Member Info for JeffMills

While Ricky is likely caught up in clickbait stories he can't even access due to paywalls (what an idiot), I’ll stick to the real news — RWE’s latest update to investors: Green electricity and green hydrogen are offering massive opportunities for profitable growth. From 2024 to 2030, RWE plans to invest €55 billion and expand its green energy portfolio to over 65 gigawatts (GW). Meanwhile, Ricky probably spends his time obsessing over shorts not covering. According to him, the one company on the planet shorting ITM above 0.50, and somehow, they’re the only ones who "know," while everyone else is in the dark. What a fool.

The slow FIDs could have been because hydrogen producers needed clear certification to prove their hydrogen was truly "green" and meet EU standards. Now that the certification is in place, it removes that barrier, so FIDs should speed up as projects become more attractive to investors and eligible for funding.

This certification is massive for ITM Power imo, especially for large projects like the 500MW FID. Before this, there wasn’t a clear, standardised way to prove that hydrogen was truly "green" under EU rules. Now that the certification is in place, people using ITM's tech can officially label their hydrogen as sustainable, which makes it much easier to access EU funding, secure partnerships, and enter new markets.

For projects like the 500MW FID, this certification means they can meet the EU’s renewable energy targets, making them more attractive to investors and customers. It also makes it simpler to prove the environmental benefits of their hydrogen, helping to drive sales and accelerate development.

In short, this certification will help ITM Power boost sales, attract funding, and scale up green hydrogen projects faster. It’s a major step forward for the company and the entire industry. Sentiment is building. Its happening :-)

Bilbo. That’s an interesting take, and it does raise some valid concerns, even though I don’t think it negates the overall benefits of this move for green hydrogen. Let me break it down:

The point about aviation fuel being labeled "sustainable" under the RFNBO framework is true to an extent. With these certifications, synthetic fuels made using green hydrogen and captured CO₂ could technically qualify as “sustainable aviation fuel” (SAF). This might divert some green hydrogen toward creating fuels for aviation, which is a highly energy-intensive process. While it does open up new markets, it might also mean less green hydrogen available for other applications like industry, transportation, or energy storage.

However, I wouldn’t say this “cuts off” the market for green hydrogen—it actually expands it. The aviation sector is one of the hardest to decarbonize, and SAF made with green hydrogen could be a critical bridge while we work on long-term solutions. In fact, more demand from aviation might drive investment in green hydrogen production, which could lower costs for everyone.

The EU's financial strategies, including increased arms spending, could also be a factor here. If some of this push for green hydrogen certification is about stimulating economic activity and attracting private investment, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Yes, it’s clear the EU is balancing decarbonization goals with financial and political pressures, but this move still lays the groundwork for scaling up green hydrogen, which benefits multiple sectors, not just aviation.

while there are complexities and trade-offs here, this certification framework is still a major step forward for green hydrogen. It’s about creating a consistent system to verify sustainability and unlock funding, which is crucial for scaling up production and driving the energy transition forward.

’s honestly pathetic how little confidence you have. You need multiple accounts to back yourself up, but still hide behind a fake name. We all saw it—JZ and Ricky were AWOL all day, then suddenly both show up at the same time? What a coincidence. It’s so obvious you can’t even hide it.

Anyway, I’m about done with you, and I’ve already filtered one of your accounts. Now it’s time to filter the ‘Ricky’ account too. Funny how you can still see my posts, though—enjoy that while it lasts. I can’t see yours, so no worries on my end.

It’s honestly impressive how someone can be so determined to talk nonsense after getting proven wrong. I’ve never seen someone double down on their mistakes with such confidence. Maybe next time, try sticking to the facts instead of inventing arguments to save face.

Ah, I see. So now I’m supposed to add a ‘Mate’ disclaimer like you did? Cute. Clearly, that’s your go-to move when you can’t actually engage with the data. I haven’t mentioned profit margins, because we’re discussing revenue based on ITM’s RNS, which clearly lays out the plug and play pricing. And as for unforeseen costs—how exactly does that factor into a revenue projection? Maybe focus on the numbers next time instead of trying to deflect with empty mockery.

