Seeking Alpha

Iam Phree

View as an RSS Feed
View Iam Phree's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • The Solar Bubble Has Officially Burst - Survivors Will Ultimately Capture More Market Share [View article]
    Thanks Hobo for your well written article. I do not know if anyone crunched the numbers, but with solars dropping like flies in a cloud of Raid.... What manufacturing capacity remains against a backdrop of demand. Granted... a pipeline of modules sold below cost by creditors liquidating QCells product will have to be absorbed, but this will indeed work itself out leaving China in charge.

    Let's just hope that China, USA, and primarily SolarWorld AG does not initiate proceedings that the EU is dumping QCE panels below cost!

    Ladies and Gents - The long term investment strategy is China, lowest cost and most vertically integrated. I comfortably await for FSLR and other USA Solars to experience PPS price inversion to those in China.

    As to Politics here in the USA - We resemble the hunters, foraging for oil paid for by subsidies, and efforts to keep oil producing boarders and distribution channels clear. We spend more on the process, than we would on placing a strategic initiative in place to replace carbon. Harvard puts 500 billion per year in ancillary health and pollution costs due to carbon. Anyone remember the Gulf disaster?

    Tomorrow I will wake up to find China sitting with renewables kicking out power without the cost of coal, oil, or natural gas. Anyone think they can compete then with their industry running on free energy? You know, these solar panels will operate for probably 45 years since their warranty runs around 30 right?

    Until then, I will just watch this and shake my head at the USA arrogance.

    http://bit.ly/HtvN47
    http://bit.ly/HtvPsG

    Maybe arrogance is not the right word...
    http://bit.ly/HoVX6L

    Campaign contributions are the politically correct way of describing payoffs 'bribes' to maintain oil/coal subsidies. It costs Americans dearly!
    Apr 6 09:31 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Solar: Here It Comes [View article]
    Where are you deriving 3000 dollar costs?

    DM Solar offers turnkey systems (excluding labor) at a low of 1.81/watt or 1810 per kw. Granted, it is a much larger system, but if you are saying 1190 is what the contractor charges, you've been doing business with the wrong people!

    http://bit.ly/uuo3Ms

    Additionally there is a 30% Fed Grant. Probably covers the contractor services. Try installs near $1800 per kWp on large buildings.

    BTW: Alibaba.com offers, and contractors get solar components much cheaper than DMSolar sells to retail.

    As to the article and not drifting into math errors or my occupation, the subject is and the assertion is that solar is not competitive.

    Again, the links clearly show Wisconsin placing a new coal company in place at 1.135 GWp for 2.7 billion. With coal running $40/short ton and the amount this plant consumes daily, 30 years of operation consumes 3.3 billion in coal presuming ZERO INFLATION, ZERO MECHANICAL FAILURES, ZERO LABOR COSTS, ZERO FINES, ZERO DECOMMISSIONING.

    6 billion for a new coal plant plus coal to run it, conservative vs 1.8 billion for Solar and if you don't like the number for Solar, I'll use yours before FED Grant and awful contractor prices of 3000/kw for 3 billion.

    I trust you will research how many new coal plants went in this year as opposed to last. It is a real eye opener! Interest rates are at least in one state offered at prime rate for solar. Shop DSIRE.com
    Dec 28 11:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Solar: Here It Comes [View article]
    My bad on the module cost. Figure 4 years instead of one. 5-7 year pay off on a system mounted on a roof.

    As to the authors comments. We probably should talk about service life like Coal Crushers, Plant maintenance, Coal Explosions, Mine Collapse, Generator Failures, Service Life, Added Labor Cost. I guess I was low on the 2.7 billion cost for a 1.135 GW plant, 3.3 billion over 30 years for coal.

    Should we include EPA fines too? Coal Ash spills? Decommissioning costs? Land?

    Michigan consumers of Wisconsin power will pay a 30% increase for their portion of power from this plant. Should we use 12 cents, the current cost of electric or bump it up 30% for compliance to EPA regulation?

    Due to an unfortunate math error, I wouldn't be so fast in dismissing the links given. What about the construction costs of a coal company and the coal it consumes?
    Dec 28 10:45 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Solar: Here It Comes [View article]
    The calculation is simple...

    KW_Size x Insolence x 365 = kWh produced per year.

    When insolence is specified in Sun Hours

    If 1 kW is used then, and 5.5 Sun hours..... you achieve approximately 2000.

    Assuming a consumer pays 12 cents per kWh, then 2000 x 12 cents ~ $240.00

    In case you have not been paying attention, in the first year, the module is paid for... and the second year, the install and the inverter. Call it 3 years since there are some losses along the wires and inverter, loan interest.

    So exactly what data are you working on? 2008 price list?

