Member Info for Ashershares

Sparhawk I hear your points, however I dont think the concern currently is between the UK and China relationship, firstly China has oversupply of wind and solar turbines and framework so is unlikely to look at deterring exports and also there is the argument to be made that UK China relationship could even improve in coming years as we rotate away from our reliance on America until we have had time to create new plans and policy however I dont wish to speculate on that, Canada is just an example that might make this route possible for other nations. Also, once the wind and solar is installed (for the most part) there is a good 15-25 years of generation then so I think the current manufactuer is a mute point in the here and now.

To address my views on the second point, the idea is Energy Security not Energy Efficiency. Therefore a broader range of power generation would be favourable (Or at the very least, dont dis-incentivise investment and returns in the space). I do think North Sea conitnues to play a crucial role, one that may even grow. It doesnt have to crowd out other forms of generation as the goal is security.

I also dont think drastic changes take place "tomorrow" because of these latest actions by the Tump administration, but I do think it should continue to bolster the view that self-sufficiency to a larger degree than we have today will play an important roll in future policies and across the EU too.

I fail to see how securing national energy security has never been more important and continues to grow in importance as the political situation with our once closest ally continues to fray at the seams (or maybe its even worse than that already). One would think as an Island nation that wind / renewables should play a key role in that.... if politicians were able to be forward looking that is.

Gas prices on the continent took a jump higher end of last trading week, Europe continues to draw on inventories but probably has enough to get through winter however US LNG exports are maybe not as secure / obvious as they were two weeks ago?

Metals bull market carries on. Tin just hit 50k/mt

Interestingly I dont see these fees being charged in my HL or Fidelity account.

Tbh should be expected, big moves or big value open eyes. Then people start looking. The other one is big trades, "size opens eyes".

You should expect to see more eyes on this as discounts remain large and yeilds remain high and cover is adequate. It will trigger more and more filters professionals use to scan for "value" in this particular case.

I also think in the begining its ok to see these being touted in the newpaper etc. For now it shows potential trend reversal, but if we see a substantial increase in coverage then it become a little more concerning (but we are aways away from that).

I myself have multiple models that run everyday to scan for various aspect of (commodities) markets at the fund I work for; eg Value, momemntum etc

By BloombergNEF

(BloombergNEF) -- Solar projects paired with energy storage systems are winning record investments to feed new power demand. At least $80.5 billion of co-located asset finance deals have been closed since 2021, according to data compiled by BloombergNEF.

Some 58% of that money was invested in the US, underscoring the economic durability of clean power despite President Donald Trump’s efforts to curb renewables. Investment in solar and storage projects has expanded at a compound annual growth rate of 153% based on BNEF’s proprietary Asset Finance database. 

Lastly I missed, asymmetric risk reward is increasingly being skewed to the topside.

Whilst I am longer term holder of UKW, and for as much as Mr Bunsen posts, some of his points are very vaild with respect to peak fear and rhetoric starting to get priced into the share price.

Things not being mentioned that I think are somewhat interesting:

- There is an embedded call option with holding these renewables for any unforeseen price spikes in energy, similar to 2022 with the Ru/Uk war and thus bumper profits. This can happen in any form that we dont know as of yet. Its hard to value exactly how much this is worth to holding this share but I do think its something that should be considered.

- Markets can remain illogical longer than you can remain solvent, this certainly looks to be the case here. To trade this much of a discount to NAV and dont forget the NAV is "checked" by analysts across wall street, I have a BBG Terminal so check these forecasts and NAV weekly (JP are good at writing a report on this weekly, as are Barc). Point here is that for this discount to NAV to be "real", it would have passed through many eyes and models and everyone missed it...

- LNG exports from US are up a lot, the policy changes from the Trump administraiton have not helped. The goal into the mid-terms is cheap energy prices (namely at the gas pump, but affordability in general into elections tends to hit energy prices). This is suppressing energy prices and thus revenues globally for energy producers. The expectation of Ru/Uk war resolution also pressures energy prices, this not helping.

- The IR stuff is overblown now, its largely full priced into the discount curves. It isnt causing these day-to-day moves. We are in cutting cycles by CB and its not sending the SP higher, theres your proof.

