Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free
Analyst
Philip Shen
Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2024 Q4 – 2026 Q2 (7 quarters).
- Questions
- 19on tracked calls
- Challenge rate
- 32%6 of 19 questions
- Companies
- 2questioned at least once
- Reporting periods
- 7with 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 19 of 19 questions from 2 companies
FSLRFirst Solar11 questions · 7 reporting periods · 4 of 11 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q2
what’s your view based on the folks that you guys are in touch with that this should be August
Show response
Widmar would not handicap August versus September, saying meetings suggest a decision is close but offering no conviction on timing.
Calendar 2026 Q1
on the 232, I was wondering if you might be able to share a little bit more color on what the framework of that decision might be
Show response
Mark described 232 proposal framework as cents-per-watt or minimum import price with positive administration feedback. Timing expected Q2 but could slip to early Q3. On perovskite, 1 GW pilot line in Perrysburg for 2027 with full-size Series 6 form factor modules. Evaluating single-junction vs tandem construct, prioritizing field validation of perovskite durability.
Calendar 2025 Q4
just was wondering if you could give us a little more color on why no EPS guide for 2026
Show response
Alex cited underutilization, start-up costs, and potential Pillar Two tax noise as reasons for EBITDA guidance. U.S. ASP of $0.308 reflects backlog clearing with limited 2026 CuRe uplift due to contractual notification deadlines. Mark detailed perovskite small form factor development line running, pilot line for full-size modules in 2027, but fundamental challenges remain around stability, encapsulation, and scaling.
Calendar 2025 Q3
in terms of rebooking this volume, it sounds like it's volume from '26 through '29. What kind of incremental pricing do you think you can get for this?
Show response
Mark outlined $0.36-$0.365 pricing target with CuRe adders for rebooking. Emphasized patience to benefit from additional catalysts including 232 and FEOC guidance. Confirmed existing fixed-price contracts have no openers for 232-type tariff changes.
Calendar 2025 Q2
if international is at this $0.32 level, domestic content must be -- I mean I got to imagine high 30s is possible
Show response
Mark outlined finishing line strategy to reduce tariff exposure to ~1/3 of declared value, qualify for 45X assembly credits, and blend international with domestic for content requirements.
Calendar 2025 Q1
in our checks, some customers are flagging some underperformance of Series 6
Show response
Mark deflected to standard warranty process rather than quantifying any Series 6 issues. Reiterated commitment to test and remediate per contractual obligations but did not confirm or deny scope.
Since the tariffs, what have the conversations been like with customers? Have you been able to do or generate bookings
Show response
Mark acknowledged stronger customer engagement post-tariffs but emphasized patience on pricing until IRA, FEOC, and tariff outcomes are known. Near-term bookings constrained by policy uncertainty.
when do you think that kind of resolves? Do you think it's more 2026 and we should expect that to maybe not resolve in 2025
Show response
Mark indicated uncertainty has worsened since last quarter, particularly with battery storage project economics, suggesting warehousing headwinds unlikely to resolve in 2025.
Calendar 2024 Q4
Can you confirm that you guys have indeed solved the production issues?
Show response
Mark confirmed corrective actions are implemented, a third-party validation study is ongoing, and the $56M-$100M range remains the best estimate based on current information.
these customers may be left with underperforming projects and systems and maybe reluctant to buy First Solar modules again
Show response
Mark acknowledged warranty obligations within contract parameters, drew parallel to First Solar absorbing $500M in 2022 headwinds, and expressed confidence in customer retention.
can you share to what degree tariffs are included in the guide?
Show response
Mark clarified no module import tariffs assumed, but 25% Section 232 aluminum tariffs and potential Chinese freight carrier charges are included in guidance.
PWRQuanta Services8 questions · 7 reporting periods · 2 of 8 challenging
Calendar 2026 Q2
What are your thoughts on this potential risk? How could it impact your business?
Show response
Duke said technology is only about 15% to 20% of the business and little gets built in New York anyway; Jayshree added backlog only includes LNTP-cleared data center work, so pauses pose limited risk to booked projects.
Calendar 2026 Q1
Can you give some additional color on your conversations with the hyperscalers? And is there a potential that the segment could grow even faster
Show response
Duke confirmed the technology segment is a huge business only 1.5 years in, growing over 100% including acquisitions, with organics growing nicely too.
Can you give some color on why the '26 EPS guide percentage increase was less than the Q1 EPS beat?
Show response
Jayshree said the raise carries forward both the Q1 beat and improved back-half views. Duke added they raised $50M past the beat and are prudent about guidance.
Calendar 2025 Q4
Can AI meaningfully change your outlook for OpEx in the coming year or 2?
Show response
Duke confirmed AI initiatives for engineering and field productivity. Not looking at engineering-focused M&A due to AI disruption. Every savings reinvested in AI.
Calendar 2025 Q3
can you share what the growth trajectory for organic growth might look like for '26?
Show response
Duke provided multiyear EPS CAGR framework: 10% floor, 15% midpoint, 20% actual. NiSource JV margin in line or accretive to segment.
Calendar 2025 Q2
With the ITC winding down by year-end '27, to what degree can you pull forward renewables work?
Show response
Duke confirmed LNTPs pulling in, with customers safe harbored into 2028-2029. Jayshree noted Tier 1 customers lived through PTC/ITC dynamics for 20+ years.
Calendar 2025 Q1
they highlighted that 50 gigawatts of coal plants may not be decommissioned. And this could result in tens of billions of interconnection work
Show response
Duke noted coal sites may see gas colocation and transmission upgrades. Confirmed 2025 construction megawatts are steady and climbing versus year-end expectations.
Calendar 2024 Q4
What opportunities are you conceptualizing now that could deepen your exposure to the AI data center trend beyond Cupertino?
Show response
Duke emphasized convergence between utility and data center customers, positioning Quanta in the middle of infrastructure discussions across all stakeholders.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| FSLR First Solar | 11 | 36%4 of 11 questions |
| PWR Quanta Services | 8 | 25%2 of 8 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 | 4 | 50%2 of 4 questions | 2 |
| 2025 Q1 | 4 | 25%1 of 4 questions | 2 |
| 2025 Q2 | 2 | 0%none of 2 questions | 2 |
| 2025 Q3 | 2 | 0%none of 2 questions | 2 |
| 2025 Q4 | 2 | 0%none of 2 questions | 2 |
| 2026 Q1 | 3 | 33%1 of 3 questions | 2 |
| 2026 Q2 | 2 | 100%2 of 2 questions | 2 |
- 2024 Q44 questions · challenge rate 50% (2 of 4 questions) · 2 companies
- 2025 Q14 questions · challenge rate 25% (1 of 4 questions) · 2 companies
- 2025 Q22 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
- 2025 Q32 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
- 2025 Q42 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
- 2026 Q13 questions · challenge rate 33% (1 of 3 questions) · 2 companies
- 2026 Q22 questions · challenge rate 100% (2 of 2 questions) · 2 companies
Topics
Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.
- Demand5
- Regulation Policy4
- Cloud & AI4
- Guidance Reliability4
- Trade Tariffs3
- Innovation & R&D3
- Competitive Dynamics3
- Cost Pressure3
- Revenue Growth2
- Pricing2
Show all 13 topics
- Capex Investment1
- Supply Chain1
- Margin1