Author Archives: Scalper1

Nevada PUC ‘Contortionist’ Act Will Kill Rooftop Solar: Sunrun

Nevada regulators will vote Friday on a restructured net-metering scheme that increases rates over 12 years and doesn’t grandfather existing solar-energy customers — a decision sure to rile installers SolarCity ( SCTY ) and Sunrun ( RUN ). The draft order , released late Wednesday, stems from a week of hearings at the Public Utilities Commission, and pits billionaire CEOs Warren Buffett and Elon Musk in a battle over the sun. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway ( BRKA ) owns NV Energy, the utility pushing for a rate change, and Tesla Motors ( TSLA ) CEO Musk chairs SolarCity. SolarCity and Sunrun exited Nevada in December when the PUC first voted to cut payments to solar customers for excess energy fed back into the grid. Net-metering angers utilities because it forces them to buy energy from rooftop customers at the expensive retail rate. California regulators recently upheld net metering. Under the Nevada commission’s new proposal, the new rates won’t apply to existing solar customers for a period of 12 years. Over that time, the rates will step up five times until reaching a cost-based structure on Jan. 1, 2028. The PUC estimates that the 12-year time frame represents $81 million in costs shifted to non-solar customers. Solar Advocates Cry Foul In May, the Nevada Legislature voted to allow the PUC to create new solar-energy rates in exchange for lifting the 3% cap on customers eligible for net metering. On Dec. 23, the commission voted unanimously to cut net-metering payments. Solar-energy advocates immediately began calling for a reversal. “By eliminating net-metering, the order has discouraged private investment, which has led to layoffs and ensured that there will not be future applications to install (rooftop solar),” the Solar Energy Industries Association argued in a PUC filing. Not grandfathering existing solar-energy customers under the old net-metering rules was particularly egregious, the SEIA wrote. “The elimination of net-metering for existing customers makes their investment meaningless and creates a ‘financial catch 22’ of deciding between spending more every month or spending significantly to remove a (rooftop solar) system,” they wrote. “For potential customers, the decision is easier because there is no longer a financial incentive to invest in net-metering.” Bureau of Consumer Protection representatives argued for a 20-year grandfather clause that would allow existing solar customers to recoup the costs of their hefty investments. NV Energy, in turn, filed a proposal for a 20-year grandfathering period last month. Solar advocates also bashed the NV Energy rate study used to justify the net-metering cut, with the Southern Nevada Home Builders Association claiming it contained “logical and factual flaws.” The BCP argued that the study discounted medium- and large-scale users, which skewed the results. “No reasonable person would accept as reasonable the inference that Nevada Power Company’s ability to provide as much power to (rooftop solar) customers as they could need creates an obligation to pay for power not received,” the SNHBA wrote. Further, the SEIA argued the new rate structure ignores 9 of 11 rooftop solar values, and unfairly lets the utility buy solar energy at a wholesale price to sell it back at a retail price. “This decision denies their right to be fairly compensated,” The Alliance for Solar Choice (TASC) separately argued. ‘Kicking The Can Down The Road’ Net-metering was codified in 1997, the PUC wrote. Since then, rooftop installers have made big bucks by advertising set-in-stone solar rates and “unrealistic payback periods,” the commission argued. And as a result, non-solar customers are now paying $16 million annually to carry solar customers — a subsidy that “will cumulatively grow unreasonably larger over time,” said the PUC. Proposals to delay the necessary correction in rates to a cost-based structure only serve to kick “the can down the road,” it said. Over 40 years, the subsidy borne by non-solar customers would grow to $640 million. “These proposals do nothing to address the problem of antiquated rates that were instituted nearly 20 years ago to jump-start an industry,” the commission wrote. “The old net-metering rates are not reflective of accurate price signals or actual costs to serve.” And while the PUC understands the desire to “lock in rates and structures . . . electric utility rate-making cannot work in this manner.” Over time, new ratepayers would be forced to take up increasing incremental costs as new customers join the grid. By gradually shifting costs, solar customers can avoid “rate shock.” The structure also allows solar customers time to customize their usage to benefit from time-of-use policies. Currently, NPC and Sierra Pacific Power Company solar customers still rely on the grid 42% and 49% of the time. Under the new proposal, solar customers will save about a third on their electric bills, according to TASC estimates. That’s in line with the cost of service, the PUC wrote. The PUC also took issue with SolarCity, Sunrun and TASC’s “all-out campaign to influence public perception” by claiming the commission was in NV Energy’s pocket. Customers are now unlikely to accept the new rates. “However, this commission will not allow such actions by TASC, SolarCity, Sunrun and other rooftop vendors to dictate a certain outcome in this proceeding,” the PUC wrote. ‘Contortionist Twisting Of The Law’ Sunrun executives blamed Commissioner Dave Noble and Gov. Brian Sandoval for the ultimate death of Nevada’s solar industry, in an emailed statement to IBD. “Every party to the case, including NV Energy, recommended grandfathering these customers for a period of 20 years,” they wrote. “Once again, Noble proposes to give NV Energy more than it asked for.” As presiding officer, Noble has received a fair amount of online flak since the commission’s decision in December. Bryan Miller, TASC president and senior vice president of public policy and power markets at Sunrun, accused Noble of contorting the law to “kill” the industry. “Noble’s contortionist twisting of the law belongs in a Vegas Cirque du Soleil show, not the halls of government,” he wrote in the email to IBD. “Brian Sandoval’s legacy will be letting his hand-picked commissioners eliminate a booming industry while he complicitly stays silent.” SolarCity didn’t respond to an email seeking comment.

