odyd

8point3 Energy Partners LP (CAFD)

59 posts in this topic

Black numbers. Less than 50% of target CAFD. Raising DPS 3.5%. Should have a decent reception I think.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, given the information CSIQ has provided, they would be able to create a yieldco with cash available for distribution similar to CAFD. CAFD has a market cap of $744M (from broker, haven't verified). This means at a cost to build of $2/W and 30% equity, the Recurrent pipeline will cost $2.4B to build after putting in $720M in equity. In other words, it is essentially worthless in current market conditions. 

I do not know how one account for the ITC tax credit, is that rolled into the cash available for distribution as CAFD revenue was only 50% of it dividend payout.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, given the information CSIQ has provided, they would be able to create a yieldco with cash available for distribution similar to CAFD. CAFD has a market cap of $744M (from broker, haven't verified). This means at a cost to build of $2/W and 30% equity, the Recurrent pipeline will cost $2.4B to build after putting in $720M in equity. In other words, it is essentially worthless in current market conditions. 

I do not know how one account for the ITC tax credit, is that rolled into the cash available for distribution as CAFD revenue was only 50% of it dividend payout.

It would indeed be bad news if Recurrent's pipeline gets built at 17% to 30% higher than average Q1 2015 utility solar costs.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would indeed be bad news if Recurrent's pipeline gets built at 17% to 30% higher than average Q1 2015 utility solar costs.

Go and insert some costs and see what it takes for CSIQ to recover it acquisition cost and make s profit that rationalizes the buildout. At 1.70 which SEIA estimates as the average for Q1, they still don't recover their acquisition costs.

Edited by BIPV Investor
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Go and insert some costs and see what it takes for CSIQ to recover it acquisition cost and make s profit that rationalizes the buildout. At 1.70 which SEIA estimates as the average for Q1, they still don't recover their acquisition costs.

What are the acquisition costs?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the acquisition costs?

 

The $265M they had to pay Sharp to buy Recurrent. 8th dimension has done lots of rough estimates on cash generation for the current generation of solar plants being built/bid and it is not overly apparent that they make financial sense based on the estimated cash generation over the projects lifetime. The key with solar plants is that it is a depreciating asset that has little value 20 years out. We aren't buying real estate here as that tends to appreciate over time, hence in is willing to accept a lower return. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The $265M they had to pay Sharp to buy Recurrent. 8th dimension has done lots of rough estimates on cash generation for the current generation of solar plants being built/bid and it is not overly apparent that they make financial sense based on the estimated cash generation over the projects lifetime. The key with solar plants is that it is a depreciating asset that has little value 20 years out. We aren't buying real estate here as that tends to appreciate over time, hence in is willing to accept a lower return. 

What happened to the rest of the pipeline?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The $265M they had to pay Sharp to buy Recurrent. 8th dimension has done lots of rough estimates on cash generation for the current generation of solar plants being built/bid and it is not overly apparent that they make financial sense based on the estimated cash generation over the projects lifetime. The key with solar plants is that it is a depreciating asset that has little value 20 years out. We aren't buying real estate here as that tends to appreciate over time, hence in is willing to accept a lower return. 

You mean $130M?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now