Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/24/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    https://www.engadget.com/2018/09/26/china-raises-renewable-energy-target-to-reduce-coal/?yptr=yahoo
  2. 3 points
    There's also this: Canadian Solar Inc. (the "Company" or "Canadian Solar") CSIQ, -0.42% one of the world's largest solar power companies, announced that it has completed the sale of three additional solar power plants totaling 30.4 MWp for JPY11.5 billion (US$103.1 million) to the Canadian Solar Infrastructure Fund, Inc. ("CSIF", Tokyo Stock Exchange ticker 9284) in Japan. This expands CSIF's current capacity to 105.6 MWp from 75.2 MWp. I suspect there's no reaction because there are 250 of us in the world that invest in solar stocks and we're all holding a bag already.
  3. 3 points
    I was thinking in a longer perspective on profitability on panel production. Much of their GM (not to mention their NM considering high R&D) on that was related to the cost of polysilicon. It's like you want to move the long-term ASP pain of FSLR from falling polysilicon costs to DQ. DQ shareholder pain won't alleviate FSLR shareholder pain so what's the point on bashing another stock for the pain that hits both your stock and that stock. Again I'm talking long-term profits and then it is really the thin film margin only that suffer from lowered polysilicon production costs not the polysilicon production margins. At least DQ can (in theory) do something about it by remaining competitive by re-taking the cost leadership in the future. FSLR can't do anything about the drop in contribution from this margin component (they can improve other components, but not this one).
  4. 2 points
    New CN policy looks to be targeting 2019 installations greater than 2018. Seems to set targets of around 45GW. http://guangfu.bjx.com.cn/news/20190219/963630.shtml According to the most conservative estimate, the installed capacity of photovoltaics will reach more than 45 million kilowatts in 2019, which has exceeded 44.26 million kilowatts in 2018 http://guangfu.bjx.com.cn/news/20190219/963637.shtml In 2019, the subsidized rated installed capacity will be calculated according to the current expected 3 billion subsidy scale (excluding poverty alleviation). The subsidy intensity of the power subsidy is 0.075 yuan/kWh, and the subsidy scale is about 35.9 GW. (When the power subsidy intensity is 0.05 yuan/kWh, the subsidy scale is about 53.8GW), and then consider 5GW photovoltaic poverty alleviation and 5GW unsubsidized projects, and deduct about 1GW of household occupancy index after 2018 531, 2019 The installed capacity of photovoltaics in the year may reach 45GW, exceeding the installed capacity of 44.3GW in 2018.
  5. 2 points
    Awesome update from CSIQ. Beat on Q4.
  6. 2 points
    Hopefully not for a buyout at 18.60! Chuckle....
  7. 2 points
    The story of Canadian pipeline shrinking was heard loud and clear on this forum since Canadian plants were completed. The company is not only one pure developer still standing, but it is producing more and more business encompassing other arms of managing solar plants. It maintains healthy "sell and/or keep" strategy. There are many markets to go with solar plants. And those markets will expand. We have not seen any victims of the slowdowns with exception of few subs going bankrupt in China. There is plenty of space available. The manufacturing and the decisions made had worked thus far for the company. I am not sure why transformation, when required, would not be as well executed as it has been to date. Not sure why a successful organization would suddenly lose its footing. They are the most capable of a shift. FSLR has zero ability to shift, SPWR is dead, JKS is almost dead and will never be buried if it died, like Yingli, but CSIQ is somehow paralyzed and cannot make a move? I read those scenarios too many times. I argued against them as many, and I am surprised to see them again. Even Snake seems to be seeing Chinese taking FSLR to cleaners now. I do not have a skin in this game, but I think Canadian could surprise few folks here with its share price going forward. Cheers, I am back under the rock.
  8. 2 points
    While I understand (and, as a former [albeit small] JASO stockholder, share) the sentiment, I wouldn't put too much stock into this announcement (pun intended). First, since the guilty parties are all in China, I don't know if a US court has any jurisdiction over them. Second, Pomerantz are ambulance chasers. I've seen their name in dozens of headlines. A company will announce bad news one day, and the next half a dozen of these guys all announce lawsuits, including Pomerantz. I have never once heard of such a suit actually being successful. So this may be a Pyrrhic victory at best....
