Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/21/2017 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    If there's one thing I have learned from the solar space is that the CNs think of Wall Street as an ATM and that their respect for western shareholders is non-existent. This secondary offer is just a last round of WS milking before they tank the stock and take the company private. And looking at company and market fundamentals it will be child's play to tank the stock.
  2. 2 points
    The TAN chart since inception best describe the industry rollercoaster I and many here experienced: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TAN/chart?p=TAN#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%3D I was lucky to enter on a low in 2009 following the 2008 crash and enjoyed the recovery to bloated PPS in 2009. By end of 2010 the EPS followed to bloated too and I and many others got exuberant on the EPS growth. Early in 2011 a massive crash PPS lasting 2 years started and I lost the 10-folding of my wealth I had built the past 2 years. Almost wiped out and with less than when I started in early 2009. Betting what I had on the lows (JKS at $2.00 and CSIQ in the $2's) I recover back to half the peak wealth during the 2013 recovery. Then I started to play defence (JASO the lagger) more and was able to preserve wealth during the 2015 and 2016 slide (avoiding being dragged down by surge leaders JKS, CSIQ and DQ from 40's to teens). Going into 2016 I reduced my exposure to the industry to 20% of what I had before and enjoyed the mild recovery of 2017 until August at which time I exited. If I had invested broadly I would have made more the past 10 years, but looking at the TAN I'm happy that I made decent gains during my 9 years solar venture with 100%+ exposure of my wealth to solar stocks. Anyway the chart shows a cycling downtrend. I agree at some point the trend and cycles might fundamentally change, but it is dangerous to prematurely bet on that occurring until it is already established. Before that it is important to be nimble. The TAN seems to flatten out a year before it turn on you, so it might be ok to buy during periods when recovery is clearly established and before flattening has been established. Beware of volatility during the flattening though and don't hold out too long for a new ATH before getting out. So far there still seems to be a year or so. Good exit point usually occur in November, but it is also an exuberance period. A second chance usually comes in Q1. If you miss your mark don't hold out for it too long during the volatile plateauing if you already have good gains to pocket. The new money is made when you buy into the next recovery. It's hard to stay on side-lines though. Rebalanced diversification with something non-cyclic really helps to buy the troughs and sell the plateaus of the cyclic part.
  3. 2 points
    Odyd, if you simply want to invest in stocks and stock funds you can apply a simple rebalanced risk parity strategy by equal weighting value * beta. You then consider portfolio risk contribution from both volatility and correlation in your risk allocation as the beta value reflects both. Many financial sites provide beta values for instruments that have more than 3 listing years. You can floor and cap the beta value to account for errors and outliers that otherwise would cause too skewed value allocation and simply assign a high beta to those that are too young to assess. Say that you don't want your largest allocation to be more than 4 times higher than your smallest allocation. You can then floor beta at 0.5 and cap it at 2 and assign 2 to those too young to measure. At least you could keep track of your risk balance by just looking at your value * beta profile if you don't want to apply a strict rebalancing scheme of an estimated optimal risk balance. Example: Stock 1 beta: 0.5 Stock 2 beta: 1.5 Target weights Stock 1: 75% Stock 2: 25% Weighted average beta: 75% * 0.5 + 25% * 1.5 = 0.75 Risk allocation Stock 1: 75% * 0.5 / 0.75 = 50% Stock 2: 25% * 1.5 / 0.75 = 50% As you portfolio now is low risk dominated in terms of value due to its low weighted average beta of 0.75 you might want to gear it up to 1 or more using leverage depending on how much total beta you want for your portfolio. If you instead had picked mainly high beta instruments you might want to allocate cash to get the total portfolio beta down. Your picks and rebalanced equal risk weighting (instead of picking all stocks and value weighting as the index does) produce your alpha return = portfolio return - total beta * index return. The strategy assumes that your picks have equal risk-adjusted return outlook (the efficient market assumption)..
  4. 2 points
    Just sold JKS for 10% gain.
