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.
Isn't it JN's job to point out the comparison? Damn, $10 looks great about now....
Swiss man!
Thailand, Switzerland top list of world's 15 happiest economies
Maybe I'll be packing my bags once SLTD gets me out for poverty!
http://www.messenger-inquirer.com/features/business/thailand-switzerland-top-list-of-world-s-happiest-economies/article_cce23298-467a-5739-8d74-c5bbbaf48bef.html
This could be my house! Needs SLTD Solar panels though!
Feeling bummed about your economy? It's time to pack your bags for Thailand or Switzerland.
That's one way to read the fate of 51 economies (including the euro area) this year, based on Bloomberg calculations of what's known as the "misery index." Inflation and unemployment, two factors that make consumers unhappy, are remarkably low in the 15 countries, according to economists surveyed by Bloomberg News. Figures reflect the latest research, private forecasts and survey data compiled by Bloomberg as of Feb. 27.
While the Swiss National Bank attracted some tumultuous headlines earlier this year, the haven of ski slopes and chocolates still outshines its peers in the survey as a consumer-friendly place to live. For the country's working-age consumers — only 3.3 percent of whom are likely to be unemployed this year — an estimated 0.9 percent drop in prices in 2015 will help cushion the blow from a surging currency. That's enough for Switzerland to claim one of the least-sad spots in the misery index. (The lower the score, the better.)
That's great news for an already wealthy country. Switzerland is the fourth-richest, as measured by International Monetary Fund estimates of gross domestic product per-capita estimates for 2015.
Look to Switzerland's north for another consumer dreamland: Norway. There, consumer prices will probably increase by a mild 2.2 percent this year, edging just slightly above the 2 percent threshold for which some major central banks worldwide aim. Joblessness is projected to be about 3.75 percent in 2015. And income? Best of any in the group, at an estimated $67,619 GDP per capita for this year.
In what may come as a surprise, the least-miserable country is the not-so-wealthy Thailand. That's partly thanks to an unusually low unemployment rate, currently tracking below 1 percent, that has so far failed to spur inflation. To be sure, the Land of Smiles, currently under martial law after a military coup last year, has a long way to go before it comes close to the living standards of developed economies.
Elsewhere in Asia are two more countries that, despite their territorial differences, are treating their consumers to a relatively nice standard of living.
Japan, whose battle with deflation that started in the 1990s is only starting to fade, probably will see inflation of about 1 percent this year. Joblessness, too, has shown progress: The unemployment rate is set to ease further to 3.5 percent after averaging 3.6 percent last year.
China's relatively subdued inflation and unemployment this year will help it move up to the seventh-happiest of the bunch, two spots better than a year ago, the surveys showed.
As for the U.S., size isn't everything. The world's largest economy places a not-too-shabby eighth-happiest on the 2015 misery ranking, with still-elevated joblessness holding it back from medal contention. GDP per-capita will be behind only Norway and Hong Kong this year, the IMF projects.
Should we tell them to PLEASE SHORT SLTD????
This article is about Wyoming but applies to other states and places.
Edith Cook: Wyoming needs to join solar-power lobby
http://www.wyomingnews.com/articles/2015/03/07/opinion/guest_column/02column_03-07-15.txt#.VPxZ-Clxt0g
A technological watershed has swept America up in delighted surprise. It is significant for Wyoming, which, should it go with the flow, will reap the rewards of lucrative change.
The cause? Thanks to China's fine-tuning of photovoltaic cell, prices have dropped by 70 percent. Hence, the capture of sun power has become an attractive business venture.
A massive influx of capital and labor energizes solar production. GTM Research reports that, in the U.S. in August 2013, one solar photovoltaic system was being installed every four minutes.
Americans use - and produce - vastly more solar electricity than most of us realize, writes Neville Williams in his 2014 "Sun Power."
Some 120,000 workers are employed in the solar-energy industry, a number that increases by 20,000 every year. In 2010 alone, America's top 10 utilities integrated 561 megawatts of solar-electricity capacity, a 100 percent increase over the previous year.
Since then, 151 coal-fired power plants have not been built and 50,000 megawatts of such plants have been retired. Although the U.S. Congress never instituted an energy policy, states are busily generating the impetus. Solar makes money - at the state level.
California's energy plan, which calls for 33 percent renewables by 2020, leads the way. Former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, ecstatic over his state's No. 1 status in solar power, promoted a "Million Solar Roofs" program while he was in office.
"Our green sector is the brightest spot in California's economy," reports Mr. Schwarzenegger, adding that the industry has grown "10 times faster than any other business sector since 2005."
For California, where Silicon Valley holds sway, that's impressive. Today, 3,500 green-energy firms exist in California. Installation companies putting solar panels on rooftops employ 25,000 people.
America's commercial electric producers and consumers are the largest users of solar photovoltaic. After Wal-Mart, which expects to have 1,000 solar-powered locations by 2020, are Costco; Kohl's; Walgreens; Macy's; Staples; Bed, Bath & Beyond; Toys R Us; GM; Ford; FedEx; Toyota; Whole Foods; Anheuser-Busch; Safeway; Lowe's; PepsiCo; IBM; DuPont; Alcoa; Dow Jones; Johnson & Johnson; Intel; HP; Google; and eBay.
