Connect with us

Published

1 year ago

on

Omar Marques | Lightrocket | Getty Images

Goldman Sachs abandoned an ill-fated push into consumer banking in late 2022, but an investment in a Texas energy retailer means its reach into American homes is about to grow.

Rhythm Energy, a Houston-based electricity provider overseen and owned by a Goldman Sachs private equity fund, has won approval from federal authorities to expand from its home market into the more than dozen states where deregulated power firms operate, CNBC has learned.

That covers energy networks, mostly in the Northeast, that provide electricity for 190 million Americans, according to federal data.

The idea that a Goldman-linked company aims to make waves by providing an essential service to Americans could invite scrutiny on the bank and its efforts to grow revenue though so-called alternative investments. It also gets Goldman into an industry, albeit through an intermediary, that critics have called a hotbed of consumer abuse.

Bad actors

A wave of energy deregulation that began in the 1990s gave rise to a new group of retailers promising savings versus existing utilities. State attorneys general, consumer groups and industry watchdogs have alleged that some of these retailers use deceptive marketing and billing practices to saddle customers with higher costs. One estimate is that customers paid $19.2 billion more than they needed to in deregulated states over a decade.

Rhythm, which calls itself the biggest independent green energy provider in Texas, positions itself as an honest company in a field of less scrupulous players. The startup, which began offering retail energy plans to Texans in 2021, avoids the teaser rates and hidden fees of rivals, it has said.

“While some of our competitors like to charge up to 18 hidden fees, we’re proud to charge exactly 0,” Rhythm says on its website.

But Rhythm’s Texas customers paid an average rate of 18 cents per kilowatt hour in 2022, five cents per hour more than what customers of the state’s regulated providers paid, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That figure doesn’t include the impact of credits provided to solar customers, which reduces their costs, according to a person with knowledge of the company who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record.

Source: Rythym

Although there have been “bad actors” in the residential power field, there have also been “great retailers with innovative products,” James Bride, an energy consultant, said in an interview. “Realizing the potential there depends on ethical company behavior.”

Nothing found in online reviews, interviews with current and former customers and conversations with watchdogs contradicts Rhythm’s claims of fair dealings and good service.

“Goldman Sachs invests in numerous industries across our private funds on behalf of clients,” a spokeswoman for the New York-based bank said in response to this article. “Many of those companies operate businesses that serve retail customers. This is not new.”

Goldman’s growth engine

Goldman’s record of dealings with the American consumer is checkered: The bank was accused of profiting off the 2008 housing bubble by betting against subprime securities. Years later, the bank named its consumer effort Marcus in part to distance itself from that memory. But the consumer division was dragged down by ballooning losses, a talent exodus and unwanted regulatory attention.

Goldman CEO David Solomon has now hitched his fortunes to the bank’s asset management division, calling it the “growth engine” after the retail banking bust. As part of that effort, Goldman aims to raise more client money for private equity funds to help his goal of generating $10 billion in fees this year.

Private equity firms have transformed the energy landscape in the nation’s largest power markets. For instance, in the PJM zone including Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland, private capital owns about 60% of the fossil fuel generators and enjoy less regulatory oversight than legacy utilities, according to an August report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

“Ownership status is important,” the report’s author Dennis Wamsted wrote. “Utilities are overseen by state regulators who have a vested interest in keeping costs for ratepayers in check; private capital is largely free from that oversight.”

Rhythm, which buys energy on wholesale markets and sells it to consumers, first appeared in headlines in November, after its application to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission surfaced.

The move made Goldman Sachs, via its private equity arm, one of the first Wall Street firms involved in selling retail energy contracts to households, according to Tyson Slocum, energy and climate director of consumer watchdog Public Citizen.

Possible conflict?

Slocum noted that Goldman’s trading arm deals in energy contracts and owns, along with other creditors, a fleet of fossil fuel generators along the Northeast corridor, while a separate division formed a solar power firm named MN8 Energy. The possibility of influence over retail sales, energy generation and trading in power contracts could lead to abuses, he said.

