Recent

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

LDK Solar Co., Ltd. Message Board

twoheadedsnake1234 65 posts  |  Last Activity: Aug 31, 2015 3:17 PM Member since: Oct 17, 2008
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    fact check - Gordo

    by sstevanage Aug 26, 2015 5:13 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 31, 2015 3:17 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    fact check - Gordo

    by sstevanage Aug 26, 2015 5:13 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 28, 2015 3:16 PM Flag

    you leave it as an asset and add the generation revenue when you earn it just like any other sale.

  • Reply to

    fact check - Gordo

    by sstevanage Aug 26, 2015 5:13 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 28, 2015 8:24 AM Flag

    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.

  • twoheadedsnake1234 by twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 20, 2015 1:07 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Simply ludicrous

    by ughyucky1 Aug 20, 2015 9:31 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 20, 2015 12:57 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Simply ludicrous

    by ughyucky1 Aug 20, 2015 9:31 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 20, 2015 12:55 PM Flag

    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

  • Reply to

    The scam that is Yieldco

    by twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 10, 2015 8:08 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 10, 2015 8:23 AM Flag

    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.

  • twoheadedsnake1234 by twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 10, 2015 8:19 AM Flag

    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?

  • twoheadedsnake1234 by twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 10, 2015 8:08 AM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Gordon Finally Woke up

    by unclespeaking Aug 8, 2015 10:53 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 10, 2015 8:00 AM Flag

    Somebody has been reading my posts. :)

  • Reply to

    Overvalued based on $ per watt.

    by billberggren Aug 4, 2015 1:58 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 8, 2015 5:39 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Overvalued based on $ per watt.

    by billberggren Aug 4, 2015 1:58 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 8, 2015 5:36 PM Flag

    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?

    LMFAO

  • Reply to

    Rolling correction

    by zangnut Aug 6, 2015 1:34 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 8, 2015 6:53 AM Flag

    and when fundamentals suggest my other head needs to be yappin, it will

  • Reply to

    CSIQ $0.13 eps expected..

    by mtay515 Aug 7, 2015 12:09 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 7, 2015 4:32 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    CSIQ $0.13 eps expected..

    by mtay515 Aug 7, 2015 12:09 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 7, 2015 3:14 PM Flag

    could be a loss......

  • Reply to

    Rolling correction

    by zangnut Aug 6, 2015 1:34 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 7, 2015 3:04 PM Flag

    Not if you are looking for another 1000 points for the markets to drop. I would expect Trina at $6 then.

  • Reply to

    Rolling correction

    by zangnut Aug 6, 2015 1:34 PM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 7, 2015 12:01 PM Flag

    The market needs a 10 to 15% correction. The peak was over 18,000. it needs to pull back to $15,500 to $16,500. That means solars have much more downside room

  • Reply to

    div 6+

    by amaretto_fianchetto Aug 7, 2015 11:37 AM
    twoheadedsnake1234 twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 7, 2015 11:57 AM Flag

    tell you what, you give me $100,000. I will give you $5,000 per year and take $20,000 per year in salary for myself. In 5 years sue me because I have no more money for the dividend, yet I showed cash flow statements to you that told you that.

    That is what you are getting in the Yieldco garbage.

  • twoheadedsnake1234 by twoheadedsnake1234 Aug 6, 2015 6:52 PM Flag

    to check out the merchandise and found she was a he and said no longer taking a walk on the wild side. Won't get fooled again