Member Info for LuckyLaurie

I actually thought Jemesa’s post was fairly balanced.

He wasn’t saying approval tomorrow is guaranteed. He outlined the milestones achieved, the milestones still to come, acknowledged the possibility of a delay, and then gave his own probability assessment.

Saying you agree with most of the post and then arguing that “the market doesn’t share the same perspective” feels like a different discussion altogether.

The market is a voting machine in the short term and a weighing machine in the long term. The question isn’t whether the market agrees today, it’s whether the milestones being delivered eventually change the market’s view.

Either way, 30 June isn’t very far away now and we won’t have to wait long to see whether the market starts to reassess the value of a progressively de-risked Cinovec project.

Lots to look forward to now and EIA approval is the starting gun 🥳

Thanks Rpks, another very encouraging development in my view.

The key takeaway for me is not simply that a public hearing has been scheduled, but that the project continues to move through the EIA process and towards a final determination. We now have a clear date in the diary and another milestone on the path to environmental approval.

For months the market has focused on EIA timing and whether the project would remain on track. This latest update suggests the process is progressing as expected and keeps the project moving towards the important June grant-related timeline.

Looking at the bigger picture, any future strategic partner will want confidence not only in the quality of the resource, but also in the permitting process and the commitment of both ČEZ and the Czech authorities to seeing strategic projects advance. Every milestone successfully completed helps build that confidence.

None of us can predict the final outcome before the Ministry makes its decision, but Cinovec is one of Europe’s most strategically important lithium projects and today’s news feels like another positive step in reducing project risk and increasing its attractiveness to potential partners.

A big thank you to Rpks for finding and posting this.

Truly Exciting Times Ahead …….📈

I don’t think there’s necessarily a right or wrong answer here. Every shareholder will have their own strategy and time horizon.

Some will look at their past investing experiences and prefer the certainty of a buyout if a fair offer arrives. Others will look at the sheer scale of Cinovec, its multi-generational potential, and its strategic importance to Europe’s future lithium supply, and conclude that the greatest value may come from remaining invested for many years.

There are also investors who have been here a long time and simply want to realise the rewards of that patience when major milestones are achieved.

Personally, I can see merit in both arguments. A successful mine could ultimately be worth far more than an early exit, but a fair takeover offer would remove a lot of uncertainty around financing, execution, commodity cycles and, ultimately, timing.

That’s what makes the discussion interesting. We’re all looking at the same asset, but through slightly different lenses.

For me, a buyout would actually remove one of the biggest uncertainties as a shareholder: timing.

If EMH remains independent and successfully de-risks the project, the question then becomes when do you sell? Do you take profits at 80p, £1, £1.20 or hold out for more? It’s very easy to either sell too early and watch it keep running, or hold too long and watch gains evaporate.

A fair buyout offer removes that dilemma. You know exactly what you’re getting, there’s no trying to pick the top or worrying about selling at the bottom after a period of volatility.

As for where the share price could trade after the initial milestones, I think there are too many variables to put a precise figure on it. EIA approval, financing, offtake agreements and strategic interest could all have a significant impact. That’s why I tend to focus more on fair value than trying to predict a specific share price on a specific date.

Today’s RNS may look like “just another partnership” to some, but I think it highlights where ITM is heading.

The key line for me wasn’t the 15MW Cromarty project itself, it was the framework to develop, invest in and operate green hydrogen plants across the UK, potentially through Hydropulse.

For years ITM was viewed purely as an electrolyser manufacturer. Now we’re starting to see the BOO (Build, Own, Operate) model move from concept to implementation. That changes the opportunity significantly.

Selling electrolysers generates one-off revenue. Owning and operating hydrogen production assets can create recurring long-term revenue streams and potentially much higher lifetime value per project.

What also caught my eye was the reference to Protium’s portfolio of HAR projects. Cromarty may simply be the first step rather than the end goal.

Piece by piece, ITM appears to be building not only an electrolyser business but also a growing hydrogen production pipeline. If Hydropulse successfully scales alongside equipment sales, investors may eventually need to value ITM on more than just units sold.

