Connect with us

Published

on

Pipes run along a technical facility for compressing natural gas on the site of astora GmbH’s Rehden natural gas storage facility, the largest in Western Europe.

Picture Alliance | Picture Alliance | Getty Images

The European Union Monday concluded two months of heated talks over how to protect households from rising energy prices — but some analysts argue the bloc’s solution is unsustainable and might not withstand the realities of a 2023 gas supply crunch.

EU members compromised by adopting a “dynamic” cap on the price that can be bid for front-month gas contracts on Europe’s benchmark trading facility.

The level at which the cap is triggered was lowered to 180 euros per megawatt hour, after an initial proposal of 275 euros per megawatt hour was criticized as far too high by countries including Poland, Spain and Greece.

The 180 euro limit must be surpassed for three working days on the Dutch Title Transfer Facility (TTF), and it must be 35 euros per megawatt above the global reference price for liquefied natural gas over the same period.

Several conditions were inserted to allay the concerns of members such as Germany, which had argued that the scheme could result in gas shortages next year. These clauses prompt an automatic suspension of the cap and include the dynamic bidding rate dropping below 180 euros per megawatt hour for three consecutive working days, or the European Commission declaring an emergency.

Germany eventually voted in favor of the so-called “market correction mechanism,” but the Netherlands and Austria abstained.

EU's proposed gas price cap could be 'very harmful' for supply chains, Dutch energy minister says

Austria’s ministry for climate action said in a Tuesday statement that while it was “confident that the market correction mechanism can play an important role to avoid extreme spikes in European gas prices, the last minute extension of the mechanism on more gas hubs than the TTF does issue some concerns.”

The ministry noted that “there are some risks that the necessary safeguards are undermined by this extension.” Austria depends on Russian gas.

Rob Jetten, Dutch energy minister, said that the mechanism remained “unsafe” despite the latest improvements. He flagged that it could disrupt the European energy market, risk security of supply and have wider financial implications.

“From its inception, we have been very clear about this mechanism: it does not solve the core problem,” he said, adding that the Netherlands’ concerns were shared by the European Central Bank and by ICE (Intercontinental Exchange)the operator of the key natural-gas market in Europe.

The ECB earlier this month said “the current design of the proposed market correction mechanism may, in some circumstances, jeopardize financial stability in the euro area.” It declined to provide further comment to CNBC following the EU announcement.

ICE said in a statement it had “consistently voiced concerns” about the destabilizing impact of a price cap. It added that it would now review the details of the EU announcement to see whether it “can continue to operate fair and orderly markets for TTF from the Netherlands as per our European regulatory obligations.”

Europe's gas price cap will not result in lower prices for consumers, says RBC's Helima Croft

Easy to overturn?

The EU argued the mechanism will be monitored regularly and can be stopped if financial stressors or supply challenges are raised, in response to concerns flagged by the likes of the ECB.

Analysts told CNBC that these conditions called into question the ability of the mechanism to limit energy price rises.

“It reflects the challenge between strong rhetoric and the realities of the security of supply,” Nathan Piper, head of oil and gas research at Investec, said by phone. “It’s a cap, but allows them to operate above the cap if they really need the gas. The fact on the ground is, if you need the gas, you will pay any price, which is what Europe did in 2022.”

Piper listed two possible areas of additional upcoming demand: China and Europe. Beijing this month abruptly relaxed the zero-Covid policy it pursued this year. Europe has meanwhile managed to get its gas stores near-full for this winter by continuing to import Russian gas supplies — but plans to drop this intake drastically in 2023.

Europe and Asia remain net oil and gas importers, Piper continued, which means that intense competition for spot cargoes lies ahead. Around 70% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is tied up in long-term contracts, leaving 30% available on a spot basis.

In a Tuesday interview with Reuters, Norway’s prime minister Jonas Gahr Støre said he did not expect more Norwegian LNG to be exported outside of Europe as a result of the new EU measure.

But Piper said, “There is no motivation for spot LNG carriers [other] than the highest price. So volumes could go up elsewhere, and [European] security would be jeopardized.”

Janko Lukac, senior analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, echoed this sentiment to CNBC: “The efficiency of an unilateral cap on purchase prices from the EU is highly uncertain.”

“LNG markets globally and structurally will be short for the next couple of years. Hence, if an international buyer is willing to pay a higher price, Europe runs the risk that the respective volumes will go to another buyer,” he said.

Long-term measures

Energy Minister Rob Jetten said it was more important for the EU to focus on its electricity savings targets, on joint gas purchasing agreements and on issuing faster permits for renewable energy schemes.

