View Single Post
Old 07-26-2016, 11:50 AM   #2131
Bring_Back_Shantz
Franchise Player
 
Bring_Back_Shantz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Regorium View Post
100% the former. I think the clause was poorly written as is.
I would tend to disagree, but at least it's a reasonable position to have.

The reason I disagree is that if these companies have been taking it on the chin because these agreements are unprofitable due to the current price environment, I'd say it's unreasonable to to expect them to put up with more losses due to a change in regulations.

If the PPAs were marginally profitable or break even at this point would people be complaining that they shouldn't be allowed to invoke this clause?

Really what the clause should have said was that they can bail on the PPAs if new regulations had a material impact on their costs (with some definition of "material). This loosens that up a bit, but I think you'd have a hard time arguing that even if the contracts were written that way that this wouldn't constitute a material change.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Bring_Back_Shantz is offline