FIRSTSOLAR - $1,50 pro Wp - Werden die etablierten Solarzellenhersteller unter Druck kommen? (Seite 243)

[Hoerschwelle]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 32.672.728 von meinolf67 am 05.12.07 15:28:23

[meinolf67]

von Snare aus dem LDK-Thread:
http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story;jsession…

5. Dezember 2007
Are Feed-in Tariffs a Possibility in California?
The California commission is set to recommend renewable energy feed-in tariffs; this would be the first formal endorsement of the policy in the U.S.
by Paul Gipe

In a dramatic about face from previous policy, the California Energy Commission is expected today to recommend that the state adopt feed-in tariffs to spur renewable energy development.

"[Feed-in tariffs] turn homes, farms, and businesses into entrepreneurs who will accelerate our path to clean energy."

Terry Tamminen, former Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency

The recommendation is contained within the Energy Commission's 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report. The Energy Commission is expected to approve the report December 5 at its regularly-scheduled meeting.

The 300-page report concludes in part that the state's current programs have failed to deliver significant amounts of new renewable generation and California will not meet its renewable energy objectives unless corrective action is taken soon.

Feed-in tariffs are widely used in Europe, notably in Germany, France, and Spain.

Renewable sources of energy now supply nearly 12% of Germany's electricity, much of which was installed as a result of the country's groundbreaking Renewable Energy Sources Act or feed-in law.

Under the German program, renewable energy producers are paid a fixed-price for feeding their electricity into the grid. This has led to a boom in the construction of wind turbines, rooftop solar systems and on-farm biogas plants.

Feed-in tariffs "turn homes, farms, and businesses into entrepreneurs who will accelerate our path to clean energy," says Terry Tamminen about the Energy Commission's recommendation. Tamminen is a former Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency and was the Chief Policy Advisor to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The Energy Commission's policy reversal follows the poor results from several years of unfulfilled expectations for renewable energy development in California. California's Renewable Portfolio Standard, the state's current program intended to develop renewable energy, was passed as SB 1078 in 2002 and set a target of 20% renewables by 2017. Though thousands of megawatts of new renewable generation have been contracted in the five years since the program was launched, only 242 megawatts (MW) has actually been built.

In 2006 alone, German farmers installed 300 MW of solar photovoltaics on barn roofs. German homeowners installed an equal amount. Altogether, Germans installed 4,000 MW of new renewables last year.

In contrast, California installed about 200 MW of wind energy in 2006, and 60 MW of solar photovoltaics.

The Energy Commission report concludes that at the current pace the state will not meet its target of 33% renewables by 2020. "To scale the program toward reaching the 33% goal," says the report, "California must move to a new system, such as the expanded use of feed-in tariffs."

The report recommends immediate adoption of feed-in tariffs for renewable energy projects of less than 20 MW, and that the Energy Commission and the California Public Utility Commission collaborate on a study of feed-in tariffs for larger projects.

"We have no time to lose if California is going to meet its renewable energy goals. The Energy Commission has called for a dramatic change in direction. The Sierra Club supports their call for feed-in tariffs. This policy has been remarkably successful elsewhere. It's being used in Ontario, Canada and Michigan is considering it as well. We need this kind of policy leadership in California too," says Carl Zichella, the Sierra Club's regional field director for California, Nevada and Hawaii.

Paul Gipe is a wind industry analyst who has written extensively about wind energy for both the popular and trade press.

[meinolf67]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 32.669.248 von Hoerschwelle am 05.12.07 10:44:59

Ist kein echter Kauf, sondern irgendeine Art Umbuchung.

