I owned SolarCity for a few months in 2013 and made a nice profit. I bought back in late today. It's a way of buying more Tesla shares at a discount.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I owned SolarCity for a few months in 2013 and made a nice profit. I bought back in late today. It's a way of buying more Tesla shares at a discount.
Mark Harvey
Member
I'm voting yes because the TSLA/SCTY combo would create an unstoppable flywheel of electricity generation and consumption(think Amazon Prime flywheel). Combination of companies will add to Tesla's growing economic "moat". Only short term traders, and short sellers don't see the "synergies".
SCTY shares are trading for less than the PV from the current solar installations. SCTY is undervalued and Tesla is getting a great deal on the shares anyway. Musk is a great fund manager in addition to being the founder of Mars.
SCTY shares are trading for less than the PV from the current solar installations. SCTY is undervalued and Tesla is getting a great deal on the shares anyway. Musk is a great fund manager in addition to being the founder of Mars.
Owner
Active Member
Gosh, I'm leaning towards no.
I have had solar before any Tesla. I had an early VIN Roadster.
I see the whole point of a vertical company, but these are really different markets. A lot of people want solar but may not have an electric car yet, or want something more inexpensive like a Leaf. I doubt that a huge number of Solar City customers are Tesla owners.
Installing solar is really a 1:1 thing with your contractor. I think they all provide 25 years warranty on the panels. I have had them for 10!
Powerwall just does not excite me at all. Won't help in cost savings here in California, and we don't get that many power outages. It was hyped a lot in the beginning but who even hears about it now? I think Tesla energy is probably really targeting power companies not the little guy, and is in a way a diversion.
Just seems like too many eggs that in theory could be related but aren't. If Powerwall was a big hit might be more interesting but it is not in the home market.
So I'm a no unless anyone can rebut me. Not that my small number of shares matter.
I have had solar before any Tesla. I had an early VIN Roadster.
I see the whole point of a vertical company, but these are really different markets. A lot of people want solar but may not have an electric car yet, or want something more inexpensive like a Leaf. I doubt that a huge number of Solar City customers are Tesla owners.
Installing solar is really a 1:1 thing with your contractor. I think they all provide 25 years warranty on the panels. I have had them for 10!
Powerwall just does not excite me at all. Won't help in cost savings here in California, and we don't get that many power outages. It was hyped a lot in the beginning but who even hears about it now? I think Tesla energy is probably really targeting power companies not the little guy, and is in a way a diversion.
Just seems like too many eggs that in theory could be related but aren't. If Powerwall was a big hit might be more interesting but it is not in the home market.
So I'm a no unless anyone can rebut me. Not that my small number of shares matter.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Agree that powerwall dies not appeal much as of now, BUT......retail price will be 1/3 in very short order and solar/battery install should become the standard package. Not just for outage relief or peak shifting, but also aggregated wholesale selling.
rogbmw
Member
I am leaning toward NO also - we received our vote letter this week. Maybe it is just here in the Southeast US, but solar is not a good long-term business to own here, as history seems to indicate many people get in, then eventually get out of the business at a loss.
Very interesting amendment here in Florida on the ballet - Amendment 1. The way it is worded - one would want to vote yes, but in actuality yes is a vote for the current large electric companies who want to not deregulate solar energy. But in hearing their commercials, one would surely think that a yes vote is for solar - VERY deceiving.
Very interesting amendment here in Florida on the ballet - Amendment 1. The way it is worded - one would want to vote yes, but in actuality yes is a vote for the current large electric companies who want to not deregulate solar energy. But in hearing their commercials, one would surely think that a yes vote is for solar - VERY deceiving.
1101011
Proud TSLA/SCTY shareholder since 2013.
I just got my proxies (?) today (or yesterday, not sure if we checked the mail after it arrived).
I'm voting yes, but ...I'm not 100% sure what I'm looking at.
I got a copy of the joint proxy statement/prospectus, and a voting thing to mark and put in the mail.
