RE: STG versus Competitors
Keep in mind also variable costs.
Efficiencies of crystalline and TF panels and SET's inverter efficiency with each. It would appear it is more efficient with TF but that still is overcome because of the safety issue.
TF needs more space and thus more panels for same project compared to crystallines. Resulting also in more racking costs and higher installation costs. Again though, TF panels are cheaper to help offset costs.
Something else mentioned at SET's workshop in relation to an installation using TF.
A typical 100 kw rooftop using the competitor would use one central inverter with a cost of $35000.00
The same project would use 20 of the SET inverters at $2100 each for a cost of $42.000.00 putting it more expensive but minor in the overall cost.
The benefit, of course, of using SET's inverter is the low voltage, thus safety issue, and the efficiency with TF parallel vs series due to shading etc. for a much higher efficiency.
Another important thing to put into the equation is the cost of financing which further offsets profit. Regular maintenance costs etc are another ongoing cost on your investment.