|
cremnob posted:FSLR had terrible earnings today. Wasn't there a guy in this thread that was long FSLR? I was, but got out down 8% a long time ago (made a post about it, I swear!). Massively mistimed it, I could've made a lot of money on that trade. I bought in at $33, got out $31... then it promptly zoomed to nearly $50. Oh well- 8% down was my limit and it hit exactly that before reversing. edit: I bought some FSLR Jan2013 puts at the close today despite the high premiums. It seems entirely possible the FSLRs panels aren't holding up over time. There is no historical data for these types of panels and their warranty coverage costs are through the roof. Very surprised to not see more panic in the shares today after that conference call- I think it's about to spiral down. If this trade burns me I'm not touching solar again, though. Crazy sector but the volatility is very temping to the gambler in me. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Feb 29, 2012 |
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 09:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
Dolphin posted:I liked this book until it took a left turn towards Toon Town. Are there any sane books on trading the stock market? I don't like that I have to keep skimming through to find the sane parts of the books that I'm reading. Are all the big shot investors this crazy? If you haven't read The Four Pillars of Investing, I would give that a try. Granted, the methods he teaches are not going to be wildly exciting or sexy, but he does do a good job of debunking poo poo like the above. There's also a whole section about the big shot investors and why they are all that crazy because they are all essentially guessing blind about how the market moves and need to make sense of it somehow
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 21:24
|
|
|
What the heck is going on with gold funds today?
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
Bernanke didn't signal QE.
|
|
#
?
Feb 29, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
from FSLR 10k filed this evening, solar panels that don't work in hot climates(where they are supposedly going to build most of their projects going forward): We believe our PV modules are potentially subject to increased failure rates in hot climates. This assumption is based on technical literature, data that we have developed internally including through accelerated-life testing, our analysis of modules returned under warranty, and our analysis of performance data from systems that we monitor under O&M agreements. Processes that are accelerated by higher ambient temperatures include stress corrosion cracking in glass, polymer creepage and impurity diffusion processes. For more information about risks related to thin film module product performance, please see Item 1A: "Thin-film technology has a short history, and our thin-film technology and solar modules and systems may perform below expectations; problems with product quality or performance may cause us to incur significant and/or unexpected warranty and related expenses, damage our market reputation, and prevent us from maintaining or increasing our market share." First Solar has an extensive deployment history in temperate climates, such as Europe. Our deployed volume into hot climates, such as the southwestern United States, is mostly recent. We have increased our warranty reserve by $37.8 million to reflect our exposure to this shift in the mix of geographic regions where our modules are installed. As we execute on our Long Term Strategic Plan, we expect to install higher volumes in non-temperate climates as part of our utility-scale offerings in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Australia and the southwestern United States. Accordingly, we will continue to review our warranty reserve in the future to reflect actual installations in such non-temperate climates and adjust such reserve as appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
Why not make panels that perform in hot climates instead of just putting money behind a lovely product?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
lightpole posted:Why not make panels that perform in hot climates instead of just putting money behind a lovely product? While we're at it, why not make cars that run on sand instead of pumping oil? Sand is so much easier to get, right?  Sucks how physics, chemistry, and reality in general gets in the way, doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 05:27
|
|
|
if solar panels that work in hot climates are impossible, I think we need to seriously reconsider solar power as a viable form of alternative energy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 05:50
|
|
|
Silicon based panels work ok(and have a long tested history) in hot climates, this is a FSLR specific problem. FSLR panels use cadmium telluride (which has, essentially, no tested history) and they are seeing rapid and unexpected degradation problems in hot climates.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 14:28
|
|
|
Silicon based panels are also not cost effective unless electricity prices triple. Even then, their usefulness is limited due to technical issues deriving from their grid interface.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 15:58
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:Silicon based panels work ok(and have a long tested history) in hot climates, this is a FSLR specific problem. FSLR panels use cadmium telluride (which has, essentially, no tested history) and they are seeing rapid and unexpected degradation problems in hot climates. How the hell was this not tested? I thought one of the big things about solar panels was that you could stick them in the desert and get sweet delicious power from the oppressive sun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
Harry posted:How the hell was this not tested? I thought one of the big things about solar panels was that you could stick them in the desert and get sweet delicious power from the oppressive sun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 16:34
|
|
|
Thinking about shorting LDK, there's a lot of inventory and PPE that might be written down in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 17:02
|
|
|