So we're not allowed to discuss potential revenue based on industry standards and real sales from competitors now? Listen to yourself, who do you think you are? Hahaha, just quit it mate, get some rest

Instead of fixating solely on ITM’s share price, maybe you should take a look at the other companies you’ve been hyping up, like Plug Power and Nel, JZ/Ricky. It’s the entire industry at play here—it's always going to take time after a sharp drop in stock price driven by potential and over-excitement. The recovery is starting now. If you don’t see it, stop trying to grab my attention non-stop. Seriously, just chill.

In my opinion, Plug Power's deal with Amazon was likely a way to get a foot in the door, cover initial costs, and secure future contracts—similar to how ITM has done with RWE.

ITM’s 5MW plug-and-play electrolyzer is priced at £4.3 million, which comes to about £870,000 per MW.

If you can actually read, you’d see I based that forecast on the 500MW FID. At £870,000 per MW, that comes to a total of £435 million for the 500MW deal alone, which is to be completed by 2028.

However, I’d imagine that with a 500MW deal, ITM would likely get a cheaper price per MW due to the bulk size. For example, the cheapest ive seen is Plug Power's $290 million deal with Amazon for a 500 MW electrolyzer, and itworked out to about $580,000 per MW, or around £464,000 per MW

So i'm currently at 230m revenue for 2028 with this contract alone; however, the typical industry standard price for PEM electrolyzers is generally between £1.2 million to £1.5 million per MW...

Would you like me to continue? Because I can easily go on, but it’s honestly a bit embarrassing how little effort some people put into actually looking things up before making claims, stop using two accounts.

"Nothing will happen here tomorrow, if anything more sell-offs and into the 20's range on more disappointment." - JZ, December 4th. Merry Christmas lad.

I can only imagine how much this must be eating him up right now—absolutely priceless.

It’s almost amusing how predictable he is. Even with him filtered, the replies paint a clear picture. Since his bold prediction of 20 last week, ITM has secured a 50MW feed contract and confirmed a 15MW deal. Yet here he is, still posturing as if he knows what he’s talking about. The disconnect is almost embarrassing at this point.

Now we just need to see Biden push through that Plug Power loan before Trump takes office, and sentiment could shift dramatically.

While it's true we haven't had the FID for the 500 MW yet, it's also speculative to assume it will be the only large project—clearly, it won’t be. It's incredibly exciting to see us breaking into the EU refuelling stations.

So, if we exclude the Shell project, ITM Power’s total revenue for 2026 would come from the £22 million of deferred revenue from 2025, plus the £13 million expected from the 15 MW deal. That brings the total to around £35 million for the year. That's not including any more Neptune V's, so I'm going to say we could easily double that to £70 million for 2026.

I’d expect all the revenue from the Shell 100 MW deal to be recognised in 2027 since that’s when it’s due to be completed, so that’s around £80 million right there. Then, with the growth from Neptune V sales, I’d expect similar growth as we saw in 2026, so let’s say another £70 million from those. All in, I’d say ITM Power’s total revenue for 2027 could easily be around £150 million.

For 2028, with the 500 MW deal expected to be completed, that should bring in around £400 million. Then, with the same growth from Neptune V sales, I’d expect about £100m + So, ITM Power’s total revenue for 2028 could easily hit £500 million revenue.

This doesn't even include any additional deals from major players like BP, RWE, Linde, Shell, and others.

ITM Power has a 1 GW annual capacity, and since a Neptune V is 5 MW, going by that it would only take them about 2 days to make one, not 1.5 years. Hope that answers your question Laughton.

He also inherited some of the most advanced technology in the industry. However, he took over a company that was poorly managed and struggling to execute effectively..

Spot on, that’s Dennis’ job—but let’s not forget what he inherited. When he took over, ITM was a mess. Cooley had completely shattered investor trust with that 5gw by 2024 electrolyzer target, and the company was plagued by manufacturing issues that caused contracts to either be delayed or outright canceled.

Since Dennis stepped in, it’s been a steady rebuild. We’ve seen projects like RWE delivered on time, major deals signed with the likes of Shell, and actual products and sales coming through (looking at you, Neptune V).

So let’s be clear: unless you’ve been a long-term holder or fully understand the reasons behind the drop—like high inflation, the hydrogen market crash, Cooley’s overpromising, and the operational chaos Dennis inherited—there’s no excuse to pin that on him. He’s been quietly fixing the mess, and we’re starting to see the results.