Dennis has repeatedly spoken about becoming a major hydrogen supplier. This RNS suggests that vision is now starting to be implemented in the real world.

The market may focus on “no order value today”. I’m focusing on where this could lead over the next 3-5 years. ⬆️🚀🚀

Many thanks to Rpks for continuing to dig out these AGM comments and related Czech articles. For me, the most encouraging aspect is not any single statement, but the direction of travel.

A few months ago the discussion was largely centred around whether Cinovec would progress. The language coming out of ČEZ now appears very different. They are talking about permits, funding, ownership structures and potential strategic partners.

To me, that suggests the discussion is increasingly becoming one of how the project is developed and with whom, rather than if it is developed.

The comment that ČEZ is considering several variants, including a possible increase in the Geomet stake or inviting another partner, is particularly interesting. Combined with the recent references to POSCO and the need for long-term lithium supply, it suggests multiple strategic options are being evaluated.

Reading between the lines, ČEZ already has control, local expertise and political support. What a future partner could bring is battery processing expertise, global customer relationships, downstream integration and additional capital.

None of this proves what the eventual structure will be, but it does reinforce the view that Cinovec is increasingly being treated as a strategic development project rather than a distant aspiration.

Thanks again Rpks. Very useful information and exactly the sort of insight that is difficult for most UK investors to access.

Looking more and more like a buyout of EMH? What price?

Fair enough, anything is possible.

My point was simply that “strategic partner” does not automatically mean dilution, as some seem to be implying. There are numerous ways a partner could be involved without altering EMH’s 49% interest.

Given the protections within the JV structure, I’d be more interested in who the partner is and what they bring to the table than assuming dilution is the default outcome.

A strategic partner does not equal EMH dilution.

EMH’s 49% interest in Geomet is protected by the joint venture arrangements and ČEZ cannot simply dilute EMH at will.

A strategic partner could bring expertise, customers, financing or downstream capability or buy EMH and become the 49% strategic partner CEZ is looking for. The fact ČEZ is discussing partners suggests a focus on development, not abandonment.

Many thanks to Lukask for posting the Czech article and Rpks for the AGM updates. Reading the full article, I actually think it is one of the most significant updates we’ve had for some time.

Three things stood out:

1. Cinovec is now being discussed as a live development project.

ČEZ isn’t debating whether lithium mining should happen. The discussion has moved on to obtaining the building permit and progressing the project.

2. The funding pathway is becoming clearer.

The AGM referenced project capex of around US$1.7bn and confirmed that approximately 20% is already covered through grants and public funding. That is a substantial contribution and further evidence of the strategic importance attached to Cinovec.

3. Ownership and partnership structures remain under consideration.

The article states that regarding a possible increase in the stake in Geomet or inviting another partner, ČEZ is considering several variants.

That wording is fascinating.

To me, it suggests the discussion inside ČEZ is no longer “Should we develop Cinovec?” but rather “What is the optimal ownership, funding and partnership structure?”

Reading between the lines, ČEZ already has control, political support and local expertise through its 51% ownership. What it may be looking for now is a partner that can bring:

• Battery processing expertise

• Global customer relationships

• Downstream integration

• Additional capital

That sounds more like a major industrial or battery materials group than a simple financial investor.

None of this proves who that partner may be, or whether they ultimately enter through Geomet, financing, offtake agreements, a strategic investment, or potentially through the acquisition of EMH itself.

However, my takeaway is simple:

Cinovec increasingly looks like a question of “how” and “with whom”, not “if”.

Extremely positive place for EMH and for us all as shareholders.

Good catch Mick. Perhaps it’s nothing more than legacy mining costs, but “Coal 0%” and “Mining 6%” doesn’t immediately reconcile. Given today’s AGM comments on strategic partners and long-term lithium supply, it’s exactly the sort of detail that makes you wonder what ČEZ is planning for beyond coal 🤔 …. Lithium 🤭

Many thanks Rpks for taking the time to relay that update from the ČEZ AGM. In my view it is one of the more important snippets of information we’ve had for some time because it gives a rare insight into how ČEZ itself is thinking about Cinovec.

A few things stood out.

