rkbabang Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Solar City is now manufacturing panels with that are over 22% efficient. They claim that they are the most efficient panels on the market. SolarCity Unveils World’s Most Efficient Rooftop Solar Panel, To Be Made in America "New module that generates more power per square foot than any rooftop solar panel in production will also be the highest-volume solar panel manufactured in the U.S." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awindenberger Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Why wouldn't you want them installed by SolarCity? Is there something wrong with their installers? Installation price too high or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adesigar Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Why wouldn't you want them installed by SolarCity? Is there something wrong with their installers? Installation price too high or something? I think Solarcity lease is a terrible option for consumers. Its really only for people who cant afford to own their solar setup and are planning not to sell the house for 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Do they (or other installers) even itemize out the total system cost? If they don', then selling the panels separately may undermine their sales teams' flexibility on getting good deals done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awindenberger Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Why wouldn't you want them installed by SolarCity? Is there something wrong with their installers? Installation price too high or something? Well for one I don't believe they have a presence where I live, and 2nd I would rather do the installation myself and save the money on that process. My friend did his own installation and it was much cheaper than going through a company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I think Solarcity lease is a terrible option for consumers. Its really only for people who cant afford to own their solar setup and are planning not to sell the house for 10 years. Is it "terrible", or is it just not as good as buying the system upfront is you have the capital to invest? The way I see it, you get a lower energy bill each month and don't have to pay upfront. For most people, that's better than what they're doing now, and the energy is clean, which many people also value and are ready to pay for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picasso Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I think Solarcity lease is a terrible option for consumers. Its really only for people who cant afford to own their solar setup and are planning not to sell the house for 10 years. Is it "terrible", or is it just not as good as buying the system upfront is you have the capital to invest? The way I see it, you get a lower energy bill each month and don't have to pay upfront. For most people, that's better than what they're doing now, and the power is clean. Right, and it shows in their very low default rates. If it was such a bad deal like Chanos point out, then we should start seeing default rates go up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benhacker Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I think the problem with a lot of the solar leases I have specifically seen or been offered is that they reduce your rate up front (generally modestly), but provide escalating rates (generally 1-3%) annually through the term of the lease. This is sold to consumers this way (at least by the pitches I've seen) "typically, power rates in your area have risen by 3-5% over the last X years, so this is a great investment". I think the reason it can be a bad deal (for some) is that the future power prices are unlikely going to rise at those rates (largely, I would say, because of solar), and may in fact fall, and thus, in a few years, consumers may be contractually obligated in certain areas to pay above market rates for power to RUN / SCTY or bond holders. I don't think there is a tremendous amount of default risk, as power bills are rarely unpaid. But I think it will impact the uptake of solar leasing (vs. buying). As panels + installation gets cheaper, I think buying outright will become more popular as it's cheaper and leasing model for such a transaction is really adding a lot of overhead and providing limited value. Selling / buying panels directly makes some sense, although I think utility scale solar is a better approach for solar generally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I think the problem with a lot of the solar leases I have specifically seen or been offered is that they reduce your rate up front (generally modestly), but provide escalating rates (generally 1-3%) annually through the term of the lease. This is sold to consumers this way (at least by the pitches I've seen) "typically, power rates in your area have risen by 3-5% over the last X years, so this is a great investment". I think the reason it can be a bad deal (for some) is that the future power prices are unlikely going to rise at those rates (largely, I would say, because of solar), and may in fact fall, and thus, in a few years, consumers may be contractually obligated in certain areas to pay above market rates for power to RUN / SCTY or bond holders. I don't think there is a tremendous amount of default risk, as power bills are rarely unpaid. But I think it will impact the uptake of solar leasing (vs. buying). As panels + installation gets cheaper, I think buying outright will become more popular as it's cheaper and leasing model for such a transaction is really adding a lot of overhead and providing limited value. Selling / buying panels directly makes some sense, although I think utility scale solar is a better approach for solar generally. That makes sense. Isn't it also possible that power rates will go up faster in the coming years because there's so much infrastructure investment to do to decarbonize the system, make it able to handle more intermittent sources and storage, turn things into more of a smart grid? It might be somewhat cheaper to buy upfront, but don't underestimate how people mostly care about convenience and not having sticker shock upfront. Car leases make no financial sense for the vast majority of people compared to owning, yet leases are popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Why wouldn't you want them installed by SolarCity? Is there something wrong with their installers? Installation price too high or something? I think Solarcity lease is a terrible option for consumers. Its really only for people who cant afford to own their solar setup and are planning not to sell the house for 10 years. Yes, but it was my understanding (and I could be wrong about this) that you can also just buy the system off SolarCity, have them install it, and you then own it outright. EDIT: Yes it says just this on their website. http://www.solarcity.com/residential/how-much-do-solar-panels-cost#purchase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffmori7 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. Why wouldn't you want them installed by SolarCity? Is there something wrong with their installers? Installation price too high or something? I think Solarcity lease is a terrible option for consumers. Its really only for people who cant afford to own their solar setup and are planning not to sell the house for 10 