  9. 2 points
    What are you talking about???? The CNs (well, what's left of them--JKS and CSIQ) are actually UP 30-50% off their lows, and holding steady despite the market tanking 400 points/day. Even DQ never hit your predicted teens (although it came darn close), is up 25% from there, and is also not falling back down. It looks to me like "the market" has called a bottom on the CN solars. Barring unexpected bad news, the expected direction is up from here.
  10. 2 points
    New article just out: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/daqo-energy-begins-pilot-production-103000440.html So here's the business case, according to the article: production cost to decrease to $7.50/kg by end of Q1 19, to $6.80/kg by end of Q1 20. Klothilde, what does your number-crunching say about profitability at these cost levels?
  11. 2 points
    I find the Poly market segment and DQ going through what looks like a 2 to 3 year re-adjustment. This is something this specific segment has not done as it has been relatively young compared to the wafer / cell / module segments. There is cloudiness in the Poly segment of the industry as it looks to re-allocate manufacturing capacity and costs. DQ itself has recently announced writedowns and an exiting of wafer manufacturing. They are taking $20M on 500MW. I am not certain that covers the whole costs. As for the segment, there is a ton of new cpacity coming online that is all under $6/Kg based on analysis. This capacity is coming online now and forever on. The poly segment has indicated that the $12/KG capacity is going to be shut down near term due to not being competitive. The next question is when there is a bunch of sub $6/Kg poly production what will the ASP be like? I might speculate it would be $7-8 +/-. That would then put the capacity that has costs in in the $7-$9/KG at risk of write downs or shutdowns over the next few years. DQ will have over 30+KMT of that capacities production targets online by the end of the year. This would lead me to believe that this current capacity may be written down at some point in the next 3 years. This ASP adjustments and the potential of additional adjustments in the next few years creates a cloud in the Poly industry. That cloudiness has happened in every other segment of the Solar industry several times. To quote Mark Cuban, for that reason I am out.
  12. 2 points
    Given the Issuer’s high quality assets as well as the outstanding $18.47 per Share acquisition proposal (the “Privatization Proposal”) made by Shawn (Xiaohua) Qu, the Issuer’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (the “Chairman”), Lion Point continues to believe that the Shares are significantly undervalued and trade at a steep discount to their intrinsic value. Lion Point also believes that there are significant opportunities within the control of the Issuer’s management and Board of Directors (the “Board”) to unlock shareholder value, including operational expense reductions, share repurchases, improved communication with public investors and strategic transactions, including a spin-off or separate listing of the Issuer’s energy business or a sale of the Issuer as a whole or in parts. Following the public announcement of the Privatization Proposal, Lion Point had conversations with several large financial and strategic institutions that expressed an interest in potentially providing financing for the Privatization Proposal, and Lion Point subsequently submitted a preliminary term sheet, subject to due diligence and certain other conditions being met, including the participation of certain third party financing sources, to the Chairman offering to provide a 5-year financing package of up to $250 million to i) backstop the sources of funds arranged by the Chairman for the Privatization Proposal and ii) to make additional funds available to increase the per Share price of the Privatization Proposal, if necessary. Lion Point has also indicated to the Chairman that, based on its discussions with certain financial institutions and strategic investors, it may be able to significantly increase the size of the offered financing subject to governance, diligence and other conditions.
  13. 2 points
    The crown would be that of low cost manufacturer. FSLR is around $0.27 without shipping. The numbers suggested by CSIQ puts them lower than that even with shipping costs. This makes the cost advantage that FSLR has had for years as gone. Their only advantage in the markets now are in the U.S. due to tariffs. A company propped up by a single market and its policies is not an attractive investment. When FSLR gets the S6 next gen finally ramped is not going to add the margins that where being projected by some anymore. Couple that with the lack of project development revenues and their future does not look bright enough to wear shades.
  14. 2 points
    I'm pretty happy Klothilde is here. Happy she is thinking of other folks' holdings. It's the discussing that has value for me.
