Member Info for StarBright

I don’t own any MET1 but saw this interesting post on X…

https://x.com/jubcapital/status/1923339373241639048?s=61

What’s the story?

Back in September 2024 the company said via RNS: “ The Board would like to take the opportunity to reaffirm to investors that it remains committed to the Company's 7.0 pence dividend target per Ordinary Share for the financial year.”

Since then I can’t see any further RNS mentions, but there have been numerous interviews, presentations and a Capital Markets event. If you’ve seen anything relevant to the 7.0p commitment, could you please share it here…?

The UK is enjoying a prolonged period of high sunshine hours, with some record breaking stats for March, April and May so far. This is great news for solar-derived revenues, but also for BESS because BESS installations have enhanced revenue generation opportunities during periods of high irradiance.

I don’t like ChatGPT explanations posted here but it did produce a good summary, so with my apologies:

Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) can potentially earn more revenue during periods of high irradiance, but it depends on how they are integrated and utilized within the grid or solar system. Here’s how:

1. Energy Arbitrage: During periods of high irradiance, solar generation is typically high, leading to lower grid electricity prices. A BESS can charge during these low-cost periods and discharge during peak demand periods when electricity prices are higher, maximizing revenue.

2. Peak Shaving: High irradiance can lead to excess solar generation, potentially causing grid congestion or curtailment. BESS can store excess energy and discharge it during peak demand, thereby reducing demand charges and capturing peak pricing.

3. Ancillary Services: During periods of high irradiance, solar generation can cause grid instability. BESS can provide grid-balancing services like frequency regulation, voltage support, and ramp rate control, earning additional income.

4. Capacity Markets: In markets with capacity payments, BESS can be compensated for being available to supply power during periods of high demand, which may correlate with periods of high solar output.

We may see some very positive earnings figures for this period, perhaps especially if the sunshine continues…

The UK is enjoying a prolonged period of high sunshine hours, with some record breaking stats for March, April and May so far. This is great news for Solar-derived revenues, but also for BESS because BESS installations have enhanced revenue generation opportunities during periods of high irradiance.

We may see some very positive earnings figures for this period, especially if the sunshine continues…

The UK is enjoying a prolonged period of high sunshine hours, with some record breaking stats for March, April and May so far. This is great news for Solar-derived revenues, but also for BESS because BESS installations have enhanced revenue generation opportunities during periods of high irradiance.

We may see some very positive earnings figures for this period, especially if the sunshine continues…

@Douvrey - you mention a forthcoming government report. Are you referring to this https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/planning-for-new-energy-infrastructure-2025-revisions-to-national-policy-statements or to something else?

Thank you for this. Is a replay of the Zoom call available anywhere? I wasn’t able to join and am interested to hear what they said.

@bunsenburner, what material non-public information do you have to support your assertion? I think most will wait for the call and then form a view….

But....

My reading is that SUPR will have a holding in a JV following the transfer(s). This will be a material portion (25%?) of the full portfolio. This holding will be less fungible/liquid than the current individual holdings. For example the JV partner may need to be involved in disposal decisions?

I'm a little surprised there isn't more governance process here. It feels like quite a material change for existing holders.

Nice to see them remember their disclosure obligations....!

They are actually a good addition to GSF's shareholder register. I don't know them professionally, but their website describes them as a "...specialist asset manager with a focus on alternative investments". The bio details they disclose for their team indicate that they are proper investors, in stark contrast to some of the DFM's who have historically populated GSF's register... They have a total of ~£500m in AuM

The holding appears in their £182m VT RM Alternative Income Fund: https://rm-funds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/VT-RM-Alternative-Income-March-2025-vFinal.pdf

It sits alongside holdings in:

Primary Health Properties PLC Property - Specialist (Healthcare) 5.6%

Target Healthcare REIT PLC Property - Specialist (Healthcare) 5.5%

Warehouse Reit PLC Property - UK Commercial 5.0%

Renewables Infrastructure Group Infrastructure - Renewables, Mixed 4.9%

NextEnergy Solar Fund Ltd Infrastructure - Renewables, Solar 4.9%

Greencoat UK Wind PLC/Funds Infrastructure - Renewables, Wind 4.8%

Foresight Solar Fund Ltd Infrastructure - Renewables, Solar 4.7%

Gore Street Energy Storage Fund Infrastructure - Renewables, Other/Special 4.7%

Octopus Renewables Infrastructure Infrastructure - Renewables, Mixed 4.0%

Hicl Infrastructure PLC Infrastructure - PPP - Core 3.9%

Foresight Environmental Infrastructure Infrastructure - Renewables, Mixed 3.9%

International Public Partnership Infrastructure - PPP - Core 3.7%

Bluefield Solar Income Fund Ltd Infrastructure - Renewables, Solar 3.6%

I have posted here several times in the last year or so that clued-up professional buyers will emerge at some point. Let's hope that this is the start of a trend.

Will the power blackouts in Spain/Portugal/France increase the attractiveness of BESS assets, systems and expertise globally?

Interesting question.

Yep. Someone paid 63.6pps for 765k shares, £486k total. That’s a reasonably sized trade at a price point we haven’t seen for a while.

Watch this space.

Looks like today is moving day…

EPP is not worth £12.3m today in terms of asset or earnings based valuation metrics.

It may however be worth substantially more than £12.3m in the next few years. Perhaps EPP has a 10% chance of being worth £123m at some point in the future, when it is generating sustainable earnings? Or perhaps it has a 25% chance of being worth £49.2m….? None of us know for sure, but the market reflects the aggregate of interested parties thoughts on potential returns and the probability they will be realised.

That’s how markets work.

HTH.

Thank you @tomhuk2000 - I appreciate your response, and your contribution here generally.

What you said was: “The CEO clarified in an interview in January that the initial £100k drawdown of the £5.1m GGAF loan has completed and was done as per terms of the agreement and further drawdowns would commence only if funds were needed. So the fact nothing more has been drawn down demonstrates that the EPP cash balance is fine at the moment.”

So it is interesting that they (evidently) needed cash but elected NOT to draw down further from the GGAF loan. Presumably because the strings attached to the GGAF loan are more onerous than the placing.

I don’t like back-room placings. They hint at information asymmetry; even though placees will have had to attest to the contrary, we all know this is a grey area.

So for me this is a two-sided coin.

On one side it’s great that management and connected parties paid cash to increase their ownership. And the amounts involved - both in terms of £££ and % discount - are modest compared to MCap. It’s a clear signal of management commitment and appears to be interpreted this way by the market today.

But… the same management and connected parties are now sitting on a nice unrealised profit, only hours after the announcement. We have learned that some of the terms attached to the GGAF are onerous. And it is reasonable to assume that there’ll be no material corporate news in the very near term, as this would call into question any managements assertion regarding non-public information.

@tomhuk2000, trading at 26% above the placing price as you say.

You’ve also been asserting strongly that the company has plenty of cash. So why the placing? Which of these two statements is correct?

1. The company did need cash after all, and the back-room placing was the best way to secure it.

2. The company didn’t need cash, so the back-room placing was just a mechanism for a select group of insiders / friends and family to buy some discounted shares.

100% agreed. Holders here should be delighted to see how the HEIT situation is playing out.

@Profitjock's inane ramping probably puts people off...

@jrlse - when shares are bought back and cancelled, the cost of the dividend is reduced proportionally. This reduction benefits the owners of the remaining shares.

If shares are bought back whilst the dividend yield is 12.5%, the capital employed in the buyback generates a return of 12.5% for the remaining shareholders.

I hope that helps you understand this better.

@rylidan - remember that the company can earn 12.5%pa by buying back its own shares..!