Reliant Energy Company

[bruce_oneal]

harbinger of things to come...? we all knew that it was a matter of time before the rising cost of fuel was gonna have an impact. reliant, one of the largest energy suppliers in the region (and certainly houston) has taken a loss for the year. this is on top of their $1.3B loss a year ago.

who's next? what's next? i am not financial expert, but a company can't keep losing money year after year... can it?

*******

March 2, 2005, 4:16PM

Reliant Energy falls to loss on rising fuel

Dow Jones / Associated Press

Power-plant operator Reliant Energy Inc. said today it fell to a loss for its latest quarter as higher expenses for fuel and purchased power hurt profit margins.

ADVERTISEMENT

The loss for the fourth quarter was $264.4 million, or 88 cents a share, compared with a profit of $32.5 million, or 11 cents a share, a year ago.

On a continuing operations basis, the company posted a deeper loss, to $188 million, or 63 cents a share, from $25 million, or 8 cents a share, a year ago. On an adjusted basis, the loss was $81 million, or 27 cents a share, for the quarter.

Analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call had forecast a loss of 3 cents per share in the latest quarter.

Revenue for the latest quarter climbed 19 percent to $2.1 billion from $1.78 billion.

Expense for fuel and cost of gas sold rose 54 percent to $468.3 million, while purchased power expense rose 54 percent to $1.38 billion.

For the full year, Houston-based Reliant posted a loss of $29.4 million, or 10 cents a share, narrower than a loss of $1.34 billion, or $4.57 a share, a year earlier.

Adjusted earnings from continuing operations, which exclude a number of unusual items, amounted to 7 cents a share for the year, well below the 25 cents a share Reliant had forecast in November and which was also projected by a survey of analysts by Thomson First Call.

The company said the difference was due to two unexpected expenses -- a charge of 13 cents a share for a refinancing and a charge of 3 cents a share for a regulatory settlement, which were both included in the adjusted earnings number.

[Subdude]

who's next? what's next? i am not financial expert, but a company can't keep losing money year after year... can it?

Reliant has quite a track record for piling up large unexpected losses. They were able to refinance their debt last year, and with their rate base they won't be going out of business anytime soon. It is strange that they have such a large market share when they are generally the highest-priced local electricity provider.

[Talbot]

I guess that's why they charge the crazy amounts of money they do for electricity.

I hope that somehow, the company can stop all their losses. I'd hate to see the company go. Although I doubt we'd see that for a while.

[77017]

Edited due to threats of others. 1/2

[HoustonMidtown]

.

[houstonmacbro]

he's not that bad is he?

[ricco67]

While I'm sure he's a GREAT guy in person and he does appear so, he can't help the writing on the commercials.

Every once in awhile I want to dive through the TIVO and choke him.

[wendyps]

Here Here! As a Reliant employee he drives me NUTS!!!! He doesn't SAY anything of any value. He doesn't TELL you what he is selling you. Just stands around being goofy. I can't stand him. However, I'm told that he gets very good marketing results. People actually DO trust in him. ah well.

[MidtownCoog]

Too bad Tom is a liar!

Or maybe he's not. Does he mention the rates are higher compared to many providers?

Maybe he just says "I'm cute, and we're high".

I try not to listen too closely.

[Parrothead]

I do love the spot where he leans over to the woman and says, "Hey, what does this smell like?" If he asked me that question I'd say, "YOUR SWEATY SACK!"

[houstonmacbro]

I do love the spot where he leans over to the woman and says, "Hey, what does this smell like?" If he asked me that question I'd say, "YOUR SWEATY SACK!"

oh my ...

[MidtownCoog]

I love sniffin things.

[houstonmacbro]

I love sniffin things.

um ... TMI bro.

[MidtownCoog]

um...Not enough movie watchin, bro.

[editor]

Brand New, one of the blogs I frequent, recently reviewed Reliant's Energy's new logo.

Here's the before and after pic:

The old logo looked like a frickin' energy company, no questions asked. It was bold, energetic, and it looked corporate. All good things. The new one looks like a printing company with the CMYK icon that also looks like crop marks

Full review here: Reliant Lacks Energy

[lockmat]

I agree with their analysis, however I do like the new logo.

[NenaE]

I think the new font lacks energy. Like the colors of those flowery things though. Are they suppposed to symbolize firecrackers, per the picture?

[lockmat]

actually, I like the way it looks better on the stadium more than it does by itself.

[Mister X]

The new one is more sophisticated, simple, understated and contemporary. I like it better than the old loud, horsey one. I think the new logo is less 'expected' or cliched than the old one. Plus, I think it complements the architecture of Reliant Stadium better.

[fatesdisastr]

All lower case letters on a stadium like that just comes across unimportant and unprofessional to me

[editor]

IMO, the new logo is very "Web 2.0," which is no longer in vogue. Perhaps it was fashionable at the time the artists presented it to NRG's board and it took a long time to get approved. But the whole "forced lower, Helvetica, pastels, gradient, white background, abstract shapes" thing is passé.

Much like this:

But I'm going to keep it around for a while longer to establish the brand. It took nine years to come up with a stable logo around here. Plus, it's Trebuchet, not Helvetica.

[Mister X]

That isn't Helvetica on the new Reliant logo. Look closely at the e, the a and the t. It's either a close cousin or an original word mark.