“Goldman knows how to execute, they own and operate energy assets and they’re involved in the futures and physical market,” Slocum said. “They’ll be able to manage this well. Will the customers do as well? I’m not convinced.”

Goldman has “strict information barriers between its public and private businesses” that prevent such self-dealing, the company spokeswoman said.

In a statement provided to CNBC, Rhythm CEO P.J. Popovic said his firm “has never purchased power from Goldman Sachs or any Goldman Sachs owned or affiliated power generation asset, nor has Rhythm ever purchased physical or financial power from Goldman Sachs or any of its affiliates in the commodity markets.”

Rhythm operates “autonomously” from West Street Capital Partners, the Goldman Sachs private equity fund that is listed in federal filings as an owner, according to the person who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record for the company.

Still, Goldman Sachs has been involved with Rhythm since the year it was founded in 2020, and the bank has placed at least one director on Rhythm’s board, a typical arrangement in the private equity industry, according to this person.

Private equity funds can exert influence on portfolio companies in a number of ways, including by hiring and firing of CEOs and signing off on acquisitions and company sales, according to Columbia Business School finance professor Michael Ewens.

But the main focus of Goldman Sachs managers — ensuring a profitable result for investors of West Street Capital Partners and boosting the odds they will participate in future rounds — should instill discipline in its stewardship of companies, Ewens added.

“People tend to think a lot of bad things about private equity, but Goldman is always going to have one overriding concern,” Ewens said. “Will somebody buy this company for more than they paid for it five years from now?”

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Environment

Solar and wind industry faces up to $7 billion tax hike under Trump’s big bill, trade group says

Published

2 hours ago

on

June 30, 2025

By

Solar and wind industry faces up to billion tax hike under Trump's big bill, trade group says

Witthaya Prasongsin | Moment | Getty Images

Senate Republicans are threatening to hike taxes on clean energy projects and abruptly phase out credits that have supported the industry’s expansion in the latest version of President Donald Trump‘s big spending bill.

The measures, if enacted, would jeopardize hundreds of thousands of construction jobs, hurt the electric grid, and potentially raise electricity prices for consumers, trade groups warn.

The Senate GOP released a draft of the massive domestic spending bill over the weekend that imposes a new tax on renewable energy projects if they source components from foreign entities of concern, which basically means China. The bill also phases out the two most important tax credits for wind and solar power projects that enter service after 2027.

Republicans are racing to pass Trump’s domestic spending legislation by a self-imposed Friday deadline. The Senate is voting Monday on amendments to the latest version of the bill.

The tax on wind and solar projects surprised the renewable energy industry and feels punitive, said John Hensley, senior vice president for market analysis at the American Clean Power Association. It would increase the industry’s burden by an estimated $4 billion to $7 billion, he said.

“At the end of the day, it’s a new tax in a package that is designed to reduce the tax burden of companies across the American economy,” Hensley said. The tax hits any wind and solar project that enters service after 2027 and exceeds certain thresholds for how many components are sourced from China.

This combined with the abrupt elimination of the investment tax credit and electricity production tax credit after 2027 threatens to eliminate 300 gigawatts of wind and solar projects over the next 10 years, which is equivalent to about $450 billion worth of infrastructure investment, Hensley said.

“It is going to take a huge chunk of the development pipeline and either eliminate it completely or certainly push it down the road,” Hensley said. This will increase electricity prices for consumers and potentially strain the electric grid, he said.

The construction industry has warned that nearly 2 million jobs in the building trades are at risk if the energy tax credits are terminated and other measures in budget bill are implemented. Those credits have supported a boom in clean power installations and clean technology manufacturing.

“If enacted, this stands to be the biggest job-killing bill in the history of this country,” said Sean McGarvey, president of North America’s Building Trades Unions, in a statement. “Simply put, it is the equivalent of terminating more than 1,000 Keystone XL pipeline projects.”

