Means they are most likely behind on getting enough quality projects to do a Yieldco in a reasonable time period(by summer).
Right after an IPO that raised tons of cash. Now the real value of the assets comes into play. The CAFD is not a profitable business model and is a money losing venture for any shareholder.
Q3 baby big asset writedown coming from devaluation. $1Billion shareholder equity that consists of assets and liabilities primarily in China depreciated 4% instantly.
That street number obliterated by the write downs that should be comming
They may not claim sales to themselves but they do 1 better and add all their future estimated profits from the projects to the books now even though there is no guarantee of the revenues.
Which is why you should ignore nonGAAP numbers and focus on strictly GAAP. In those numbers, you can not include sales to a majority owned subsidiary which is what CSIQ is doing and kinda like what Trina is doing by placing retained earnings on their books.
I mean what do you expect for share price. Look at earnings. They have made $0.58 so far and will be lucky to make $1.25. That is a far cry from the $2 and $3 many expected this year.
Now that the evidence is in regarding earnings, the reset the price according. That places this puppy at thee $9 range. Might even hit $6's if the market continues to drop the 100 points it already has
All those people looking for $4 or $5 in EPS this year will be lucky to earn $1.50 net profits. That $32 a share was based on $4 in net profits, now less that $2 is a positive. You must reset the price to the earnings. That is $12-$16 at best.
In their blowout quarter they made $0.40 net profits. That is pathetic. They are giving away $1 in EPS to the third party owners or nearly 1/3 of the companies earnings for servicing the convertible loan. That is a scam.
fundamentals say this company is going to earn $1.50 net profit this year. A PE of 8 says $12 a share in value. Lots more to go down from here.
First off they made $0.40 on top of the $0.19 they made in Q1. They are on pace for earning $1.50 a share this year. Do you really think they deserve above $12 or $16 with that kind of earnings? Historically a PE of 8 suggests this thing is a $12 stock.
When the market falls further as it is headed, you may very well be getting this for that $12 if not $16 dollars
WS will scam investors. The sponsors are the beneficiary of the Yieldco story being spun by WS and a counterparty to the potential problems. These sponsors get basically their entire investments paid in cash upfront plus profit and then take over half the dividend distribution. And WS gets their multi million dollar commissions every time the Yoeldco goes to the well for more money and more debt finance. The debt secured assets because lord knows, WS can't be in a position to lend money and not have is secured.
Look at TERP. They return 40 cents on the dollar to the investor as dividends from revenue. They generate around $0.13/kwhr for revenue. 20 years they generate some $3.90 in revenue but only return $1.56 in dividends.
Now look at CAFD, they suckered investors into paying(including sponsors share) near $2B. That is over $5 per watt. If they operate similar to TERP(and they will) you get returned $1.56 for every $5 you invested and the cash generation left in that product is half the $1.56 you got. You will be lucky to have gotten $2.25/watt while the assets you helped them buy has near zero value left.
Would you invest in a company that asks for $5 and promises to pay you only half that and then tell you sorry the assets are gone and we have no more money to give you 20 years later?
TERP has averaged around $0.13/KWR. They are giving a dividend of 40-45% of the revenue. They are retuning over 20 years only $1.39/watt fromt he revenue generation. The rest is going to maintenance and operational expense and interest and principal.
Think about that CAFD suckered investors into paying $5/watt. If they perform like TERP(and they will) this is a massive money losing proposition where there is no asset and you get less than 50% of your asset back over 20 years and not even your principal.
liweixin, the guy was showing what 8.3 paid for the assets. 8.3 bought the assets for near $2Bilion if you count the debt and all 75M shares. That is $5/watt on contracts thta will generate $1.5 to $1.6B in revenue.
Could not agree more. This company is going to generate in real revenue less than $250M to give to the shareholders not named SPWR or FSLR once all debt interest and expenses are paid. They con investors into believing cash flows are good enough to pay dividends and operate the company. $65M for 25 years is well $1.6Billion to be given to shareholders including the Sunpower and First Solar. So where does the extra $1Billion come from to fund that?
yeah, run midrange guidance on midrange margins. $600M * ,14 = $84M. Not the $154Mm they pulled down last quarter in gross.
Then take Q1 Opex of $74M and add the $7M per Q they stated Recurrent will add and you are already at $81M in expenses and no interest paymetns yet.
Unlikely? , from an operational perspective it could very well happen.
And the rest of the quarters are not expected to be to much father off on the revenues based on the full year guidance.