Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
No filling stations. Shell just closed a bunch of them.
There's the hoot.
The hoot might just be a reality...not trigen but a PEM fuel cell. Totally different application. Each to their respective niches.
"Construction has begun on a flexible microgrid that features energy sources available today, including a 230-kW solar photovoltaic system, a 1-MW stationary proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell generator, 325-kW solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC), and an onsite 500-kWh battery energy storage system. The microgrid is designed to support the campus' energy needs, allowing it the ability to operate off-grid. The system is expected to be fully operational by 2026."
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/toyota-establishes-hydrogen-headquarters-to-accelerate-advancement-of-fuel-cell-technology-302132596.html
However, Toyota and FuelCell Energy have established a long term relationship as Toyota has signed on with FuelCell to receive Tri-gen products under a 20-year purchase agreement.
https://www.waste360.com/fleet-technology/toyota-invests-long-term-in-hydrogen-production
"stationary fuel cell power generation" may mean their own brand of trigen ? Haha wouldn't that be a hoot!
Where's the filling stations? Besides, California is 1 state of 50. There's a world out there w/o a place to fill.
The interest rate of the Derby financing from 2 banks is 7.25% and 8%.The loan is for $13 mil subordinated but the company will receive $11.2 mil after fees are taken out.
Dilution will continue in order to make payrents
Stock reacting accordingly. The market doesn't see the Derby projects financing or the return from it as a positive.
Canada rockin & Rollin
https://albertainnovates.ca/news/alberta-innovates-and-emissions-reduction-alberta-announce-new-hydrogen-funding/
From above link
https://www.eralberta.ca/funding-technology/accelerating-hydrogen-challenge/
Look at all these Funding Opportunities!!!
https://albertainnovates.ca/funding/
https://www.eralberta.ca/
We already have $6.8M award
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://investor.fce.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2022/Fuelcell-Energy-Project-Identified-for-Funding-From-Canadas-Clean-Resource-Innovation-Network-to-Design-Pilot-for-Clean-Carbon-Capture/default.aspx&ved=2ahUKEwiv-e37h-2FAxXzFVkFHRE1DQsQFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3fDaUwm_XMci3wNlWSXToJ
Toyota establishes North American hydrogen business headquarters in Los Angeles
"The North American headquarters will lead hydrogen initiatives across sectors, including passenger cars, heavy-duty trucks, stationary fuel cell power generation and port vehicle applications."
"Toyota said it is working on several projects but did not provide details."
https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/toyota-puts-north-american-hydrogen-headquarters-los-angeles
Yes, that's why we get Generation revenue over $15M moving forward. What most don't know, or understand is that they have a significant history of write downs and losses for delays and projects they decided not to do because the financial profile no longer made sense. Those are all gone, with Toyota and Groton being a large part. Financials Will look much better strictly based on that. I recall Michael Bishop commenting that once those were all out of the way margins were going to come in over 40% on generation. Q2 + Q3 should garner much attention from investors and traders alike. You and I both know it's only going to take a little bit of momentum than who knows how far it goes or how quickly. Just assume about $1M revenue per year, per MW of generation. That's close enough that it's not worth trying to figure out the marginal difference. It will take about four quarters to figure out more accurately especially since generation is impacted by the service. So whenever they're doing service they will lose some of the generation but they will gain more than what they lost through service and license agreements to not only offset but give much greater revenue on similar margins.
Reacting poorly to Fed decision. Another buying opportunity.
I went back through financials audio for Q1 (at time stamp 15 min 10 seconds) and although both Derby projects went online in Q1 the full amount of revenue will be realized in Q2.
14 MW and 2.8 MW total 16.8 MW revenue added in Q2 !
C'mon $.96 do I hear $.96!! Powell has to give us something promising. At least suggesting rate cuts likely in the near future.
Yes I'm certain that was factored into his numbers and yes we are the only ones that can do trigeneration on the planet at this point. There's boatloads of water treatment plants out there We already have several installations and one new contract for such. That alone is a huge opportunity. We were not in the electrolyzer or SOFC market before that announcement. That brings a whole new ball game for us to start immediately getting contracts. Much easier to sell sub megawatt or one megawatt Then it is to sell multi-megawatt scale projects, without as much red tape also. We already have three contracts for the electrolyzers. And I expect that to increase yearly moving forward. Hence The increasing capex ramping up production in Canada from 4 megawatts to 40 megawatts, with the expressed possibility to increase to 80 megawatts. I'd like to hear their status on the 400 megawatt manufacturing facility they were previously planning in the United States. That may be the reason they actually needed cash recently. The original estimate was that they were going to need $250 million. They revised that either at the Q4 conference or Q1 conference stating they now only need $100 million. It's a huge savings, And they may have needed the cash to get the ball rolling on that.
