dandurston
Member
I bought today at $16.88. There's a good chance there will be more opportunities this low this year, but there could also be some spikes up to $25-$30 that could be an opportunities for profit.
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
I'm torn on strategy, but am going to be patient for a couple weeks. LEAP prices are always slow to adjust to these mega-drops in share price. Looking for a dip down to $17-18ish in about 3 weeks if the share price floats back up. Gonna buy my last chunk of 2018 LEAPs and move on to other things for the summer. Been following this waaaay too close for the last 6 months.
doggusfluffy
Closed
I'm torn short term as well. Chanos will probably be out calling for single digits soon I imagine on the squawk box circuit. Energy bill should progress on Wednesday after they vote down the Iran amendment according to this. With my luck I would buy a strangle and the SP will linger until expiration. 
Overnight Energy: Senate Dems block energy, water bill a third time
Overnight Energy: Senate Dems block energy, water bill a third time
Today was accumulation, not short covering. Maybe a little short covering, but I'm fairly sure most of it was accumulation. Short covering doesn't usually create a straight line throughout the entire day.
My thoughts, the drop to $18 was due to the "miss". The rest of the drop was panic selling, and margin calls.
1) Liquidity concerns are BS.
2) Chanos is a chad who enjoys receiving credit for misrepresenting facts.
3) Every time Solar City has fallen to ~$17 it has seen plenty of buyers. I'll remind you that many analysts had price targets of $80-$100 6 months ago. The only thing that has changed is the market sentiment, and the price of oil.
My thoughts, the drop to $18 was due to the "miss". The rest of the drop was panic selling, and margin calls.
1) Liquidity concerns are BS.
2) Chanos is a chad who enjoys receiving credit for misrepresenting facts.
3) Every time Solar City has fallen to ~$17 it has seen plenty of buyers. I'll remind you that many analysts had price targets of $80-$100 6 months ago. The only thing that has changed is the market sentiment, and the price of oil.
Last edited:
I agree, aside from the last 15 minutes of the day. That definitely looked like covering for that little recovery.
I have ser
I'm not convinced. Usually flat movement after a very big drop with significant volume indicates accumulation. I think the last 10 minutes was short covering, and traders who were short exiting stage left, after making 30-50% in 3 weeks. Seriously, every headline today was basically saying SolarCity is doomed, and Elon is a liar. Manipulation?
Either SolarCity will go bankrupt or it won't. I trust Elon and Lyndon 10000% more than I trust Chanos.
If SolarCity succeeds, it is worth $100-300 long term. If SolarCity goes bankrupt, SolarCity's assets and portfolio are likely worth $1-2 billion. At $1.5 the market is basically not pricing in anything.
Chanos = The Gary The Rat of financial Analysts
I'm not convinced. Usually flat movement after a very big drop with significant volume indicates accumulation. I think the last 10 minutes was short covering, and traders who were short exiting stage left, after making 30-50% in 3 weeks. Seriously, every headline today was basically saying SolarCity is doomed, and Elon is a liar. Manipulation?
Either SolarCity will go bankrupt or it won't. I trust Elon and Lyndon 10000% more than I trust Chanos.
If SolarCity succeeds, it is worth $100-300 long term. If SolarCity goes bankrupt, SolarCity's assets and portfolio are likely worth $1-2 billion. At $1.5 the market is basically not pricing in anything.
Chanos = The Gary The Rat of financial Analysts
But he does provide for good buying opportunities; but your description sounds better
Not that it matters, but I think we are saying the same thing.
Me: I agree it was accumulation today aside from the last 15 minutes, which looked like short covering.
You: I'm not convinced. It looked like accumulation until the last 10 minutes, which looked like short covering.
Maybe there's just vehement disagreement re: 3:45-3:50PM today?
I have so many shares and LEAPS... I am hyperventilating for sure. Any chance this sees 90 before Jan of 2018? LOL.
Drinker of Koolaid, you cannot fault Chanos for anything. If SCTY is a real company with a bright future and big profits as so many of us believe, none of this will matter.
If not and he is right... well then he is right.
Drinker of Koolaid, you cannot fault Chanos for anything. If SCTY is a real company with a bright future and big profits as so many of us believe, none of this will matter.
If not and he is right... well then he is right.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
I would say $90 in Jan2018 is a near certainty and up until this quarter I would have said Jan2017 would be 50/50. After this abysmal quarter I'll still say 30/70 for $90 by Jan2017 due to the near lock for Clinton and a more desperate fossil industry forcing Congress into give and take on energy legislation.
