Let's try that again.
@cindercone Again very much appreciated but in all honesty, there are some very well versed investors in BMN.
That aside, at current prices and my estimated total costs, the outcome that this BMN management team achieved on their Invinity investment will likely add 40% to the profitability of the company this year. That's great business acumen and is worth far more than PR in my book.
However, despite the clear need for better communication and guidance, starting with what 2022 is going to look like, this team has delivered a +4,000 mtV producing mining company just as vanadium prices look set for another surge.
Yes costs are higher and the Rand is really sticking the knife in at the moment but that in itself points to where the market expects these commodity prices to head. If not then the Rand falls back. It likely can't have both.
Quite frankly no one in this for the long energy storage game likely wants to see a repeat of 2018 but let's be honest, it wouldn't hurt our pockets now, would it?
It has been a tough journey to get to 4,000 mtV but again that is already +56% higher than what they were achieving when the last surge took place. So 2018 prices need not apply. As an example, $60 vanadium, so less than half the peak of 2018, would deliver $120m in pre-tax profits even if current costs and production stayed still.
That's not an impossibility given what is happening in the vanadium market today. This management team delivered that and this market, however stupid it may wish to look, will notice that if it happens. PR or not.
If the said surge in pricing takes longer to come through which is what FM indicated in their analysts call ( and that is what it was an analyst call, not an investor call) and I have to, then even with these bumps in the road production is going to be higher than 4,000 mtV in 2022 and that will reflect even more in the SP.
Right now $35 vanadium is healthy but the market wants more in order to buy into it. Just like they did in 2016/17. But mark FM's measured words in that call, steel production is much stronger than it was in 2016. BMN is sending much more material into China now. That reflects a Chinese market that is in deficit and they are maxing out on production in a very high iron ore price environment. That is a recipe for significant price rises and a great deal of pressure for the US/Europe because they need material to come out of China not be sent into it.
@cindercone Again very much appreciated but in all honesty, there are some very well versed investors in BMN.
That aside, at current prices and my estimated total costs, the outcome that this BMN management team achieved on their Invinity investment will likely add 40% to the profitability of the company this year.
Yes costs are higher and the Rand is really sticking the knife in at the moment but that in itself points to where the market expects these commodity prices to head. If not then the Rand falls back. It likely can't have both.
However, despite the clear need for better communication and guidance, starting with what 2022 is going to look like, this team has delivered a +4,000 mtV producing mining company just as vanadium prices look set for another surge.
Quite frankly no one in this for the long energy storage game likely wants to see a repeat of 2018 but let's be honest, it wouldn't hurt our pockets now, would it?
It has been a tough journey to get to 4,000 mtV but again that is already +56% higher than what they were achieving when the last surge took place. So 2018 prices need not apply. As an example, $60 vanadium, so less than half the peak of 2018, would deliver $120m in pre-tax profits even if current costs and production stayed still.
That's not an impossibility given what is happening in the vanadium market today. This management team delivered that and this market, however stupid it may wish to look, will notice that if it happens. PR or not.
If the said surge in pricing takes longer to come through which is what FM indicated in their analysts call ( and that is what it was an analyst call, not an investor call) and I have to, then even with these bumps in the road production is going to be higher than 4,000 mtV in 2022 and that will reflect even more in the SP.
Right now $35 vanadium is healthy but the market wants more in order to buy into it. Just like they did in 2016/17. But mark FM's measured words in that call, steel production is much stronger than it was in 2016. BMN is sending much more material into China now. That reflects a Chinese market that is in deficit and they are maxing out on production in a very high iron ore price environment. That is a recipe for significant price rises and a great deal of pressure for the US/Europe because they need material to come out of China not be sent into it.