New branding is not usually chosen haphazardly. I'm willing to bet this logo was selected from HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of options. I think they made a pretty good decision. The old logo was very much out of date. Could they have found a better new one? ALWAYS. But I still think that the new one is unexpected and fresh for an energy company.

The lighter approach probably came from the desire of wanting something friendlier and less authoritative. Big bad power companies are such a turn off these days. I like the movement that the 'sparks' and colors create. The lighter, sleeker look is much more inviting than that authoritative bold dark and red heavy handed old logo. The new word mark is certainly not the most cutting edge I've ever seen but it is a definite improvement - IMO.

It's all opinion and taste. No right or wrong. Ask 10 different people, get 10 different opinions.

Edited September 24, 2011 by Mister X

[TheNiche]

The lighter approach probably came from the desire of wanting something friendlier and less authoritative. Big bad power companies are such a turn off these days. I like the movement that the 'sparks' and colors create. The lighter, sleeker look is much more inviting than that authoritative bold dark and red heavy handed old logo. The new word mark is certainly not the most cutting edge I've ever seen but it is a definite improvement - IMO.

Reliant has something of a branding problem. So does TXU. These were the two giant companies from before deregulation took place, and for a long time they skirted by on brand recognition and the lack of consumer awareness about options between energy companies, charging relatively high prices on their energy.

But the political environment was and remains hazardous for them. This logo is very feminine. I'm not sure that it'll play well to Texas consumers, but it may help keep them from being the 800-pound gorilla that everybody likes to take a shot at.

I can see that they want new branding, but I can also see that they're afraid to completely write off all the built-in goodwill of the name. But if they're taking on such a weak aesthetic, better to put the name out of its misery IMO.

[editor]

Since Reliant and NRG now have the same logo, I wonder if in a few years the word "Reliant" will be dropped in favor of NRG. That sort of thing happens all the time.

[Simbha]

It's all opinion and taste. No right or wrong. Ask 10 different people, get 10 different opinions.

It's all opinion and taste. No right or wrong. Ask 10 different people, get 12 different opinions.

There, I corrected that for ya.

[Simbha]

I'm somewhat of a branding consultant. (I own a firm that advises on branding/marketing, in addition to other strategy, issues.) That does NOT mean my opinion means more than others, but I actually like the new logo (albeit, not on the stadium).

What my position may give me is an informed perspective on the process companies use in re-branding. Reliant/NRG's branding directors (should have) had a particular image they wished to convey, and this logo fit the bill in their mind. It's nothing less isolated than that. Whether the image they choose to convey is the appropriate one, or whether this image conveys it properly to their target market, is a different issue.

I'll point out that the new Reliant logo was released at the same time - and is based on - the new NRG logo (below). NRG is a national company which also recently (last year) acquired Green Mountain Energy and now touts itself as a provider of 'green power'. The new logo (for NRG and Reliant) may convey this image better than the last.

Here's the new NRG logo:

I believe the design elements were purposefully chosen to appeal to a younger audience - likely, those who would more care about 'green energy' (at least in the minds of the company exec's). The lowercase 'nrg' is a trend that's been seen for the past 15 or so years that is built off 'netspeak'. The colored elements seem to convey connections - perhaps between 'people' (i.e., consumers), the company and the environment. The 'connection' part is apparent from the use of secondary colors at the joins.

Nothing I've said should be non-obvious; that's the point -- that it can be understood easily by the masses.

Here's NRG's logo prior to 2004:

And, here's the one released in 2004:

Each of these conveys a particular image. The contrast between the one prior to 2004 and the new one is quite obvious. It does appear that NRG is attempting to move towards an image of 'friendly' (e.g., green) energy. The move to lowercase letters in the newest design is likely influenced by the cultural impact of 'netspeak' - although I, personally, think this is way overplayed. The colored design elements are simplistic, but that's probably the right way to go.

Our designers likely would have gone with a different tact on this, but I don't think they've done horribly or anything with the new logo.

[Simbha]

Since Reliant and NRG now have the same logo, I wonder if in a few years the word "Reliant" will be dropped in favor of NRG. That sort of thing happens all the time.

There's a recent (read: past 8 to 10 years or so) for large national/international service companies to build 'local' brands in conjunction with the broader brand. This is part of that trend, which is also related to 'glocalization'. My suspicion is that we'll see this continue for another 5 to 7 years, then wane. Once it does, NRG will likely slowly consider re-branding Reliant as NRG. Much of this is going to depend on cultural trends, though.

My principal concern with this branding is that it's backward-looking. It doesn't anticipate future shifts in social perspective, but instead (per my previous post, above) is reactive to social trends over the past 5 to 15 years. That's NOT a good thing for Reliant/NRG in a competitive, deregulated environment. Then again, this is common - and NRG probably doesn't care. <sigh>

Edit: Woohoo! I'm now a 'museum'!

Edited September 25, 2011 by Simbha

[Hartmann]

Since Reliant and NRG now have the same logo, I wonder if in a few years the word "Reliant" will be dropped in favor of NRG. That sort of thing happens all the time.

This is what I was thinking. NRG bought Reliant's retail side in Texas and they're clearly beginning the transition by making their logo stick in customer's minds.

[Talbot]

I actually like the new design, I don't think that everything needs to have a corporate image in order to still look professional. One thing about the new one that I personally like, is that it seems more calm with the lowercase, whereas with the capital letters it seems like it was more brute and in your face.