Member Info for doc7

What??

I know that the MRE was slated for mid July, but Ibwasnt aware the assay results had been pushed back. I thought those were still end of June. I must have missed when Paul said otherwise?

Slightly disappointed no assay results this week but fully expect them next week and MRE mid July. If tin reserves greater than 70k tonnes I can see 1p in short order.

Better to be gullible than just plain nasty.

Not a great guess at all Marcb, as you would know if you bothered to report the facts.

There are two sets of clinical trial reports due in H1 2026. If either is positive it will be transformational to the sp. The POLB001 trial has a good chance as phase 1 studies showed excellent dose-dependent effects on cytokines.

Between now and then the sp is likely to be a little stagnant, but fall to 2.5p?? No way. ONLY if the trials are negative. But not before data is out. And expectation will push the sp before results say.

Your negativity is unfounded and not based on fact. But presumably your dialogue suits your needs so why let the truth get in the way?

I haven't posted on here for some time but felt the new Zeus note today to do a good reason to. I do keep an eye on the board and I noted the positive comments shared by many (eg Escala's post of a few days ago which got over 30 recs). I didn't attend the AGM, but did view the webinar and know many who were at the AGM and I agree with Escala's sentiments.

The Zeus note released today gives a new sp target of 100p. I know some will say that is a significant fall from there previous target, but that needs comment.

Previous Zeus targets for AFC have not specified the mechanism of calculation (apologies if I have recalled that wrong) and there was no timeline. So assigning a target of 184p actually meant very little. Today's broker note is a 10- year DCF valuation based on close liaison with AFC (as Peter Dixon-Clark said) and so that 100p is their DCF value right now. That's a 500% upside.

There are a couple of other things worth noting. DCF valuations require lots of assumptions, a pivotal one of which is revenue. The Zeus note records the £600k revenue for 2022, and estimates the same for 2023. However 2024 revenue is set at £6m. Remember that AFC itself has informed this figure. That means that the year to which that £6m figure pertains starts in just over 5 months. Zeus also noted that the £600k for 2023 is low because only rental income will be bookable....they note that larger revenue will require sales. In other words Zeus, and hence AFC, think that sales will be coming from the period that starts in 5 months. That must mean Power Tower sales as orders must be close if revenue is to be recognised in 2024 and so presumably means sales to hire companies; this is important as this is the industry-wide model.

Zeus also notes that their assumptions re the uptake of Power Towers (presumably in the 30-50 Kv range) could prove conservative.

Listening to Adam on the webinar I do wonder if AFC is closer to a cracker partnership than apparent at present. This tech could rival the fuel cell side of the business in terms of value very quickly.

Put these things together and I think there is potential for an early re rate in the SP in the direction of Zeus' new target.

Was that post meant to be helpful Haggis? Unless the poster is one on filter already you have to read the post to know whether to filter it. Your MO may be to ignore anyone and everyone you dont agree with (Putin does that) but I have very few on filter, and certainly not jgbb. Yet. But now you have accused me of helping con men and liars.
You really do make my points for me.

Well thank you for making my mind up for me jgbb. I will not be posting in more detail.

The culture on this board is awful and responses like yours make it so. Posts over the last few weeks and months have been negative, and in cases vile. Hence the reason I stopped posting. I am not prepared to put time into this to be shot down by the usual culprits. It is not about being an elite group, but those who were there are certainly a better informed group. It was that information I was hoping to share. But you have shot me down jgbb so I'll carry on playng my "silly little games"

If those posters who know me on here want to contact me directly it will be my pleasure to send some recollections of the meeting/

I don't often post here these days, but I was at the AGM and it was great to meet up with PIs I have known for a long time. The four of us who met for breakfast have a combined time as shareholders of over 5 decades.

It says much that Wendy told me that just 10 private investors attended the AGM (plus some corporate reps....essential those with nominee accounts. I honestly feel that those not present now have no insight at all into the company that AFC has become and the paradigm shift since 2019. I left the meeting very reassured.

I had intended a detailed summary for the board, but having thought about it I agree with the comments of others. I do not think it will be well received. I will not mention names (you know who they are) but the serial detractors and pessimists will continue their endless negative rants (but without any grounds as they were not there), the constantly-ramping optimists who know more than everybody else will continue to think they know more than anyone (without grounds as they were not there) and the small number of posters who are nasty and mocking will remain exactly that.

Suffice to say that the HFC market has matured and the end-user requirements better defined and understood, and AFC is uniquely placed to meet those needs. It has understood the market (in my view) and has the right people in place developing the right products to capitalise.

I'm sorry I am not providing more detail here.

I should also add that that does not concern me as I think the outlook with the new solid cell range across data centres, marine and diesel back up is superb. I am less convinced re EV, but am buoyed that posters I communicate with elsewhere feel that the ABB relationship will bear EV fruit.

I am looking forward to the rest of this year to see where AFC takes us.

if we are still in a relationship with Rolec one has to ask what the point of that relationship is as it has produced the square root of nothing. It is hence no more than a distraction. Personally I think it foundered months ago.

Russia Mucksy? Just go to Salisbury and you will get an idea. Or look at flights where individuals are poisoned.
or you could consider the bigger picture and look at what happened in Crimea. But you still try to condone. And you bring Gadaffi in to prove your point. I think we can all see what values you stand for.

Shame on you Mucksy. Putin is a murderer and a terrorist. Do you condone such people?

....continued

If my concerns prove founded then it will be mid 2021 before AFC is revenue generating. Not a problem if the potential of the company is realised…..the solid cell could be massive, and Alkamem significant. But it does mean that cash will be needed. I hope the government will see this and support (and tout) the AFC journey. I also think AFC would benefit hugely if a major company saw the potential and either partnered with them or took a stake. It could be the bargain of the year for Shell or similar to pay £60m for a third of the expanded company…peanuts to them, but transformational for their green agenda, and transformational for the attention AFC could give to commercial development of the solid cell.

I also hope AFC is talking to the likes of Grant Shapps who is clearly coming round to hydrogen. And Jo Bamford who could usefully look at fuel cells for buses and has the ear of government (and access to their wallet as shown by the recent hydrogen town announcement). The government needs to be green, it needs to identify the UK-based technology giants of tomorrow, and AFC is one of few candidates.

Just a few musings for a Saturday morning. I would love to see that RNS next week re sales. And we may get it. But the realist in me feels that there might be a bit of a wait yet. I still think it worth waiting. Just.

I don't often post these days, and my last post or two were pretty upbeat. These reflected my enthusiasm at where the company was going, its messaging and the apparent commercial traction.

Red_hornet's line below "....doesn't seem to be from EV chargers" caused me to reflect on this.

The good stuff: I remain very excited about the HydroX-Cell(S). I remember feeling when I first heard about it that it would be the product that makes AFC. I can't see how it won't make the L version redundant. It's power dense, portable, and can run off less pure H2, or NH3, at low temperature. What's not to like ? I felt then that trains and ships would be ideal markets and AFC has since mentioned these, but what about data centres, back up generation with a reduced footprint etc. The potential is huge.

Alkamem: AFC has significantly dialed down the rhetoric on this. It was initially presented as a wonder substance that would be highly disruptive and have huge margins. The latest update was less effusive, although noted its potential and the need for development to build robustness into the product. In some domains it now "matches" existing product performance. Clearly Alkamem has potential, but I am less sure that it is going to generate any meaningful near-term revenue unless some sort of licensing deal is done.

And so to HydroX-cell(L): I have looked back over the RNSs this year. There was an Alkamem update on 23rd June, and on 1st June the Acciona deal was announced. I think construction has great potential, as does the back up market, and construction sites rarely have space limitations so L rather than S will suffice. Possibly a very big market, but the trial is not until 2021 so near term revenue is not likely. So that leaves EV which has been expected to generate the near term cash.

The 19th May RNS was a covid update and just one line was about EV. It reported "an uplift in the number of proposals we are working on". The Covid update of 19th March made no mention of EV, the RNS of 9th March merely noted Tom Pollard's appointment, and that of 12th Feb reported a stop on the roadshow.

Given the above there has been no report or mention in 2020 of the performance of the EV system, the business model, the commercial progress or anything other than the vague mention of MOUs that may or may not relate to EV. It seems curious that EV is receiving so little mention when it is the hat on which AFC has hung initial commercialisation. AFC may prove my concerns unfounded with a RNS on Monday morning announcing sales, but I am worried that EV is being sidelined as the next big thing has come along. Is this a product that anyone wants? I really have no idea despite it being 18 months since EV was announced and eight months since product launch.

continued in next post......

Lots of (perhaps understandable) negativity here today.

I'd like to think we can still give the benefit of the doubt and accept some of the reassurances at face value. The Q&A alluded to a lot of ongoing interaction with various commercial entities, and the forward view from AFC still appears optimistic. The only reason to doubt that is the lack of detail or subsequent communication.

I hope Ab understands the concern this causes. We do not need weekly RNSs, but a weekly CEO update on the website would be a very helpful means of communicating and providing ongoing reassurance. Unless, as an earlier poster suggested, they really do have nothing to say.

There seems surprise that only 10 submitted questions. Few from here seem to have done but let’s see if we can prove it.

I know I did, and muscorum and Daz have said they did so the current list is:
Athansius
Muscorum
Daz
Piltick
Desertwolf
Doc7
Notes
Sonnets

If you submitted please add your name to the list and re post

Thanks Muscorum...I have corrected Athansius' mistake and removed Sky so 8 on the list. Maybe only 10 did submit questions!

This should help AFC's cause:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52418624

There seems surprise that only 10 submitted questions. Few from here seem to have done but let’s see if we can prove it.

I know I did, and muscorum and Daz have said they did so the current list is:
Athansius
Muscorum
Daz
Piltick
Desertwolf
Doc7

If you submitted please add your name to the list and re post

Exactly desertwolf. We don't have a test.
As well as having had Covid I also sit on a number of specialist committees that make the decisions and much of my doctoral thesis involved PCR and similar technologies. I am also well published in the field of clinical trials and peer review multiple journals so I understand sensitivity and specificity, as well as observational studies and epidemiological data.