Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dydo

Trading Solars

Recommended Posts

Guest spiritcraft

As always, they are just being played. The wind could blow and they go up 20% in a day. I am sure there are some serious chart folks around here. The only T&A i know anything about belongs on a completely different board!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiritcraft

An ongoing thread for all things discussing the daily share price and the direction headed. We can discuss Level II, Block Trades, short attacks, short and long term price targets, conspiracy theories and any number of things regarding share price for any solar name. We can keep this discussion here so we don't clutter up news and specific company threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiritcraft

Blocks on the bid this AM. Avg trade size seems up as well. Much more fun than the last several days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ILOVEPV

earning season. The market is waiting for clearer picture. Volume is anemic especially for SOL, CSIQ. This pattern likely will be lasted for the next 2 weeks. American based stocks are trading with a bigger interest and as always greener. Waiting/trading time. I noticed when the stock price hits the bottom it almost impossible to pick shares even at ask. Yesterday I was trying hard to buy SOL shares for 2.10-2.11 and despite the ask was adequate my order was not filled while ask was immediately moved higher. It happened 3 times in a row and only when I put order higher than ask 2.12 and then 2.13 orders got filled. Same happened when I tried to sell SOL trading shares this morning. I had to decrease a price from 2.31 to 2.28 to make my order filled. The same story with TSL - I had to chase the stock in a downside direction from 4.3 to 4.23 to sell shares that I bought yesterday to the close. All of the above is a clear pattern of accumulation - guys at the "helm" do not want your participation in this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiritcraft

Agreed... and in TSL's case, someone has kept a bottom at $4 with a block big enough to make the price jump off $4. We'll see if it gets tested again and how deep the pockets are. I have seen it from 55K to 75K @ $4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spiritcraft

Thanks, That TSL short is amazing. Almost twice that of STP. Just an easy target at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ILOVEPV

I see the intermediate VERY bottom range before a rally resumes: TSL 3.60-3.70 CSIQ 3.70-3.80 YGE 2.20-2.30 FSLR 22.00-23.00 SPWR it is the most difficult for to predict. Theoretically it should be 6.3 though likely 9.00-9.50. At least I will start to buy SPWR back in the above-mentioned range. SOL 1.95-2.05 JKS 6.50-6.70 WFR 4.25-4.40 STP and LDK are out of picture due to negative equity and possible BK. I set this range a week ago. Until now no one stock reached a range noted above. The next leg up top prices (before the next consolidaiton) TSL 7.70-8.20 SOL 4.90-5.30 SPWR 19.00-21.00 JKS 12.00-13.00 WFR 8.20-8.50 YGE 4.50-4.80 I was more or less right on a top price for SOL before a serios (up to 50% correction) that is going on for the last 7 days (my target was 2.75), CSIQ (5.25) and SPWR (12.30). The targets above were set over 2 months ago. I was totally wrong on JKS (I had only 5.5-6 target while the stock reached 10) and overestimated GTAT (4.50-5.00). I had no targets for TSL, YGE, LDK and STP. I did not consider et all HSOL, CSUN, WFR, SCTY and PWER as stocks for investing/playing. Now I'm watching them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or since the sector started a new bull trend play the RSI... Since the new rally began (Dec) every time RSI dips below 50, load because a rally follows. Anytime stock gets over bout in mid 70's RSI unload some to lock profits. For example take a look at SOL chart since December.... If you followed this rule you could keep a core bit still trade in and out based on RSI levels. Many solars severly oversold while news flow is getting more and more bullish. You can try tp wait for your exact levels but you don't want to miss a violent snap back over a couple pennies.... http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=Sol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SOL 1.95-2.05

