ITM Power Plc

Good morning. Welcome to the ITM Power PLC investor presentation. Throughout this recorded meeting, investors will be in listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged and can be submitted at any time by the Q&A tab situated on the right-hand corner of your screen. Just click Q&A, type your question, and press send. The company may not be in a position to answer every question received during the meeting itself. If the company would be in a position to review all questions submitted today and publish responses where appropriate to do so. Before we begin, we'd like to submit the following poll. I'd now like to hand you over to the ITM Power team.

Good morning! Today we want to talk about how the financial year which ended in April went for us as a business. We will give an update on how the regulatory and funding landscape has evolved and which trends we see with our customers. We will check in on our strategic priorities and provide impressions of our company's evolution. We will share insights into our pipeline of sales opportunities and we will give an update on our reference plan situation and product performance. Last but not least, we will summarize our financial results and provide guidance for the financial year 2024-2025. My first full financial year at IDM has seen the company make significant progress. We completed our 12-month plan and have transformed IDM into a credible delivery organization. Today, we have a focused portfolio of products, all utilizing the same market-leading stack technology, which we can now deploy into projects of any size and into almost every region of the world without adaptation. This offers us unmatched supply chain and scale-up advantages. We have achieved a crucial shift in culture. Previously, we spoke about slowing down and focusing on doing things right the first time and putting quality over quantity. This shift in culture has been encouraging our employees to contribute ideas for improvement. It also fosters a culture of accountability, collaboration and continuous learning. The transformation we have undertaken is evident in our day-to-day operations. As a result, EBITDA losses in the financial year decreased significantly to only one third of the previous year, whilst we were able to grow revenues threefold. We now have a disciplined approach to the use of our capital, which is reflected in our strong year-end net cash position. On the technology side, we are at the forefront globally, and we are deploying our electrolysers into some of the largest and most prestigious green hydrogen plants under construction worldwide today. In June this year, we inaugurated the 24-megawatt plant we built jointly with Linde Foyara in Porsgrunn, Norway. It is now the biggest PEM electrolyser plant in operation in Europe. For RWE, we are delivering 200 megawatt to Lingen and following Shell's final investment decision for the Refine2 project taken just a few weeks ago, we are now also delivering another 100 megawatt of our Trident stacks and skids into Shell's refinery in Wesseling, Germany. Recently, we also commissioned our first reference plant in Japan for Sumitomo and Tokyo Gas. Our growing base of reference plants and operational field data helps us to convince new customers of our capabilities. Our recently announced partnership with Hygen, where we were appointed as their preferred supplier for PEM electrolysers for hydrogen projects in the UK and the European Union, and more recently the huge 500 MW capacity reservation by a large industrial customer, are further strong endorsements of our technology and credibility to deliver. Clean technologies are fundamental to governments achieving their ambitious climate, economic and energy security goals. The widespread adoption of clean technologies will accelerate the energy transition and improve energy resilience. Green hydrogen is said to play a key role in the energy mix of the future. In the short and medium term, government incentives and support mechanisms will remain key enablers of the hydrogen economy. They can remove barriers to investment by offsetting cost differentials between fossil-based fuels and green hydrogen. Over time, as the industry scales up, business cases will get stronger and the industry and hydrogen economy will become self-sustaining. According to the International Energy Agency, only under 4% of electrolytic hydrogen production projects worldwide have reached FID so far. In many cases, this is due to a combination of policy and regulatory uncertainty, inflation, increased cost of capital, lack of infrastructure, or uncertain off-tail commitments. They estimate that 70 million tonnes per annum of clean hydrogen will need to be produced by 2030 to remain on track for climate goals. This compares to less than 1 million tonnes produced today. To be robust and resilient, the entire hydrogen value chain must develop and scale in parallel, including production, transport, storage and end-use demand. While this poses complexity, it is widely acknowledged today that renewables will dominate tomorrow's energy systems. Green hydrogen will be vital to ensure uninterrupted access to clean energy and to decarbonize especially energy-intensive sectors like steel production, chemicals, long-haul transport and aviation. There have been lots of tangible developments on