I appreciate that HarChris. Here they are. I trust they are worth it and easy enough to follow. It's just my opinion remember. There are lots of very good other ones out there too.
https://www.bbnbigbitenow.com/post/bushveld-minerals-review-of-q1-2021-update-part-1
https://www.bbnbigbitenow.com/post/bushveld-minerals-review-of-q1-2021-update-part-2
Morning everyone,
I have just put some notes together in the recent vanadium price rises in China.
https://twitter.com/BigBiteNow/status/1392751140736012288?s=20
All three main markets are now running at +$8 per lb which is a significant milestone.
It is important not to lose sight of the fact that the majority of BMN production will come in H2 2021. The 35 day maintenance period at Vametco and possibly the kiln 3 refurb at Vanchem have seen to that.
8th Feb update,
"Estimated Group production of between 4,100 mtV and 4,350 mtV in 2021, a 13 per cent to 20 per cent increase relative to 2020, with volumes weighted towards the second half due to a 35-day maintenance shutdown at Vametco during Q1 2021."
Important not to forget that Vametco is at various levels feeding into the Vanchem plant and will likely replace Vanchem ore acquired from Mapochs at some point this year.
So Vametco's operating position post the Q1 shutdown is significant. Even on an evenly weighted basis Vametco guidance at 2,775 mTV, would mean Vametco lost c. 240 mtV just on the 35-day shutdown alone. TO this we need to add the effects of the maintenance work and de-bottlenecking + the fact that weather-wise H2 is always a much stronger production period.
So we are likely talking about a significantly bigger H2 2021 which makes prices year to date less influential. This is all about what pricing environment BMN is expanding into (possible inventory sell down noted). Therefore, Q1 update is about stability and maintaining guidance. Subsequent quarterly reports are what are going to deliver the impact if this vanadium market rise is maintained.
I cannot say for certain that it will be but the macro factors are certainly in place and history says when prices push beyond $6-$7 per lb, we are already in a deficit scenario. This push beyond $8 in my view, compounds that argument and says it will now continue (significant market crashes or Covid related influences aside).
Thank you. You are a star.
Morning gambitxjs,
Thank you for this. It makes for very interesting reading. You wouldn't happen to have access to the 2nd article posted by Ferroallloy to day, would you? It's the one entitled "vanadium system is in good atmosphere..."
No problem if you don't.
An unnecessary and unsubstantiated tirade that I didn't earn or deserve.
For the record, I only visit BBs where I am invested. I don't go looking for fights because they are a waste of time and I don't feel any need to be in a BMN cult just because I am passionate about the stock. Whether I am believed or not is of little relevance. The markets and the stocks we choose to support will do the real talking in the end.
I have posted some thoughts based on what I have learnt from being invested in vanadium for the last 6 years or so. I have put a lot of time into this industry. It will be of use to some who will hopefully be encouraged to look deeper into it and find things out for themselves. Whilst others will likely ignore it or write it off as lies. That's fine. It is of little consequence to me because facts cannot be changed.
I will continue to add to my position here as the price allows and I will post here as and when I feel I can add something of worth. However, my home these days is my Twitter feed and my blog which when I feel stronger (currently sick) will now include Invinity because post the SGRE deal this is for me a long term hold.
Until then.
2/2
Where BMN remain of great importance to Invinity and so yes should be involved in any sensible discussion about Invinity and their prospects, is that they are a willing partner even when the vanadium price is set to spike. That long term security sets a benchmark for the like of SGRE when they carry out their extensive due diligence.
As I wrote earlier today, in SGRE Invinity have found a partner who is going to be asking about GW size production and not MWh which is where Invinty still is at this time. So we are talking many thousands of tonnes of vanadium and it cannot simply be about abundant material in the ground, it has to be about how does it get out of the ground and into our batteries and at what sort of likely price? It is highly unlikely that the likes of Siemens would make such commitments without these answers having some sort of structured plan attached.
In the 2 years that it will take for SGRE/Invinity to deliver on their developments plans the energy storage market is likely going to explode. Vanadium supply is therefore going to come under even more pressure even if steel demand waivers somewhat in between. The VRFB market can expand far more quickly than any mine can be developed.
