|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
09-01-2011, 10:11 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Huh? The problem was that the company couldn't compete because the Chinese Government
-spence
|
maybe this was the problem
The Government Accountability Office would later single out the Solyndra deal as an example of the government’s failing to fully vet such arrangements before approving the loan guarantees. With all those stimulus dollars burning a hole in its pocket, the Obama administration was overeager to get them spent. “If you don’t have really strong processes in place, and if you’re under pressure to get a lot of these dollars allocated, you can make unproductive decisions and ones that ultimately put taxpayers’ dollars at risk,” GAO analyst Franklin Rusco said. In fact, the administration announced its commitment to the loan guarantees before the required outside reviews were even in hand.
|
|
|
|
09-02-2011, 03:23 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
maybe this was the problem
The Government Accountability Office would later single out the Solyndra deal as an example of the government’s failing to fully vet such arrangements before approving the loan guarantees. With all those stimulus dollars burning a hole in its pocket, the Obama administration was overeager to get them spent. “If you don’t have really strong processes in place, and if you’re under pressure to get a lot of these dollars allocated, you can make unproductive decisions and ones that ultimately put taxpayers’ dollars at risk,” GAO analyst Franklin Rusco said. In fact, the administration announced its commitment to the loan guarantees before the required outside reviews were even in hand.
|
That's a different issue.
It's fine to argue due diligence wasn't done, but that's not necessarily why the company folded.
-spence
|
|
|
|
09-02-2011, 03:34 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
That's a different issue.
It's fine to argue due diligence wasn't done, but that's not necessarily why the company folded.
-spence
|
due dilligence not being done often results in things folding
it all relates to the same issue and in particular, this issue...."unproductive decisions and ones that ultimately put taxpayers’ dollars at risk" through foolish Government Subsidies that don't pan out because coincidentally, too many Chinese Government Subsidies and not enough European Government subsidies, bad business plan hastily funded thanks to campaign donation paybacks....sounds like a complete failure for Government Subsidies...who would have thunk it? the only entity that made out on this deal was the Obama Election Fund
|
|
|
|
09-02-2011, 03:45 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
due dilligence not being done often results in things folding
it all relates to the same issue and in particular, this issue...."unproductive decisions and ones that ultimately put taxpayers’ dollars at risk" through foolish Government Subsidies that don't pan out because coincidentally, too many Chinese Government Subsidies and not enough European Government subsidies, bad business plan hastily funded thanks to campaign donation paybacks....sounds like a complete failure for Government Subsidies...who would have thunk it? the only entity that made out on this deal was the Obama Election Fund
|
You're making a lot of assumptions.
-spence
|
|
|
|
09-03-2011, 05:24 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
You're making a lot of assumptions.
-spence
|
here's some more assumptions for ya....
Beyond the pressure the White House put on the Department of Energy and OMB to expedite the loan, it is coming to light that solar industry analysts were always skeptical of the company's business plan.
ABC News:
While Energy Department officials steadfastly vouched for Solyndra -- even after an earlier round of layoffs raised eyebrows -- other federal agencies and industry analysts for months questioned the viability of the company. Peter Lynch, a longtime solar industry analyst, told ABC News the company's fate should have been obvious from the start.
"Here's the bottom line," Lynch said. "It costs them $6 to make a unit. They're selling it for $3. In order to be competitive today, they have to sell it for between $1.5 and $2. That is not a viable business plan."
Other flags have been raised about how the Energy Department pushed the deal forward. The Center for Public Integrity's iWatch News and ABC disclosed that Energy Department officials announced the support for Solyndra even before final marketing and legal reviews were in. To government auditors, that move raised questions about just how fully the department vetted the deal -- and assessed its risk to taxpayers -- before signing off.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.
|
| |