Member Info for 13thmonkey

It's in a filing cabinet.

Mitch, you forgot the sob story of putting while pension into this. Ultimately he's full of BS.

I could easily see that they could be told about things upcoming that a likely to come off but are not yet signed and sealed and therefore 'real' and hence not price sensitive, the cost to AFC is burnt goodwill and credibility if they don't come off, the II on the other hand will maybe accept that 50% of what they are told won't come to fruition.

Good job you sold out at 6p then iamjim

Back in the late 90's the discussion about the potential for the future energy shortages were all over the engineering trade mags, yes we've gotten more efficient, but the increase in peak load, and it will be peak load, will be huge, there is a need for grid supplementation.

1.6MW, wow.

This is my last comment, you are now challenging the timing, which no-one has really mentioned, we've been here long enough, what's another couple of years before it gets interesting.
However this is a change in tone from Friday, where you were challenging the very premise of an FC, and whether they were safe etc. That is all.

in fact up to Jun/Aug of this year their share price hadn't moved a jot when the 10:1 is taken into account, so were they massively overvalued?

so 2.5 times as many share, which means what exactly? There might be some dilution? lets say they need to raise 20M (as a lot of work is outsourced), at current prices that'll be an extra 20% in terms of share count, only when they need to do that there'll be a reason to do it, the SP will be higher. However ignoring that the mcap difference would then have grown from a factor 4 to a factor of 5, and our holdings would have diluted by 20% because we have a need to grow. I'm relatively happy with that idea. Note that Ceres dis this at a time when H2 was not fashionable, was not seen as a need, from here on in it is important, so raising that will be a lot easier.

You missed fridays attempts to spread fear.

Arvin, so are you saying that people won't spontaneously have their lungs filled with H2 and die/explode?

It amuses me that last week it was all about the inherent perils of H2 and boxes. Now it's all about comparing to a different company.

They've outsourced a lot of complex stuff, that will massively reduce the capex required. We've an mCap about 25% that of Ceres, reported revenues are similar to what Ceres's were 3 years ago. It's tough to tell what their Mcap was at that time, i'm thinking there has been a share consolidation in 2018? If we had a similar mcap i'd be a lot more concerned.

Just agreeing that scale affects price, it was Jim's earlier today.

As per the cheap H2 comment earlier, with no demand there'll be no cheap process, or no scale.

It just requires the technology and the economic incentive to implement it, or the future economic incentive to develop the technology.

looking at a new scientist from 2017, the target for 2C warming was that CO2 growth stops in 2020, and after that we start to reduce it....

There are two broad issues with scaling, can you sell it and can you make it.
Considering the selling argument as a precondition, if we had £nM of sales land tomorrow could we actually service them?

There's 3 broad areas to manufacturing this product, the stack, the inverters and batteries and plumbing.
The stack we have denora making all of the chemcially complex elements, and advanced plastics (from memory) making the complex parts of the housing, they'll be able to scale as this is their core business.
The inverters and batteries and other control electronics will be easy to scale or off the shelf.
The plumbing might be a bit more tricky, i'm assuming that highly technical welding is needed that might take some scaling but with good design that will have been minimised.
Everything else is tin bashing for the housings.

I don't see this being that difficult to scale, pre-denora i was concerned the kind of plant needed to produce volume is expensive and probably with a long lead time, denora will have capacity. I'm an ex manufacturing engineer, my job was figuring out how to make something that someone else had designed.

So then we hit the question, is there a market, and that is where something akin to faith comes in. There seems to be a need for the offering, the zeitgeist is with us, it's inputs and outputs are not novel and doesn't require reworking of other infrastructure, on balance there is a market and we have a product and it seems to have a competitive advantage. To me that gives it a good chance in the future.

What the Mcap is now will be effected by the possibilities in the future and how probable they are. Look at some of the unicorn caps that have not made a profit and don't solve a problem they just make a life a little easier for a tiny proportion of the population. Now don't get me wrong i'm not talking unicorn, but the concept of pricing in the future is not new.

What level of profit would justify a 20p share price at a P:E of 15? £5M profit I think? Could we see that in 2 years, I see no problem making the product, and the market is big enough, so yes we could. And a forward looking P:E of 15 is low for a growing company. This is all about the future not about the present.

I have spoken for myself, and I thank BumbleB for the clarification. The Salient point was one step away from the light aircraft scenario.

Bumbleb, precisely, in fact I referred to it explicitly as were were one step away from the light aircraft scenario, not actually discussing the light aircraft scenario.

I was referring to Friday, as clearly stated. Your posts yesterday were comparing a mature company with an essentially new company. I didn't get involved in those, as I think your very foundation is flawed, we know it's in the early stages of sales... you seem to be arguing as if it isn't.