The voting thing has two things to vote on, the merger plan (voting yes is voting yes for both SCTY and TSLA? Or just one, and I should get another proxy in the mail?), and "A proposal to adjourn the special meeting of Solarcity stockholders, if necessary or appropriate, to solicit additional proxies if there are not sufficient votes to approve the Solarcity merger proposal" (does this mean, failing enough proxies (due to not everyone voting) they will basically pause things and try wait for / reach out to other possible shareholders who haven't submitted a proxy ?). If I'm in favor, I should be voting yes to both?
I'm voting yes, but ...I'm not 100% sure what I'm looking at.
I got a copy of the joint proxy statement/prospectus, and a voting thing to mark and put in the mail.
The voting thing has two things to vote on, the merger plan (voting yes is voting yes for both SCTY and TSLA? Or just one, and I should get another proxy in the mail?), and "A proposal to adjourn the special meeting of Solarcity stockholders, if necessary or appropriate, to solicit additional proxies if there are not sufficient votes to approve the Solarcity merger proposal" (does this mean, failing enough proxies (due to not everyone voting) they will basically pause things and try wait for / reach out to other possible shareholders who haven't submitted a proxy ?). If I'm in favor, I should be voting yes to both?
They are separate companies, so if you own shares in both you will get (at least) two proxy forms.
There is a quorum required for the merger vote to be binding, and either the shareholders must be present at the actual meeting, or have filed their proxy forms. For a lot of companies, people just throw out the forms and then the quorum isn't met. Including the second resolution (which has a lower bar for participation) allows them to reach out without having to restart the whole process. I can't remember what company it was, but a few years ago I was getting phone messages for about 4 weeks asking me to lodge a proxy for a special meeting.
TheTalkingMule
Distributed Energy Enthusiast
Was just hand-washing a load of dishes since my dishwasher crapped out and started thinking about what to replace it with. All these dishwashers now have to be super energy efficient and therefore don't wash so well. If I were living in a 100% solar home with all smart appliances, why do I have to care as much?
I'm in a Philly rowhome and am installing enough solar to net out all my usage plus a little bit once I seal up the house a little better. So I'm going to have excess juice until I buy an EV. Then I started thinking about what new developments would look like under 2018's starkly different possibilities. We're going to live in a world of excess electricity at peak, that much is a clear certainty. Does that not make solar/storage micro-grids the logical next reality for large developments? How could you possibly justify builind out simple one-way grid connected homes within this new dynamic?
I can see TSLA/SCTY rolling out packages in partnership with appliance manufacturers for end to end energy needs. Soon enough no one will build higher-end developments without optmizing appliances and energy production/distribution, the potential savings and efficiency will have passed the major tipping point. Given the new option of solar roofs, why would the market ever demand anything else?
Utilities are rushing to add mega-solar-farms as quickly as possible in a desperate bid to keep supply on their side of the meter, but what happens when we cross 50% of supply at peak like Germany has? That wholesale solar will have nearly zero value. Profits will need to be maintained, so cost will be added to ratepayers elsewhere. How does this have any conclusion other than ratepayer revolt and a near complete shift to decentralized self-consuming production?
We've gone so far down the path that I'm surprised you still hear about people investing in the "steady and reliable" utilities. Am I missing something here? How will NV Energy(Nevada's major utility) possibly make $1 of profit in 2019?
The old dynamic was a corrupt partnership between fossil fuel companies, car manufacturers and utilities with government greasing the skids. The future is in end-to-end decentralized energy solutions unless I'm nuts. Production, storage and consumption all combined out of necessity just as it has been in the past, only this time Tesla can provide you with a fully sustainable end-to-end solution that is actually cheaper than the nonsense we support today.
