NWF - NZ Windfarms

[Grimy]

I bought some more today. I know the general consensus on averaging down, but it's worked for me in the past. Hopefully will in this case too long term.

[Jerry]

Vector flogged off their entire holding a few days ago. Then SALT and AMP jumped in to buy on 27th. Then the results are announced on 28th.
Why does this seem cockeyed?

[Elles]

Vector flogged off their entire holding a few days ago. Then SALT and AMP jumped in to buy on 27th. Then the results are announced on 28th.
Why does this seem cockeyed?

Looking at the amount of shares they bought them off Vector. Not sure why Vector decided to sell before the announcement, I guess they didn't care enough to wait.

[blackcap]

Vector flogged off their entire holding a few days ago. Then SALT and AMP jumped in to buy on 27th. Then the results are announced on 28th.
Why does this seem cockeyed?

I may have been wrong in my initial analysis. It seems that Salt and AMP are one and the same..... so 21m shares taken up by this entity and then another 40m odd outstanding amoungst a bunch of entities with less than 5%.

[ratkin]

"In December, we put a multi-axis version of this in place, and now every turbine on the wind farm “decides” when to operate
based on a range of wind parameters and price. In the first half of the year we have not had a single gearbox failure,
compared to a six-month failure rate of 6 in the previous year; it is clear to us we have really moved the dial on reducing
mechanical costs.!
The Machines now down tools when it is windy. No wonder the gears are not failing, as they are doing nowt. A positive spin.
Worded with a cynical pen the following could be true.

Due to the terrible design of our wind turbines we have discovered they make more money when not actually operating in the windy environment they were supposedly designed for. It is far more cost effective to have them sitting idle, as the pittance they were producing was outweighed by the cost of repairing them everytime there was a gust of wind..

[blackcap]

"In December, we put a multi-axis version of this in place, and now every turbine on the wind farm “decides” when to operate
based on a range of wind parameters and price. In the first half of the year we have not had a single gearbox failure,
compared to a six-month failure rate of 6 in the previous year; it is clear to us we have really moved the dial on reducing
mechanical costs.!
The Machines now down tools when it is windy. No wonder the gears are not failing, as they are doing nowt. A positive spin.
Worded with a cynical pen the following could be true.

Due to the terrible design of our wind turbines we have discovered they make more money when not actually operating in the windy environment they were supposedly designed for. It is far more cost effective to have them sitting idle, as the pittance they were producing was outweighed by the cost of repairing them everytime there was a gust of wind..

You can write what you like but if NWF with their "inept technology" can get their marginal cost of production on a par with other wind operators they have done well. Also what they are doing is curtailing production when the price for power is very low. Sometimes over night the price ranges from $0 to $10MW. But under old regulations they had to operate even in very gusty (hard wind that is not gusting is fine for the gearboxes) or any conditions. Now they can curtail and stop production which is a huge win. The Marginal cost of producing was at about $29 from memory at the last AGM. If the power price is under that it makes no sense to produce as it just contributes to wear and tear. It looks like this new implementation has substantially reduced costs of operation (see HY report) and for some reason has actually increased revenue substantially. It is a win win.
Management acknowledge the turbines may not be the best technology but they are playing with what they have and are doing a stellar job.

[ratkin]

It looks like this new implementation has substantially reduced costs of operation (see HY report) and for some reason has actually increased revenue substantially. It is a win win.
Management acknowledge the turbines may not be the best technology but they are playing with what they have and are doing a stellar job.

I can see how it has drastically decreased costs, but it is the increasing revenue part I am struggling with. How can the turbines be bringing in more money when they are working less. ?

[blackcap]

I can see how it has drastically decreased costs, but it is the increasing revenue part I am struggling with. How can the turbines be bringing in more money when they are working less. ?

They will not bring in more revenue (the HY was a good result due to high power prices), but they are curtailing the costs when the turbines are not bringing in any revenue anyway. So its a win win. So cutting costs and keeping revenues pretty much constant. Hope that makes sense. I said earlier the Marginal cost per MW was $29... which they are looking to drop to $20. So if energy prices are under $29MW it makes no sense to produce, especially if its in times where costs rise because of adverse weather.
Under previous management nothing was ever attempted to improve anything. Or that is the perception I got.

[Well Endowed]

I'd add that the turbine availability (largely as a consequence of less maintenance issues) increased from 95.3 to 98%. When there is wind, it pays to have all turbines ready to go. a gearbox failure impacts more than just the maintenance costs, its the lost revenue whilst it is being repaired.

[Well Endowed]

http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...210/275855.pdf

Robert Stone buying $120k worth (at 14.5c) from Southworth.. .