If you look overseas generation cos are not a good investment as alternative technological solutions are cheaper than them . They are not a good long term investment
Printable View
If you look overseas generation cos are not a good investment as alternative technological solutions are cheaper than them . They are not a good long term investment
.... and some of them are "cheaper" - as in shareprice - because their technology is still unproven in practical, economic terms. An example of this is the Australian solar energy company Dyesol - in which I've been invested off and on for yonks. They stumble from one funding crisis to another and somehow manage to survive but as for being an alternative investment to the likes of CEN - let's just say the jury's still out.
Suggestions on good long term investments in the alternative energy field would be appreciated.
:)
Have you considered the timing and what impact the election if any would have. I have not looked recently but is there still an implied discount in the share price to account for the risk of a Labour Green Government? Add in Winston and his repurchase of the former SOE and CEN may see a run up post election.
Note: Just thinking out loud. I am a long term holder so have not looked to see if there is a build in discount. CEN is the small of my holding in all the power co's with the exception of my IPO allocation in GEN.
Phaedrus has gone because his job was done here. However it is not difficult to predict what he would be saying now. Firstly he would show you an historical chart showing the share price decline in CY2008 , pointing out the three sell signals you missed on the sawtooth ride down from the local peak of $7 as the share price declined all the way to the lower $4 range.
Then he would zoom in on the time since January 2012 and look at the slow and steady uptrend that remains intact to this day. What his chart would not show would be the steady stream of dividends paid out over that time. I am by no means a chartist, but it looks like the 'uptrend' is still in place. So why sell? I am pretty sure Phaedrus wouldn't if he had bought in during the first half of CY2012.
Don't be seduced by those others making big speculative bucks Troy. That kind of investing is not sustainable. You have been in for the long haul and so have I. Some think that Contact will always be a monolithic megaproducer of power but this isn't necessarily so. They are currently the leading power generator buying excess power produced by solar panels on peoples roofs. They are adaptable. I say stick with 'em, and I reckon thet Phaedrus would agree, judging by the chart..
SNOOPY
I wouldn't say being the market leader in a loss making business a good thing. There is a reason the other power company (cant remember which one) dropped their price, losing alot of their business to CEN.
Having said that, we are currently only talking in the 100's of consumers not 1,000's so not a biggy.
It was Meridian. However, rather than drop their price Meridian introduced a two tier price. A very small amount of power they would buy at the original headline price. But after that the price paid for more pwer than that dropped back to a much lower level.
The point I was trying to make was that Contact are keeping their hand in the game of buying solar power. They will have the experience to quickly upscale should such purchasing become more profitable.Quote:
losing alot of their business to CEN.
Having said that, we are currently only talking in the 100's of consumers not 1,000's so not a biggy.
SNOOPY
Great from a PR perspective but it will never be profitable as you can buy of a generator for less than 10c, yet market rate for distributed solar generation appears to be 15c+. Dont be fooled by the rate shown on your bill as that includes transmission and network charges.
Further more, by definition, these customers will use less electricity (since they have solar) but when they do consume grid electricity it is when it is most expensive to generate (ie. fire up the peaker plants) even though they are still on a one rate plan which assumes consumption at off peak as well as on peak.
Recently watched a program in regards to the electricity consumption (and income for electricity providers) in Australia. The trend was that forecasts, after a very long time of increasing consumption, has taken a backwards step, even with an increase in consumers. The number of people installing solar power has increased dramatically (due to a lower cost of installation). The move also comes with storage increases, more efficient and cheaper storage batteries, storing electricity for use in peak times (when prices are high anyway). When even better battery technology comes along (current talk about biological sugar-batteries) and the price starts to come down, I think there will be an even larger threat to electricity providers income, and subsequent bottom line figures. It is a talk of when, and I thought I'd throw the idea out there. (If it has been mentioned in previous posts/pages, forgive my lack of reading as this is something recent by the sounds of it). I for one am keen to get off the "grid" at some stage and seem to notice a growing trend in this area.
You are dead right, the day of the generator retailer has passed.The key is that customers will have choice. The Govt got out of 50% just in time and did not mention declining volumes in the prospectus's., which I believe was misleading
Totally agree... didn't want to get into that... good choice in my eye they got out... I didn't buy as I think the future looks too uncertain and unpredictable... and looked over price (given level of risk vs reward). Ahhhh technology... what will come next.