There's no way more than one person that has no interest in a company and believes they are complete failure could spend as much time on a message board posting as some I've seen historically. I've blocked them all because they waste time & space. I'm thinking it's 1 maybe 2 individuals on all boards. it's shocking that one person can waste so much time talking nonsense speaking so negatively on a social media platform about a company they supposedly believe should not exist and has no future. So, there's absolutely no way there are three, 4, 5 or more. They never once provided any factual information about why the company is not going to succeed. factual information. Not what somebody else wrote or analysts say. I can tell you they've increased recurring revenue from generation from approximately 7.5 million a year in 2019 to now approximately 63 million a year. I can tell you that they've signed more contracts in the last 6 months then they did in any previous 2 years. They also completed a project with the largest automobile manufacturer in the world. They signed yet another joint development agreement extension with questionably the most powerful company in the world which they've been working with for 10 years. They also were granted the rights to use FCE carbon capture technology developed independently and jointly with ExxonMobil with other partners to develop or install commercially. Bashers repeatedly said they gave away their technology but the new joint development agreement clearly says they are 100% inaccurate. these are facts not opinion. They have the most affordable carbon capture method on the planet, it will prove efficiency at Porthos just like they already have in the lab. it's the most affordable option because it actually creates energy rather than being parasitic like other methods. They were also dead wrong about carbon capture being a failure Carbon capture is now the primary focus globally to address climate change. That's globally. They may want to get some help looking that up and figuring out the definition. within the last 6 months they have also gone 100% operational with a project for the US Navy & the Department of defense. They began commercial operations with 2 separate projects in their home state, 1 which is the 2nd largest (Only to FCE Bridgeport project) in the US.
+++ updates coming from the following within the next 9 months:
1) South Korea, big contracts incoming
2) Canadian Carbon Capture contract incoming
3) Navajo Nation contract incoming
4) MHB contract incoming, all by end of January!!
Q2, Q3, Q4 to average over $40M each
Stated May 1, 2024! Take that and store it in a safe place so you can plan to throw it back at me. I am!!
IMO Volume is back to reality because the shorts are now back to reality, I believe realizing there's way too much support under 90 cents. Although I would love to see us trade over 20 million shares every day, seems not likely right now. Can't wait to see what happens after the Fed speak today. But looking at support Friday to Monday to Tuesday to Wednesday so far, it certainly looks like we're headed back over $1 quickly. Favorable fed speak would be wonderful and may actually allow this thing to run, get a bit of a squeeze, and get to new 52 week highs with a good earnings report in early June. That's not asking a whole lot. I can easily see this ranging between $1.50-$2.50 after a nice run, then breaking loose on ++ fed speak and ++ Q3. Hopefully June-September bring an entirely new/old world to life. Especially with a big contract in SK which I do expect this fiscal year, Hopefully sooner rather than later.
I would have to review Few's numbers because I have difficulty separating numbers from CCS and from Solid Oxide (MOU from Malaysia ? etc)
Cash flow and dilution/share price control is a delicate dance. Factor in the fed decisions and tax abatement and It's challenge to see the outcome. I can see floating the share price between 1-2 until some of the bigger variables shake out this summer and see who is still in and who bails out by Q3. We are only one with Tri-gen right? We have solvency and can control cash flow while we build out CCS and H2 production.
The following pulled from FCEL seems to imply we were ready to go with solid oxide if we were "accepting orders" a year and a few months ago. Was that factored in to
future revenue?
DANBURY, Conn., Dec. 06, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- FuelCell Energy, Inc. (Nasdaq: FCEL) today announced it is accepting orders for its solid oxide electrolyzer and solid oxide fuel cell platform. The platform will give more organizations the option to implement a flexible energy strategy in order to..
* Start their energy transition today knowing they can shift to 100% zero-carbon hydrogen in the future.
* Produce clean hydrogen for use or storage from zero-carbon renewable or nuclear power, managing the peaks and valleys of renewables and providing flexibility to nuclear energy production.
* Create energy from any combination of available sources — from renewables, hydrogen, biogas, or natural gas.