I would think that a Siemens of this world could have a 1GW plant up and running within 18 months. At 17,000 mtV that would require 4 fully expanded Vametcos to feed. Right now until vanadium prices rise most greenfield projects that aren't owned by existing producers aren't going to get financed. The vanadium price is just too damn volatile to enable it.
That means vanadium price spikes are a real risk for VRFB companies as they were in 2017/18.
Despite all of that SGRE signed up with Invinity to develop grid-scale sized VRFB opportunities. Without BMN behind them the questions on the sort of risks I have just listed, couldn't be answered by Invinity on their own.
That is not to say that BMN are the only story here. This is a partnership that has come together at just the right time and presents a compelling pitch. That is why Siemens has signed up. Great tech. Great experience and now defined supply lines for the one product that is most important right now, the vanadium.
Once the scale starts to really kick in (and it has to be well beyond what Invinity is approaching now c. 50-60 MWh) then the vanadium element becomes less influential. However, in order to achieve the commitments to that scale, the vanadium supply has to be the most central concern right now. It's unfortunately unavoidable.
In time I believe Invinity will have more choice and all along the way BMN and its shareholders have to respect its place in this partnership.
I am really excited by this deal and what it means for Invinity and BMN. It is the first real springboard to large scale VRFB production outside of China and is groundbreaking, and both sets of shareholders really should be rejoicing it together.
1/2
Having now started to build a position in this company I find myself visiting a BB that looks to be filled with a great deal of unnecessary anger. That doesn't do anybody any good and detracts away from the work that both companies are achieving both individually and in partnership.
As I have explained on my Twitter feed today, the sell-down by BMN when looked at factually had no lasting effect on Invinity or its future. The two key elements for longer-term success centred around a high placing price (so minimal dilution) and a completed deal with SGRE at the same level of valuation. Both have been achieved. Anything that happens in between is purely short term market dynamics and only affect those that feel compelled to sell during that period.
https://twitter.com/BigBiteNow/status/1392378787225120769?s=20
As someone who has also invested for a long period in the markets, such actions are common and often have far worse outcomes but placed in long term minded context they really are not critical to my/this investment's overall success.
IES management is all about that longer-term consideration and when all things are considered, I am sure they are delighted by the support that BMN has given them since they tabled the idea of a merger to both Redt/Avalon in 2019.
Moving forward these two companies futures are now intertwined and it looks very much like BMN will be IES go-to partner for vanadium for the foreseeable future. That continued relationship will of course be dependent on BMN matching any offers of vanadium/electrolyte available in the market. So it's not a given.
However, it is in my view a mistake to assume that vanadium and/or electrolyte is easy to come by at prices that make business sense. Yes, the world is full of vanadium and in the case of China, 87% of their resource sits in stone coal. Unfortunately, right now, it is too expensive to extract to be of value to what are still fledgeling VRFB companies. It is also under a great deal of pressure from China environmental crackdowns.
Therefore, the vast majority of vanadium is still coming from Chinese co-producers and right now they are struggling to keep up with demand in their own country. In addition, Chinese VRFB companies including VRB Energy, are ramping up to demand to c. 5,000 mtV for their own list of VRFB projects starting later this year. My belief is that is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of 'local' demand. At c. 110,000 mtV total 2020 production, we are already talking c. 4% of world production going into VRFBs in China in 2021/early 2022. Once that begins to expand then the likes of Invinity are going to need low-cost vanadium from ex-China sources and that is limited at this time.
Apologies, I was a tad lazy there. A re-run.
Everyone has their threshold and their own persona timeframes which I certainly have no right questioning.
From a purely personal point of view, I think we're are still several years away from any potential takeover of BMN, if indeed it were to come.