I consider myself an investor, not a trader, but trading while investing can improve risk/reward ratio in your investment. I don't know much about trading patterns, but if these up trend patterns with consistent pullback magnitudes of recent run-ups are very consistent they can be useful to understand. Question. SOL bottomed (hopefully) at $1.08. It then run-up 80 cent or 74% to $1.88, before pulling back 42 cents or 53% of the recent gain to $1.46, before next run-up of $1.39 or 95% to $2.85. Then we saw the ongoing pullback dipping so far 75 cents or 54% of recent gain to $2.10. My question is why you expect it to pullback 50% of the gain from the bigger and so far absolute $1.08 bottom instead of 50% of the gain form the smaller more recent bottom at $1.46 (in which case it is already done). Does it always have to pullback in relation the very first bottom or to the recent one of sufficient significance and in that case is the $1.46 bottom far from significant (what would be required)? You said that MM had trouble getting any trade volume below 2.12-2.13 range. Does this tell us something, like that the traders are uncertain about what pullback potential other traders see and noone dare to take the lead beyond this point (without more support from negative industry sentiment or general market sell-off pressure) in a gain/risk perspective (regardless of if they're on the bid or ask side) to squeeze out those potential extra 15 cents before next run-up? Another question. How comfirmed is the up trend? What is required for it to be firm? Is this the cross roads, another run-up to the $4 and the 3 year long down trend can be considered broken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boss, I am moving this thread to trading forum, you bought options on CSIQ of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest littleguyintucson
Exactly. That's what I meant with that it did not seem right. I've never seen any of these companies talk about other things than net-debt-to-equity ratios. But looking up debt ratio it seems to use total liabilities, not considering the type and working capital structure. The standard net-debt-to-equity ratio is a more stable financial health measure that can be used in combination with looking at working capital health. With pure debt ratio Trina would have 325%, while their net-debt-to-equity ratio is 52%. Trina is considered finanically healthy, which would not be indicated if 325% was used.
Debt to equity is total liabilities divided by shareholder equity. It is not debt divided by equity. CSIQ does have one of the poorer debt to equity at near 418%. What is overlooked is several hundred million in liabilities associated with projects that others do not have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no problem, I suppose members want to separate trading from fundamentals. I do not trade I buy and hold, so it is helpful for me to see this separated. thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all depends what one is looking for I suppose. Company which is operating with high liabilities like solar industry is very common. Debt ratio, showing financial debt separating it from operational liabilities make mores sense imho, as far as measuring health of the company's financial stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ILOVEPV

you asked very difficult questions to answer in 1 shot. First we have 3 factors that move stocks and all 3 must be taken into account 1. FA (fundamental analysis) - current fundamentals and what is more important the FUTURE one 2. TA -technical analysis 3. Price manipulation How all of them works separatly and in conjuction depends on many many circumstances. Any of those listed above can prevail in different times and time frames. Normally FA works perfect on a long distance: 6 months and longer. That is why those who made a right bet i.e. bought and forgot make much more than RETAIL traders but in a case they made a mistake they are the bigger losers. Contrary to it a price manipulation is a short term issue - from minutes to several weeks, sometimes several months. TA is a tricky stuff, more art than science and JMHO can be taken into account only in specific situations. A problem here: TA and price manipulation are connected very tight: both sides of the market (say the "wall street" and investors) can not win using the same TA, so a winner is always only one and almost often - the WS. How it works it is separate story, may be I will write it later. In general FUTURE fundamentals determine a trend direction while a chart trajectory of reaching a top is in hands of big players. Lets' take a look at SOL. Initially a first run from 1.08 to almost 1.8 was fast, specifically we saw 1 day 30% gain that made a half of an initial rally. It was more or less obvious that after such a big gain within 1 trading day especially at the beginning of a rally major players will start taking profits and killing smart early birds. The stock dropped to 1.50 (20% down). After several days of consolidation a rally was resumed using a typical pattern: 2 steps up-one step down: from 1.5 to 2.15, then back to 1.80 again. The last move was more substantial - from 2.00 to 2.8. This move was made in pre-earning time to leave behind those who was willing to wait for earning and guidance resultsn (they started chasing the stock in 2.60-2.80 range and already punished) . As soon as first report hits a wire - TSL all 11 Chinese were brutally taken down on a biggest scale compared to their american based counterparts - almost 50% loss from an entire gain made from the very bottom and more than 80% from the last $2 "consolidation platform" (2.00-2.80). Since fundamentals will be improving the stocks will continue their rally no matter what a general market will suggest (the only exception is a general market collapse). That said that the next move up will be more substantial in terms of %% gain than a previous one and most likely more nervious in terms of big swings in both directions. I can not explain it rationally - just my 25 year of experience dealing with stocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Klothilde

all depends what one is looking for I suppose. Company which is operating with high liabilities like solar industry is very common. Debt ratio, showing financial debt separating it from operational liabilities make mores sense imho, as far as measuring health of the company's financial stance.