* Provide continuous power and reduce grid dependence, co-locating generation and use wherever possible.
If we think realistically, 24 might be a challenge for revenue growth given Q1. Averaging $130M in 22+23 I believe. They need to average $40M per Q for the remainder of 24 just to beat 2022+23. That's feasible and I believe they will, but 40% increase YOY in 24 would be over $56M perQ average Q2, Q3, + Q4. That's iffy. S&L is supposed to kick in Q2 or Q3 but not a ton. So I'm a bit confused about any substantial beat for the year. But, extrapolate Few's numbers we get 130% in 2 years and 670% in 7 years. That's just under 52% Annual growth through 25 but under 40% through 2030, which is largely why I believe we gut upward guidance no later than 2026
And if you extrapolate out Few's #s, it's $300M in 2025 and $1B in 2030, which I believe will be revised up by end of 24 or 2025 at the latest. SK is the key for 2025 and needs to happen by end of fiscal year. That would mostly be MCFC which I think has run rate of 40-45MW annually. If they get 100MW, which I expect +/- 20MW, they will need to ramp production at least a little, along with Cap Ex. Margins will be important, not sure what margins will be in restarting plants. I think they run 20-30%? Over all margins running at full capacity after expansion is supposed to be 40-50%. But I'm uncertain how the incentives and tax benefits will effect that. This is going to be growth and increased Cap Ex for such for quite some time. This company should grow at a high rate consistently for the next 10 years. Commercial carbon capture projects won't start rolling for at least 2 years, and they would coincide with PORTHOS going operational. Should have several decent contracts in place by end of 2026, operational by 2027-2028. Due to expanding and increasing Cap Ex, profit may not be attainable until 26 or 27 im thinking. I'm thinking $400-$500M revenue needed for profit during huge growth cycle. $1B for 2030 might be revised to $1.5-$2B by 2026
Initially $11.6M yes. If it were 100MW there's no way anyone could manipulate the SP below $1. Demonstration is to demonstrate affordability, durability, efficiency in a real life commercial setting.
"Quote" I am buying all I am able.
FCEL need that for their dilutive behavior.
Here's the shovel. Dig a little deeper.
$1.00 is where it stops. Charts don't lie especially when they back up fundamentals.
Thank you, Max. So maybe the burst of share sales is to pay for work in progress well ahead of any realized gains? In the meanwhile I am buying all I am able. By the time we get good news at earnings, in my opinion, we will be above $1and stay there.
When the quartertly is released you'll see another loss. This time and due to the lack of announced revenues the expectation is once again to disappoint.
Duyring the quarter the company sold into the market to raise much needed cash to build out their plants. The expense from this accomplishes 2 things:
1) It offsets any benefit the company may derive from the meager sales it gained.
2) It ensures a wider loss/sh than otherwise would have been expected.
Note: Sales may increase from its 55% drop in the prior quarter. The slight increase compared to the drop shouldn't impress.
Lest we forget, the company is diluting your value every time they sell into the market. And, on top of that, they're borrowing . Thus weighing on the financials.
All professional analysts, trusted for their objective and thorough research, see losses through 2029. They've been saying that for 3 years and THEY ALONE HAVE BEEN RIGHT. Compare their record with the promoters and observe the results. The difference is startling.
The world’s most advanced economies just agreed to end coal use by 2035 – with a catch
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/g7-agrees-shut-down-coal-170656815.html
Some clarifications on Rotterdam
Rotterdam is scheduled to be operational in early 2026. This is fiscal year not calendar year...so 18 months from now is fiscal year 2026.
ExxonMobil’s affiliate Esso Nederland BV plans to build a pilot plant at its Rotterdam Manufacturing Complex to test a breakthrough technology that could significantly reduce CO2 emissions from key industries. The pilot plant aims to obtain data on performance and operability of the carbonate fuel cell (CFC) technology, jointly developed with FuelCell Energy. Additionally, the pilot aims to address potential technical issues that may occur in a commercial environment and better understand the costs of installing and operating a CFC plant for carbon capture.
Esso’s Rotterdam integrated manufacturing site will be the first place in the world to pilot this technology. Pending a successful demonstration, ExxonMobil could deploy this technology at its manufacturing sites around the world.
https://investor.fce.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2023/ExxonMobil-to-Build-CCS-Pilot-Plant-with-FuelCell-EnergyUsing-Carbonate-Fuel-Cell-Technology/default.aspx
On January 31, 2024, the Company received a purchase order valued at $11.6 million from Esso Nederland B.V. (“Esso”), an affiliate of Exxon Mobil Corporation and EMTEC, for fuel cell modules as well as engineering, procurement, fabrication, testing and delivery services required for the construction and implementation of the modular point source carbon capture pilot plant at the Esso Rotterdam Manufacturing Complex.
