[greenyoda]

"On the other hand they are super leveraged and have no asset backing them, they are truly naked and finance the most dangerous trench of the Solarcity business."

Why does getting a 2-5% yield for what you admit is a very risky investment seem compelling to you?

According to Bloomberg, investment grade corporate bonds (a safe investment) are currently yielding 3.52%, and high yield bonds are currently yielding 5.97%.[1]

You can buy an ETF (ticker: JNK) that has a diversified portfolio of high yield bonds that yields 5.84%.[2]

By failing to list such investment alternatives on its web site, solarcity.com is making their bonds look like a deceptively good investment. Sure, it's easy to beat high yield CD rates, but CDs have no capital risk (bank accounts are FDIC insured).

[1] http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates-bonds/corporate-bonds...

[2] http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=jnk&ql=1

[aharonovich]

I agree, but counting issues (type 424B5) in Solarcity's SEC filings[1] I see >$150m in solar bonds, and that's excluding the $90 mio from SpaceX. I try to understand who is buying them and why, given all the good reasons you've just mentioned.