Something to consider after read the recent news article, and perhaps already mentioned by someone here is
Just as big oil companies continue to receive government subsidies so will American solar companies in an effort to increase expansion of solar energy into the existing grid. To me, it seems like a no brainer to be investing in both FSLR and SPWR (only time will tell who the ultimate winner will be), but right now FSLR has the most cash to play with. After reading the recent headlines, is FSLR looking to become a utility company by selling power to existing utility companies from what it expects to produce from the solar farms it’s buying, or does it simply intent to complete these solar farm projects and sell them as turnkey systems back to the local power companies?
Doing the first could have tremendous positive financial impact going forward as electricity will only increase in cost with time. It will be a real cash cow for the company if they’re able to setup these solar farms all over the country/world because eventually their cost of producing this power is next to nothing.
Can anyone else elaborate on this.
Let me try and clear up these "oil subsidies" we always hear about. I know the press is 98.7% Left so I understand the mis-information.
Here is the difference: Oil companies recieve a tax credit AFTER they have spent their OWN money to drill and out fit the wells. And only if it qualifies. Now solar. Solar gets a loan from the govenrment because nobody will lend them$ at a rate they can even stand a chance to stay alive. They then build the panels, equip. etc. It gets better. Lib govt have mandated that solar be used so the big utility companies have to buy the stuff and in comes a middle man-like Buffet. His companies gets money from the govt for the same reason-even he can not get a private loan at a favorable rate for this #$%$. He then contracts with fslr to build the plant and sells the electricity to the big utility-I am not done.
Then the utility buys the energy BUT it is more expensive then Nat gas etc so they get a credit from the govt so they do not have to charge the idiots in the public that doesnt know better. So lets review:
Oil companies use their own money, provide a product with a huge demand , employ 100 of thousands of people , paid over 350 billion in all taxes last year, and has found the largest pool of energy the world has ever know.
solar- there is no demand at all. It is created by govt, funded at every level of the business cycle, and has produced 376 bankruptcies and counting....and there is one more possibility. Obama, after watching the complete and total failure of the scam, may actually know insist that all govt,schools, and military bases switch to Solar etc. So the circle is complete. Fund the start up capital, fund the distribution, fund the purchase, and then when all else fails-buy the product.
Meanwhile the alternative is now 40% more effecient and the gap is increasing....and we now have a 600 year supply.
Cant figure out why we have increased the national Debt by 8 trillion since Obama came to power..
My understanding is quite different finplan - but the results are essentially the same. Oil and gas companies get subsidies for exploratory drilling. If it proves out, and goes into production, then every barrel of oil and therm of natural gas pulled out of the ground has a royalty attached to it payable to the US Treasury. So, there is payback on the subsidy. The exception is the case of BP and Exxon who took $10B tax credits for cleaning up their oil spill messes. Now that's a fiasco. And it dwarfs what the US government pays out in renewable energy tax credits every year.
And I can guarantee they won't. I work the utilities on solar projects, and no way do they want to own a solar company. To wit, how many utilities own coal, natural gas, or nuclear companies ? LOL Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. First fracing and now this. PS . and you covered your short too early too.