Firstly, there was no suggestion whatsoever that the project is in doubt. Quite the opposite. The discussion appears to have moved on to obtaining permits, securing long-term supply and ensuring the economics are right before making a final mining decision.

Secondly, the comment that ČEZ “does not rule out another strategic partner” is fascinating. It doesn’t mean anything is imminent, but it clearly shows they are open to strengthening the project with additional expertise, funding, processing capability and market access if that helps maximise value.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, ČEZ reiterated its desire for long-term lithium supply. That is exactly what shareholders should want to hear from a state-backed strategic partner. This isn’t about chasing short-term lithium prices, it’s about securing a domestic European source of a critical raw material for decades to come.

For EMH shareholders, the strategic partner comment is particularly interesting. There are multiple ways a partner could enter the story, whether at project level, financing level, offtake level or potentially through EMH itself. Nobody can say which route will ultimately be chosen, but the door is clearly not closed.

Overall I see this as another positive piece of the jigsaw. Permitting progressing, long-term supply remaining the objective and openness to strategic partners all point towards a project moving forward rather than standing still.

Thanks again Rpks. Very useful information.

Good point Bluerill.

The Passivhaus angle could be far more significant than many initially realise, particularly when you consider the direction of travel in UK housing policy, energy efficiency standards and the growing pressure on housing associations to deliver better quality homes at lower cost.

What also stood out to me was the ability to supply the UK immediately from the Albanian facility while domestic manufacturing options are evaluated. That potentially removes one of the biggest barriers to entry and allows ECOB to demonstrate the product in real-world UK conditions much sooner.

The two demonstration homes are therefore more important than they may first appear. If they successfully showcase build speed, energy efficiency, quality and economics, they effectively become a live reference site for housing associations, local authorities and developers.

Combined with the recent Albania progress, second production line funding and the international projects already underway, this feels like another piece of the puzzle falling into place.

Interesting that the UK opportunity is now moving from “future ambition” to “active implementation”.

Goldfinger77, We’ve all bought shares on the wrong day before 🤣. The good news is your average is 145p, not 209p.

If someone had offered you 194p six months ago you’d probably have snapped their hand off. Nothing fundamental has changed in the last 48 hours other than a few traders taking profit and some volatility.

The market’s job is to test conviction. So far ITM has done a pretty good job of testing everyone’s! 😅

Dennis has been exceptional and I don't think many shareholders would argue otherwise.

He inherited a company that was burning cash, missing targets and struggling for credibility. Today ITM has one of the strongest balance sheets in the sector, world-class manufacturing capability, improving margins, a clear roadmap and growing strategic importance.

That said, I think it's important not to confuse a great CEO with the company itself.

The ~£86m of Government support wasn't invested into Dennis, it was invested into ITM. The factory, technology, IP, customer relationships, engineering expertise and growing order pipeline belong to ITM and its shareholders.

One of the hallmarks of a truly great CEO is building a business that becomes greater than any one individual. Dennis has recruited an outstanding team, brought in significant industrial experience and created a culture focused on delivery, quality and financial discipline.

I was actually slightly apprehensive before the site visit. Previous meetings with CEOs have sometimes left me questioning my investment. The opposite happened at ITM. The professionalism, clarity of strategy and consistency of message from everyone I met only increased my conviction.

The reason I invested heavily here wasn't because of one person. It was because I could see a company moving from an R&D story to a commercially disciplined industrial business with global ambitions. Even when sentiment was at its lowest and many had written ITM off, the company had a substantial cash position which gave it the runway needed to execute a turnaround. That balance sheet gave me confidence to keep buying when others were selling.

Today, following disciplined cash management, operational improvements and significant Government support, the company is arguably in an even stronger financial position than ever before.

Dennis deserves enormous credit for that transformation, but ITM's future value will ultimately be created by the entire team executing against what is now a very clear strategy.

To me, that is exactly what Dennis has built: a business with strong foundations, exceptional people, global ambitions and the financial strength to pursue opportunities that many of its competitors simply cannot.

Momentum, I wouldn’t call it luck.

