Job001, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of not only how utilities work in the U.S., but the exhorbitant subsidy structure behind solar power, without which the industry would not exist.
The American utility industry is the most highly regulated in the country, and its executives are the lowest paid. In many respects, the "industry" is a government agency with enough financial incentives to drive innovation while keeping a tight lid on profits. In California, utilities are prevented by state law from raising their rates more than 10% above costs. There is no other business in the country with this level of oversight and restriction on profitability.
Despite all the hype, solar power generates less than 1% of U.S. electricity. The only reason solar costs are declining 11%/year is the government is handing out 30% of solar installation costs to everyone who wants it, whether they live in sunny Arizona or rainy Seattle. On a per-kilowatthour basis, that's twice the subsidy which is offered the nuclear industry, which nationwide generates seventeen times as much carbon-free power. It's power which is available day or night, rain or shine, and doesn't require fossil fuel backup. It costs one-third less than solar and, contrary to popular belief, is even safer.
So I have to laugh at your portrayal of utilities as powerful monoliths bent on crushing solar innovation under their heavy boots. That's a fantasy of Greenpeace and solar entrepreneurs, who are rushing to capitalize on an obscene federal windfall before the cash runs out.
Have you considered that the reason "utility guy blogs show no cognizance of learning curve progress with wind, storage, fuel cells, or solar" might be because none of those technologies are proving adequate for either providing power or addressing climate change?