My current belief is that whatever entity comes out of this JDCA it will look to tie up vanadium off-takes in some shape or form, much along the same lines that large auto companies do deals with the likes of CATL and Ganfeng.
That I believe is what BMN will also ultimately wish to achieve as it would give them the security to continue to expand into their vast resources.
A big entity like Siemens will surely seek such security given the risks associated with mineral supply which are amplified in the vanadium sector. The Chinese are always a risk at any point in time and at any level. Be it competition or as the aggressor. Just look at what Ganfeng just did over at BCN.
However, in my experience, they tend to do their best work from the inside.
The whole VFB/energy storage sector is now very much alive and so things can change very quickly indeed, meaning opinions can change but I believe that is ultimately where BMN want to/should be heading because that's what they have been indicating for some time now. They just haven't had the scale or big enough players to achieve it. They perhaps do now.
BMN website once more,
"Low-cost primary producers with significant production capacity are well positioned to address price volatility by potentially providing long-term, stable pricing."
Everyone has their threshold and their own persona timeframes which I certainly have no right questioning.
From a purely personal point of view, I think we're are still several years away from any potential takeover of BMN, if indeed it were to come.
My current belief is that whatever entity comes out of this JDCA it will look to tie up vanadium off-takes in some shape or form, much along the same lines that large auto companies do deals with the likes of CATL and Ganfeng.
That I believe is what BMN will also ultimately wish to achieve as it would give them the security to continue to expand into their vast resources.
A big entity like Siemens will surely seek such security given the risks associated with mineral supply which are amplified in the vanadium sector. The Chinese are always a risk at any point in time and at any level. Be it competition or as the aggressor. Just look at what Ganfeng just did over at BCN.
However, in my experience, they tend to do their best work from the inside.
The whole VFB/energy storage sector is now very much alive and so things can change very quickly indeed, meaning opinions can change but I believe that is ultimately where BMN want to/should be heading. Otherwise the whole talk about
BMN website once more,
"Low-cost primary producers with significant production capacity are well positioned to address price volatility by potentially providing long-term, stable pricing."
@jimbo66 That may be a possibility but SGRE didn't commit to this deal based on any hope. This deal for me has much stronger concrete footings already.
BMN at c. 6,000 mtV by close of 2022 and 8,400 mtV over the next 3-4 years max, can deliver SGRE the sort of initial capacity it needs when this starts to takes off in c. 2 years or so.
BMN electrolyte plant at starter 200 MWh but with the ability to push to 1,000 MWh has the ability to deliver secure electrolyte supply to SGRE world portfolio of projects. Take a look at slide 13 below. For the right projects, it really doesn't have to travel very far. For those further afield vanadium would be the supply of choice.
This move by SGRE says very loudly that VFBs are in play outside of China. It will bring a lot of attention to the whole industry and IES in particular. BMN is more than happy pulling the commercial strategy strings in the background knowing at some point it will all come together very nicely.
With the green transition now unstoppable, this was never about the tech being good enough. It was about guaranteed vanadium supply at fair prices and interest in the tech that could scale it to the next level.
SGRE entering the picture (added to the China scale-up which must not be underestimated) just provided the last piece of the puzzle. One angle, one opportunity but a giant step forward that I cannot stress the importance of enough.
https://www.siemensgamesa.com/en-int/-/media/siemensgamesa/downloads/en/investors-and-shareholders/periodic-information/2021/q2/q2-results-presentation-fiscal-year-2021-siemens-gamesa-en.pdf?la=en-bz&hash=5FFF23CB98B832230FE0B61F723C7D4F0C35E74C
@jimbo66
The deal announced by IES today is in my opinion the culmination of a process that BMN started back in 2019 and that always had an SGRE sitting at the end of it.
What Redt/Avalon and BMN have done is put together a package that can pass Siemens due diligence and persuade them that VFBs are viable at a grid-scale level that works for SGRE. A company with a pipeline of 10GW of work.