My first purchase was actually around £2 back in late 2022 after a recommendation from a friend whose opinion I respected. He was in around £5 and painted a very compelling long-term picture of where hydrogen could eventually go.

The difference is that he sold and I stayed.

Like many here, I spent a long time heavily underwater and there were plenty of opportunities to throw in the towel. Instead, I invested a huge amount of time trying to understand the business, the technology, the balance sheet, the market opportunity and, more recently, building a detailed research project to help me cut through the noise.

I averaged down when I felt the risk/reward justified it and later averaged up as my conviction increased. Looking back, I actually hesitated at 65p when funds were available and bought elsewhere instead, so there are plenty of decisions I’d change with hindsight!

What really changed things for me was seeing the transformation in the company and being fortunate enough to attend the site visit. It was probably one of the most professional presentations I’ve ever attended. Seeing the facilities, meeting the team and hearing the strategy directly from management significantly increased my confidence.

My holding here is actually a larger percentage of my portfolio than I would normally allow, having been badly burned in the past. But occasionally you come across a company where the opportunity, management, balance sheet and market timing all start lining up.

For me, this is one of those occasions.

The share price has done well, but what excites me most is that it still feels like we’re only at the beginning of the commercialisation journey.

To think one of the hardest decisions I made was buying at 25p 🙈😁 that said I was heavily underwater but hey a little more hindsight and I would have thrown the sink at it.

I might have to top up again 🤸🤸🏽 I have a target 🎯 to hit.

Of course theoretically lots of things “could” happen, but I think people are overcomplicating this now.

ČEZ already effectively controls Geomet operationally through its 51% holding, so if they were ever going to make a serious move on EMH it would most likely be because they wanted certainty, simplicity and full economic exposure to a globally strategic asset.

A messy partial structure where:

• some EMH holders cash out

• others remain

• the market stays fragmented

• and EMH continues listed with minority uncertainty

…does not really solve much strategically.

If anything, as Cinovec progresses through EIA, funding and potential offtakes, clarity and stability become increasingly important for all parties involved.

Personally I think any serious corporate move would more likely be structured around long-term strategic control and fair value rather than financial engineering games around a temporarily weak AIM share price.

Interesting post and I agree with the general point that every major milestone potentially increases the strategic value of EMH.

What I would say though is that some people still seem to underestimate the significance of the April clarification RNS and the wider JV structure.

EMH has repeatedly indicated that major Geomet decisions require agreement between the parties and that meaningful governance protections exist. That is precisely why the “EMH can simply be steamrolled and diluted away overnight” narrative has never really matched what the company itself has been saying publicly.

Also worth remembering:

• ČEZ already owns 51% of Geomet

• they already have exposure to the project upside

• the objective is developing a strategic European lithium asset, not destroying confidence in Czech investment partnerships

Personally I think a deal between both parties at some stage could potentially benefit both sides enormously, but I do not believe it would be some “lowball steamroller” situation.

Both sides understand the strategic importance and potential scale of Cinovec, particularly given the resource longevity which some estimates suggest could extend for generations at current mining rates.

Add into that:

• CRMA strategic relevance

• EIA progression

• grant potential

• future offtakes/funding

• and even Zeus previously pointing toward an 88p fair value before major derisking milestones

…and it becomes increasingly difficult to argue that a globally strategic European lithium asset would simply be handed over cheaply because AIM sentiment happened to be weak for a few months.

Time will tell of course, but personally I believe any serious corporate discussion would ultimately need to reflect fair long-term value for both sides.

I actually think people underestimate one hugely important factor here: reputation.

Keith has spent years pushing Cinovec through commodity crashes, political changes, lithium bear markets, permitting complexity and endless scepticism.

At this stage I personally struggle to believe he has done all of that just to wave through some bargain basement outcome right near the finish line.

If Cinovec achieves what many believe it can achieve strategically, his legacy and reputation in the sector are made.

If shareholders get stitched up cheaply after 10+ years, that reputation follows him forever too.

That is why I think alignment matters.

And honestly Jemesa’s “endangered troll in the tunnel” comment nearly finished me off 🤣

£2.14 to buy 🚀📈⬆️