Manufacturing of the modules for the Rotterdam demonstration has begun in FuelCell Energy’s Torrington, Connecticut, manufacturing facility. (April 8, 2024)
https://investor.fce.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2024/Recently-Updated-and-Extended-Joint-Development-Agreement-between-ExxonMobil-Technology-and-Engineering-Company-and-FuelCell-Energy-Aimed-at-Accelerating-Access-to-Carbonate-Fuel-Cell-Technology-for-Carbon-Capture/default.aspx
From Simply Wall St one week ago regarding FCEL;
Turning to the outlook, the next three years should generate growth of 42% per year as estimated by the ten analysts watching the company. Meanwhile, the rest of the industry is forecast to only expand by 34% per year, which is noticeably less attractive.
In light of this, it's understandable that FuelCell Energy's P/S sits above the majority of other companies. Apparently shareholders aren't keen to offload something that is potentially eyeing a more prosperous future.
Even after such a strong price drop, FuelCell Energy's P/S still exceeds the industry median significantly. Generally, our preference is to limit the use of the price-to-sales ratio to establishing what the market thinks about the overall health of a company.
Our look into FuelCell Energy shows that its P/S ratio remains high on the merit of its strong future revenues. It appears that shareholders are confident in the company's future revenues, which is propping up the P/S. Unless the analysts have really missed the mark, these strong revenue forecasts should keep the share price buoyant.
Anxiously waiting for Q2 beat and what Analysts are predicting. Since they are all of very the place. There are only 2 variables on revenue So they should be close on that. However earnings should be improving substantially, Since all of the previous quarters have included losses related to delays and problems with Groton and Toyota which are no longer. Origins on service and license and generation which are going to be the consistent revenue moving forward are much better I believe over 40%. Earnings should be vastly improved. Revenue might not impress, But it will certainly handily beat Q1. Generation should be over $15M by itself.
I've read and posted research, these references are fairly accurate. The US target was under $40 per ton capture, FCE was under $33 per ton. FCE creates power adding to 500MW plant vs being parasitic.
OK - so Rotterdam is worth $11 million ?
It seems hard to get excited about this.
Thanks for all the info - I wish the numbers were much better ....
No, those are the revenue categories for their backlog
What's all this $$$ about ??
Is this part of the Rotterdam deal ..... ??
(from previous post ....)
Remaining Performance Obligations
Remaining performance obligations are the aggregate amount of total contract transaction price that is unsatisfied or partially unsatisfied. As of January 31, 2024, the Company’s total remaining performance obligations were: $140.4 million for service agreements (expected to be recognized as revenue over approximately three to fifteen years which is based on the remaining term of the service agreements), $346.0 million for generation power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) (expected to be recognized as revenue over approximately nineteen to twenty years based on the PPA terms remaining), $18.3 million for Advanced Technologies contracts (expected to be recognized within approximately two years) and $0 for product purchase agreements.
Biden has mandated 90% rate for CCS for all power plants.
The critics all say that CCS has not been demonstrated 'at scale'. So my assumpiton has been that Rotterdam must produce 90% CCS rate. This, as I said in another post, is legally required for the EPA to claim that this has been 'adequately demonstrate'. So, whether 90% was originally envisioned at Rotterdam or not, it seems like it now must be 90% rate. Otherwise, after all the effort, the same argument that 'this has never been demonstrated at scale' will still persist, and hence Biden's EPA mandate of 90% will be in limbo and there will be lawsuits. Maybe I am wrong about all this. But the way I see it is that Exxon must show 90% capure rate. Then again, as I have said before, I think Exxon is not really motivated to show/claim 90% capture ability until they maxmimize the tax credits/permiting process. So it's probably complicated ..
$11.6M for the modules, install etc.
Thanks Hog! I appreciate the post -
I am still not really sure what it means, in terms of the scope/terms of the contract, for now and for future.
Would sure be nice for Few to discuss this in detail. ......
