Ripple Energy wind farm?

TCA

When I say they wouldn't want to invest, I don't mean it's because it wouldn't make money via a low borrowing cost.

I mean because it goes against the whole set up. They can't surely be both investor and managing agent? Having only a tiny proportion owned by the co-op would also fly in the face of the "customer owned" mantra.

barker77

Thing for me is the limit for where I can move to provider wise. It would be preferable to me if I got paid even if I chose to move to a provider who ripple didn’t have a deal with for example. Agh tough one though - tempted to just do a few hundred pounds and see what happens. 

chqshaitan

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

TCA

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

I didn't disagree with you. I was trying to understand the Facebook comment from Ripple saying that share credits wouldn't be affected.

As you said, someone has to pay for any borrowed funds. So the only way that running costs (and therefore share credits) wouldn't be impacted is if the money is loaned interest-free to the co-op.

And I can't see how that's possible.

chqshaitan

TCA said:

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

I didn't disagree with you. I was trying to understand the Facebook comment from Ripple saying that share credits wouldn't be affected.

As you said, someone has to pay for any borrowed funds. So the only way that running costs (and therefore share credits) wouldn't be impacted is if the money is loaned interest-free to the co-op.

And I can't see how that's possible.

Yea, just to clarify(my understanding) is that are returns are two separate payments, the first is the known share credit return, and the unknown/variable is the difference between the running cost of the windfarm vs the wholesale cost of what electricity it generated in any given period, this is where we can save a reasonable amount of money, based on the difference.

The way I see the loan impacting this, is that the running cost will be higher, so we will in effect receive less over the life time of the wind farm(or at least until the loan/mortgage is serviced).

Petriix

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

Presumably the interest on the loan will be paid out of the profits generated by the equivalent share bought by that money; assuming that the cost of finance is roughly equivalent to the profit of the wind farm. 

TCA

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

I didn't disagree with you. I was trying to understand the Facebook comment from Ripple saying that share credits wouldn't be affected.

As you said, someone has to pay for any borrowed funds. So the only way that running costs (and therefore share credits) wouldn't be impacted is if the money is loaned interest-free to the co-op.

And I can't see how that's possible.

Yea, just to clarify(my understanding) is that are returns are two separate payments, the first is the known share credit return, and the unknown/variable is the difference between the running cost of the windfarm vs the wholesale cost of what electricity it generated in any given period, this is where we can save a reasonable amount of money, based on the difference.

The way I see the loan impacting this, is that the running cost will be higher, so we will in effect receive less over the life time of the wind farm(or at least until the loan/mortgage is serviced).

There's only one payment equal to the difference in the wholesale costs v running costs. The 5% is included in that, not additional to it.

But you've hit on the point that he uses the phrase "share credit", which I took to mean bill credit from your co-op shares. However if he means the 5% isn't affected, that's different. Per their share offer document I'm sure it says 5% will always be paid out, regardless of wind output and as you said,  equating that to share capital.

If that's the case, then he's cleverly avoided saying operating costs will rise and the "trading benefit" will fall, by referring to the 5% only.

TCA

Petriix said:

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

Presumably the interest on the loan will be paid out of the profits generated by the equivalent share bought by that money; assuming that the cost of finance is roughly equivalent to the profit of the wind farm. 

Do you think Ripple therefore becomes an investor in the wind farm? I can't see it. But then I can't think how else it can be done as presumably it's Ripple who have the borrowing facility.

Unless Ripple set up another company to lend to the co-op or some crazy set up like that. I'll ask them tomorrow.

chqshaitan

TCA said:

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

chqshaitan said:

TCA said:

Coastalwatch said:

The last sentence states "To confirm this would not effect your share credits".

The only way I can see that being true is if they're saying Ripple would borrow the money and lend it free of charge to the co-op. Ripple presumably wouldn't want to invest as such. Not sure.

Yes, this is true, but don't forget, that is a fixed sum(ie  return of 5% roughly per year). I was referring to the return of the running cost vs wholesale cost, that will be reduced, as the running costs will be higher, as the coop will have to pay the interest on the loan

I didn't disagree with you. I was trying to understand the Facebook comment from Ripple saying that share credits wouldn't be affected.

As you said, someone has to pay for any borrowed funds. So the only way that running costs (and therefore share credits) wouldn't be impacted is if the money is loaned interest-free to the co-op.

And I can't see how that's possible.

Yea, just to clarify(my understanding) is that are returns are two separate payments, the first is the known share credit return, and the unknown/variable is the difference between the running cost of the windfarm vs the wholesale cost of what electricity it generated in any given period, this is where we can save a reasonable amount of money, based on the difference.

The way I see the loan impacting this, is that the running cost will be higher, so we will in effect receive less over the life time of the wind farm(or at least until the loan/mortgage is serviced).

There's only one payment equal to the difference in the wholesale costs v running costs. The 5% is included in that, not additional to it.

But you've hit on the point that he uses the phrase "share credit", which I took to mean bill credit from your co-op shares. However if he means the 5% isn't affected, that's different. Per their share offer document I'm sure it says 5% will always be paid out, regardless of wind output and as you said,  equating that to share capital.

If that's the case, then he's cleverly avoided saying operating costs will rise and the "trading benefit" will fall, by referring to the 5% only.

Hi Bud,


Yes, he has been very clever, in only referencing what is already ring fenced and determined, namely your share capital return.

You will be able to get annual reports from your dashboard, which will detail your share credit(for arguments sake) and also what 'profit' you have had returned based on the running costs vs wholesale electric costs.

Ultimately electricity costs are only going to increase, but its a shame due to lack of promotion/advertising a loan is required to fill any shortfall.

Cheers

Exiled_Tyke

Share credits remain unaffected I suggest is confusing. If they take out a loan and issue fewer shares then the profits per share should be increased and investors should benefit.   Loan interest should be lower than shareholder returns (in theory) but that all depends on how all this has been structured.  Are they suggesting that the loan would be taken out on similar terms to the shares?  

On another note I see that Octopus don't appear to be pushing Ripple as one of their partner schemes. So what's going on there is another question.