 Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. MLP Investor Conference MLP Investor Conference May 21, 2008 May 21, 2008 Exhibit 99.2 |
 Forward-Looking Statements Forward-Looking Statements This presentation contains forward-looking statements and information that are based on the beliefs of Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. and Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. (the “Partnerships”) and those of their respective general partners (the “General Partners”), as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to them. When used in this presentation, words such as “anticipate,” “project,” “expect,” “plan,” “goal,” “forecast,” “intend,” “could,” “believe,” “may,” and similar expressions and statements regarding the plans and objectives of the Partnerships for future operations, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Although the Partnerships and their General Partners believe that such expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable at the time such statements are made, neither the Partnerships nor the General Partners can give assurances that such expectations will prove to be correct. Such statements are subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those the Partnerships anticipated, estimated, projected or expected. The Partnerships have no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. 2 2 |
 Outlook for coal Outlook for coal |
 Coal has been and is Most Likely to Remain Coal has been and is Most Likely to Remain the Cornerstone for America’s Energy Future the Cornerstone for America’s Energy Future Coal is a vital source of secure, affordable domestic energy The U.S. has a 200+ year supply of coal Coal comprises approximately 95% of U.S. energy reserves Approximately 50% of U.S. electric power generation is coal fired Oil, natural gas and uranium prices are at or near record levels On an as-delivered basis, coal is significantly cheaper than other fuels and alternative energy sources Proven conversion technologies will only increase the demand for coal over time Nature and impact of potential U.S. CO² regulations remains unknown, however, coal is likely to remain the cornerstone for America’s energy future Source: Energy Information Administration Source: Energy Information Administration 4 4 |
 Coal has been the most Stable and Cost Coal has been the most Stable and Cost Effective Source of Energy Effective Source of Energy 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Jan-2005 Feb-2006 Mar-2007 May-2008 $5.10 $11.29 $20.11 Coal Natural Gas Petroleum Spot Delivered cost ($ / mm Btu) Spot Delivered cost ($ / mm Btu) Energy benchmarks Energy benchmarks Central Appalachian Coal - NYMEX Crude Oil, Light - NYMEX Natural Gas-Henry Hub MB-Uranium 5 5 69% 69% 94% 94% 177% 177% 217% 217% Source: Bloomberg, Energy Information Administration and FactSet Weekly prices from January 1, 2005 through May 9, 2008. Delivered costs based on May 9, 2008 NYMEX – Crude Oil Light and Henry Hub Natural Gas spot price and NYMEX Central Appalachian near month future converted to $ / mm Btu using EIA methodology. |
 Low-cost Electricity comes from Coal Low-cost Electricity comes from Coal 6 6 Source: Energy Information Administration, November 2007 Source: Energy Information Administration, November 2007 4 8 12 16 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent of generation from coal < 9.0 ¢ > 9.0 ¢ Hydro WY WY WV WV KY KY NE NE UT UT MO MO IA IA KS KS ND ND IN IN SD SD AR AR MN MN SC SC VA VA OK OK TN TN AL AL MT MT GA GA NM NM CO CO NC NC OH OH LA LA MS MS AZ AZ WI WI MI MI PA PA IL IL NV NV TX TX FL FL DE DE MD MD DC DC VT VT CA CA AK AK NJ NJ RI RI ME ME NH NH MA MA CT CT NY NY WA WA ID ID OR OR |
 U.S. Coal Use Expected to Accelerate over U.S. Coal Use Expected to Accelerate over next Several Decades next Several Decades 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Coal Petroleum Natural gas Nuclear Renewables 7 7 1 1 Renewables include hydroelectric, solar and wind. Source: Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2007 and Annual Energy Outlook 2008 9% Petroleum 60% Renewables1 (24%) Natural Gas 19% Nuclear 48% Coal 2008 – 2030 Percent Change |
 World’s Fastest Growing Fuel World’s Fastest Growing Fuel 30% 16% 15% 9% 6% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Coal Natural Gas Hydro Oil Nuclear Five-year change in global energy consumption (2001 – 2006) CAGR 1.1% 1.7% 2.9% 3.1% 5.3% Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 2007. Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 2007. Figures represent change from 2001 to 2006. Figures represent change from 2001 to 2006. 8 8 |
