Wind power developer Orsted sees 2025 core profit in line with or higher than in 2024
COPENHAGEN, Feb 6 (Reuters) - Orsted (ORSTED.CO), opens new tab, the world's biggest offshore wind power developer, said on Thursday it expected core profit this year to be equal to, or above 2024, a day after cutting investment plans for coming years, sending its shares higher.
After the market close on Wednesday, the Danish company said it had decided to scale back the total amount it planned to invest for the years through 2030 by about 25% to shore up its finances in a challenging market.
It also said it saw no need to raise new cash, and that the revised plan would allow the group to keep cutting costs given it would construct at a slower pace than previously planned.
Shares in Orsted were up 6% in early trade, trimming a year-to-date fall to 8%. Sydbank analyst Jacob Pedersen said many investors had feared the company would announce a capital increase.
Offshore wind companies have faced challenges including rising costs, supply chain issues and planning delays. President Donald Trump created further uncertainty by suspending offshore wind leases on his first day in office last month.
Orsted said on Thursday most of its projects were progressing according to plan, but warned it continued to face supply chain and construction challenges at its two U.S. offshore construction projects Revolution Wind and Sunrise Wind.
Orsted said it had successfully renegotiated and settled contracts related to the closure of its Ocean Wind projects in New Jersey with a better-than-expected outcome, resulting in a net reversal of cancellation fees of 7.3 billion crowns.
The company guided for 2025 operating profit before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation, new partnerships and cancellation fees of between 25 billion and 28 billion crowns ($3.5 billion-$3.9 billion).
The outlook matched analysts' average expectations, according to a company-provided poll.
In its full-year earnings report on Thursday, Orsted confirmed a preliminary reading for 2024 of 24.8 billion crowns.
"The year 2024 proved to be a challenging year for the industry and for Orsted," Rasmus Errboe, new CEO since Feb. 1, said in the statement. "We've experienced headwinds and have therefore taken necessary actions."
($1 = 7.1798 Danish crowns)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
32 minutes ago
- Reuters
Dollar slides on easing trade tensions, Fed expectations
SINGAPORE, June 12 (Reuters) - The dollar slid on Thursday on further signs that U.S. President Donald Trump may adopt a softer stance in tariff negotiations and heightened expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts. Trump said on Wednesday he would be willing to extend a July 8 deadline for completing trade talks with countries before higher U.S. tariffs are imposed. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested earlier that the Trump administration may offer extensions from a July trade deal deadline for countries negotiating in good faith. The remarks renewed dollar weakness, lifting the euro to a seven-week high. It last bought $1.1525. The greenback lost 0.43% against the yen and 0.34% against the Swiss franc to last trade at 143.98 and 0.81725, respectively. Against a basket of currencies, the dollar fell to its weakest since April 22 at 98.327. "It's hard to tell whether there is a masterplan behind this, but common sense would suggest that President Trump is trying to create a level of urgency in terms of trade negotiations," said Rodrigo Catril, senior currency strategist at National Australia Bank. "I think the market, in terms of the size of the moves, is becoming a little bit more sanguine about what this all means... the market is also very wary that the picture could change quite dramatically in a week's time or two weeks' time." Elsewhere, sterling was up 0.38% to $1.3588. The Australian dollar ticked up 0.05% to $0.6506, while the New Zealand dollar rose 0.1% to $0.6033. On Wednesday, data showed U.S. consumer prices rose less than expected in May, leading traders to ramp up bets of a Fed cut as early as September and keeping pressure on the dollar. Thursday's producer price index data will be the next test for markets. The offshore yuan was last a touch stronger at 7.1953 per dollar, helped slightly by news that a fragile truce in the U.S.-China trade war was restored as both sides reached a deal following talks in London this week. "Full details have not been published, and it remains unclear if the talks brought the two largest economies closer to productive cooperation," said Mantas Vanagas, senior economist at Westpac. The euro was clinging to strong gains on Thursday, having jumped against most other currencies in the previous session. Against the yen, the common currency last stood at 165.88 having risen to its firmest since October at 166.42 on Thursday. It was up 0.13% against the Aussie , extending a 0.9% gain from Thursday, and had also touched a one-month high of 84.88 pence overnight . While there was no immediate trigger behind the moves, analysts say the euro has over the past week drawn support from hawkish European Central Bank (ECB) rhetoric. Last week, the ECB cut interest rates as expected but hinted at a pause in its year-long easing cycle after inflation finally returned to its 2% target. "Expectations of fewer previously expected ECB rate cuts have lent some support to the euro," said Carol Kong, a currency strategist at Commonwealth Bank of Australia. That contrasts with the likely resumption of a Fed easing cycle later this year, and as Trump has repeatedly called for U.S. rates to be lowered. Trump said last week that a decision on the next Fed chief will be coming soon, adding that a good Fed chair would lower interest rates. The euro has risen nearly 11% for the year thus far, helped in part by a weaker dollar and as investors pour money into European markets in a move away from the U.S.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