years. Yes, but it was my understanding (and I could be wrong about this) that you can also just buy the system off SolarCity, have them install it, and you then own it outright. And maybe you could pay it, and they finance it upfront, but in the end, you will own the system. Is it just a leasing system they offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share Posted October 2, 2015 From their website (http://www.solarcity.com/residential/how-much-do-solar-panels-cost) they offer 4 different ways of getting their panels. A loan, A lease, a "Power Purchase Agreement", and simply buying it outright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I think Chanos is out to lunch on this one. Distributed power generation just makes a lot of sense to me and I don't see how on earth these financing arrangements could skew to subprime borrowers. I am not long however as I've never been able to convince myself this company is cheap or even on the cheap side of fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picasso Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 The Chanos short thesis somehow thinks cheaper solar costs over time will make customers want to default. It just makes my brain numb thinking how that's possible when that's the whole reason the company has been successful in the first place. Continued price drops make the value proposition better not worse. I haven't paid too much attention to SCTY but I heard his thesis and laughed. It should also be noted that the Rives basically saved Elon in 2008. Without them we probably wouldn't have Tesla. Elon recently purchased shares after the Chanos comment so there's probably some risk of Elon becoming involved in some fashion. I don't have any views long or short but I hear a lot of funds are trying to short this stock right now. Funny thing is, the one they were all long SUNE blew up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted October 2, 2015 Author Share Posted October 2, 2015 Looks like the acquisition of Silevo is paying off (well, technologically at least). I wonder if they will be willing to sell the panels to consumers that aren't interested in getting them installed by SolarCity. I'll ask again, because last time everyone went off onto a discussion about loans and leases. Assuming you buy the panels outright, what is wrong with SolarCity installers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Speaking of Musk being awesome: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelagic Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Speaking of Musk being awesome: Seems like a solar mirror would be a hell of a lot easier, cheaper and safer than fusion bombs over the poles. Wonder if SCTY is going to have a monopoly on solar panels going to the Mars colony, is that priced into the stock yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adesigar Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 From their website (http://www.solarcity.com/residential/how-much-do-solar-panels-cost) they offer 4 different ways of getting their panels. A loan, A lease, a "Power Purchase Agreement", and simply buying it outright. In my opinion for their prices/rates etc pretty much all of their options are a terrible choice. Here is a review of their loan option http://pickmysolar.com/about/news/solarcity-mypower-review-part-1 http://pickmysolar.com/about/news/solarcity-mypower-review-part-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescobrk Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Can anyone find the link to the actual interview of Musk talking about the temporary suns on Mars? I've tried solar city and youtube but no luck. Man this guy IS awesome! Speaking of Musk being awesome: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adesigar Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Can anyone find the link to the actual interview of Musk talking about the temporary suns on Mars? I've tried solar city and youtube but no luck. Man this guy IS awesome! Speaking of Musk being awesome: That's all I could find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Speaking of Musk being awesome: Seems like a solar mirror would be a hell of a lot easier, cheaper and safer than fusion bombs over the poles. In his original remark on it, Musk said that this would be the fastest way to do it. Not necessarily his favorite or the cheapest, just the quickest. When you want to release a lot of energy, hard to beat a series of fusion bombs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin4u2 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I really don't know why we are talking about this company on a value investment board but anyway...there are many more dynamics at play here than meets the eye. 1) Talk to an electrical engineer about how these solar panel tied to the grid affects the power generation business. 2) Lower commodity prices, particularly coal and NG affect the economics of solar. 3) This business would not exist without government subsidies. Not sure if anyone has ever looked at this financials but the lack of a viable business model tied to government subsidies makes it destined to fail. Would any elon musk business be viable without subsidies? 4) Solar costs have been falling, for both photovolatic and solar thermal collectors, so the success of this business is directly tied to that trend continuing. 5) What the heck is "incremental Economic Value Creation"? As the losses grow, the is focus on iEVC. See any quarterly or annual report to figure that one out. Chinos is right, this one is a zero. The Chanos short thesis somehow thinks cheaper solar costs over time will make customers want to default. It just makes my brain numb thinking how that's possible when that's the whole reason the company has been successful in the first place. Continued price drops make the value proposition better not worse. I haven't paid too much attention to SCTY but I heard his thesis and laughed. It should also be noted that the Rives basically saved Elon in 2008. Without them we probably wouldn't have Tesla. Elon recently purchased shares after the Chanos comment so there's probably some risk of Elon becoming involved in some fashion. I don't have any views long or short but I hear a lot of funds are trying to short this stock right now. Funny thing is, the one they were all long SUNE blew up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Picasso Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 Chanos is hinging his short thesis on the price of solar going down. Based on what you are saying that their success is tied to lower prices, Chanos is right but it's going to zero for precisely the wrong reasons? Also, I don't understand the condescension with "value investors" when topics like Solar City or Amazon or whatever. If it is so egregiously overvalued, then it's a value investment from the other direction. Which seems to be what you think about Solar City. There are plenty of topics on things like ZINC or SHLD or other value traps, so should we stop talking about those, or do I only have to turn in my value investing card when I try to understand Solar City or Tesla? There's plenty of money to be made both ways and there's thousands of other stocks out there. Perhaps a discussion of Solar City on a value investing board is getting your spidey senses tingling as a clear sign of overvaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now