 Developing Nations will Increase Energy Use and put Developing Nations will Increase Energy Use and put Pressure on Global Supply Pressure on Global Supply Electricity Usage Per Capita 0 3,000 6,000 9,000 12,000 15,000 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 GDP Per Capita (in $U.S.) U.S. U.S. Russia Russia Australia Australia U.K. U.K. Italy Italy Mexico Mexico Malaysia Malaysia India India S. Korea S. Korea China China Source: United Nations Human Development Report 2007, 2006 World Development Indicators (World Bank) Passenger Vehicles / 1,000 People 0 150 300 450 600 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 GDP Per Capita (in $U.S.) U.S. U.S. Russia Russia Australia Australia U.K. U.K. Italy Italy Mexico Mexico Malaysia Malaysia India India S. Korea S. Korea China China 9 9 |
 Global Coal Demand Driven by Developing Global Coal Demand Driven by Developing Countries Countries World Coal Demand 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 1980 2000 2005 2015 2030 OECD Countries China Rest of Non-OECD Economic growth expected to drive primary energy consumption up 60% by 2030 World coal demand expected to increase 73% from 2005 - 2030 Source:Â IEA World Energy Outlook 2007 Source:Â IEA World Energy Outlook 2007 10 10 |
 Coal Prices Reaching All-Time Highs Coal Prices Reaching All-Time Highs $10.95 $45.75 $47.50 $33.50 $70.00 $66.00 $13.50 $102.50 $100.00 $68.00 $130.00 $113.50 $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 PRB CAPP NAPP ILB Australia (Newcastle) South Africa (Richards Bay) October 2007 May 2008 Source:Bloomberg and industry research Note: Australia (Newcastle) and South Africa (Richards Bay) priced in metric tons. U.S. prices are short tons. Current prompt month spot prices versus October 2007 Current prompt month spot prices versus October 2007 11 11 (8,800 BTU; 0.8#SO2) (8,800 BTU; 0.8#SO2) (13,000 BTU; 4.5#SO2) (13,000 BTU; 4.5#SO2) (12,000 BTU; 5.0#SO2) (12,000 BTU; 5.0#SO2) (12,000 BTU; 1.7#SO2) (12,000 BTU; 1.7#SO2) |
 International Coal Supply and Demand International Coal Supply and Demand Dynamics Dynamics Confluence of issues have constrained international coal supply Confluence of issues have constrained international coal supply Chinese market shifts to net importer of coal Chinese market shifts to net importer of coal Australian port congestion and infrastructure deficiencies are Australian port congestion and infrastructure deficiencies are compounded by severe weather compounded by severe weather South Africa’s aging power grid force mines to halt operations South Africa’s aging power grid force mines to halt operations Decrease in Russian exports to Europe Decrease in Russian exports to Europe Repricing Repricing of Venezuelan contracts of Venezuelan contracts Demand for coal as power source continues to grow Demand for coal as power source continues to grow U.S. net exports tripled since 2005 U.S. net exports tripled since 2005 Increased demand from Indian industrialization and domestic Increased demand from Indian industrialization and domestic power consumption power consumption Europe increases imports of U.S. coal Europe increases imports of U.S. coal Favorable U.S. currency Favorable U.S. currency 12 12 |
 Between 2009 and 2011, capacity reserve margins will drop below levels needed to ensure electricity reliability. Decisions need to be made today to ensure reliable electricity generation for Americas’ future. The BEST answer to this problem continues to be coal-fired generation. Action is Required NOW Action is Required NOW to avoid an to avoid an Electricity Shortage Electricity Shortage Source: NERC 2007 Long-Term Reliability Assessment Estimated Summer Available Capacity Margin W/O Uncommitted Resources 13 13 West Coast 20% 16% 2007 2011 Midwest 16% 9% 2007 2011 Texas 13% 6% 2007 2011 Northeast 17% 12% 2007 2011 Southeast 16% 15% 2007 2011 |
