Tag Archives: utility

Public Utility Commission Decisions Will Determine The Future Of Investor Owned Utilities

Investors in utilities should be considering the impact of alternate energy sources on utilities. One of the best way to measure the impact is by looking at the decisions of the Public Utility Commissions and how they respond to alternate energy sources. We look at California market as one example where the Public Utility Commission decisions should discourage utility investments. When electricity rates go up in a region, consumers in that region are quick to blame the local utilities and cast them as villains. This phenomenon is particularly acute when it comes to Investor Owned Utilities. While the IOUs profit motive gets most of the blame, in many regions of the US, utilities operate under some very specific mandates from local Public Utility Commissions. This dynamic did not matter much to utility investors in the past since utilities were in a monopolistic situation and customers did not have much of a choice when it comes to energy sources. However, times are changing and in this era of distributed energy, utility investors should factor in the mindset of the relevant PUCs in determining which utility investments are vulnerable. The concern about utility future is especially acute in states where solar penetration is increasing rapidly. In these states, a local PUC’s response to solar and wind technologies is one very good way to assess whether a utility can do well in its regulatory landscape. In this context, we look at the regulatory landscape in California – a state with the highest solar penetration in the US outside of Hawaii. California Public Utilities Commission, or CPUC, after much contentious dialogue, announced a much awaited new rate design a few weeks back. While not completely unexpected, the rate decision is reflective of ongoing poor rate setting history in California and has severe long term implications for California’s three major Investor Owned Utilities Pacific Gas & Electric (NYSE: PCG ), Southern California Edison [owned by Edison International] (NYSE: EIX ) , San Diego Gas & Electric [owned by Sempra Energy] (NYSE: SRE ) While the decision itself is a long complex document with many nuances, the highlights of the ruling are as follows: – A minimum bill of $10 as opposed to a fixed bill requested by the utilities – Two tiered rate structure with a 25% cost difference between the tiers – A new super user rate for heavy electric users – A relatively accelerated path to TOU rate structures – 4 year glide path to new tiered rate structures Almost all of these decisions, except for the TOU rate structures, while directionally positive compared to the prior rate structures, fall woefully short of what is required to align California electric rates with the market forces. In evaluating the decision, it is instructive to understand the parameters that the PUC set for itself for this rate design. The so-called rate design principles, RDP, adopted by the Commission are as follows: 1. Low-income and medical baseline customers should have access to enough electricity to ensure basic needs (such as health and comfort) are met at an affordable cost; 2. Rates should be based on marginal cost; 3. Rates should be based on cost-causation principles; 4. Rates should encourage conservation and energy efficiency; 5. Rates should encourage reduction of both coincident and non-coincident peak demand; 6. Rates should be stable and understandable and provide customer choice; 7. Rates should generally avoid cross-subsidies, unless the cross-subsidies appropriately support explicit state policy goals; 8. Incentives should be explicit and transparent; 9. Rates should encourage economically efficient decision-making; 10. Transitions to new rate structures should emphasize customer education and outreach that enhances customer understanding and acceptance of new rates, and minimizes and appropriately considers the bill impacts associated with such transitions. What is most ironic about these rate design principles is that many of these goals are in conflict with each other and there is not a single criteria that mentions the goal as delivering low cost long term electricity to consumers. Understandably, a look at the pricing difference between California IOUs and municipal utilities (image below from energy.ca.gov) indicates that CPUC has largely been a failure in delivering low prices to California consumers. (click to enlarge) The root of the problem related to CPUC’s incoherent principles and an over reliance on cost based metrics, instead of market based metrics, in setting utility directives. This poor process has led to historical over investment in assets to justify a higher return to the IOU shareholders. This worked reasonably well for all involved (except customers) as long as there was no competition to the utilities. However, solar energy, and to a lesser degree, wind energy, are dramatically changing the market place dynamics. With many alternate sources of distributed generation accessible to customers, utilities are no longer the energy generating monopolies they used to be. The CPUC, unfortunately, continues to see consumers as subjects that pay the rates they set without considering that the electric generation landscape has changed and the consumer today has choices. CPUC rate structures hide many different subsidies in the form of volumetric rate structures. These subsidies will be problematic to utilities because they are not