50/MMBTu for most of the summer and then a bit higher into next winter. Stocks with hefty Haynesville exposure (like EXE) will underperform low-cost Marcellus names (like EQT) until we see prices settling closer to $3.75 to $4.00/MMBtu, which is where this play has a sizable free cash flow inflection. Right now, the market is focused on weather and demand is usually light this time of year. Storage close to the 5-year average. I think what you need for these stocks to take a leg higher is some upside in US natgas prices into the summer. The set up in the gas futures market is that the speculators are heavily short here (about 175,000 cts and 1.6 standard deviations below the 2-year mean). In futures we generally look to fade (trade against) lopsided positions like that. What it really means is that the gas market is like dry tinder right now and gas prices are low sub-$3. I don't think it would take much to catalyze a significant

Elliott Gue

2:26

rally and short covering. Expectations for warm summer weather are very low right now due to the El Nino, but any inkling of average to above average temperatures is one example of a catalyst. Another would be that cargoes are ramping up from various LNG export terminals (Plaquemines and Golden Pass for example), and that's a steady drumbeat of growing demand for US gas this summer with European and Asian gas storage so tight. So, those are some short to intermediate term catalysts I'm watching. Specifically looking at EXE, I see a valuation floor for this stock in the high $90s and my target based on $4/MMBtu long-term gas prices is $150+, so I think the risk reward is rather lopsided. As for oil, it's a very rough "guess" but I think WTI could trade to around $80/bbl on a quick resolution of the Iran situation. That's a comfortable level for the producers/services names we recommend. Longer term, I'd be surprised if we don't see sustained $100+/bbl (probably $125+) before this supercycle is over.

susan p

2:31

Wondering if the relative performance of Western Midstream (not as strong as some midstreamers) is connected to the potential involvement with Kinetick? You guys added it to EIA's High Yield list last October. It's up but not as dramatically and wondering if it's a better choice than buying/adding to the others who have popped. I need to review your October thinking but getting a current view would be helpful, as well as any insight on Kinetick impact--be it a positive or negative--if WES gets involved. Tankers of thanks.
--

Roger Conrad

2:31

It's a fact that companies announcing acquisitions tend to at least initially come under selling pressure--sometimes regardless of the industrial logic for a deal. And sometimes even a rumored transaction can have that effect.

We've pretty consistently kept our highest entry point for Western Midstream at 40. And it's still slightly above that now. That's in part because the yield is still the primary attraction. And while a deal for Kinetik on the right terms would be a positive, until something is announced and closed that too is likely to weigh on the stock. I think it would be a buy under 40.

It's also true that C-Corps have run a lot harder than MLPs like WES.

Phil C.

2:40

Unfortunately I am working at this time and unable to join. A few questions:

1. I am curious if there is a short term opportunity to take profits on oil producers with the expectation when the Gulf conflict is over the stocks will retreat where we can buy back at a lower price.
2. With 7 or so Mideast refineries out of commission due to war, how will this affect refining crack spreads and for how long. You recently advised taking partial profits on VLO but don’t think stock price may go higher for longer as a result of that reduced capacity? Thank you.

Elliott Gue

2:40

Stocks in many of the producers are extended right now, so a pullback at any time is certainly possible. However, I think it's important to remember that most of these stocks actually started to rally last summer/autumn well ahead of any Iran news or concerns and they aren't really pricing in $100+ WTI right now -- they're pricing in more like $75 or $80/bbl. Interestingly, if you go back and look at the 1990-91 experience -- Gulf War I -- a lot of stocks (XOM is one example) stopped rallying once oil prices spiked around the time of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in the summer of '90. Then, when oil peaked and sold off hard in early 1991, these stocks saw a renewed advance. In my view the reason is that there's actually a "sweet spot" or Goldilocks level for oil where the risk of major demand destruction is contained (not too high) yet the price is sufficient for the producers to make significant cash flow (Not too low). So, in my view a steady state +/-$80/bbl would actually be fundamentally very bullish for

Elliott Gue

2:40

the group and any dips you get on "Straight of Hormuz Reopens" sort of headlines is likely to be a buying opportunity. Re refiners and VLO, our longstanding Golden Age of refining thesis remains intact and is unfolding faster than we expected. However, VLO has already priced in a lot of good news via the 50%+ rally year-to-date. At the same time there are risks such as that if prices remain elevated and the global economy slows you could see some weakness on the demand side. The reason we recommended buying partial gains is just that after the rally we've seen, we see the risks as more balanced on VLO compared to skewed to the upside late last year. Also, we see better opportunities elsewhere such as in SLB which we wrote about in that flash alert.