the regulatory and funding side. I'd like to highlight a selected few. In the European Union, the Net Zero Industry Act is a key piece of legislation. Proposed by the European Commission as part of the broader Green Deal Industrial Plan, the Council and Parliament agreed to it in February 24. It aims to strengthen the resilience and competitiveness of key net zero technologies in the European Union and to create the right conditions to attract investments. The EU aims to produce 10 million tonnes and to import 10 million tonnes of green hydrogen by 2030. Several funding and subsidy avenues are available to industry, including the Important Projects of Common European Interest and the European Hydrogen Bank, which recently completed its first 800 million euro pilot auction. In addition to the availability of central EU funding, individual Member States are allowed to fund projects and developments directly as well. Beyond incentives, the EU's Renewable Energy Directive, and most recently RET3, mandate an increase of renewable fuels of non-biological origin, primarily hydrogen. It sets ambitious targets for the hydrogen sector, notably requiring at least 42% usage by 2030 and 60% by 2035. Also, the UK has seen lots of movement recently. The government's ambition is to produce 10 gigawatts of clean hydrogen by 2030, with a minimum of 6 gigawatts of it being green. The hydrogen allocation rounds, short HAR, allocate revenue support to hydrogen production facilities to bridge the cost gap. For the first round, HAR1, 11 projects with in total 125 megawatts were successfully announced in December last year. The projects will receive over £2 billion of revenue support through 15-year contracts and £91 million of upfront capital funding. Haar 2 aims to support up to 875 MW of capacity, with the application window having just closed in April this year. A shortlist of projects is expected to be announced in autumn. Haar 3 and Haar 4 are expected to target 1.5 GW each. The UK's Green Industries Growth Accelerator, short Giga Fund, of £960 million was announced in autumn last year to support the expansion of clean energy supply chains, including hydrogen. In March this year, an additional 120 million was added to the fund, and successful applications are expected to begin drawing down their funding from 2025. In the U.S., the Department of Energy released its National Clean Hydrogen Strategy and Roadmap in 2023, targeting 10 million tons by 2030, 20 million tons by 2040, and an impressive 50 million tons by 2050. Furthermore, the Treasury Department and the IRS released long-awaited proposed regulations for the eligibility and implementation of the Section 45V hydrogen production tax credit, with up to US$3 per kg of hydrogen for producers. In October last year, the DOE announced US$7 billion of funding to launch seven regional clean hydrogen hubs to accelerate commercial-scale deployment. In March of this year, the DOE announced $750 million in funding to reduce the cost of clean hydrogen, covering 52 projects across 24 states. Also elsewhere in the world, green hydrogen strategies continue to evolve at pace. Last year, Japan updated its strategy with $107 billion earmarked to be invested over 15 years to achieve 2 million tons by 2030, 12 million tons by 2040, and 20 million tons by 2050. In May this year, the Japanese Parliament passed the Hydrogen Society Promotion Act, which paves the way for providing 15-year subsidies for locally produced and imported low-carbon hydrogen. India announced an ambition to produce 5 million tons of green hydrogen by 2030. Egypt's green hydrogen strategy is targeting up to 8% of the global tradable market by 2040. Australia announced a hydrogen production tax incentive of 2 Australian dollars per kilogram, which will be available over a 10-year period starting from 2027. I could go on for hours, but let's keep it short. Given the ambitions and targets of governments around the world, the green hydrogen market and electrolyzer demand are expected to see strong growth over the coming years. We are out of the hype phase. Green hydrogen is happening, and ITM is well positioned to play a leading role in this emerging, very large market. There is broad consensus that green hydrogen is the enabler of a successful energy transition for grid balancing and decarbonizing especially hard-to-obey industries, which are the cause of approximately 30% of global emissions today. As just explained, governments all over the world are creating environments conducive to investment, including grant funding and increasing carbon taxation. At the same time, these governments are proactively investing into infrastructure for hydrogen transport and storage, both which are essential for a cross-border hydrogen economy to take shape. The EU and US alone both foresee more than 300 billion of investments by 2050 each. Green hydrogen is becoming a massive market. The rationale hasn't changed. In the short term, however, the electrolyzer market is still immature, with many companies promising more than they are actually capable of delivering. IDN Power is standing out as one of the few exceptions here. We have been completing important reference plans. We are generating more and more field data, and an increasing number of industrial customers is investing their trust in us. While the number and size