"Solar" is going to change a LOT this summer as consumers become more educated.
'Solar. Planned utility-scale solar additions total 9.5 GW in 2016, the most of any single energy source. This level of additions is substantially higher than the 3.1 GW of solar added in 2015 and would be more than the total solar installations for the past three years combined (9.4 GW during 2013-15). The top five states where solar capacity is being added are California (3.9 GW), North Carolina (1.1 GW), Nevada (0.9 GW), Texas (0.7 GW), and Georgia (0.7 GW). These values reflect utility-scale solar capacity additions, and do not include any distributed generation (i.e., rooftop solar)'
Kinda cute isn't it, Nevada is now 3rd in the country for solar additions, I wonder why.
on a separate note '3.676 cents per kWh' is the new industry benchmark for California utility solar
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/50920
Perfectlogic
Member
If the company goes bankrupt the shares will be worthless. There are a lot of hyper bulls in this thread that also says things that imply limited understanding of the investing world. I know my post will be disliked in this bullish echo chamber and I have said it before here, but I urge anyone reading not to bet the farm on SCTY, it's a risky investment there is no doubt about that. It's a bet on residential solar which is a business model with no guarantee of ever gaining significant traction (it does compete against utility scale which is 1/3rd the price).
Like traxila said let's wind down the comments about Chanos. I know you are angry about losing money but repeatedly talking about how you would be happy if he died, come on now (also are there no mods watching this thread?). Even at this point the bulls in this thread are as bullish as ever, try to be realistic. The growth is slowing down quickly and the costs are rising, even in spite of the massive rise in customer acquisition spending the growth is slowing, this is a huge warning sign. It looks like the low hanging fruit has dried up and their growth is about to peak and turn south, which makes sense as there is a huge difference in viability of residential solar in the US due to both sun hours and regulation.
My point is that it is easy to fall in love with a stock, that is just how the human mind works. Confirmation bias is not our friend when it comes to investing so be careful and don't martingale.
Last edited:
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
I have often made the same statement in the TSLA related threads. The temptation of easy money can draw people into short-term trading and options, both of which are extremely dangerous for the retail investor.
I've strongly advised people NOT to invest retirement funds in individual stocks. A mix of stock and bond index-based mutual funds is generally the wisest path for money that will be needed in the future.
Either SCTY succeeds or it doesn't. What has yet to come into play is the effect of Tesla Energy products combined with SolarCity arrays. It is entirely possible that residential solar won't be as big a play as some thought, but that doesn't preclude SolarCity from transitioning its business more to the commercial sector, especially if corporate customers see big savings from a Solar & PowerPack setup. So: stay calm, don't bet the farm, and plan on holding shares for a long time rather than trying to make $ off trades and options.
Perfectlogic
Member
The thing with the Powerwall is though that it will only make it more expensive for the customer. The only reason why residential solar is viable right now is that in some states you can just use the grid as a free battery, all you pay for is the electricity from the panels. The only reason for a SCTY customer to get a Powerwall with the solar panels is if the utility starts to demand it because of the loss they are currently taking. If that were to happen SCTY wouldn't be able to compete at all, the current price from SCTY is something like 13 cents/kwh right? If you added a Powerwall to the deal the total price would exceed 20c/kwh, noone would pay that.
jhm
Well-Known Member
This will be a huge year for solar. Utility solar had declined last year, so there does seem to be a little catch up to do.
'Solar. Planned utility-scale solar additions total 9.5 GW in 2016, the most of any single energy source. This level of additions is substantially higher than the 3.1 GW of solar added in 2015 and would be more than the total solar installations for the past three years combined (9.4 GW during 2013-15). The top five states where solar capacity is being added are California (3.9 GW), North Carolina (1.1 GW), Nevada (0.9 GW), Texas (0.7 GW), and Georgia (0.7 GW). These values reflect utility-scale solar capacity additions, and do not include any distributed generation (i.e., rooftop solar)'
Kinda cute isn't it, Nevada is now 3rd in the country for solar additions, I wonder why.
on a separate note '3.676 cents per kWh' is the new industry benchmark for California utility solar
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/50920
It's very exciting to see how low cost of solar is going. Internationally, Dubai has seen a utility scale PPA go for 2.99 c/kWh. Fossil fuels are getting priced out of the market all over the globe.
