-
20-01-2016, 04:27 PM
#771
If they are selling 7% less, that's a BIG loss of sales, and a big problem to turn around (future discounting so lower profits)
Take a look at what happened to GNE a year back when they reported a decline in customers. The SP was hammered.
Today also seems to be a "down day" for the generators across the board, so probably some effect from general market sentiment to this group of stocks as well
I personally don't rate MRP highly in the electricity generator/retailer category, but everyone has a different view on each companies merits
-
20-01-2016, 04:50 PM
#772
from reading it this morning I recall it saying something along the lines of best quarter for national usage yet their sales were down (as mentioned above) by 7%. That's not just a negative, its a negative in a market where usage was high. One or more of the other gentailers will have better news as someone must have picked up the extra sales.....
-
20-01-2016, 05:00 PM
#773
Originally Posted by xafalcon
From the report in capital letters ENERGY PRICES DOWN 1.5%; VOLUMES DOWN 7%
So they sold significantly less electricity and what they sold was at a lower price
I think the market read it like I did - not good!!
They generated less electricity, not sold less. Their sales (retail) while not given would be in line with the demand; i.e. up 0.9%. The difference between generation and retail would be bought off the wholesale market at a price that is down on the previous period, and so a greater mark-up for retail sales.
Not as bad as some would imagine.
Disc: Not holding
-
20-01-2016, 06:05 PM
#774
A low watt (but energy efficient) bulb shining out from the darkest of the dark
Here is a link to the full update:
https://www.nzx.com/files/attachments/228540.pdf
Best Wishes
Paper Tiger
-
20-01-2016, 06:38 PM
#775
Originally Posted by Jantar
They generated less electricity, not sold less. Their sales (retail) while not given would be in line with the demand; i.e. up 0.9%. The difference between generation and retail would be bought off the wholesale market at a price that is down on the previous period, and so a greater mark-up for retail sales.
Not as bad as some would imagine.
Disc: Not holding
The link Paper Tiger provided seems to indicate they sold less at a lower price (bottom of pg 1).
"ENERGY PRICES DOWN 1.5%; VOLUMES DOWN 7%. A reduction in overall customer sales volumes reflects the highly competitive market across bothresidential and commercial. The average electricity price to customers was $110.94/MWh, lower thanpcp. This was due to additional discounted offers to customers and Mighty River Power absorbingincreases in lines and transmission costs for its customers on fixed-price contracts."
Data on pg 2 seems to back that up
It appears they also bought less electricity from other generators, which makes sense if they sold less
-
20-01-2016, 06:39 PM
#776
Jantar would I be correct in guessing that geothermal generation would be generated at lower cost than thermal?
Would 0% thermal in Q1 and increased Geothermal in the same period lead to increased margins?
DISC Hold MRP and MEL.
Originally Posted by Jantar
They generated less electricity, not sold less. Their sales (retail) while not given would be in line with the demand; i.e. up 0.9%. The difference between generation and retail would be bought off the wholesale market at a price that is down on the previous period, and so a greater mark-up for retail sales.
Not as bad as some would imagine.
Disc: Not holding
Last edited by axe; 20-01-2016 at 06:41 PM.
-
20-01-2016, 07:07 PM
#777
Member
Originally Posted by xafalcon
The link Paper Tiger provided seems to indicate they sold less at a lower price (bottom of pg 1).
"ENERGY PRICES DOWN 1.5%; VOLUMES DOWN 7%. A reduction in overall customer sales volumes reflects the highly competitive market across bothresidential and commercial. The average electricity price to customers was $110.94/MWh, lower thanpcp. This was due to additional discounted offers to customers and Mighty River Power absorbingincreases in lines and transmission costs for its customers on fixed-price contracts."
Data on pg 2 seems to back that up
It appears they also bought less electricity from other generators, which makes sense if they sold less
Yes, looks as if their share of total market has dropped 2% in a pretty short space of time, despite discounting activity. A bit of a wory.
-
20-01-2016, 07:19 PM
#778
Originally Posted by axe
Jantar would I be correct in guessing that geothermal generation would be generated at lower cost than thermal?
Would 0% thermal in Q1 and increased Geothermal in the same period lead to increased margins?
DISC Hold MRP and MEL.
That would be a fair assumption
-
20-01-2016, 08:26 PM
#779
A nice piece of Ash
I want you to imagine that I have printed out the update and wrapped it round the hitting end of a baseball bat.
Now read it all, including the bits about the amount of electricity generated and the composition of that generation (this quarter and running total).
Then come to your conclusions.
Best Wishes
Paper Tiger
Disc: I may be back later, with or without the bat.
-
22-01-2016, 03:55 PM
#780
Junior Member
Can anyone explain why MRP is paying out in dividends 3-4x what they are earning, despite having massive debt. It would appear they are borrowing not for expansion, but to pay dividends.I think paying dividends while owing money makes little sense, as you are borrowing, paying interest, just to pay dividends.Mainly to the Govt as they are major shareholders.
Last edited by Crac A Jac; 22-01-2016 at 04:40 PM.
Reason: addition
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks