Member Info for JeffMills

If a company’s hiring in Germany, selling a Neptune V over there, and having directors buy up shares just before the results, there’s no way they’re gearing up for bad news. It’s actually a pretty strong sign they’re confident about the future. I mean, if the company was really in trouble, they wouldn’t be doing all this, right?

It’s crazy, right? Germany just passed a £24 billion loan for its hydrogen pipeline, yet it barely gets any coverage. Meanwhile, the media’s full of stories about small companies pulling out or struggling. The reason is simple: it’s these types of clickbait stories that get attention because they’re more dramatic and immediate. Day traders love this stuff—it’s all about short-term moves and quick profits, so they jump on it. Meanwhile, the big, long-term projects like Germany’s go under the radar, even though that’s where the real money and future growth are. It’s all about what gets clicks, even if it doesn't tell the full story.

Ricky thoughts on this; say ITM Power cab secure 20% of RWE’s 4 GW target (that’s 800 MW), plus 1.5 GW from the UK’s 10 GW target (including 500 MW from Aberdeen), we’re talking about a total of 2.8 GW by 2030. With an average price of €800,000 to €1 million per MW, that gives us sales between €2.24 billion and €2.8 billion.

If Linde takes 50% of the profits, ITM Power’s share would be €1.12 billion to €1.4 billion. Now, if we use a 10x earnings multiple (a bit more conservative than the 30x), that gives a market cap between €11.2 billion and €14 billion. With about 1 billion shares outstanding, the share price could fall between €11.20 and €14. But with this sort of growth you'd imagine it would be closer to x30, so £40 a share is possible.

So, hitting £10 a share by 2030 seems very achievable when we look at the potential sales and market cap.

I get where you're coming from, but you've got to remember, Linde's a huge player in this. The deal is basically with Shell and Linde, and we’re their PEM supplier, so I don’t see them walking away. As for the £10 per share target, yeah, it’s ambitious, but we’ve already got £150 million a year locked in from now to 2028 if the FID goes through, it’s not that far-fetched. I can’t see RWE taking 200MW from us at basically zero cost and then deciding we're not part of any 2GW target in the next five years—if that happens, I'd be shocked.

Anyone suggesting that Shell could cancel at any time should remember that it’s not just ITM involved—Linde is also a key partner. With such a big player on board, it’s highly unlikely Shell would back out without serious consequences for them too.

If Linde were to take half of the profit from the 500 MW and 100 MW, that would reduce ITM’s revenue share. Let’s adjust the calculation accordingly:

• Total MW: 600 MW (500 MW over 3 years + 100 MW from Shell).

• Assuming £1 million per MW, total revenue would be £600 million.

• If Linde takes 50%, ITM’s share would be £300 million in total revenue over 3 years.

• This averages to £100 million per year.

Using a 10x revenue multiple, ITM’s market cap would be £1 billion.

With 600 million shares outstanding, the share price would rise to around £1.67

Including the 100 MW from Shell, we have a total of 600 MW (500 MW over 3 years + 100 MW from Shell).

At £1 million per MW, that’s £600 million in total revenue. Over 3 years, this averages £200 million per year.

Using a 10x revenue multiple (for growth potential), this gives an estimated market cap of £2 billion.

With 600 million shares outstanding, the share price could rise to around £3.33, up from 35p.

After Ricky reads this, I’m sure his perspective will shift. Thank me later.

ITM and Velocys are completely different animals. Velocys was focused on biofuels and struggled with scalability, whereas ITM is leading the charge in green hydrogen, a sector with huge backing from governments and giants like RWE. ITM’s tech is more advanced, and its projects are on a much larger scale, with real contracts and funding, like the €25 billion from Germany. Velocys just never had the same level of support or market fit, so the comparison isn’t really fair jz

With 100 MW to be completed by 2027 and 500 MW FID by 2028, that’s a total of 600 MW over the next 4 years. So, ITM would need to deliver around 150 MW per year to hit that target..