[Hoerschwelle]

Insider kaufen 23.500 FSLR zu 243,18 US §

http://investor.firstsolar.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=120919…

[Hoerschwelle]

Sagen wir es so, FSLR ist "gesliped" weil sie am AnalZyst Day nicht verkündet haben "wir ziehen morgen noch 4 Plants hoch". Die Bewertung ist ziemlich angemessen, jedoch könnte es nochmal zu einem stärkeren "slipping" kommen, andererseits könnte es auch noch zu einer verspäteten JER kommen. Oder aber FSLR verkündet die Tage noch einen fetten Deal für 2008.
Kursrückschläge sind bei FSLR eigentlich immer Kaufgelegenheiten, denn bisher sind die immer very, very heftig über den Prognosen gewesen, so das eigentlich alles i.O. sein sollte. Nur wenn es mal zu einem unvorhergesehenem Ereigniss kommen sollte, könnten wir schnell 30-50% verlieren. Die Erwartungen an GFSLR sind megahoch! Bisher mach FSLR den Eindruck, als könnten sie die Erwartungen immer noch toppen.
Mein persönliches Kursziel, auch ich musste meine Kursziele immer weiter schrauben, weil FSLR ständig fett nachlegte liegt Ende 2008
bei 350,00 US $ , mindestens!!!

Ob es so kommt ... wir werden sehen.

Vielleicht ist es auch ganz gut mit einem Auge nach Bali zu schielen und einen Einstieg davon abhängig zu machen. Am langen Ende gewinnt man natürlich immer mit FSLR, kommt eben darauf an, welchen Horizont Du hast.

Habe die Ehre,

HS

P.S. Die Rohstoffseite sollte aus meiner Sicht als abgesichert gellten, denn FSLR hat diese in den Planzahlen eingespreist und ich glaube nicht, das diese Profis da Kindergartenrechnungen anfertigen. Zu Not kauft man eben einen Rohstoffversorger aus der Portokasse und bezahlt wie bei Turner ein bisschen was in bar und den Rest in Shares!

[petsy678]

Bin investiert und will noch nachkaufen. Seht Ihr die Chance jetzt, oder könnte mangels newsflow bis anfang 08 ein besserer Einstieg kommen. Laut Euren Analysten-Postings müssten die Amies doch darauf fliegen?

Danke und Gruss eines Mitlesers,
Petsy

[Hoerschwelle]

First Solar Slides After Analyst Day

Posted 04 December 2007 @ 07:47 pm EST
IBTimes RSS
Print
E-Mail
digg
Del.icio.us

NEW YORK (AP) - Shares of solar cell maker First Solar Inc. slid more than 6 percent Tuesday, as investors seemed dissatisfied with the lack of news coming out of the company's first analyst day.

Stocks slipped $14.68, or 6.4 percent, to $214.54. The stock rose 9.9 percent at the end of last week ahead of yesterday's analyst meeting, but fell 3.3 percent Monday.

Collins Stewart analyst Daniel Ries said investors were expecting First Solar to share some major news.

"There was some anticipation... that there would be an announcement of either a new customer or additional plant expansion," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "While certainly not negative in any way, the event was primarily an overview of the company's strategy."

Ries has a "Buy" rating and $260 price target on the stock. He said First Solar will become the first solar power company that can compete with traditional utilities with government subsidies, and believes its prices will reach competitive levels between 2010 and 2012.

In a client note, CIBC World Markets analyst Adam Hinckley said the company did offer some insight into its plans to enter the U.S. utility market.

Hinckley said the company plans to reach the U.S. through Turner Renewable Energy LLC, a company it bought last week. He said Turner, which does business as DT Solar, sells solar systems to utilities, and the move will increase First Solar's profit.

"We expect the move into the U.S. utility market to drive net income growth, although volume and profitability of system sales is very difficult to quantify at this point," he said.

The analyst maintained a "Sector Outperformer," or "Buy," rating, and raised his target price to $ 250 per share from $ 230. Analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial have price targets ranging from $ 220 to $ 310 on the Phoenix-based company.

$ 310, jopp, nicht motzen, klotzen

FSLR wird noch viel Freude bereiten, selbst denen die noch einsteigen wollen.

[meinolf67]

Ein echter Fan:


Last week I wrote an article entitled First Solar's Rapidly Expanding Economies of Scale in which I detailed the various advantages which have led to FSLR astounding returns this year.

This week I will delve deeper into capex costs. On Monday, Sharp (SHCAY.PK) announced a thin film plant costing 380 billion yen which will start producing in March 2010.