applied evenly across all the energy sources and will be increasingly coming at the expense of utilities. By being oblivious or nearly completely ignoring market forces, the CPUC is on the course to making utilities a lot less relevant for a big part of its customer base. Given the exponential growth in solar, this subsidy structure will start exacting an increasingly heavier toll on these utilities. The problem, especially in California, is likely to get worse if the PUC continues with its net metering policies and layers in subsidies for battery technologies on top of the already expensive other subsidies. Unless Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric can meaningfully alter this regulatory landscape, their future in California will be threatened. Investors will do well to stay away from these and other utilities that operate in an archaic framework that does not properly recognize the threat of solar to the utility business models. We see Pacific Gas & Electric as one of the highest risk utilities. Our view on PCG: Avoid

Eversource Energy Prepares For Earnings Growth By Alleviating The Northeast’s Energy Shortages

Summary Northeast electric and natural gas utility Eversource Energy reported Q2 earnings that beat on both lines by keeping its costs low even as revenue increased. The company is preparing the groundwork for long-term future earnings growth via multiple large capex projects to import additional electricity and natural gas to ease the region’s supply constraints. Its short-term outlook has been hampered by the development of strong El Nino conditions, which will likely cause Q4 and Q1 temperatures in its service area to be warmer than normal. The company’s shares are trading at low valuations, however, and they will be attractively valued if the price falls below 15x future earnings in response to a warm winter. Northeast electric and natural gas utility Eversource Energy (NYSE: ES ) reported Q2 earnings at the end of July that beat on both lines , as the company’s three major segments all reported strong YoY increases to income. Eversource occupies a unique position as a major utility in the U.S. Northeast, which suffers from a lack of natural gas supply infrastructure following the conversion of many of the region’s coal-fired power plants to natural gas. This shortfall causes the price of natural gas, which is finding increasing use in heating applications as well, to experience substantial volatility during the winter as supply is insufficient to meet both heating and electric generation demand. The utility has been undertaking large-scale transmission projects to minimize this volatility while simultaneously selling unattractive generation assets, both of which will support its planned earnings growth. Its share price has fallen YTD despite these moves, however (see figure). This article evaluates Eversource Energy as a potential long investment opportunity. ES data by YCharts Eversource Energy at a glance Formerly known as Northeast Utilities, Eversource Energy took on its current name and ticker symbol in February 2015. The changes followed the utility’s merger with Massachusetts utility NSTAR in April 2012. Headquartered in Hartford, CT, Eversource Energy provides electric and natural gas utility services to a total of 3.6 million customers in Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts via multiple regulated subsidiaries (all of which now share the Eversource name). The company’s operations are broadly divided into three segments: electric transmission, electric generation and distribution, and natural gas distribution. Its transmission segment includes 4,270 miles of lines in all three of the states located within its service area. Likewise, its generation and distribution segment, which includes 72,000 miles of distribution lines, also operates in all three states. Finally, the natural gas segment, which includes 6,459 miles of pipeline, operates in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Massachusetts became the largest state by population in the company’s service area following the merger and it now provides for 1.4 million electric customers and 283,000 natural gas customers. Connecticut is close behind with 1.2 million electric customers and 222,000 natural gas customers. New Hampshire, on the other hand, only has 510,000 electric customers. The latter’s small number led Eversource to announce in March 2015 that it intends to sell 1,058 MW of electric generating capacity in the state. The majority of the capacity is coal- and oil-fired and the company determined that, given the relatively small customer base in the state, pending environmental regulations on power plants made their continued ownership by it unattractive. New Hampshire’s governor signed off on the divestiture agreement in July. That said, it remains to be seen whether potential buyers will find the agreement’s terms, which includes requiring the buyer to honor the existing collective bargaining agreement and keep the plants open for 18 months post-acquisition, to be too onerous. Even as it is reducing its exposure to generation (Eversource Energy will continue to distribute purchased electricity to its New Hampshire customers), the company is expanding its natural gas and electric transmission segments. Natural gas and heating oil prices moved in opposite directions following the advent of shale gas extraction, with the former falling to a fraction of the latter’s price. While the recent fall in the price of crude has offset