of project inquiries has continued to grow significantly, and I will talk more about this later, customer FIDs oftentimes keep being delayed. Energy price and inflation developments have entailed business cases by customers who are waiting for a government funding decision, in some cases for more than a year. The market potential for green hydrogen remains excellent, with strong growth expected in the coming years. In the short term, the realities of industrial scale-up will remain incremental though. This does not mean that FIDs won't come, as just proven wrong by the positive ReFind2 FID, but patience remains key. The energy transition and green hydrogen do not magically happen overnight. This is a marathon, not a sprint. As such, we have to make sure not to run out of breath before we reach the finish line. Equally, we cannot run too slow as to not fall behind. This balance between exponential long-term growth but slowed down FIDs in the near term implies the need for readiness and flexibility whilst managing cash commitments carefully. Our strategic priorities announced in January this year aligned with our vision of delivering the world's best electronizers, scaling our operations profitably to meet the rising demand and growing our global footprint and reach over time. We have reassessed these priorities against the observed market developments and can confirm that they remain fully valid. As a recap, To remain at the forefront of technology, product and delivery credibility, we will evolve our products, including the continuous improvement of our Trident Stack Platform and Neptune Plug and Play units. We will strategically extend our portfolio, currently under development, with a larger capacity, game-changing Stack Platform to widen the gap to competition even further. be prepared for rapid scaling of stack volumes and continue to evolve our processes and capabilities in manufacturing, engineering, procurement and field services. To scale our operations whilst retaining flexibility and conserving cash, we will continue to deepen the level of automation, which we have been making great progress on. We will grow production capacity in line with commercial projects and focus on credible sales opportunities and capture a significant market share by offering the best products, value and credibility to our customers. To grow our global footprint and reach, while staying adaptable, we will ensure an appropriate setup in all attractive off-tech regions. We want to be best positioned and ready for rapid demand uptick, as we are in the European Union by means of our new entity IT Empower Germany. We have also just recently expanded our business development in the US. We will take an asset-light product and service first approach and continue to expand regional product compliance. To reiterate, these strategic priorities remain fully valid and we have been making significant progress on each one of them already since we announced them in January this year. In the beginning of this year, we promised to be launching a larger capacity containerized unit. As always, we walked the talk. In May, in response to significant customer demand, we introduced Neptune 5, our new 5 megawatt containerized full-scope plug-and-play electrolyzer plant. Designed against the highest safety and quality standards and incorporating the learnings from our operational electrolyzers around the world, Neptune 5 utilizes our leading and proven Trident Stack technology. Neptune 5 is compact and versatile, providing 5 MW of reliable and highly efficient hydrogen production capacity, all contained in the smallest footprint per MW in the industry today. It offers the widest operational range in its class. It can cope with load changes between 12.5 and 100% within just seconds. Neptune 5 is competitively priced and ideally suited for midsize projects. Customer interest has been overwhelming since its launch. With this latest addition, we now have a complete and comprehensive product portfolio, perfectly aligned with what our customers want and need. With Trident, we continue to offer the leading PEM technology, coming in a 2 MW hydraulic skid solution. Whilst for some customers we can directly send Trident into capable EPC integrators, many other customers cannot do much with electrolyzer stacks alone. Therefore, we are offering our Trinet technology packaged in full-scope plug-and-play electrolyzer plants coming in 40 food containers. Customers only require tap water and electricity, our system does the rest. Neptune 2 is our 2 MW solution, a popular choice for mobility applications and smaller projects below 10 MW. Neptune 5, as just explained, is our 5 MW containerized plant, well suited for mid-sized projects. Poseidon is our 20 MW core electrolysis module solution for large-scale EPC projects, typically starting from 60 MW in size, open-ended, or where customers want to build plants in a way which allows later modular expansion. The vast majority of projects we are building Poseidon into is way beyond 100 MW in size. For projects which we are realizing together with Linde Engineering as our strategic EPC partner, Linde is deploying their own high-PEM module which scope-wise is comparable to our Poseidon offering. It is a highly standardized and proven 10 megawatt solution integrating our Trident stacks and skids into the