What Do Twitter And Zynga Earnings Mean For Social Media ETF?

The Global X Social Media Index ETF (NASDAQ: SOCL ) is going through a rough patch. The ongoing tech rout, mainly instigated by overvaluation concerns amid broad-based gloom and a weak guidance issued by LinkedIn Corporation (NYSE: LNKD ) , was already there to punish the fund (read: LinkedIn Crashes: Should You Connect with Social Media ETF? ). Then, fresh woes emanated from the fourth-quarter earnings results from social networking site Twitter (NYSE: TWTR ) and social game developer Zynga (NASDAQ: ZNGA ) will likely compel investors to stay away from the social media ETF in the near term. Twitter’s Q4 in Detail The company’s fourth-quarter 2015 loss per share (excluding the stock-based compensation expense) of $0.07 was narrower than the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $0.13 loss per share. Including the stock-based compensation expense, the company posted a loss of $0.13 per share on a GAAP basis. This was narrower than the year-ago loss of $0.20 per share. The company’s non-GAAP earnings (excluding the stock-based compensation expense) were $0.16 per share, up 33.3% year over year. Revenues of $710.5 million in the quarter missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $718 million. Revenues were up 48.3% from the year-ago period. Absent the impact of negative currency translation, revenues grew 53%. The company finished the quarter with an average 320 million monthly active users (MAU). This indicated no change quarter over quarter and 9% year-over-year expansion. Although this is the first quarter that Twitter has seen no user growth sequentially, investors clearly could not digest the fact. The blow came in the form of guidance as well. Twitter anticipates total revenue between $595 million and $610 million for the first quarter of 2016, way below the Zacks Consensus Estimate which was pegged at $630 million prior to the release. Market Impact The soft MAU metric, an earnings miss and soft revenue guidance dampened investors’ mood as the stock tumbled 3% after hours. Year to date, the stock is down 35.3%. In the last one year, the stock has plunged about 70%. Twitter has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold), which is subject to change post earnings release. The stock is a good growth and momentum play with a Zacks Style Score of ‘A’, but it lacks the value quotient as indicated by the score of ‘F’. There is a high chance that Twitter will decline in the coming trading sessions, especially given the ongoing correction in the online and social media space. Zynga’s Q4 in Detail GAAP loss per share (excluding the stock-based compensation expense) of $0.02 cents was narrower than the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $0.04 cents loss per share. Including the charges, GAAP loss was $0.5 per share, same as the year-ago quarter. Zynga’s revenues of $185.8 million beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $177 million. Zynga also failed to live up of analysts’ projection as it expects first-quarter 2016 revenues in the range of $160-$175 million, below the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $177 million. Market Impact Zynga also saw a landslide in its shares after hours with a 10.8% plunge. Year to date, the stock is down 20.5%. Though the stock currently has a Zacks Rank #3, it looks like that the rank is due for a downgrade. The stock is a decent momentum play with a Zacks Style Score of ‘A’, but its value and growth scores are not optimistic. Social Media ETF in Focus Notably, Twitter does not have a sizable exposure in the overall ETF world, with SOCL holding just 2.7% share in it. However, the company’s results are crucial to the entire social media sector. Plus, a freefall in the shares of Zynga – which accounts for about 3% of SOCL – will make matters worse. However, SOCL has strong long-term fundamentals and carries a Zacks ETF Rank #2 (Buy). So, investors having a strong gut for risks can play this dip. SOCL is down 19.3% so far this year (see all technology ETFs here). Link to the original post on Zacks.com

Apple iPhone Sales In China Fall Off Cliff In January

Apple ( AAPL ) iPhone sales sank deeper than the overall market in China in January, as smartphone sales disappointed ahead of the Chinese New Year. “January was supposed to be a seasonally strong month, but smartphone sell-through was down 20% (vs. December) and down year over year,” Rosenblatt Securities analyst Jun Zhang said in a report Thursday. Apple and Samsung were hit harder than other smartphone vendors. Zhang estimates that Apple iPhone sales in China were down 35% in January vs. December. Last year, iPhone sales were up 15% month-over-month in January, he said. Meanwhile, Samsung’s smartphone sales were cut in half in January vs. December, Zhang said. Samsung’s high-end smartphone (Galaxy S6 and Note 5) sell-through was 1.1 million units in January, compared with 2.3 million in December. South Korea-based Samsung was hurt by Chinese vendor Huawei launching new models (Mate 8) and gaining market share in the high-end of the market. “Since people usually buy smartphones as a Chinese New Year gift, January is usually a solid month,” Zhang said. “We also believe the smartphone market has not bottomed yet and that the overall slowing macro affecting consumer spending is now becoming a real concern since we are seeing more layoffs in Chinese companies (different from the 2008-2009 situation).” China is an important market for Apple. It accounted for 24% of the company’s sales in the December quarter. Apple CEO Tim Cook said last month that the company’s sales in Greater China started showing signs of weakness in January, most notably in Hong Kong. RELATED: Morgan Stanley Says Apple Stock Ripe For Picking . Apple Poised To Disappoint With March Product-Launch Event .