Sunrun (RUN) shares getting hammered

[Tony Burgh]

Looks like loss of solar subsidies is causing investors to dump Sunrun.

Sponsored

 

[Maquis]

Not just SunRun….

https://www.investors.com/news/solar-stocks-dive-senate-bill-cuts-solar-wind-energy-incentives/

 

[RickLightning]

This is the flaw with our system of government. Companies (and people) need consistency to plan. Every 4 years, we change our leader, and sometimes every 2 years we change our Congress to a different viewpoint. Subsidies / tax credits / grants / loans, preferential tax treatment - none of it is guaranteed. So, a company develops a business model and then, POOF, that model is destroyed by a new government. Or a utility lobbies to dramatically change the way electricity is reimbursed when supplied to the grid, thereby destroying the analysis that might have justified solar to begin with.

Yet, some things never get touched (and should IMO). Farm subsidies, oil and gas subsidies, etc. You want a free market? Let's see how everyone likes it when all subsidies are removed.

This is why an individual should never plan on the future not changing. It's also why I took years of spending out of the market in December. We're going to get bent over for at least the next 3.5 years.

 

[Dan C]

There are a lot of businesses that are totally dependent on subsidies for their revenue. It is a very flawed business plan in the long term. I do not think sun run was thinking long term. It is a get your money and get out company.

 

[RickLightning]

There are a lot of businesses that are totally dependent on subsidies for their revenue. It is a very flawed business plan in the long term. I do not think sun run was thinking long term. It is a get your money and get out company.

How about the farmers business plans, which rely on subsidies and low interest loans and grants?

Oil / natural gas exploration?

How many billions has Tesla received from selling off carbon credits? In 2024, $2.76B...

I could go on, but businesses need CONSISTENCY.

It's not a matter of whether you agree, or disagree, with subsidies, grants, loans from government. But CONSISTENCY is needed.

A great example of the need for consistency is the current immigration crackdown. One day it's hit every industry. Then it's "oh no, hotels / farms / restaurants are being negatively impacted and can't function (even with legal immigrants working for them, because they stay home)". So it's "nope, don't crack down on hotels / farms / restaurants".

 

[Dan C]

I understand subsidies. Politics aside, if that is your entire business plan you are vulnerable to the whim of the government. That is never a good place to be. Oil and gas is way to powerful to loose their money. I wouldn't want to be a farmer. Some companies stake their entire business on it and that is not sustainable.

 

[Rocket808]

This is ops normal for any business who’s primary customer is the USG.

I experience this every year, regardless of president.
The huge issue comes out when the presidents budget doesn’t come out in time

 

[Garyl]

Here is a break down of USDA spending by sub-component off a web site called USA spending .gov. I didn't do any more "fact checking" but Im assuming these are close. The food and nutrition figure would be food stamp/ SNAP probably school lunch programs. the FSA number would include a program CRP to retire highly erodible ground and direct cash payments including disaster assistance. To be fair you need to include the RMA figure in the Farmer category although farmers pay a premium for crop insurance it is backstopped by USDA.

As far as low interest loans and grants most of those are reserved for beginning farmers or ranchers although there always is the possibility of abuse.

Just trying to provide some information







Department of Agriculture (USDA) by
Sub-Component
for FY 2025

View Outlays

What is this?

Sub-Component	FY25 Total Budgetary Resources	FY25 Obligations
Food and Nutrition Service	$261,572,667,687.73	$95,058,969,831.65
Farm Service Agency	$40,302,850,668.42	$10,799,336,351.05
Office of the Secretary	$37,361,123,730.78	$10,023,290,053.93
Forest Service	$27,039,239,317.25	$6,412,488,603.84
Risk Management Agency	$22,173,728,382.95	$14,552,515,680.89
Natural Resources Conservation Service	$20,665,939,783.54	$2,900,505,769.69
Rural Utilities Service	$10,844,189,009.32	$8,702,799,759.79
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service	$4,896,460,581.28	$1,609,246,650.06
Agricultural Marketing Service	$4,659,142,668.83	$2,028,621,997.83
Rural Housing Service	$3,314,636,327.06	$1,278,388,502.01

 

[chl]

Someone once said, the business of America is business.

Which partly explains why the tax code favors business investment, the idea being it will create jobs and benefit the populace.

The other reason is, as Will Rogers said: we have the best politicians money can buy.

However, now it seems we have tech billionaires and crypto-crooks calling the shots along with oil executives who pretend they don't know their products are causing a global warming crisis.

What, me worry?

 

[v2h8484]

Politics aside, if that is your entire business plan you are vulnerable to the whim of the government.

Lol ... politics aside, you think one guy randomly flipping a switch back and forth qualifies as government

 

[Firn]

There are a lot of businesses that are totally dependent on subsidies for their revenue. It is a very flawed business plan in the long term. I do not think sun run was thinking long term. It is a get your money and get out company.

Well, that's the point.

Yes, their may be fly by night companies, but the subsidies are to get that market moving

 

[Firn]

I understand subsidies. Politics aside, if that is your entire business plan you are vulnerable to the whim of the government. That is never a good place to be. Oil and gas is way to powerful to loose their money. I wouldn't want to be a farmer. Some companies stake their entire business on it and that is not sustainable.

The point is there should be no "whim" of the government. If there is, its not functional.

Subsidies are not to increase profits for existing markets, if used for that they are just blatant corruption.

A business SHOULD stake their business on it, that's what subsidies exist FOR. Yes, they have to move off of that eventually, but that's in the transition plan. Regardless the very existence of the subsidy is to build business where it doesnt (currently) exist.

 

[chl]

BTW, isn't the oil and gasoline industry adequately established at this point that all their subsidies could be removed?

And WTF are we subsidizing our planet's demise anyway?

$$$$ and power = corruption

Sponsored