Seeking Alpha

Bill Cunningham

View as an RSS Feed
View Bill Cunningham's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • The Problem With SolarCity [View article]
    Quartapint,

    It appears you may be overlooking the fact that the market value of the company is a multiple of what it would otherwise have been if Elon Musk were not viewed as an innovator. It is up by 700+% since its IPO less than 18 months ago, has no current earnings and is trading at a huge multiple to revenue. It is definitely not trading as a stagnant company; the debate is about whether a potentially very bright future justifies an astronomical (no pun intended, well maybe it is) stock price due to the Musk factor.
    Apr 10 09:05 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Problem With SolarCity [View article]
    Tesla is a separate public company and Elon Musk has to be careful to avoid conflicts of interest by marketing Tesla's batteries in a way that most benefits Tesla's stockholders, which could mean selling these batteries to whatever solar installer (or installers) offer Tesla the best deal.
    Apr 10 08:28 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Tesla's Gigafactory Becoming A Gigafarce? [View article]
    Some of them were, and that worked out real well for them, didn't it? That's why they're all required to have much higher capital ratios now, and have been required to exit riskier businesses.
    Apr 9 06:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Tesla's Gigafactory Becoming A Gigafarce? [View article]
    Thank you for providing one of the more informative articles on this site. It provides perspectives, facts, and analyses I haven't seen other places. Too many articles on this site are simply rehashing of well known information or "elevator analysis" (this number went up, that number went down in the last quarter etc.)
    Apr 8 07:53 AM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My Money Is On Elon Musk [View article]
    Arondaniel:

    I don't think it's that simple. Here are a couple of reasons:

    -some utilities have installed massive solar farms and so are generating their own solar to sell (First Solar has done some large installations in the desert in Arizona for utilities there); in theory probably more efficient this way with one large installation to maintain rather multiple than small ones, and being able to place panels where they are most efficient rather finding a marginally acceptable location on someone's roof.
    -With current net metering system, utilities are essentially providing free transmission and storage of excess power generated during the day for consumer use at night. They've done this so far because they are required to produce a certain amount of "green energy," but are now reaching or exceeding mandated levels in many cases. This free storage/transmission is now becoming a material item for them. As a result, you are likely to see utilities start to push to get compensated for providing this service. Otherwise, the homeowner with a solar installation would also have to start installing storage batteries, adding a big additional expense to their system.
    Mar 24 03:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My Money Is On Elon Musk [View article]
    Chesscat,

    I am confident this stock will stop going down when it reaches 0. It is losing money, has taken on a huge amount of debt, and has questionable accounting. Except for these qualifiers, it is a strong buy. By my calculation, your "friend' has now lost about 20% of his investment and should close out his position. At least he'll have a short term tax loss to offset gains in other positions. (Making the best of a bad situation...)
    Mar 20 05:32 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • My Money Is On Elon Musk [View article]
    Luelani,

    The market IS a believer! Company is currently losing money, but trades at a huge premium to sales, book value etc., up by a factor of 8 x since it's IPO. What makes you think the market is not a believer?
    Mar 17 10:44 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My Money Is On Elon Musk [View article]
    i don't understand why you are making it necessary to follow you on Twitter to see if you change your position on Solar City. I would hope you would write a change of position article on "Seeking Alpha" or at least post a change in the comments section under this article. Requiring readers to sign up as your Twitter followers sounds to me like a marketing ploy for your firm, Gunderson Capital Management.
    Mar 16 10:17 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Halcon Resources sells Woodbine properties for $450M [View news story]
    Closing the deal in mid-April? Wow, that's fast. Hopefully, it's not a desperation move. I suspect Devon may be getting a good deal. Time to look at Devon stock.
    Mar 4 08:56 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kaiser makes bear case on BPT [View news story]
    I watched the mock interview of Kaiser by his boss on the Hedgeye website, and it is short on detail (but long on sarcasm). In it, he makes reference to the high cost of hedging oil prices due to backwardation etc. The only way the figures in his chart make sense would be if he using an expensive hedging technique and then only showing the net annual distribution after subtracting out this high cost of hedging. This makes no sense at all; you either like BPT or you don't and you go long or you go short. If you want to hedge a long position in BPT, invest in companies that would benefit from a decrease in oil prices, or simply diversify.
    I didn't hear him discuss the $33 NAV or the 9.7% cost of capital quoted above. Are there further details of his analysis available anywhere?
    Feb 6 07:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A New Year's Gift From BP Prudhoe Bay Royalty Trust - Beneficial Alaskan Production Tax Reform [View article]
    Prudent investor,
    I believe that exports of crude oil via ship, except for some limited exceptions for Canada, are prohibited; only refined products can be exported, so no exports of crude oil to Asian refineries. Of course, for BPT holders, it is irrelevant; BP Alaska pays the posted WTI price to the Trust, irrespective of the price BP Alaska receives (higher or lower than WTI) or who they sell it to.
    Feb 3 07:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BP Prudhoe Bay slips 2.4% as valuation questioned [View news story]
    BPfix,

