Member Info for toneman

oneandonly1, I suspect this is legitimate selling and profit taking over middle-east tensions. Unless you suspect a large sell order in the pipeline the market isn't in the right direction for a large buy. If there were a large buy out there the market price would be up as MMs tease out profit takers. All I can see on the list is selling strength and the MMs trying to tease out some buyers with lower prices.

Who's right, we'll see...place your bets.

It's interesting that all the hydrogen boilers discussed in the press this week seem to only mention burning hydrogen rather than fuel cell. CWR are not into burning hydrogen, even with Worcester-Bosch, so I hope someone starts pushing the combined heat and power (CHP) angle for homes soon otherwise it may not get a look in for that market.

yayay, just curious...have your other AIM shares gained as much as ITM recently?

I think it's understandable given the tensions in the middle-east. A lot of people will be thinking solely about locking in recent gains or profits irrespective of the stock. I've been tempted myself, and have chosen to do that on more mainstream stocks, but decided that ITM long term hold outweighs that for this particular stock.

daltry, you should be happy he is confident to keep funding the business. PPS will only be self sustaining once fuel cells are properly mainstream. If, as I am, you are confident that that will eventually be the case then sit tight. All the news and direction from mainstream humanity is away from fossil fuel. There is only a small pool to choose from to replace fossil fuel and fuel cell is an extremely likely candidate.

If you can suggest another mechanism for PPS cashflow other than from the majority shareholder, then what is it? Otherwise don't be put off by their continued share selling - it's what allows the business to manufacture and fulfill its order-book.

What a fantastic opening day to the '20s - the "Hydrogen Decade" (I hope). Great fun.

daltry, I'm pretty sure that this continued selling is the source of PPS cashflow and not a sign of loss of faith in the business - quite the opposite. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the SFN Cleantech company sells shares on the open market to us, then loans the money to PPS - hence the large debt that's building up. They can only sell in small quantities because it's not a very fluid market for PPS shares. It's a toss up whether the selling is there to cover the buys (as oneandonly1 points to) or instead if there are only enough buys anyway to feed the required selling by SFN. The spikes would surely happen when SFN don't want/need to sell to cover the buys, like in the frenzy earlier this year on strong RNS good news. Conversely, if more loan money is needed than buyers available the price will fall considerably.

Sorry to hear that daltry. Bad luck. I may be well up on this one, but I've had my share of stinkers.

daltry - "Pray tell me, what will change the fortunes of this company"

There are two main issues to consider...product success and share structure. Product success is obviously not guaranteed but their portfolio and experience is good, potential customers are good depending on successful trials, and as long as fuel cells maintain the current traction future sales should be very good. However - even if all that positivity turns into good company growth the share structure is such that constant dilution could leave your share value little changed as a result. There is a vast debt building up which is likely to hold the share price back.

Personally I am still a holder. I have made a very good profit already, but I am still a 100% backer of the hydrogen economy. But I see it as a 10-15 year phased introduction. My issue with your comments so far is that you come across as wanting instant results. You are not going to see instant results here. Drift and spike is what you'll get. If you're in it just for the profit, you may get one, you may not...seems like this is not the right company for that strategy. If it spikes again you may get lucky...but who know when/if that'll happen again. Unlike you I am in this for backing the technology. I believe the profit will come because I believe in the technology.

In the end it's your choice. These are just my thoughts on the matter and my 'sanctimonious' choice of words - I am an acquired taste. But I wish you the best with whatever you decide.

daltry, you confuse me. For 10 years this share hadn't broken above 10p and has been arguably very flat. If you invested any time over that period, you are sitting on a profit. And so, as this is what you are in it for, why don't you take your profit and go and find a company more to your liking. If you invested following the recent 10-fold jump in share price hoping that these large jumps would continue, I should like to point out that 'hope' is not a strategy. If you are therefore sitting on a loss, then perhaps you should consider accepting your mistake and find a company more to your liking. Moaning on this board will not change the fortunes of this company. If, otherwise, you are trying to ramp it down with your negativity, you are wasting your time. This company is clearly in the right market at the right time, but that is no guarantee of success either.