This deal doesn't get done unless the due diligence on the vanadium supply is also there. SGRE wouldn't be committing to such a JV unless clear enough markers on future vanadium supply at prices that do not undermine their tendering processes, can be achieved.
That doesn't happen without BMN on board.
The connections you describe are what we know today because that's what we've been told so far. Just like when we were told that the initial IES supportive investment was,
"Demonstrating upstream support from the vanadium industry for the development of the VRFB sector and encouraging additional investment into the combined company."
When in reality it was all part of a greater package that was designed to deliver one of the biggest project development fishes in renewable energy waters.
I don't believe that IES tech and ambition alone could have landed this deal because they are still a baby swimming in lithium infested waters. They needed the backing of BMN and their massive vanadium resources and the demonstration that significant expansion was happening there. That's what the Orion monies brought and have guaranteed.
FM sells us the notion that we have to be brave and expand now in order to meet the potential pending demand that can arrive much quicker than the production can expand. The reality is he knew this deal was being progressed and that its success needed BMN to act. So the move perhaps wasn't so brave after all.
There are clear milestones to achieve and it won't happen overnight but this deal is potentially massive for both IES and BMN and we have to start somewhere. One of the biggest RE developers in the world is about as good a start as it gets because they just answered the biggest question of all.
Scaled production large enough to go get those +10MW-100MW and beyond projects.
Massive day in the world of IES, BMN and the vanadium industry as a whole.
@Sanchez599
I certainly do not sit in the "oh well it's BMN and they can't do both" camp. My comments were not designed to dismiss concerns over PR or how the company presents itself.
If I could have both I would gladly take them and management should be encouraged where possible to deliver on this front. However, if I have to make a choice then clearly I would take substance over PR and that is where BMN is at right now.
Does the lack of PR drive me to want to give up on the opportunity that is clearly being presented here? No, because even without it the substance is there.
This company is fully funded to deliver 6,800 mtV to a market that is clearly beginning to accept the role of VRFBs in the energy storage sector. The energy storage sector is clearly heavily supported by an energy transition that cannot now turn back. Meaning it's very likely that BMN's initial 6,800 mtV planned output will find consistent and well-priced demand.
That will happen whether BMN advertises it or not. Furthermore, the energy transition itself coupled with the efforts of energy storage/VRFB industry participants will very likely do all the PR work for them. That interest and attention are now just gathering pace. At some point, VRFB players will be included and then everything else should then take care of itself.
It's important not to forget that BMN attracted the support of Orion. Yes the price could have been higher and PR may have helped that cause but then the effects of the Covid pandemic would likely have snuffed such endeavour out. That's because many weren't sure what the future held back in September 2020 and yet Orion committed to this business at that time. Orion doesn't invest in just any mining business. They are particular.
Despite all of that I would really like to see BMN present its updates more clearly and more staggered. What I am saying is that despite this failing the investment case remains very strong and the key fundamentals unaffected.
When sentiment turns and the market takes up the BMN story properly again, it will have a far different beast on its hands and it will be because of the substance that was created in the testing interim and not any PR that sells a business that isn't built yet.
My view only and I fully respect that of yours and anybody else invested here.
2/2
When the excitement all started in 2015/16 over VRFBs and what BE could achieve in the market, very few appreciated it would take 5 years or so to come good me included, but that history doesn't make the present any less viable or exciting.
If Largo somehow taps into that VRFB opportunity at a large scale then that means the world is equally as ready for the likes of Invinity, Eneroxy and indeed BMN led projects themselves. That's because those companies are far more advanced in their networks and project pipelines than Largo could ever be at this point.
Time and sentiment can wear us all down but right now is truly the most exciting point in BMN's world as a fully integrated vanadium player. A statement that is not undermined by the lack of updates or the style of their presentation. Substance is what wins through in the end and not sexy headlines. BMN with the opportunities they have carved out these last few years, whilst the share price has fallen away have created the architecture for delivering that substance. All other shareholder desires and earned rewards should then follow.
