Some Market And Energy News -- Nothing About The Bakken -- January 7, 2018

First, Plug Power, from Motley Fool; the latter is not impressed with the profitability of the company but seems to be following it closely. This is the third or fourth article I've seen on Plug by Motley Fool. Have they changed their tune? From the second page of the story:

To add insult to injury, the company sold more stock over the period to raise cash, increasing the share count -- and diluting existing investors -- by 27%. This isn't a new thing for Plug Power or its investors, who have seen the company issue stock on a regular basis just about every year since going public. Over the past five years the company's share count has more than tripled, in part because the company has been forced to raise cash to fund the business. The company has also added about $40 million in debt over the past year.
For years the company has steadily burned through its cash and diluted investors. That situation hasn't changed in recent years, even as sales have improved.

Hydrogen fuel cells are far more viable today than at any point in history, and it's likely that their use will only grow from here, especially as hydrogen production costs fall and the infrastructure improves. At the same time, there will be opportunities for investors to do well. 

And eventually Plug Power could become one of the companies to profit. However, so far the company has only proved adept at destroying shareholder value, not making millionaires. Until management demonstrates it can meaningfully improve cash flows and turn the growth in demand for its products into better operating results, it remains a stock investors should probably avoid.

Disclaimer: this is not an investment site. Do not make any investment, financial, job, travel, or relationship decisions based on what you read here or think you may have read here.

Second, Statoil, also from Motley Fool, gets a nice review.This is the second or third time I've read a positive story on Statoil, from other sources.

Third, Prius, from The Wall Street Journal, a very nice story. For the Chevy Bolt and Volt. LOL. The WSJ writer is not enamored with the Prius. Wow, it appears that the Prius is a lemon. Speaking of which, high school chemistry students often use lemons to show how electricity works.

Toyota took a halfhearted swing at PHEV with its previous generation Prius, using a barely-there 4.4 kWh battery providing an official range of 11 miles. The 2017 Prius Prime, with a new name to go with its bad-acid styling, roughly doubles those capacities, and yet it’s nowhere near enough. From its torpid performance to its fretful user experience—watching your EV range evaporate like spilled ether anytime you touch the accelerator—the Prime seems to be less an endorsement of PHEV than a repudiation.

What follows represents a change of heart: Being an advocate for vehicle electrification, I have regarded PHEV to be practical transitional technology in the next decade. After all, a large majority of car owners in the U.S. drive fewer than 30 miles a day. A PHEV allows them to drive some or all of their commutes on electric power; should the day take them further, the gas-powered engine can take over.

The Prime’s problem is fundamentally one of packaging, which is a pretty way to say the battery is too small to do any good. The Prime, like its siblings, is built on Toyota’s New Generation Vehicle Architecture rather than a dedicated platform. This cost-saving decision constrained the space and configuration available to the batteries. As it is, the Prime’s lithium-ion pack consumes nearly 5 more cubic feet of cargo space than a standard Prius, as well as the rear-center seat position.

In a 3,375-pound car (300 pounds more than standard Prius) that juice doesn’t take you very far or very fast. In EV mode the Prime accelerates to 60 mph in a shockingly deliberate 12 seconds. In hybrid mode (121 hp system net), it’s a bit quicker—10.2 seconds. These full-throttle exertions fill the cabin with the keening of engine, motors, transmission and power electrics, a chamber orchestra of mechanical lament. Oof. That will lighten your foot.

Fourth, Tesla. A reader asks a question with regard to EV sales: "Why are more Teslas sold in the last month of every quarter than in the two previous months of the same quarter, combined?"

I've noticed the same thing; never commented. I have no idea. It must be noted that Tesla is the only manufacturer out there that provides the number of vehicles "delivered", not "sold."

My hunch is that with a limited supply of Teslas, Elon Musk holds on to vehicles as long as possible for his own showrooms, etc., but gets the max delivered by the end of the quarter to coincide with quarterly earnings.

We visit the Tesla store often, and just before the end of 4Q17 (December, 2017) there were two Teslas in the showroom (there is room for three): one Model X and one Model S. When we visited just four days into the new quarter, they only had one, the Model S.

When we asked about the Model X, we were told, the Model X had just been leased (which, by the way, is another story - apparently Tesla is leasing more vehicles than selling). When we walked out back where they have five charging stations and have had five Teslas to show for the past few weeks, four days into the new quarter, they had only one. Four of five charging stations were unused. It was clear that this particular showroom had held the max number of Teslas to the end of the quarter (to show) and then "delivered" all but one or two just as the quarter ended.

And, finally, Spotify. Spotify's IPO will be the deal to watch in 2017. But it looks like the deal won't actually be an IPO in the traditional sense. See the linked article for more.