the advantage of natural gas to a large degree, customers in the Northeast have been switching from heating oil to gas in large numbers. Eversource, for example, is targeting 16,000 new natural gas customers annually through 2023 via such conversions. This shift has coincided with a broader move by power plants to abandon coal in favor of natural gas, first due to the latter’s low price and more recently to comply with expanding federal regulations on power plant emissions. Natural gas distribution capacity in the Northeast has not managed to keep up with the combined demand effects of this increased consumption. While sufficient supply is achieved in the summer when heaters aren’t running, natural gas shortages and consequent price volatility have been frequent occurrences in the Northeast during the winter months, especially during the type of exceptionally cold winters seen in 2014-15, for example. In an effort to offset increased demand for natural gas by its customers, Eversource Energy is building the high-voltage Northern Pass Transmission [NPT] line that will connect its service area’s electric grid to the Quebec province by way of New Hampshire. The $1.4 billion will construct 187 miles of new transmission lines that will run the length of New Hampshire and, in the process, connect the service area to 1,200 MW of Canadian hydroelectric capacity. The project is still several years away from completion, with the company stating that it doesn’t expect it to be in service until the first half of 2019, assuming that construction begins by the end of 2016. Complementing the Northern Pass project is a natural gas pipeline that Eversource announced late last year in partnership with Spectra Energy (NYSE: SE ). The $3 billion project is actually an expansion of pre-existing pipelines in the Northeast that supply natural gas to 60% of the region’s natural gas-fired power plants. When completed, the Access Northeast project will supply 5,000 MW of gas-fired electric generation capacity with natural gas from the Utica and Marcellus Shale regions, further helping to alleviate the Northeast’s natural gas shortages in the winter. The full expansion is expected to be in service as early as November 2018. Q2 earnings report Eversource Energy reported Q2 revenue of $1.8 billion, up by 8.3% YoY (see table) and beating the consensus estimate by $70 million. The increase came despite lower retail sales across its segments, with electric distribution sales down 0.1% YoY and natural gas sales down 1.2% YoY. Total operating income rose to $412 million from $294 million YoY as operating expenses failed to increase by the same amount as revenue. The company’s O&M costs fell as well, helping to offset an increase to purchased power costs over the same period. Eversource Energy financials (non-adjusted) Q2 2015 Q1 2015 Q4 2014 Q3 2014 Q2 2014 Revenue ($MM) 1,817.1 2,513.4 1,881.1 1,892.5 1,677.6 Gross income ($MM) 1,131.9 1,351.4 1,538.8 1,057.2 950.7 Net income ($MM) 207.5 253.3 221.6 234.6 127.4 Diluted EPS ($) 0.65 0.80 0.70 0.74 0.40 EBITDA ($MM) 588.6 667.0 594.3 606.0 451.7 Source: Morningstar (2015). Net income rose to $209.5 million from $129.2 million YoY, resulting in a diluted EPS of $0.65 versus $0.40 over the same period and beating the consensus estimate by $0.09. The strong earnings result was due to a number of factors related to both the company’s core operations and regulatory changes. Its electric generation and distribution segment fared best, reporting earnings of $121.6 million compared to $83.4 million in the previous year. The gain, which the company attributed to rising revenue and lower O&M expenses, occurred across all of the segment’s subsidiary entities. The electric transmission segment generated earnings of $80.4 million, up from $43.9 million YoY. The gain was almost entirely due to a FERC charge that was accounted for in the company’s Q2 2014 earnings report and was not repeated in the most recent quarter. Finally, the natural gas distribution segment had a slow quarter due to seasonal issues, although its earnings more than doubled from $2 million to $5.3 million YoY as a result of cold weather early in the quarter that resulted in a larger number of heating degree-days. Of Eversource’s total $0.25 YoY gain to diluted EPS, $0.11 was due to the previous year’s FERC charge and $0.10 was due to higher revenues in the most recent quarter. The Q2 earnings were in line with management’s earnings expectations and the company reaffirmed its estimated FY 2015 EPS range of $2.75 to $2.90 during the Q2 earnings call . The company also increased its quarterly dividend by 7.7% YoY to $0.42, resulting in a forward yield of 3.6%. Outlook Eversource Energy’s outlook has been dampened over the last year due to adverse regulatory decisions. The first of these was a decision by Connecticut state regulators to limit the company’s ROE to 9.17% , with 50/50 earnings sharing for the 100 basis points over that amount. This ROE was less than the company had expected and relatively low compared to those permitted for its industry peers. Second, federal regulators recently reduced the company’s transmission ROE from 11.14% to 10.57% . This latter decision in particular is a negative for Eversource given its large investment in new transmission assets. I am also concerned about the weather outlook for the company’s service area over the next six months. This year’s El Nino event is now expected to be one of the strongest on record even if it doesn’t actually set a new