CVR REFINING (CVI)

[jugs]

Your comment, as always, strikes me as perfectly rational. Yet I'm troubled, too. One of several books I'm finally getting around to reading is "Against The Gods" written by Peter Bernstein. In it, the author goes to quite exhaustive lengths in an effort to explain the nature of risk. Underlying is the nature of probability and those scientists most necessarily included in any index of those most deserving of recognition for having contributed mightily.

There would be no stock market were we not to embrace aspects of risk and probability. There would be no actuarial tables and Las Vegas would cease to exist. lol This book is a fascinating read.

You point to your being in CVRR for

"the potential return of distribution here."

I'm seeing reference to some items I regard as questionable:

1. potential
2. return
3. distribution
4. here

Betting on potential is always front and center when risk abounds.
Return is straight out of Wall Street jargon but often we mistake it for something not originally meant or even indicated. Return points towards something being restored to an earlier setting or position in relation to other things. I doubt it is mathematically possible to find instances in which there's a restoration of all things earlier pertinent to anything one might view as concrete. To do so would require that we allude to something we humans don't find acceptable: Facts in evidence are always going to be questioned as we pull further away from their original disclosure.

This is a big part of why it is that we challenge factoids and then go on to question our memories of having read such and such. Further out on this we question the veracity of others and perhaps finally we begin to decay from within---wondering if we remembered to check this out or challenge that. Thus it is that we lose confidence in even our own ability to recognize our logic from an example of a generally accepted premise.

When it comes to variable MLPs there's nothing resembling an absolute if we're discussing returns as in distributions.

Lastly, referring to "here?" Here for me is southern Texas. It is elsewhere for you. If the comment refers to "here in CVRR-land," then it might be wise to consult with Carl Icahn who has the final say in things---"here."

I'm not here for distributions. Risks being what they are and the probability that Icahn will do as Icahn does for Icahn, I'm not about to place much value, if any, on distributions as the likelihood of same falls into the crapshoot zone and we don't even hold meaningful tickets to the merriment Icahn might access!

Nitty-gritty: I'm here strictly for an opportunistic moment such as has occurred towards the end of last week when we investors were nicely rewarded with a spike in the unit price, this, after much of the week eagerly rising as well. And now I sit on a $5.5K gain on a mere 2,000 unit position launched on June 29th. I have not received a single penny yet on this investment. All the potentials and acceptances of risk and probability don't play into my gains at this moment.

In my opinion it is often a huge mistake to approach the investment in energy MLP's as predicated on distributions. I used to think along those lines, myself. But I am now rethinking the process and am of the belief that it is a mistake to gamble on a General Partner's acts which are most often unkind to us lesser participants in the business at hand. At the same time, there are many opportunities to gain a foothold on profits by carefully thinking our way through massive fluctuations however they may crop up from time to time.

We saw such events occurring on Friday with CVRR as well as ALDW. Some of us took advantage of these opportunities.

Finally, I know of no way to eliminate risk for it would require that we discover a way to mute if not eradicate the possibility of probability occupying a negative role in our unsteady portfolios.

What I'm left with is the realization that each of us must fend for him/herself. Information alone won't safeguard us from all things possible when playing with a loaded deck. And make no mistake: A General Partner controls much of the deck!