We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
IP group hold 13% here, doubt they'd let a funding crisis develop over a few million!
Sure let's compare ITM to Xeros:
Revenue:
XSG: 3.54
ITM: 4.59
Operating loss:
XSG: -30.51
ITM: -9.35
EPS:
XSG: -28.24p
ITM: -2.89p
See the problem? Want more?
Market Cap:
XSG: 9 Million
ITM: 632 Million
Politely suggest you just stop responding to me. Then I'll stop posting and you can get on with your ramping.
CN.
How has Woodford affected the stock? has there been mass offloading?
Dontfret, you clearly don't read the boards in 'threaded' view! Try turning it on, it will help you understand the conversations better!
I've already said what my review consisted of, I mapped all of IP Groups holdings and ranked them by earnings per share and cash burn. XSG were bottom of that list. I was spooked - enough to think I'll leave them alone.
I posted it here, for others to comment on. To tell me why it's not a concern to them.
Anyway, hopefully it all comes good for you!
CN
Dontfret, your post history is full of garbage, you're a ramper..
"BOOM BOOM (basil)"
"16.50 about to be taken out"
"Bring it on. Three bags already. Want at least another four!"
I've yet to find a post where you say anything actually useful! If you believe the earnings per share of this stock is nothing to worry about then say why? I'm happy to be informed.
I wanted to alert others to what I've seen, that XSG are the worst performing, in terms of EPS, of all IP Groups holdings. That spooked me. You might not like the info, but I thought it useful so I posted it.
I'd want others to do the same for stocks I'm in.
What ****es me off on these boards is muppets who post bllx like:
"Not sold any from 4p. How’s that for balls of steel (rocket you tried to make me sell earlier) naughty boy"
"Not just that. The royalties in this are immense! This is just the start"
"We are up 6%! He best order more toilet roll ;)"
yet every single one of your posts is ramping! Not a single one supplying any useful information to other investors... why are you here if not to ramp? Show me one post where you've tried to make a positive contribution? Above:
"Called it well , We must have some news next week ?"
"My buy is showing up as a sell !"
"Why sell now ! Because someone might make a bid ???? Holding to the end"
I would have thought an SXX investor might appreciate a bit of pessimism on a board??? Mind boggles.
How much have you all lost here already? go on, give me a laugh.
Nothing worse than board full of ramping. For me, the most interesting posts are the negative ones. I supplied a perfectly valid reason why I won't be investing.
Instead of being a d!ck, show why I'm wrong?
CN
Taverham: Here's what I know.
Ceres are now intellectual property only, so other companies are working on the end solution but in essence:
Ceres's steel cell is a 1KW unit that would replace a typical homes boiler. Their early example units were the same size as a UK combi boiler, the idea being a straight swap could take place.
The unit would be connected to mains gas, as normal, but instead of burning the gas, it is passed through the fuel cell. At this point the fuel cell generates electricity. This electricity is then fed in to the house or, if not required, back in to the grid. As mentioned by others, the electricity generated is ~1KW.
The bonus part is the heat exchange. SOFC's run hot, > 500C, this exhaust temp is what's used to heat your water. 'A typical homes hot water' they say.
I believe the units would also encompass a burner, for when the central heating kicks in, but I'm not 100% on this.
So, you get most of your electricity and your hot water needs, all with no emissions.
Ceres are distinct because their fuel cell uses steel & ceramic components, making them cheaper to manufacture. I believe other cells use a Platinum catalyst and thus are significantly more expensive.
They're also branching out in to automotive, with a 5KW unit.
According to Wikipedia, there are 8385 petrol stations.
I don't know about you, but sticking a H pump at each of those feels a lot more sensible than spraying charging points around the place.
Easily achievable for the 2035 target.
CN
Taverham: the ceres cell can operate on natural gas, there is no need to convert the gas network to H.
The way I see this panning out is as follows:
1) boiler replacement incentive, all boilers must be fuel cell and support mchp. Gov can choose to be as aggressive as they like on this.
2) we immediately start injecting clean H into the grid, ideally from the oversupply of renewables. Up to the magic 20% mark. (ITM leading the way!)
3) new legislation to force all gas appliances to be H ready.
4) start increasing H mix.
5) at the same time begin a national roll out of H refuelling. All forecourts to have H dispensing by 2025. (can't be that hard, LPG was everywhere and no one had it either!)
6) proliferation of H refueling drives uptake in H cars.
7) producing H becomes big business, with busses, trucks and trains all switching fast. Companies like PHE spring up, finding new, funky ways to get at the stuff.
I think you're all missing the importance of a fuel cell boiler here. For the vast majority of your day 2 day hot water needs + background heating, a fuel cell boiler can meet this. All while producing electricity to run your home and feed the grid. This is how we get to net zero, no need to dig up roads and carry out mass upgrades, just a boiler replacement scheme. Mix in home solar and you can start to see the picture develop.