Tim W.

2:40

Roger,

My father-in-law started investing with you back in the Ute Forecaster days, using drip plans to avoid fees. He would get the printed newsletter in the mail; so fun to remember those days.

My father-in-law likes to review P/Es like the Wall Street Journal used to do, list the stocks in order, and it had info for each stock, including P/E. I recently had a Wall Street Journal mailed to him, and he said it no longer includes the P/E. Do you know of any print publication that lists stocks and their P/E?

Roger Conrad

2:40

Hi Tim. Thanks for joining us today! I used to post earnings multiples in the old Utility Forecaster--which I founded in 1989 and left in 2013. And I have occasionally in Conrad's Utility Investor, which I launched after joining Capitalist Times in 2013.

Barron's still publishes a weekly edition that has a stock databank. I'm not certain if they highlight P/Es. There are also online databanks like Morningstar.

I will say that there's a "trick" to accurately reading P/Es. Mainly, you've got to get the right "E"--and that's not always earnings per share under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

That's why putting together the payout ratio data I calculate in Utility Report Card, REIT Sheet databank etc for CT is always a time consuming process. Use an earnings number that's inflated by non-cash items or including one-time items and you get a misleading result on valuation.

Phil C

2:49

With Qatar LNG out of service for what could be several years do you think VG or LNG have more room to run and are you thinking of higher entry points are justified? Thank you

Lastly, I'm so sad about AES. We made good money, but I was sure hoping for more than $15. I think BlackRock is getting a bargain. I appreciated your insights about the merger via your special email to subscribers; it was spot on as always.

Thanks in advance

Roger Conrad

2:49

Hi Phil. Thank you for those kind words. I'm not 100% certain the AES deal is going to close--really unusual that management never had a Q4 guidance call, after announcing one for Feb 27 and then postponing to March 3. Anyway, there's a lot of value there for 14 if it doesn't.

I think it's possible Operation Epic Fury fallout has done lasting reputational damage to Gulf States producers--meaning Asian and European buyers of LNG, oil and NGLs will going forward prefer to long term contract with more secure sources such as the US and Canada. That definitely helps the US LNG facility operators but also midstream in general as well as nat gas producers. VG and LNG are definitely big long-term winners but watch those entry points!

Susan P.

2:56

I hear about the "Iranian Premium" as it relates to oil prices. Does Elliott give credence to its existence? If so, what % would you cite it has averaged over the decades? Assuming it has been a long-dated factor, do you see it dissipating in any meaningful way if the Iranian conflict subsides enough? I understand supply/demand is the key to understanding energy-related pricing. So, just curious about Elliott's view on the concept/categorization of an Iranian premium. Finally, Elliott's encyclopedic energy knowledge has been made that much more vivid over the last month. Thank you.

Elliott Gue

2:56

Hi Susan and thanks for the kind comments! Geopolitical risk premiums and a specific Iranian oil premium are very tough to estimate and I'd argue are unstable over time. I'd frame it like this. Right now, there's clearly an Iran premium (really a Strait of Hormuz premium) in oil and I think you could see WTI pull back to around $80/bbl on a quick resolution. However, I don't think you'll see sub $70/bbl again for any sustained period for a long time to come. A lot of the excess storage of oil the oil bears were talking about last year has now been eliminated as the US government is allowing sanctioned tankers to head to their destinations. That would include the absolute mass of ships moored off Malaysia with their transponders switched off carrying oil from "Oman" (it's really Iranian barrels that they move ship-to-ship in the dead of night and with transponders off to avoid detection). Those barrels are being imported into China. We also saw news this week that the US navy is allowing a Russian tanker into

Elliott Gue

2:56

Cuba. Ahead of this conflict, OPEC was already struggling to meet their announced production hikes and damage to infrastructure in the region coupled with normal restart procedures means that it will take time to restore production to the pre-war level even once there's resolution. The US can't ramp up output and exports enough to offset all of that. Even if there's a quick resolution, it will also take years for Iran's production to rise significantly above its pre-war level, because they've been underinvesting in those fields for many years now. Finally, longer term, this sort of event acts as a shock for countries and I do think that some countries will look at their reliance on Middle Eastern barrels (and LNG supply) and conclude that it makes sense to diversify supply sources.