Ending energy dependency was the key reason why Pavel Molchanov, managing director for renewable energy at wealth management firm Raymond James, said the mechanism was a “stop-gap measure.”

“The solution for Europe will be to diversify its energy mix away from fossil fuels entirely,” Molchanov told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” Tuesday.

“As it stands, about 20% of Europe’s electricity comes from natural gas, 10% comes from coal. Both of these commodities are up dramatically as a result of the war, and the Kremlin’s weaponization of energy exports.”

Energy transition solutions — such as wind, solar and green hydrogen, as well as increasing energy efficiency and removing coal from the electricity mix — could be put on an accelerated timetable to rid Europe of natural gas concerns within five years, he said.

Ending the war premium

EU ministers in favor of the mechanism were upbeat about its impact.

Kadri Simson, European commissioner for energy, said the initiative would “take away the war premium, the mark-up compared to global LNG prices, that Europe pays” due to pricing on the Dutch TTF.

Tinne Van der Straeten, Belgium’s energy minister, said the move would ensure security of supply while protecting citizens and the economy from higher prices.

Investec’s Nathan Piper also said that there were strong reasons why Europe needed to bring down gas prices beyond the strain on households.

“Very high gas prices for multiple years will have major impacts on the competitiveness of European industry. The U.S. gas price is a fraction of Europe’s because they are self-sufficient, so industry could move to where input costs are lower,” he said. “That means a long-term risk for Europe and the U.K. if energy costs can’t come down.”

Continue Reading

Environment

Here’s what TSLA analysts are saying about Tesla’s big delivery miss

Published

on

By

Here's what TSLA analysts are saying about Tesla's big delivery miss

Most Wall Street analysts covering Tesla’s stock (TSLA) badly misread the automaker’s delivery volumes this quarter. Some of them have started releasing notes to clients following Tesla’s production and delivery results.

Here’s what they have to say:

According to Tesla-compiled analyst consensus, the automaker was expected to report “377,592 deliveries” in the first quarter.

Tesla confirmed yesterday that it delivered only 336,000 electric vehicles during the first three months of 2025.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

  • Cantor Fitzgerald was the first analyst firm to issue a note after the release. They reaffirmed their overweight rating with a $425 price target. As we previously reported, Cantor has some major conflicts of interest with Tesla and CEO Elon Musk.
  • Truist Securities maintained its hold rating on Tesla’s stock, but it greatly lowered its price target from $373 to $280 a share. They insist that while their earnings expectations have crashed because they overestimated deliveries, investors should focus on Tesla’s self-driving effort, which they see as “much more important for the long-term value of the stock.”
  • Goldman Sachs lowered its price target from $320 to $275 a share. The firm expected 375,000 deliveries from Tesla in Q1 and therefore had to adjust its earnings expectations with almost 40,000 fewer deliveries.
  • Wedbush‘s Dan Ives, one of Tesla’s biggest cheerleaders, called the delivery results “disastrous”, but he reiterated his $550 price target on Tesla’s stock.
  • UBS has reiterated its $225 price target which it had lowered last month after adjusting its delivery expectations in Q1 to 367,000 – one of the more accurate predictions on Wall Street.
  • CFRA‘s analyst Garrett Nelson reduced his price target from $385 to $360 a share.

Electrek’s Take

I find it funny that most of them are maintaining or barely changing their expectations after they were so wrong about Tesla in Q1.

If you were so wrong in Q1, you should expect to be incorrect also for the rest of the year, and readjust accordingly.

But Cantor is invested in Tesla, and the firm is owned by Elon’s friend, who happens to now be the secretary of commerce. Truist still believes Elon’s self-driving lies, Goldman Sachs overestimated Tesla’s deliveries by the equivalent of $2 billion in revenues, and Dan Ives is Dan Ives.

Covering Tesla over the last 15 years has confirmed to me that most Wall Street analysts have no idea what they are doing – or at least not when it comes to companies like Tesla.

Do you know any who have been consistently good lately? I’d love suggestions in the comment section below.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Fintech stocks such as Affirm, PayPal plunge on concern Trump tariffs will hurt consumer spending

Published

on

By

Fintech stocks such as Affirm, PayPal plunge on concern Trump tariffs will hurt consumer spending

The global market rout on Thursday, sparked by President Donald Trump’s announcement of widespread tariffs, had an outsized effect on fintech companies and credit card issuers that are closely tied to consumer spending and credit.