  5. 2 points
    "China will stay flat in 2018 at best" (Klothilde, 6 hours ago) --- "Get ready for the cliff" (Klothilde, May 11, 2017) "the approaching China cliff" (Klothilde, May 31, 2017) "we have a China demand cliff coming up in a matter of weeks" (Klothilde, Jun 1, 2017) "I really HATE repeating myself, therefore PLEASE put your glasses on when you read. Here AGAIN": The China Cliff is coooooming "The China cliff is here" (Klothilde, Jun 21, 2017) "Looks like China cliff to me" "you can smell China cliff" (Klothilde, Jun 28, 2017) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant Porcelain shop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindness_(novel) "Polysilicon price another day up" (W20, Jun 9, 2017) "Polysilicon +8% I do not understand Why this quantitatively beautiful Enterprise is loveless. DQ neither buy Polysilicon nor sell Oil. DQ sell Polysilicon. One day maybe the market will understand these simple statements or maybe not, I don't know" (W20, Aug 2, 2017)
  6. 2 points
    Watch out for Hemlock... If there will be a deal, in the next 10 days, with 201 section rejection in exchange for Chinese poly market access for Hemlock and other US poly producers, then DQ may have a problem... https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2018/01/12/hemlock-calls-on-trump-to-restore-access-to-the-chinese-polysilicon-market/
  7. 2 points
    Your hate and resentment are well known What can we do to heal your soul ? With an obsidian knife tear Dydo's heart and offer it to Wotan/Odin on the Altar of Sacrifices ? Sell our daughters to a television producer ? Burn us like a bonzo monk ? What can we do to heal your soul ? http://www.sunsirs.com/uk/prodetail-463.html http://pv.energytrend.com/pricequotes.html
  8. 2 points
    The stock would easily be trading in the mid 20s if he had communicated the virtues of project monetization appropriately. However he decided for the opposite in order to ensure himself a juicy bargain. This is the worse conflict of interest you can have at the helm of a company. This should be outlawed under any circumstance.
  9. 2 points
    Yes, however this is very disrespectful of shareholders. Many people have hung in there, waiting for a long time for them to sell off projects so equity can go up and the share price as well. Now that the company is almost there he cannot just pull the plug. It's like a breach of trust. You know what I'm saying?
  10. 2 points
    Since M. Potter (former CFO) left the company, Canadian's presentation became a joke... with hardly understandable mumbling presentations...
  11. 2 points
    Hey y'all now just take a deep breath & realize that none of us are really in control of the situation... just doing our best to figure it out. So we are all on the same side. The not inside side. For what it is worth I will say I appreciate both Klothilde & Roberts posts. & I think the quality and detail of discussion since Klothilde started posting has improved. I've really enjoyed her being around and I think the result has yielded some great discussions. I think she is one of the few of us who can really pull out some numbers and does a good job with analysis. I think that you must agree here Robert because I've also noticed a willingness for you to engage and discuss based on her posts. You are both quite good at what you do. Seems to me that Robert has been focused on balance sheet while Klothilde has been warning that might not be enough... the future income statements may not be so great. Robert likes CSIQ while Klothilde sides with FSLR. In truth we need a world where both thrive. Global warming is of course no small challenge. It's likely that every form of intelligent life on nearly every planet out there must deal with this problem. And because Earth has zero contact with any other intelligent life, speaks highly about how big of a challenge this will be. Both CSIQ & FSLR hopefully will do well. Demand certainly should be plentiful. Companies just need to survive to the point when some politicians realize that solar power is a very important source of energy that needs to be rolled out ASAP. Now... to take your minds off this & onto something much more entertaining. Have a look at this! https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/us/politics/joe-barton-explicit-photo-twitter.html A long time vocal global warming denialist has been caught masturbating for his new girlfriend! That's what I call funny. Hopefully the chair underneath him is pulled. What a loser. Cheers & happy thanksgiving in case anyone here is celebrating that. Am I the only American around here? It's ok I'm in Hungary actually and just had pizza & beer.
  12. 2 points
    You know they have a lot of work in Japan. You always chuckle about them dropping MW here and there, and still, they have a lot of work. This time you were sarcastic about if they are in the auction. Now you are if there is enough won. You worry too much. You should not invest on in hope, but you have not invested at all, and all you do is what troll would do. Is this an investment advice? Do you know what their plans are? You begin to act like you used to work. Remeber when you did not contribute to anything? Show me that I did not hope for you to change in vain.
