Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free
Analyst
Chris Ellinghaus
Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2024 Q4 – 2026 Q1 (6 quarters; questions recorded in 3).
- Questions
- 8on tracked calls
- Challenge rate
- 0%none of 8 questionsLimited sample
- Companies
- 2questioned at least once
- Reporting periods
- 3with questions
These figures cover the whole profile: every tracked question, all reporting periods.
How to read these numbers
Challenge rate is the share of questions that pushed back, pressed for specifics or questioned management’s assumptions. It describes how questions were asked on the calls tracked here; it does not measure whether any view turned out to be right.
Rounding. Rates are rounded to whole percentages, so a small share can show as 0% even when some questions were challenging. The count beside each rate is exact; “none of N questions” means no question was challenging.
No questions recorded. “—” means there is nothing to calculate: no questions were recorded for that period on the calls tracked here. It does not mean there was no activity.
Fewer than 3 questions. A company-level rate is withheld when fewer than 3 questions were recorded for that company; the questions are still counted everywhere else.
Small samples. Profiles with fewer than 10 questions are marked Limited sample.
Reporting periods. Questions are grouped by the calendar quarter each company’s fiscal reporting period maps to, not by the date of the call. Periods without a calendar mapping are listed separately under their fiscal label.
Questions asked
Grouped by company, most questions first. Open a company to read its questions, newest reporting period first.
Showing 8 of 8 questions from 2 companies
PNWPinnacle West5 questions · 2 reporting periods · 0 of 5 challenging
Calendar 2025 Q4
is it just the formula rates being effective or do you also need to have some greater clarity on, say, what's in the committed queue
Show response
Ted said it's almost entirely about recovery mechanism consistency, not demand visibility. They have good view of committed demand. The lumpy rate case process is what prevents linear disclosure.
How should we think about that going forward relative to where you are for 2026?
Show response
Andrew explained commission discontinued some DSM programs, condensing both revenue and O&M. Net neutral to earnings. Ted added remaining programs focus on customers who need them most, reaching saturation.
The additional TSMC expansions, how much vision do you have into them at this point?
Show response
Ted said they're in active discussions on both committed fab timing and potential expansion. Will articulate infrastructure needs when TSMC solidifies their plans.
Calendar 2024 Q4
when you talk about the early 2040s, can you just sort of discuss what you see as the decision points to get to that point
Show response
Ted described it as an assessment period focused on suitable locations, technology maturity, and supply chain readiness before any commitment.
As you get a better sense of some of these longer lead time owned projects, would that give you the opportunity to extend your CapEx forecast at that point?
Show response
Ted said priority is filing the rate case first, then reassessing capital allocation across generation, transmission, and distribution.
ETREntergy3 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 3 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q1
Are there any other Cottonwood type transactions in your mind sort of in the hopper
Show response
Drew directly stated asset M&A is not expected to be a significant part of capital outlay beyond Cottonwood due to limited available assets.
is that providing some impetus were interest in new ESAs in their sort of calculus of where the world markets are
Show response
Drew characterized geopolitical uncertainty as continuation of the on-shoring trend that has benefited the Gulf Coast, with natural advantages in energy, transport and community support.
Can you give us any idea of how it might alter your thinking about the cadence of dividend payouts over the 4-year horizon
Show response
Kimberly confirmed the philosophy of balancing 6% dividend growth against faster earnings growth, maintaining a declining payout ratio.
Challenge rate by company
Every company this analyst questioned, most questions first. A company-level rate is shown from 3 questions; below that it is withheld.
| Company | Questions | Challenge rate |
|---|---|---|
| PNW Pinnacle West | 5 | 0%none of 5 questions |
| ETR Entergy | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions |
Activity by reporting period
Questions recorded for each calendar quarter that companies’ reporting periods map to (not the call date), with the challenge rate for that period. Periods inside the range with no questions are shown as “No questions recorded”.
| Calendar period | Questions | Challenge rate | Companies |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 Q4 | 2 | 0%none of 2 questions | 1 |
| 2025 Q1 | No questions recorded | — | — |
| 2025 Q2 | No questions recorded | — | — |
| 2025 Q3 | No questions recorded | — | — |
| 2025 Q4 | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions | 1 |
| 2026 Q1 | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions | 1 |
- 2024 Q42 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company
- 2025 Q1No questions recorded
- 2025 Q2No questions recorded
- 2025 Q3No questions recorded
- 2025 Q43 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 3 questions) · 1 company
- 2026 Q13 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 3 questions) · 1 company
Topics
Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.
- Demand2
- Regulation Policy2
- Capex Investment2
- M&A1
- Macroeconomic1
- Capital Allocation1
- Guidance Reliability1
- Cost Pressure1
- Innovation & R&D1