  15. 2 points
    Regarding the ASP drops for upstream supplies, if you track the 2 past major oversupplies there is only a slight bounce back in ASP of 15% or so. Then a period of relative stability. The most recent was the crash to the lower $0.50's down to the low low $0.30s appx 1.5 to 2 years ago. This happened relatively quick before CN demand drove up the price to the upper $0.30's where it stood for the last year. The $0.31-$0.32 was more or less cash cost less depreciation. Remember Poly back then was also bottomed at $12/KG back then as well. You should expect this cycle to act similar but the recovery to be slightly different due to the CN policy change designed to drive the ASP to $0.25. As for the past YOY cost cutting, you need to recognize that the company was shifting from a pure Poly module manufacturer to a mono manufacturer. Those cost reductions include what is now 30% production and climbing of mono that was a 8-10% higher production cost with what was claimed as a 12%+/- higher ASP. The reductions were also during a materials price hike on most materials. Eventually there is a re-balancing of those input cost margins. The Si Cost of it when Diamond wire and new Tech is in place is going to drop the SI from $0.075 to $0.4. That alone is a permanent 10% savings. The SI cost will have room to drop even further in the next 2 years that will impact the cost to manufacture a module by another 5-10%. What is clear is that the CN mfg cost are approaching $0.25 or less. This will be a permanent price range that the upstream suppliers will lower costs to be profitable. The CN companies have a path to further increase efficiencies by another 20% using new technologies that wiill be ramped in the next 1 to 2 years. These will drive the productin costs down to the $0.20 range to support the $0.24 ASP price range targets in 2020. Just in time for FSLR Series 6 mass scale ramps. By the way some of the new technology that will be ramped chips away at some of FLSR benefits being better performance under higher temperatures and low light absorption.That 7% benefit making them more desirable for certain markets and a price premium per watt will decrease the premium.
  16. 2 points
    I consider this poly drop from $19 to $11 way less of a challenge for FSLR than the historical drop from $500 to $19 which they navigated through quite successfully. The key was delivering a higher rate of process cost reduction / efficiency improvement than their CN peers. Currently JKS' cost data suggests that the rate of process cost reduction (i.e. non-poly cost) of the CNs has slowed down significantly over the last several quarters to less than 5% yoy, which translates to an advantage for FSLR who is currently going supersonic in cost reduction with S6. Yes, the CNs are currently seeing way lower input costs through cheaper upstream materials but this does not truly reflect process improvement. It's pure desperation of wafer and cell makers who are forced to sell at cash or below to remain liquid. Anyhows, interesting topic that belongs in a FSLR thread and not here. As DQ is concerned I'm just interested in counteracting some irrational pumping that we've seen here (stock going to $120 etc.) and warning people based on facts and data. A poly drop from $19 to $11 means that DQ quarterly EPS drops from $3 to $0, as simple as that. Moreover since poly oversupply will likely worsen over the next quarters there's little chance that earnings will rebound anytime soon. Imho this is not reflected in the current share price yet and people have to be extremely careful. The last thing I would do is hold this one through the ER next week. I'm sure some of the smart people here think alike so please speak up and don't make me look like the forum b*tch here please.
  17. 2 points
    Getting slammed the past few days. Comments by Prescience Point Capital Management are tanking it. Such a scam that stuff like that is legal.
  18. 2 points
    CHONGQING, China, July 13, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Daqo New Energy Corp. (NYSE: DQ) ("Daqo New Energy" or the "Company"), a leading manufacturer of high-purity polysilicon for the global solar PV industry, today announced updates to its previous polysilicon and wafer sales guidance for the second quarter of 2018 and reiterates its full year 2018 polysilicon production guidance. The Company estimates that its polysilicon sales to external customers during the second quarter of 2018 will be approximately 3,800 MT to 3,900 MT, as compared to the previous guidance of approximately 5,300 MT to 5,500 MT. The Company sold approximately 2,600 MT of polysilicon during the first two weeks of July and reduced inventory to low levels. The Company produced 5,659 MT of polysilicon during the second quarter of 2018, within the range of its previously announced guidance of 5,600 MT to 5,800 MT. The Company reiterates its full year 2018 polysilicon production guidance of 22,000 to 23,000 MT, which takes into account the impact of annual facility maintenance. The Company also estimates that its wafer sales volume during the second quarter of 2018 amounted to approximately 9.5 million to 10.0 million pieces, as compared to the previous guidance of approximately 15.0 million to 20.0 million pieces. The above updates are mainly attributable to the new solar PV policies issued by the Chinese government on May 31, 2018, which are expected to reduce solar installation quotas and feed-in tariffs in China during the second half of 2018. The policies created significant uncertainty in the domestic solar market and negatively impacted downstream demand. As a result, the Company's customers adjusted production plans and utilization levels, and due to the volatility of polysilicon average selling prices, a significant number of customer orders were not confirmed until the beginning of July. Mr. Longgen Zhang, Chief Executive Officer of Daqo New Energy, commented, "We remain confident in the long-term sustainable growth of polysilicon industry despite the new policies' impact on shipments in the short-term. The new policies created significant uncertainty in the market and disrupted our downstream customer's production plans. At the same time, polysilicon average selling prices saw increased volatility in June but have since stabilized over the past two weeks." "Leveraging our strong cash position, we maintained our production schedule believing that polysilicon ASPs would eventually stabilize and delayed shipments until demand returned in early July. During the first two weeks of July, polysilicon prices stabilized and our shipments returned to normal levels. We are currently running at full production capacity with low levels of inventory, which allows us to reiterate our full year production guidance. The sudden change in policy hasn't impacted our long-term strategic plan to strengthen our leadership position in the industry by further increasing our capacity, improving our cost structure and polysilicon purity."