Harry posted:How the hell was this not tested? I thought one of the big things about solar panels was that you could stick them in the desert and get sweet delicious power from the oppressive sun. It is one of the big things, which is why it's a pretty big deal... It wasn't tested because it's relatively new tech and you can't give it the test of time without time. They can do accelerated simulations, but those aren't always correct.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
Mikey Purp posted:If you haven't read The Four Pillars of Investing, I would give that a try. Granted, the methods he teaches are not going to be wildly exciting or sexy, but he does do a good job of debunking poo poo like the above. There's also a whole section about the big shot investors and why they are all that crazy because they are all essentially guessing blind about how the market moves and need to make sense of it somehow And does anyone know of any decent backtesting software that's free (or cheap) to use? I've done searches but can't find much, and I have trouble believing that there aren't any backtesting sites or open source programs around.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Thanks, I'll check it out. The trading model builders I know use SAS, or at least they did the last time I asked. It is not free but you might be able to get an academic version. Statistical modeling is not really something you can just pickup in your spare time though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
As an investing newb, can I have some insight on what you use charting/execution platforms for (mentioned on the first page)? Access to a real time feed I understand. You pay for real time quotes. But what does "downloadable past history for back testing" do for investing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Thanks, I'll check it out. What are you looking for that can't be done in Excel? At least as a preliminary step to determine if more advanced analysis (i.e. SAS, Matlab, etc) is required. Cheap backtesting software is usually just that, cheap. Kneel Before Zog posted:As an investing newb, can I have some insight on what you use charting/execution platforms for (mentioned on the first page)? Let's say I have a theory that every time the moon is full, FSLR outperforms TAN. The only way to test this is to download historical data to "back" test my theory. It's not as useful if you're investing purely on fundamentals, but even then I might want to know how a stock tends to perform when its P/E is at a certain level. edit: goddam trading after-hours is boring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
T0MSERV0 posted:While we're at it, why not make cars that run on sand instead of pumping oil? Sand is so much easier to get, right? Aside from what others have said, FSLR was making money with those panels in the cool, northern Euro climate of Germany since the Germans had large subsidies. Those are gone and were dumb as Germany is not a very good solar climate. Now FSLR has to have panels compete in high solar areas, generally hot places like the SW US. But you have a very convincing argument and know what you are talking about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 01:12
|
|
|
lightpole posted:Aside from what others have said, FSLR was making money with those panels in the cool, northern Euro climate of Germany since the Germans had large subsidies. Those are gone and were dumb as Germany is not a very good solar climate. Now FSLR has to have panels compete in high solar areas, generally hot places like the SW US. The point you're missing though is that FSLR does one thing- CdTe panels. These are a relatively new tech and haven't had the 'test of time'. The test of time appears to be going poorly in hot areas *right* as they shifted the companies focus to building primarily in hot areas (where solar can be attractive without subsidies). They can't just 'make panels that work in hot climates' beacause the problem is quite possibly inherent to CdTe. Besides, you don't just snap your fingers and make a radically different product, it takes years of research and retooling. They can't even dream of competing in the Si space. *If* it turns out these panels suck in high heat, FSLR is finished.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:The point you're missing though is that FSLR does one thing- CdTe panels. These are a relatively new tech and haven't had the 'test of time'. The test of time appears to be going poorly in hot areas *right* as they shifted the companies focus to building primarily in hot areas (where solar can be attractive without subsidies). They can't just 'make panels that work in hot climates' beacause the problem is quite possibly inherent to CdTe. Besides, you don't just snap your fingers and make a radically different product, it takes years of research and retooling. They can't even dream of competing in the Si space. *If* it turns out these panels suck in high heat, FSLR is finished. I did not miss that point anywhere. FSLR's focus on Germany with the success of their panels there is all tied together. But really the only thing they themselves did not cover is the loss of the German subsidies which was the reason they were there in the first place. Edit: Sorry, Im exhausted and am losing this. They did not state they were focused on Germany due to subsidies and they were having success there due to a specific type of panel construction that appears to be poo poo in certain areas. Anyways I have no desire to touch solar panel companies and have done as much due diligence as I need to in that regard. lightpole fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Mar 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2012 04:34
|
|
|
So the Forex thread is gone, did the discussion get merged here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2012 04:11
|
|
|
I'm not really understanding what causes a stock to become "undervalued". For example, I've had my eye on Hecla Mining recently due to a 12% surge they had last week, but then quickly eroded that gain over the past week. Articles I read keep saying that Hecla is "way undervalued" or something like that. When analysts claim a stock is undervalued, are they just saying that all of a sudden a bunch of people are going to wake up one day and go "oh my god, where have we been, let's get in on this!" and the stock price will rise?