Jack A.

2:58

There was an article in today's WSJ that argues that the rise in LNG prices as a result of the war in Iran is boosting LNG export prices, benefiting companies such as Venture Global, but long term is detrimental to their business as it causes countries to use other sources of energy. What are your thoughts on the long term viability of LNG exporters such as Venture Global and what companies could be a prime beneficiary from a switch from LNG?

Thank you

Roger Conrad

2:58

Hi Jack. I wouldn't argue with the basic thesis that countries dependent on imported oil and gas will try to become more self sufficient. The US was in that position in the late 1970s when President Carter went all in on cutting oil imports from the Middle East. And China is definitely trying to get there as quickly as it can by rolling out new wind, solar, electric vehicles and nuclear power plants.

But energy independence won't happen overnight either. It arguably took America 40 years and a shale revolution to get there. And right now, natural gas is the only fuel capable of providing the needed energy--unless countries are willing to rely on coal that creates choking smog, toxic particulate matter that enters lungs, mercury in the water, acid rain gasses and after its burned coal ash that must be stored in massive pits constantly in danger of leakage.

Eventually, LNG export capacity will be overbuilt. But we're no where near that now.

Brian O.

3:03

Hi Roger,do you think that BEPC would be a good buy under $40.00? Thanks

Roger Conrad

3:03

Hi Brian. $40 is my long standing buy limit price for Brookfield Renewable's C-Corp shares--which I personally own. I do think the MLP units traded as BEP are a better bargain, as they currently trade at a discount to BEPC and therefore yield about half a percentage point more tax advantaged. And BEP and BEPC represent the same ownership and pay the same dividend amount. But I understand some investors' aversion to K-1s--which is what you get at tax time with BEP.

Whether you own BEP or BEPC, you're getting a well managed company that has multiple avenues to grow funds from operations 10% a year through this decade at least--and shares the wealth with a generous dividend. And the Boralex takeover by parent Brookfield Asset Management is likely to add to those opportunities.

John C

3:10

please ask Roger to comment on his advice for the upcoming rights offer for BUI and BUIRT.

Roger Conrad

3:10

Hi John. As of yesterday's close, the closed-end fund Blackrock Utilities and Infrastructure (BUI) traded at a market price -5% below its net asset value. If that level holds, the rights offering will confer no benefit for exercising.

Before Blackrock announced this offering, BUI's market price was a 10% premium to NAV. I think it's fair to say, events have not gone the way they wanted. But the fund is protected by the phase out of the discount.

I still like BUI at a price of 28 or less. Unlike the vast majority of CEFs, it uses no leverage. And its holdings are first rate. But investors that already have a full position should stand pat--maybe try to sell the rights if you can. Those who want to build a position can exercise them--but don't expect any benefit over just buying shares on the market.

Jack

3:12

Hi Elliott: With the closing of the Strait of Hormuz and the bombings in Qatar, it is expected that the price of LNG will be elevated for some time. My guess is there will probably be some power plant energy switching to a cheaper source of fuel. What do you expect to see and what companies do you expect to prosper from the energy switch? If it's a greater use of coal, what company or companies do you think will benefit the most, and what companies would you recommend as an investment? Thank you, Jack (Almeleh)

Elliott Gue

3:12

I think one of the things we learned from the European energy crisis around the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 is that there aren't really viable alternatives in many markets.

You're already seeing some moves to restart idled coal facilities in some countries like India that have significant exposure to imported LNG volumes from Qatar.