 Current Coal-Fired Capacity Additions Current Coal-Fired Capacity Additions 65,560 65,560 114 114 TOTAL TOTAL 42,394 42,394 67 67 Announced (Early Stages) Announced (Early Stages) 23,166 23,166 47 47 Sub Total Sub Total 6,422 6,422 13 13 Permitted Permitted 1,859 1,859 6 6 Near Construction Near Construction 14,885 14,885 28 28 Under Construction Under Construction Capacity (MW) Capacity (MW) Number of Plants Number of Plants General Status General Status Project is under construction Project is under construction Under Construction Under Construction Description Description Status Listing Status Listing Early stages of development to filing for permits. May include a feasibility study. Announced Announced In the permitting phase. Two or more permits approved or fuel / In the permitting phase. Two or more permits approved or fuel / power power contracts have been negotiated. contracts have been negotiated. Permitted Permitted Project has been approved; majority of all permits are obtained. Project has been approved; majority of all permits are obtained. Sponsor is contracting vendors and site preparation has begun. Sponsor is contracting vendors and site preparation has begun. Near Construction Near Construction Source: U.S. Department of Energy, “Tracking New Coal-Fired Power Plants”, December 2007 Progressing Progressing Projects Projects Uncertain Uncertain Potential Potential 14 14 |
 New Coal-Fired Power Plant Development New Coal-Fired Power Plant Development (few near-term alternatives exist) (few near-term alternatives exist) Following several years of delay, new coal-fired generation is Following several years of delay, new coal-fired generation is increasingly required for maintaining minimum regional electricity increasingly required for maintaining minimum regional electricity capacity margins capacity margins Forecasts of North American natural gas supply to the U.S. are flat Forecasts of North American natural gas supply to the U.S. are flat to declining by 2030;Â added gas-fired generation needs will rely on to declining by 2030;Â added gas-fired generation needs will rely on imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) or new higher efficiency gas imported liquefied natural gas (LNG) or new higher efficiency gas plants plants Nuclear power is increasingly recognized as an option but Nuclear power is increasingly recognized as an option but meaningful added capacity remains years away meaningful added capacity remains years away ERCOT study:Â 6,300 MW of wind capacity had the same load ERCOT study:Â 6,300 MW of wind capacity had the same load carrying capacity as 550 MW of thermal generation carrying capacity as 550 MW of thermal generation Potential carbon legislation introduces need for large incremental Potential carbon legislation introduces need for large incremental power demand for carbon capture and storage;Â this will require power demand for carbon capture and storage;Â this will require equivalent replacement capacity and more in order to support equivalent replacement capacity and more in order to support economic growth economic growth Source:Â NETL; OSAP 10/10/2007 Source:Â NETL; OSAP 10/10/2007 15 15 |
 Coal Usage is Increasingly Clean Coal Usage is Increasingly Clean -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Electricity Generation from Coal Sulfur Dioxide Emissions (SO2) Nitrogen Oxide Emissions (NOx) +26% +26% -41% -41% 41% -57% -57% 57% Existing regulations have and are expected to further reduce emissions Utilization of coal gasification technologies creates opportunities to reduce carbon intensity as well Source:Â EIA;Â NMA Source:Â EIA;Â NMA 16 16 +90% +90% -78% -78% 78% -73% -73% 73% |
 Outlook for Alliance Outlook for Alliance |
 Alliance Snapshot Alliance Snapshot Alliance operates eight underground Alliance operates eight underground mining complexes in all major eastern mining complexes in all major eastern coal producing regions coal producing regions Diversified reserve position in the Illinois Diversified reserve position in the Illinois Basin, Central Appalachia and Northern Basin, Central Appalachia and Northern Appalachia regions Appalachia regions Four significant organic development Four significant organic development projects identified in the growing Illinois projects identified in the growing Illinois Basin and Northern Appalachia high sulfur Basin and Northern Appalachia high sulfur coal markets coal markets 1 1 2 2 3 3 5 5 6 6 4 4 9 9 8 8 12 12 11 11 10 10 Illinois Illinois Indiana Indiana Ohio Ohio Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Maryland Maryland Virginia Virginia West West Virginia Virginia Kentucky Kentucky 7 7 Current Mining Operation Current Mining Operation Future Growth Project Future Growth Project Transfer Terminal Transfer Terminal Pattiki Complex Pattiki Complex River View Complex River View Complex Dotiki Complex Dotiki Complex Mount Vernon Mount Vernon Transfer Terminal Transfer Terminal Warrior Complex Warrior Complex Hopkins Complex Hopkins Complex Gibson Complex Gibson Complex Pontiki Complex Pontiki Complex MC Mining Complex MC Mining Complex Tunnel Ridge Complex Tunnel Ridge Complex Penn Ridge Complex Penn Ridge Complex Mettiki Complex Mettiki Complex 3 3 4 4 1 1 2 2 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 18 18 |