Add in potential contracts in between and any Neptune V sales, and it’s very achievable. This is how they can get to a £6 billion market cap and £10 share price by 2030.

Alright, Ricky here’s the breakdown. For ITM to hit a £6 billion market cap with a £10 share price, they’d need to generate around £200-400 million in annual revenue. To get there, they’d likely need to produce 500 MW to 1 GW of green hydrogen electrolyzers per year from 2030 which could bring in that kind of revenue through major contracts with companies like Shell and RWE. So, with the right scaling and projects, hitting £10 a share in 5 years is very realistic.

So, since you’re convinced green hydrogen is a terrible investment, tell us—honest forecast—How long are you willing to bet against a sector with billions in global investment ramping up every year? Genuinely curious. 25 billion announced today

“Ah, the classic ‘green hydrogen is miles away’ argument, as if O&G holding the cards is some revelation to the rest of us. Yes, we know fossil fuels are cheap now, but let’s not pretend they’ll stay that way indefinitely. Governments aren’t throwing billions at hydrogen and renewables out of charity—they’re preparing for the inevitable, even while being lobbied heavily by fossil fuel giants.

As for ITM, long-term means 5 years for me to see £10+ per share, not the forever you seem to think. The sector is scaling rapidly, with major projects already underway—Germany’s €25 billion green hydrogen funding, the EU’s 40GW targets, and deals with giants like Shell and RWE. This isn’t some pipe dream; it’s groundwork for the next energy transition.

But by all means, stick to your short-term fossil comfort zone and wait until hydrogen is competing head-to-head. By then, you’ll be scrambling to buy in at a premium while we’re enjoying the growth you said was ‘terrible’ years earlier.

Not that it really matters, but I might just copy and paste the headlines you post here straight into the AFC chat. After all, if you’ve gone to the trouble of making two accounts to spam AFC, you clearly think it matters more than you’re letting on. Behave.

Constructive news, right? Funny how that only ever means posting negative headlines in the ITM board but never AFC. What is it—are you simple, or have you got a short open on Trading 212? Bit odd, though, considering we’re in the same sector. Strange behavior. And embarrassing having two accounts to post the same posts in the same forum.

Ah yes, the wise oracle has arrived to tell us that oil and gas is still king—groundbreaking insight there. Who here didn’t know that already? We’re investing in green hydrogen because we see the transition unfolding, not because we think oil and gas will disappear tomorrow.

And as for broker ratings and short positions? Thanks for the lecture, but we’re well aware of the current challenges. Unlike you, we’re focused on the long-term growth of an industry backed by billions in global investment. Keep clinging to the ‘harsh reality’ of today while we position for the future. Ricky we know that’s you!

Another new account, and once again, a passive shot at any optimism. Forget the $25 billion Germany loan—let’s focus on a broker rating that always seems to stay within 10% of the share price. Is that you, Ricky?

Exactly—it’s like a few people forget that during the boom, ITM was smart enough to generate £300m. This guy’s telling me he invested in ITM back in 2005, and then has the cheek to call us optimistic.

“In 2020, global investment in green hydrogen was $1.5 billion. In 2005? Pretty much nothing. Now we’re looking at over $10 billion annually, with projections to hit $100 billion+ by 2030. Facts.

When we’re looking at Germany’s GW targets, the UK’s, and the EU’s—all set to be delivered within the next 5 years—I’m more than happy to wait. ITM is building a 200MW electrolyser for RWE, a 100MW plant for Shell, and has partnerships with some of the biggest names in energy. Can you name a better PEM company in the UK or EU with stronger partnerships or a clearer path to scaling?

If your argument is that these governments, and companies like Shell and RWE, are all wrong or lying about their hydrogen plans, then by all means, tell us where to invest instead. Until then, I’ll stick with ITM and the long-term fundamentals.