IKEA has already put solar on 89 percent of its stores. Apple is building huge solar farms in North Carolina, committed to providing 100 percent renewable energy for its operations.
Recently, the Department of Energy launched SunShot, which aims to reduce the cost of residential solar electric installations by 75 percent before 2020.
Subsequently, Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industry Association, declared: "By 2016, solar electricity will be the lowest-cost source of retail power in the U.S."
Bank of America Merrill Lynch has launched Project AMP to finance 750 megawatts of distributed generation. In California's Antelope Valley, Warren Buffett's solar corporation began construction of two gigantic photovoltaic projects totaling 579 megawatts.
Another 130-megawatt solar plant is financed by Tenaska, the giant natural-gas firm. Incredibly, as large central solar plants come on line, solar is becoming cheaper than natural gas.
Even Canada is going solar.
Not exactly a sunny place, Ontario passed the first North American feed-in-tariff some years ago. Since then, nearly 400 megawatts of solar photovoltaic have appeared, along with an 80-megawatt photovoltaic plant of thin-film panels.
Canada is set to surpass California in solar installations. In this scenario, who needs dirty tar-sands oil?
"Regardless of whether one agrees with climate change," writes Author Williams, "investing in solar flourishes because that's where the money is."
New Jersey, the second state to lead with solar installations, created a renewable portfolio standard that requires utilities and electric-grid operators to purchase enough solar power to reach the state's goal of 22.5 percent renewables by 2021. Then it instituted Solar Renewable Energy Credits. Since then, 29 states and Washington, D.C., have emulated New Jersey's portfolio.
Not all states embrace change for the better.
When Colorado legislators, accustomed to genuflecting before Big Fossil, refused to develop Renewable Energy Credits, Coloradans took matters in hand with Proposition 37, offering them to the voters. It passed. Colorado expects to reach 1 million solar roofs by 2030.
Meanwhile in Wyoming, Gov. Matt Mead continues to promote coal; legislators pump money into fossil-fuel subsidies.
"I have never seen a state government so indifferent to the concerns of its residents," commented one constituent recently.
Mr. Schwarzenegger echoed the view nationally when he wrote in the Washington Post in 2011: "It is absurd that our federal government spends tens of billions of dollars annually subsidizing the oil industry."
Nevertheless, homes, businesses, stadiums and parking garages will be roofed with solar in no time. Cars will run on electricity. Even in Wyoming.
Edith Cook is a Cheyenne writer. Email: e104cook@gmail.com.
Published on: Friday, Mar 06, 2015 - 11:28:43 pm MST
Last week we were going to sign a deal with GE....... Oh Sierra Equity...
On the dopey Undercover Boss...
1 segment they are at an emergency call center. Phone get garbled. Computers are crap. Always new workers because everybody is doing responsible jobs at minimum wage.
the other segment they were about to go out on a solar job. The crew is waiting because searching for parts was on paper, with paper forms.
GOOFY GOOFY CEO....
High tech company???????
I saw VIVINT on Undercover Boss.
VERY Goofy company! And CEO.....
IMERGY storage
I was analyzing their systems.
I like the cost.
I love that fact that it has almost unlimited cycles.
However I found the problem with their system
.0008 green is better than nothng...
OT But interesting....
Walter Energy Notified by NYSE of Non-Compliance With a Continued Listing Standard
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/walter-energy-notified-by-nyse-of-non-compliance-with-a-continued-listing-standard-2015-03-05
BIRMINGHAM, AL, Mar 05, 2015 (Marketwired via COMTEX) -- Walter Energy, Inc. WLT, -3.12% a leading, publicly traded "pure-play" producer of metallurgical coal for the global steel industry, announced today that the Company has been notified by the New York Stock Exchange that its common stock does not presently satisfy one of the NYSE's continued listing standards. The NYSE requires that the average closing price per share of a listed company's common stock be at least $1.00 over a consecutive 30 trading-day period. As of March 3, 2015, the average closing price per share of the Company's common stock over the preceding 30 trading-day period was $0.99.
Under the NYSE's rules, the Company has six months to regain compliance with the NYSE's continued listing standards. The Company's common stock will continue to be listed and traded on the NYSE during this period, subject to the Company's compliance with other continued listing standards. As required by the NYSE's rules, the Company plans to notify the NYSE within 10 business days of the receipt of the notice of non-compliance of its intent to cure the deficiency.
The deficiency does not affect the Company's business operations or its Securities and Exchange Commission reporting requirements, and it does not violate any of the Company's credit agreements or other debt obligations.
Does JN have any ammo left?
Or did he blow his wad?
I can't watch this pain...
Leaving for the green expo...
http://www.sustainabilitysummit.us
Bid 2.26 come on!
Back to .08 pre split?
Come on Jim-Bob!
It wasn't all that bad today....
LIKE HELL!
ONLY 45% down......
