Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Exelon Corporation Message Board

barrygeo 63 posts  |  Last Activity: May 1, 2015 10:15 AM Member since: Oct 8, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    INOX booked one new biggie

    by anybonus Apr 30, 2015 1:41 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo May 1, 2015 10:15 AM Flag

    Hi getaclue,

    I think your $9 million/qrt burn rate is probably too high. I don’t think it was quite that high last year, and I expect it to improve in the future.

    The last 10q states that “Cash used in operations for the nine months ended December 31, 2014 was $20.9 million” … which is about $7 million per quarter.

    At dec 31 they had about $36.5m of cash and restricted cash. According to their preliminary results pr, they expected to report a cash balance for Mar 31 of “ $24.5 million of cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash, which reflects payment made to Ghodawat Energy Pvt Ltd during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014 in final settlement of their arbitration claim.”

    … a decrease of about $12m cash balance for the quarter.

    The payment to Ghodawat was about $8.5 million. Doing the math, excluding the one-time payment to Ghodawat, cash burn for the most recent quarter was $3.5 million.

    I don’t claim to know what cash burn will be like in coming quarters, but it’s bound to be a decent improvement from last year, due mostly to Inox. But turning cash-flow positive is going to be a tough nut for them, and I think you are right to assume there will eventually be more dilution.

    Good luck

  • Reply to

    INOX booked one new biggie

    by anybonus Apr 30, 2015 1:41 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 30, 2015 6:46 PM Flag

    I think last year there was an initial $40m order from Inox, and later they had to add a $15m order to that. In Inox' prospectus, it says the contracts cover deliveries up to the end of April 2015, so we should see a new order in the next month or two (would be my guess).

    Figure $55 million total last year, then look at Inox' recent growth rate, and maybe the next order will increase somewhat in proportion to how much Inox is growing. The most optimistic guess I'm willing to venture is a 50% increase from last year's order, which would be about $80 million.

    But like I said, it's a guess, and it could be substantially more or less than that. Let's hope the market reacts favorably.
    glta

  • barrygeo by barrygeo Apr 29, 2015 10:43 AM Flag

    To read a good article on Inox, google the following:

    forbes india inox

    For the prospectus, google the following:

    inox wind limited red herring prospectus

  • Reply to

    Sinovel's turnaround short-lived?

    by barrygeo Apr 28, 2015 10:01 AM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 28, 2015 3:03 PM Flag

    AMSC never had a chance of getting anything out of China's courts, in my opinion. For that matter, even an award from the U.S. courts will simply be ignored by Sinovel, because the U.S. will have no way to enforce it.

    The market is aware that the legal route will not pan out for amsc, and that is reflected in amsc's stock price.

    Look for good news in other areas. Particularly, next Inox order, and maybe dvar business will pick up.

    good luck

  • That company's reporting of full-year profit for 2014 - after they suffered heavy losses the first three quarters - didn't seem quite right to me. They sold a bunch of their receivables in order to pay off debt, and I think they were able to report that sale as a profit (Thus, technically, the full-year profit.) But it looks like 1q 2015 was terrible for Sinovel. Google the following:

    Sinovel swings to USD-13m profit in 2014

    cut and pasted:

    "Yet, in the first quarter of 2015 the company’s attributable net loss widened to CNY 248 million from CNY 171.2 million in the same period of 2014. This came as a result of a 84.14% year-on-year drop in January-March revenues to CNY 228 million."

    Now google the following:

    US warns China over intellectual property risks

    Deep in the story there is mention of the amsc-sinovel legal dispute, and a single sentence that caught my attention:

    "Chinese wind industry sources say the government has quietly sidelined Sinovel from participating in new tenders."

    So the embarrassment of a large bond default was avoided by the sale of receivables. And they are going to let Sinovel continue to wither away.

    glta

  • Reply to

    Will trade back over a buck

    by barrygeo Dec 23, 2014 12:51 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 10:22 PM Flag

    And sooner than I thought. But there's no date or number of shares set yet. My bull argument is weakened by this notice, but at the same it's strengthened by the company's announced expectations for DVAR sales, another REG project, and more Navy business.