    Do you want to know what the problem is? The problem is that coal companies and natural gas companies survive due to subsidies. Corporate welfare. There is no incentive to step out of the line when there are handouts.

    http://bit.ly/s2sZm2

    So could you run the article again, revised with the total cost.

    BTW: EPA is shutting down coal plants.
    http://fxn.ws/s1pMDn

    Oh! BTW... the Senator mentioned...
    http://bit.ly/rIuiva

    When are people in the USA going to realize their representation in Washington are bought off!

    Cost for a 1.135 GW Wisconsin plant are running 2.7 billion to construct and consume 3.3 billion in coal over a 30 year period.

    http://bit.ly/vTTomm...
    http://bit.ly/tbWbjD...
    http://bit.ly/shL5xX

    I fail to see where consumers paying 6 billion over 30 years for 1.135GW is a good deal. The same solar installation would come in at about 2 billion, maybe 3 billion. What it suggests is that carbon is subsidized at the 50% level, solar at 30%. It is not that solar cannot survive without subsidies, coal cannot survive without subsidies! Subsidies you did not even know you were paying!

    You do realize 500 billion/300 million people in the USA = $1,333.33 per person.... but since the kids probably do not work, the family is being hit with nearly $3,000.00 per year. 4 years of that non-sense, and I could have free power on my home. Four years of that nonsense and every home could have free power for the balance of the 30 years! Ahh! You must be a bean counter expecting return in the first year! Short sighted don't you think?

    Frankly, it is people like you that operate on advertising paid for by fracking coal and oil heads. Do the math! China is!

    http://bit.ly/sSOw1W

    Dec 27 08:14 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • LDK Solar And The Rigged Solar Panel Bond Market In Shanghai [View article]
    I'm confused...

    Are you bashing a market where shorting is not allowed or LDK for its business sense to pull in money at lower interest to pay off higher interest in Singapore or perhaps the stake in the poly plant.

    I think the fraud is on Wall Street. LDK apparently negotiated a deal in Hothot relating to coal and has some 180 million on the ground in parks probably generating 15% IRR. They may have debt, but they also have capacity to show for it and many that are closing doors in this market. Where do the spoils of war go to? The supply and demand is undergoing rebalance right now and the PPS ramps are the risk takers that understand the Law of Supply and Demand.

    If you want to analyze further, debt should be a function of capacity as a metric to compare to others.

    Now their are some articles coming out relating to an IPO serving as cash injections. The short ratio and float could be very positive for LDK PPS.
    Dec 7 07:27 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Using Debt-To-Equity Ratios To Identify Potential Solar Downturn Survivors [View article]
    Survivability is also a function of burn rate. These dynamics may change. For instance, LDK stopped expansion for the moment. They still have the ability to layoff workers. They have a potential IPO. They also have other investments in Sinoma and SOPW.

    The question may also be posited from a standpoint of who has the ability to tap these or other resources for survivability.

    You also have to consider cost. LDK achieved 89 cents per module.

    The thesis is incomplete.
    Nov 29 07:22 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 4 High Growth Stocks That Are Bad Bets [View article]
    Some things of interest:

    www.greenpeace.org/usa.../

    For that amount of money, you could in 3 years, put enough solar in place to provide free electric to every household in the USA.

    Now tell me this... what are the odds with every country other than the USA realizing this, with jobs situation demanding it, and the need to fix the budget likely to pull subsidies from coal and oil, that solar will soon explode in demand?

    Then look at the Government mandate to achieve higher gas mileage, creating a whole new need for electric and electric hybrids.

    2.bp.blogspot.com/_b5h...

    And coal plants by the time they are built get only 2 years of cheaper costs according to this chart (ignoring the harvard subsidies angle) making all the infrastructure to build the plant being a liability when competing against solar pv parks.

    No, this is a historic event. Do not be fooled by paid advertising (with your subsidy dollars) telling you lies.
    Aug 17 07:23 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shedding Some Light on Solar PV Valuations [View article]
    Well, I just didn't want to go there, but you are probably right to a degree. My take on the matter is 50% technology, 50% ADR stocks not played on home court.

    Don't worry, the LDK IPO will be the HK market where PE valuations exceed USA. LDK also shifted to Nat. Gas and was producing with diesel, so expect some serious cost reduction yet again. I bet the market will see 15% down in Net margins and LDK may see only 6%. GBL wafers from LDK are also likely to cushion the blow. It is all the others I am concerned about. Especially CdTe as cost structures are mature and there is no real method to lessen impact. 6% or even 10% down on LDK with FSLR dropping 10%-15% puts LDK in the number one spot for both Net Income and Net Margin on top of already being far under book. For others, there may be equally compelling stories, DQ as noted has current margin cushion, but a historical ramp rate of net margins from Q4 to Q1 show margins for DQ dropping fast. Far worse for others unless there is an Ace up the sleeve.