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:I'm not really understanding what causes a stock to become "undervalued". For example, I've had my eye on Hecla Mining recently due to a 12% surge they had last week, but then quickly eroded that gain over the past week. Articles I read keep saying that Hecla is "way undervalued" or something like that. When analysts claim a stock is undervalued, are they just saying that all of a sudden a bunch of people are going to wake up one day and go "oh my god, where have we been, let's get in on this!" and the stock price will rise? There are a few very general things that can make a firm "undervalued" compared to its stock price. In order to understand the concept one must be fairly familiar with company valuation. I would recommend "Investment Banking" by Rosenbaum in Pearl if you're interested in an incredibly in-depth understanding of discounted cash flow (DCF), comparable company analysis (comps), and precedent transaction (fairly useless for valuing equities) valuation. 1. The company is trading at a lower P/E or EV/EBITDA etc ratio than its close competitors or is further off from it's 52 week high than its competitors and there's no good reason why that should be the case 2. The company's growth prospects as priced in by the market (very closely related to the P/E and other ratios mentioned in 1.) are lower than the growth prospects you believe the firm has. The way to determine this is to run a DCF model with your assumptions. This can also involve the discount rate you believe is appropriate being lower than what the market thinks. 3. The company's assets and operation even assuming little or standard growth are worth more than the market is pricing it at. This generally implies that the market is predicting a downturn or risk associated with the firm's continuing operations - see the financial sector recently for an example. However, if you believe the firm will go on just fine this would imply that the firm is undervalued. It's actually much more complicated than this, but this is a good way for you to start thinking about valuation beyond "geez microsoft is a great company, I should buy microsoft!" (Not saying this is how you think but this is how a lot of layman investor think). Swingline fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Mar 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2012 20:15
|
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:I'm not really understanding what causes a stock to become "undervalued". For example, I've had my eye on Hecla Mining recently due to a 12% surge they had last week, but then quickly eroded that gain over the past week. Articles I read keep saying that Hecla is "way undervalued" or something like that. When analysts claim a stock is undervalued, are they just saying that all of a sudden a bunch of people are going to wake up one day and go "oh my god, where have we been, let's get in on this!" and the stock price will rise? I stopped following HL but they were riding a surge in silver some months back but one of their mines was shut down due to an accident or safety issue or something along those lines, thus lowering the stock. I stopped following then, but it is possible this wasn't a long term issue so the huge downswing in the stock price wasn't exactly warranted. Thus, they thought it would naturally correct itself and saw it as undervalued.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2012 03:17
|
|
|
Crazyweasel posted:I stopped following HL but they were riding a surge in silver some months back but one of their mines was shut down due to an accident or safety issue or something along those lines, thus lowering the stock. I stopped following then, but it is possible this wasn't a long term issue so the huge downswing in the stock price wasn't exactly warranted. Thus, they thought it would naturally correct itself and saw it as undervalued. The mine isn't reopening until 2013, and there is now a class action lawsuit related to the mine closure, which might actually have merit. They are also on the hook for some pretty substantial environmental monetary payments over the next few years. If the mine wasn't closed it would be a slam dunk stock, but it also wouldn't be at the current price. Some things I always look for first when looking at a company: their debt, their cash, and their cash generating ability.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2012 04:27
|
|
|
Swingline posted:2. The company's growth prospects as priced in by the market (very closely related to the P/E and other ratios mentioned in 1.) are lower than the growth prospects you believe the firm has. The way to determine this is to run a DCF model with your assumptions. This can also involve the discount rate you believe is appropriate being lower than what the market thinks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2012 12:40
|
|
|
Does this mean the AAPL train ride is over?Swingline posted:Words I wanted to acknowledge this, thanks. The Shep fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Mar 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2012 17:17
|