The unit will be attached to a large 500MW fossil fuels plant. But at scale means they are going to see what the capture rate is in real world situation for a commercial unit, hence 2.8. they previously identified the need to install 100MW on a 500MW Nat Gas unit to capture 90%, and would ultimately generate more power vs other options which would be parasitic and have much less power.
In May 2023, the Company entered into a second letter agreement with ExxonMobil Technology and Engineering Company (formerly known as ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company) (“EMTEC”), pursuant to which the parties agreed that the conditions to the Company’s agreement to invest in the future demonstration of the technology for capturing carbon at an ExxonMobil refinery located in Rotterdam, Netherlands (such demonstration, the “Rotterdam Project”) were met in April 2023 and, as a result, the Company will recognize $2.5 million of the $5.0 million milestone payment received in fiscal year 2022 under the Company’s Joint Development Agreement with EMTEC as revenue across future deliverables to EMTEC. Of this $2.5 million, the Company recognized revenue of $0.5 million through January 31, 2024. The other $2.5 million of the $5.0 million milestone payment received in fiscal year 2022 under the Company’s Joint Development Agreement with EMTEC was applied during fiscal year 2023 to discount EMTEC’s purchase of the Company’s fuel cell module and detailed engineering design for the Rotterdam Project.
On January 31, 2024, the Company received a purchase order valued at $11.6 million from Esso Nederland B.V. (“Esso”), an affiliate of Exxon Mobil Corporation and EMTEC, for fuel cell modules as well as engineering, procurement, fabrication, testing and delivery services required for the construction and implementation of the modular point source carbon capture pilot plant at the Esso Rotterdam Manufacturing Complex.
Remaining Performance Obligations
Remaining performance obligations are the aggregate amount of total contract transaction price that is unsatisfied or partially unsatisfied. As of January 31, 2024, the Company’s total remaining performance obligations were: $140.4 million for service agreements (expected to be recognized as revenue over approximately three to fifteen years which is based on the remaining term of the service agreements), $346.0 million for generation power purchase agreements (“PPAs”) (expected to be recognized as revenue over approximately nineteen to twenty years based on the PPA terms remaining), $18.3 million for Advanced Technologies contracts (expected to be recognized within approximately two years) and $0 for product purchase agreements.
This is a very important issue imho.
If Rotterdam is all bout one 2.8 MW module a few years from now, then it is basically a nothing burger which means nothing, and is probably a delay deal so that the insiders can drive down the price for 500 million new shares to under $1.
On the other hand, if this is a real demonstration project of 90% CCS 'at scale' - which means a 500 MW power plant or more - which truly addresses all of the YES/NO decisions being arugued about all around the world, then this will be much more than one 2.8 MW unit, imo, from all I have read.
Not sure what the real deal is, or what type of games are being played. If there is not absolute clarity by the end of 2024, as far as the scope of this project, then it will probably be a disappointment. There is tremendous potential - but it may all be 'set-up'. Only time will tell.
I read it somewhere. I know construction has begun. As for 8K, I read something a while back about the agreement. The project was $11M and change I believe. Don't feel like searching right now, but I'm thinking it was 2.8MW and $11M was for installing the 1 unit. That was after FCE contributed $5M from part of the previous JDA towards the project. Might have been 10Q
Hog, these are two different issues, in my mind. Both are huge issues.
The part about demonstrating 90% successful CCS will take time, probaby around end of 2026 and that would be a humongous event.
But much before that is the contract/manufacuring for modules for Rotterdam project. You said that manufacturing has probably begun. Wouldn't that need to be news/8k ? And with associated terms/scope of the contract? I don' know SEC rules governing 8k/news. I would think that this would be required. Maybe somehow Exxon is able to tell FCEL no to announce it ???? But as far as I can tell, manufacturing has not begun, nor has any conract been signed with Exxon. And not even sure if we are talking about one or two 2.8 MW modules, or more like 40 or 50 such modules. A lot of confusion for a project tha may or may not be moving forward. ???
Then again, the CEO for NKLA opened his mouth too much and made some questionable statements and not only did he lose his job and billions but they literally sentenced him to jail for years .... so I can understand FCEL relectuance to say anything ....
And yes, certainly seems as though the recent strong show of support should stop shorts in their tracks pretty quickly.
