Member Info for JeffMills

Reminder: when it was up above 40 last week, he was quick to tell everyone he was also invested. The guy’s a total tool.

Dennis wasn’t just talking about FIDs accelerating and being bullish for nothing. The 500 MW FID is right around the corner, and it’s easy to see why he’s so excited—there’s a big bonus coming his way.

In reply to you spuders:

We’ve got 100 MW through Shell, three 5 MW Neptune V units with a private German company, one 5 MW Neptune V through Guttroff GmbH, 200 MW with RWE (nearly done, but I think it’s just costs covered, so maybe not fully on the books), plus a 500 MW FID to confirm and a 50 MW feed.

That’s 870 MW total, all set for completion by 2028.

Now, costs: Neptune V units cost 4.3m per 5 MW, so for the 20 MW from those, it’s 17.2m. So just going by the cost of neptune v's heres the revenue based on 800k per mw, however there could be a discount on larger projects.

Shell (100 MW): ~80m

Private German co. (3 x 5 MW Neptune V): ~12.9m

Guttroff GmbH (5 MW): ~4.3m

RWE (200 MW): ~160m

500 MW FID: ~400m

50 MW feed: ~40m

Total revenue in three years = 697.2m

It looks like Plug Power's loan could be on its way. From what I've read, they were waiting on the NEPA review to assess the environmental impact of their planned Texas hydrogen plant. The good news came on Friday that the review showed no negative impact, allowing them to move forward with the project. I was wondering why it had dropped 5%, then surged 15%, and now it makes sense—this was one of the key hurdles for loan approval. I'm excited for next week, as if the loan comes through, we could see a significant rise as well. The sentiment is building.

https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/250110_PlugPower_Limestone%20EA_FONSI%20signed.pdf

Trump went on and on about how steel tariffs would protect U.S. jobs, but in the end, he had to give exemptions to a bunch of countries. Here’s the list: Canada, Mexico, European Union, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, and Australia. So much for the big protectionist move—he basically caved and gave out exemptions after all the noise. It wasn’t the game-changer he made it out to be.

Ricky’s just chasing headlines and treating them like fact. He’s clearly all about the drama, jumping from one sensational story to the next without any real understanding.

Look, during Trump’s first presidency, he was known for making big, dramatic statements, but when you look at what actually happened, it was often just talk. Take tariffs, for example. He went on about hitting China and other countries with huge tariffs, and while he did impose some, they were often scaled back or riddled with exemptions after industries pushed back. A good example is the steel and aluminum tariffs—he announced them with a lot of fanfare, but then quietly exempted countries like Canada, Mexico, and others. The result? The impact wasn’t as devastating as his words suggested.

Same with energy policy. He talked endlessly about bringing back coal and being the "energy dominance" president, but the reality was very different. Coal plants still shut down under his watch because market forces made them uncompetitive. At the same time, wind and solar power actually grew significantly, even though he mocked wind turbines and claimed they caused cancer. The guy was all about messaging, not substance.

As for hydrogen? It wasn’t on his radar at all. He was more focused on deregulating oil and gas, but he didn’t actively go after clean energy industries—he just ignored them. The hydrogen sector grew during his term because global demand and private investment pushed it forward, not because of anything he did or didn’t do.

Trump’s MO is to stir the pot with dramatic statements to grab attention, but the follow-through often fizzles. So, anyone saying his "big tariffs" or anti-hydrogen stance will crush ITM Power is probably overreacting. If history’s any guide, it’s all noise with little real substance behind it.

Interesting to see Plug Power up 12% in the last couple of hours.

Honestly, I’ve never invested in ITM Power, thinking fuel cell cars might overtake EVs. But fuel cell cars are actually better for heavy-duty vehicles like trucks and buses. They have higher energy density, so they can go farther without the heavy battery weight of EVs. Plus, refueling takes just minutes, whereas EVs need long charging times.

Fuel cells also have the edge in long-distance driving and are more efficient for industries that rely on frequent, long trips. So, in heavy-duty applications, hydrogen definitely has some clear advantages over EVs.

I get where you're coming from, but I believe Plug will come through as well. If they secure that loan, the sentiment in the industry could shift dramatically.

If a 5MW unit costs £4.3m, that means for 500MW, we're talking £430m (500MW x £860,000 per MW). Of course, with a project this size, you'd expect some discount, so the actual cost could be a bit lower. But £430m is the realistic starting point for a 500MW FID using Neptune Vs. Simple maths, really. However they may not be buying Neptune Vs. My guess is the revenue from it will land around 350m.

Regarding the opening of a small short. Shorters often open and close positions to hedge or take advantage of short-term volatility—it’s not a reflection of the company’s fundamentals.