record. Previous El Ninos of similar strengths have been characterized by warmer-than-normal winter weather across the northern half of the U.S. that, as far as the eastern seaboard is concerned, pushes as far south as Washington D.C. This year’s event is expected to last into the spring, meaning that Eversource Energy’s service area is likely to experience fewer heating degree-days than normal (and certainly fewer than last year’s bitter winter) during its traditional high-earnings quarters of Q4 and Q1. It should be noted that El Nino’s impacts are not as severe on the eastern seaboard as on the western seaboard and, just as importantly, the forecast is still quite uncertain. That said, investors should not be surprised if the company reports YoY declines for the period from October to March. Eversource Energy’s longer-term outlook is improved by its heavy planned capital expenditures, especially on natural gas pipelines and electric transmission lines. In addition to providing a basis for future rate case increases, the capex is also intended to serve a more fundamental purpose by reducing the Northeast’s notorious natural gas price volatility, particularly in the winter months. As discussed earlier, the widespread replacement of coal in power plants and heating oil in homes by natural gas leads to shortages when temperatures turn colder, resulting in wide price swings in states such as Massachusetts that aren’t reflected by the Henry Hub price (see figure). In addition to being onerous for consumers who find their heating and, more recently, electric bills spiking each autumn and winter, this volatility threatens long-term consumption trends by encouraging consumers to find alternatives. Massachusetts Natural Gas Citygate Price data by YCharts While Eversource’s proposed capex is intended to lay the groundwork for long-term earnings growth via both rate and volume growth, potential investors should be aware that, as a regulated entity, many of these plans are dependent on the support of multiple regulated entities. The Northern Pass project has encountered numerous instances of NIMBYism in sparsely-populated New Hampshire that have driven up its costs by requiring some of the line to be buried, for example, and despite its relatively advanced stage, the company doesn’t expect final permits to be received until the end of 2016. Likewise, while the Access Northeast pipeline has political support due to the history of natural gas shortages in the region, there is always the potential for a combination of NIMBYism and environmental concerns to cause delays and additional expenses. Valuation The consensus analyst estimates for Eversource Energy’s diluted EPS in FY 2015 and FY 2016 have remained relatively flat over the last 90 days as its Q1 and Q2 earnings have largely met expectations. The FY 2015 estimate has increased from $2.85 to $2.87, near the top of management’s expected range, while the FY 2016 estimate has remained flat at $3.04. Based on a share price at the time of writing of $47.47, the company’s shares are trading at a trailing P/E ratio of 16.5x and forward ratios of 16.5x and 15.6x for FY 2015 and FY 2016, respectively. All three of the ratios are near, but not quite at, the bottom of their historical respective ranges since the beginning of 2012, having fallen substantially since the beginning of the year (see figure). ES PE Ratio (TTM) data by YCharts Conclusion Electric and natural gas utility Eversource Energy reported Q2 earnings earlier in the summer that beat on both lines, as its cost-saving efforts offset slight declines to retail volumes. The company is in the midst of a strategic shift following its recent merger that will see it move from electric generation and distribution to electric transmission and natural gas distribution. This is a forward-looking move that, in addition to providing the company with years of large capex to support future rate cases, is aimed at mitigating the natural gas shortages that affect its service area on an annual basis. Furthermore, unlike some logistics projects (the Keystone XL pipeline being the most visible example), neither the Northern Pass nor the Access Northeast projects are likely to be especially offensive to the environmentally-conscious residents of the region, with the former in particular connecting the company’s service area to zero-emission electricity. NIMBYism and opposition to natural gas do create some regulatory uncertainty regarding both projects’ futures, of course, but these are more likely to increase their costs rather than result in their cancellations. The company’s share price is trading at low valuations in terms of both trailing and future earnings. The only thing that prevents me from buying its shares today is the presence of an especially strong El Nino, which increases the likelihood that the company’s service area will experience warmer-than-normal temperatures in Q4 and Q1 2016, especially on a YoY basis. Disappointing earnings results in one or both quarters could cause the company’s shares to fall a bit further, especially if such an announcement follows on the heels of an expected interest rate increase by the Federal Reserve at the end of 2015. It has been more than three years since Eversource Energy’s share price has remained below 15x future earnings for a lengthy period of time, however, and I consider its shares to be an attractive long investment opportunity in the event that they decline below $45.60, or 15x FY 2016 earnings at the time of writing.

