Member Info for KelhamKing

I think Daz has provided more than enough evidence 'jgbb123'. Your turn.

The only one on that list Klunk that is a bona fide 'fund' investor is Janus Henderson..... we'll just have to await a TR1 to see if it was them that trimmed their holding.

Just remember - there's a world of difference between the sales side and buy side.

I'd love to see a buy-side analyst assessment. Regrettably I suspect it doesn't exist given the ongoing lack of meaningful revenue, meaning that it rarely appears across their desks....

Assuming that's the same market that's walked down most FTSE stocks today?

What a charming life you must lead.

"I comprehend incompetend very well"

Derek 'Bleach' Warner, Trump Towers, 2024

Completely agree AmusementNow. It is also obvious they have done next to no preparation for this presentation, often just reading information straight off the slides and being totally ill-prepared for the Q and A. Bizarre.

The £4m is the revenue figure that AB has just 'advised' for FY24.

Interesting that he's just ref'd the 50 qualified leads comment, a regular gripe of Garonne. "Some of these are Speedy customers"....yet the 50 qualified leads comment was in 2021 interims, some two years before the creation of Speedy Hydrogen Services. Bit of an odd reference - and what about the apparent £27m order book?

Ahead of what is likely to be Adam Bond's last public appearance as an AFC employee at 10am tomorrow, I've been through the last nine years of Annual Reports to satisfy a long-held question: has Adam Bond earned more than the company has generated in revenue during that time?

I've added together his 'total remuneration' within the Directors Report for the first part, whilst combining 'grant income, sales from customers and other income' for the second part. This is what I've calculated:

TOTAL REVENUE: £5.29M

TOTAL REMUNERATION: £6.92M

Given the promises involved and the level of equity raised in the same period, this is not a proud track record I'm afraid.

Hang on Haggis - you need to be very careful on your language here. The company can agree terms without CE marking, but can you find me a company that would complete the purchase of anything without an assurance it could be used in the field?

Today's news is cautiously welcomed by this non-holder and it's good to see the continued ABB tie up. This needs to be tempered however against the need to show progress on what it's already announced with Speedy, Acciona et. al.

“The cash wasn’t needed”.

Oh yes it was Haggis. The company has a small matter of ‘Going Concern’ to satisfy with auditors on an annual basis, hence needed to raise to get through FY24’s eventual audit.

No-one here can gauge whether profits will be raised from any sales as no figures have ever been released to confirm or deny it.

I’m surprised by the timing of the announcement. I thought the company might have used the tailwind of a new ‘greener’ Government to support a higher raise….

Away from the gentle ribbing I remain on the sidelines for two specific reasons:

- Still no reported delivery to Speedy despite what was promised earlier in the year, plus no reported delivery to either ABB or Acciona - leading to the ramping up of the rumour mill; plus

- The need for the company to raise additional funds this year (see messages passim), hence the fear of dilution.

If they sort both, the company could be in a reasonable position. Time is ticking though.

Dennis Schulz Garonne, not George Shultz - the long dead US diplomat.

Spot on Ogggs. At what point will the company actually nail its colours to the mast when it issues regulatory announcements, as I have absolutely no idea on scale or basis of this deal?

You may also want to see p68 of the FY22 Annual Report, which gives the exercise price of the majority of these options - this was curiously omitted in the FY23 report.....

https://www.afcenergy.com/media/htif2hwl/afc-energy-2022-annual-report.pdf

Good question red_hornet....and the answer is to be found in two places beyond today's news: p60 of the most recent Annual Report, alongside the RNS dated 2 May '24 outlining the most recent 'Grant of Share Options'.

Following today, Bond has the following:

6m share options with expiry 17.5.28;

620,970 share options with expiry 6.9.31;

Nearly 1.7m share options with expiry 11.7.32; and

Over 2.1m share options with expiry 31.5.33.

There are also 2.7m share options granted under the most recent 'PSP', payable dependent on the satisfaction of certain performance conditions based on absolute/relative Total Shareholder Return.

Whilst there are different metrics in play as to whether these vest, he holds options over a cool 13m shares on top of the 3.3m he already owns (which he did not buy out of his own pocket).

Given base salary, the continued bonuses he continues to receive and the extent of these share options, Bonds remuneration must be near the top end of AIM. Superb work on just £200k of revenue last year.

Did you supply the soap from your swiss bunker Derek?

For Christ's sake Haggis - you need calling out on this.

Read Note 2 of the company's own financial statements. Note that this isn't trolling or 'bashing' behaviour, but simply a reflection of what was published at 7am - and draw your own conclusions:

"These results are audited, however the financial information does not constitute statutory accounts as defined under section 434 of the Companies Act 2006. The financial information for the year ended 31 October 2023 has been derived from the Company's statutory accounts for that year. The auditors' report on the statutory accounts for the year ended 31 October 2023 was unqualified with a material uncertainty relating to going concern and did not contain statements under section 498 of the Companies Act 2006.

Going concern

The financial statements of AFC Energy plc have been prepared in accordance with UK Adopted International Accounting Standards (IASs).

The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis notwithstanding the trading losses being carried forward and the expectation that the trading losses will continue for the near to medium future as the Company transitions from predominantly undertaking research and development to a more commercial basis.

In line with normal practice, and prior to signing this report, the Directors are required to assess whether it is appropriate to prepare the financial statements on a going concern basis. In making this assessment the Directors need to be satisfied that the Company can meet its obligations as they fall due for at least 12 months from the date of this report.

As part of this assessment, the Directors reviewed the Company's forecast cash position through to the end of the 2025 financial year. This was based on the agreed budget for the 2024 financial year and the forecast for the 2025 financial year. As the period goes beyond the 12 months required it provides additional information when making the assessment. To reach the end of 2025 with positive cash would require at least £7 million of additional funding, however this amount would not be enough for the Company to scale up at its preferred rate."

….worth having a look at the German board to see the views of these shareholders - you’ll recognise a number of recurring themes via the aid of Google translate:

https://www.boersennews.de/community/diskussion/afc-energy/24145/

Haha red_hornet - he really is the European mainland version of David Brent.

"Removes the stain job not the paint job. Let me ask you a question....who does your tampons?"

Eight working days before the AGM (fewer to return proxy form in time) and still no sign of the Annual Report & Financial Statements, never mind seeing the FY22 results themselves - even in unaudited form!

I've never come across such a late filing before once an AGM has been announced - anyone else?