1/2
Well, there is a lot of opinions spliced into what I just wrote also.
I completely understand the frustration from shareholders who have watched the value of their investment consistently fall these last few years. It is why I try to tread as carefully as I can when presenting facts and my interpretation of them.
However, I also believe that BMN is in a far stronger position than many are prepared to accept right now because sentiment is undermining the general through the process. This is playing out right now through the perceptions of the progress being made by Largo in their clean energy arm. To be clear, its not a competition and nobody is getting a jump on anyone.
These guys all work closely together and I have little doubt that there will be a link back to the work of MN and BMN at Vanitec which has helped form this strategic move by Largo. When the SP is deflated it is easy to forget such details but MN is the chair of the Vanitec Energy Storage committee. He and this company are forefathers to the whole VRFB industry having started on this path many years ago. They have single-handedly resurrected 3 VRFB companies and delivered all their business to their door. That business requires time to come through but it is on the way.
For those that dig deep enough, it is clear that BMN's tie-up with the IDC in 2016 delivered the Eskom BESS project to the market. BMN management drove that and investors should be asking themselves on what grounds the IDC was convinced to part on the largest electrolyte plant outside of China?
The hardest part was getting them set up with the capital, the structure and a manufacturing capability that has the ability to expand into the opportunities they are now carving out. Again, this all takes time and Largo for all their headline-making words must walk the same path. There is no quick fix. Just look at Rongke Power and their 300MWh facility which should by now be 3GWh and they are the biggest player out there.
As an example, take Invinity. Through their Oxford hub project which I believe is due to come online at the end of H1 2021
and their work with the California Energy Commission, they have landed core partners who once they see the benefits of the systems they have inaugurated, can and I think will scale up their business with the company. With Pivot Power at Oxford, there is a strong chance that the vanadium rental product finds an expanding home. However, if nothing else the rental product beds in.
We are yet to hear about Enerox but we know they are the supplier to Portliner and will highly likely be the local VRFB assembly partner, feeding into opportunities presented by the Vametco mini grid. All of which will be fed by BMN because of the work they spent these last few years cultivating but that takes time to develop.
I applaud Largo's drive and the simplicity of their sales pitch but I take their headlines with a pinch of salt.
To be clear, I really do hope that they push hard and succeed as quickly as possible because it can only help expand the understanding of VRFBs and improve demand for vanadium.
However, VionX Energy look s to have succeeded about as much as Redt or Avalon did prior to their merger. Their IP could well be strong but their contract wins and portfolio just isn't there right now. So first and foremost just like Invinity they have to win smaller projects and demonstrate their capabilities. Yes the VRFB landscape is changing but even so, companies with limited experience and roll out remain a risk for clients.
So whilst the headline figure states a very sexy "annual manufacturing capacity of 1.4 GWh" the journey to achieving such built out capacity (because the first facility clearly won't be that large because it would only add to production costs) is for me unfortunately still a long way off.
Largo may well be able to throw more cash at their enterprise but I really don't see it being any more intensive than what Enerox have just achieved. Plus cash can only go so far. They need the staff, the expertise, the organizational structure etc mand most of all the contracts pipeline.
That all takes time to bring together and will likely follow the exact same path that Invinity and Enerox are now on.
The market isn't stupid. These headlines will of course receive initial excitement but it will quickly fade until such time that the headlines are replaced by something of substance.
There has been much talk about Largo's share price being unjustifiably higher than BMN which to a certain extent is true. However, they are considerably more profitable at current prices than BMN and have a large cash pile and no debt. They also have a far more favourable exchange rate which has not returned to its pre-Covid levels as the Rand has. This is driven in part by their Covid situation and has a significant impact on profitability.
Do I think the gap is fair? No, I do not but then BMN is on a different journey right now. Largo has a relatively new plant with limited expansion programmes that don't cost too much and don't affect ongoing production.