wider balance of plant. Linde's HiPAM module is the basis for the 200 MW we are jointly delivering to RWE in Lingen and the 100 MW we are now together deploying for Shell. HiPAM is without a doubt the most mature module of its type in the market worldwide today. This is how a Linde 200 megawatt high-prem configuration with IDM stacks and spits looks like in a real project. This is a render of the RWE Lingen 200 megawatt plant currently in construction. When talking about electrolyzers, people often underestimate how huge and complex a 200 megawatt plant really is. This is a massive gas plant and to be successful requires a very close collaboration between the core electrolyzer technology provider on the one hand and a highly skilled and capable hydrogen experienced EPC integrator on the other hand. Here another view to give you an impression of the size and dimension. The GetH2 Nucleus 200 MW plant in Lingen is the largest PEM electrolyzer plant in physical build worldwide today. Here now an example of how a Neptune 2 unit looks like in commercial reality as delivered to Sumitomo for Tokyo Gas. This photo was taken last month in Yokohama, Japan. The unit marks the first commercial scale electrolyzer ever imported into the country. I won't go into more details at this point, as Simon will provide a more detailed update on our reference plans later in the presentation. However, in the context of significant funding programs for green hydrogen recently announced by the Japanese government, having an early foot in the door in this strategically growing market is certainly an important milestone and achievement for IDM. We are evolving and growing into regions in which we see relevant customer demand, justifying investments into increased customer proximity. Besides our resources on the ground in France, the US and Australia, our main operating hubs today are Sheffield in the UK and Linden in Germany. Our Sheffield factory was not only the world's first PEMGIGA factory, with our expansion to 20,000 square meters, it continues to be the world's largest PEMGIGA factory in commercial operation. We have continuously deepened the level of automation in our factory, something for which it is important to get the balance right. You need to be absolutely certain what to automate before you invest and you need robust validation of new manufacturing methods and equipment before introduction into the commercial production process. An incremental approach to automation has proven to be right. Given significant customer demand, a key focus area in our expansion in Sheffield lies on our capability to manufacture an increasing number of Neptune units in parallel. In October last year, we have opened our new Continental European Hub in Linden. ITM Power Germany is home to our after-sales operations in the region and we are recruiting into functions such as business development and IoT, all of which we need for our accelerated growth. As local content requirements may become stricter in the European Union, we are making sure that we are ready. Our pipeline of project opportunities has grown strongly, especially in regions where companies see consistent regulation and incentive schemes relating to green hydrogen production or demand. Today, we are working on more than 100 sales projects, and over the past 18 months, our sales pipeline has grown by an almost unbelievable 25 times. At the same time, with more and more industrial customer demand, also the quality of our sales pipeline has improved. Although this does not necessarily translate into FIDs overnight, I personally have never seen a sales pipeline grow so quickly ever in my career. Over time, this will eventually translate into massive orders. Europe continues to lead the way in terms of tangible progress on green hydrogen projects, with major industrial and energy companies developing portfolios of projects. In addition to the strong energy markets of Germany and the Netherlands, the first hydrogen bank auction confirmed the competitiveness of the Iberian and Nordic markets for large-scale production. Customers are developing their projects at a range of capacities with a significant number of projects in the sub 50 megawatt range where our containerized products are ideally suited. These projects commonly target mobility applications and specific industrial use cases such as distilleries or semiconductor manufacturing. In the 100 megawatt plus scale, we see strong momentum in relation to green ammonia production, refining and sustainable aviation fuel. Due to the large volumes of hydrogen produced and the risks associated with single off-takers, such projects are often contingent on emerging hydrogen infrastructure like pipelines and storage. There are also a number of very large gigawatt-scale projects, predominantly in regions offering low-cost renewable energy potential, typically targeting export. We expect these projects to adopt a realistic phased approach to manage execution, financial and off-take risks. Integrated energy, oil and gas companies continue to be active in the development of their green hydrogen project portfolios. They have a mature approach to technical and financial risk management in relation to the investment into physical assets at scale and the capability to finance off their balance sheet. Pure play green hydrogen or wider renewable energy project developers are also increasingly common and, in the absence of balance sheet strength, are driving the market in relation to project financing options. Customers are now reacting to their very own experience of developing and delivering early pilot projects or to reports of the experience of others. This has increased customer focus on evidence of technology performance, design, integration, and execution capability across OEMs and EPCs, and the ability to demonstrate real-world operational data. As projects scale in size, customers increasingly want to ensure they can deliver on their business case, especially when they get paid only for each kilogram of hydrogen produced, like for example under the UK market mechanism. Furthermore, customers recognize that there are only a small number of OEMs and EPCs truly capable to deliver reliably, especially large-scale projects. This will become an ever more decisive differentiator in the market. For us, IDM, this leads to capacity reservations, under which customers typically prepay a certain amount of the final contract price to secure production slots ahead of their pending FID. Especially industrial customers have started to realize that production capacity will become scarce, given the low number of credible OEMs in combination with significantly growing project sales pipelines. Let's talk data. Our pipeline by product and year of manufacturing from 2024 to 2031 shows a 60% share of Trident stacks and skids and a 33% share of Poseidon module demand. Projects based on containerized Neptune units are typically planned less long ahead by customers, given their smaller size and shorter project execution time. The further out, the bigger the average project size. If we take a look at the year 2026 as a snapshot , then the picture looks very different though. There is a significantly higher share of demand for containerized Neptune systems, predominantly Neptune 5 for mid-sized projects. This is highly important to us, as the underlying data gives us valuable insights into where to put our focus on capacity growth and regional product compliance necessities. As I had already mentioned, our current factory expansion is putting strong emphasis on a further increase of our parallel container assembly capabilities. Let's take a view on this data by region. More than half of our pipeline, and I would also dare to say the on average more mature projects, are located in Europe, with a quickly growing demand uptick in the UK due to the HA funding. Australia, with its vast renewable potential, remains a very interesting but rather slowly developing market. And the rest of the world is leaning strong towards US projects.

Thanks, Dennis, and good morning, everyone. I'd like to start by building on the important theme of product performance data that Dennis mentioned earlier. I'll outline some practical examples of recent product deployments, give an impression of what we're learning from these experiences and how this is helping our customers build confidence towards making investment decisions. As you've seen, the deployment of Trident stacks continues, both in containerized and non containerized products. In the recent months, we've deployed nine Neptune 2 products into semiconductor, gas synthesis and refuelling applications, and each of those has been deployed into very different world regions. Non-containerised Trident stacks have also been integrated and operated in different process industries. The 4MW RWE plant in Lingen, the 24MW YARA project in Porsgrunn, and the 10 MW Refine One project with Shell in Vesseling. The Refine One stacks have been upgraded to the latest generation in a phased process that started in late 2023. The pictures on the right are from key events during June and July this year, and all of these plants have generated valuable data, which I'll explain in more detail. It's well known that ITM has extensive test facilities, from cell and stack through to full product. Any of you that have visited ITM will have seen this firsthand. These facilities have generated a tremendous amount of data over the years. Now the addition of experience from infill products is really starting to drive customer confidence. ITM has built and tested over 200 Trident stacks. Each one goes through a full factory acceptance program. This includes integrity, certification and performance tests over the full operating range. I've explained in previous presentations the performance of Trident and so won't repeat it here, But what I will say is that full load efficiency of every stack is measured and analyzed in detail for consistency. The stacks continue to deliver industry-leading efficiency, and this data can be made available to prospective customers. Tens of thousands of stack operating hours have been accrued at Yara alone. Similarly, every Neptune unit undergoes factory acceptance testing and a detailed customer witness test. This is performed over the full operating range with multiple test points. Every unit tested has met all metrics defined in the specification. Importantly, the Neptune product run rate indicates in-field availability of over 98%. While having such performance data is clearly valuable, our facilities for live customer witness testing has made a significant impact. Via this facility, prospective customers effectively