The leverage among solar companies is high because we are going through a consolidation and not because the industry warrants a high leverage. High leverages usually go in line with high capital investment and relatively high cash flow certainty, e.g. in the utilities business. Look at semi companies for adequate proxies for solar, e.g. STMicroelectronics has a debt-to-equity of 64%. As to singling out financial liabilities: this has an advantage when assessing burden of debt. However leaving operational liabilities out also has the disadvantage that you lose the overview of the complete leverage risk that your investment is exposed to. If your debt-to-equity is high then big ticket loss items can destroy shareholder value in the blink of an eye. That's why I go the purist way and look at my total liabs / equity. Here is my Q3 assessment (Suntech Q1 figures): Debt-to-Equity ratios 12Q3: SMA...............69%....GOOD First Solar.......73%....GOOD REC...............86%....GOOD JA.................161%...OK Sunpower........185%...OK Trina.............195%...OK Hanwha..........208%...OK Jinko.............311%...DANGER Solarworld.......347%...DANGER Renesola.........355%...DANGER Canadian........418%...TOXIC Yingli.............421%...TOXIC Suntech..........445%...TOXIC China Sunergy.1175%...TOXIC LDK.............12456%...TOXIC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest solarman1

ILOVEPV - in your opinion, how long do you think this Chi solar 11 consolidation/pullback we are experience will last? Most have doubled from mid-November 2012 bottom. We are 1 1/2 weeks into this consolidation process I believe. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ILOVEPV

good question. This is the most complicated issue because I am not involved in "consolidation" process and have no idea what forces are behind it. The stocks are held down artificially to let big boys accumulate and may be cover (I do not think there were a lot new short positions to cover). Probably we have to wait for 2-3 weeks more though a continuation of a rally can be started in any moment. Please be aware that we won't have a straight line up day by day, rather it is gonna be a very nervous curve with big fast swings in both directions but a general trend will be up (say, if you compare today's and even recent top digits to those in 3-4 months the last one are going to be higher; same will happen in next 3-4 months, etc). As for current price I already stated we are pretty close to the intermediate bottom. May be several cents down within a brief time frame and this is it. March 4th we will see YGE earnings and guidance, then Macrh 11 - CSIQ and 3 days later SOL. I've got a feeling that to the time of SOL report SOL shares will be higher than today. I can not say the same for CSIQ and definitely YGE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YGE has already given hints of very strong 2013 with big time margin recovery. Personally I think there CC will be reversal mark in solars for next continuation rally. Be patient longs, this sector is volatile but can change in a dime. News flow is positive and getting better and better as we are seeing from Overseas articles where demand is trumping supply. load while you can for next leg up. YGE reports Monday I believe and I will stick my neck out and say this will be start of next leg up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Operational expenses and their extensive nature are part of the industry’s format. Chinese companies are using completely different method of payable cycles, which enables them to have high balances at any given time on their operational liabilities. At the same time, they could, until recently, leverage this behaviour by allowing high value carried at their high accounts receivables, and continue to have cash flow availability. Capital investments are not recognized in any other aspect but debt, or cash spent. Both are located in the financing activities of the company, not operational ones, and certainly not in operational liabilities. While impact on the net income has reduced the free cash flows, they have even further used the leverage of cycle payables, to support themselves to survive income depression.I do not argue that this is not s a viable method to assess any company, but when you are looking in this way I think that you may not give a justice to nature of the industry and the stage it is in. I look at the behaviour of paying payables, in line with debt increases, cash movement in area of extra injections from lowering receivables to assess health of companies. Ultimately, choices we make are based on ratios we endorse. I am not here to say this is the right or wrong thing; it is just really a matter of a choice. Conservative investors do not come into the view of solar companies, as the ratio implications would never placed stocks like that in their portfolio. So relationship of what assessment or ratio you are comfortable with is the level of risk you willing to take. Therefore as the matter of preference instead of the objectivity, I feel imho, this depends on one’s choice not the standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MichaelZhao

It is bit risky to me though. I would use spare $$$ to pick up some Jan 14 $3 call (bid 1.2, ask 1.6), and forget about it. It may turn out to be a good Chrismas gift in the end of this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest littleguyintucson

Operational expenses and their extensive nature are part of the industry’s format. Chinese companies are using completely different method of payable cycles, which enables them to have high balances at any given time on their operational liabilities. At the same time, they could, until recently, leverage this behaviour by allowing high value carried at their high accounts receivables, and continue to have cash flow availability. Capital investments are not recognized in any other aspect but debt, or cash spent. Both are located in the financing activities of the company, not operational ones, and certainly not in operational liabilities. While impact on the net income has reduced the free cash flows, they have even further used the leverage of cycle payables, to support themselves to survive income depression.I do not argue that this is not s a viable method to assess any company, but when you are looking in this way I think that you may not give a justice to nature of the industry and the stage it is in. I look at the behaviour of paying payables, in line with debt increases, cash movement in area of extra injections from lowering receivables to assess health of companies. Ultimately, choices we make are based on ratios we endorse. I am not here to say this is the right or wrong thing; it is just really a matter of a choice. Conservative investors do not come into the view of solar companies, as the ratio implications would never placed stocks like that in their portfolio. So relationship of what assessment or ratio you are comfortable with is the level of risk you willing to take. Therefore as the matter of preference instead of the objectivity, I feel imho, this depends on one’s choice not the standard.