My belief all along is that Exxon Mobil does not want to own a fuel cell company. Although they will obviously work out something favorable to them as far as carbon capture goes. I was delightfully surprised at the newest developments with fuel cell having free rein to work with whomever to develop or deploy the carbon capture technology. Canada is gung-ho, And there's plenty of other opportunities with existing partners or potentially new partners. Novel technology and game changer Are the terms that have been used numerous times by different people. I thought with Toyota involved Long Beach would be quicker and smoother, but that didn't matter. I'd like to think with Exxonmobil and the current sense of urgency to get CCUS rolling the Porthos project will at least be on schedule. JDA through 12/31/26 suggest to me, If everything is going as hoped, They will have a new commercialization agreement prior to the 31st of December. And finally at that point it will be something very big. FCEL is going to need time to ramp to maximum output of 200MW a year prior to that or they won't make any significant progress with installation for a couple years after the commercialization agreement. Language regarding ramping MCFC as needed has already begun in Q1 call.
Construction is underway to my knowledge, fairly certain. However, the project is not supposed to be operational until 2026, I believe they are shooting for spring. Let's just say summer 26. I'm also relatively certain they need testing after operational to validate capture and cost, as well as cell/membrane degradation. I don't think we have conclusive data until 2027. But I believe follow on orders or a buyout will be in process prior to any updates we get. They'll have a good idea after operational for 1 month, except for degradation over the longer term. Efficiency for the first 6 months & 1 year is far more important at this point than lasting 7+ years. They can compare all results from lab and real world and get a clearer picture if they are parallel.
Assuming Rotterdam on schedule for operational in 2026:
Wouldn't this mean that beginning manufacturing of fuel cells in early 2025? And therefore signed contracts with Exxon by the end of 2024??
If they want to demonstrate 90% CCS then I believe this will entail perhaps 30 or 40 (maybe) 2.8 MW modules, depending on the overall MW of the Rotterdam facility.
Maybe my assumptions are wrong....
FCEL under $1 for only nine days now with 21 more business days to close over $1 and stop the 30 day rule. Volume and action today with the Nasdaq so ugly is atypical and suggests it will pop and close over $1 relatively soon...and certainly within the remaining time. The buyers over the past few days should see to that. We're only talking about 8% or 8 cents from today's close.
***************
Exxon would be the candidate for a buy-out and ownership on paper would be the only result...FCE, the Company, remains intact as it is with all the current players...like Warren Buffett owning See's Candy.
The commercial agreement between Exxon and FCE, aimed at enabling deployments of the carbonate fuel cell technology for carbon capture, is yet to be established...no doubt a work in progress with no timetable...but certainly has many possibilities...including a JV which is more likely than a buy-out.
One man's opinion
Ya, problem is Rotterdam won't be operational until 26. Canada man that being operational before that
I have been buying at 0.85 I was surprised today by the volume. Not due to selling shares. Buying support is strong for being five or more weeks out from earnings. We are so undervalued from any reasonable evaluation. No way we can be valued less than we were 5 yrs ago. CCS is so big but perhaps not advertised enough to retail stock groups. When the Rotterdam "experiment" verifies proof of concept we fly!
Certainly seems pretty strong at $.85-$.89 and if it stays that way tomorrow they should recognize it. Battle in that range of $.85-$.93. the volume speaking loudly. Tells me shorts are trying and there are too many buyers to allow it to go lower. Shame it's under $1 while doing so. Should have had this battle over $1.
I want none if those either. I don't believe we will reverse split. Buyout would worry me and I have been giving it a lot of thought. It would be risky for the buyer. Would the buyer be able to maintain the effort to continue all the contracts for recurring generation? What if a couple of key players decided to bail? If the company is as bad as some on this board like you to believe, why buy?
Every time the stock jumps up a hell of a lot of shorting follows. But like Pavlov's dogs shorties are programmed and will short when they should buy and set off a squeeze. Coming soon to a FCEL near you😀
Two things I don't want to see here. RS of course is one, the other is a buyout. No chance we even sniff $20.00, let alone $29.00 if FCE gets bought out. Will be sold for pennies on the dollar.
It almost appears like people are waiting to dump a s*** ton of money on this. I'm starting to think more about a short squeeze then I was before. Would it be nice if Insiders were buying boatloads.
LMAO. Not only possible; but assured. I've been saying it for years following analysts research. And guess who was right.
Check the record.
What you excuse to "manipulation" is savvy traders knowing where and why this stock and company belongs. 3 years of "manipulation" ??? Give it a rest and stop the comedy .
FuelCell Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FCEL) is an integrated fuel cell company that designs, manufactures, installs, operates and services stationary fuel cell power plants.
