solar jim's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/115192/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/170837-invest-in-silver-over-gold?source=feed#comment-745027 745027

On Nov 03 08:51 PM Hyperinflation wrote:

> I think the market is grossly overvalued at 10k. I think the next
> bear market decline will bring the dow somewhere between 8000-8500
> ]]> Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:03:22 -0500

On Nov 03 08:51 PM Hyperinflation wrote:

> I think the market is grossly overvalued at 10k. I think the next
> bear market decline will bring the dow somewhere between 8000-8500
> ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/166596-has-the-u-s-reached-the-hyperinflation-tipping-point?source=feed#comment-720783 720783
Now, you don't have to have 3000% per year inflation for that. It simply implies that the level of inflation is growing and not stabilizing and each iteration of the cycle of money printing to pay bills causes it to ratchet up further.


On Oct 15 09:45 PM goldbug101 wrote:

> Well, if it is true "hyperinflation" (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) is coming
> then civil society within the US will come to an end and there will
> be mass riots and most likely martial law and forced dusk to dawn
> curfews.
>
> I don't think the US government would ever let it get to the point
> of "hyperinflation", rather what will most likely occur will be a
> prolonged period of high inflation.
>
> Someday a can of Coke will cost $5 or so, high inflation, but "hyperinflation"
> (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) for USD isn't gonna happen.
>
> For hyperinflation, that can of Coke will have to cost around $150,000!
>
>
> Stop tossing around the term "hyperinflation" and instead use the
> correct terminology - prolonged period of high inflation.
>
> If one really believes hyperinflation will occur ala Weimer or Zimbabwe,
> then you better have:
>
> (1) Lots of guns & ammo
> (2) Basement vault full of actual gold
> (3) Lots of MREs and canned foodstuff or live on farmland with livestock
>
> (4) Stockpiles of gasoline and fresh water
>
> Shakespeare said it would start by killing all the lawyers. If true
> hyperinflation comes to pass, it will be the bankers first followed
> quickly by the politicians.
>
> Let's recap that fact- "hyperinflation" (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) for
> USD isn't gonna happen.
>
> The US will go to war with China before hyperinflation ala Zimbabwe
> / Weimar takes place.]]> Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:15:47 -0400
Now, you don't have to have 3000% per year inflation for that. It simply implies that the level of inflation is growing and not stabilizing and each iteration of the cycle of money printing to pay bills causes it to ratchet up further.


On Oct 15 09:45 PM goldbug101 wrote:

> Well, if it is true "hyperinflation" (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) is coming
> then civil society within the US will come to an end and there will
> be mass riots and most likely martial law and forced dusk to dawn
> curfews.
>
> I don't think the US government would ever let it get to the point
> of "hyperinflation", rather what will most likely occur will be a
> prolonged period of high inflation.
>
> Someday a can of Coke will cost $5 or so, high inflation, but "hyperinflation"
> (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) for USD isn't gonna happen.
>
> For hyperinflation, that can of Coke will have to cost around $150,000!
>
>
> Stop tossing around the term "hyperinflation" and instead use the
> correct terminology - prolonged period of high inflation.
>
> If one really believes hyperinflation will occur ala Weimer or Zimbabwe,
> then you better have:
>
> (1) Lots of guns & ammo
> (2) Basement vault full of actual gold
> (3) Lots of MREs and canned foodstuff or live on farmland with livestock
>
> (4) Stockpiles of gasoline and fresh water
>
> Shakespeare said it would start by killing all the lawyers. If true
> hyperinflation comes to pass, it will be the bankers first followed
> quickly by the politicians.
>
> Let's recap that fact- "hyperinflation" (ala Zimbabwe / Weimar) for
> USD isn't gonna happen.
>
> The US will go to war with China before hyperinflation ala Zimbabwe
> / Weimar takes place.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/140599-burgeoning-bioplastics-metabolix-s-breakthrough?source=feed#comment-528742 528742
You should take a look at it. Unlike all the players you listed above, MBLX has 100% fully biodegradeable bioplastics that degrade in natural environment of soil, water, sand, arid, wet, etc... The players you list above all need secondary treatments to the created plastic to reuse or recycle. They are not use and throw away anywhere products that decompose on their own without secondary treatment of heating or another chemical applied.