Actually the model is as it is due to the second prolonged downturn. The business model had great visions of $0.45 profit ASP above $1.45 and leverage to expand to meet the growth targets with promise of profits. The large inventories were stockpiled and then the 2+ year carnage of the ASP drops and over capacity has crippled the bussiness models tot he point they either shut the doors and banks lose money or they keep funding them. The payable accounts and billable stockpiling up is just a way to put off the inevitable cash flow issues that are being had by all. Banks could shut them down and lose most everything or they can fund them and hope that they eventually turn back to profits. That scenario is sickening many companies as they are throwing bad money after bad.

Klothide, thank you for the data. Jaso is ne of the dark horses that I am betting on due to a variety of metrics being size, ability to expand upstream, debt level about to be reduced significantly and fairly low inventory levels that when utilization cranks up, should turn them to a profit far quicker and greater than most others as their share count is now very low compared to most peers.

Losses near term will sound large due to that low share count but relative to peers will be inline with them on a $$/watt loss.

I do believe that CSIQ is floating projects which will have greater returns on 1/4 of their accrued debts and thus are setup better than several of the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the model is as it is due to the second prolonged downturn. The business model had great visions of $0.45 profit ASP above $1.45 and leverage to expand to meet the growth targets with promise of profits.

So the downturn had taken the levels of the retained earnings down, lowering the equity ( RE is the only moveable part, unless more equity is offered for sale). However second part of the ratio, debt are not the phenomenon of the downturn, they are operating dynamics in China and growth factors, and sure some companies use short-term debt for working capital as they have always done. I took a look at the data for Trina for 5 years comparing those factors. When you look at them it appears that money borrowed has been well spent. The costs per watt for operational liabilities have been reduced from 2008, but 2010, the best where there was ton of the cash to go around. Still improved in 2011 and 2012 over 2009 and 2008. The dynamic of the industry is growth, hence your financial liabilities are rocketing. Operating liabilities in association to shipments do not show anything in particular in years of 2012 and 2011, as when you buying your materials for 2GW capacity versus 500MW capacity, your needs grow equally, thus your accounts have larger balances. When two factors are constant, then third payable cycle must be the same, which has been long to start and have been extended in some cases, as I described to keep the cash.

The payable accounts and billable stockpiling up is just a way to put off the inevitable cash flow issues that are being had by all. Banks could shut them down and lose most everything or they can fund them and hope that they eventually turn back to profits.

I am not sure what this statement describes. Accounts payable, notes payable are means of operating any business, these are credits with vendors having payable cycles of 30, 60, or 180 days as in China on many occasions. Those are free of interest. In same cases of notes will have interest, and they will lose it if notes are cashed before maturity. Accounts receivable represent credit extended to purchaser of the product (who puts it accounts payable). When you do not pay your bills for 180 days, which is 2 quarters your account will have a high balance, but you are not using cash, so you can sell on credit, as you have working capital from not paying bills. I do not get how bank has anything to do with it. As long as you pay your costs of borrowing,and do not breach covenants banks do not manage companies. As I have stated, the balance sheets manifest growing nature of the industry and the particularly cycles of operating in China, which is the industry. Therefore using it against the industry, would call to discard everything in it but FSLR, which operates in the US has a different business model to date, therefore not a good example of comparison. Nice weekend to all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest solarman1

Odyd, can you put your latest comments in regards to CSIQ in plain English? In another word, would you buy CSIQ at this level? Or another Chi Solar 11 for that matter. If any, which one are you looking to buy and/or add? Thank you, Have a great weekend. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt-to-Equity ratios 12Q3: SMA...............69%....GOOD First Solar.......73%....GOOD REC...............86%....GOOD

Curious how REC appears healthy here, by diluting existing shareholders with double of equity offering to pay debt. Company has 0 retained earnings, meaning everything in its operations have been paid by debt and equity issues. That does not sound good to me at all, only confirming fallibility of this ratio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Donate

    Please donate to support this community. We appreciate all donations!

    Donate Sidebar by DevFuse
  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      33
    • Total Posts
      92,035
  • Who's Online (See full list)



×
×
  • Create New...