Was reading some of the filings with the PUC. The last scheduling order expects a decision by September 26th, 2014.
I only read a few of the filings but in general it was just as you would expect in that there are letters from local politicans and providers supporting the change and letters from everywhere else opposed. The politicians chairing the committees in charge of utilities seemed consistently opposed to the change.
What if it is basically a stock issuance scam where they just continually issue shares to cover expenses such as executive salaries or expenses of trips to New York with no real intention of operating a viable business? Wouldn't you agree such an operation should be de-listed?
You wouldn't want to unload something that is worthless on someone else would you?
Basically, they outsource pretty much everything both components and assembly. Extremely low fixed costs, high variable but it can depend on contracts with the contract providers. If they are paying large fees to have them ready to kick into gear it is not disclosed in regulatory filings as a risk-factor and it would be a violation of GAAP to not disclose a large commitment like that. Maybe it is short-term, if that is the case, then it would be mentioned as a risk-factor. We also know they do not have significant fixed assets so it has to be a contractual obligation such as AMD has with their foundry in order for it to be the situation you describe.
If you have any information to indicate my understanding is wrong that is specific, I would welcome it but I'm pretty sure you don't so I'll leave you alone now.
If anyone wants to discuss their supply chain I'd be happy to discuss it. I know my information is fragmented and can be improved upon but I'm pretty sure I get the basics.
o.k. what are they? Please point me to where you are reading about these significant fixed costs. I'm not saying they are non-existent, I'm just saying they are not significant based on a review of the MD&A and financials.
Well, it is disappointing to be sure. Still, the contracts probably aren't completely clear and the procedures and processes that are being established today will have a big impact on the country 25 years from now. They should do what they think is best. If that means further delay and arbitration, that is the way it goes.
They do not have manufacturing plants sitting idle so what are the fixed costs?
If they do have volume and margins at some point in the future don't you think others will rush in to capture those margins or do you think the market is static?
What metrics are you looking at? I am looking at cash balances, current margins, quality of management (as indicated by prior actions which are very consistent), current and future performance as I see it based on my understanding of events, regulatory documents and other management guidance.
I do not know how things are going to work out. I simply make educated guesses but the most important thing I can do is bring discipline when it comes to purchase and sale decisions so that the odds may ever be in my favor. Who knows, maybe over the long-long term the odds aren't but I think they are and I've been around.
No need to insult. Probably did hear wrong. Whoever he was, he sounded like he has lost a ton of money and didn't care at all.
Greedy, listen to the annual report on-line. Tim McDonald asked some good questions and seemed like a very nice man. How he wound up putting so much money into this company's shares is hard to understand. Why he felt the need to "suck up" to management is hard to understand too.
You are certainly welcome to your opinions and express them as I am. The questions in the meeting were good, I think people generally understand the situation, including you, but Mr. Allen didn't really respond to them.
Will correct your statement regarding the margins on Reliance. They did not say margins are going to be low to mid 20s. That is their goal for the business. World of difference.
One would hope that someone will ask about (1) terms of Reliance deal or at least a promise that margins will be north of 20% without extended payment terms, (2) when is Nokia going to be paid back, (3) cash balances and how they can survive the next four or five months, (4) do they think they were transparent in that last share issuance with regard to how the full-ratchet provision worked.
They are generally an ethical if not particularly sharp group of guys but they did cross the line of what I consider acceptable in that last share issuance.
Loyal3 is a very positive innovation. I loved the way AMC allowed their customers to participate in the IPO.
SC was obviously fully priced but it isn't like Loyal3 customers were the only ones buying it.
I just tend to assume the company would issue a press release plus the share price has spiked (and gone down) with no news. It doesn't take much buying or selling to move the price.
Doesn't mean I don't hope otherwise.
Yes, that is certainly the case. Everyone wants reduced electricity rates and who knows, maybe they should get it but if the smelter is at risk they are in bad shape because of their significant debt load. The smelter could be financially viable and they still go bankrupt when the debt has to be repaid.
It is a tough issue to deal with. I don't envy the management team.
I tend to not put much stock in the price action of stocks in this sector. I don't think they leak, few people actually read the regulatory documents or do analysis and even fewer (myself included) actually know the future prospects of the sector.
The India deal will be interesting. They had to buy it, what choice did they have? If I were them I would have done it and I'd try and structure it so I could get as much margin possible and create back end liabilities via extended payment terms or service obligations. Then they can declare victory, issue stock and survive for a few more years.
Who really believes the smelter faces a substantial likelihood of an imminent closure?
If prices collapse further, sure, it might happen but aren't they already a low-cost producer? Maybe giving them a rate that declines with aluminum prices makes sense provided that an increase in prices results in increased rates.