  19. 2 points
    Good overview of ASP changes over the last month along the value chain. Multi modules in the U.S. still selling at a high level of 39 cts, which is good news for FSLR. https://www.pvinfolink.com/post-view.php?ID=83
  20. 2 points
    Q1 comparisons are in the past and are not relevant for the current market. I understand your concern about it not being sustainable, but you then go and suggest that it is going to take 2 years to reach a price equilibrium for cash cost depreciation and profit. What you are saying is that the production costs of today at $0.23 is the price for the next year or 2 at least. With the price as noted and agreed upon being $0.23 to manufacture now when you add in shipping and opex is running at $0.04 to the most expensive area like the U.S., then the ASP is soon to be $0.27. That will allow profits for sales to the U.S. The 30% tariff places the ASP at $0.35 and for more high end modules a few pennies higher. If they are selling at cash cost with shipping, then the ASP is $0.32 with the tariff. https://news.energysage.com/2018-us-solar-tariff-impact-prices/ When you look at the revised ASP with the tariff impacts, FSLR will not be profitable for sales in the U.S. First Solar is looking at $295M in Operational expenses for 2018 on 3GW of module sales. That is $0.09 per watt Non GAAP which does not include the foot noted restructuring costs or series 6 startup costs. (page 21) http://investor.firstsolar.com/static-files/ee216426-f3a9-4dff-940f-db862cb351f9 FSLR requires an ASP in the US of over $0.38 in order to start being NON GAAP profitable. When you add in the startup costs and potential restructuring charges and S6 startup costs that ASP needs to be even higher. When you look at the S6 costs come 2020 when they get it ramped most of the margin numbers presented on page 16 they are suggesting is going to be lowered and the modules will be less profitable when you are looking at their current Opex costs. To me FSLR appears to have no module markets to milk for profits near term. That is the issue with their over bloated Opex. Any advantage they claim as having with their production costs is wiped out by their Opex costs. Infact, when you look at the S6 costs come 2020 when they get it ramped there is little there there.
  21. 2 points
    I would worry more about FSLR. What kind of profit are they going to make selling outside of the U.S? Right now Multi wafers are under $0.07/W, and you can buy High efficient Multi cells for $0.135. Multi modules costs to manufacture now is $0.23+/-. They can be selling them for $0.27 and make net profits. The last I recall is that FSLR was suggesting a quarter or 2 ago they were the cost leader at $0.29ish including shipping. That is before adding in their $60M+ a quarter Operational expenses. The company is going to have to be selling at $0.35/Watt or lose money on every non US sold module. I believe it was First Solar that a couple of pennies would not impact project decisions, however a 8-10% cost difference clearly would have issues. An 8-10% price difference in a module cost will kill their sales or their potential profits.
  22. 2 points
    Something unusual is happening with CSIQ. As mentioned above, last week - Wed, Thr & Fir - at 5PM over 200K shares blocks, each day, at closing price. Now this week yesterday - 151+K block after 6PM and today an other 58K well after 6PM all at closing price. It is extremely unusual for the reconciliation to take place so late and on days with relative small volume in a given stock and with no general market related moves, so those are not reconciliation trades. Someone is buying those shares (Qu?), but who is selling at these levels? Is there a deal made on a side?
