Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Your making a hell of a lot of assumsions there. 1. He can't contol the city employee. 2. The employee had all the info need. 3. The employee left the info on his desk didn't think he would need it as everything had been covered before. 4. Employee now as his ass on fire for being stupid.
And all that is MD and Jim's fault??
Fortunatly big investment busines knows it's politics and won't pay any attention.
Personally I would be just as happy to never see anything goverment again. Even if you get a signed contract your not safe from problems. Politics and business just do not belong together. Ever wonder why no one else bid tye job? They've learned that lesson the hard way.
I can't believe that POS jerry is still dupping ya all.
You have never called this stock correcly. Stop trying.
AGAIN! IT WAS NOT OUR GUY! He works for the city.
WHY is it so difficult to understand that we had nothing to do with the presentation?
A city employee. Vendors rarely do direct presentations.
Thanks, but I would be much happier right now if I had been wrong. This too will pass.
Talking about CYA!
He made a common mistake, which is not an excuse, he assumed that it was in the bag and that they wouldn't have further questions. Number one never ever assume with goverment body. Number two he failed to recognize that any contract the size of this one is going to get questions and input from the polititions on the board. It's called CYA for the next election. Being a goverment employee he should have known better.
Nobody at any level in SLTD can do anything at this point but ask the ass if he needs more information. This is now politics and any pressure by a vender at this point can backfire. If you pressure him he can, and quite possibly will tear up the contract and recommend to the council they start over. Best right now to just give him some TLC.
And we better hope he gets a chance to redeem himself or they will throw the whole thing out and start over.
If you want to throw someone to the dogs howabout the study group chairman who was suppose to be prepared for all,questions. That is an internal FU and no doubt he will get reamed for wasting council time, and not being prepared.
I don't think we need to see ST posts on this board.
Again, unlikely he would be allowed to speak. This was a committee issue and they were expected to have answers. The vendor rarely getsbto,present directly.
He would not be allowed to speak even if he was their.
I told you. This is goverment at it's most asinine. One council member wanting to showoff, big ego, and you have a mess. Have seen this way to many times. Now it is going to get really messy as they will actually start looking into the contract. Up until now it is unlikely any of them have actually read any of it. That's why they have assistants. This will not be settled by the 20th. And don't be surprised if one of them gets on their high horse about local contracters being left out.
There were profits we just don't know yet what they were spent on. At the end of the first Q we were debt free. Obviously something is happening we just don't know yet.
Yep. TD just put them up. I understand the concept but not sure I'm ready to jump in.
Didn't even bother to read it. His lack of common sense tells me he is under the age of maturity, that being 24 as proven by science. That for some illogical reason on his part he is anti SLTD and chooses to demonstrate his ignorance by writing such crap puts him on the ignore list. Besides I refuse to allow him to make money just from reading his drivel.
didn't say you were bashing or anything. Simply ask why you thought it might fall through. surley you have some unease about something in the process that leads you to believe it could fail. I was simply asking why you feel as you do.
As my logic prof would have said back in the sixties "that sir, is a fine example of inverted upside down logic, and as such as no relationship to the real world." But thank you for your input.
Nor should you. I simply ask why you thought it might not go through. You have given me a non answer.
Please define what you mean by "opportunity costs". In all my years in business I don't believe I have ever heard that term. I Would also like to understand how,whatever it is, relates to energy costs. And why a company would choose it over fixed savings ofvan energy cost.mmevery company i have ever worked for has wanted to regulate thier energy expenditures so as to have more money for capital projects.
Please explaine your meanings/definitions.
Ah we are backto 4.15
Get back, get back
Get back to where you once belonged
Get back, get back
Get back to where you once belonged
Get back SOLAR3
What makes you think we won't get Fresno?
So glad the "charts" are looking good. Now if someone could just convince this stock to follow the charts we'd be all set, right?
Unfortunately, as someone mentioned this morn, this stock doesn't follow charts it does what it wants when it wants.
The good news is that we are currently up, and hopefully will stay that way till the next big news, which it does somewhat react to. Unfortunately you can't chart for news.
Since it is National Hot Dog Day suggest we all suck down a dog in celebration of closing green and over 4!
I do believe that a company can turn things around, and that if handled correctly can win investor approval again. So far I believe this one has done just that. It will be a slow go to get back, maybe two or three quarters, however I think they can do it. Lot's of smart moves here instead of typical panic issue more shares mentality. I'm in the red as many of you are, however I believe I will recover in time. The worse thing I could do right now is bail. The loss would then be written in stone with no chance of recovery. Not something I am willing to accept right now.
Let the battery war begin.
