We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sse Plc | SSE | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| -12.00 | -0.72% | 1,655.00 | 16:35:02 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,670.00 | 1,648.00 | 1,670.00 | 1,655.00 | 1,667.00 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| ELECTRICITY |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 30/3/2024 11:43 by jrphoenixw2 SSE PLC NOTIFICATION OF CLOSED PERIOD 27 MARCH 2024• 2023/24 adjusted earnings per share expected to be in the range of 152 – 160 pence,consistent with previous guidance. • On course to deliver investment of around £2.5bn this financial year, reflecting high-quality project pipeline and disciplined capital allocation. • Reaffirming target of 175 – 200 pence adjusted earnings per share for 2026/27, as the Group continues to deliver the Net Zero Acceleration Programme Plus. PRE-CLOSE TRADING UPDATE SSE today updates the market that it expects full-year 2023/24 adjusted earnings per share to be between 152 – 160 pence. This narrower range is consistent with previous guidance of more than 150 pence, and reflects renewables output 13% below plan for the year to 21 March 2024 as well as SSE Thermal delivering adjusted operating profit of more than £750m. The Group remains on track to report full-year 2023/24 capital expenditure of around £2.5bn, as it continues to progress its high-quality project pipeline. This is underpinned by a strong balance sheet, with adjusted net debt and hybrid capital expected to be around £9.5bn at 31 March 2024. In the longer term, the Group continues to focus on the delivery of the investment, operational and financial growth targets as set out in the Net Zero Acceleration Programme Plus. This includes reaffirming the target of 175 – 200 pence adjusted earnings per share for 2026/27. The full-year Results presentation and Q&A session will be conducted virtually on 22 May 2024. Source: |
Posted at 16/11/2023 23:27 by wad collector Rather depends what their nationalisation policy is ; previously they have said they will renationalise all the Utilities. This was official party policy in 2019"it is imperative that energy networks be run transparently, in the public interest with democratic control and oversight. This is inconsistent with current ownership structures, in which electricity and gas distribution companies are owned and controlled by largely international investors including private investment banks, private equity funds, international pension funds and sovereign wealth funds." More recently they suggest GB Energy will lead the way , though it is rather vague what the plan is for existing companies like SSE. I have just read their campaign document which does not say what the plan is for the existing companies and it includes the catch all ; "Ahead of the next General Election, Labour will work with senior energy industry figures from across the nations and regions - including energy companies, energy experts and trade unions to further shape the role and remit of GBE." Which could be read as , "we haven't actually thought this through and don't know how it will work" But easy to say these things when not in government. But that uncertainty remains my main worry here rather than what the dividend policy is. |
Posted at 15/11/2023 11:16 by anhar The figures aren't bad but that big 38% divi slash for the full year still hurts me as an income investor, having held SSE for many years. I know the "rebase", ie. cut, was flagged well in advance but it still stings as the actual accounts are revealed.SSE is one of the clutch of utis in my diversified income port but with a forecast yield of about 3.4% on a 60p divi at 1,745p it's one of the lower yielders. Before anyone asks why don't I sell, my strat is to hold income shares very long term and rarely sell unless I think they have gone seriously wrong which SSE has not, despite the divi cut. It's the income stream with which I am primarily concerned, not share prices. Inevitably, some shares sometimes cut divis over the long term and that's why I have a port diversified across many industries, to ameliorate that risk. |
Posted at 30/8/2023 15:03 by jrphoenixw2 I was wondering what whacked the px this morning...Telegraph, this lunchtime: ' The real costs of wind power prove the sums don’t add up The chasm between net zero ambition and reality is growing ever larger Someone get a grip. UK energy policy is once again coming apart at the seams, with growing doubts over whether net zero or even energy security goals can be met. Only now are the true economic costs and practical difficulties of going carbon-free becoming fully evident, and it’s not a pretty sight. Yet still policymakers don’t seem to get it; either that or they are being deliberately misleading on the ease with which it can be delivered. All pretence at “leading the world” in the application of renewables is meanwhile going up in smoke, as one-time champions pare back their ambitions for the UK market in the face of rising costs, oppressive planning laws, and better opportunities elsewhere. Rival jurisdictions, particularly the US and EU, are beginning to offer far superior incentives. If you cannot beat them, do the opposite. Slowly, but surely, the Government is watering down its environmental agenda, which sadly but inevitably frequently clashes with the parallel goal of enhanced economic growth – the latest example being so-called “nutrient neutrality” water pollution rules which act as a barrier to more housebuilding. Yet on paper at least, and indeed legally, the overarching environmental goal of net zero by 2050 – together with the staged targets set for getting there – remains sacrosanct, even though most practically minded people have long thought there is not a snowball’s chance in Hades of actually meeting it. A giant leap of faith in the transforming powers of technology is demanded to think it can be. As if to confirm the gaping chasm between ambition and reality, the latest round of auctions for UK renewable energy licences, the outcome of which is due to be announced late next week, has plainly hit the rocks. Having already abandoned a key UK offshore wind development because of rising costs, the Swedish utility Vattenfall has indicated that it won’t be participating in the Government’s so-called Auction Round Five. Similarly with the UK energy group SSE, which has said it will not be entering its Seagreen offshore development into the auction, citing a low, officially set, strike price, and dramatically rising costs. Under pressure from the renewables industry, the Government has announced a slight increase in the promised subsidy below strike prices, but it’s unlikely to make a difference. Presumably there are at least some bidders still in the running; even so, officials will struggle to get the capacity hoped for, putting in jeopardy the target of 50GW of offshore wind by 2030. Current capacity stands at just 14GW, so there is a way to go. This in turn raises doubts about the Government’s separate target of complete decarbonisation of the electricity network by 2035. This, too, looks unrealistic. British energy policy is once more in a chaotic mess. It was ever thus. As it is, policymakers have set strike prices so low that investors are struggling to see how they might make a return. No surprise that prices should be forced down like this, for the green energy transition is not just about saving the planet. It is also meant to deliver much lower energy costs. This, too, is turning out to be a pretence. It’s true that in the past seven or eight years, the notional cost of renewable energy has plummeted. The price of offshore wind output has, for instance, fallen by around two thirds, from £100 per megawatt hour to less than £40. There you go, say ministers in response to net zero sceptics; it’s cheaper than coal. Would that it was, but the claim is in fact a statistical illusion. The manufacturing, installation and maintenance costs alone have been surging since the war in Ukraine. To these we must also add the costs of upgrading the National Grid to bring the new sources of electricity from where they are generated to where they are used. Littering the countryside with pylons is understandably running into local opposition. Billions may have to be forked out to compensate affected communities, or in finding alternative, more expensive, transmission routes. It could make HS2 look cheap by comparison. But to gain a proper understanding of the real costs of wind, and to a lesser extent, solar, we need to factor in another of their characteristics – that they are intermittent. In order to function effectively, the grid needs a constant balance between supply and demand; if the wind isn’t blowing, or even if it is blowing too strongly, thereby overloading the grid, there is a problem. Lots of conventional backup capacity is required to deal with the shortfalls that result from intermittency – capacity that can be brought online quickly at the flick of a switch when needs arise. The upshot is likely to be a high degree of duplication in generating capacity. This will obviously very considerably add to the costs of the renewable element. It’s disingenuous to say wind is cheaper than fossil fuels. Potentially, storage could provide a solution to the intermittency problem, yet for the moment it doesn’t exist at the scale needed to do the trick. If Britain cannot guarantee to keep the lights on, nobody is going to want to set up shop here. What about batteries? This may seem unduly pessimistic, but it stretches credulity to believe that they can ever really be the solution. Is there even enough lithium in the world to provide the level of battery power needed to supply the National Grid when the wind stops blowing? There are alternatives, nuclear being the most obvious, but many environmentalists are as opposed to it as they are to coal, gas and oil, and here in the UK, policy on new nuclear capacity, as on much else, falls woefully short. It is as much as we can do even to get the money-eating leviathan of Hinkley Point C up and running. Next comes Sizewell C, which scarcely promises to be much better. As Britain’s ageing fleet of existing nuclear power stations reaches the end of its life, merely replacing what’s closing down seems to be beyond us. And to phase out the 80pc of UK energy demand currently satisfied by fossil fuels, we would need far, far more. Yet the Government continues to procrastinate. Shamefully, it is still faffing around with an international competition to decide who gets to build Small Modular Reactors, never mind how to finance them. The last two auction rounds lulled the Government into a false sense of security on the economics of renewables. Both were hugely successful in attracting bidders at apparently highly competitive prices. But things have changed. Having been ahead, Britain is slipping behind. Next week’s announcement on the outcome of the fifth round auction threatens to be a rude awakening. |