  23. 2 points
    This news should not be unexpected. As the article indicates the government had been signalling and end to the FIT with competitive bidding and secured buyers for the power. That is the global trend. They are still supporting Poverty Alleviation and the Top Runner projects. They are just pushing the DG FIT out to the local provinces. It has been known for years that the government did not have the money to pay the FITS. That is one reason why they were 2 to 3 years behind on adding projects to the catalog. What this is going to do is curtail the massive build outs and probably lower future project builds to 35-45GW with 20 GW of that being Top Runner and Poverty alleviation. This would take 10-15GW of demand off the market. That lack of demand will probably take out the legacy capacity and small producers in China. The ASP will likely drop from the low 30's upper 20's for traditional Poly to the low 20's to mid 20's as oversupply happens and companies sell for cash costs or less for the next 9-12 months. The slack demand last year caused the ASP to drop 30%. The margins dropped to single to low double digits for manufactures. This is likely to happen again for the top manufacturers again. As the Poly modules collapse, you can expect a drag on all types of modules to try and keep demand interested in their PERC or Mono capacities. What will most likely happen is that the lower demand will create less demand for Poly causing it to trend faster to that $12 price or less that some have suggested for 2019 and beyond. That would not be good for say DQ as most contracts are not firm and have variable market price clauses. The poly drop should offset the module price drop by some 8% for module manufacturers. If you look at the implied recent margins of 18% on $0.37 ASP, their is $0.067 gross and a cost of around $0.30 blended. A 20% drop in ASP would place the module ASP under $0.30. A 30% drop as what happened last year would drop it to $0.26. A drop of Poly to $12 would save around $0.018. That savings would place blended costs in the $0.28 range which is close to year end targets. Added other savings as the entire industry will have declines could save manufacturers another $0.018 putting blended costs in the $0.25-$0.26 range. Take out depreciation and the cash costs is closer to $0.24 to $0.23 depending on manufacturing processes. There is the floor on ASP. In general though a 10% price cut on the cost to build a project should make the technology which is currently a cost leader now even more viable. It will just take another year or 2 to be able to drive the cost to manufacture down. This again would be par for the course for solars.
  24. 2 points
    Good Gracious, it hit a 6-year high above $80! Sorry Credit Suisse, that must suck big time!
  25. 1 point
    Second half recovery! Everybody's doing it. It's all the rage. (MU, NVDA, AMD).. why not the solar stocks too?
  26. 1 point
    They are sold out into 2021 at fixed prices. Nothing can change their top line in 2020, not even the meteorite that killed the dinosaurs.
  27. 1 point
    I think they have positive earnings of a couple pennies before 1 timers I expect a $1.85 spread on cost to ASP. I am using a lower cost and volume than yours Gross comes in around $12.6M My Opex and Int are slightly higher at $12.2M Q4 though is not relevant. 2019 costs and guidance are. I expect Q1 to be the low for the year in earnings in the low double digits and increasing from there. I expect Q1 costs to be around $7.50 I expect costs to decline slightly from there with production ramps and optimization The second half of 2019 should be stronger as that is were the forecast in volume increases over the first half. This should lead to a slight rise in ASP int he second half even with the new capacity. From this I reasonably expect a full year profit of North of $2 a share. Disclosure: I do not own DQ.
  28. 1 point
    I think he's referring to 2018 and their FY GM of 17.5% vs. original guidance of 22-23% in Dec. 2017. I don't know all the reasons, they had some extra costs in Q4 to finish the projects on time, but that's only one of several reasons probably. On a positive note revenue came very close to the lower end of guidance, EPS within the guidance range, and net cash above guidance. However I think pointing out their GM miss is like searching for a hair in the soup, as they say in my country. Good thing the CNs don't give you GM guidance because then you would find the whole wig in the soup.
  29. 1 point
    Who says I don't believe the outlook is shiny? Just because I warn against investing in some solar companies doesn't mean I don't believe in solar. In fact I think I'm one of the fiercest believers in solar here.
  30. 1 point
    Says ASP's have already stabilized and will rise 10-15 percent this year. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-davos-meeting-solar-gcl/party-is-over-for-dirt-cheap-solar-panels-says-china-executive-idUSKCN1PI2OQ
  31. 1 point
    Here is a news: China ready to set 3 GW quota for residential solar in 2019 https://www.pv-magazine.com/2019/01/24/china-ready-to-set-3-gw-quota-for-residential-solar-in-2019/
  32. 1 point
    Good god they have a PT of 58 USD and my glass ball has them in the single digits. I should revisit my assumptions when I have some time. Can I be so off?