BMN is in the middle of a significant capacity expansion that will soon start to deliver them the same cost benefits and has yet to report on progress. As the market grows in confidence about its expansion and the timelines involved, then some of that valuation gap will start to be filled in. Also, the exchange rate can't have it both ways. A weakening dollar shouldn't just bring higher local costs. Eventually, it should deliver higher commodity prices in the things that are dollar-denominated such as vanadium.
Thank you jimbo66.
That's great teamwork which is what this should all be about.
2/2
I don't make many valuation predictions. I like to stick to delivering facts and analysis. However, when,
1. BMN is delivering substantial quantities of its increased production into VRFB projects, which it will.
2. When it has established a hungry market for its rental product and the market can better appreciate its future potential impact on the energy storage market,
3. When BMN is taking part in utility-scale projects, which deliver the VRFB market to that larger scale.
4. When BMN is understood,
then for starters, this is a multi-billion pound company. That's because it will no longer be measured on mining metrics but as a green transition player, expanding into a vast market opportunity.
Can it all still go wrong? Yes of course but in terms of market penetration for VRFBs, nobody has a better chance than those companies that are backed by vanadium producers, their guaranteed supply and their rental products. That in my view places the likes of BMN and Largo at the top of the tree and whether the market wants to appreciate it or not, BMN is actually streets ahead on this particular angle.
Right now Largo is being judged on its mining profitability and low costs, helped greatly by the Real being extremely weak against the dollar. On its energy storage credentials, it is a county mile behind BMN.
That aside, BMN has full control of its destiny but just needs a little more time to deliver. This is why for me vanadium prices in 2021 just need to deliver some profitability. To support BMN with their investment and expansion. Once we hit 2022, the risk reduces substantially further and the whole picture gets even more attractive, especially if the share price continues to stand still, which I very much doubt.
1/2
Hi LionelGreen,
I assure you I am not FM and if I was then investors should be disappointed by how much time I was spending on discussing the company rather than building it.
I appreciate greatly all the positive feedback. BMN is a passion of mine which I share gladly.
When it comes to share price manipulation, whilst I recognise it exists in the markets and shouldn't be too easily dismissed, I cannot make it a central focus to my approach.
My focus is on analysing and monitoring the key fundamentals to establish whether a substantial additional value exists.
So long as a company does not need to raise further funds, the current share price has no real bearing on proceedings.
So long as the company in question is delivering on its goals and I can see clearly that further bigger goals are attainable, then the current price as frustrating as it is does not truly matter. I recognise that for some investors time is an issue. Everyone has their own individual pressures. I can only talk from my own experience and how my plans feed into an investment like BMN.
Whatever BMN do or do not PR wise, the green transition is real and it's changing peoples perspective on how they invest and what they invest in. Energy storage is therefore a far more realistic proposition than it was even 5 years ago when BMN/BE started their integrated energy storage journey.
The one-piece that is still missing is the belief that VRFBs have a significant role to play in that industry. By securing significant ownership in and contracts with VRFB companies, BMN is gradually delivering a world that independently sits and can operate within that whole industry space. At some point that changing and evolving market place is going to begin to sweep up the VRFB element of this whole green transition story. When it does then BMN will likely be the most attractive member within it. That's certainly my belief anyway.
How long it takes to deliver I cannot say but my own timelines allow a great deal of room for it to happen and market understanding is certainly now happening at pace. This is helped greatly by China's approach, by VRFB companies with real futures entering the public markets, and other vanadium plays gaining attention, whether we like them or not.
I am certain that it will happen faster than most appreciate and some will get caught out by it.
The world's focus has only just come to rest heavily on EV technology and their transformation of the car industry. Energy storage is running parallel to that but EV success + the fear being generated by global warming, will in my view accelerate energy storage industry understanding, such that the same time frames to full market acceptance won't apply.