Ripple Energy wind farm?

NedS

Reed_Richards said:

I never understood why Ripple had to be different from a regular company in which you bought shares (which could go up or down in value) and which paid a cash dividend rather than money off your electricity bill.  Should I conclude that Ripple's alternative business model didn't work?  Or was it just bad management?  

I agree, and invested in UK Wind (UKW) as I believed the economies of scale of a £4.5bn professionally run fund outweigh a small scale co-op like Ripple together with the tax efficiencies of being able to hold that investment in a pension or ISA. The dividends are linked to RPI inflation and more than cover my bills. I really wanted to like Ripple, but it was just too opaque on the potential returns.
I really hope things get sorted for the sake of those who have invested, and that it can remain viable for the long term.

QrizB

I've got far more in UKW than I do in Kirk Hill. They're quite different investment vehicles.

70sbudgie

Reed_Richards said:

I never understood why Ripple had to be different from a regular company in which you bought shares (which could go up or down in value) and which paid a cash dividend rather than money off your electricity bill.  Should I conclude that Ripple's alternative business model didn't work?  Or was it just bad management?  

That was one of the things that attracted me to Ripple - the different model with a co-op rather than being just another anonymous (tiny) shareholder. I think I am more disappointed that the model hasn't worked than potentially losing my investment (which I had deliberately kept fairly small). So I will be very interested in why Ripple has failed. 

jaybeetoo

Ripple was always too high risk for me.  No FSCS protection, potential tax on income, can’t shelter in an ISA, locked in for decades, all eggs in one very small basket, reliant on energy suppliers support, restricted on which energy suppliers you could use, etc.  A renewables investment trust or ETF was always much lower risk and far more flexible.  Anyone who pointed out the problems with Ripple were usually shouted down.  I hope investors money is safe.  Too many none FSCS protected or none FSA approved “investment opportunities” have resulted in losses for ordinary people.

phlebas192

I invested in Ripple because it offerred an opportunity to directly fund the building of renewable energy infrastructure (in my case the Derril Water solar farm) which is something you cannot do when buying shares in an IT or ETF in the secondary market. I never expected it to be more than an 'OK' return but soon became disillusioned with how poorly the project seemed to be managed with every update reporting further slippage and no apparent plan to get things back on track. It won't hurt me in the slightest if I lose the lot, although I can't see that happening unless there's been some fraudulent activity since the co-ops own the infrastructure, not 'Ripple Energy'. Hopefully a more competent entity will take over the management aspect.

Ripple Energy also sought crowdfunded investment directly into the company. Those people have presumably lost the lot now.

orbit1

jaybeetoo said:

Ripple was always too high risk for me.  

...locked in for decades, 

all eggs in one very small basket, 

reliant on energy suppliers support, restricted on which energy suppliers you could use, 

etc.  A renewables investment trust or ETF was always much lower risk and far more flexible.  Anyone who pointed out the problems with Ripple were usually shouted down.  I hope investors money is safe.  Too many none FSCS protected or none FSA approved “investment opportunities” have resulted in losses for ordinary people.

Locked in for 2 years.

Admittedly you can only sell a share to someone who wants to buy it, but isn't that the general case.

The baskets, of which there are now 3, are independent. And in 3 different countries, should it matter.

Electricity could only be sold to someone who would buy it - vid. sup. And payments only handled by Octopus and a few others, yes, that rules out people who don't want to use green electricity/suppliers. Good.

The other bits I know little of, but they don't sound like organisations which proximally cause the construction of, and continue the use of, turbines and panels.

Ripple and the co-ops are separate objects.

orbit1

Oscarmax said:

I made a £25 deposit a few years ago for the next project, it ended up being a solar farm with poor returns reading between the lines I just had a very bad feeling so never went forward.

Odd that something which is 90% built and energising* this Spring should end up a few years ago with poor returns.

* I see no reason it shouldn't, and several why it should.

144003

some screenshots of Ripple financials
 drive    google    com/drive/folders/1e6xUX2TNIskTHaKsUewtXZHtUJJECnnw?usp=sharing

paul991

seems kirk hill windfarm are leaving ripple and looking for another company to manage them , will the other co ops follow suit

xnetco

paul991 said:

seems kirk hill windfarm are leaving ripple and looking for another company to manage them , will the other co ops follow suit

I don't think they have any option. Ripple essentially won't exist soon.