    I'd already been expecting a "large wind order", but I hesitate to guess a dollar figure.

    I'll be holding, and maybe even adding more shares if it drops below $9. good luck

  • Reply to

    For bigfatty

    by barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 2:47 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 9:40 PM Flag

    [Why give him any kind of help, isn't that a emotion on your part]

    True, amps. I'm no Spock. Good luck to you.

  • Reply to

    For bigfatty

    by barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 2:47 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 4:08 PM Flag

    Dude, do you understand that decisions get appealed? Yes, an initial hearing on one of the cases will be heard in lower court on May 11. There could be more hearings over the coming months. After the last hearing, a judgement comes still months later. Then, if amsc wins, Sinovel appeals to a higher court. If Sinovel wins, amsc appeals. From there, the process is repeated until goes all the way to the Chinese Supreme. A final ruling that cannot be appealed could very well still be years away.

    BTW, there are two civil cases ongoing in China. One was dismissed today. AMSC lost. They are appealing.

    Starting to understand yet?

  • Reply to

    For bigfatty

    by barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 2:47 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 3:19 PM Flag

    [ ... cash wont burn if we win lawsuit ]

    I won't say it's impossible, archarch. But I don't think you appreciate how long it would take, even if we do get favorable rulings from China. AMSC made it clear in their pr today that they expect their cases in China will ultimately have to go before the Chinese supreme court.

    I guess for the next few years we get to keep hearing your impatient whining demands on this msg board. There is really nothing McGahn or amsc's lawyers can do to speed up the process. Suggest you accept that reality, or else move on to something else.

    good luck

  • barrygeo by barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 2:47 PM Flag

    There will be a time in the future when shorting amsc will be a good move again, but it's not now.

    Yes, cash burn will continue, and there will be more dilution. But the long, relentless downward spiral has played out. We will be seeing a medium or long-term uptrend coinciding with favorable YoY comparisons, virtually guaranteed by Inox' impressive growth (and augmented to an unknown extent by Navy revenue and sooner or later REG revenue)

    Today is classic consolidation before the uptrend continues. I hope you will use the next few days to cover.

    I really and truly admire your earlier short play here. It was a great call. But at what point do you stop seeking praise and credit for it? I know you don't like it, but as I said before, my take on you is that you've become sort of emotionally invested in seeing amsc fail, and it's gotten in the way of your judgement of the facts.

    "The equity is worthless"
    "BK this year"
    "Curse of the reverse"

    They are nothing but snappy slogans, dude. Good luck

  • Reply to

    HTS Magnet System/500 employees

    by mchase9255 Apr 22, 2015 7:46 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 2:31 PM Flag

    Google the following to find the 500 employee limit to Small Business Initiative Rewards:

    Guide to SBIR/STTR Program Eligibility

    Cut and pasted from the first page:

    "This guide explains the ownership and control requirements and provides illustrative examples. It also explains the 500 employee size limit and how a firm’s affiliates are determined when measuring its size."

  • Reply to

    HTS Magnet System/500 employees

    by mchase9255 Apr 22, 2015 7:46 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 1:17 PM Flag

    A repair manual and a users manual for a product that would exist only as a design on paper? You are really reaching

    Anyway, the stuff you mention would still only take a handful of engineers to accomplish. The 500 employee figure obviously has nothing to do with the workforce needed for the contract, but more likely refers to the size of company eligible for the contract.

    good luck

  • Reply to

    HTS Magnet System/500 employees

    by mchase9255 Apr 22, 2015 7:46 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 23, 2015 10:19 AM Flag

    I think it's a small business award, and the 500 employees might be a limit or a guidance of the approximate size of the business that should be awarded the contract. Obviously, it would not take 500 people to merely come up with a " conceptual/preliminary design" for an hts magnet

  • Reply to

    Will trade back over a buck

    by barrygeo Dec 23, 2014 12:51 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 22, 2015 1:48 PM Flag

    Posted that near the end of last year. Pre-split. It's there now.