    In a more serious note, remember when Poly was $400/Kg? The high price allowed FSLR to market their product at a premium to cost raking in >50% margins. The company grew and was able to pay debt down and accumulate cash and a healthy balance sheet. The cost per module watt has been the rally cry when it is just happen stance that the ROI for the customer favored CdTe. The tables are turning. Poly has fallen and is falling again. The contraction may be hard on cSi, but if that contraction remains where it is, sustained for a long time, CdTe is in real trouble long term. FSLR may do well to hedge its cash in a cSi competitor with great margins at discount. Then again, LDK is doing just that with a $110m buyback. The biggest point to be made is that cSi is just coming into the full vertical lower cost model, with Poly < 50/kg pitted against CdTe made at 75 cents. The market has spoken and will continue to pay a premium price for cSi. I'd say it is a dead heat with cSi taking market share and applying margin pressure for years.

    That is the premise here.

    At the end of the day when you go out an buy a cell phone, do you flip it over and see if it was made in the USA, or do you check out what you can get for your money. I assume if you are bothering to put solar that will last for years on the home, you are going to put some up that will cover your power needs. That implies longer warranty and greater power production in a limited space.

    In a way, CdTe technology has stunted solar growth. Many that I speak to do not realize the amount of power cSi is capable of, comparing it to 10% or even 5% efficient product. If the public were to understand that cSi is almost double that number, I think there would be a very strong push for the technology.
    Jul 5 08:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shedding Some Light on Solar PV Valuations [View article]
    DQ definitely shines in this environment. Any stock having a higher margin and a capacity to capitalize on said margin are as always good stocks. Many of these stocks enjoyed much larger market capitalization and have fallen from grace meaning they are on a fire sale. As BestStockPicker points out the ridiculous valuations, it would be an excellent buying opportunity going forward in my opinion.

    If I may comment on the charts, it would appear the investors are only valuing the equity as noted by the close match to the market cap line. For the rough patch expected in Q2, choices where net margin exceeds 15% are advisable since ASP's have dropped considerably.

    Various companies have or are making strategic choices that may mitigate the ASP drop by reducing internal manufacturing cost.

    LDK has added Hefei, 1 GW Cells and 500 MW Modules as internal production, reducing the cost of outsourcing. Today, JASO appears to be moving into silver in order to get a hold of costs. Investors appear to be taking on an additional 20% dilution to make it happen.

    Consolidation is likely thus even low margin players may be targets, but guessing is not the level risk that I like to do when their equity and likely market cap erodes waiting for it to happen.

    Since market cap and equity track closely, the value in the diverse range of net margins appears to be completely ignored. Due to the scales on the left and right side of the chart, whenever the net income line matches equity, you are looking at a 10 quarter doubling rate in equity. Most of these stocks are already below book. Presumably, even if these stocks are not going to be high flyers in Q2, any sign of improvement long term will push the stocks above the P/B valuation provided. That is why I am preferential to stocks meeting this criteria. As to Q2, the fact that it is a rough quarter will serve to eliminate some weaker players. Darwinism of stocks where the strongest survive to grab a larger share of business.

    If I may add one more comment, a long long time will go by for FSLR investors before the blue line matches the market cap, then again, if one of these China stocks closing in takes top spot, the wait may not be long at all.

    Be very careful out there.
    Jul 5 05:19 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Highly Shorted Tech Stocks With Strong Sources of Profitability [View article]
    LDK Solar beat FSLR NET Earnings in 11Q1. LDK Solar is only solar to achieve an actual increase in NET Margin of this group:

    LDK
    SOL
    HSOL
    CSUN
    JASO
    FSLR
    JKS
    YGE
    TSL
    STP
    CSIQ
    SPWRA

    Data from Google Finance. Income/Revenue ratio.

    LDK Solar is now turning NET Profit at levels of FSLR. Q2 should be very close in NET Margins to FSLR. The distinction here is Debt and Equity and Q2 environment. FSLR runs 3.5x book, LDK around 0.75 in that same market environment. LDK CapEx is now minimal and as I understand it FSLR is adding 300m. If you look at LDK's balance sheet, Q1 resulted in deferred tax being paid up. Technically, the 95 cents posted could have been much higher.

    FSLR product is mature, there is not much else they can do to push costs down. LDK is looking at 10 cents added cost reduction over the next year.

    The difference between these companies really stands out when looking at the P/B ratio. About 3.7 points difference and one of these two is growing NET Earnings over the last year, the other is not.