FXG: Consumer Staples With Less Of The Consumer Staples

Summary The portfolio for FXG just doesn’t look right to me. The ETF uses fairly low allocations for some core consumer staple holdings. I’d like to see a heavier weighting for companies with massive market share or addictive products because those firms should be able to protect margins better. Investors should be seeking to improve their risk-adjusted returns. I’m a big fan of using ETFs to achieve the risk-adjusted returns relative to the portfolios that a normal investor can generate for themselves after trading costs. One of the funds that I’m considering is the First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF (NYSEARCA: FXG ). I’ll be performing a substantial portion of my analysis along the lines of modern portfolio theory, so my goal is to find ways to minimize costs while achieving diversification to reduce my risk level. Expense Ratio The expense ratio for FXG is a fairly unappealing .67%, which leaves me feeling that there is some substantial room for improvement. Holdings I was able to grab a chart with all of the holdings for FXG: (click to enlarge) Is this really a consumer staples portfolio? Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG ) is only 1.68% of the portfolio? Altria Group (NYSE: MO ) is less than 1% of the portfolio? Costco (NASDAQ: COST ) is entirely absent from the portfolio. Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO ) and Pepsi (NYSE: PEP ) are entirely absent. When I’m looking at an ETF of consumer staples, I want to see products that people are going to buy regardless of what is happening in the economy. I’m not a fan of smoking, but I wouldn’t mind a substantial allocation to tobacco. For that matter, I would prefer a portfolio built on companies that have enormous market share and sell addictive products. The fundamental goal of creating a consumer staples allocation in the portfolio is to provide the portfolio with more protection from weakness in the economy. Despite the challenges with firms missing, I do think a large allocation to Tyson Foods (NYSE: TSN ) and ConAgra Foods (NYSE: CAG ) does make sense. There has been enough concentration in this part of the industry that the major players are controlling a large part of the market and are unlikely to be forced to take major price cuts even if the market enters another recession. Building the Portfolio This hypothetical portfolio has a moderately aggressive allocation for the middle-aged investor. Only 25% of the total portfolio value is placed in bonds and a fifth of that bond allocation is given to high-yield bonds. If the investor wants to treat an investment in an mREIT index as an investment in the underlying bonds that the individual mREITs hold, then the total bond allocation would be 35%. Given how substantially mREITs can deviate from book value, I’d rather consider the allocation as an equity position designed to create a very high yield. This portfolio is probably taking on more risk than would be appropriate for many retiring investors since a major recession could still hit this pretty hard. If the investor wanted to modify the portfolio to be more appropriate for retirement, the first place to start would be increasing the bond exposure at the cost of equity. However, the diversification within the portfolio is fairly solid. Long-term treasuries work nicely with major market indexes, and I’ve designed this hypothetical portfolio without putting in the allocation I normally would for equity REITs. An allocation is created for the mortgage REITs, which can offer some fairly nice diversification relative to the rest of the portfolio and they are a major source of yield in this hypothetical portfolio. The portfolio assumes frequent rebalancing which would be a problem for short-term trading outside of tax advantaged accounts unless the investor was going to rebalance by adding to their positions on a regular basis and allocating the majority of the capital towards whichever portions of the portfolio had been underperforming recently. Because a substantial portion of the yield from this portfolio comes from REITs and interest, I would favor this portfolio as a tax exempt strategy even if the investor was frequently rebalancing by adding new capital. The portfolio allocations can be seen below along with the dividend yields from each investment: Name Ticker Portfolio Weight Yield SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY 35.00% 2.06% Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY 10.00% 1.36% First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG 10.00% 1.60% Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO 5.00% 3.17% First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU 5.00% 3.77% SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK 5.00% 5.45% PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW 20.00% 2.22% iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM 10.00% 14.45% Portfolio 100.00% 3.53% The next chart shows the annualized volatility and beta of the portfolio since April of 2012: (click to enlarge) A Quick Rundown of the Portfolio Using SJNK offers investors better yields from using short-term exposure to credit-sensitive debt. The yield on this is fairly nice, and due to the short duration of the securities, the volatility isn’t too bad. PLW