 Reserves – 2007 Central Appalachia 5% Northern Appalachia 22% Illinois Basin 73% Operations Summary Operations Summary 2007 Summary (MM Tons) 2007 Summary (MM Tons) 2007 Production 2007 Production Northern Appalachia 13% Central Appalachia 13% Illinois Basin 74% Select Customers Reserve Production Illinois Basin 712.8 24.3 Total Company 156.7 3.2 Region Total Allegheny Energy 56.7 – Penn Ridge – 70.5 – Tunnel Ridge Virginia Electric Power 29.5 3.2 Mettiki / Mettiki WV Northern Appalachia 34.7 3.2 Region Total Progress; NRG; East KY Power 19.8 1.8 MC Mining Progress; Ontario Power 14.9 1.4 Pontiki Central Appalachia 521.4 17.9 Region Total – – 82.6 – Gibson (South) Duke Energy; Alabama Electric 29.3 3.2 Gibson (North) – – 117.1 – River View Tampa Electric; TVA 54.9 2.6 Hopkins Corn Products; LG&E 54.5 2.9 Pattiki LG&E 57.4 4.6 Warrior Seminole; TVA 125.6 4.6 Dotiki 19 19 |
 Alliance’s Long Term Growth Strategy Alliance’s Long Term Growth Strategy Capitalize on the expected strong demand growth in scrubber Capitalize on the expected strong demand growth in scrubber quality coal quality coal Continue to be a disciplined producer - Continue to be a disciplined producer - project developments project developments tied to sales commitments tied to sales commitments Continuous focus on safety and operational optimization Continuous focus on safety and operational optimization Pursue opportunistic bolt-on acquisitions Pursue opportunistic bolt-on acquisitions 20 20 |
 Large Inventory of Organic Growth Projects Large Inventory of Organic Growth Projects Permitting in progress Estimated capital cost ~ $210 – $235 million Estimated reserves ~ 70 million tons high sulfur coal Production capacity ~ 6 million tons/year Initial production in 2009 – 2011 Tunnel Ridge Tunnel Ridge Initiating permitting process Estimated capital cost ~ $165 – $175 million Estimated reserves ~ 57 million tons high sulfur coal Production capacity ~ 5 million tons/year Initial production in 2011 – 2013 Penn Ridge Penn Ridge Constructing slope and shaft Estimated capital cost ~ $250 – $275 million Estimated reserves ~ 117 million tons high sulfur coal Production capacity ~ 6.4 million tons/year Initial production in 2009 – 2010 River View River View Permitting in progress Estimated capital cost ~ $100 – $110 million Estimated reserves ~ 83 million tons medium sulfur coal Production capacity ~ 2.7 – 3.1 million tons/year Initial production in 2010 – 2012 Gibson South Gibson South Illinois Illinois Indiana Indiana Ohio Ohio Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Maryland Maryland Virginia Virginia West West Virginia Virginia Kentucky Kentucky Note: Estimated capital costs are based on 2007 dollars and exclude capitalized development and interest expenses. Timing of anticipated initial production dependent upon obtaining required permits and customer contracts. 21 21 |
 River View Facilities Overview River View Facilities Overview 22 22 |
 Focus on Safety Focus on Safety Safety is our #1 core value Alliance’s safety performance has been consistently better than its industry peer group Innovative use of Innovative use of technology to improve technology to improve safety at all operations safety at all operations State-of-the-art Leaky Feeder mine communication systems Fiber optic based mine monitoring systems Proprietary Miner Tracking systems Alliance Safety Comparison 1997-2007 1 Nonfatal days lost (NFDL) 5.6 7.6 4.8 6.4 4.7 5.7 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.8 3.1 8.6 9.1 8.4 8.5 7.3 7.4 6.7 5.9 5.5 5.1 5.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Alliance NFDL Industry Average 23 23 |
 Well Positioned in Scrubber Markets Well Positioned in Scrubber Markets Future growth potential for scrubber market bodes well for Alliance’s high sulfur operations Source: The McIlvaine Company 1 Assumption used to convert gigawatts of capacity to million tons of coal: 9,600 Btu/Kwhr plant heat rate, 75% plant capacity factor, 12,500 Btu coal. Projected Eastern U.S. Installed Scrubber Capacity 122 122 122 122 122 122 122 122 122 122 122 129 76 35 11 4 188 200 238 248 272 308 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Baseline Scrubber Capacity Incremental Scrubber Capacity 12,500 Btu Equivalent 12,500 Btu Equivalent 24 24 |