    You may well be right that there is more oil there than originally thought and that it can be removed more efficiently with the latest techniques. The problem is very little of this benefit will accrue to BPT holders and most of it goes to BP Alaska. Currently, the Trust gets hit with the Adj. Chargeable Cost of a little over $30 which is scheduled to escalate and has nothing to do wit the actual cost of getting oil out of the ground. For all we know, it might cost BP Alaska only $10 but they get to charge the Trust this higher $30+ number which is scheduled to escalate according to a pre-set formula, even if their costs go down. To analyze your upside, it might be worthwhile for you to run a model showing oil production at 90,000 + bls./day, (the maximum the trust benefits from), using whatever CPI increase and oil increase you think reasonable, and then rerun your model showing a few percent decrease in production each year. You will see that the annual distributions are higher at the max production level, but under both scenarios, the payments will run out in the same year, when the Adj. Chargeable cost reaches the WTI price. After that the entire benefit will go to BP Alaska and the Trust will have terminated.
    Jan 29 06:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • BP Prudhoe Bay slips 2.4% as valuation questioned [View news story]
    BPfix,

    I'm still here, and I never argued that BP Prudhoe Bay is worth only $33/unit. I haven't seen details of this analysis, but if he wants to sell me BP Prudhoe Bay units at this price ( or even a few bucks more), I will gobble them up. I'm confidant that annual distributions of roughly $10/ unit (possibly a bit more or less depending upon oil prices, CPI increases, production etc.) will continue for the next four years, resulting in total distributions of $35-45/unit. However, after this date, distributions will begin to decrease dramatically as the adjusted chargeable cost calculation escalator kicks in. As a result, I doubt that the remaining payments will total more than $100. If someone is happy with a 2-5% return, they should buy the units. However, I see lots of comments here where the authors assume the entire distribution is interest and the authors think they are earning a double digit return. Investors need to expect their units to drop in value each year and need to offset this against their cash distributions. These units are not like bonds, where you get your original principal back at the end. At the end, you get nothing. It is clear from comments on this site, that most owners do not understand this.
    Jan 21 09:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A New Year's Gift From BP Prudhoe Bay Royalty Trust - Beneficial Alaskan Production Tax Reform [View article]
    I suspect BP will transport as much oil as physically possible between now and the referendum date, since they know this oil will be taxed at a lower rate and they risk the possibility of a higher rate after the referendum. Per the Alaska Dep't of tax website, shipments are already running much higher than last year, at or above the 90,000bbl/day amount. Of course, BP has the added incentive of getting the shipments above 90,000 bbls/ day for a few quarters, even at the expense of lower amounts in subsequent quarters since none of the excess needs to be shared with the Trust. ("Heads" BP wins, "Tails" the Trust holders lose) Assuming oil prices hold up, distributions will most likely be healthy the next two or three quarters.
    Jan 8 10:01 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pure Cycle's Land Assets Could Propel The Stock Higher [View article]
    Is Sky Ranch just undeveloped land or has infrastructure been installed? (Roads, utilities etc.). What about the lots "near you" that are going for $50,000+? I suspect you may be comparing "apples" to "oranges.". My understanding is that the real value to the company will be the tap fees for each lot, ($20,000 plus per lot but requiring investment of $10,000 or more per lot, which means they'll have a whole lot more than $900 invested per lot), and the recurring revenue from selling water/ sewer services to the homeowners.
    Aug 19 04:47 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
46 Comments
30 Likes