  33. 1 point
    They were asked why their competitors (read CSIQ) reported significantly higher margins. The reply was basically "it is not sustainable". Keep in mind that CSIQ reported exactly double GMs of JKS (taking CVD out, 25% or so for CSIQ vs. 12.5% or so for JKS). How can this great margins disparity continue? JKS said they expect margins to remain stable (read mid-upper 12% not including one timers, not 15%+ they said before). This means CSIQ's manufacturing business margins have to go down eventually or sooner than later.
  34. 1 point
    Hmm... something sounds familiar here... First Solar shares are 'significantly undervlaued,' says JPMorgan https://thefly.com/landingPageNews.php?id=2813212 "JPMorgan analyst Paul Coster believes First Solar is "significantly undervalued" based on a sum-of-the-parts analysis which factors in the company's current projects and net cash position. Net cash currently represents nearly 60% of market value and the core module business is trading at about 3.9 times 2021 EBIT net of capex and pending project sales, Coster tells investors in a research note. He keeps an Overweight rating on First Solar with a $75 price target. He reminds investors that the company will provide fiscal 2019 guidance on an investor update call to be held in late-Q4, which he believes could serve as a positive catalyst."
  35. 1 point
    That looks close to their asset cost for the sale once you take out the power revenues from 2 years. That would be in line with very low single digit margins that had been suggested for US assets.
  36. 1 point
    Chinese solars coming in with Q3 express reports. No surprise earnings are down and impacted by the new deal https://www.pv-tech.org/news/impact-from-chinas-solar-deployment-cuts-start-hitting-companies-q3-financi
  37. 1 point
    China strict control takes heavy toll on PV firms, says Tongwei chairman https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20181001PD211.html
  38. 1 point
    Eh, I'm thinking maybe its about the possible corruption in China and how it may affect the Top Runner program. https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/09/28/an-investigation-at-chinas-national-energy-agency-might-delay-pv-programs/
  39. 1 point
    Those fat tarfifs are not as much an impact with the Costs basis dropping like a rock. 30% on a cost basis of $0.35 was significant pushing the average ASP to around $0.45-$0.48. Now with production costs in the $0.23 and could be as low as $0.21 the dynamics change. The average ASP with freight Tarrif and Opex + profit is now at around $0.36-$0.37. That is soon to drop by a penny or 2 as the tariff gets reduced by 5% in a few months. That places the new ASP at $0.345+/- with tariffs, freight, opex and profits. Those ASP could be lower as there is 2.5GW of tariff free modules. Those modules carry another 6-8 cents in gross . That means that they can basically cut a penny or 2 off the ASP and still have decent profits from the U.S when all are blended. Slap the $0.034 on FSLRs $0.27 S4 cost basis and you are profitless and operating at a loss with their near $100M a quarter in Opex. That $0.34-$0.36 ASP is significantly down from the $0.50 you were expecting before the ASP collapse. There is good concern which Godron Johnson mentioned that FSLR might be looking at cancellations of contracts due to the ASP declines. FSLR a while back indicated 2 or 3 cent premium on a module would not kill a sale,. They are now looking at a $0.10-$0.15 swing certainly that certainly could. And we have not even discussed the ability of FSLR to compete outside of the U.S. markets where there are no tariff impacts and the ASP is sub $0.30.
  40. 1 point
    They should do quite well as they are migrating quickly from junk poly wafers to high efficiency perc and mono. The spread on Poly Perc Cells to Poly Perc Modules is $0.17 or 25% margins (0.11/0.28). The spread on Mono Perc Cells to Mono Perc Modules is $0.155 or 18.2% margins (0.147/0.302). Compare those margin potentials with the current S4 costs of $0.27 production costs for FSLR and the average Thin Film ASP at $0.265.
  41. 1 point
    https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/08/27/is-china-about-to-add-10-gw-of-unsubsidized-solar/
  42. 1 point
    Looks like FSLR is loosing the crown in favor of CSIQ... 🙂
  43. 1 point
    It's your dirty mind. They just MADE $1/share in earnings, when you confidently predicted your calculations showed they would be losing money. Your calculations were correct, by the way--just for the wrong stock. It's your beloved FSLR that couldn't stay above breakeven during this period. Of the two stocks, I know which one I'm more comfortable holding. It's just a shame the market doesn't reward results equally, otherwise we both know which stock would lead the other by $20 share price. I suspect that gap will now narrow, if not close.