It was always going to be a tightrope walk... Now Albo has everything on the line when he meets Donald Trump this weekend: PETER VAN ONSELEN
Anthony Albanese is expected to meet US President Donald Trump during the G7 Leaders' Summit in Canada, starting in three days time. And boy are there some big issues likely to be on the agenda, starting with the AUKUS agreement. Australia's ambitious plan to enhance its naval capabilities through the AUKUS partnership faces renewed uncertainty as the United States launches a comprehensive review of the agreement. Assuming their meeting still happens it will be the first face-to-face encounter between the PM and Trump since the US President was elected. It's only been a matter of months since Trump has been back in charge, and he's already seeking to reassert a combative vision of American power globally. How Albo reacts to Trump when they meet will test the PM's ability to defend national interests without undermining the alliance. Under the AUKUS pact, Australia is set to acquire between three and five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US. However, questions have arisen about the US industrial base's capacity to produce the subs without compromising its own needs. The review is being led by Under Secretary of Defense Elbridge Colby, a known skeptic of the pact. Its terms of reference include assessing whether the AUKUS agreement aligns with President Trump's America First policy. Colby has previously questioned the wisdom of transferring critical assets like the Virginia-class submarines to US allies, suggesting it could weaken America's naval strength. Deputy PM and Defence Minister Richard Marles has attempted to downplay the significance of the review, describing it as a natural step to ensure alignment with US defence priorities. But it will certainly be on the top of the agenda when Albo and Trump meet. The PM will want to be able to say that he has received assurances that the agreement is iron clad. The question of defence spending also isn't clear cut. Trump's supporters in the US have floated a 3.5 per cent of GDP benchmark they want Australia's defence spending to rise to. Given that it's currently only at 2.4 per cent (including across forward estimates stretching all the way out to 2034), to lift our defence spending in line with US expectations would be fiscally reckless without cuts being made elsewhere. The Australian budget is already forecast to be in deficit for the coming decade, with gross national debt at the trillion dollar mark. While some domestic foreign policy hawks are independently pushing for higher defence spending, the figure team Trump wants us to meet is unrealistic for a country that faces no direct military threat and is unlikely to anytime soon. Equally, social spending pressures are mounting. The recent election campaign included a raft of new spending promises, with recurrent spending on policies such as the NDIS already a strain on the budget. To increase defence spending in that climate is unlikely to be popular. Besides, Australia's commitment to spend $368 billion on the AUKUS submarine program should be more than enough to signal that we take our defence and alliance duties seriously. Another volatile topic expected to come up at Albo's meeting with Trump is trade. The US President's across-the-board 10 per cent tariff on imports is economic vandalism dressed up as nationalism, and Australia currently isn't exempt. It's a regressive policy that punishes allies and undermines the very order the US once built. Albanese has been unusually forthright on this issue, condemning the move and seeking exemptions. Whether he can actually secure them is another matter, and depends less on the logic of his arguments than it does on Trump's whims. If the meeting achieves anything it will be to gauge whether the President is open to pragmatism rather than simply doubling down on his new found protectionism. Finally, the beef issue is deceptively niche but symbolically important for Australia. For decades, we have maintained biosecurity restrictions on US beef imports, particularly those involving supply chains running through countries with a history of mad cow disease. Washington wants access to the Australian market but the government is firm in saying no way. Albanese has so far been unequivocal that protecting Australia's disease-free status is non-negotiable. The blunt rejection of US demands for access is all about Australia retaining its access to high-value export markets like Japan and Korea, which is dependent on our gold-standard reputation for safe meat. In all of these areas of discussion the real test for Albanese when he meets Trump Mark II for the very first time is to show resolve in the face of Trump's tendency to dominate and distract. Voters won't necessarily remember every talking point, or the finer details of what gets discussed. But they will notice if their Prime Minister looks like he blinked and Trump got the better of him.