At the current conversion rate of 110 yen to the dollar this amounts to a huge investment of USD $3.45 Billion. Compare this to First Solar's (FSLR) recent Malaysian plants which will produce 168 MW annually with construction costs estimated at $150-200 million. Sharp's capex costs/watt are approximately triple that of FSLR. Also, construction times are nearly double that of First Solar's. Formerly one of the world's leading PV manufacturers, no wonder they've been stuck in the mud the last few years.

Stuart Wenham from SunTech Power (STP), themselves working on thin-film technology, was quoted as saying "I think with regard to a lot of the thin-film technologies around at the moment, the CapEx costs tend to be very high and it’s certainly a key issue that we are addressing in terms of the development of our new thin-film technology." This is why many so-called thin-film competitors to FSLR are dead in the water. In order to compete with FSLR's advantages a startup would require a far superior technology. In the case of the later they will probably still need billions and several years of tweaking manufacturing. CIGS, the so called "third generation" of photovoltaics may be the answer but to date it has failed to yield greater than 6% outside a lab. Miasole infamously proclaimed back in 2004 that they would bring a product to market by 2005. They have yet to commercialize a product. Neither has Nanosolar.

Contributing to FSLR's expansion in it's economies of scale are these unheard of $1/watt capex costs. With profit margins of roughly $1/watt, they have a one year return of capital investment. If you could get $1 back each year for each $1 invested you'd be expanding at breakneck speeds also. Of course at the current pace of expansion there is a question of how much FSLR product that market can absorb at current prices. Monday's investor's presentation stated that typical solar farm returns for systems 100KW-20MW range from 8-12% annually. Since these return are guaranteed by the government through their 39 euro cents/kwh feed in tariffs, combined with the predictability and reliability of solar, these returns are almost as safe as those from government bonds. Imagine purchasing a government backed bond yielding 8-12%. It's no surprise that demand has been nearly limitless in Germany, Spain, and Italy where generous feed in tariffs exist.

FSLR's economy of scale advantages are indeed multi-faceted. For example, the following conditions combine to produce astronomical growth:

1) highest profit margins in the industry
2) lowest capex/watt in the industry
3) skyrocketing stock price

This allows FSLR to issue secondary offerings much like they did back in July. The funds raised through these financing round can be invested almost exclusively back into new manufacturing plants. As more plants come online the pace of cost reduction increases as mentioned in the previous article. Upper management has been quoted stating they have access to vast amounts of financing but will not utilize it until necessary.

If FSLR announces another secondary offering raising $1 billion for example, rest assured that within a few months there will be an announcement of 4 new plants. This will probably occur in the first half of 2008. I for one will not be surprise if in addition to the 900 MW 09 production estimate we have a 2 GW 2010 estimate in 6 months.

Economics involve tradeoffs. If you want a car with a powerful engine you generally have to sacrifice mileage and pay a higher sticker price. Imagine if the more powerful the car became, the better mileage it got, the more reliable it became, the better it handled, and the cheaper it became.

This is what FSLR is trying to achieve. Revolutionary technologies overwhelm the traditional marketplace by finding ways to bypass the tradeoffs that entrenched business have to balance. You would expect to pay a premium for clean energy much like the premium you pay for a Ferrari. But when FSLR reaches grid parity, it will be like Ferraris selling for the price of Buicks. The first to reach grid parity will no doubt become a $100 billion market cap company. In the solar sector past earnings are relevant only in proving the future viability of a product and serving as a baseline from which progress is made. After all, if they could turn a profit earlier in the year with a mere 75MWs production, something no other thin-film company has yet to achieve, imagine what they can accomplish at 1gw, 2gw, and 10gw. The market is handicapping FSLR as the overwhelming favorite, with STP and SPWR now running a distant 2nd and 3rd.

[Hoerschwelle]

Der AnalZyst Day war ja der Hammer. Was für eine Potenzprotz-Vorstellung von Meyerhof, Sohn und Co

Noch den 6. abwarten

[Hoerschwelle]

Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 32.663.557 von meinolf67 am 04.12.07 19:34:11

So sind se die HillBillies