A lot of India's imported steam coal volumes are going to come from Indonesia and so the story is a bit tough to play directly. The go-to US names would be Peabody (BTU), Core Natural Resources (CNR) and Alliance Resource Partners (ARLP). We don't currently recommend any of these in the model portfolio though we do have a trade on BTU in our trading services.

Interestingly, Germany, which generates a significant amount of power with coal, recently destroyed one of its remaining, and relatively new, coal-fired power facilities (about a year ago if memory serves). When you couple that with their new sanctions on Russian gas, the EU seems determined to burn all their

Elliott Gue

3:12

bridges to the ground and eliminate their alternatives. Nuclear could be a solution, but it takes too long to build, so it won't be able to bridge the gap from 2026 to the early 2030s. In my view, US LNG remains a key beneficiary.

Jack A.

3:21

Hi Elliott:

To what extent will BSM benefit from an increase in the spot price of natural gas overseas? If they are tied down with long term contracts for the use of their properties, they would obviously benefit less with a rise in price. I guess the question is, to what extent are their earnings aligned with the spot price of natural gas?

Roger Conrad

3:21

Hi Jack. In 2025, 52% of Blackstone Minerals' oil and gas revenue came from oil and condensate sales, with the balance from natural gas. That revenue is leveraged to North American prices in two ways--(1) the realized selling price of the output from its lands and (2) what's produced on its lands by third parties that tie drilling decisions to oil and gas prices. The company hedges a portion of the expected output, which smooths out some of the impact of fuel cost volatility.

There's a close correlation between North American benchmark oil prices and Brent crude oil prices. There's less of one between North American natural gas and say European prices, mainly because the LNG market has not evolved to that extent and also because of the cost to liquefy gas. But over time as more gets exported, the closer North American prices will follow those in Europe for example.

In any case, BSM will benefit from strength in oil and gas prices this year and as the energy upcycle continues.

Mike C.

3:37

Good morning Roger, Elliott, and Sherry -

Thanks to all of you for steady guidance in turbulent times. And for highly useful insight in stable times: years ago, you published a "table pounding buy" recommendation on MLPs. It's paying for my retirement, so I'm grateful for you advice every day. (Even more now that it seems like US midstreams look like one of the safest ports in the storm.)

I have basically the same question about a handful of names, (and I fully appreciate that a couple of these are recommendations dating back to previous guidance). Essentially, what do you see as the prospects (with or without a global recession, or demand destruction, or other fallout from the Iran war) for: LYB, AA, and EWH?

Also - and I'm guessing I'm not the only one with this question - any updated thoughts on BUI's "rights offer" (updated since Roger's 3/16 Income portfolio update)?

Again, many thanks for the great work and steady guidance

Roger Conrad

3:37

Hi Mike. It looks like Blackrock would have been better off with an at-the-market stock offering than the rights offering. And I think you're going to see limited exercising of the rights--given the CEF's 5% discount to NAV basically eliminates any benefit. My advice is to buy BUI at 28 or lower if you don't have a position. If you do, try to sell the rights or just let them expire worthless.

I'm very bullish on iShares Hong Kong ETF (EWH). Leaving aside politics, after several years of turmoil, China is now positioning the port city as a major hub for global trade and finance. I think the fund could trade in the lower 30s the next 12 months even if there is a US bear market.

Lyondell is benefitting from the fact that natural gas feedstocks are price advantaged to oil feedstocks--the result of Operation Epic Fury fallout. Alcoa is benefitting from destruction of aluminum smelting capacity in the Middle East. I'm hesitant to bet on either at these prices. And it's not a bad idea to take some profit.

jbarth

3:45

In your opinions, has Verizon peaked and is it a good sale candidate?

Roger Conrad

3:45

I think Verizon is still pretty deep value at this price. Earnings and revenue have returned to growth and are expected to accelerate this year--largely on factors within management's control. And the stock is not expensive yielding a little less than 6% after this year's increase and just over 10X the mid-point of 2026 earnings guidance.

I think investors are only starting to appreciate the fact that the US communications market is fast concentrating into the hands of 3 companies--AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile (Deutsche Telekom). And that will continue to be a growth driver going forward.

