A little DD? LOL. Who cares what you did in 2011? I didn't say to buy RIG or DO, only that they are better values than HERO. MUCH better values. And who's ranting? You are incoherent.
"... first point out that most stocks in the sector are trading at a range of 1.5X BV to 2X BV"
Are you comparing HERO to RIG and DO and the like? That's funny. Unless my information is wrong, HERO's got 13 jackups cold-stacked. And how many high spec deep water floaters do they have? Don't look at BV for this one. What's the market for jackups? Can you get anything for them? HERO may be undervalued but I would say it's hard to value this company and that's the reason the stock stinks. You're better off with DO or RIG, both of which are better values IMO.
Everybody needs to take it easy. It's very much worth comparing these companies in a cool-headed way. Looking at Rev / Market cap may be too simple, though.
PLUG will be growing rev at ~150% and their gross margins will change drastically. PLUG gets all the attention because of Walmart. They're the ones who sparked the rally in this space. Their sales growth is off the charts. But their gross margins are negative (for now). Will they be profitable selling to WMT?
BLDP has lower revs but higher margins than FCEL. Their growth trajectory seems a better than FCEL.
FCEL has high sales and razor thin margins. Growth rates are a little irregular. From what I can tell, FCEL has projects that are in a kind of "trial" mode and could be a model for many more larger-scale power projects. Perhaps they'd then be acquired by a larger player? GE, maybe?
The problem I see with all of these companies is that there just doesn't seem to be a lot of profit potential. I really don't like to see single digit margins on $200M+ revenues.
The run up is simply attention being paid to the space after PLUG's successes lately. Hence, the reason I am here. Can anybody tell me what the deal is with gross margins? I was going to buy this but I can't in good conscience buy a company with such awful GMs. Still, they're at least positive, compared to PLUG. Is this a temporary thing? Will they rise with more volume?
Improved operating earnings and a positive economy has led to the upgrade of several mortgage insurance companies in the US.
"The rating actions reflect these mortgage insurers' improved recent and prospective operating earnings arising from the overall positive macroeconomic trends in the US," said Standard & Poor's (S&P) credit analyst Ron Joas.
The rating agency raised its financial strength (FSR) and issuer credit ratings (ICR) on Mortgage Guaranty Insurance (MGIC) and MGIC Indemnity (MIC) to 'BB' from 'B', as well as its unsolicited issue-level rating and ICR on MGIC Investment to 'B' from 'B-'. It also revised the outlook on MGIC Investment to positive from stable, while MGIC and MIC remain positive.
Radian Guaranty and its related mortgage insurance subsidiaries also received an improved FSR and ICR to 'BB-' from 'B'. The group’s ICR remained at 'B-', while the outlook was increased to positive from stable.
“We also raised our FSR on Genworth Mortgage Insurance and Genworth Residential Mortgage Insurance of North Carolina to 'BB-' from 'B' and ICR on Genworth Mortgage Insurance to 'BB-' from 'B'. We revised the outlook to positive from stable,” said S&P.
In addition, FSRs on United Guaranty Residential Insurance and United Guaranty Mortgage Indemnity (collectively UGC MI) increased to 'A-' from 'BBB+' and ICR on United Guaranty Residential Insurance went to 'A-' from 'BBB+'. The outlook remains stable.
Arch Mortgage Insurance received an increase in FSR and ICR to 'BBB+' from 'BBB-', and went to stable from positive.
The statement concluded: “Our view stems largely from the continued reduction of incurred losses that are based on the decline in the number of new notices of delinquencies (NODs) and rate of development of delinquencies to claim. The current ratings incorporate the potential for adverse business, financial, economic, and regulatory conditions, including potentially higher capital requirements, from government-sponsored entities (GSEs) th
MLPs pay distributions from future investors. All the DCF stuff is just a way to justify their model to people who don't know any better. That's why they have to raise capital regularly. That said, shorting a stock and then getting Barron's to bash it for you is bush league.
He also bought shares in the 13s and 14s. His average is probably around $19 or so.
"If that was true we would all be driving electric cars now and coking on coal emissions."
The technology needed for electric cars -- namely the battery capacity -- is still improving, and has only become good enough in the last few years. It will continue to improve over the next few years and the costs will come down. As you can tell, it's expensive right now but as the tech improves and adoption rates rise, you'll see mroe and more electric cars until most people are driving electric. This will take maybe 10 years. Remember, our infrastructure and our culture are built on gasoline-powered IC cars. That takes time to change. As soon as electric cars are cheaper and give at least 200 miles in range, you will start to see mass adoption. It is the future.
" And also having electrical outlets every 20 miles on the highway with rest areas for thousands of people as they wait hours for the vehicle to charge."
That's already happening, but charging stations can be made anywhere -- right at your home or at your place of work or at the supermarket. You charge before you ever get on the road or at your destination.
That 40% is only for coal/gas. What about the 31% of the US grid that is nuclear and renewable resources? They use ZERO fossil fuels and have ZERO emissions. So assuming the other 69% of the grid is 40% efficient, that makes the whole grid 58.6% efficient. And that 59-62% efficiency already includes charging inefficiencies. And taking all the worst case numbers, including 10% transmission loss (which, as I said, is very high) you still end up with 30% efficiency compared to gasoline-powered IC cars. If consider the fact that gasoline-powered IC cars spend a lot of time idling, the real efficiency is actually much lower than 17-21%. So, yeah, DOUBLE the efficiency in the worst case scenarios. And it can even be improved much more by making our grid more efficient. Stop embarrassing yourself. If you hate electric cars for political reasons, thats your problem, but it doesn't change the facts.
All that said I think TSLA is overvalued. I happen to think all-electric vehicles are the future, but that doesn't mean I would buy an overvalued stock.
Um, no it's not. IC engines are 17-21% efficient in terms of energy conversion. Electric cars are 59-62% efficient in converting electric power FROM THE GRID -- that accounts for charging efficiency and parasitic losses. Transmission losses are less than 10% depending on where you live, and usually less than 5% for most cities. Stop making assertions based on something you know nothing about.