Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
84 73 93 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
46 27 65 -
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
60 40 79
All types combined: 70 (likely 61 to 78, medium confidence), from 29 claims: 16 factual claims, 7 predictions, 6 promises. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Ørsted's claims
8 claims
“In the future, our guidance will only include the effect from existing offshore wind partnership agreements.”
Ørsted February 2018 Annual report 2017 - Strong results support Ørsted's green transformation (Ørsted)
Ørsted's future guidance will only include the effect from existing offshore wind partnership agreements.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
The second judge said resolved true; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
What would count as true or false
Test: in financial guidance issued after February 2018, did Ørsted include only the effect of offshore wind partnership (farm-down) agreements already signed when the guidance was issued, and exclude expected or unsigned future partnerships? True: guidance statements after Feb 2018 (annual and interim reports, guidance announcements) explicitly or demonstrably base partnership gains only on signed agreements, with no instance of unsigned deals being included. Mostly true: this is the consistent practice, with one ambiguous or minor wording deviation. Mixed: the practice was followed for a while and then dropped, or applied inconsistently across roughly half of guidance releases. Mostly false: the stated practice appears only rarely and most guidance includes assumed future partnership gains. False: post-Feb 2018 guidance clearly includes expected effects from partnership agreements not yet signed, or Ørsted announced it had reverted to including them. Ørsted's own description of its method counts only if the guidance documents reflect it.
Evidence
- Ørsted Annual report 2018 Ørsted · February 2019 Own record
“EBITDA (excluding new partnerships) increased by 18% to DKK 15.0 billion. The good results were driven by an increase in generation from our offshore wind farms in operation, which led to an increase of 29% in EBITDA from these activities. Including new partnerships, EBITDA increased by 33% to DKK 30.0 billion, of which DKK 15.1 billion came from the 50% farm-down of Hornsea 1.”
- Interim financial report Q1 2019 v8.pub - Ørsted Ørsted · May 2019 Own record
“* EBITDA excluding new partnership agreements closed later than 1 January 2019 (2018)”
- Interim financial report Q1 2019 v8.pub - Ørsted Ørsted · May 2019 Own record
“EBITDA (business performance), excluding new partnership agreements, is expected to be DKK 15.5-16.5 billion”
Reasoning
Ørsted's Q1 2019 interim report states its 2019 EBITDA guidance as DKK 15.5-16.5 billion 'excluding new partnership agreements' (E3). A footnote ties the exclusion to agreements closed after 1 January 2019 (E2). The 2018 annual report likewise reports EBITDA excluding new partnerships, with the signed Hornsea 1 farm-down shown as a separate component (E1). These guidance documents match the stated practice, but they cover only a small part of the post-February 2018 releases and come from the subject itself, so consistent application across all guidance cannot be fully confirmed.
Cite this claim
Ørsted, “Ørsted's future guidance will only include the effect from existing offshore wind partnership agreements.” (said February 2018). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_d07f1de5625f, method 0.1.0+7831dd9d. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_d07f1de5625f
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Ørsted? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.