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
In defence of the Trump playbook
The standard explanation for why charges for plastic bags reduced waste is economic. People were reluctant to pay 10p for a bag and so brought their own instead. This is partly true. But it would still be highly effective if the charge for a bag were merely 1p. That's because charging any amount, however trifling, was sufficient to change the implicit assumptions about normal retail behaviour. Previously, if you went into Boots and bought, say, a toothbrush and a tube of Anusol, the default was for the cashier to put them in a new bag – it would have seemed rude not to do so. Suddenly, however, the imposition of a charge meant that shopkeepers had to ask whether you wanted a bag or not. Often the answer was 'no'; you had one already, or, if you were a chap, your clothing was miraculously equipped with things called 'pockets'. There are many ways in which you can achieve large changes in behaviour without imposing large economic penalties. For instance, I contend that you could significantly reduce intergenerational inequality simply by the imposition of a property tax of 0.1 per cent annually on all homes. The relatively small amount raised could be hypothecated to fund child benefit, or to reduce the income tax burden on the young. For the purposes of comparison, the typical property tax levied by those well-known leftists in the State of Texas is slightly over 1.8 per cent. Bear me out. I am borrowing here from the Donald Trump playbook. This is an under-rated approach to legislation where you impose taxes not for their direct effect, but for their symbolic value. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold about the future. You don't necessarily have to do anything massive – you simply raise the possibility you might. Most human behaviour runs on implicit deterrents of this kind. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold Before The Donald, it had become an axiomatic assumption in all businesses that no democratic government of any political stripe would ever deviate from the smug Davos neo-liberal globalist consensus in any shape or form. This artificial certainty meant that for decades you could offshore employment with abandon and treat your native staff fairly shabbily, without fear of any adverse consequences. Today it's different: even if you later reduce many tariffs to near zero and stop randomly abusing Canada, the signal has been sent. I hate to say this, but this approach could work well to solve many other problems. For instance, Britons have been lulled into planning for their future on the assumption that three unwritten rules underpin the tax system. 1) If you actually get up in the morning and do some useful work for which you get paid, you'll be taxed to buggery; 2) If you acquire wealth and then ride the wave of asset-price inflation (i.e. you have more money than you need 'cos you're old), you will be treated very generously; 3) If the asset in question is your own home, you won't be taxed at all, and nor will your good-for-nothing kids when they inherit it all. A large part of the reason why young people cannot afford to buy homes is nothing to do with the use value of a home – it is driven by the as-yet-unshaken belief that residential property has been sanctified as an asset class. It is this belief which possibly accounts for 25 per cent of the price of a home and a similarly large part of oldsters' pathological reluctance to downsize. Residential property is seen as Britain's only tax haven. To unseat this assumption, you don't need to rewrite the whole tax code, or go full Henry George – much as I would personally support this. You just have to make the unthinkable suddenly thinkable.