While I am impressed with utility solar, I remain convinced that distributed solar will play a huge role in the future. As the cost of generation comes down, the costs of transmission and distribution stick out as irreducible. So even with utility solar at 2 c/kWh, why should all grid participants put up with an additional 8 c/kWh for T&D to deliver that power. Properly valuing distributed energy assets can drive that T&D cost down to 4 c/kWh or less. This is the direction the whole system needs to go and it depends on integrating the expertise of distributed installers such as SolarCity.
The difficulty is that the utilities do not really want to embrace this change just yet. They still want an exclusive 10% rent on a system capable of 12 c/kWh average.
But the utilities will have to change. Just by loading up on GWs of solar, the utilities are committing themselves to making changes in how they manage the generation, transmission and distribution of power. They must make investments that integrate solar and wind into the mix. If they don't, then their costs get pushed onto ratepayers and rooftop solar becomes more compelling. If they do make these invesents, then it becomes more difficult to argue that distributed solar imposes incremental costs upon that system while utility solar does not. And finally, those costs are largely T&D costs. SolarCity is offering services to the grid that reduce those costs and the cost of balancing consumption and production.
So it is well and good, if utilities can acquire solar as cheap as 2 c/kWh. What SolarCity is offering are solutions to minimize the cost of distributing solar and other energy wherever it may originate. The first step to minimizing T&D costs is to reduce the distance from generation to consumption. Distributed solar does that. The second step is the minimize the peak load the transmission system must carry and reduce congestion. Distributed batteries help in many ways. The third is to improve stability and reliability while cutting redundancies. The combination of smart inverters, solar and batteries help in this direction. SolarCity is extremely well positioned to offer these solutions from behind-the-meter. Utilities simply are not allowed to do that. Thus, there is regulatory arbitrage to be had by utilities and SolarCity working together, exchanging value they are distinctly positioned to create. Moreover, this is value that distributed solar can create which utility solar cannot. Utility solar can compete on the price of remote wholesale generation, while SolarCity can compete on value created in distribution. These are two very distinct niches, so there is no a priori reason why one would exclude the other.
So longer-term this ecosystem and SolarCity's place in it will take shape, but the friction of present situation obscures this future. SolarCity has had to fight just to find a way into the market. The problem is no with SolarCity's business model; rather it is with a regulatory environment that is rigid and uncompetitive. SolarCity is quite capable of adapting its business to whatever it takes to break in. They are like the weed that finds a crack in the pavement to take root. What is needed is a more open ecosystem, and SolarCity is actually a big part of what is changing the system. They are the weeds that break up the whole parking lot, so that all sorts of new things can take root as well.
I agree that distributed solar will play a huge role in the future, I come from a state where 25% of residences have rooftop solar. But the cost savings to the grid are basically a mirage, (except for reduction of peak aircon load, which could've been supplied by utility solar anyway). Until a home actually disconnects from the grid, it is adding costs to the grid, one way or another, due to that cost burden, the payment for rooftop solar will be reduced to trend towards either wholesale price of solar or the TOU midday rate (these are effectively closely related, to a large extent (but not complete extent) they are same thing)). Think of solar as an alternate form of energy efficiency, not as a power source itself.
I've bought 2 solar PV systems, one about 8 years ago, one recently. Pre subsidy, the first was around US $5 per watt?, the second was around US $1 per watt. After-subsidy it was much better than that. Solar is great, but to me Solarcity is quite reprehensible when they sell PPA to the asset rich, income poor (ie the elderly), if there is an escalation clause. Its also why I think of SCTY as having a terrible business plan, they have high FICO grade customers, but seriously sub prime backing assets. Overtime, USA retail customers will trend towards what business customers pay, fixed + variable + demand charge. with big blocks of midday solar causing the midday to the cheapest time of day. Its also demonstrates the most probity. (Ie business customers pay that way because it is the most cost defensible way to apportion the electricity bull)
Solar power is co-ordinated by an extraterrestrial energy source called the sun. In the USA $1 of utility solar buys about 3x as much solar energy as a $1 of SCTY solar. Its really quite a simple and somewhat binary proposition.
look at today's net demand, California ISO - Todays Outlook and consider what would've happened if California had a nice breeze occurring while the sun was shining.
next year solar = this years solar + wind
next year solar = this years solar + wind
- Status
Similar threads