Posted at 24/7/2023 18:45 by marktime1231 The share price not climbing as hoped towards ex-div, but today I decided to cash out the final tranche of the stake built up in the £13-14s during lockdown. Banking the gain rather than taking the dividend.Why when SSE has always been a steady part of my portfolio, and is a solid bet on energy infrastructure? Not just because I expect the share price will fall further than the payout. SSE are unlikely to repeat last winter's phenomenal income from gas thermal generation, and wind revenues continue to undershoot. Vattenfall warning of runaway costs facing all offshore wind developers. And SSE are pivoting from income cash cow to asset developer. Resetting the dividend to 3-4% is the clincher though, as an income investor that sort of yield does not put dinner on the table. |
Posted at 22/5/2023 09:55 by jrphoenixw2 anhar: 'It's quite liberating to be free from price watching and prediction and trading.'I've been a dividend investor since the late 90s. But as a good part of the income is reinvested I'm periodically reviewing the fundamentals of my holdings to ID the strongest positions to top-up. |
Posted at 19/5/2023 09:33 by anhar But whether you're long or short you're making a prediction, right?Not necessarily if like me you hold purely as an income investor in SSE or any share. I don't care about share prices and make no predictions as I'm only here for the divis, holding for extremely long periods, quite likely forever with many of my shares, in a very diversified income port. It's quite liberating to be free from price watching and prediction and trading. |
Posted at 27/11/2022 18:30 by jrphoenixw2 SSE now playing hard-ball re: windfall taxes...Telegraph 26/11 9pm: 'Windfall tax means less certain energy supply, warns SSE chief Energy giant may need to reduce output of hydroelectric plants to avoid 45pc levy The Government's windfall tax has placed the UK’s energy supply at risk this winter, according to the boss of energy giant SSE. Alistair Phillips-Davies says SSE may need to reduce the output of its hydroelectric plants in January and February to avoid the tax. “That will mean there's probably less certainty of supply over the absolute peak,” he warns. [edit...] Months of speculation about introduction of the tax weighed on SSE’s share price, but there is now some relief in certainty. SSE’s stock is up 4.18pc year to date, valuing the company at around £18bn. [edit...] Elliott has publicly gone quiet over its stake, but SSE may yet well find itself a prime bid target at a time of huge flux in the energy system. Oil giants such as BP and Shell are both pushing into wind farms, and may find they’d like some electricity networks to go with it as well. [edit...] Opportunities are also opening up further afield. In the US, Joe Biden’s administration is luring billions of pounds of investment in renewables with a massive package of tax credits and incentives, sparking concern the US will suck investment out of the UK and Europe. SSE has opened an office there and will go for good opportunities, says Phillips-Davies. But he notes Europe is “really committed to the path of renewables and clean green flexible energy … [which is] absolutely in our sweet spot”. “America could be good,” he adds. “Why not. But I think equally America, ultimately, if it needs to have cheaper energy, it'll continue to frack and and indeed, if it has to, dig coal as well.” [These are just extracts of a looong article, the bits relative to investors here. The full article can be found here: |
Posted at 29/5/2022 07:50 by waldron STOCKS TO WATCH: With Chancellor mulling an extension of his 'energy profits levy' to utility companies, are energy shares now a buy for the brave?By John Abiona, Financial Mail On Sunday Published: 21:50 BST, 28 May 2022 | Updated: 21:50 BST, 28 May 2022 It was the policy the City had been bracing itself for and it finally arrived last week – oil and gas companies were hit with a windfall tax. While shares in oil giants BP and Shell remained steady, attention turned towards others that may be in the firing line. Chancellor Rishi Sunak said he is mulling an extension of his 'energy profits levy' to utility companies, such as British Gas owner Centrica and SSE. The shares of both companies were down this week. The advice from the City seems to be: 'Don't panic.' Deepa Venkateswaran, at stockbroker Bernstein, says the Treasury had 'grossly overstated' the potential its windfall tax could take from renewable energy generators. She said the share price fall at SSE and Centrica last week was an 'overreaction' and investors should 'buy into the dip'. US bank JPMorgan criticised the effectiveness of taxing energy supply firms, saying: 'We do not believe that it would be material from a financial standpoint.' |
Posted at 18/11/2021 21:52 by bountyhunter I agree there, many investors may have been holding primarily for the yield and so this has not gone down well with them. Many of those investors will gradually be being replaced by new renewable energy focused investors who will accept the rebased yield in exchange for the accelerated growth of renewables. It's the shock change that has caused the problem not the long term plan imv so we should recover over time. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