  13. 2 points
    This is taken from the USITC recommendations, it is a major win for CSIQ if Trump approves this in this shape. First I thought it was important to note how they look at cells put in modules in Canada, second the recommendation As Canadian respondents explain, a headquarters ruling by U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirms that, under NAFTA rules of origin and marking rules, U.S. imports of finished CSPV modules assembled in a NAFTA country, even from CSPV cells originating in non‐NAFTA countries, qualify as products from the NAFTA country, where the goods originate under General Note 12(b) and are accompanied by a signed and completed NAFTA certificate of origin, because the final assembly operations in the NAFTA country involve more than minor processing and require substantial investment and value added. Although petitioners did not overtly adopt respondents’ approach to country of origin for U.S. imports of modules assembled in NAFTA countries, they did not identify any flaws in the legal reasoning underpinning Canadian respondents’ arguments.85 We find the Canadian respondents’ arguments persuasive, and accordingly the import data we primarily relied on for our analysis uses the country‐of‐origin methodology that they proposed (i.e., the NAFTA rules of origin for imports from Canada and Mexico and for imports from all other countries, the country where the cell was manufactured, as adjusted to reflect cells assembled into modules in a NAFTA country) 1. Finding With Respect to Imports from Canada We find that imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells (whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products) from Canada do not account for a substantial share of total imports and do not contribute importantly to the serious injury caused by the imports. Accordingly, we make a negative finding with respect to imports from Canada. According to adjusted importer questionnaire data, the industry in Canada was not among the top five suppliers of imports of CSPV products during the three most recent years.388 Under the second prong for imports from NAFTA countries, the statutory standard is whether the imports from the NAFTA country “contribute importantly to the serious injury … caused by imports,” which is a lower standard than whether global imports are a substantial cause of serious injury.398 Despite the larger growth rate for imports from Canada relative to global imports, given the relatively small share of total imports accounted for by imports from Canada, the relatively small change in the Canadian industry’s import share over the POI, and the more modest level and change in the level of imports from Canada, particularly relative to total imports from all sources over the POI, we find that imports from Canada considered individually do not contribute importantly to the serious injury caused by imports.399 Given that imports from Canada started the POI at a smaller baseline than other foreign suppliers and increased overall during the POI at a rate that exceeded the growth rate for global imports, we recognize that if the President were to determine to exclude imports from Canada from any safeguard measure, unrestrained imports from Canada might increase to harmful levels.400 In those circumstances, however, if any such increase were to occur, the domestic industry would have other options to consider, including the import‐surge mechanism of 19 U.S.C. § 3372(c) and the antidumping and/or countervailing duty laws (19 U.S.C. § 1671, 19 U.S.C. § 1673).
  14. 2 points
    Yes , as I stated Daqo has had a very favorable pricing environment for now. The question I posed was the length of that premium. The market dynamics in this industry turn very fast. What was boom becomes bust, what was bust becomes boom. You already pointed out 3 price points of near term earnings strength from $6 to $12 in EPS. All are very good compared to peers. That high end if sustained suggests a much higher price, the low end suggests that they are reasonably priced. As markets are forward looking I would be concerned after 2018 as that low end could become the high end range and the lower end range would be down to $3 or less. My reasoning is if China is looking at a 3 year 40% price decline for projects to achieve a 3 RMB solar price unsubsidized, then Poly certainly must fall as must the entire chain. You can run some analysis on $0.90 project prices today with high efficiency mono Perc at $0.40. If pricing falls to meet the targets of China, and a similar ratio is used of module to project costs, then that module price falls to $0.24 for high efficiency mono with production costs near $0.21. Multi would be within 1 or 2 cents. Clearly Poly at 25% of a module production cost would have poly below $14 and somewhere between $9-$13. In addition at some point the markets will adjust and you will not have 1 market sector getting 7-12% margins and profitless when another is pulling down 75-100% GM. My guess is the Government will step in once the cash flow is paying down the debt as the Si market has matured in China and is not in risk of destruction from foreign competition. That is why they put in the Poly Tariffs in the first place.
  15. 2 points
    We did not get into poly, we talked about the projects. He was very interested in my interpretation and offer support with what he heard. He said that KEPCO is high single digit and Shenzhen is a low double-digit, but CFO said some revenue have no margin, which is basically what I am trying to say. I explained to him that KEPCO bought all tax equity projects, and Shenzhen has one, Mustang. He thinks Q1 will be bigger ( I assumed GM) but he thought even on revenues. He said the market does not understand the potential of those sales and thought what my article shown was the best analysis he seen from anyone. I explained that Roth and Oppenheimer have high prices, but he chuckled commenting they did not do a lot of work on those. We talked for the first time ever today.
