Member Info for Hydro-Jen

This is in a thread lower down but posting separately as otherwise it will be lost in Ade's drivel . I can't recall JW referring much to this project?

Https://www.linkedin.com/posts/towards-a-single-fuel-near-zero-emission-share-7419653067987369984-PR4f?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&rcm=ACoAADhXRG0BLoKf9_pZbHWAV4opL1qwIhaFQno

Factual context re speculation that this fund is an investor in AFC.

Fund size as at yesterday is £19.24m. How that is viable is not really obvious. It is generally accepted that £20-£25m is the bare minimum to make an authorised fund viable. Any lower than that and the costs have such an impact on the performance that it would drop off any radar unless the management company is prepared to subsidise expenses. That is possible given that Oberon is part of a very large group (ultimately BNY Mellon)

The fund has 39 holdings. The top ten (which have to be disclosed) account for 33.56% of the total assets, so that is £6.46m accounted for,

The other 29 holdings are therefore valued at £12.78m.

If this fund holds an AFC investment then the absolute maximum it could be is £560k (just below the current then the largest holding) but if those 29 residual holdings are equally weighted then it would be £440k. However, the fund's total exposure to the energy sector is 1.76% so even if AFC is the only company in that sector in which it is invested then the most that holding could be worth is £338k.

To be a notifiable shareholding it would have to have a current valuation of c. £4.3m. Clearly that's not feasible for a fund this small as the most it could have in a single equity would be 10% of its AUM and it is very unlikely to have that level of exposure to a single security.

A surge here? I'm definitely calling c. 2% a surge!

I was trying to find live ammonia pricing but didn't seem to be available without signing up to something or other

Who cares bout a rebrand? Seriously? There are FTSE 100 companies whose name bears no relation, other than historic, as to what the do now. Xero relevance

It would be pretty pointless going big on marketing the LC30s now as they can't be available until they get CE (etc.) marked

Https://www.speedyhire.com/customer-solutions/hydrogen-solutions/

Alde - you are inordinately pleased with having come up with something that rhymes.

Lord only knows what that is supposed to mean. Maybe I should ask ChatGPT.

Hmmm, US spellings. How odd...

It is obvious that at some point before cash runs out at the current burn rate that funds will be needed. But there is more than one way of achieving that:

1. Placing as per previous exercises at a heavily discounted price

2. Third party taking a stake

3. Via cash for orders

4. Financing on the back of firm orders

I'd say option 2 is the most likely, and the one that would be most positively received by the market

Maybe they could get an asphalt company onboard to do a bit of resurfacing!

Backed up here

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/markadlowe_excellent-event-at-afc-energy-site-in-surrey-ugcPost-7434606745508872193-RnMV?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAAEDomgBlwgFTvcRcrzCwP_qBBYdC-OrOLM

This was posted below but worthy of its own thread. one would hope that all the companies mentioned are/are planning to work with AFC

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/emma-jayne-guthrie_construction-ammonia-fuelcell-share-7434612347685482496-5m0o/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAkyjQ0B7bMMkoLn8XD8s2HLk9vizWE-zfc

I pledged yesterday not to respond to him and I'll be sticking with that - it's completely pointless.

I would recommend others do the same and just leave him to shout into a void.

Beachboy - that's just taking the best possible scenarios as facts

The units need certifying - CE/MENA and US

Where are these 4 Hy5 units that are already operating and generating revenue?

It is not true that no funding will be required. In 2027 we need funding - that may come from orders but if not hen it will need to come from elsewhere. That may be from existing shareholders, new shareholders or other sources that may be available if we look like being commercially successful

We do not have 15 units ready for immediate sale. The haven't been built yet

Agreed, Silures.

Nobody this side of the men in white coats expected huge revenue news, but neither did anyone sane leap out of their chai and punch the air when they heard 'fifteen'.

The apparent deepening of the relationship is clearly a positive but developing larger scale crackers won't obviously speed the path to revenue from that source.

We are over four months into the current financial year now and we're not there yet.

So yes, broadly positive but the risks remain high. The current capital is good for c. 18 months (can't be left till the last minute so less than that in reality) and while I think that if all goes well then the likeliest source of new capital would be from the S&P partner taking a stake there clearly remains a possibility of a less positive dilution. That gap could be filled by material orders, clearly, but if we did receive them in a few months' time then doubtless the cash burn would increase for a while, for good reasons.

So yes, broadly positive but with a weather eye out for the obvious risks

Much though he spouts nonsense and he clearly has minimal understanding of the market making process it isn't true to say every buy is a sell in the sense of it being some sort of matched bargain driven by actual investor demand; liquidity would dry up overnight of that was the case. The trades are reported by MMs and they are saying whether someone has sold to them or bought from them.

I'm not a massive fan of being unfairly accused of nefarious behaviour by nutjobs. Weirdly.