Andrew Ling

Solar Power Will Be Transformational in the Next Decade

Supershort you're missing the point completely. A major reason the economy is in such bad shape is due to rising energy prices which benefits solar stocks. Would you also short agricultural stocks, energy, and mining due to the economic downturn?

Trina Solar: Best Value in the Solar Space

Also, all the debate your hear about silicon supply and pricing, government subsidies, new cigs entrants, solar's viability vs other renewables etc are all really arguments about whether future earnings will be better or worse than expect. 2009 silicon prices has a direct impact on 2009 and 2010 earnings of all solar stocks, and therefore effects today's stock price. Whether solar's market share vs wind in 2030 is a sort of 2030 earnings debate, with far less effect on today's share prices. The only reason that the dramatic stock movements are cause by things such as current and next quarter's earnings is because 2009 earnings change very gradually. They determine the intermediate term performance of the stock.

Trina Solar: Best Value in the Solar Space

Ignoring 2009/2010 earnings is a big mistake. 2009 earnings on what today's stocks will be primarily trading on. Even if you find the analyst's estimates unreliable you should at least use 2007/2008 earnings and growth rates to extrapolate 2009 earnings. In Feb. 07 FSLR analysts called for 0 08 earnings. I speculated $1.50 08 earnings and bought the stock. The rest is history. If you ignore them you're just throwing darts at the Wall Street journal. Just because speculation is difficult it doesn't mean you shouldn't speculate at all.

Solar Power Will Be Transformational in the Next Decade

Also, consider the adoption of past comparable technologies. In order to displace an old technology it's not enough for the new technology to be equal. It has to be far superior. I've always been an early adopter, one of the first 1% to switch to a new technology e.g. dialup modem to broadband, film to digital cameras, cds to dvds to blu-ray. But there is a major lag between when a product seems clearly superior to me and other early adopters and when the general public finally switch over.

A good example of this is the number of HDTVs that were still flying off the shelves last year that were NOT 1080p capable. By the year the prices for 720/1080i and 1080p were already comparable. People just weren't aware what 1080p was.

Another is when Intel introduced the Core Duo. Everyone that reads benchmarking sites knew this was the end for AMD. After a decade of having a superior product but being barely able to compete with Intel they now had an inferior product and nothing in the pipeline. The market is still discovering this as proven by the fact the entire market sold off when AMD missed but then rallied when Intel beat. This was to be expected.

Solar Power Will Be Transformational in the Next Decade

Jack, using solar water heaters as a example, just because a technology is economical doesn't mean it will catch on quickly. Solar water heaters are such a great value and have been for decades. But relatively few in the States have one. Then again, the Toyota Corolla is probably the most economical car on the market but again
it's not even the best selling car in the country.

Most of us agree that solar will take the lion's share of new energy generation 30 years from now due to economics, but how much share it has in 5 years will depend highly on the whims of people and governments.

When Will Solar Achieve Grid Parity? We're Already There!

I understand your point Jack I've done the math myself numerous times. The problem is that the $1.8B coal plan is a one of a kind project. They can surely build "clean coal" plants for less if motivated or forced too. How much does a conventional coal plant cost to build?

At present time comparing conventional forms of generation with renewables is like apples to oranges. Either the apples (dirty fuels) need to be hindered so people choose oranges or the oranges (renewables) need to turn into apples by competing on cost alone regardless of emissions.

When Will Solar Achieve Grid Parity? We're Already There!

Governments are going the wrong route in subsidizing solar. The correct way to go is either subsidizing research directly or creating a government backed loan program. People don't want to pay $30K upfront for a PV system. Nor do they want to pay $20K up front with subsidies. Subsidizing research directly would maximize benefit to the public whereas finance subsidies would have a major impact on sales and maximize benefit to investors.

When Will Solar Achieve Grid Parity? We're Already There!

The problem is you're assuming utilities care whether their energy generation is clean or not. It's unbelievable to me that energy companies besides BP haven't jumped all over technologies like solar. Big oil has the most to benefit from renewables since they get the bonus propaganda boost which the pure plays don't need. It's also the perfect marriage because big oil has nothing to invest in with little oil left to be discovered in the world. The most likely reason is that big oil has an aversion to renewables and an us vs them mentality.

Cloudy Future for Applied Material's SunFab - Barron's

Eli, if AMAT's equipment is really able to produce at $.80/watt the $3 capex/watt investment may be worthwhile. The question would then shift to installation costs. The physically huge panels should in theory also reduce installation costs. However, we'll have to wait and see since as you mentioned no one has yet dealt with such huge panels. If they succeed in economically installing such huge panels I'd expect FSLR to follow suit within the next few years with a larger substrate.

Installation costs really are one of the few things the monocrystaline manufacturers have going for them, along with limited area systems such as the retail market. Lower efficiency panels involve higher installation costs.

Cloudy Future for Applied Material's SunFab - Barron's

Eli, AMAT never said their sunfab equipment could produce cheaper than FSLR. I'm assuming the 17% cheaper figure is based off of AMAT's 2010 goal of $1.00/watt vs FSLR's 2007 costs of $1.17. Hardly a fair comparison. Check out my similar article
seekingalpha.com/artic...

PBW: Strong Performance, High Level of Risk

Very typical article from a typical retail investor. The fact that a stock has appreciated lately has little to do with whether it's "expensive." e.g. one of the most "expensive" stocks in the market right now is Ford Motors, a company with no future. This is why institutional investors continue to buy FSLR while they continue to sell Ford. Along with AMD they're the only two stocks I've ever considered shorting. Glad I went long FSLR instead. A stock that has recently appreciated may indeed be more "risky" but even this is not necessarily true. Valueline has FSLR and SPWR, the only two solar stocks covered, rated at 3 or average for safety. If you still don't understand why the smart money is still long FSLR read this article:

seekingalpha.com/artic...

The Impact of High-Priced Oil on Solar Manufacturers

techy, once the fact that we have peaked in world production becomes widely agreed upon speculators will drive oil prices up. It doesn't require waiting until there is an actual supply and demand imbalance. This is part of the reason oil is already trading at such "speculative" levels. I've already considered economic slowdowns and conservation into my $200 oil assumptions. That's why I base my investments off of $200 oil and not $400 or $1000 oil. $200 oil is a level which the economy can bear, where conservation will still have very little effect on price. When Gas was on the rise at $2/gallon surveys were conducted to determine at what price consumers would begin to conserve. The consensus was $3. $3 has been reached and there has been little if any conservation. People are still purchasing pickup trucks that achieve 15 MPG. Using Europe as an example, price will probably not have any major impact on demand until $5-6/gallon or more. This translates to $200 oil. Basically oil will go as high as people are willing to pay.

First Solar's $1/Watt Capex: Half the Industry Average

Thanks for pointing out the error I made with Sharp's capex. Is efficiency estimated to be greater than 10% by the time the plant is completed? I don't know how well Sharp moves technology from the lab to mass production. FSLR's 10.5% efficiency will most likely be around 12% by that time.

First Solar's $1/Watt Capex: Half the Industry Average

Yes, any time your comment concludes with the statement "no joking" you know you have problems. Of course he could should be ending every sentence with that.

Suntech Power Should Benefit From Kevin Rudd’s Victory Down Under

Himanshu, are you still short FSLR? I can't believe anyone that realizes the potential of solar who is long STP would be short FSLR. Personally I'm long all three FSLR, STP, and SPWR with my largest position being FSLR. I figure I can't afford to miss out on any one of the three if they turn out to be the market leader 10 years down the road.

Check out my article

seekingalpha.com/artic...