I don’t find the quotes shared actually proof of the claims made. Of course rooftop solar messes with utility profits, but the operative question is how. The article seems assume simple 1:1 demand reduction as the driver of lowering profits, but, for example, a larger driver could be a shift from base load generation (cheaper) to peaker generation (more expensive). Another possibility could be net metering laws creating demand for services (usage of utility at night as if it were a giant battery) without actually paying for the cost of utility infrastructure and the services provided by incorrectly equating a kWh as the same no matter when it’s generated.
Full disclosure: I have rooftop solar and also benefit from net metering, so I am not speaking as one who can’t see why the consumer desires those things.
With a domain like insideclimatenews.org, I feel this article meets my expectations in treating more competition -> less profits as some sort of news.
The major issue we've seen was showcased in Germany [0] where renewable sources simultaneously destroyed profits and drove record high prices for consumers, because they were bought in by a program of subsidies that decoupled retail and wholesale prices. As long as solar demand is driven by actual market forces, then it'll follow the usual market dynamic of more entrants with lower costs leading to lower prices. The only way that can't happen is if legislators roll in to do something stupid, like a special subsidy.
There are also the secondary reliability issues; things like the Texas cold snap a few years ago where wind was so unreliable the contingency plans just assumed it wasn't there from what I recall. But then the reliable generation didn't work either and it was a double whammy into major crisis. That will do weird things to profits, I won't attempt to forecast that one.
[0] I don't speak German so if someone wants to challenge this go ahead, but the prices seemed to speak for themselves.