 Indiana Indiana Ohio Ohio Maryland Maryland Virginia Virginia West West Virginia Virginia Kentucky Kentucky Approximately 678 million tons, or 95% of reserves, are “Scrubber” Quality Coal Illinois Basin: Second largest producer in the basin Currently accounts for ~74% of total Alliance coal production Northern Appalachian: Strong reserve base of ~157 million tons of high and medium sulfur coal Currently accounts for ~13% of total Alliance coal production Well Positioned in Scrubber Markets Well Positioned in Scrubber Markets Current Mining Operations Current Mining Operations Future Growth Project Future Growth Project Transfer Terminal Transfer Terminal Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Illinois Illinois 25 25 |
 Financial Summary and Financial Summary and Historical Results Historical Results |
 Consistent Track Record of Growth at Alliance Consistent Track Record of Growth at Alliance ($ in millions) ($ in millions) Note: EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure defined as income before net interest expense, income taxes and depreciation, depletion and amortization. Source: Company filings EBITDA EBITDA ARLP Distribution Per Unit ARLP Distribution Per Unit $1.05 $1.24 $1.58 $1.92 $2.20 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Production Production Revenue Revenue $523.2 $623.5 $799.6 $920.0 $995.6 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 $119.0 $147.9 $230.1 $250.8 $267.0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 24.3 23.7 22.3 20.4 19.2 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 27 27 |
 17.0% 19.4% 16.2% 13.7% 11.3% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 21.9% 22.6% 27.4% 25.9% 24.5% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Efficient Operator Efficient Operator Alliance is a low-cost, efficient coal operator, delivering sector-leading EBITDA margins 6 Year Average: Alliance: 24.5%Â vs. Peers: 15.5% Source: Public filings Note: EBITDA margin represents EBITDA / Total Revenues. EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure. See reconciliation slide of EBITDA to Net Income 1 Coal Peers include: Alpha, Arch, Consol, Foundation, Massey and Peabody Alliance Alliance PeersÂą Average: 24.5% Average: 24.5% Average: 15.5% Average: 15.5% 28 28 |
 $3,191 $2,190 $341 $304 $84 $67 $132 $733 $136 Strong Balance Sheet Strong Balance Sheet Gross Legacy Liabilities ($mm) Gross Legacy Liabilities ($mm) Peer A Peer B Peer C Peer E Peer F Alliance Peer H Peer D Peer G 29 29 Net Debt as Percentage of Net Debt as Percentage of Capitalization Capitalization 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2007 92.1% 64.3% 34.1% 30.1% 32.5% Source:Â Public filings Source:Â Public filings |
 Investing in Alliance Investing in Alliance |
 Two Ways to Invest in Alliance Partnerships Two Ways to Invest in Alliance Partnerships 56.9% L.P. Interest 42.1% L.P. Interest 1.98% General Pa rtner Interest² Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. (NASDAQ: AHGP) 59.9 million units outstanding Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. (NASDAQ: ARLP) 36.6 million units outstanding Public Unitholders Management / Others¹ 80.0% L.P. Interest Public Unitholders 20.0% L.P. Interest IDRs Distribution Distribution growth growth from from Alliance Alliance Resource Resource benefits benefits all all unitholders unitholders Strong Strong alignment alignment of of interests interests throughout throughout the the Alliance Alliance Partnerships Partnerships Management Management owns owns significant significant interests interests directly directly in in Alliance Alliance Holdings Holdings and and indirectly indirectly in in Alliance Alliance Resource Resource 1 Includes control group comprised of present and former members of Alliance Resource management. 2 Includes general partner interest held directly in Alliance Resource’s Intermediate Partnership. 31 31 |