The Senate legislation is moving toward a “worst case outcome for solar and wind,” Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco told clients in a Sunday note.

Shares of NextEra Energy, the largest renewable developer in the U.S., fell 2%. Solar stocks Array Technologies fell 8%, Enphase lost nearly 2% and Nextracker tumbled 5%.

Trump’s former advisor Elon Musk slammed the Senate legislation over the weekend.

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country,” The Tesla CEO posted on X. “Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

Catch up on the latest energy news from CNBC Pro:

Continue Reading

Environment

Nissan is in crisis mode as job cuts begin and suppliers are caught in the crosshairs

Published

3 hours ago

on

June 30, 2025

By

Nissan is in crisis mode as job cuts begin and suppliers are caught in the crosshairs

Nissan-delays-supplier-payments

Is Nissan raising the red flag? Nissan is cutting about 15% of its workforce and is now asking suppliers for more time to make payments.

Nissan starts job cuts, asks supplier to delay payments

As part of its recovery plan, Nissan announced in May that it plans to cut 20,000 jobs, or around 15% of its global workforce. It’s also closing several factories to free up cash and reduce costs.

Nissan said it will begin talks with employees at its Sunderland plant in the UK this week about voluntary retirement opportunities. The company is aiming to lay off around 250 workers.

The Sunderland plant is the largest employer in the city with around 6,000 workers and is critical piece to Nissan’s comeback. Nissan will build its next-gen electric vehicles at the facility, including the new LEAF, Juke, and Qashqai.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

According to several emails and company documents (via Reuters), Nissan is also working with its suppliers to for more time to make payments.

Nissan-delays-supplier-payments
The new Nissan LEAF (Source: Nissan)

“They could choose to be paid immediately or opt for a later payment,” Nissan said. The company explained in a statement to Reuters that it had incentivized some of its suppliers in Europe and the UK to accept more flexible payment terms, at no extra cost.

The emails show that the move would free up cash for the first quarter (April to June), similar to its request before the end of the financial year.

Nissan-delays-supplier-payments
Nissan N7 electric sedan (Source: Dongfeng Nissan)

One employee said in an email to co-workers that Nissan was asking suppliers “again” to delay payments. The emails, viewed by Reuters, were exchanged between Nissan workers in Europe and the United Kingdom.

Nissan is taking immediate action as part of its recovery plan, aiming to turn things around, the company said in a statement.

Nissan-Micra-EV
The new Nissan Micra EV (Source: Nissan)

“While we are taking these actions, we aim for sufficient liquidity to weather the costs of the turnaround actions and redeem bond maturities,” the company said.

Nissan didn’t comment on the internal discussions, but the emails did reveal it gave suppliers two options. They could either delay payments at a higher interest rate, or HSBC would make the payment, and Nissan would repay the bank with interest.

Nissan-delays-supplier-payments
Nissan’s upcoming lineup for the US, including the new LEAF EV and “Adventure Focused” SUV (Source: Nissan)

The company had 2.2 trillion yen ($15.2 billion) in cash and equivalents at the end of March, but it has around 700 billion yen ($4.9 billion) in debt that’s due later this year.

As part of Re:Nissan, the Japanese automaker’s recovery plan, Nissan looks to cut costs by 250 billion yen. By fiscal year 2026, it plans to return to profitability.

Electrek’s Take

With an aging vehicle lineup and a wave of new low-cost rivals from China, like BYD, Nissan is quickly falling behind.

Nissan is launching several new electric and hybrid vehicles over the next few years, including the next-gen LEAF, which is expected to help boost sales.

In China, the world’s largest EV market, Nissan’s first dedicated electric sedan, the N7, is off to a hot start with over 20,000 orders in 50 days.

The N7 will play a role in Nissan’s recovery efforts as it plans to export it to overseas markets. It will be one of nine new energy vehicles, including EVs and PHEVs, that Nissan plans to launch in China.