CN
Here's an old doc, from when CWR were still trying to build a boiler.
https://aleo.org.uk/downloads/root/regions/em/meetings/introduction_to_ceres_power.pdf
Thought I'd start a new thread for clarity.
>>Thanks for this, it is years since I've bothered to look at Ceres and it was worth looking at it again.
You're welcome!
>>While not part of the argument it would be nice if their website actually told you how it functioned, what sort of size a >>unit it is etc and a clear view of the thermal mass and Max temp of the unit. For me, the lack of facts is especially irritating >>but if I take it as just a puff piece I can learn a few things.
I think it's worth re-capping on the history of Ceres. So they were originally planning to launch their own mCHP boiler, handling the process end to end. However, they almost went under & the IP Group stepped up to save them. Management then moved the company to a 'licensing model' and the rest is well history :)
When they were in the boiler build phase there was much more tech info available, now, they're just selling IP for their stacks to 3rd parties.
>>Depending on page and product they claim 60% efficiency all the way up to>90% is significantly better than petrol >>engines, but significantly below the 90 to 98% efficiencies claimed by combi boilers across the piste. The limit looks like >>85% with combined heat and power. I'm not sure how this works in a domestic situation I assume you make A of >>electricity and A* of hot water where A:A* is a fixed ratio to maximise efficiency and with any movement away from that >>ratio leading to a drop off of efficiency. So electricity or hot water storage is still required.
Not necessarily, the boiler could run to purely generate electricity, 24hrs a day, if that's what is desired. Should someone turn on a tap, the water would pass through the excess heat from the fuel stack and thus become instantly hot.
Of course, I think this situation unlikely, the most common installation would be to replace the traditional boiler. You turn on the hot tap, the fuel cell starts up and generates electricity, your house consumes this or, if it's excess, it's fed back to the grid. Meanwhile the water is passed over the stack and made hot. Certainly no storage 'required'.
>>BTW selling combi-boilers is famously tight margin work. The technology is ancient and no patents apply. This would >>have to offer something more to make a better margin. Does it? What would a domestic fuel cell for a house cost?
Agree, the boilers would need to be cost neutral to standard boilers, or be forced on us through legislation (eg. all new boilers must be mCHP capable). Ceres are interesting because their technology is the 'SteelCell' which has wider applications than just boilers!
>>I'd like to see some technical facts and understand the technical limitations of CH4 fuel cells more. Any advice, other than >>their website where I can get this stuff?
There used to be more info around, but since they're just pushing their IP these days it's up to the individual OEMs to publish their tech specs.
If you just sit back and think about the practicalities of battery electric vehicles, for more than 5 minutes, the number of issues soon become insurmountable.
Here's a few:
^ I grew up in Lancashire where there is street after street of terraced housing. Hardly anyone has the luxury of a driveway. Where are these people supposed to charge their cars? Are we going to run cables across the pavement? What about flats and inner cities? I don't know about you, but when I drive around I see streets full of cars, not driveways.
^ Motorways, so you're driving long distance, 1/2 way you need to re-charge. We'd literally need multi storey carparks building at all service stations, they'd need to be packed with charging stations so everyone could plug in for an hour. A complete non-starter.
^ I'm told, here on this forum and by others, who work for SSE, that the electricity network can not cope with millions of cars being connected.
^ Even if the network is up to scratch, where is the electricity to charge the cars going to come from? This demand is not currently on the grid, there's no generation to cover it. Would we need to build more nuclear or gas power plants to service it? Think about it, the energy from millions of litres of fuel, sold every week, now needs to come from our power stations.
^ Lifecycle of the batteries, producing, replacing and recycling. Can this really be considered green? Suspect we'd just be storing up new problems.
CN.
I recently sold out of AFC at a heavy loss and moved to PHE, lack of news from AFC was troubling, so took a punt on something else.
I'm still in here and CWR and agree ceres seem the more advanced, but I believe there's always going to be multiple players in this space, I invested in them all, CFU, IEH, CWR, AFC and PPS. Only one no longer exists... (tho I no longer hold AFC or IEH (delisted)) Also, the fact I'm in here at 3p keeps me clinging on ??
Are you sure ITM aren't involved? Isn't RYSE owned by the heir of JCB? Same JCB that own a big chunk of ITM?
PPS also down, H even got a mention on question time... Things are changing, finally!
"For the vast majority the ch4 H2 mix will be used to burn for heating."
Don't disagree, but the CWR fuel cell can run on a gas mix, it doesn't require pure H. So electricity can be generated on site cleanly. Gas still burnt for heating though I believe.
Hi all,
Hope this one works out for you all but I won't be investing. I've completed my review of XSG. Compared to the rest of the publicly traded IP Group's interests, this stock has seriously concerning fundamentals.
They're operating at earnings per share of -28.24p. The worst performing of all IP Group's holdings. With their move to a licensing model and the potential impact on revenues, I think this one is best avoided for a few years!
Good luck though all!