You could make a case that near-term upside is limited with the stock more or less holding this level the past month. But I'm very comfortable holding this stock--even with the prospect of a wider market decline continuing. Great value at this price.

Victor

3:51

Hello Gents and thank you for the content provided in this chat. GLD is trading under its 50DMA and it seems that a reversal is taking place. Do you see a move upwards above the 50DMA or do you expect more weakness in the short term?

Elliott Gue

3:51

I am looking at gold and silver closely right now. They were ridiculously overextended a few months ago and we recommended taking significant profits across our trading and longer-term services. However, the speculators in the futures market are now very bearish both gold and silver (about 1.71 standard deviations underweight gold and 1.95 underweight silver compared to the 104 week average). This is quite a 180 from what we saw a couple of months ago. Interestingly it also mirrors what I'm seeing in energy -- specs are now quite long oil (after having been very bearish late last year) and very bearish natgas again. So, for gold and silver I am looking for some more back and forth action but I'm inclined to think we're putting in a low and could see some upside in the summer or into the autumn.

jgthomasj

3:51

What's your latest view on what's happening with the AES buyout?

Roger Conrad

3:51

Good question. As I indicated in a few previous answers during this chat, three things have happened since the announcement that could be considered setbacks. First, management more or less went to ground--not even so much as an earnings press release let alone a guidance call. Second, Qatar is retrenching for obvious reasons, and it's conceivable they could pull out of this deal. And third, the consent solicitation to change terms of several bond issues is going very slowly at best, which could indicate some resistance to what's in effect a leveraged buyout.

My view is the offer is too low for shareholders and I intend to vote no unless it's raised. But I don't see a lot of risk to holding AES at this point or even buying at 14.25 or less. Dividends plus the difference to the offer $15) add up to about a 10% return if it closes. And while the stock may retreat initially on deal failure, I think we'll see a mid-20s price the next 12-18 months if the company stays independent.

Mark Z

3:57

Hello Roger,

DVN has had a nice run recently. However, the future is unclear. Considering the pending merger, is DVN a hold? Thanks

Roger Conrad

3:57

Hi Mark. Devon Energy has not been one of our favorites for a while. But this is a scale business and the merger should be a plus for shareholders of both companies--the other being Coterra Energy. It will also still be small enough to be a takeover target after the merger--particularly as the Permian Basin continues to consolidate. Again--not a favorite but the stock will benefit from the long-term energy upcycle. Still a hold.

susan p

4:06

One other deal-related question concerns Hess Midstream. I appreciated all your specifics written in the March EIA on the price Chevron would require. Hess is dropping roughly 2% today and has not run up this past month. Still a $3 above your buy-in price target of 35 but getting close. Any thoughts/update other than what was written in the March 23 EIA. Appreciate both Roger and Elliott's hard work.

Roger Conrad

4:06

Thank you Susan. The latest news on Hess Midstream regarding Chevron is the partnership is actually buying back and retiring $42 mil of Class A and $18 mil Class B shares held by the parent. That would seem to indicate CVX is moving in the opposite direction--monetizing HESM rather than buying out the publicly owned shares.

On the other hand, $60 mil is pretty much a drop in the bucket--both for Chevron's balance sheet and its overall ownership stake in HESM. So my opinion still hasn't changed that it will ultimately take Hess fully private so it can get a higher dividend and restructure the MVCs (minimum value contracts).

Our advice is still to wait for dip under $35 to buy--otherwise stand pat. A nearly 8% yield increasing 5% a year and underpinned by long-term contracts with a super major is good value.

Leilani

4:16

Hello Roger,

Now that BEP is headquartered in Bermuda, which multiple sources say has no withholding tax on dividends and distributions, should 15% still be withheld? I go way back to the Great Lakes Hydro days, with periodic additions of the stock, and have always had the 15% withdrawn go to Canada. BEP Bermuda apparently has three different holding companies, two of which withhold no taxes. Ask my broker about this? Ha! Do you know more than I do? Thanks

Connecting…

Your current subscriptions

None

Register now to continue managing your subscriptions

E-mail Address	Chat Owner	Status	Remove

Enter your email address to be notified when Sherry Roberts hosts a chat