As a leading global fuel cell company, we provide ultra-clean, efficient and reliable baseload distributed generation for electric utilities, commercial and industrial companies, universities, municipalities, government entities and other customers around the world.
Direct FuelCell® (DFC®) power plants manufactured by FuelCell Energy can utilize a variety of fuels including renewable biogas from wastewater treatment and food processing, as well as clean natural gas, directed biogas and propane.
Our DFC power plants produce power electrochemically — without burning fuels — making them clean, quiet and environmentally responsible alternatives to combustion-based generation.
Our power plants have generated more than 1.5 billion kilowatt hours of ultra-clean electricity, equivalent to powering more than 135,000 average-size U.S. homes for one year.
FuelCell Energy’s world headquarters are located in Danbury, Connecticut, in the USA. Our global markets are served from a state-of-the-art production facility in nearby Torrington, Connecticut.
Our customers in Europe are served by German-based FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH, a majority owned joint venture with sales and service located in Dresden, Germany and manufacturing in Ottobrunn, Germany, which is near Munich.
Customers in Asia are served by our partner POSCO Energy from manufacturing facilities located in Pohang, South Korea.
FuelCell Energy offers a comprehensive portfolio of services for fuel cell power plants. Specially trained technicians and engineers remotely operate and maintain virtually our entire installed base of Direct FuelCell power plants globally, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year from the state-of-the-art Global Technical Assistance Center located at our Danbury, Connecticut headquarters. Field service technicians directly employed by FuelCell Energy service the power plants on-site.
FuelCell Energy scientists are actively researching unique applications for our versatile DFC technology including hydrogen generation and carbon capture. In addition, we are pursuing research with solid oxide fuel cells as well ashydrogen compression and storage.
FuelCell Energy’s international reputation for leadership in ultra-clean energy solutions has been built on a long history of innovative research and development that reflects the successes of our highly talented and creative workforce. We are the first fuel cell manufacturer to commercialize megawatt-class stationary fuel cell power plants and we believe that we are the first stationary fuel cell manufacturer to generate a quarterly gross profit.
FuelCell Energy traces its roots back to 1969 and the founding of Energy Research Corporation (ERC) by early fuel cell pioneers Bernard Baker and Martin Klein, both chemical engineers with expertise in advanced battery technologies.
In the 1970′s, with funding from the U.S. military and utility companies, the Company conducted extensive research into low-temperature fuel cells as well as silver-zinc battery cells. In the 1980′s and 1990′s the Company switched its focus to high-temperature carbonate fuel cell systems which offered greater commercial applications due to the ability to internally reform readily available fuels such as natural gas and renewable biogas within the fuel cell itself to provide the hydrogen for the power generation process.
Our first commercial power plant was installed in 2003 using a 250 kilowatt (kW) fuel cell stack. Through technology enhancements and cost reductions, we have increased the power output of the stacks by 40 percent to 350 kW and reduced product costs by more than 60 percent. Today we are installing multi-megawatt fuel cell plants and fuel cell parks globally.
The production facility in Torrington, Connecticut, USA was completed in 2001 and produced [2] megawatts (MW) of product the first year. As of the end of fiscal year 2012, the plant was producing at an annual run-rate of 56 MW. The total annual capacity of the facility is 90 MW.
FuelCell Energy began expanding globally in 2007 through its partnership with POSCO Energy , targeting markets in Southeast Asia, particularly South Korea. A European manufacturing, sales and service presence was established in 2012, with German-based FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH.
1969 | Company founded as Energy Research Corporation (ERC) |
1992 | 120 kilowatt fuel cell stack demonstrated |
1992 | Initial Public Offering (IPO) |
1996 | 2 megawatt demonstration plant installed in Santa Clara, California |
1999 | Company focuses on carbonate fuel cells, is renamed FuelCell Energy, Inc. & spins off battery division, Evercel |
2003 | First commercial installation of a Direct FuelCell® power plant |
2003 | Annual production of approximately 3 megawatts |
2007 | POSCO Energy partnership begins – global expansion commences |
2007 | Annual production of approximately 11 megawatts |
2009 | Production of 350 kilowatt stack commences |
2011 | Power output milestone reached with one billion kWh of ultra clean electricity produced since 2003 |
2011 | 11 megawatt fuel cell park commences operations in South Korea |
2011 | Annual production of approximately 46 megawatts |
2012 | European presence established with FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH |
2012 | Asian manufacturing strategy implemented through license agreement with POSCO Energy |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |