Member Info for toneman

Looks like your nudge worked SD. Then again, maybe this was the plan all along. Either way, happy it's released.

It's interesting to consider better batteries. Solid state, I'm assuming. From an EV use perspective they still exhibit at least one large drawback which is charging. Even if solid state batteries can charge really fast, that energy has to be transferred as electrons via cables from a large power source. The faster you want to charge the more massive that power source has to be.

I'm not arguing that fuel cell cars are better than battery ones, just that a better battery doesn't magically solve the EV problem, it simply moves you onto trying to solve the next obstacle. In my opinion though, there would have been fewer obstacles overall had the transport industry adopted fuel cell from the start. Unfortunately the efficiency argument and the 'charge from home' argument won in the short term so we're travelling down that road now with a lot of obstacles yet to be resolved.

Valid point SD. You can see how it escalates - Starts with a missed loan payment, then they borrow from their own loan facility to pay the dividend, then the missed payment turns into a loan default, next the future dividends get cut, credibility trashed.

Their payment history so far also demonstrates a nice short time between ex-dividend and payment. So announce, ex, and payment all still within March is not out of the question.

The five year comment is a little worrying. It shows how little confidence he has of their pipeline panning out in a 'reasonable' timeframe. I would have thought that their 1GW factory should be profitable when full and, if the hydrogen forecasts by industry commentators is to be believed, it should be at full capacity before 2028.

Does it also mean a further fund raise once the 'second factory' cash is depleted through general run-rate?

Personally I suspect he's sand-bagging in order to avoid over promise and under deliver scenario of past company performance.

Valuable info SD. Many thanks.

That's right Bilbs, they certainly weren't immune to the hype/crushed trajectory we've been riding. Previously IES suggested they weren't looking for extra cash, but then they won some big orders and realised they'd need more cash to build enough stuff. Consequently they've set up an equity loan scheme which didn't go down well. And last week announced a cash raise by rights issue. So it's a rocky old road. They're due to launch a large scale battery later this year which they reckon will open the flood gates. We'll see. But they've certainly got a lot of potential and some very interested parties with huge scale if it pans out. I've got just enough invested there to keep it interesting.

I agree on the battery storage technology issue Arthur. I'd leave all the lithium batteries for the transport sector and use flow batteries for distributed grid storage. That's why I'm also invested in IES. Hoping they're going to be big one day when everyone follows my thinking about the technology split between transport and grid scale.

Arthur, I think the point is that we shouldn't simply dump coal, gas and nuclear. But we also shouldn't be building more of that either. We should continue to scale up renewables and storage, which will take a few decades, and transition steadily.

There is vast scope for domestic solar and storage, but the current model is a bit weak. Currently there is only a minority of households that can justify paying up front for something that is tied to the home and requires a multi-year payback. Typically only affluent households, that own their own home, are not considering moving home for many years, and are not considering dying for many years, can justify the up front expense. Energy companies need to find a new model. For example, they could 'borrow' your roofspace in exchange for a discounted electricity bill, and aim to install solar on all homes and install a 1MWh storage battery at the end of each street.

Continued expansion of wind (and the introduction of hydrogen conversion of the excess) will slowly replace the rest of the electricity generators. But we shouldn't be afraid to fire up the gas generators (or even coal) where it's a short term necessity, cold snap, reduced winter sun, low wind, and our hydrogen storage has run low. I think it's important to accept that the long term target is nett zero, not absolute zero. But to reduce the need to switch on the fossil generators we would also be importing green hydrogen from the desert regions, once established.

They gave their Q4 results presentation yesterday. Subsequently a pile of analyst downgrades today (although all of them still at valuations reasonably higher than today's SP). I think a lot of sentiment still on the side of doubt that Plug will hit all of their bullish targets. Personally, I think they will. I think the market is too bearish on Plug. Still got at least 2 years to see how it plays out though. Either side could win at this stage.

I hope that's a continuation of you not being serious Arthur.

I'm pretty sure they only have to notify on completion of the full transaction. It is essentially outside of the control of the seller how long it will take the marketmakers to complete the transaction. So it is not necessary to inform every integer percentage crossed during the course of the transaction.

"(4) an acquisition or disposal of shares is to be regarded as effective
when the relevant transaction is executed unless the transaction
provides for settlement to be subject to conditions which are beyond
the control of the parties in which case the acquisition or disposal is
to be regarded as effective on the settlement of the transaction;"

Agricore, thanks for your analysis. What is your understanding/expectation of the protection (you mentioned "Senior Debt Finance") in the event of defaults on the debt financing elements? I'm wondering if the risks there are large enough to justify the current discount to NAV and then whilst those debt financing elements remain perhaps we stay at a permanent discount to NAV, albeit with a growing NAV.

No worries. We'll complete our government vehicle trials in 2027 and then we'll leap into action.

Agricore, I got the loan idea from their investor documentation.

e.g. "The Group signed contracts to provide a debt facility to a subsidiary of Virmati Energy Ltd (trading as “Field”), for the purposes of building a portfolio of four geographically diverse Battery Energy Storage System assets in the UK. The total facility amounts to £45.6 million and carries a fixed interest rate."

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the terminology, but that still reads like a loan to me.

Yes, good point Krusty. I was mixing myself up a bit there, as if TENT had to pay out dividends related to the whole fund value, but of course you're right they're not paying dividends out on the new money borrowed as that's not additional investor capital. So I agree, as long as they can balance the rate they're borrowing new money against the energy loans they're handing out (allowing for some project failures) then it should drop to the bottom line as profit.

Presumably also the NAV isn't massively altered either as the amount borrowed should net off against the increased project loans, aside from some organic growth attributed to the marginal difference between the two rates.

I'm still not altogether sure then why this fund is so far below its NAV.

You don't even have to pick out the stockmarket minnows. Amazon got hammered over 90% when the tech bubble burst. Yeah...but where are they now?

The recording of the recent presentation is now available on the "Investor Meet" platform. Along with the recorded presentation is a Q&A tab. There are over 100 submitted questions that ITM did not have time for during the presentation but they have provided written answers to all of them alongside audio clips of the ones addressed during the presentation call. Hopefully the answer to your burning question is among them.

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/investor/meeting/interim-results-investor-presentation-15

Funny, never thought to check that Taskmaster. I'll look for a southerly full moon on a clear night and see if I spot anything.

"The initial plans for Ballymena have not finalised the source of renewable energy for the electrolyser."

This will continue to be the spanner in the works for all electrolyser sales as new renewable energy sources (particularly for the UK) are not being created fast enough. I still think it's crazy that they (politicians, regulators, etc) choose to take two technologies, that individually have challenges restricting expansion, and then handcuff them together. I'm convinced companies like ITM will eventually win through, but it'll be no thanks to the geniuses in political power.