Canadian Solar (CSIQ)

[dydo 1,473]

Explo and others,

I have a question on the total solution MW. Are you under impression that revenue recognized in the other income has modules recorded in total solution without any revenue?

Example, the 99.8M sale of 70MW in China, is certainly in the total solution, however, 59MW in Canada revenue is in other.

The total solution number of MW was quoted as 176.3MW. If I take 69.5WM out and $99.8M for it, I have $27.2M and 106MW with 0.25 per watt. As soon as I remove 77.24MW (AC to DC) for Ontario and zero revs, I get 35MW and $0.93, which could be kits of modules and inverters in Japan or some part of selling Brazilian plants.

I looked at the numbers for Q4. Some $44M and 85MW in total solution. 20*1.3 For Canada, an average of $1.43 from the Q1 transaction for $32.2M so about 22MW, we have 48.42MW. That leaves some 36MW at $1.20, some retail selling staff certainly or Brazilain percentage of completion.

I guess I am confused.

Does anyone have an opinion on this?

[explo 673]

I haven't broken it down, but just at first glance my assumption is that the 59.8 MWac (83.7 MWp) sold in Canada are included in the 176.3 MWp total soultion shipments.

Edited June 21 by explo

[dydo 1,473]

Thanks I am glad you are seeing the same

 

Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

[dydo 1,473]

I found this headline but I am not sure what this is about.

Singapore financier joins Canadian Solar. A Singapore-based project financier has joined Canadian....

The stock has moved too well, so it could be a news in the morning.

[dydo 1,473]

I do love this statement  calling Canadian contribution as Canada's

http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/edc-to-provide-project-financing-for-dubai-solar-park-for-key-contract-with-canadian-solar-630046913.html

[disdaniel 69]

People all say that CSIQ margins on recurrent projects (USA) are low/crummy.  But that was well over a year ago...now solar modules cost a lot less.  Prices down $0.20/W (or more?) over the past year  How should I think about if these project still have low margins?

[dydo 1,473]

Looks like the final result is in for AD review AD3, was announced today. the booked $44.1M if they paid 13.07% AD from 8.52% and 0.04% on CVD they should put back about $34 to $35M back from the true-up, that is about .60 per share. Back to $2.15 EPS potential and now $21.50 target.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/06/27/2017-13426/crystalline-silicon-photovoltaic-cells-whether-or-not-assembled-into-modules-from-the-peoples

[sunnypease 16]

2 hours ago, odyd said:

Looks like the final result is in for AD review AD3, was announced today. the booked $44.1M if they paid 13.07% AD from 8.52% and 0.04% on CVD they should put back about $34 to $35M back from the true-up, that is about .60 per share. Back to $2.15 EPS potential and now $21.50 target.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/06/27/2017-13426/crystalline-silicon-photovoltaic-cells-whether-or-not-assembled-into-modules-from-the-peoples

Thanks for staying completely on top of this & sharing your findings.

You are saying that the final AD duty is lower than what they already paid?   What was the AD duty before this decision?

And going forward, the duty is lower & so margins are better?  I am surprised it makes such a big difference for CSIQ considering that north America sales are not the majority of their sales. 

[explo 673]

3 hours ago, odyd said:

Looks like the final result is in for AD review AD3, was announced today. the booked $44.1M if they paid 13.07% AD from 8.52% and 0.04% on CVD they should put back about $34 to $35M back from the true-up, that is about .60 per share. Back to $2.15 EPS potential and now $21.50 target.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/06/27/2017-13426/crystalline-silicon-photovoltaic-cells-whether-or-not-assembled-into-modules-from-the-peoples

Thanks. Since it is not a recurrent EPS adjustment the PE 10 multiplier adjustment to it before adding to price target seems excessive. I.e. a $0.60 adjustment of stock value target rather than a $6 adjustment seems more reasonable unless we expect this rate change to apply (rates seems to be reviewed and changed quite frequently) and be relevant (shipping from China to US) for 10 years.

[dydo 1,473]

3 hours ago, explo said:

Thanks. Since it is not a recurrent EPS adjustment the PE 10 multiplier adjustment to it before adding to price target seems excessive. I.e. a $0.60 adjustment of stock value target rather than a $6 adjustment seems more reasonable unless we expect this rate change to apply (rates seems to be reviewed and changed quite frequently) and be relevant (shipping from China to US) for 10 years.

It is PE EPS situation. EPS is also variable every year. The rate is meaningless as there are no tariffs on what is shipped now.