Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free
Analyst
Constantine Lednev
Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2025 Q3 – 2026 Q2 (4 quarters).
- Questions
- 16on tracked calls
- Challenge rate
- 6%1 of 16 questions
- Companies
- 6questioned at least once
- Reporting periods
- 4with 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 16 of 16 questions from 6 companies
VSTVistra Corp.5 questions · 2 reporting periods · 0 of 5 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q2
The preference for Vistra is still kind of the hybrid solution, so mix of new plus existing capacity for this sort of deal
Show response
Burke confirmed an all-of-the-above, customer-driven approach spanning new build, existing assets, and co-location, provided returns meet shareholder hurdles.
Should long-term contracting still focus on the new build cost, kind of in that $90 range, or is there room for clean premium
Show response
Burke described a wide spread between spot day-ahead prices and new-build economics, noting the cost of new build has risen as equipment prices doubled or tripled, so customers will contract for existing at a premium as a discount to new build.
I just wanted to get your view on Texas data center audits, potential delays, Batch Zero
Show response
Burke framed the audit as a near-term pause of a couple of months that does not affect the Comanche Peak project targeted to energize end of 2027, and reiterated support for thinning an ERCOT queue he views as overstated by more than 20x.
Calendar 2026 Q1
Do you anticipate the FERC PJM colocation rules to kind of start opening up more opportunities to do repeat deals
Show response
Burke directly confirmed optimism on colocation for both gas and nuclear. Dore added FERC is ordering short timelines for PJM compliance filings. Clear and comprehensive.
Does that shift any of the expectations? And are you thinking of any offsets around '26
Show response
Burke explained the integrated model naturally offsets, retail was hurt by mild weather but generation had a strong quarter. No need for specific offsets.
ETREntergy3 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 3 challenging
Calendar 2025 Q3
Do you see customers agnostic to the resource mix? Or is there still a push for some renewable components
Show response
CFO described all-of-the-above approach. CEO added carbon capture work underway with RFPs in Mississippi and Texas, supported by data center customers' clean energy objectives.
Is that directly associated with some of the more visible load in the current pipeline, you anticipate any incremental CapEx needs
Show response
CFO clarified $41B covers in-plan load. The 4.5 GW incremental supports pipeline customers. Supplemental capital expected when pipeline customers sign ESAs.
Do you see any opportunity to potentially guide on the longer-term EPS growth outlook beyond 2030
Show response
CFO confirmed good visibility through 2029 with individual yearly outlooks. Extension beyond depends on additional customer signings. Long-term opportunity exists.
PEGPublic Service Enterprise Group3 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 3 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q1
do the changes in ROE move the needle on affordability, or is there just a general recognition that the pressure is coming from the supply-demand that is really outside the state?
Show response
LaRossa acknowledged constructive conversations across stakeholders, noted challenge is from outside the state but they share responsibility on affordability.
What could we see in terms of your participation in the RBA from both the power side and as the EDC? Any concerns around capacity cost allocation for your zone?
Show response
LaRossa urged calm, noted many steps ahead and the 2031 limit will make it tough to be a game changer. Cregg reinforced commitment to fair cost allocation.
do things like the capacity price cap extension provide any additional upsides on the power side versus the 6% to 8% plan?
Show response
LaRossa gave a brief, somewhat evasive answer suggesting capacity prices staying flat was already embedded in their plan, no incremental upside signaled.
CEGConstellation Energy2 questions · 1 reporting period · 1 of 2 challenging
Calendar 2025 Q4
Do you see that as enough offering for hyperscalers looking to contract?
Show response
Joe acknowledged 10GW may not be enough or correctly located. Will partner with other companies for incremental capacity and continue searching for renewable/battery platforms to add capability.
is there kind of a level of interest that you would highlight in more immediate term versus long term
Show response
Joe declined to break out regional or temporal detail on contracting interest, saying there's interest across the board but no specific megawatt commitments to share by geography.
EIXEdison International2 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 2 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q1
how do you feel about the pace of the claim submissions? And is there a way to frame maybe a time line where you can get to a point of visibility?
Show response
CFO noted statute runs until January 2028. Complex interdependencies between claims and insurance levels (fully insured, underinsured, uninsured). Claims don't require specificity on damages. Cannot provide timeline for estimate.
Is there anything that you see that's actionable or practical? And does this suggested distributed solution kind of work for driving down costs?
Show response
CEO directly challenged Tom Steyer's claims of 25% rate reduction from utility breakup, noting no factual basis. Lowest rates nationally tend to be in vertically integrated utilities. CFO added they question the mathematical foundation.
ATOAtmos Energy1 question · 1 reporting period · 0 of 1 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q2
Great quarter, given we are a quarter short of the year, do you anticipate to be in the top end of guidance?
Show response
Reaffirmed $8.40 to $8.50 guidance and explained APT spreads are narrowing as new takeaway capacity comes online; addressed both parts.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| VST Vistra Corp. | 5 | 0%none of 5 questions |
| ETR Entergy | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions |
| PEG Public Service Enterprise Group | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions |
| CEG Constellation Energy | 2 | —Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions |
| EIX Edison International | 2 | —Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions |
| ATO Atmos Energy | 1 | —Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions |
- VSTVistra Corp. · 5 questions0%none of 5 questions
- ETREntergy · 3 questions0%none of 3 questions
- PEGPublic Service Enterprise Group · 3 questions0%none of 3 questions
- CEGConstellation Energy · 2 questions—rate withheld: under 3 questions
- EIXEdison International · 2 questions—rate withheld: under 3 questions
- ATOAtmos Energy · 1 question—rate withheld: under 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Q3 | 3 | 0%none of 3 questions | 1 |
| 2025 Q4 | 2 | 50%1 of 2 questions | 1 |
| 2026 Q1 | 7 | 0%none of 7 questions | 3 |
| 2026 Q2 | 4 | 0%none of 4 questions | 2 |
- 2025 Q33 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 3 questions) · 1 company
- 2025 Q42 questions · challenge rate 50% (1 of 2 questions) · 1 company
- 2026 Q17 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 7 questions) · 3 companies
- 2026 Q24 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 4 questions) · 2 companies
Topics
Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.
- Regulation Policy7
- Pricing4
- Demand4
- Guidance Reliability3
- Competitive Dynamics3
- Cloud & AI3
- Revenue Growth2
- Supply Chain1
- Innovation & R&D1
- Capex Investment1