Of course I may be wrong, but I'd be surprised if the shares fall tomorrow on the back of the directors sales - I'd imagine that it's these sales that cause the 10% drop over the past two days (perhaps not then as I'd suggested before solely down to Nikola Motors announcement). These share sales must already be completed, hence the after hours announcement, so tomorrow we go back to normal supply and demand don't we. Right? Wrong?

He's a cheerie chappie isn't he?! I'm not sure he understands the financing of companies like ITM. Currently not making a profit they have to raise additional cash don't they. Yes, you can argue the point that they 'sold' 20% of the company to Linde, but in the light of the company need for cash it really is more of an 'investment' by Linde into the future of ITM. So I reckon Dick needs to add a pair of rose-tinted spectacles on his letter to Santa and lighten up a bit.

I don't think there's anything to worry about here. They've all got stacks of stock options available to them and it's possible that these ones were due to lapse. I guess to me the clue is that Rachel triggered 100,000 options and sold 35921 of them to cover the cost of buying the options. That tells us that the option price was 24.372p, so it's possible they're quite old. As for Simon and Graham...who can blame them for taking a nice Christmas treat for themselves.

Very interesting Bellers. That's why it's laughable when pro-battery people claim that hydrogen is a no-go because the infrastructure isn't in place. That is undoubtedly true, but it's the same case for high power, high capacity ev charging...the infrastructure is not there either. Cost of implementing a small ev charge point vs cost of hydrogen fuel station is a valid argument, but cost of high power, high capacity charge point will be significant so not so black and white.

Bellers, I think your son is exactly right. Even if you could eventually drive far enough on a battery charge, the logistics of high power charging is tricky. You'd either have to have multiple chargers at company depots to do their whole fleet overnight (huge electricity demand) or there would have to be a massive network of overnight chargers for sleeper-cabs up and down the country. That would be like the Tesla network on steroids as you'd arguably have to aim for over-capacity in every region otherwise you'd end up with some trucks missing out and effectively disabled for the next day's route.

...and here's the link if anyone wants a read...
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/12/03/nikola-iveco-partner-to-bring-the-battery-electric-nikola-tre-to-the-eu/

My suspicion is that today's drop is for the same reason as the one two weeks ago. It coincides with an announcement from Nikola Motors, this time for their model Tre (for the European market). The problem is that they are pushing Hydrogen further away with their talk of battery trucks. They're now suggesting the Tre will launch in Europe in 2021 as battery only with Hydrogen to follow if the infrastructure allows from 2023. My worry is that this approach could do them more harm than good as the truck is only likely to travel 250 miles on a charge. And with 720kWh to refill it's hard to see the appeal for heavy logistics people. So if they don't adopt it, that sort of market flop could make people extremely hesitant about backing a punt on the follow-up hydrogen one being a success.

Personally I still don't see an alternative for Heavy Goods other than hydrogen...except the alternative being to give up on climate change and just carry on burning fossils and re-evaluate in another 50 years.

...and to be clear...that was not a rant at you Folderboy. I appreciated the link posted.

Thanks for the link Folderboy. I'm not sure I would call it "Well worth a read". I would call the 41 truths the biggest load of claptrap I've read in a long time. They may well be facts, but most of them are totally irrelevant. Mark P. Wills should be ashamed of himself. His main thrust appears to be that the growth in demand for oil means that we shouldn't even bother to compete with it. Most of his like-for-like comparisons are in many cases more like comparing apples with oranges, and in other cases like comparing apples with donkeys.

Exactly. The big advantage with H2 is that you use a MW turbine and a MW electrolyser and produce a mobile product with a much greater energy density. Then use a refueling model similar to today's...distributed and pumped (compressed).