- CTAs or some for of systematic flow / long only asset-mangers are likely still in a sell cycle with the techincals and performance so weak. This takes a long time to chop through.

For me, its a 10 year + hold, close your eyes and wake up in 10 years and my belief is energy will have been an important sector and revenue generator with bumper years along the way. If you want to de-risk but stay in then sector then dont re-invest the dividends and move them into other diversifiers until you re-gain some confidence.

Good Luck All, DYOR of course.

Apollo funds are investing $6.5 billion in Orsted’s Hornsea 3 wind farm.

Whats peoples thoughts on the fact in the recent report depreciation is higher than capital generation?

Add to that the fact the dividend has become an ongoing liability for this company (reasonably they cant cut it without huge repercussions as many investors are here for the divi) - there is some big pulls on the cash generated.

I am obviously a long term holder and continue to like UKW, I am just flagging a concern I had from the recent report

This looks like a really good website - thank you.

Thanks Zebbo, would you mind sharing more around the process you used so we can understand the analysis and results more pelase?

Couldnt agree more. I am shocked even fossil fuel companies arent loading up as potential diversification plays in the future. Seems a lot cheaper / easier than building endless windfarms or solar farms from scratch when they need too. Maybe oil prices too low for them to be interested right now, I dunno. Would seem smart though.

At the very least, use the cash generation to consolidate but cant buy assets from others below NAV so would need to buy their shares

How big is your sofa!

The other question that crosses my mind is at what point are these cheap enough to NaV that it makes sense for other energy providers to start either buying the shares to eventually do a take over or to make an offer between here and NaV to get the assets on the "cheap". A real easy way for them to expand clean energy production, especially if it ever becomes fashionable again to be green

I think this is more on the 5-10 year horizon, close your eyes and collect divi and re-invest, wake up in 10 years.

Power / energy is something we need and only need more of. Also this share has inbedded convexity to blow outs in energy prices for whatever those reasons may be.

I guess the issue for many is where they sit on the investment spectrum right now. If in / closer to retirement this continued share price decline is very annoying and potentially worrisome, where as if still building a long term portfolio then its likely a reasonable risk reward adjusted opportunity.

Thank you Zebbo

So in terms of them being useless here, what are they doing that is worse than the other companies in the sector? Trying to understand if actually there is bad managment here vs just sectorial pressure that can ease over a 5-10 year horizon.

So far all I have seen personally, cutting of fees to the lower of NaV or basicallly MC, disposal of assets at NaV, share buybacks during a period of below NaV price action and a rising dividend. Meanwhile over optermistic energy forecasts (which can be considered mmgt error) have been readjusted lower bringing NaV lower but with the new forecasts one assumes closer to what was real NaV in the first place, and an entire sector that has been crushed from reduced sentiment, higher back end rates discounting effect and uncertainty around future energy policies. Couple that with the fact asset managers cannot hold losers whilst they fall behind winners and the share price decline does make a lot of sense.

fwiw, I am not backing Shroders mmgt here, I dont know enough about it or havent probably considered it enough. Simply just laying out how I see the current situation is all.

Good morning, could you kindlly elaborate more on this - why did you think Shroders would be totally useless and what is it they are doing totallly useless currently? Not questioning your validity just curious to understand more around what you are seeing please.

From BBG

Previous Next Send Actions Translate News Story

08/11/2025 06:33:31[BN]

Meanwhile, the outlook for solar and wind stocks is starting to improve.

​​The analysis of Hazeltree’s data shows that the average share of funds that

were net short stocks in the Invesco Solar ETF dropped to 3% in June. That’s the

lowest percentage since April 2021, when green equities were trading

near record highs. The number of funds net long stocks in the First Trust Global

Wind Energy ETF reached a 30-month high in February this year. Those positions

fell back in June, but net longs still dominated shorts overall. 

This just suggests that the NaV erosion is from the mmgt fees, which in reality are small and the lowest of the peer group. I NaV erosion is from getting their power price forecasts and wind generation forecasts wrong. We should look at other peers in the group and see what forecasts they are using and apply them to UKW for a more balanced picture. I don't see any of the banks that follow UKW calling for it to wind-up, probably for good reason. Maybe if forward dividend cover drops below 1x then we would see a real issue for the company.