Member Info for Gitfinger

Can one of you intellectual giants please set out in a concise, unambiguous way how the AFC fuel cell integrates into the extreme e setup, and what the battery is for.
If you can do this, then we can all understand the methodologies being employed. Until such time as someone posts thus, and explains why we need a battery in the system, any comments such as I’ll informed really have no validity.
Once again for the hard of thinking……..if a battery is needed to support the charge, then a fuel cell is NOT an on demand supply, in which case, what’s the point, as you may as well pump electricity from renewables directly into battery storage and cut out the middle man…….responses based on actual knowledge would be appreciated, as opposed to the usual “not a shareholder ‘ I’ll informed (aren’t we all?) nonsense……

So let me get this straight. There are batteries involved as effectively a buffer in between the supply of electricity from the fuel cell, and the end user. can anyone explain why the battery might be needed, on the basis that a fuel cell is meant to be an on demand supply…….just asking……

So let me get this straight. All of the fanboys have been batting on about how great the tie in with extreme e is, because it raises the profile of the company insofar as the delivery of a supply of electricity from hydrogen is concerned. We now discover that extreme e is going to morph into extreme h, which will use an onboard fuel cell to power the vehicles, thereby doing away with the need for a hulking great box of tricks to turn the hydrogen into electricity and then charge batteries. Now I’m not aware that AFC has the necessary expertise in automotive fuel cells, and they don’t at this point in time make an electrolyser, so what exactly is the point of the tie in, if we aren’t going to provide the automotive fuel cell, and our current one is effectively obsolete within the context of this particular project.
Are we to believe that those running extreme e decided to change tack overnight, or was AB aware of the relatively short lifespan of the usefulness of the project?
Ah well, suppose we can always go into the electrolyser business, and get back to what we do best, which is R&D (but it could be argued without the D)
Yup, guess we’re trying to sell a Betamax in a VHS world……never mind, long and strong, as they say……

About 20 years.................

Such what?
Realists?

One good thing about the share price tanking is that McRampup seems to have left the building....maybe the board will now return to a sense of normality, assuming the remaining AB apologists allow it, of course.....

Duh Yes!
The company was able to produce something that could do that for short periods of time years ago as you well know, The problem has always been degradation of the membranes leading to a tailing off of charge. Its all well and good being able to build something that can do it once, but the market needs something that can do it again and again, and we simply have no idea whether the unit at Extreme E is capable of this. If it's based on the units which AAB seem to have walked away from, then the Extreme E thing isn't really a great proof of concept, is it?
Has the company actually said anywhere "The unit we sent round the world to power the extreme E vehicles can power up to 300 homes for a period of longer than the time it takes to charge a dozen cars a dozen times without falling over" ? I think not, and until we see some form of performance data on longevity ref any of the products, they should only be regarded as concept, and any talk of sales, and sale ready products is simply wishful thinking.

I wasn't aware that the Extreme E unit had actually been benchmarked for longevity, as this wasn't required because of the short period of use. Not actually a product per se, but more really a statement of intent. Similarly, the system sent to ABB wasn't actually a complete box of tricks, but really something they could play with, and order of they found that it met the required performance criteria, I'm guessing that as they are looking at alternative products from AFC (S series, etc.) maybe they found the L series wanting.....
Never mind, there's always tomorrow.....tomorrow....

Don't panic!
It's always darkest before the dawn, and there's always Tomorrow, Tomorrow, it's always Tomorow........

AB = Annie Bond
The sale will come out tomorrow,
Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there'll be a sale
Just thinking about tomorrow.....
The sale will come out tomorrow,
So you gotta hang on 'til tomorrow, come what may!
Tomorrow, tomorrow, I love ya, tomorrow
You're always a day away...

Anybody fancy pinning their colours to the mast and saying when AFC will actually announce the sale of an actual product to an actual customer who will actually have paid for it?

Can we just not accept that there is no black or white answer to the relative performance of the company or it's CEO. It's all a bit of a grey area, and down to each individual's subjective interpretation of the situation, and events of the last 12 months.
The key thing is, it is your own interpretation of the situation; no one knows how AB is playing this, there may be MANY ducks all lined up ready for the taking, in which case, fair play, well done, you deserve a big chunk of wonga for your efforts. Conversely, it could be a case that the technology is proving far more difficult to deliver in a commercial form, and he is having to talk the company up in order to forge strategy partnerships in order to get the thing over the finish line. If this is the case, then I have no problem with this, and fair play for him trying to keep the ship afloat. We simply need to be told where we actually are insofar as product salability is, otherwise it simply looks like a catalogue of hype out of which nothing of substance ultimately materialises.
What we have seen delivered so far this year has its merits, but whether it lives up to expectation is another matter, and this is where the subjectivity comes in, if you are an AB evangelist, then all is good, and he will deliver, but if you have a more cynical mindset, then it could be perceived as continually not being able to "close the loop" as someone quoted earlier.
A difference of opinion is fine, expressions of optimism are fine, and conversely expressions of doubt are fine, if they are your beliefs, but just because you don't agree with that respective view doesn't make the other person a bad person, so why not just read the posts from both sides of the fence with an open mind, and let's all live in harmony.
Or we can just keep on scrapping and making the board not a good place to be.................

Aaron J
behold the keyboard warrior!

Wouldn't the username HaggisMcSpam be more appropriate, as the drivel now seems to be duplicated on each post... just replacing one dodgy meat product with another..............

I'm fine to stay here and slug it out with the con man (yup, the McRamper). I think most reading this board already know who's posts are worth reading and who's are not (yup, McRaamper's aren't), and many are finally using the filter, so the con man is mostly just talking to himself.
Some of us should supply genuine investors with research finds and well thought through analysis and observations (rather than a load of cut and paste drivel) otherwise those that have filtered the con man will have nothing to read at all.

AFiCionado
No problemo.............
No problemo.............
Oh no!, I'm repeating myself now.........Hahahaha!

AFiCionado
What on earth makes you think that the post was directed at you? The response would suggest you either have a persecution complex or have self identified as a Mc child who spouts drivel……shame, because until the last post there wasn’t anything to suggest any fragility….

And a child posting drivel on here...............

Best way to see troll posts is this:
Look in the mirror.............who is the one who frequently resorts to insults.......

Syntax, spelling and grammar not really helping the cause though, is it?