Member Info for Gitfinger

The thing is......if there's no cost of entry, and the possibility of being able to turn a buck on something, then why not. The new agents will have been given the spiel, and no doubt like the sound of it, but the balance of probabilities is that there will be no hard cash transaction involved, which actually makes any deal attractive. Look at the units out on test, no sales of such yet, and no real cost to the potential customers who were testing. As at this point in time, all that the units going on test achieved was to get the ubers really really excited about the kettle boiler, and give the potential customers a whole bunch of greenwash PR for free, if one was of a suspicious mind, you could say that these kind of deals are a nothing more than a symbiotic relationship entered into purely for the purposes of PR, with no real intention of selling the product being promoted with such fanfare....

I will again ask the question, anyone any idea why no kettle boilers have been sold yet?

Ginger

You obviously haven’t ever owned ‘ run a business….agency agreements don’t work like that….units are held on site by the agent, owned by the manufacturer and drawn down from stock when required, and the units are only paid for when this happens. At the point the stock drawdown takes place, the unit will have been sold / leased so the agents exposure only arises at the point they know what their income stream is. If it’s an outright sale, then most issues will be covered by warranty which is underwritten by the manufacturer, and this is actually a profit centre for the agency because the recharge usually carries a margin. If it’s a lease deal, then the warranty will sit with the agent so he’s covered, and any maintenance will have been sorted by a maintenance package, which is good for the agent….

In summary, an agency is a useful outlet, but with a limited tie in and the level of incentivisation is really dependent on the level of profit achievable…

At least with the proposed speedy deal it’s possible that speedy will have some skin in the game (unless, of course the costs are disguised as “consideration in kind” whatever that is, as was the case with the trial units) but as you say, with no tie in and possibly units being held as impress stock, there really isn’t a downside for the agency.

Talking of the trial units, pretty big lead time now, and presumably they’ve collated their data and compiled their report (“consideration in kind”anyone?) and as of now, no orders for the 10kw amazing towers of power from….keltbray, mace, etc….are they all being held at bay pending the speedy thing, or is there another explanation, I wonder…..

JN….it’s not pomposity, it’s just absolute confidence that what I post can be proven. If anyone can put a valid counter argument to any post then absolutely fine, but generally that never happens and the response is usually a rant…to which I will respond…..just to set the record straight…..

By the way, are you sure you’re right about in your statement about state aid not affecting R&D tax credits? I’m not convinced you’re right so please educate me…..

Klunk

Phoned customer services, they knew absolutely nothing about the possible maybe JV let alone anything about the amazing powers of tower…..I suggest you try emailing the address posted and let us all know whether firstly the email gets through, and what the response was…..

Apologies…..got my B’s and M’s mixed up…..good job I didn’t make the same mistake with electrode assemblies and membranes……not that you could tell, because someone had the so called offending post that supported my position deleted…now who might that be, I wonder…..

M3

And there you go again!

Catalyst and membrane are PART OF THE ELECTRODE ASSEMBLY! What bit don’t you get……That’s like saying that you don’t know what t tyre is because you refer to the tyre as a part of the wheel assembly…..you seem to be over thinking this in an attempt to remove yourself from your preposterous position….which to any right minded person is preposterous….get a grip

Klunk

"We" relates to a private company I am directly invested in. The product would be a direct add on to the current offering. Obviously it would be a try before you buy, but it is unfortunate that the company cannot release any information ref capital costs, running costs, anticipated lead times, or any information at all. One would hope that Speedy will be more forthcoming, but having said that, has anyone tried to email them on the quoted email address?

Klunk

Highly possible, assuming that Speedy are in the market for selling the units, and the CAPEX / return ratios make it economically viable. Just a shame that we would need to go through an intermediary..

B3

Oh, and another thing.....the various buts of a fuel cell (cathode, anode, catalyst, membrane and gasket) when all cobbled together are commonly (well, at least according to the Department of Energy in the US) as the membrane electrode assembly, usually shortened to "electrode".

Not that this is actually relevant, because the phrase used was all about using a croissant making machine to produce the catalyst layer to go into the electrode assembly, You chose to ignore the word "assembly" because it suited your purpose in trying to discredit anyone who opposed your apologist views, as is par for the course.

The great thing about only saying something you can back up is that you don't necessarily need a long memory, and certainly don't have to rely on deleting posts that prove you wrong...unlike some, eh?

B3

In the words of her late Maj (bless her) "recollections may vary"

I said that I would come to the AGM to show you my proof of someone making contact with the company with a genuine enquiry about purchasing the products that the website said were "available to order" to which there has been no response (and before you start having a go about the company not responding to all tin pot enquiries, this was from a company with a balance sheet of in excess of £10.0M, so not tin pot) if you were prepared to show me the interpretation of the phrase "cumulative output" that you reckoned had been given to you by some clever bloke (which I suspect you actually made up)

You were the one who said you wouldn't show me yours, even if I showed you mine, so what was the incentive to go then, if I wasn't going to get the opportunity to call you out as a fraud who makes things up to suit his own narrative?

And before you say it, I didn’t go to the AGM, and I do know what the constituent parts of a fuel cell are, and I don’t work for Helikon or whoever, and I’m not related to AIM…

B3

Is that the 100kw nameplate unit, or the 100kw cumulative output one that ABB got a 50% discount on for some unknown reason?

Oggs

That’s precisely my point. Nothing that the company ever releases ever has a truly quantifiable CSF lead time, or anything of substance, so the whole thing is subject to conjecture and argument. It’s simply the case that until we have a little clarity (as opposed to complete obscurity) the company will be exposed to critical comment from the doubters amongst us…

If it comes good, then excellent news, and well done, but until then, to any sensible person who’s aware if the history, they jury must surely be out until then….

B3

You sure about that?

Red

Simple

Cause I can

As a wise person once said.....(or, something like it)

"The jam'll come in, tomorrow

Bet your bottom dollar, that tomorrow there'll be jam!

Just thinking about, tomorrow

The jam'll come in, tomorrow

So you gotta hang on 'til tomorrow come what may

Tomorrow! Tomorrow! I love ya, tomorrow

The jam's always a day away"

Just seen the RDR grant phase 2 documentation, and it would appear that the grant will be 65% of qualifying spend for research and 40% for experimental development. The spend required to achieve maximum grant will therefore be £6.6M, with a net cost to the company of £2.3M assuming it qualifies as research, which is better than a kick in the teeth... The grant is regarded as state support and accordingly could potentially compromise the R&D tax credit position.

Just for clarification purposes.

Nothing in the RNS about timescales, etc. but I take it from this that you are happy to take the RNS at face value, and believe that good things will happen...which you are quite entitled to do. However, this seems just like everything else, no firm deadlines, no firm CSF's and everyone's happy, because the company has announced that it might possibly maybe do something with someone at an indeterminate point in time....

The company might as well have said that it's investigating building a fusion reactor, because without any meaningful information on how and when, at what investment cost, and what the anticipated result is going to be, it's just about as relevant....

I would ask, if the two companies involved haven't agreed terms, and haven't set up the necessary structure (I may be wrong, they may have, but I know that none of the AFC board will have been appointed as directors if they have indeed set something up) don't you think that the RNS might be just a little premature, like most things associated with "the next big thing" (of which there have been many)?

JN

You may not agree, but he does have a point. It doesn’t look as though the SPV that they will need to run the JV has been formed yet, so it may be that the JV coming to fruition could be further down the line than the RNS implies…..never mind, no news is good news, as they say…..