Member Info for Hydro-Jen

If you bear in mind that our financial year is to end of October I'd expect materially less than that

Yes we do Lary:

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/AFC/joint-development-agreement-ovcbptu6be3ch86.html

What we don't have (yet) is a commercial proposition emanating from the JDA

This is from the RNS, whose anniversary is 2 days away.

Under the JDA, the Company and the Industrial Partner will collaborate to develop a range of small to large scale highly efficient ammonia crackers for hydrogen production using AFC Energy's proprietary modular and efficient ammonia cracking technology. Development costs incurred by AFC Energy under the JDA will be reimbursed by the Industrial Partner, an established, publicly listed player with an aligned supply chain who brings strong financial capacity and a wealth of technical capability.

W4ttsy. Just ignore the nonsense about shorting. It's a truly weird form of paranoia.

It's just pitiful that you can't have a debate without resorting to such nonsense. Just pitiful. If you think it was a tracker then identify the ones it could have been due to their structure. I'll wait.

The UT is little understood.

If there is a very large actual purchase I would say it is much more likely to be Helikon than an actively managed long fund and infinitely more likely to be them than a tracker!

We know there are no sales of the whole package - genuine commercial sales would have to be announced. If you are expecting any numbers on that front next week then you're riding for a fall.

We know that there have been some sales just of hydrogen from the plant (Metier, presumably. Maybe others). We'll find out that but in the great scheme of things it can't be especially important or material

It will be interesting, Y-Alam, but whatever they are they are highly unlikely to be related to tracker funds for the reasons explained.

Some appear to have made an assumption (or been told to assume something by AI) that Friday's unusual activity was the result of tracker funds being forced (by their terms) to make a substantial investment into AFC. That possibility was enhanced by the fact it was month end and some tracker funds do rebalance at that point.

So, which trackers funds might have been involved?

There is no tracker fund that focuses solely on AIM so we are looking at two categories. Small cap and sector (i.e. hydrogen) specific.

In the small cap category no tracker fund will have invested into H-Power because the company is not a constituent of the index they track.

I can't see any others (may have missed something of course) that would be likely to include H-Pow simply by virtue of its market status so we are probably looking at hydrogen trackers, of which there are a few, although none have really acquired critical mass. These are the ones that feature in a list of funds which would be likely to include H-Pow:

Van Eck Hydrogen Economy.

Amundi Global Hydrogen

L&G Hydrogen Economy

Global X Hydrogen

Invesco Hydrogen Economy

BNP Paribas Global Hydrogen Economy

HOWEVER.... By the very nature of tracker funds (and these are all tracker funds - largely the Solactive index) turnover is very low and major share purchases for securities already held are very rare. The reason is simple - movements in the price of each investee company make portfolio weightings take care of themselves. The only drivers of transactions are cashflows in and out of the fund and the disappearance of an old/emergence of a new constituent company. It makes no sense to suggest that a rise in a share's value translates to material purchases.

So it is highly, highly unlikely that any of the tracker funds made a material purchase on Friday.

Speculation and AI feeds are all very 'interesting' but to suggest that tracker ETFs were behind Friday's blip are vey unlikely to be correct.

Could an actively managed fund have made a significant investment? Possible. If so I'd be expecting a significant shareholding disclosure and none has been made so far.

I don't know what Friday indicated, if anything. I can rule out a few things.

Has Archer ever disclosed how much he holds?

Dear oh lord! An index fund is-re-evaluating the company after it's name change?!

Do try to at least keep ramping credible!

I wish I'd asked Julie out back when I was in the 6th form and that I'd backed the 80/1 winner at Hamilton Park yesterday. Neither happened.

If that's true then he must be mad to take such risks without any guarantee of success.

Fair point Anne. A genuine respectful debate would be very welcome

Evidence for paid negative posters would be?

if it's true then they are completely wasting their cash. The most relentless posters on here are the one-eyed positive posters and they clearly have no effect on the share price. So why would anyone pay anyone to post?

It's all very positive. Problem could be that companies with this sort of capitalisation fly so far below the radar

And there you go again, making stuff up...

'massive amounts of capital'

You have no idea how much I have invested and, more importantly, what proportion of my overall portfolio/assets it constitutes.

As is blindingly obvious I am hopeful that the partnerships with ICL & the S&P outfit come to fruition. I am less hopeful re Speedy on the basis that they have failed to make a successful business over a very long period of time. Like I said I am 'hopeful' That does not translate to certainty.

There was a time, ALBM, where I was sure that you weren't the same person as CN/STF (doesn't that need another letter...) but when you start calling other posters 'scum', 'ridiculous', 'pathetic' etc. I am less convinced.

Debate is good. One-eyedness and abuse - less so.

You want to talk about ridiculous?

Ridiculous is refusing to believe anything except one perspective.

Ridiculous is having apparently absolute certainty about things which you yourself say we do not know

Ridiculous is thinking you know what other peoples' motivation is when you have absolutely no idea

Ridiculous is swallowing things hook, line and sinker with zero critical analysis

Ridiculous is perpetually positioning this as a one way bet when it is clearly very high risk

Ridiculous is thinking that posts on here really do sway the market

Ridiculous is saying that there are people paid by Helikon on here

Ridiculous is etc. etc. etc.

I am here because I am hopeful that this share may transform into a genuinely successful business. Note the key word there - 'hopeful'.

Similar recruitment was often flagged in the Bond era. It proves nothing at this point,. We hope that it means genuine commercialisation is imminent but until that actually happens the jury clearly remains out. And that's fair enough.