I hate to see a bad day....
No $3 bottom tomorrow. Don't forget that......
Revenue Growth?
June 2014 7,471,000
Sept 2014 6,437,000
Dec 2014 6 mil something
Now where is it up? I know from 2013 ....
---------------------
SCTY I see growth here.... YTY
March 2014 2013 2012
Revenue $63,546(t) $29,988(t) $24,841(t)
EPS -0.26 (3/31/2014) -0.54 (3/31/2013) 0.04 (3/31/2012)
Dividends N/A N/A N/A
June
Revenue $61,334(t) $37,949(t) $46,574(t)
EPS -0.52 (6/30/2014) -0.52 (6/30/2013) -2.2 (6/30/2012)
Dividends N/A N/A N/A
September
Revenue $58,343(t) $48,600(t) $31,974(t)
EPS 0.21 (9/30/2014) -0.01 (9/30/2013) -3.47 (9/30/2012)
Dividends N/A N/A N/A
December (FYE)
Revenue $71,808(t) $47,300(t) $23,519(t)
EPS -0.03 (12/31/2014) 0.37 (12/31/2013) -2.06 (12/31/2012)
Dividends N/A N/A N/A
Totals
Revenue $255,031(t) $163,837(t) $126,908(t)
EPS -0.6 -0.7 -7.69
Dividends N/A N/A N/A
After having a bad day.
My granddaughter comes and reads a book to me.
Makes my day much cheerier!
I can smile now!
Edgar Online is a Virus
It just keeps on popping up while I'm working.
I guess I have to find out how to remove that garbage off my Apple....
Trading halt.
Limit down
This why I'm happy that I sold 25% at .095 to put me on a free ride.
It makes this much easier to take!
Wife's account still show profit.....
But sheeeeeet this IS ridiculous....
Are we going to $15 like you promised?
Scottrade: Solar3D Inc SLTD:NASDAQ (Common Stock)
Tried a premarket order... Didn't work....
Unable to enter the order because the symbol entered does not have a Last price, Bid or Ask.
Got it right on my Smart TV. Which is a Yahoo APP...
The story I hear from Coal Supporters.
"That is because they use the dirtiest coal"
"Our coal is cleaner"
Wyoming coal is less bad. But..............
ATTACK ON SOLAR WAKE UP<------------------------
SUPPORT SOLARCITY HERE!
While we can enjoy the moment, we have to pay attention on the ATTACK ON SOLAR.
In Arizona they have levied a charge on Solar customers of $30 to $125 per month. While SCTY is a competitor, their subscriptions are DOWN 96%.
Wake up. Politics are important here. SCTY has filed an anti trust lawsuit. I love competition in the Solar Industry but WE MUST STICK TOGETHER too.
An attack on SCTY is an attack on SLTD.<--------------------
SolarCity sues Arizona utility over solar anti-competitive practices
https://gigaom.com/2015/03/03/solarcity-sues-arizona-utility-over-solar-anti-competitive-practices/
The solar financier and installer chaired by Elon Musk, SolarCity, has filed a lawsuit in Arizona federal court claiming that the Arizona utility Salt River Project is using anti-competitive practices to maintain a monopoly around energy and solar power and unfairly block competition.
Last week the board of directors of Salt River Project approved a new monthly average $50 “demand charge” fee for solar customers that live in the utility’s footprint. The charge is based on their peak energy use, and all solar customers would have to pay the fee even if the amount of solar energy that they produce on their roofs offsets the amount of energy they take from the grid. Most solar panel rooftop systems aren’t connected to batteries, so solar customers still use grid power at night or during non-sunny days.
he utility says the new monthly fee is fair because it needs to maintain the grid for these solar customers even if they are paying the utility less for energy. SRP says solar customers have a unique relationship with the grid and are actually shifting grid maintenance costs onto non-solar customers.
SRP is hiking rates minimally for all of its customers due to take place in April. Without new charges SRP says it is projected to deliver a net loss of $46 million for the fiscal year that begins in May. SolarCity says in its lawsuit that SRP actually has over $100 million in profits from its electricity generation from last year but that it is structured to shift that profit to subsidize its partner’s water customers in the region.
Solar customers in SRP’s footprint that signed solar contracts before SRP’s proposal was first introduced in December can keep their current rates and will be “grandfathered” in. SolarCity notes in its lawsuit that these customers are already “essentially lost to SRP for significant portions of their electricity purchases.”
SolarCity sells solar rooftop systems that enable customers to generate their own electricity, and thus buy much less energy from the power grid run by utilities like SRP. SolarCity says the actions that SRP is taking are meant to stifle competition, and act as a monopolist.
SolarCity says the fee, which could around be $600 per year, “eliminates the economic value to customers of generating their own power.” SolarCity says that after the utility’s plan was suggested in December, applications for solar panel systems in SRP’s territory dropped by a dramatic 96 percent.
SolarCity says in its suit:
I think that we had a bunch of expenses this Q.
I hope that they don't hurt us.
WE DO have to spend money to make money.
Somebody buy at 5.85 and make us green!