20-F is out

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

1

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 6:27pm

http://ir.trinasolar.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=206405&p=irol-sec

$178M negative cash flow, bummer.
Checked and reported JA Solar is the only one with positive operating cash flow 1.4M
Hanwha 168, ReneSola 93M negative

Go to the top of the page

larryvand

Unregistered

2

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 6:57pm

Since I don't see a 20-F for JASO, HSOL, SOL, YGE or CSIQ, how much was the negative operating cash flow for 2012 for Yingli and Canadian Solar? Thanks.

http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html

Go to the top of the page

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

3

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 7:05pm

Do not know. I think Canadian said their was negative for the year. If Trina's is YGE will be for sure.

Go to the top of the page

larryvand

Unregistered

4

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 7:08pm

So how did you get the JASO, HSOL and SOL numbers without 20-F's?

Go to the top of the page

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

5

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 7:22pm

JASO stated in their release, HSOL and SOL provided breakdown in their Q4 releases.

Go to the top of the page

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

6

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 7:39pm

I should not be surprised as much as they used cash to pay their accrued expenses and liabilities. Took money on project assets. Grew inventory. What they spent in operating and investing activities they covered with borrowing.

@Explo if you are reading this thread. their finished goods inventory on Dec 31st 2012, was $207M or 65%, this sounds like 318MW of modules at 0.66. They produced 1720MW modules and sold 1594MW, which leaves a balance of 126MW from 2012 production. Their 2011 finished goods inventory was $205M. Stack this against 192MW carry over (318-126) and you have some $1.06 per watt 205/192. Looking at the ASP in Q4 2011, it was at 1.01. So I think they had still that many modules.

Go to the top of the page

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

7

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 8:44pm

I could not find anything about $1.3B in off the balance sheet arrangements. All those contracts have been re-written. Pages F-46 and F-47. This basically closes the gap on the nonsense from the SeekingAlpha article.

Go to the top of the page

Klothilde

Professional

Posts: 737

Date of registration: Nov 19th 2012

Thanks: 77

8

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 9:25pm

Depreciation of 7.0 cts/W, dropping to 4.6 under full utilization.

Shipping of 3.4 cts/W, I think this is a slight increase relative to last year

Warranty of 0.78 cts/W, exactly 1% of ASP

Go to the top of the page

1 registered user thanked already.

Users who thanked for this post:

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

9

Tuesday, April 2nd 2013, 10:45pm

Based on Q4 statements it clearer that at 92% of 2.5GW, Q4 processing would be around .58 per watt. So the amo has a huge impact on the bottom line.

Go to the top of the page

explo

Professional

Posts: 1,171

Date of registration: Sep 29th 2012

Thanks: 103

10

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 1:22am

Quoted from "odyd12"

@Explo if you are reading this thread. their finished goods inventory on Dec 31st 2012, was $207M or 65%, this sounds like 318MW of modules at 0.66. They produced 1720MW modules and sold 1594MW, which leaves a balance of 126MW from 2012 production. Their 2011 finished goods inventory was $205M. Stack this against 192MW carry over (318-126) and you have some $1.06 per watt 205/192. Looking at the ASP in Q4 2011, it was at 1.01. So I think they had still that many modules.

Thanks I'll have to dig into this. I saw that their depreciation was close to 28m per Q on average. They've been a bit unclear on CCs indicating both 22m and 28m levels. I used 25m in my model. It looks like they are at least at 28m now, which adds a bit to their cash flow over their profit/loss and helps reduce cost when they get utilization up.

Go to the top of the page

explo

Professional

Posts: 1,171

Date of registration: Sep 29th 2012

Thanks: 103

11

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 1:35am

Quoted from "Klothilde"

Depreciation of 7.0 cts/W, dropping to 4.6 under full utilization.

Yes, they could get that down to 5 cts/W in 2013 if running at 90% as guided in Q4 CC. Exiting 2012 might have been higher than the average 7.0 cts/W though.

Quoted from "Klothilde"

Shipping of 3.4 cts/W, I think this is a slight increase relative to last year

Thanks. Quite high I think.

Quoted from "Klothilde"

Warranty of 0.78 cts/W, exactly 1% of ASP

Yes. This should be exactly 1% for everyone.

Go to the top of the page

explo

Professional

Posts: 1,171

Date of registration: Sep 29th 2012

Thanks: 103

12

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 1:39am

Quoted from "odyd12"

I could not find anything about $1.3B in off the balance sheet arrangements. All those contracts have been re-written. Pages F-46 and F-47. This basically closes the gap on the nonsense from the SeekingAlpha article.

LOL. Those 14.5b in "off balance sheet liabilities", which was more correctly stated contractual obligations (at legacy pricing) went down to 260m. Page 70. So much for that short angle. Trina is as free as CSIQ and SOL in their 20-F.

Go to the top of the page

Klothilde

Professional

Posts: 737

Date of registration: Nov 19th 2012

Thanks: 77

13

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 1:45am

Quoted from "explo"

Yes. This should be exactly 1% for everyone.

My darling FSLR recorded 2.2 cts/w in warranty expense, so I guess 2% of module value.

Go to the top of the page

explo

Professional

Posts: 1,171

Date of registration: Sep 29th 2012

Thanks: 103

14

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 1:54am

Okey, for everyone in c-Si

TF techs do not have the long field history as c-Si and with increasing warranty claims on FSLR panels I guess they need to use a bigger provision.

Note that SOL reversed some of it's provision in 2012. Only a 7m gain, since they haven't shipped a lot historically and thus had not accrued much, but for some of the old solar 11 module names like STP, YGE, TSL, CSIQ and HSOL, they should be able to cut the accrued provision for a one-off non-cash gain (some equity adrenaline shot during the melt). Replacing a defect module costs a lot less now than it did back in 2008.

Go to the top of the page

odyd12

Administrator

Posts: 1,529

Date of registration: Jan 3rd 2013

Thanks: 201

15

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 7:24am

Interesting that Trina is not really big on mono. They better efficiency in multi (different module but still)

Their R&D is only fractions of % lower on multi than mono. This explains perhaps smaller showing in Japan?

Go to the top of the page

Klothilde

Professional

Posts: 737

Date of registration: Nov 19th 2012

Thanks: 77

16

Wednesday, April 3rd 2013, 7:43am

Quoted from "odyd12"

Interesting that Trina is not really big on mono. They better efficiency in multi (different module but still)

Their R&D is only fractions of % lower on multi than mono. This explains perhaps smaller showing in Japan?

How do you know all this? From the 20-F ?