stockguru

US Energy Bill: Solar Stocks Will Feel All the Heat

someone on yahoo by name of gungbao2003

It has been claimed and I quote from Bill Alpert's Barrons' Article:
"What dismayed investors were September-quarter gross margins of 30.8% -- down from 35% in June and 39% in 2006. Piper Jaffray's Jesse Pichel noted that LDK gross margins were still an inexplicable 10 percentage points above those of peer ReneSola (SOLA). LDK inventory is turning just 2.2 times a year. Pichel downgraded the shares to a Sell with a price target of 34.50."

In summary the answers to why RENESOLA's margins are 10% points lower than LDK are found in RENESOLA's press releases and financial statements. The difference is in the technology. Majority of RENESOLA's solar wafers produced up to 3rd Qtr of 2007 are monocrystalline wafers while LDK's are MULTIcrystalline wafers. Why would this difference account for LDK's margin's being better?

First, RENESOLA in their IPO papers stated and I quote from
buchanan.uk.com/cgi-bi......
"In early 2007, the Directors intend to commence the installation of 15 multicrystalline furnaces, which each have a capacity in excess of 2,400 kg per month. Multicrystalline furnaces are more energy efficient than monocrystalline furnaces and require a lower grade of polysilicon which would improve the yield from ReneSola's raw materials."

What happened since then? Did RENESOLA achieve full capacity production yet on cheaper and more efficient Multi-crystalline solar wafer production? The answers are in RENESOLA's 3rd quarter ER. renesola.com/investorR......

"ReneSola commenced the installation of multicrystalline furnaces in September following the delivery of the coated crucibles. 15 multicrystalline furnaces, with a combined manufacturing capacity of 75 MW, have now been delivered and installed and are in initial production. The remaining 17 furnaces will be delivered and installed, as planned, by the end of 2007."

If you use your brains, then you would see that majority of RENESOLA's products were still made using the less efficient mono-crystalline methods and they are just going on-stream with Multi-crystalline production in 4th Qtr of 2007. RENESOLA is just playing catch up to LDK and are aware their margins are lower hence their decision to switch to the more efficient production of multicrystalline wafers.

Best Performing Stocks YTD

someone on yahoo by name of gungbao2003

It has been claimed and I quote from Bill Alpert's Barrons' Article:
"What dismayed investors were September-quarter gross margins of 30.8% -- down from 35% in June and 39% in 2006. Piper Jaffray's Jesse Pichel noted that LDK gross margins were still an inexplicable 10 percentage points above those of peer ReneSola (SOLA). LDK inventory is turning just 2.2 times a year. Pichel downgraded the shares to a Sell with a price target of 34.50."

In summary the answers to why RENESOLA's margins are 10% points lower than LDK are found in RENESOLA's press releases and financial statements. The difference is in the technology. Majority of RENESOLA's solar wafers produced up to 3rd Qtr of 2007 are monocrystalline wafers while LDK's are MULTIcrystalline wafers. Why would this difference account for LDK's margin's being better?

First, RENESOLA in their IPO papers stated and I quote from
buchanan.uk.com/cgi-bi......
"In early 2007, the Directors intend to commence the installation of 15 multicrystalline furnaces, which each have a capacity in excess of 2,400 kg per month. Multicrystalline furnaces are more energy efficient than monocrystalline furnaces and require a lower grade of polysilicon which would improve the yield from ReneSola's raw materials."

What happened since then? Did RENESOLA achieve full capacity production yet on cheaper and more efficient Multi-crystalline solar wafer production? The answers are in RENESOLA's 3rd quarter ER. renesola.com/investorR......

"ReneSola commenced the installation of multicrystalline furnaces in September following the delivery of the coated crucibles. 15 multicrystalline furnaces, with a combined manufacturing capacity of 75 MW, have now been delivered and installed and are in initial production. The remaining 17 furnaces will be delivered and installed, as planned, by the end of 2007."

If you use your brains, then you would see that majority of RENESOLA's products were still made using the less efficient mono-crystalline methods and they are just going on-stream with Multi-crystalline production in 4th Qtr of 2007. RENESOLA is just playing catch up to LDK and are aware their margins are lower hence their decision to switch to the more efficient production of multicrystalline wafers.

