HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Southern Co Downgrade: no... » Reply #7

Response to kristopher (Reply #6)

Mon Jul 1, 2013, 06:30 AM

7. Oh silly me!

And here I was assuming that Bananas' link was in some way related to the title of the post and/or the OP. Now why would I assume that?

Trying to cover your earlier cock-up by fabricating a supposed "touting" of "expectations for the growth in the solar manufacturing industry" circa 2009? Really? How freaking pathetic can you get? First, I doubt we were "touting" any stock in any sector.

Yes. In 2009 you were talking about them as significantly undervalued. You can "doubt" that all you want... but we've already seen how your memory has convenient lapses... now haven't we?

Overpriced relative to the industry is fine, no problem with that part; but then to say they are "in a multi-quarter decline while they're overleveraged" is pure technobabble when, in fact, you are just saying they spent too much money and the money they've spent/obligated isn't earning them any money and wont for an unknown length of time.

That isn't what the "technobabble" said. Two companies can spend the same amount on the same things and have very different profit results (good or bad) over time depending on whether they finance those assets with capital or debt. Their EBITD is actually superior to most of the industry, but their high debt levels (particularly in a rising rate environment) hamper them. So their revenues can go up while their bottom line moves in the wrong direction (not just "can"... "has".

And no... anticipating your next error... the nuclear plant under construction represents a small proportion of their debt load (~10%)

Both of those issues are the major reasons the much ballyhoo'd nuclear revival has been all fizzle and no flash.

You're seriously able to look at the profitability of a single company and extrapolate the failure of a technology that makes up a small portion of that company's portfolio... while entirely ignoring the stock/profit performance of an entire sector that consists entirely of solar manufacturing? One is an indicator of a technology's future while the other is just an irrelevant sideshow?

How odd.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Please login to view edit histories.