MBLX has a commercial plant that will start production by the end of this year. You may have heard of their partner in this project, a little company that's been around for a year or two called ADM. Already have contracts for when production starts. While its small now, their future is huge.

They are the only company that exists that has a fully biodegradable plastic. Their plastic is grown in algae and harvested. Future platforms are switchgrass and oilseeds. The switchgrass program is slated for commercial production in the next couple years.

MBLX plastic can be used in the same production machines that use traditional plastics as well. Check them out when you write another article on bioplastics.]]> Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:06:25 -0400
You should take a look at it. Unlike all the players you listed above, MBLX has 100% fully biodegradeable bioplastics that degrade in natural environment of soil, water, sand, arid, wet, etc... The players you list above all need secondary treatments to the created plastic to reuse or recycle. They are not use and throw away anywhere products that decompose on their own without secondary treatment of heating or another chemical applied.

MBLX has a commercial plant that will start production by the end of this year. You may have heard of their partner in this project, a little company that's been around for a year or two called ADM. Already have contracts for when production starts. While its small now, their future is huge.

They are the only company that exists that has a fully biodegradable plastic. Their plastic is grown in algae and harvested. Future platforms are switchgrass and oilseeds. The switchgrass program is slated for commercial production in the next couple years.

MBLX plastic can be used in the same production machines that use traditional plastics as well. Check them out when you write another article on bioplastics.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/104630-the-honeymoon-is-over-gauging-the-market-with-an-obama-presidency?source=feed#comment-300438 300438
"There are 55 million Americans who did not swallow the Obama Kool-Aid." Speaking for myself, I can only hope his statement is the truest one uttered by him in at least 21 months. He promised more than he could payoff, but the pandering got him the votes he needed to get elected.

But to be fair, the only difference between him, the Democrats collectively, and the Republicans collectively is the speed with which they will bankrupt the nation and confiscate our individual wealth through monetization of the ever increasing debt.




If you didn't drink the Obama KoolAid did you drink the McCain KoolAid? Or just not vote? Or go with a third party candidate that does nothing but appease your inner self as they will never win and have no power base once in?

Especially since you said the only difference is how fast either will get to the same spot and that Obama won because he pandered. And McCain wasn't?

So did you vote at all? If so, McCain? Obama? Third party?

Your statements would imply that it's useless to vote for either or any, yet if you don't vote then you have no point to complain. Yet you then attack Obama... interesting.]]> Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:18:40 -0500
"There are 55 million Americans who did not swallow the Obama Kool-Aid." Speaking for myself, I can only hope his statement is the truest one uttered by him in at least 21 months. He promised more than he could payoff, but the pandering got him the votes he needed to get elected.

But to be fair, the only difference between him, the Democrats collectively, and the Republicans collectively is the speed with which they will bankrupt the nation and confiscate our individual wealth through monetization of the ever increasing debt.




If you didn't drink the Obama KoolAid did you drink the McCain KoolAid? Or just not vote? Or go with a third party candidate that does nothing but appease your inner self as they will never win and have no power base once in?

Especially since you said the only difference is how fast either will get to the same spot and that Obama won because he pandered. And McCain wasn't?

So did you vote at all? If so, McCain? Obama? Third party?

Your statements would imply that it's useless to vote for either or any, yet if you don't vote then you have no point to complain. Yet you then attack Obama... interesting.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/97981-a-giant-pinball-game-fast-money-recap-9-30-08?source=feed#comment-270583 270583 Wed, 01 Oct 2008 13:36:39 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/97981-a-giant-pinball-game-fast-money-recap-9-30-08?source=feed#comment-270582 270582 Wed, 01 Oct 2008 13:32:51 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/92211-first-solar-cheaper-than-sunpower-citi?source=feed#comment-237032 237032
FSLR is actually finishing their plant expansions faster than initially planned and talked about and the ramp is going faster and quicker each plant as well. So considering they will have just about or over 1 Gw in yearly production capacity at end of next year I'm interested to hear how they are going to 'fail'. Everything they do they deliver better than initially projected, which means you have an interesting idea of failure.

Just as they have long term contracts to deliver panels to customers they have contracts to get delivered to them a bunch of tellerium on a long term basis. Anyone who uses the Te argument and tight supply is a dumbass. It's called a long term contract for delivery of the element needed in supply to meet the long term contracts they have to make panels. Tough, I know, to actually do a few minutes of investigation, but very much worth it.]]> Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:25:01 -0400
FSLR is actually finishing their plant expansions faster than initially planned and talked about and the ramp is going faster and quicker each plant as well. So considering they will have just about or over 1 Gw in yearly production capacity at end of next year I'm interested to hear how they are going to 'fail'. Everything they do they deliver better than initially projected, which means you have an interesting idea of failure.

Just as they have long term contracts to deliver panels to customers they have contracts to get delivered to them a bunch of tellerium on a long term basis. Anyone who uses the Te argument and tight supply is a dumbass. It's called a long term contract for delivery of the element needed in supply to meet the long term contracts they have to make panels. Tough, I know, to actually do a few minutes of investigation, but very much worth it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/92133-solar-cycles-and-stocks-the-sun-also-rises?source=feed#comment-237029 237029
In opposition to many types of manufacturing, solar doesn't take all that much labor in the form of people. Its a small part of the total cost equation meaning China doesn't enjoy this huge advantage like they do in textiles or other labor intensive industries.

Solar panels weigh a good bit. Shipping from China, at these oil prices, increases the cost and it becomes harder to maintain any cost advantage.

And the idea that AMAT is going to do anything is laughable. Maybe in ten years. They sell undifferentiated equipment, which was an adaptation of chip gear. I believe that proprietary technologies and equipment are going to do better (FSLR, ENER, Nanosolar), otherwise they would already be buying AMAT equipment instead of continuing to expand with their own technology.]]> Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:15:37 -0400
In opposition to many types of manufacturing, solar doesn't take all that much labor in the form of people. Its a small part of the total cost equation meaning China doesn't enjoy this huge advantage like they do in textiles or other labor intensive industries.

Solar panels weigh a good bit. Shipping from China, at these oil prices, increases the cost and it becomes harder to maintain any cost advantage.

And the idea that AMAT is going to do anything is laughable. Maybe in ten years. They sell undifferentiated equipment, which was an adaptation of chip gear. I believe that proprietary technologies and equipment are going to do better (FSLR, ENER, Nanosolar), otherwise they would already be buying AMAT equipment instead of continuing to expand with their own technology.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/84094-janet-yellen-on-risks-prospects-for-the-u-s-economy?source=feed#comment-223518 223518 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:02:08 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/84094-janet-yellen-on-risks-prospects-for-the-u-s-economy?source=feed#comment-223516 223516 Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:57:27 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/87038-sepa-report-showing-end-market-demand-disconnect-could-sink-first-solar-sunpower?source=feed#comment-220666 220666 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:36:50 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/88095-first-solar-spreads-some-sunshine?source=feed#comment-218860 218860 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:24:27 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/88095-first-solar-spreads-some-sunshine?source=feed#comment-218858 218858 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:22:02 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/87287-northern-oil-may-be-headed-south-barron-s?source=feed#comment-216932 216932
While I don't own any NOG and don't plan on it, I did research them along with CLR when I was looking into the Bakken oil. I went with CLR, but not because I thought NOG was in trouble as the author of this article does.

All Barron's does is print with abondon all the rumors they get from anonymous 'insiders' who in actuality are more likely hedge funds that have huge short positions they want to blow out at a profit (after using Barrons to disseminate the propaganda).

I saw the cover of Barrons a week or two ago (and really, there's not much point in wasting your time reading past the front page) and they had the question on the front asking if the housing downturn was over. I bet they advocated to get in and buy some homebuilders. Watch how that one plays out over the next year while the market still tries to find a bottom, unsuccessfully, in housing. People like to bash Cramer, but these guys are soooo much worse. Cramer at least gets it right sometimes on some grand slams. These guys.... I think the best that can be said is that they might not lose you too much money if your lucky.]]> Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:19:44 -0400
While I don't own any NOG and don't plan on it, I did research them along with CLR when I was looking into the Bakken oil. I went with CLR, but not because I thought NOG was in trouble as the author of this article does.

All Barron's does is print with abondon all the rumors they get from anonymous 'insiders' who in actuality are more likely hedge funds that have huge short positions they want to blow out at a profit (after using Barrons to disseminate the propaganda).

I saw the cover of Barrons a week or two ago (and really, there's not much point in wasting your time reading past the front page) and they had the question on the front asking if the housing downturn was over. I bet they advocated to get in and buy some homebuilders. Watch how that one plays out over the next year while the market still tries to find a bottom, unsuccessfully, in housing. People like to bash Cramer, but these guys are soooo much worse. Cramer at least gets it right sometimes on some grand slams. These guys.... I think the best that can be said is that they might not lose you too much money if your lucky.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/82276-investing-in-oil-prices-not-companies?source=feed#comment-198270 198270
If speculation is the reason oil is going up then at some point people would have to take actual possession of the good and continue to keep taking it off the market and continually reduce the total supply enough to actually raise prices over the amount actually produced by hoarding it somewhere. Please show me where these extra barrels that speculators are buying are being stored - which costs still more capital.

The fact that people don't want to address is that the US dollar has decreased in purchasing power under the Bush administration. As oil is priced in dollars and these other sovereign nations (middle east) want to have the same purchasing power as before the price goes up as a reflection of that fact.

China and India are growing at a very fast pace. The US and other devloped nations can do little to stop the rise in energy costs by raising interet rates so long as China, India, Brazil, etc... keep growing as fast as they currently are. If the major users, and buyers, are these fast groing counties that don't have a problem continuing to buy and push up rates then everyone else gets to join in for higher prices.

If this doesn't make sense then get ready to keep paying ever more over the next decade, or two, and have no idea why prices keep going up.]]> Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:48:28 -0400
If speculation is the reason oil is going up then at some point people would have to take actual possession of the good and continue to keep taking it off the market and continually reduce the total supply enough to actually raise prices over the amount actually produced by hoarding it somewhere. Please show me where these extra barrels that speculators are buying are being stored - which costs still more capital.

The fact that people don't want to address is that the US dollar has decreased in purchasing power under the Bush administration. As oil is priced in dollars and these other sovereign nations (middle east) want to have the same purchasing power as before the price goes up as a reflection of that fact.

China and India are growing at a very fast pace. The US and other devloped nations can do little to stop the rise in energy costs by raising interet rates so long as China, India, Brazil, etc... keep growing as fast as they currently are. If the major users, and buyers, are these fast groing counties that don't have a problem continuing to buy and push up rates then everyone else gets to join in for higher prices.

If this doesn't make sense then get ready to keep paying ever more over the next decade, or two, and have no idea why prices keep going up.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/77297-senate-may-kill-solar-rally?source=feed#comment-168463 168463 Thu, 15 May 2008 20:40:39 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/76540-is-energy-conversion-devices-ready-for-a-comeback?source=feed#comment-165077 165077
At first, like many things, I thought 'yeah right, here's someone pumping up so they can dump later'...

Went to the USPTO site and checked it out. While it has only been filed and the actual implementation of this tech/machine may take a few years to work out the kinks, I have to admit this sounds very interesting. They claim to be able to use a plasma deposition process instead of the current process that will enable an increase in the run rate per machine/line from the current rate of about 30Mw per line to Gw's per line in the same space due to increased throughput rates from new deposition process. If actually true then this is big. Really big. The question is how long it takes to actually implement. Now I wonder if the reconfiguration of their plant has anything to do with this machine/process, or if its just normal optimazation of current plant space.]]> Fri, 09 May 2008 15:49:27 -0400
At first, like many things, I thought 'yeah right, here's someone pumping up so they can dump later'...

Went to the USPTO site and checked it out. While it has only been filed and the actual implementation of this tech/machine may take a few years to work out the kinks, I have to admit this sounds very interesting. They claim to be able to use a plasma deposition process instead of the current process that will enable an increase in the run rate per machine/line from the current rate of about 30Mw per line to Gw's per line in the same space due to increased throughput rates from new deposition process. If actually true then this is big. Really big. The question is how long it takes to actually implement. Now I wonder if the reconfiguration of their plant has anything to do with this machine/process, or if its just normal optimazation of current plant space.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/75340-former-merck-ceo-prods-industry-on-drug-pricing?source=feed#comment-163783 163783
We live in a country whose economy is more market oriented than centrally run (govt) oriented. As a result, you have for profit companies in the pharma industry. The reason to incorporate is to make money. Period. That's the one responsibility a "company" has to abide by. As long as medicine continues to be a for profit business then the way it is will continue ad infinitum. Putting restrictions on profit motive will make future investment (R&D) more expensive relative to future profit. Ultimately, This means that their are some drug candidates that are not as risk free in developing and these will be the ones not pursued. Breakthroughs wont stop, but they will come at a much slower pace.

Personally, I think people are having an argument over the wrong question/issue. It's not about legislating the prices that companies can charge. It's about whether pharma should be allowed to be for profit companies. Non-profits could still invest for R&D as current Co's do and still charge less because they don't need to make all these billions of dollars of profits every year.]]> Wed, 07 May 2008 20:49:15 -0400
We live in a country whose economy is more market oriented than centrally run (govt) oriented. As a result, you have for profit companies in the pharma industry. The reason to incorporate is to make money. Period. That's the one responsibility a "company" has to abide by. As long as medicine continues to be a for profit business then the way it is will continue ad infinitum. Putting restrictions on profit motive will make future investment (R&D) more expensive relative to future profit. Ultimately, This means that their are some drug candidates that are not as risk free in developing and these will be the ones not pursued. Breakthroughs wont stop, but they will come at a much slower pace.

Personally, I think people are having an argument over the wrong question/issue. It's not about legislating the prices that companies can charge. It's about whether pharma should be allowed to be for profit companies. Non-profits could still invest for R&D as current Co's do and still charge less because they don't need to make all these billions of dollars of profits every year.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/75600-buying-fertilizer-stocks-in-lieu-of-camel-futures?source=feed#comment-162101 162101
I'd really like to see where his own money (Krudlow) is invested to see if it's anywhere near where his brilliant advice says you should invest your money at. ]]> Mon, 05 May 2008 12:34:09 -0400
I'd really like to see where his own money (Krudlow) is invested to see if it's anywhere near where his brilliant advice says you should invest your money at. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/74215-major-corporate-shift-to-solar-energy-and-leds?source=feed#comment-157523 157523 Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:10:45 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/73738-further-musings-on-solar-stocks?source=feed#comment-156248 156248 Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:13:12 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/73738-further-musings-on-solar-stocks?source=feed#comment-156246 156246
If solar were a more mature industry I don't think I would have any issue with anything you've mentioned above. The only mistake I think you may be making is in applying good and very solid fundamental analysis on an industry that is still in, for the most part, hyper growth mode at the early part of its lifetime.

Another function of p/e spreads within an industry relates to the markets belief of risk for each company to execute and earn the projected revenue/earnings going forward. Companies in China are harder to ascertain whether the news is actuality, as well as having less news/releases, and so they therefore generally have lower p/e's than western based companies that other than location are exactly the same.

I would argue with your assessment of FSLR and the others being no different. In fact, there is quite a bit of difference. FSLR has a higher profit margin than all the other solar companies. They have already presold 70% of all the panels they will make through 2012, which includes all the currently announced factory expansions taking them to 1 Gigawatt per year by around mid 09. Except for FSLR, all the ones mentioned above use silicon and as far as I know they all make them they same way in that its a slightly modified version of CPU chip making with many less steps than CPU chips, but still lots more time/work to create that wafer of cells than FSLR takes. FSLR is automated continuous line. They've been increasing the Mw run rate of each line each quarter. Even if another company were to start doing thin film with CdTe they would have to find a different way as FSLR's line tech is proprietary and they have intellectual property on that. Most of the other companies buy stock solar equipment from manufacturers.

If you're looking at companies that all use stock solar equipment than I agree with you exactly on selling whatever the higher p/e stock is and buying the lowest p/e stock because they are the same - apples to apples. So while FSLR does have a high p/e it should have a higher p/e due to their tech position over those that aren't innovating at the edge. I'm not justifying the current price or saying it deserves to be higher, but I do believe it should have a premium to the others due to its position. That may change going forward, but right now, they are the clear leader and will be for at least another few years. Of course, what premium they should receive is open to debate. Going forward, I do not expect to continue to see a premium of 100%+ to the average of the field.

]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:04:09 -0400
If solar were a more mature industry I don't think I would have any issue with anything you've mentioned above. The only mistake I think you may be making is in applying good and very solid fundamental analysis on an industry that is still in, for the most part, hyper growth mode at the early part of its lifetime.

Another function of p/e spreads within an industry relates to the markets belief of risk for each company to execute and earn the projected revenue/earnings going forward. Companies in China are harder to ascertain whether the news is actuality, as well as having less news/releases, and so they therefore generally have lower p/e's than western based companies that other than location are exactly the same.

I would argue with your assessment of FSLR and the others being no different. In fact, there is quite a bit of difference. FSLR has a higher profit margin than all the other solar companies. They have already presold 70% of all the panels they will make through 2012, which includes all the currently announced factory expansions taking them to 1 Gigawatt per year by around mid 09. Except for FSLR, all the ones mentioned above use silicon and as far as I know they all make them they same way in that its a slightly modified version of CPU chip making with many less steps than CPU chips, but still lots more time/work to create that wafer of cells than FSLR takes. FSLR is automated continuous line. They've been increasing the Mw run rate of each line each quarter. Even if another company were to start doing thin film with CdTe they would have to find a different way as FSLR's line tech is proprietary and they have intellectual property on that. Most of the other companies buy stock solar equipment from manufacturers.

If you're looking at companies that all use stock solar equipment than I agree with you exactly on selling whatever the higher p/e stock is and buying the lowest p/e stock because they are the same - apples to apples. So while FSLR does have a high p/e it should have a higher p/e due to their tech position over those that aren't innovating at the edge. I'm not justifying the current price or saying it deserves to be higher, but I do believe it should have a premium to the others due to its position. That may change going forward, but right now, they are the clear leader and will be for at least another few years. Of course, what premium they should receive is open to debate. Going forward, I do not expect to continue to see a premium of 100%+ to the average of the field.

]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73489-trina-solar-best-value-in-the-solar-space?source=feed#comment-155365 155365
Without discussing or debating the prospects of FSLR's revenue/earnings growth rate and whether it merits the current 2008 p/e I would first point out that "analysts" havn't been correct on this company once since the very first qtr as a public company. Considering the percentage amount that the company has managed to beat "analysts" projected earnings every quarter to date I think it is prudent to realize that the current 2008 p/e for FSLR, and some of the other higher priced stocks (on p/e 2008 ratio) are only correct so long as the "analysts" are correct this time. While this doesn't bring the PEG ratio to TSL levels or any of the China based solar plays, it would lower it.]]> Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:26:45 -0400
Without discussing or debating the prospects of FSLR's revenue/earnings growth rate and whether it merits the current 2008 p/e I would first point out that "analysts" havn't been correct on this company once since the very first qtr as a public company. Considering the percentage amount that the company has managed to beat "analysts" projected earnings every quarter to date I think it is prudent to realize that the current 2008 p/e for FSLR, and some of the other higher priced stocks (on p/e 2008 ratio) are only correct so long as the "analysts" are correct this time. While this doesn't bring the PEG ratio to TSL levels or any of the China based solar plays, it would lower it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73152-first-solar-and-sunpower-competitors-with-synergy?source=feed#comment-154191 154191 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:57:46 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/73152-first-solar-and-sunpower-competitors-with-synergy?source=feed#comment-154187 154187 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:53:31 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/73152-first-solar-and-sunpower-competitors-with-synergy?source=feed#comment-154182 154182
Only thing I would point out is that I believe the reason SPWR does not use all of their own cells for themselves is due to contractual obligations to deliver these cells, which were in place prior to their acqisition of Powerlight, which then allowed them to use their own surplus cells after contractual obligations for themselves.]]> Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:51:10 -0400
Only thing I would point out is that I believe the reason SPWR does not use all of their own cells for themselves is due to contractual obligations to deliver these cells, which were in place prior to their acqisition of Powerlight, which then allowed them to use their own surplus cells after contractual obligations for themselves.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73152-first-solar-and-sunpower-competitors-with-synergy?source=feed#comment-154178 154178
Scott
-marketbar


Pretty Simple reason STP isn't mentioned - they aren't a market leader in terms of innovation or efficiency. What's the conversion of STP panels? SPWR is at 22% currently. I'll bet you even money STP is in the 15-16% range. That's why they aren't mentioned. SPWR makes other products such as roof tiles that substitute for roof shingling during construction of a new home while STP does not have such a product that I am aware of. That's why STP isn't in here. Again, I may be wrong, but I don't believe STP installs system as well as panels whereas SPWR is vertically integrated, which is another reason.

While STP may be a good investment its a China play and the way they win is through mass production and saving on labor, not innovation. Think SPWR as being more Intel with innovation versus STP being more AMD in backward engineering Intel's successes. Whenever any crunch or industry consolidation occurs I am way more confident of SPWR's ability to survive/weather the downturn and come out with gains versus STP whose only advantage, at best, is cost.]]> Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:47:56 -0400
Scott
-marketbar


Pretty Simple reason STP isn't mentioned - they aren't a market leader in terms of innovation or efficiency. What's the conversion of STP panels? SPWR is at 22% currently. I'll bet you even money STP is in the 15-16% range. That's why they aren't mentioned. SPWR makes other products such as roof tiles that substitute for roof shingling during construction of a new home while STP does not have such a product that I am aware of. That's why STP isn't in here. Again, I may be wrong, but I don't believe STP installs system as well as panels whereas SPWR is vertically integrated, which is another reason.

While STP may be a good investment its a China play and the way they win is through mass production and saving on labor, not innovation. Think SPWR as being more Intel with innovation versus STP being more AMD in backward engineering Intel's successes. Whenever any crunch or industry consolidation occurs I am way more confident of SPWR's ability to survive/weather the downturn and come out with gains versus STP whose only advantage, at best, is cost.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/64609-first-solar-q4-2007-conference-call-visualization?source=feed#comment-116578 116578 Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:53:41 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/57633-morgan-stanley-s-top-long-ideas-for-2008?source=feed#comment-106018 106018 Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:50:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/57633-morgan-stanley-s-top-long-ideas-for-2008?source=feed#comment-105979 105979 Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:48:15 -0500