I'm in a Philly rowhome and am installing enough solar to net out all my usage plus a little bit once I seal up the house a little better. So I'm going to have excess juice until I buy an EV. Then I started thinking about what new developments would look like under 2018's starkly different possibilities. We're going to live in a world of excess electricity at peak, that much is a clear certainty. Does that not make solar/storage micro-grids the logical next reality for large developments? How could you possibly justify builind out simple one-way grid connected homes within this new dynamic?
I can see TSLA/SCTY rolling out packages in partnership with appliance manufacturers for end to end energy needs. Soon enough no one will build higher-end developments without optmizing appliances and energy production/distribution, the potential savings and efficiency will have passed the major tipping point. Given the new option of solar roofs, why would the market ever demand anything else?
Utilities are rushing to add mega-solar-farms as quickly as possible in a desperate bid to keep supply on their side of the meter, but what happens when we cross 50% of supply at peak like Germany has? That wholesale solar will have nearly zero value. Profits will need to be maintained, so cost will be added to ratepayers elsewhere. How does this have any conclusion other than ratepayer revolt and a near complete shift to decentralized self-consuming production?
We've gone so far down the path that I'm surprised you still hear about people investing in the "steady and reliable" utilities. Am I missing something here? How will NV Energy(Nevada's major utility) possibly make $1 of profit in 2019?
The old dynamic was a corrupt partnership between fossil fuel companies, car manufacturers and utilities with government greasing the skids. The future is in end-to-end decentralized energy solutions unless I'm nuts. Production, storage and consumption all combined out of necessity just as it has been in the past, only this time Tesla can provide you with a fully sustainable end-to-end solution that is actually cheaper than the nonsense we support today.
I haven't answers to Mule's questions*, so I'll plow on with my own observations.
I sent in my Y votes for TSLA two days ago, and yesterday phoned in my Y votes for our SCTY shares. I'm assuming that's what provided ISS with the impetus needed for them formally to endorse the merger this morning.
And apologies if I'm belaboring the obvious, but for those amongst forum members who aren't aware of this bit of fund management arcana, a significant number of pension funds and some mutual funds MANDATE or STRONGLY ENCOURAGE their management to vote their holdings as per the recommendations of these advisory organizations. There's ISS, Glass-Steagal (no, that's not right of course but it's a similar-sounding name...) and one or two others.
With ISS sounding off, a floodgate broke with the resultant share price rise dissolving the arbitrage. Certainly some hedged positions must also be coming unwound - all part and parcel of the same big picture.
*One suggestion for Mule: I am positive that somewhere in your Philly area you can find a fine-quality older dishwasher of the efficacy you'll be longing for. Kitchen re-models are so frequent that appliances in fine working order always are being replaced by the newest latest and greatest.
I sent in my Y votes for TSLA two days ago, and yesterday phoned in my Y votes for our SCTY shares. I'm assuming that's what provided ISS with the impetus needed for them formally to endorse the merger this morning.
And apologies if I'm belaboring the obvious, but for those amongst forum members who aren't aware of this bit of fund management arcana, a significant number of pension funds and some mutual funds MANDATE or STRONGLY ENCOURAGE their management to vote their holdings as per the recommendations of these advisory organizations. There's ISS, Glass-Steagal (no, that's not right of course but it's a similar-sounding name...) and one or two others.
With ISS sounding off, a floodgate broke with the resultant share price rise dissolving the arbitrage. Certainly some hedged positions must also be coming unwound - all part and parcel of the same big picture.
*One suggestion for Mule: I am positive that somewhere in your Philly area you can find a fine-quality older dishwasher of the efficacy you'll be longing for. Kitchen re-models are so frequent that appliances in fine working order always are being replaced by the newest latest and greatest.
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
Ron Barron believes that Tesla can disrupt the energy generation and the grid. In other words the utilities. He pointed out that that's a much bigger market for cars.
Even if you are against the merger if you want to minimize the negative impact on the SP you should vote for the merger. It's going to pass, but if it barely squeaks through that will help prolly the ST pain. OTOH if it gets a huge majority that will tend to cause the negative short term impact to dissipate.
Similar threads
- Locked