    My bet is on LDK, but FSLR will still be standing with the two PPS migrating toward each other.
    Jul 2 04:39 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why LDK Solar Shares Will Double This Year [View article]
    Italy through a monkey wrench into the system. Providers are like a card game and 52-Pick-up. Bottom line is there will be severely undervalued stocks. Find a bottom and hang on. New players will emerge. Full verticals are already showing signs of moving to leader positions. LDK is moving in all the right directions. The bet is "Have we bottomed yet?" The day pvInsights.com shows stablization, LDK will be up hard.
    Jun 12 07:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • LDK Solar Revises Q1 2011 Earnings Metrics [View article]
    I'd say you are dead on Hobo. I'm showing 99 cents w/o solar pv parks and using 145m shares.

    It's the PV Parks marked sold that is preventing me from revising, plus the fact that LDK historically runs their estimates low.

    Google shows institutional numbers increased from 19 to 20%

    That EPS(ttm) number is going to clear 3 soon.
    May 13 05:35 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • LDK Solar Brightens Its Future [View article]
    I want to thank you all for the positive comments. I don't usually log on to SA [sorry seekingalpha]! However, after seeing 60 followers after writing just a few articles, along with several page views, it is really nice to see the support.

    In return, let me provide you with something else to look at that has my attention. It is the rate at which LDK Solar is reducing cost and all the up and coming prospects to continue reducing costs.

    1) Further optimization and expansion of internal poly
    2) Right size "normalization" if I can borrow the word, of other business units
    3) A great contract price on cutting fluid
    4) Saline
    Apr 22 08:34 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • LDK Solar Brightens Its Future [View article]
    Twoheaded...

    Your comments are much more constructive than in the past.

    The 2 billion contribution in revenue may or may not be in error. However the 500 mw of module production under your scenario “cells used for internal module manufacturing holds water”. In this case:

    0 GW x $1.20 + 500 MW x $1.70 = $850.00 Million Revenue Contribution from Hefei

    However, the aggregate margins are impacted in a positive manner for modules. The profit normally obtained from cells moves to modules and is capture on sales of modules.

    In the following link and quote:

    translate.googleuserco...

    “Finished solar cells about 30 cm square, thin blade, the surface of dark blue, striped texture. This is the first ever solar cells film "Hefei made" solar cells, which means a breakthrough. This is following the BOE Hefei, after another strategic new industry from scratch, "bear fruit."

    I would ask the question, “What modules that LDK currently produces require 30 cm^2 cells?”

    I did do a Google check regarding “Thin Blade”. The highest probability is that they are talking about cell thickness and the cutting process of the wafer. Perhaps this explains LDK's retrofitting of equipment and capacity additions. The impact is that the cost of material drops. In one case, 40 micron matched up.

    Another possibility may be the appearance, probably implying contact surfaces or etching.

    Another may be that “Thin Blade” may represent what the surface is like under microscope. In this case we would be talking about nano-technology. The limit here is 88% range in efficiency.

    There is also the word "Film" supporting thin-film or very thin like film cells.

    While the previous 4 paragraphs are speculative at best, what is obvious is the dimension stated differs from the norm. As such, I think something is special about them. Perhaps thin-film? The fact that they differ implies that it was in Pengs and LDK's interest to perhaps make them different. My opinion is that the circumstantial evidence weighs heavily in this direction for these reasons:

    1.NREL Agreement – Why the need?
    2.Rapid Construction – 5 months on building + 3 for first production – Why the breakneck speed?
    3.CDB 8.9 Billion Backing – What did the bankers see?
    4.Previous GaAs work – Demonstrated effort to raise efficiency
    5.R&D ties to major Universities – Ties to latest technology and theory
    6.Opportunity – To outfit the plant with new equipment, to pursue higher efficiency technology
    7.Poly IPO – Willing to sell off some or all of the poly – Do they require less?

    The bottom line is EPS. The EPS is formed from each business unit. EPS is about profit. No matter where you shift profit, from one business unit to another, you still end up with Gross Profit. LDK issued guidance and it is a whopper. I provided the article to show investors where some of the revenue source for that profit is coming from. At this time, I would be concerned (long or short) about the profit contributions that the cells will generate. To answer that question, one would have to know what type of cell it is.
    Apr 4 06:26 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Top 12 Solar Companies: Which Are the Best Bet for Investors? [View article]
    Based on solid rebuttal from multiple stocks mentioned, incorrect flawed data, I'm not convinced the Oxen Group has any credibility.

    I see admission of a mistake with LDK followed by a statement that your price target will not change.

    Are you in fact stating that your price target for LDK is independent on facts and performance of LDK? May I inquire what your price target is based on?
    Mar 31 10:32 PM | 15 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
26 Comments
83 Likes