Affirm, which offers buy now, pay later purchasing options, plunged 19%, while stock trading app Robinhood slid 10% and payments company PayPal fell 8%. American Express and Capital One each tumbled 10%, and Discover was down more than 8%.

President Trump on Wednesday laid out the U.S. “reciprocal tariff” rates that more than 180 countries and territories, including European Union members, will face under his sweeping new trade policy. Trump said his plan will set a 10% baseline tariff across the board, but that number is much higher for some countries.

The announcement sent stocks reeling, wiping out nearly $2 trillion in value from the S&P 500, and pushing the tech-heavy Nasdaq down 6%, its worst day since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.

The sell-off was especially notable for companies most exposed to consumer spending and global supply chains, including payment providers and lenders. Fintech companies that rely on transaction volume or installment-based lending could see both revenue and credit performance deteriorate.

“When you go down the spectrum, that’s when you have more cyclical risk, more exposure to tariffs,” said Sanjay Sakhrani, an analyst at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, citing PayPal and Affirm as businesses at risk. He said bigger companies in the space “are more defensive” and better positioned.

Visa, Mastercard and Fiserv held up better on Thursday.

Dan Dolev, an analyst at Mizuho, said bank processors such as Fiserv are less exposed to tariff volatility.

“It’s considered a safe haven,” he said.

Affirm executives have previously said rising prices might increase demand for their products. Chief Financial Officer Rob O’Hare said higher prices could push more consumers toward buy now, pay later services.

“If tariffs result in higher prices for consumers, we’re there to help,” O’Hare said at a Stocktwits fireside chat last month. Affirm CEO Max Levchin has offered similar comments.

However, James Friedman, an analyst at SIG, told CNBC that delinquencies become a concern. He compared Affirm to private-label store cards, and pointed to historical trends in credit performance during downturns, noting that “private label delinquency rates run roughly double” in a recession when compared to traditional credit cards.

“You have to look at who’s overexposed to discretionary,” he said.

Affirm did not provide a comment but pointed to recent remarks from its executives.

Continue Reading

Environment

Mazda’s $20,000 Chinese EV is about to launch overseas and a new SUV is up next

Published

on

By

Mazda's ,000 Chinese EV is about to launch overseas and a new SUV is up next

Wait, Mazda sells a real EV? It’s only in China for now, but that will change very soon. The first Mazda 6e built for overseas markets rolled off the assembly line Thursday. Mazda’s new EV will arrive in Europe, Southeast Asia, and other overseas markets later this year. This could be the start of something with a new SUV due out next.

Mazda’s new EV rolls off assembly for overseas markets

The Mazda EZ-6 has been on sale in China since October with prices starting as low as 139,800 yuan, or slightly under $20,000.

Earlier this year, Mazda introduced the 6e, the global version of its electric car sold in China. The stylish electric sedan is made by Changan Mazda, Mazda’s joint venture in China.

After the first Mazda 6e model rolled off the production line at the company’s Nanjing Plant, Mazda said it’s ready to “conquer the new era of electrification with China Smart Manufacturing.”

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The new global “6e” model will be built at Changan Mazda’s plant and exported to overseas markets including Europe, Thailand, and other parts of Southeast Asia.

Mazda calls it “both a Chinese car and a global car,” with Changan’s advanced EV tech and Mazda’s signature design.

Mazda-first-EV-overseas
Mazda 6e electric sedan during European debut (Source: Changan Mazda)

Built on Changan’s hybrid platform, the EZ-6 is offered in China with both electric (EV) and extended-range (EREV) powertrains. The EV version has a CLTC driving range of up to 600 km (372 miles) and can fast charge (30% to 80%) in about 15 minutes.

Mazda’s new EV will be available with two battery options in Europe: 68.8 kWh or 80 kWh. The larger (80 kWh) battery gets up to 552 km (343 miles) WLTP range, while the 68.8 kWh version is rated with up to 479 km (300 miles) range on the WLTP rating scale.

At 4,921 mm long, 1,890 mm wide, and 1,491 mm tall, the Mazda 6e is about the size of a Tesla Model 3 (4,720 mm long, 1,922 mm wide, and 1,441 mm tall).

Mazda said the successful rollout of the 6e kicks off “the official launch of Changan Mazda’s new energy vehicle export center” for global markets.

The company will launch a new SUV next year and plans to introduce a third and fourth new energy vehicle (NEV).

Although prices will be announced closer to launch, Mazda’s global EV will not arrive with the same $20,000 price tag in Europe as it will face tariffs as an export from China. Mazda is expected to launch the 6e later this year in Europe and Southeast Asia. Check back soon for more info.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending