Member Info for Digitalis

@SpicyTuna, I agree trade wars are self-defeating and generally bad news for countries, however, it was the specific impact to ITM as opposed to a more generalised impact that you had suggested, that I was querying?

Even if EU/UK were to impose tariffs on US goods, what of ITM's supply chain comes from imports from the US to experience the impact? If their supply chain is non-US, I see no direct impact.

There's enough bad news out there without ascribing something that is a fear not a reality, is my point.

And as I've said, there is opportunity here for the EU/UK to realise it must fund H2 to move away from petrochemicals based on Fossil Fuels.

The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity; the optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty - Winston Churchill - seems apt

Why would it increase inflation in ITM's target markets? Tariffs cause inflation in the imposing country so USA which ITM have some hopes for but less than elsewhere.

No reason to suppose it will drive up ITM supply side costs and even if it did in the longer term - there's £70M of inventory unaffected at the moment (from latest accounts).

Inflation may go up but not just if there's a tariff response, there were already inflationary pressures building before this.

Ah well @Bilbo true that we are all guilty of using evidence that supports our positions. I've read the REMA impact assessment too that says all consumer will benefit by at least £10 which is pure fantasy. Can't go from a postage stamp socialised payment system without winners and losers - and the consumers who lose will lose a lot in reality

Likewise, I'll try to avoid discussing actual politics but note that I made comments about the impact on geopolitics and the need to find an alternative to petrochemicals - which in my mind is Hydrogen (green)

@Bilbo

Recent survey suggests consumers don't want locational pricing.

https://renews.biz/99029/uk-public-rejects-zonal-energy-pricing/

"For zonal pricing to work it has to have winners and losers, which would result in damage to critical areas of our industrial base and also higher bills for millions of consumers."

I agree with you too ftsefan - in fact I'd go as far as to say "what I said"

Currently up £173 - raking it in

I agree with you Aath - I also appreciated your sarcasm, up there with mine the other day, pondering about making a post to see if anyone knew what was behind the rise :-)

I say "apparent" because for each article of some scale back, there is an equivalent article showing "scale up" such as Germany's pipe network, plans for rollout of Hydrogen re-fuelling etc. It just depends what one chooses to place the most weight on. I don't choose to place much weight on BP's announcements compared to country announcements on investment in Hydrogen. It is horses for courses and which announcements one tends to favour personally.

War is indeed a dirty game, but at the moment the EU is getting just about as much oil from Russia as it was before just via India refineries if I am reading information correctly. Would that still be the case in the event of wider conflict. I suspect not. If the tensions in the ME continue to increase, that puts those sources in jeopardy. Leaving the Americas as a source of Hydrocarbons, Venezuela has challenges. Leaving just the USA as sufficient source. I'll leave it to others how they judge the reliability of that.

For Geopolitics, I'm referring to all of it. Or to put it another way, if the current Geopolitics don't finally convince Europe of the need to be self-sufficient (I refer to the continent) then nothing will. Hydrogen is in my view essential for that self-sufficiency, which I have also said as much before.

Just my opinions, which might be complete nonsense and others may agree or disagree as they see fit.

I'll keep it clean, but suffice to say, everybody has one. @SpicyTuna

On the apparent scale back. I don't think it is as dramatic as some people would believe. I think that anyone who genuinely considered that Fossil Fuel companies would disrupt and cannibalise their own businesses was misguided. I have worked with some of the leading corporates and I can assure anyone interested, that they are no better at doing research or making decisions than the next person. In fact I have seen some astoundingly bad decisions, I just can't broadcast them.

Dennis clearly diversified away from Linde with the Neptunes, that said a lot.

More impiortanly, I think Geopolitics will have more influence than people realise. Europe has just been told not to rely on sources of petrochemicals for future prosperity. Anyone who thinks a tank can move with EV batteries and be any use whatsoever is naive. Hydrogen either as a fuel or pre-curser for synthetic fuels is essential in the long-term. I said as much before.

First Move has just been acquired by Cummins, FCEV or Hydrogen ICE are required for large industrial vehicles. It is a question of when, not if.

Just my opinion.

I wasn't going to post anything today but I think I might have to take that "one other reasonable person" comment personally @SpicyTuna. I might not always agree with your conclusions but I set out why. Equally I don't ignore the reality of what the SP is currently doing.

FWIW I didn't get all excited by the Director top-up - I know I hold more shares than that whether anyone else does or not.

I believe I've also earned the Helikon badge in the past (I know I got snippy about it)

Monday Short Tracker will be interesting to see if Qube jumped

You beat me to it @Vamosbien, I was literally just about to type that. I hope @Seaangler you got them before the rise. I'm trying to resist the urge to make a post titled "How high can it go?" with a pithy message of "Anyone know the reason for this rise?"

@Lucky while your enthusiasm is infectious, I think that is overambitious too. While it would be nice, the fundamentals don't support that without a massive increase in realised revenue which means deliveries to get the cashburn eliminated. In just the same way as the company numbers don't support 20p due to cash in bank plus everything else I already covered, they don't support £2.50 either. But that doesn't mean it won't go down to 20p, too many financiers are having too much fun at the moment.

£1.20 - £1.50 if cashburn is eliminated would be a reasonable target based on technology multiple on the assets.

But that is not a prediction. As I've said before Niels Bohr said "predictions are hard, especially about the future"

Over emotional nonsense. It is not a nightmare scenario. The company fundamental position is vastly improved over where it was just a few years ago. Standardised product, stabilised production and high 90s testing, satisfied customers, cashburn reduced (but not eliminated), increasing orderbook, expanding territory interest, Scandinavia, EU, Australia, Japan, UAE to name a few.

For investors this is a real opportunity to get more shares if they want to at significantly oversold and undervalued prices.

As Bilbo said, realising a loss if you want to can be great for offsetting CGT with bed & breakfast sale and buyback if you have gains on other stocks in your portfolio.

For all other investors a loss is only a loss when it is crystallised, there are clear reasons to expect this to recover.

For traders, it is a nightmare but that's not investors.

For shorters, right now, on paper, it is paradise. But as said before, they still have to get out. No reason to suspect this will go to zero as I note above.

My other post wasn't in response to this - you may be right @SpicyTuna on the sentiment issue - but frustration is relative, I have the same assets today I had yesterday. A loss is only a loss when it is crystallised. So long term there are reasons to be hopeful this malaise will pass.

For example, I also have property rented out. The capital value has dropped due to the noises coming from Government on tenant's rights and EPC etc. But I'm still getting the return I had expected and over the long term expect the capital value to recover.

Behind a paywall so not read fully but this is interesting

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/02/27/shell-to-make-natural-gas-from-hydrogen-as-china-dominates/#:~:text=Shell%20is%20exploring%20making%20natural,leave%20Europe%20in%20short%20supply.

By 0.01 on Wednesday 25th

None taken. It is an unfortunate observation on humanity, that one expects all others to think as one does and it can therefore be somewhat of a shock to discover some people don't. I was merely pointing out that I find it important to put myself into a position to hear opposing views, however uncomfortable I find them.

Read it now. I think Dennis' comment is spot on. Worth noting that Greg is advocating for Locational Charging for transmission costs as part of the Government's Review of Electricity Market Arrangements REMA. An idea that has been thrown out before as just charging poor consumers more because they happen to not live where the wind turbine has been built is not necessarily something they can do anything about. It is this sort of nonsense that risks alienating people and is the kind of thing I meant below about Net Zero leaving people behind.

But using excess wind for Hydrogen instead of curtailing it and driving up BSUoS - yes absolutely