  44. 1 point
    Poly dropping is very much an issue for FSLR and other thin film guys... Since cost of silicon technology is going down and competitiveness is growing. As for S6 modules, look at competition - Canadian Solar HIKU modules. HiKu is the first poly module (attention Poly, not Mono) exceeding 400 W and thus reaches one of the highest poly module power outputs in the solar industry. Also, If HIKU to convert to bifacial type then we may have module of 680 W capacity, as back side generates 70% of the front, according to Qu (CEO) himself. Same amount of aluminum for frame, savings in land use, etc, etc... Plus, new Indian 25% tariff blocks modules form China and Malaysia, exactly where FSLR and SPWR have facilities. And Vietnam and Thailand are exempt (as developing nations), exactly where CSIQ have production. https://www.canadiansolar.com/en/solar-panels/hiku.html
  45. 1 point
    Nice read from Trina on the markets. https://www.pv-tech.org/news/pv-talk-rongfang-yin-vice-president-of-global-sales-and-marketing-at-trina BNEF has recently said after the China policy changes that it expected PV module prices to fall 34%. What kind of solar module price declines are you expecting? "One thing I would like to clarify is that with or without the China policy changes, our forecast for this year’s prices was a decline. For example at the start of the [module] prices would be around US$0.36/W and were expected to decline to say US$0.33/W or US$0.32/W. This was expected due to cost reductions, technology etc… But people have tried to say that due to the China policy changes the prices would decline by so much. What will be interesting to watch is what will be the actual impact on prices, due only to the China policy change. From my perspective, I think the China policy change will make a 15% to 18% difference to pricing by year-end.
  46. 1 point
    Wow. Don't knock yourself out. Here is the take from Credit Suisse on Friday's action: ■ Our take – Renewables: Solar manufacturers were down 5-10% on Friday morning possibly due to quad witching, market sell off, and concerns that the US would impose additional 25% duty on an expanded list of Chinese imports (which might include solar products). We believe the reaction is overblown as the oversupplied solar sector has enough non-China capacity to supply to the US market if required. We have not yet seen signs of consolidation upstream, but downstream micro-inverters have taken the first step. Declining cost of solar and storage continues to exceed expectations, while cities and states ramp renewable demand.
  47. 1 point
    I would view a worst case scenario of companies being profitable with an ASP above of $0.175+$0.035=$0.21 I would view a better case scenario of companies being profitable with an ASP above $0.15+$0.03 = $0.18 I would view a best case scenarion of companies being profitable with an ASP above $0.13+$0.025 = $0.0155 I am using USD as a reference. Currency fluctuations would change the results. In my example I use a cost savings in areas that detail a drop in manufacturing of modules to atleast $0.175/watt. If you use a slower Mores Law adjusted 25% cost reduction per doubling of capacity for the next decade, Then a $0.24-$0.28 cost to manufacture today drops to $0.15 to $0.175 cost to manufacture. I am saying the ASP to be profitable is Cost to manufacture + Opex + Interest + Profit I am saying today Opex is at $0.04/watt including shipping look at the JKS and JASO ERS. I expect it to drop 25% or more per doubling of capacity. A 10% shipment growth per year places shipments aproaching 300GW. A 25% lower Sales cost(including shipping) on efficiency gains of 25%(aka 23-25% efficient modules) is $0.007 savings from todays costs of $0.027(JKS Q4). A 25% lower Admin cost per watt per doubling of shipments places General Admin around $0.0045 from todays $0.007/watt. A 25% lower RnD cost per watt per doubling of shipments places RnD at $0.00329 from todays $0.0516/watt Based on the market growth forcast at 10%+ per year for the next 10 years and savings at 25% per doubling of shipments Opex=$0.02+$0.0045+$0.00329 = ~$0.0278 or $0.03 or less. Yes. Depending on module manufacturer and volumes Interest Net Income runs $0.0035-$0.01/watt. This drops to $0.0027 to $0.0068/watt with a 2.5 times increase in shipments at a 25% reduction per doubling. I expect then in 10 years that the Opex and+ Interest will be under $0.04/watt and in the range of $0.03-$0.035. down from todays $0.045-$0.05. It could be lower.
  48. 1 point
    ALERT ALERT https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/06/15/us-to-slap-additional-25-tariffs-on-chinese-cells-modules/ Isn't this GOOD news for FSLR?? 51 calls expiring today are selling for just 21 cents each. I just bought 5 on this news. Or is this somehow bad for FSLR??
  49. 1 point
  50. 1 point


×
×
  • Create New...