 Alliance Partnership Profiles Alliance Partnership Profiles 8.8% 8.8% 33.4% 33.4% $1,828mm $1,828mm $1,668mm $1,668mm 5.1% 5.1% $2.34 $2.34 $45.60 $45.60 ARLP ARLP $26.73 $26.73 Unit Price (5/15/08): Unit Price (5/15/08): (5/15/08): $1,600mm $1,600mm Equity Market Cap: Equity Market Cap: 0.0% 0.0% Net Debt / Book Cap: Net Debt / Book Cap: $1,600mm $1,600mm Enterprise Value: Enterprise Value: $1.15 $1.15 Distribution: Distribution: AHGP AHGP NASDAQ Symbol: NASDAQ Symbol: 0.0% 0.0% Net Debt / Enterprise Value: Net Debt / Enterprise Value: 4.3% 4.3% Distribution Yield: Distribution Yield: Ownership Interests in Alliance Resource Ownership Interests in Alliance Resource 1.98% G.P. Interest 1.98% G.P. Interest 100% of Incentive Distribution Rights 100% of Incentive Distribution Rights 15.5 mm Alliance Resource common 15.5 mm Alliance Resource common units units 4th largest eastern coal producer 4th largest eastern coal producer operating 8 underground mining operating 8 underground mining complexes complexes 713 million tons of reserves at 713 million tons of reserves at December 31, 2007 December 31, 2007 Asset Profile: Asset Profile: 32 32 Market data as of May 15, 2008. Market data as of May 15, 2008. |
 Note: Potential one year ARLP distribution growth over current annualized distribution level of $2.34 and assuming 36.6 million common units outstanding at ARLP as of 3/31/08. __________________Â Alliance Holdings Leverage to Alliance Resource Alliance Holdings Leverage to Alliance Resource Distribution Growth Distribution Growth ARLP Distribution Growth 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 8.5% 25.4% 17.0% 34.0% Incentive distribution rights provide Alliance Holdings unitholders with significant financial leverage to Alliance Resource distribution growth 33 33 |
 Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. Performance Proven track record of superior operating and financial results Clear strategy and visible inventory of growth prospects to exploit favorable long- term coal fundamentals Results (a) ARLP has delivered a 504% total return to unitholders since its IPO Alliance Holding GP, L.P. Opportunity IDRs provide leverage to distribution growth potential of ARLP Results (a) AHGP has increased distributions 55.4% since its IPO Alliance Investment Take Aways Alliance Investment Take Aways (a) As of May 15, 2008 (a) As of May 15, 2008 34 34 |
 Appendix Appendix |
 Alliance EBITDA Reconciliation Alliance EBITDA Reconciliation – – 3,189 1,188 1,188 (1,477) (1,477) 332 332 Net Gain (Loss) on Sale/Retirement of PP&E – – 7,445 – – – – – – Gain from insurance recoveries/settlements (4,100) (3,925) (4,112) (8,193) (20,320) Non-cash compensation expense $172,927 161 112 (2,443) (9,175) (66,489) $250,761 2,443 9,175 (5,317) (1,119) (319) (2,101) $250,923 2006 $160,010 – – – (2,682) (11,816) (55,637) $230,145 2,682 11,816 34,770 (580) (573) (1,918) $193,618 2005 2008E Mid-Point 2007 2004 $145,000 $170,390 $76,621 Net Income (400) 332 – Minority Interest Income (Expense) – - – Cumulative Effect of Accounting Change 200 (1,669) (2,641) Income Tax Expense (Benefit) (15,100) (9,952) (14,963) Interest Expense, Net (104,700) (85,310) (53,664) Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization $265,000 $266,989 $147,889 EBITDA (200) 1,669 2,641 Income Tax Expense (Benefit) 15,100 9,952 14,963 Interest Expense, Net (15,000) 7,898 7,915 Net Effect of Working Capital Changes – – (811) (587) Other – – (21) (488) Coal Inventory Adjustment to Market (2,800) (2,419) (1,622) Asset retirement obligations $272,000 $244,012 $145,055 Cash Flow Provided by Operating Activities Note: EBITDA is defined as income before net interest expense, income taxes and depreciation, depletion and amortization. Management believes EBITDA is a useful indicator of its ability to meet debt service and capital expenditure requirements and uses EBITDA as a measure of operating performance. EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to net income, income from operations, cash flows from operating activities or any other measure of financial performance presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. EBITDA is not intended to represent cash flow and does not represent the measure of cash available for distribution. The Partnership's method of computing EBITDA may not be the same method used to compute similar measures reported by other companies, or EBITDA may be computed differently by the Partnership in different contexts (i.e. public reporting versus computation under financing agreements). Estimate midpoint reflects the Partnership’s most recent guidance 36 36 |
 Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. Alliance Resource Partners, L.P. Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. Alliance Holdings GP, L.P. MLP Investor Conference MLP Investor Conference May 21, 2008 May 21, 2008 |