I can’t help but notice that a certain individual was completely silent when the shorts closed their positions weeks ago, yet now they’re making noise as if they know something special because a new short has opened. And then they turn around and claim to be invested? Whatever small respect I had for ricky/jz is gone.

At one point, I thought his behavior might have been the result of a personal crisis over Christmas, but this pattern just keeps going. It’s hard to take him seriously anymore when it’s clear they’re more interested in stirring up drama than actually understanding what’s happening with ITM.

All I’m saying is, if Dennis Schulz has come out this bullish, it’s because he’s confident and has news back it up. The idea that he’d make such a strong statement only to turn around two weeks later and announce delays on FIDs doesn’t add up—he’s been too measured and honest throughout to pull something like that. Only an idiot, like Ricky, would question this and then start spamming Bloomberg posts as if they’re gospel.

Honestly, you can literally Google “electric cars doomed” and find FT or Bloomberg articles predicting EVs would never take off. If those headlines were even half-right most of the time, people like him would be millionaires. But they’re not, because they’re just noise. The real story is in the long-term progress, and ITM is clearly on the right track.

He’s never overpromised once. For instance, when ITM faced challenges two years ago, he didn’t shy away from acknowledging them. Instead, he laid out a plan to streamline operations, stabilise the company, and focus on execution.

Now, seeing him this bullish a few weeks before the trading update feels like a huge moment.

This is easily the most bullish I’ve seen Dennis Schulz (his post yesterday) and for good reason. ITM Power is in its strongest operational and financial position ever, with a competitive product portfolio, a growing contract backlog, and a healthy sales pipeline. If that 500MW FID comes through, it could seriously turbocharge their momentum.

As for the “keeping the ball low” comment, I think it’s a masterclass in confidence—he’s playing it humble while clearly signaling they’re about to deliver. 2025 feels like it’s shaping up to be a breakout year for ITM.

I’ve got the idiot filtered, but I couldn’t help myself when I saw someone laughing at Ricky over another one of his so-called investments. Curiosity got the better of me (sue me), so I unfiltered—and what do I find? This cheeky, self-important prat, acting like some seasoned sage, lecturing us all on the 'risks' involved. The irony? This is the same clown who’s out here hyping investments that plummet 40% in a single day. Absolute genius, isn’t he? He’s not here to enlighten anyone; he’s here for the attention because every other chat has already clocked what he is—a complete and utter idiot. Filter him out. He’s noise, nothing more.

Revenue for 2025 is expected to be between £18M-£22M, and with a market cap of £237M currently, the calculation seems to hold. I’m anticipating the 15MW Neptune V will be added this year, which could contribute an additional £13M (with each Neptune V generating around £4.3M). If we take £22M plus the £13M from Neptune V, we could see £35M in revenue for 2025. Based on a 10x revenue multiple, this suggests a market cap of £350M, which would push the share price up to around 58p on trading update at the end of the month on that alone..

It’s frustrating seeing people criticise the share price when it’s clearly reflecting current revenue. Looking ahead to 2026, we already have projects like the 100MW and 15MW Neptune V lined up, with potential for £60M-£100M in revenue. Fundamentally, that puts the share price between £1.50-£2. But if Dennis announces 2027 revenue hitting £200M (e.g., with a 500MW FID), the share price could easily shoot up to £4 in the next 1-1.5 years. The potential is there, it’s just a matter of time.

To hit a share price of 50p, £1, £2, or £4, assuming a 10x revenue multiple (which is reasonable for a high-growth tech company in the green energy sector like ITM Power), here’s the revenue required for each price target but bilbo is correct, cash flow/sentiment makes it impossible to know.

50p share price: With a 10x revenue multiple, ITM would need to generate £30M in revenue to reach a £300M market cap, which would push the share price to around 50p.

£1 share price: For a £1 share price, they would need £50M in revenue to achieve a £500M market cap.

£2 share price: To hit £2 per share, ITM would need £100M in revenue to reach a £1B market cap.

£4 share price: For £4 per share, they’d need to generate £240M in revenue to achieve a £2.4B market cap.

I’ve used a 10x revenue multiple because ITM Power is in a high-growth sector (green energy) and companies in this space can often command higher multiples due to the strong demand and future potential. This multiple reflects the market's expectations for rapid growth and scalability.

This hesitation of them not closing their short in itm will create a coiled spring effect: the longer they hold off, the greater the risk that a sudden uptick—whether from bullish sentiment, good news, or improving fundamentals—forces them to cover in a rush, driving the SP higher. it's entirely possible they someone have long positions, personal possible, so when you see shorts opened, its basically a hedge bet.