1 pointI think you need to take with a grain of salt their stated costs. Typically costs are quarters end stated for internal production with current quarterly claimed margins. They have a large deferred revenue recognition with respect to their project builds and module acceptance periods of customers. This means that a large portion 30% or more could be from earlier builds as much as 6 months earlier when their costs were much higher than Q4 stated. For example it takes 1 to 2 months to freight ship. It could take another 1 to 2 months to get them installed. The contracts may also have acceptance clauses that require 6 months of running for baseline output. This suggests that a good portion of the quarterly recognized modules for revenues could be deffered from quarters back. Just look at Q1 where there revenue recognized modules were 1423MW and shipped is about 150MW more. As they mentioned they have over 900MW of EPC projects going on. That is the potential of 250MW a quarter in deferred sales until completed and acceptance. As they roll into more and more NTP this will be worse as will some of their major customer contracts like the recent 1.8GW contract. You also need to understand that not only is the deffered sales hitting their cost structure but it also props up the ASP. They are also being selective and selling to high margin markets and have built a direct sales team. These all lead to the higher ASP as well. The ASP was covered in a reply to Colin Rush.
1 pointI have a hard time confirming the $0.30 ASP. I do have theories after looking at revenue segments from the PR. The theory is that revenues of module sales is included in some of the other areas of revenues such as Kits OAM and ESS Projects. They shipped for Revenue 1423MW $371M for MSS solar modules and other products = $0.26 ASP If you add in $25M for kits , the ASP is $0.278 if you add in OAM you get $0.306 if you take MSS $431M you get $0.318 If you take MSS Kits OAM and Energy Projects you get $0.323 Clearly in MSS numbers some of the products is inverters rails etc as part of the kits. Lets presume Kits are 1/3 other costs $0.10 for inverters maybe $0.05 mounts connectors etc. This would reduce 8.3M from the revenue side and $0.006 in lowe ASP If OAM includes upgrades to modules, then there could be some module sales embedded inthose numbers. If say 20% of that is modules, then you lose about $0.022/W I presume that some of the Energy section could have embedded in it the module ASP for the NTP projects as sales. This could be as much as 70-80% of the services. That would lose about $0.01 on the above numbers. Very odd but my best guess is they took MSS numbers, at $453.1. This is $0.318. They subtracted out kits other costs and OAM non module costs(total of around $40M) or $0.028 And added in some NTP revenue say 50% or $0.008. That would get you around $0.298 ASP. This is just looking at the numbers and trying to figure where some of the module revenue would be recognized as a whole.