Sold before it exists: the company is already taking committed orders or reservations for output it cannot yet produce
The model's full reasoning — Q3 2022 call → NOWe need to determine if management describes counterparties having already committed to take output/product/capacity/service that the company is not yet able to deliver. The key is that commitments are real and made, and the ability to supply does not yet fully exist, with the gap being closed now. Let's scan the transcript for such a situation. The transcript discusses various businesses. The most relevant part is about the LFP (lithium iron phosphate) plant in St. Louis. Raviv Zoller says: "In late October, we were awarded $197 million by the U.S. Department of Energy to invest in our efforts to develop a sustainable supply chain for energy storage solutions. In total, we’re building a $400 million plant in St. Louis where we will produce high quality lithium iron phosphate material for the energy storage industry. This plant is expected to be operational by 2024 and to have two production lines with each capable of producing 15,000 metric tons of LFP material per year." But is there any mention of counterparties having committed to take output from this plant? The transcript does not mention any offtake agreements, contracts, or commitments from customers for this plant. It only mentions the DOE award (which is a grant, not a commitment to take output). The plant is under construction, but no mention of customers having signed up. Another part: "We made our first entry into these markets in China through our YPH joint venture. While this business was somewhat challenged during the quarter due to a planned overhaul and unexpected export limitations, demand for our food solutions and LFP battery materials remains strong." That's just demand, not commitments. Also, there is mention of long-term potash agreement: "During the third quarter, we signed a long-term potash agreement with a customer in Europe to supply 300,000 metric tons annually." But that is for existing potash production, not for something not yet built. The company already has potash production capacity. So that's not a case of selling output from something not yet existing. Similarly, "We’re also shifting our mineral magnesium business to long term supply agreements and we already have approximately 50% of our production under contract for the years 2023 and 2024." That's for existing production.
| Ticker | Company | Call | Date | Call grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SYM | Symbotic Inc. | Q3 2022 | 2022-08-01 | B+ |
| BXP | Boston Properties, Inc. | Q1 2022 | 2022-05-03 | A |
| CPK | Chesapeake Utilities Corporation | Q3 2017 | 2017-11-10 | A |
| GOGO | Gogo Inc. | Q1 2016 | 2016-05-06 | C+ |
GOGO · Q1 2016 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that counterparties have already committed to take output, product, capacity, or service that the company is not yet able to deliver? YES Management describes real commitments (Delta >600, IAG 130+, Shareco 50, Air Canada wide-body fleet, total 2Ku awarded >1000) already made by counterparties. They also state the company is not yet able to deliver at scale ("begin the enviable task of installing the 1000 2Ku awarded aircraft", "we expect to install the majority of our awarded aircraft by the end of 2018", "STCs... will keep us on track to exceed our 75 2Ku installation target this year", "supply chain is there", "aggressive STC program...
SYM · Q3 2022 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that counterparties have already committed to take output that the company is not yet able to deliver? Like a backlog of things they haven't built yet. YES The transcript shows management describing a $11.3 billion contracted revenue backlog (more than doubled) with customers having "voted with their wallets," alongside 13 systems currently in deployment (plus 6 fully ramped) that will take roughly 18 months to acceptance.
BXP · Q1 2022 → YESThe question is about whether management describes counterparties that have already committed to take output that the company is not yet able to deliver, like pre-leased developments that aren't built...YES The transcript shows multiple instances where management describes counterparties having already signed leases for space in developments that have not yet been completed or even commenced construction.