Seeking Alpha

Tom Konrad, CFA

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Tom Konrad, CFA's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • 10 Clean Energy Stocks For 2014: Patience Rewarded [View article]
    PEGI is not here because I thought it was overvalued at the start of the year (it was trading around $31 and I was selling short calls). It's come down a bit since, and now seems fairly valued (around $27). I'm currently short puts at $20 and $25, and calls at $30 and $35, meaning I make the most money if PEGI stays in the $25-$30 range. I'm already well up on this trade because I sold the puts in Nov/Dec when PEGI was below $25, and sold the calls when it was above $29.

    See the "relative pricing" section of this article: http://onforb.es/1hQRg6O
    Apr 2 10:23 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 10 Clean Energy Stocks For 2014: Patience Rewarded [View article]
    Some readers asked for that in the past, and it seems to be working well, along with the high/low targets.

    Research shows that most people are too optimistic about their ability to predict stocks... I'm very curious to see if I will be able to buck the trend with my high/low targets. Not that anyone will be complaining if the "high" targets are violated.
    Apr 2 09:25 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Finavera Wind Energy: Bak From The Dead [View article]
    Yes, I'm also surprised Bak is so optimistic about his long-suffering shareholders. But the thing I like best about the option is that it makes the company much easier to value.
    Apr 2 09:22 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 10 Clean Energy Stocks For 2014: March Update [View article]
    I don't think that's what they mean in the going concern part, since it would contradict what they say elsewhere. But they do need financing to continue, and that financing is contingent on decent remediation.
    Apr 1 10:50 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 10 Clean Energy Stocks For 2014: March Update [View article]
    Looks like they got a total of 3.1 extra MW out of SJ 6-1, 6-2, and 4-1 by cleaning. The bigger gains should come from deepening and forking 9-3 and 12-3, neither of which has stabilized, and both of which are expected to produce 7-10MW.
    12-3 was originally 4.7 MW gross, so they gained 2.3 to 5.3 MW there.
    9.3 was previously certified at 4.8MW, so that should be a gain of 2.2 to 5.2 MW.

    That means the remediation program increased output by 7.6 MW to 13.6 MW. They also gave a total for the remediation program of 9 to 14MW, so they're saying 13-3 and 9-3 are not both going to be at the low end.
    Apr 1 09:41 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Atlantic Power: Not So Clean [View article]
    Low natural gas prices are more of what's hurting the coal companies (and shareholders) than the current ineffective efforts to curb CO2 emissions. Coal plants are shutting down because their fuel cost is higher than combined cycle gas plants, with environmental efforts helping at the margins, but those are more efforts to reduce mercury, particulates, and other pollution than to reduce CO2.
    Mar 26 02:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Power REIT's Preferred Stock Offering: A Hedge That Pays 7.75% [View article]
    That depends which situation you think is more likely. I personally think the "win" is more likely, which is why I have more of the common. I personally hold it in a taxable account, mainly because it was not possible to subscribe to the offering in an IRA.
    Mar 23 07:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Atlantic Power: Not So Clean [View article]
    I agree, William. If they had said "Our generation capacity is 39%* Gas and we consider gas to be clean as the driven snow" I would not have had a problem with it.

    *or whatever the precise number is - the numbers you quote don't include the "other projects"

    I consider their statement that their generation is "95% clean" to be deceptive. What else are they hiding? (The sustainability of their dividend, as you say, but that's another article. Once I found the first deception, I had found enough, and stopped looking.)
    Mar 20 06:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Atlantic Power: Not So Clean [View article]
    I agree that natural gas is cleaner than coal. I'm sorry if I did not make that clear in the article.

    However, "cleaner than coal" is not the same as "clean," and the company's website clearly states that 95% of its generation is "clean" (their quotes) without defining what they mean by that.
    Mar 20 01:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ethical Investing And Philip Morris [View article]
    I guess we're in agreement on a couple of points:

    1. We agree that the share price has only minor influence on management of companies which do not plan on/ need to raising money soon, but we agree that there is an influence. I would simply rephrase your argument that, while the moral implications of owning PM and the like should be considered, you feel that the money to be made by owning them is more important than your tiny influence on management.

    2. When a company does need to raise money/debt, we seem to agree that we need to consider our security purchases in the context of how we feel about the company's business.

    3. An implication of (2) is that we should always either a) make sure a company does not do harm before we invest or b) determine that it does not need to raise funds before we expect to sell. I personally think that's a lot more trouble than just avoiding companies whose behavior I don't like, but that's just a personal preference. (You seem to have implied that only those who participate in public offerings need to think about this, but I expect you'll agree that the share price is the prime determinant of the price in a secondary offering, hence all investors have a role in determining the price of a secondary offering and how much money the company is able to raise.)

    A few situations which you have not seemed to consider are:

    A- When management compensation is closely tied to the share price.
    B -When the company is the target of activist investors (a low share price makes it harder for management to keep control.)
    C - When the company is a takeover target (a high share price increases management's compensation in a friendly takeover, and a low one means they may lose their jobs in a hostile takeover.)

    Do you agree that A,B, and C are all situations where the share price has significant influence on management?
    Mar 20 01:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • A Behaviorist's Approach To Investment Strategy: Embrace Who You Are [View article]
    Excellent advice. Too bad that articles like there that don't have stock tickers never get the attention the deserve.

    My inner adviser is a chaos theoretician who studies behavioral economics.
    http://onforb.es/1ijvJVR
    Mar 20 12:30 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • U.S. Geothermal Incorporated: A Long Term Possibility For The Patient Investor [View article]
    They will likely earn 1-3 cents per share for 2013 when they announce next week. Probably the same for 2014.
    Mar 20 10:22 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 10 Clean Energy Stocks For 2014: March Update [View article]
    The close at 0.09 was only 1500 shares. Someone probably just sold using a market order near the close and wiped out all the bids above $0.09. This is why you should always use limit orders when trading illiquid stocks.
    Mar 19 08:01 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Geothermal Heat Pumps Can Soar Like Solar [View article]
    Not true on PV vs wind. PV has a large advantage on any project less than MW scale, no matter what the wind regime. Wind and PV supply the same product, so there is some competition, but again, there is no competition between GHPs and PV
    Mar 18 10:21 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Ethical Investing And Philip Morris [View article]
    Occam- Some of us believe that there are other rules which should influence our actions than legality. To think otherwise is to not care about justice, or to believe that all laws are just, and that there are sufficient laws to serve justice in all situations.

    Using your Saudi Arabia example, you seem to think buying oil from Saudi Arabia is immoral even though it is legal, but protest that dealing with this moral dilemma is impossible. Like any real-world decision, there is no perfect solution, but there are many things you can do to improve the ethical situation- you can drive less, make sure your vehicle is running efficiently, or invest in a vehicle which uses less fuel. On the investing side, you can't divest from Saudi Aramco, but you can avoid owning companies which transport Saudi Oil and refine it. You can also invest in companies which help reduce our dependence on oil (biofuels, efficient cars, mass transit, etc.)

    No, those actions will not solve the problem. Nor will picketing outside an abortion clinic stop abortion, or helping women into that clinic make abortion safe and legal. People don't take actions motivated by their morality because they think they will fix the problem they see- they are simply trying to make a small difference for the better. Investments are one lever we can use to make the world a better place, whether that better place is not sending money to Saudis, a world without abortion, or a world where a woman has control over her own body.
    Mar 18 09:16 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
953 Comments
808 Likes