For what it's worth, I bought 800 sharesbafter hours at 3.97. Grab em while they are cheap. Long
Floridians deserve smarter solar
Dick Batchelor and Jim Kallinger 12:19 a.m. EDT July 25, 2015
J.Kallinger Headshot
(Photo: Special to The News-Press)
Most Floridians agree solar power is an essential part of our energy future. In fact, Florida voters might even find two solar amendments on their 2016 ballot.
Be warned: There are important differences between these two ideas.
One amendment, written by a group called Floridians for Solar Choice, may sound appealing at first glance. However, the fine print proves this measure is designed to benefit big, out-of-state solar companies. That’s why we’ve called it the “Shady Solar Amendment.”
Here’s how it works: Right now, Floridians can put solar panels on their homes or businesses, use the electricity those panels generate and sell the excess energy back to the grid.
But the “Shady Solar Amendment” would entice a new business model in which big, out-of-state solar companies sign Florida’s consumers to long-term contracts before placing solar panels on their rooftops. Under the “Shady Solar Amendment,” Floridians wouldn’t own the panels — they wouldn’t even own the electricity generated by those panels. Instead, they would buy the energy from the company that installed the panels.
However, much bigger problems can be found in the fine print.
The “Shady Solar Amendment” allows third parties — such as out-of-state solar companies—to act as de facto public utilities. However, it does not regulate these companies like public utilities. In fact, it expressly prohibits state and local authorities, your elected officials, from enacting commonsense consumer protection rules. It’s easy to see why out-of-state solar companies would want this type of special treatment. However, granting an entire industry constitutional immunity to sensible regulation is unprecedented and virtually impossible to reverse.
Consumers who choose solar should enjoy the same consumer protections guaranteed to consumers who choose traditional energy. Unfortunately, the “Shady Solar Amendment” even shortchanges consumers who don’t choose solar.
For example, everyone is familiar with the electric grid. It’s the infrastructure that pumps electricity into our homes and businesses. Even solar consumers are hooked up to the grid so that they can sell excess energy when the sun is shining and obtain backup power when it’s not. Here’s where it gets expensive for non-solar consumers: Big, out-of-state solar companies that sign folks to long-term contracts will make a lot of money pumping excess electricity from peoples’ rooftops onto the electric grid—but they won’t actually pay to maintain or upgrade that grid.
Guess who does pay? You.
If you don’t like the idea of signing a long-term contract with an unregulated, out-of-state solar company and instead opt to stick with traditional energy, hold onto you wallet. Under the “Shady Solar Amendment,” you will pay more money to maintain the electric grid every time these big solar companies sign a new customer to a long-term contract. Every new customer means one fewer household paying its fair share to maintain the grid we all use. Under the “Shady Solar Amendment,” the more solar customers, the higher the bills for everyone else—and big, out-of-state solar companies get a free ride.
Floridians deserve greater access to solar energy and they should not have to sacrifice consumer protections to get it. That is why members of our coalition called on Floridians for Solar Choice to revise their amendment several months ago. These groups asked simply that all energy consumers be treated fairly.
They refused—and that’s where the “Smart Solar Amendment” comes in.
We joined with a bipartisan group of business and civic leaders to create an alternative amendment that promotes solar choice while also protecting consumers from having to pick up the tab for big, out-of-state solar companies. Put simply, the “Smart Solar Amendment” says that everyone who uses the electric grid must help pay to maintain it.
The “Smart Solar Amendment” also protects solar consumers from getting ripped off by allowing authorities to regulate those companies, just like other energy providers.
Bottom line: The “Shady Solar Amendment” is designed to help big, out-of-state solar companies. The “Smart Solar Amendment” is designed to help consumers—those who choose solar and those who do not.
That is real solar choice.
Dick Batchelor and Jim Kallinger, Co-Chairman of Consumers for Smart Solar
I agree tyat it will most likely be passed without debate. Was just trying to cool the jets here. After having my wife work in county govermentnfor thirty years Imhave pretty much seen it all.
No! That post doesn't hurt us. The individual(s) who,prompted that question/statement are the people who potentially hurt us. Going to,piont fingers? Let's be sure to point them in the correct direction. The,idiot on another board, that cause JN to call him is the problem.
PPS now up.to,3.97.
Afterhours trading has us down to 3.60. Imam seriously tempted to,buy.
Requires 5 yeas to pass. Anyone know how many council members there are?
That is something we knew when the first results were posted at the end of the RFP deadline. MDE was the only RFP submitted.
MDE was the only bid, but yes if even one council member gets pissed it could cause a problem. I doubt it will,,however it isba good lesson on why shareholders should stay out of the way. Like children, seen but not heard.
Sure glad that doesn't happen with crowd sourced funding.