on the other hand does have some material volatility, but a negative correlation to other investments allows it to reduce the total risk of the portfolio. FXG is used to make the portfolio overweight on consumer staples with a goal of providing more stability to the equity portion of the portfolio. FXU is used to create a small utility allocation for the portfolio to give it a higher dividend yield and help it produce more income. I find the utility sector often has some desirable risk characteristics that make it worth at least considering for an overweight representation in a portfolio. VWO is simply there to provide more diversification from being an international equity portfolio. While giving investors exposure to emerging markets, it is also offering a very solid dividend yield that enhances the overall income level from the portfolio. XLY offers investors higher expected returns in a solid economy at the cost of higher risk. Using it as more than a small weighting would result in too much risk for the portfolio, but as a small weighting, the diversification it offers relative to the core holding of SPY is eliminating most of the additional risk. REM is primarily there to offer a substantial increase in the dividend yield which is otherwise not very strong. The mREIT sector can be subject to some pretty harsh movements, and dividends from mREITs should not be the core source of income for an investor. However, they can be used to enhance the level of dividend income while investors wait for their other equity investments to increase dividends over the coming decades. If you want a really quick version to refer back to, I put together the following chart that really simplifies the role of each investment: Name Ticker Role in Portfolio SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF SPY Core of Portfolio Consumer Discretionary Select Sector SPDR ETF XLY Enhance Expected Returned First Trust Consumer Staples AlphaDEX ETF FXG Reduce Beta of Portfolio Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF VWO Exposure to Foreign Markets First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX ETF FXU Enhance Dividends, Lower Portfolio Risk SPDR Barclays Capital Short Term High Yield Bond ETF SJNK Low Volatility with over 5% Yield PowerShares 1-30 Laddered Treasury Portfolio ETF PLW Negative Beta Reduces Portfolio Risk iShares Mortgage Real Estate Capped ETF REM Enhance Current Income Risk Contribution The risk contribution category demonstrates the amount of the portfolio’s volatility that can be attributed to that position. Despite TLT being fairly volatile and tying SPY for the second highest volatility in the portfolio, it actually produces a negative risk contribution because it has a negative correlation with most of the portfolio. It is important to recognize that the “risk” on an investment needs to be considered in the context of the entire portfolio. To make it easier to analyze how risky each holding would be in the context of the portfolio, I have most of these holdings weighted at a simple 10%. Because of TLT’s heavy negative correlation, it receives a weighting of 20% and as the core of the portfolio SPY was weighted as 50%. Correlation The chart below shows the correlation of each ETF with each other ETF in the portfolio. Blue boxes indicate positive correlations and tan box indicate negative correlations. Generally speaking lower levels of correlation are highly desirable and high levels of correlation substantially reduce the benefits from diversification. (click to enlarge) Conclusion FXG has resisted weakness in the market as demonstrated by both the lower annual volatility and the lower max “drawdown” of -9.8% relative to the market’s worst performance of -11.9%. Despite that, the portfolio composition simply does not match the way I would want the consumer staples exposure constructed. Simply put, the portfolio does not offer strong enough allocations to some of the companies that have both enormous market share and addictive products. Heavy allocations to a few food companies look solid, but I’d rather see less of the convenience stores and more of the major retail low cost leaders such as Costco and Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT ). Even if WMT is having a rough time lately, it is a long-lived dividend champion with a large market share and powerful economies of scale. Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. (More…) I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Additional disclosure: Information in this article represents the opinion of the analyst. All statements are represented as opinions, rather than facts, and should not be construed as advice to buy or sell a security. Ratings of “outperform” and “underperform” reflect the analyst’s estimation of a divergence between the market value for a security and the price that would be appropriate given the potential for risks and returns relative to other securities. The analyst does not know your particular objectives for returns or constraints upon investing. All investors are encouraged to do their own research before making any investment decision. Information is regularly obtained from Yahoo Finance, Google Finance, and SEC Database. If Yahoo, Google, or the SEC database contained faulty or old information it could be incorporated into my analysis.