Spiro Dounis: Great. That’s helpful color, sorry.
Kevin Burdick: Spiro, this is Kevin. The other thing I’d just add in there is we pull in all these opportunities that Sheridan talked about, not only there, but also on the we continue to identify opportunities on the G&A side as well from a cost reduction standpoint. When we pull all that in, we prioritize them. We understand what the value is, the timing, any cost, and then we get people assigned to them. And I think it’s that transparency and accountability internally that help us get the confidence of what we’re looking at and those numbers continue to improve. Spiro, this is – the only thing is it’s a comment of you get what you measure, and we are measuring our synergies.
Spiro Dounis: Got it. Got it. Helpful. Second question, maybe just turning to CapEx, maybe for you, Walt. Some of your peers have started to provide this sort of normalized CapEx figure that allows them to keep growing with the basin I guess I’m just curious maybe how we should think about that for ONEOK, especially as we head into 2025 in the first quarter, you’ve got three major projects coming online. It would seem like that CapEx low is going to be coming down. So just curious how you guys think about what normal looks like on the CapEx side?
Walt Hulse: Sir, I’m not going to go down the 2025 guidance route yet. But I think it’s fair to say you’ve identified directly that we’ve got three decent-sized projects that will all roll off early in 2025. So as we look at CapEx going forward, we have much more manageable, lower capital, very high return opportunities that are presenting themselves. So I think it’s fair to say that we would see that trend down. And if you were to look longer-term for a kind of sustainable CapEx level, it probably is lower than where we are for 2024.
Spiro Dounis: Great. I will leave it there for today. Thank you, gentlemen.
Operator: Next question comes from Tristan Richardson with Scotiabank. Please go ahead.
Tristan Richardson: Hey, good morning, guys. Maybe just a minor one on the guidance increase. Should we think of the small Saddlehorn acquisition as part of that increase in expectations for the year? And if so, maybe kind of what proportion of the guidance increase could be – could we attribute to the acquisition?
Sheridan Swords: Yes, we did put a little bit of the Saddlehorn increase due to – into our guidance, that was part of it. But it’s a small portion. You could see we probably increased and that we’ll get from Saddlehorn by about third.
Tristan Richardson: Appreciate it.
Walt Hulse: We’ve known that was coming for a little bit of time. So it’s not like that that was the primary driver of the expansion. It’s across – it’s really seeing strength across our entire business. And of course, a little more Saddlehorn doesn’t hurt.
Tristan Richardson: Helpful context. We appreciate it. And then maybe just more of a housekeeping one. How should we think about maybe the corporate cost allocation? You guys noted a $33 million change within refined products crude. Should we think of all of that is attributable to moving the corporate costs around? Or maybe is there a way to think about for the full year ‘24, maybe what percent of total corporate costs get allocated to the segment just as we think about refined products and crude modeling.
Walt Hulse: I would look over a couple of quarters to see a trend there as we do that. We’re – this was the first quarter that we allocated corporate costs to that. So surely, we took a look at it, but there could be some other corporate costs in the first quarter that might skew a little bit. So I would look over the next couple of quarters to get a trend, but it will proportionately carry its fair share kind of based on EBITDA contribution.
Tristan Richardson: Helpful. Appreciate, guys. Thank you very much.
Operator: Our next question comes from Michael Blum with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.
Michael Blum: Thank you. Good morning, everyone. I wanted to go back to the AI data center discussion a little bit. When you look at your gas pipeline network, how much room is there to expand capacity via compression versus having to actually build new pipe? And then if you were to increase gas pipeline capacity to serve higher power load growth, are there any upstream benefits that you’d also see.
Chuck Kelley: Good morning. Michael, this is Chuck. As far as capacity adds that we could look at along our footprint. As Pierce mentioned a couple of times here today, we are in conversations with existing customers on these – on our pipes connected to little more than – I think the number is 40 gas-fired generation facilities today. We’re working – there’s about 15 potential projects on our systems today. Not all of those will come to fruition, but the conversations are ongoing and of the 15, we’re seeing probably three or four of those folks saying the demand is derived from the data center. So we are looking at several projects that would add the BB looping as well as some compression depending where we are on which of our systems, whether it’s the interstate up in the upper Midwest in Oklahoma, not necessarily looping but rather some compression projects.
So it’s kind of an all of the above capacity additions. And I don’t recall the second part of your question.