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:Does this mean the AAPL train ride is over? It could honestly go either way. AAPL has surged a ton lately obviously but there's very little conclusive evidence that it's overvalued especially if you look at most of its ratios after adjusting for their immense amount of cash on the books. AAPL has been and most likely will continue to be an institutional favorite. Only time will tell. If Tim Cook can live up to Jobs' legacy then a $1 trillion market cap is inevitable. On the other hand is AAPL releases iTV or whatever and it's a complete joke then it could easily tumble back down.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:One thing to note is that discount rate affects everything (http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/AFA_pres_speech.pdf) but for this discussion, discount rate will affect all stocks equivalently, so if you believe the market's discount rate is incorrect, you could just buy SPY's. I agree with you for the most part in that CAPM derived discount rates effect everything equally but not everyone uses CAPM. I'm sure there are plenty of hedge funds out there that use complex multi-factor discount rate models that can vary by company based on region, market cap, how hot the CEO's wife is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 00:18
|
|
|
Swingline posted:I agree with you for the most part in that CAPM derived discount rates effect everything equally but not everyone uses CAPM. I'm sure there are plenty of hedge funds out there that use complex multi-factor discount rate models that can vary by company based on region, market cap, how hot the CEO's wife is. ... and risk premiums based upon rating agency reports. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 03:14
|
|
|
Cmdr. Shepard posted:When analysts claim a stock is undervalued, are they just saying that all of a sudden a bunch of people are going to wake up one day and go "oh my god, where have we been, let's get in on this!" and the stock price will rise? More like, over time, it will move to the proper value. The main problems are that the time frame is unspecified and there is probably a reason it is undervalued that needs to be reversed somehow. OTOH, it is a possibility that an undervalued stock will be bought out for close to book value, in which case the investors win.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 15:16
|
|
|
smackfu posted:OTOH, it is a possibility that an undervalued stock will be bought out for close to book value, in which case the investors win.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 15:54
|
|
|
Anybody know of any good ticker apps with headlines/press releases as well (and that you can adjust to certain companies/industries). And I can also easily select what markets I want to show as well as individual stocks + groups. I want to use it to track my funds, not necessarily trading stocks EDIT: The app is meant to be shown on my PC, I'm not looking for a mobile app. Kindest Forums User fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Mar 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
never happy posted:Anybody know of any good ticker apps with headlines/press releases as well (and that you can adjust to certain companies/industries). And I can also easily select what markets I want to show as well as individual stocks + groups. I had a hell of a time finding one. I ended up just leaving the thinkorswim app open all the time and just look at it periodically (obsessively) throughout the day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
Any current thoughts on NLY? I was hoping to hold it through Q3 to continue taking dividends but at the rate it's diving, that's kinda pointless. I'm currently down about 2%, but that's after considering dividends so far. Wait for an up day, or cash out today?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 16:45
|
|
|
If you are looking into something a bit more consistent for an REIT, then ARR may be where you want to move to. NLY has had some wide swings over the last year, so the current trend does look a bit nervous. ARR pays monthly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 17:05
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Any current thoughts on NLY? I was hoping to hold it through Q3 to continue taking dividends but at the rate it's diving, that's kinda pointless. I'm currently down about 2%, but that's after considering dividends so far. Wait for an up day, or cash out today? It does pretty crazy dips from time to time. I'm planning on waiting it out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 17:20
|
|
|
ARR is doing another divy cut to .10. Still 16.8% adjusted for todays price and it is good for April/May/June. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/armour-residential-reit-inc-announces-212111877.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 02:50 |
|
|
MrBigglesworth posted:ARR is doing another divy cut to .10. Still 16.8% adjusted for todays price and it is good for April/May/June. What are your thoughts on the new share offering? I haven't really followed ARRchat here. edit: I should mention that I'm worried the dividends will continue to go down as they release more shares.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 21:22
|
|
