SolarPVInvestor Forums

Any news posted on the thread dedicated to the company in a form of link should have a logical relationship to that company.
Any argument on superiority of any company should have data to confirm it and prove factual
benefit. This can be done only in the form of the analysis, operational, mathematical, accounting based.

Data must be published from the company’s documents, and sources, generally accepted as reliable.

Posting unrelated, not based on facts statements will be deleted for the benefit of the members, who are looking for facts and to benefit their investment decisions.

Analysis should be based on facts not bias, but may lead to statement of factual superiority of the condition in comparison of one company to another. Comparable analysis is welcomed on any dedicated, company thread without using emotional bias, and unsubstantiated statements, which cannot be confirmed. Assumptions
should be described as “I assume, I suspect, etc.” instead stated as facts, so there is clear distinction of fact from “expectation”. Posts, which are considered to attract emotional reaction from viewer, will be considered a spam. Assessment will be made regularly to understand what constitutes spamming. Any promotional actives should be send to administrator for consideration of advertising on the board.
Calculations must be made using factual data as a starting point and evolve to “forecast” figures.
Any single forecasted number, must be quantified, and not assumed. Quantification should be based on existing
figures, events, market setting to lead to a forecast.

Accounting principles must be used all the time if arguments to be made on points of reference to balance sheets, income statements and any financial or operating statements.

Posts, which attempt to challenge analysis done in above, described fashion, must provide mathematical and accounting based view, to prove different outcome. Other forms will be not acceptable.

In order to monitor certain forums, four forums, TSL, CSIQ, YGE and SOL, will have a role of the moderator. Members are invited to submit names of other members as candidates for moderator’s role.

In case of more than one person candidate, the poll will be held to pick the best candidate.

Please reply to this message with the names. Members cannot suggest own candidature. Polls will be initiated 48 hours from the current time 9:27AM MST. This is the period for candidate submission. another 48 hours will be added for poll activity.

Submission is id name -forum name

Nano- CSIQ
Explo-SOL

I cannot be picked I am already moderating all of it.

Bloomberg or Reuters article do not have snowflakes, roofs or OMGs. If they did they would be considered unprofessional. I am not suggesting everyone should be a professional only or act as one every time they write a post, but what is wrong with simple fact speaking for itself?

Quoted from "Pop2mollys"

Who decides which sources are allowed on this board and which ones aren't? Also which posters can be used as sources for for future data estimates? Also on future data estimates there will always be some guessing based on posters opinions and many different moving parts which may effect data one way or another.

Discussion here is no on sources of data, it is not even whether data presented is accurate. It is about the factual discussion, which is based on real figures, business conditions and indicators.
I gave enough description in regard of the forecast format and how to present it. Have a quick look at 0.51 cents conversation on CSIQ board. The company's presentation says 0.20 per watt wafer in 2013. Surely it did not go well for everyone to accept it. None of the opposing people have any "source" to say this is wrong but own forecast and perception how things will be in that time frame
Yet look at the argument pool around it. Klothilde calls Explo's analysis good, and states that GCL will sell wafers at 0.23 per watt, based on it. Then the whole thing is packaged with set of statements using reversal psychology that mediator, in here presumed nano, would want to delete such a good analysis, to hide facts. Before he was going to rip his head off, so why stop and not to do unethical. As you may observe there is no issue with the source or denial of forecasting or speculative applications offered by Explo. It is what happens with it afterward and how it is packaged. This is what we are talking about.
Who decides, the reader, those who are found accurate, more logical, using proper data and properly will be the ones, which will help to take us through already difficult task of understanding, and perhaps more difficult appreciating this industry.

Quoted from "Klothilde"

Now, these numbers hinge on assumptions and not company numbers (as do your forecasts as well), so nano as a moderator could interpret them somehow as spam and decide to delete them. That's why I'm no fan of content regulation. Less is better (imho).

I have explained how to address this:

Quoted from "odyd12"

Comparable analysis is welcomed on any dedicated, company thread without using emotional bias, and unsubstantiated statements, which cannot be confirmed. Assumptions
should be described as “I assume, I suspect, etc.” instead stated as facts, so there is clear distinction of fact from “expectation”.

Further forecast should be supported by existing data and evolve:

Quoted from "odyd12"

Calculations must be made using factual data as a starting point and evolve to “forecast” figures.
Any single forecasted number, must be quantified, and not assumed. Quantification should be based on existing
figures, events, market setting to lead to a forecast.

Your comments were unnecessary, no moderator would ever remove value from the post. I think we have an issue on matching what is "value" of any given post. If we ever agree on it, we will see posts in the same light.

Quoted from "Pop2mollys"

That's my point 2 posters could have very different end results as to where future numbers fall based on their opinions of which way market conditions could go. They both us present data sets to get to their conclusions but they diverge on which way market conditions go. It's possible both could be right using their "assumptions" but we won't know till that future data point.

And what is the concern? As long as they are based on facts there are no issues. Again perfect background: GCL, I see 0.20 possible, Explo does not. We arrived to two different conclusions. Nobody is going to delete this.
However, someone saying Renesola has the best processing in the world and check CSIQ statement of losses, with SOL shipping tariff free to EU, GCL lost $500M and they bankrupt next, would be a candidate, don't you think?
This is the essence of this conversation here.

N0mistakes -CSIQ
thejag-YGE
sc solar-TSL
Klothilde-SOL

I should also find out from the nominees if they are interested.
Let's be known that you are interested.