Jefferies Out Positive on Solar Stocks

*
Piper Jaffray
Fraud

Piper Jaffray Securities Fraud InfoCenter
Learn about Piper Jaffray fraud and securities fraud lawsuits!
InfoCenter
December 23, 2007 Protect your retirement, your savings, your financial future. Learn about securities fraud today!

Home
Piper Jaffray Fraud information
Piper Jaffray Fraud attorneys
Bookmark Page
Tell a Friend
Subscribe
Contact Us

About Piper Jaffray Fraud InfoCenter
Piper Jaffray Fraud InfoCenter is an Internet resource that offers you an opportunity to research securities fraud and your legal rights associated with Piper Jaffray fraud. Piper Jaffray Fraud InfoCenter does not offer legal advice or referrals.

Piper Jaffray Fraud Information
Piper Jaffray

What is Piper Jaffray?
Piper Jaffray, now known as U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray, is a Minneapolis-based brokerage and investment banking firm that was formed in 1895. The company provides financial information, products, and services to businesses, individuals, and institutions. It operates more than 120 offices in 25 states, employs more than 2,900 investment bankers, sales and trading executives, research analysts, and financial advisors, and is one of the nation’s most powerful firms in its class.

Why is Piper Jaffray accused of fraud?
In one of the largest securities fraud cases in Minnesota’s history, U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray is accused of making more than 6,000 fraudulent transactions in the accounts of 38 of its investors between June 1999 and June 2001. The company also allegedly paid other firms to publish research on its underwriting clients but failed to ensure that those payments were disclosed and neglected to sufficiently supervise its divisions.

Specifically, Piper Jaffray is accused of:

· Issuing research reports that violated NASD and NYSE rules to Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. and Triton Network Systems
· Failing to disclose that it received more than $18 million in payment for research coverage performed for various companies
· Failing to disclose that it paid portions of underwriting proceedings to other firms for research it performed
· Neglecting to effectively monitor its research and investment banking divisions to ensure that both complied with federal securities laws and NASD and NYSE rules.

Who were the key players in the fraud?
Although the entire company is under scrutiny, former U.S. Bancorp Jaffray stockbroker Thomas O’Neill has been charged with administrative fraud and is facing at least 35 civil lawsuits. O’Neill has a history, officials say, of volatile trading and is accused of making thousands of unethical, unwanted, and illegal trades. According to Piper Jaffray representatives, O’Neill was terminated in March 2001 and has been suspended from trading. In addition, chairman Tad Piper, president Andrew Duff, former head of retail Ross Rogers, and at least 10 other executives are being investigated on possible fraud charges.

What is the status?
On April 28, 2003, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced a settlement with U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray. Piper Jaffray agreed to pay $12.5 million in penalties and fines and $12.5 million in disgorgement. Exactly one-half of the total payment will be and placed into a fund that will be divided among customers who were defrauded by the firm. The remaining $12.5 will be used to resolve all remaining state regulators’ proceedings. In addition, Piper Jaffray accepted a federal court order prohibiting the firm from disobeying NYSE and NASD rules and all federal securities laws; the order also calls for the restructuring of the company’s equity research and banking divisions to ensure that the departments will not influence one another. Finally, the settlement stipulates that Piper Jaffray must foot the $7.5 million bill for firm clients’ independent research over the course of five years.



Find a Lawyer
Related Sites
Piper Jaffray Fraud Information
Securities Fraud Info
Criminal Law Info
Legal Rights Info

Piper Jaffray Fraud News
Securities Fraud News
Shareholder Fraud News
Investment Fraud News
Merrill Lynch Fraud News
Smith Barney Fraud News
Morgan Stanley Fraud News
UBS Warburg Fraud News
Credit Suisse Fraud News
Bear Stearns Fraud News
JP Morgan Fraud News
Lehman Brothers Fraud News
Deutsche Bank Fraud News
Charles Schwab Fraud News
Wachovia Securities Fraud News
Knight Trading Fraud News
Alliance Capital Fraud News
Goldman Sachs Fraud News
Enron Fraud News
Tyco Fraud News
WorldCom Fraud News
Adelphia Fraud News
Criminal Law News
Legal Rights News


RESOURCES
Recommended Sites
Law Schools
National Legal Associations
National Bar Associations
Statewide Legal Associations
Other Resources

Piper Jaffray Fraud InfoCenter
Terms of Use | Webmaster | Developed by Einstein Law, Inc. | Advertise

pjfraudinfocenter.com/...