    I admit it took longer than I'd expected, but I never lost confidence, and I ain't taking profits yet. Reading my original post, I'm more optimistic now compared to then. Inox growth may be more than I'd expected back then, and more good news still possible from REG and Navy.

    Profitability unlikely this year, but the downward spiral has played out. The only nagging concern is that at some point they are bound to have another offering, and it's hard to say when. glta

  • Reply to

    No numbers in the Navy announcement

    by barrygeo Apr 20, 2015 9:35 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 3:48 PM Flag

    [One ship-set will not move the needle on this money losing company]

    No, but it apparently can move the needle on the stock price rather nicely. I hope to happily eat my words that any rally based on this news will be short-lived. We shall see. If it holds, then I think the double bottom is confirmed, and we're heading to $11, $12 or higher.

    good luck

  • Reply to

    No numbers in the Navy announcement

    by barrygeo Apr 20, 2015 9:35 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 1:40 PM Flag

    [The fact that the Navy is going to do the install plus the fact that this solicitation is coded as "Research and Development" indicates that this will be for testing purposes, presumably one ship-set.]

    Read thru the pr and the solicitation and I don't see installation mentioned anywhere. Correct me if I'm wrong. It could involve involve installing in a ship, or it could be just to demonstrate that everything the Navy wants (including quick disconnects) can be achieved. I assume we will get more details, including dollar figures, after April 28. glta

  • Reply to

    No numbers in the Navy announcement

    by barrygeo Apr 20, 2015 9:35 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 11:51 AM Flag

    [For degaussing cables amsc has been sinking their own money into it so far ... amsc has had people on the payroll working on degaussing without any remuneration from the Navy. ]

    I think you are correct, lafeet. I never said the contract would not improve the bottom, but I have said it won't be enough to stop cash burn in time to avoid another round of financing. You yourself agreed with me on this a couple of months ago.

    Anyway, you and others are very critical about my "implying" things. But looking back at my post, I think I was actually stating something very close to a fact, and not "implying" anything at all when I stated:

    "If the process is "expected" to meet cost targets, then the cost remains too high."

    It does not appear to be ready for widespread deployment on Navy ships, imo. Good luck

  • Reply to

    No numbers in the Navy announcement

    by barrygeo Apr 20, 2015 9:35 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 9:42 AM Flag

    Good news was bound to come, and there will be more.

    I know my recent comments are all negative, but they've been consistent with what I've been saying: 1) Doubtful the revenue from the Navy contract will be significant enough to make a big difference in the near term, 2) Skeptical about the continued high cost of hts, and 3) Doubtful about rewards from the Sinovel lawsuit.

    But I've also been consistent about the bull argument: Mainly, revenues seem almost certain to rise YoY due to Inox's impressive growth (and assuming other revenue sources remain more or less the same). The next Inox contract is the news I'm really waiting for.

    Add to that any impetus to the stock price from navy and REG announcements, and I think the stock has been oversold. I remain long and confident at $7.70 ave.

    glta

  • Reply to

    Seventh Circuit

    by barrygeo Apr 19, 2015 11:00 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 8:59 AM Flag

    Archarch, if you were not invested in amsc, you wouldn’t give a hoot about the Sinovel case.

    Yea, I can tell you’re all about karma

    As you sow seeds of hate toward “Scumovel”, cursing them, hoping for revenge, so that your investment in amsc will rise, and as you flood this message board with impatient demands on the CEO …

  • Reply to

    No numbers in the Navy announcement

    by barrygeo Apr 20, 2015 9:35 PM
    barrygeo barrygeo Apr 21, 2015 8:57 AM Flag

    It is interesting, and it implies that the cable is not ready widespread use in the Navy. If the process is "expected" to meet cost targets, then the cost remains too high.

EXC
34.09-0.03(-0.09%)9:42 AMEDT