Can Nissan turn things around? Or will it continue falling behind the pack? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

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

Continue Reading

Environment

Elon Musk said to bet on Tesla delivering Robotaxi in June, yet those who did just lost big

Published

4 hours ago

on

June 30, 2025

By

Elon Musk said to bet on Tesla delivering Robotaxi in June, yet those who did just lost big

Elon Musk Tesla Money hero

Elon Musk said just a few weeks ago that betting on Tesla delivering its promised Robotaxi in June is a “money-making opportunity,” and yet, those who listened to him just lost big.

A fan of Musk lost $50,000 betting on Tesla Robotaxi.

With the rise in prediction markets, you can bet on virtually everything these days.

Sites like Polymarket have about a dozen prediction markets related to Tesla, where anyone can bet on events such as Tesla delivering its robotaxi service.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

There have been a couple of specific markets about that, and Musk directly commented on one titled “Will Tesla launch a driverless Robotaxi service before July?:

Less than two weeks ago, the market gave Tesla only a 14% chance of launching the service, and Musk called it a “money-making opportunity.”

At the time, less than $500,000 was traded on this market, but Musk made it way more popular.

Now, over $7 million has been traded on this market, and while Tesla claims to have launched its Robotaxi service on June 22nd, the market currently gives Tesla less than 1% chance today, with less than a day left in June.

Each prediction market has clear “resolution” rules and Musk evidently didn’t read them before suggesting there was money to be made betting “yes”:

This market will resolve to “Yes” if Tesla publicly launches a fully driverless taxi service by June 30, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, it will resolve to “No.”

Any service that allows a member of the general public to summon and ride in a Tesla vehicle operating without any human—onboard or remote—actively controlling the vehicle will count. A human may be present in the vehicle or monitoring remotely for emergency intervention, but they must not be physically positioned to take control (for example, no safety driver in the driver’s seat) and must not actively steer, brake, accelerate, or otherwise drive the car under normal operation.

A program that is restricted to Tesla employees, invite-only testers, closed-beta participants, factory self-delivery features, or the mere release of Full Self-Driving software for private owner-drivers will not qualify. Regulatory permits or approvals, press demonstrations, and prototype unveilings without live public ridership likewise will not count toward resolution.

This market’s resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.

There are a few things in the resolution that disqualify what Tesla launched on June 22nd. First off, there’s a human inside the vehicle ready to take control with their finger on a kill switch. We have already seen interventions from the in-car Tesla supervisor, who are still very much necessary.

Secondly, the resolution requires a launch that is not restricted to an invite-only basis, which is currently the case.

The level of remote operations could also prove challenging to confirm, and it is part of the resolution.

Electrek found someone who lost $50,000 following Musk’s “money-making opportunity”:

Someone else has lost $28,000 and is now betting another $27,000 that Tesla will achieve this by the end of July.

Currently, Polymarket‘s odds only put a 21% chance of Tesla delivering on the service based on the previously mentioned resolution before August:

There’s another market predicting if “Tesla launches unsupervised full self-driving (FSD) by the end of 2025” that has arguably an even more restrictive resolution, and it currently gives it a 59% chance of happening:

With Polymarket, users are not really “betting” on an outcome, but they are trying to beat the current odds by buying shares in “yes” or “no”, which they can sell to other users before the end of the timeline.

Electrek’s Take

It’s quite amusing that Musk was so confident people would believe in his Robotaxi that he didn’t bother to investigate what other people think an actual robotaxi service would entail, like in the Polymarket resolution.

Historically speaking, you are way better off betting against whatever timeline Musk claims about self-driving. He has been consistently wrong about it for a decade now.

Polymarket even has a market about Tesla launching unsupervised self-driving in California this year. I threw some money in that one because California has much stricter regulations when it comes to self-driving, and it requires a lot of testing before being deployed, as described in the resolution.

I doubt Tesla can go through that this year, but it’s not impossible.

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

Continue Reading

Trending