Member Info for Hydro-Jen

Exactly, Bondy, and anyone who doesn't recognise that is not being honest with themselves. I'd guess that the majority of PIs have been here for some time and we have been at this apparent inflection point before - more than once.

Things may be different this time and the signs are certainly promising but if anyone had said five years ago that we'd be on the cusp of cracking it, so to speak, with crackers they'd have been laughed out of the room because we appeared to be on t he cusp of massive sales of fuel cells to blue chip partners and we know how that worked out.

I'd say that as soon as we see the first meaningful revenues from both ICL and the S&P JDA then we could fly, but until we see them we're basing everything on hope and faith. Fine, to a point.

Still, my last three purchases (the placing, soon after it and last week are in profit so we are certainly moving in the right direction. But what I can't see is me holding the number of shares I do now in five years' time just due to time of life etc. My hope is that I can consistently top-slice into a rising market. We shall see.

The most significant thing about this interview is that it took place. I don't think JW would do that if he didn't think the interviewer's views in the recent report had validity.

Just the fact that this chap can get an interview certainly lends his views some credibility

What we need is another director share purchase and then everybody will know with absolute certainty that there will be n news for 28 days...........

You have made this same point hundreds of times without ever trying to explain what the motivation would be for the price to be held down. How about you justify what you have speculated about so many times?

Your understanding of the role of the MMs, the Rules which govern them, their risk appetite and associated controls are, at best, minimal.

Absolute gibberish as usual.

Day in, day out you tell us that sells are reported as buys and vice versa - and day in day out you use the reported figures which you have told us are inaccurate to make a point about MM actions.

Why do you think MMs hold the price down?

I am quite sure that if it was purely down to AFC then we would be well aware of who the partner is and probably of many more details of the arrangement. I can't see any downside to the company in such information being public.

So it seems logical to assume that the secrecy is the wish of the partner and it's hardly surprising that they call the shots.

It clearly has the potential to be utterly transformative for AFC and us as shareholders. There is one niggle in that. Let's say it's Air Products - seems more than likely. Their market cap is in the region of $60bn so whatever the scale of the actual/potential investment they are making in AFC is a fleabite; the sort of cash they might find down the back of the office sofa. There is a very strong likelihood that they have more such arrangements - they won't be staking everything on one (very) small-cap company and doubtless any other ventures are subject to the same non-disclosure consideration. Much easier in most cases as the chances are that they are with unlisted entities.

We have of course been here before, with ABB. That looked like a gamechanger for quite a while and fizzled out into nothing - the look of puzzlement on Wilson's face when their name came up on the last IM gathering spoke volumes - they are just a small shareholder now. They were clearly in the habit of taking stakes in and working with small, innovative companies and hoping that some of them came good.

Our hope is that we (and the market) become aware of achieving the milestones referred to in the original announcement, thus building confidence tha this relationship will deliver what we all hope it will.

And no, CN, this isn't negative. It's the product of a rational thought process.

You can't seriously think, Garonne,. that the absence of news on who the S&P partner is, is AFC's decision?

I'm just an apprentice - only 15....

A massively welcome rise. To sustain it we need news of progress - don't really care on what, just progress!

If this is on the back of the tipster's paper all well and good, but needs backing up with something concrete

Even with a filter on I can still see your stupid rampy headlines -so thought I'd pop on and tell you it's a stupid rampy headline. Why are you so frightened of a sensible grown up debate?

I doubt if he even knows. He's not a four year old expecting jelly and pas the parcel. News will come when it comes.

At least we are more realistic these days. I recall at the IM presentation in the interregnum between Bond and Walker, Mike Rendall said that the cracker units were basically available for sale. Presumably he learned salesmanship and PR puff from the unlamented Aussie because clearly that wasn't the case at all (or if it was there was no interest).

2026 simply has to be a year with regular positive news on the progress of key relationships because if we are still in an information void throughout next year then we're not going to make it.

One would assume that if cracker production is to be scaled up then the S&P partner would be involved

That's where we need to be and we need to capitalise on it this time.

We thought we had it with fuel cells. Perhaps we did in technological terms but in commercial reality we were clearly miles off the pace and in that area we are still well off it.

With crackers we are told that we have the absolute cutting edge tech and while there is no reason to disbelieve that, nobody on here has the slightest idea whether it is true or not. In reality neither do management because they aren't privy to what is going on in every laboratory in, say, China.

But the collaboration with the S&P company is clearly a strong vindication of the potential that lies there.

The question is whether it will still be the best around (if it indeed is) when the JDA comes to fruition.

Very interesting. The nail is struck firmly on the head in the section headed

Is this really a 10x opportunity

Because if and when AFC strikes a real commercial deal for the first time it's obvious that it could really fly. That is what is necessary - simple as that

Your obsession with 2027 is getting a little weird, Aldebaran. We know that if things go to plan:

We will begin to generate cracker revenue via the ICL JV

There will be positive updates re the JDA with the S&P company

The reduced cost generators will become available

There is, of course, no guarantee that things will go to plan, far from it, but it is clear there will be developments one way or another next year.

Serious, professional market participants know that shorting activity is a major fillip for liquidity. There could be debates to be had about disclosure and motivation , but at the end of the day what encourages shorting activity is analysis that leads institutions to conclude that shares are materially overvalued and that form of analysis is just as valid as that which seeks to identify undervalued companies.

it is most certainly more valid than the outrageous puffery that Peel Hunt and the like put out about targe prices; nobody sane could look at those and not conclude that they are misleading.

As for the relentless contention that shorters populate this and other boards - that's just utter nonsense. Childish, immature nonsense. Sell product, gain revenue, achieve breakeven and profitability...then the market cap will rise. Don't, and it won't. The simple fact remains that AFC is yet to make a single, genuinely commercial, sale.