  16. 2 points
    I disagree with GM on plants, opex, and GM in modules. Again despite the description that Opex stays flat when plants are sold, this is being increased in multiples. GM 12% in Q4 and flat Opex company can make more. I think your adverse approach to everything, seeing failure in every other company by quoting things in isolation to prove your point, have me say that glass is half empty in your statements. You quoted an article, which has nothing to do with the CSIQ doing business but someone in India winning bids. 2/3 of those will never get built. Half of them had counted to build with modules worth $0.25 per watt, and they complain that Chinese neg the module supply. CSIQ won Dubai supply and it was the one of the lowest. Their GM survived. When plants sell at $0.80 watt, CSIQ will be there to make money on it. When that time comes.
  17. 2 points
    Sold half my FSLR last night. Doh! Sold the rest around 57. Now that everyone here has sold their FSLR, it'll go to 100, right?
  18. 2 points
    At this point, CSIQ needs to make the progress in selling plants and collecting money. Every time they do that they are a better company, and should be a better stock. Again Trumps out there do not see far down the road. They pay for FSLR 7% in the aftermarket but may sell off tomorrow, because of revenue and EPS for Q4. I like FSLR to get high valuation because I think it will in comparison show value of CSIQ. In fact, I am for completely different PE all together. FSLR will have PE of 19.61 this year, and I am hoping for 9.82 if CSIQ is able to do numbers form my article. So if for any reason CSIQ gets higher PE and numbers support we will have good days. It is frustrating and I hope that balance sheet will be more convincing in time.
  19. 2 points
    Sold PEGI on the up tick bought even more CSIQ below $16. ONE DAY the market will get it or not.
  20. 2 points
    Canadian Solar Inc. priced its initial public offering of 177,800 investment units at 100,000 Japanese yen per unit, before underwriting discounts. Of the units included in the offering, Canadian Solar will purchase 25,395 units as the designated purchaser. The units of CSIF are expected to list on the Tokyo Stock Exchange on October 30, 2017. CSIF plans to use the net proceeds from the offering and anticipated borrowings of JPY 17.7 billion (approximately $156 million) to consummate the acquisition of its initial portfolio. Subsidiaries of Canadian Solar in Japan are contributing 13 solar power projects with a total installed capacity of 72.7 MWp to CSIF as its initial portfolio. Net sale proceeds to Canadian Solar from these assets amounted to JPY 30.4 billion (approximately $270 million). Canadian Solar expects to use a part of the net sale proceeds to immediately reduce its overall debt leverage by JPY 18.7 billion (approximately $165 million) and to further strengthen its liquidity.
  21. 2 points
    It sounds that CSIF will be selling units for 100,000 yen or $877. This now translates to about $163M IPO. Elsewhere is has been said CSIF raised $17.8B yen or $156M, not sure if this after or before the fees. Also due to exchange volumes differ.
  22. 1 point
    I am trying to move on. I sold all I bought yesterday at 17.68 at 17.90 and what I kept through untouched. A lot of shares for me so collected few bucks. Bought EIX and some PEGI. Probably dumb move with wind legislation but it is hard to find an attractive name. I may try to trade. However if I can make money moving it around I will. Looks like I am going to trade more than ever in last few years. I could buy if it goes below 17.00 but all the fundamental beauty of undervalued stock is gone.
  23. 1 point
    What if bitcoin were actually a programatic ponzi scheme? Designed to read out numbers that it's going up up up. What if it's just one big AI algorithm designed to bilk everybody's cash and into the hands of the 14 year old mastermind programmer that put it all together. OK, probably not... but it IS possible.
  24. 1 point
    I am currently studying a masters degree in philosophy. I am an ecologist and I would like to develop a career that makes some contribution to solving climate change. I have also spent considerable time studying markets and specifically Wyckoffs lessons from the 1900s. But I´m not a professional trader.
  25. 1 point
    They should build the whole fab into a shipping container so they can be quickly shifted around the world based on the latest tariff scenarios.