have the opportunity to try before they buy. By visiting ITM or participating online, customers can observe live performance and get access to a summary of the test data generated. Together, this is demystifying electrolyser system capabilities and performance, and therefore unlocking customer confidence. In addition, ITM has developed rapid data processing algorithms for our long-term in-house testing, and we continue to build our infrastructure to access more data and process it faster to maximize value for our customers and also for ITM. Now with its complement of current generation stacks, the Refine 1 system has also accrued tens of thousands of stack operating hours. Shell is assessing performance regularly, using a controlled and consistent test protocol, and to date no measurable degradation has been observed. Finally from me, and to bring us fully up to date, I'm delighted that Shell have made a positive final investment decision on the Refine 2 project. This was announced on the 25th of July and is another important project for ITM. It will see us supply 100 megawatts of Trident stacks and skids. This is in addition to the 10 megawatts that's already at site in Refine One. Linda has been appointed as the EBC integrator, meaning that all our joint experience will be applied. Many of you will appreciate that Shell has a rigorous FID process. Prior to reaching their decision, Shell undertook an extensive audit of ITM. This covered our technology and also our operations in the factory. This, together with the performance of our latest generation of stacks in Refine One, played a major role in Shell's confidence to proceed to FID. So I see this as a strong endorsement of our technology and company. Repeat business from a leading industrial and well-informed customer is an important achievement and another valuable reference point for other prospective customers looking for a reliable electrolyser supplier. And with that, I'll hand over to Andy.

Many thanks, Simon, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us. I will talk through the financial results of the company, as well as the guidance for the year ending 30th of April 25. Before talking about the results, I want to show again one of the features of our company and industry in terms of a typical contract structure and revenue recognition. The graph on the right shows a typical contract structure for one of our larger Trident projects. As a reminder, Trident are our highly standardised electrolyser stacks and skids for volume manufacture and large-scale deployment. The blue bar shows cash invoiced against hitting certain milestones in a profile that is fairly standard for ITM. Those milestones typically mark the completion of certain phases of the project, or you could say value creation points. They're often represented by an increase in work in progress or WIP or finished products in the inventory. As a result, revenue will significantly lag behind value creation, which in itself isn't a problem, but it's important to have in mind when looking at ITMs revenue numbers. The pink bar is the revenue recognition point. For Trident projects, this is usually when the stacks meet the skids onsite at a customer location and undergo site acceptance testing or SAT. As such, there is a dependency on revenue recognition for customer site readiness. Therefore, the timing of revenue recognition is often dependent on circumstances beyond our immediate control. Large-scale projects we are jointly delivering with Linder Engineering, such as the 200 MW RWE or the 100 MW Shell Refine projects, fall into this category. The revenue recognition profile is less extreme for Neptune products in that revenue recognition tends to align with either factory acceptance testing or readiness for shipment, both which are within our control. With Poseidon projects, these will be recognized on percentage of completion as each one will be bespoke to a specific customer. This dynamic is impacting our financial results for the year ended 30th of April 24, FY24. We see that revenue is mainly recognized from projects which have Neptune plug and play products at their core. This is a result of us having gained traction with our 12 month plan, bringing control to our operations and projects in the factory. The results for the year show a step change in the performance of the business compared to this time a year ago. The revenue has increased more than threefold to £16.5 million. We also see a growing after-sales income through maintenance services, upgrades and spare parts. Gross loss has improved by an impressive 79% as we see the benefits of incremental automation, with the year ending with a significantly improved performance compared to FY23. One of the factors of this year's gross loss was an underabsorption of production costs where we built products only to contracts and not to the maximum capacity of the factory. We will continue to keep tight control over what we produce and ensure that we are not purely building products to sit on the balance sheet which we can't sell to customers. Our adjusted EBITDA loss was 30.4 million, a decrease of more than two thirds on the prior year and reflecting a company that looks and feels very different to the one in FY23. We have achieved this result too through staying far leaner and making a number of strategic hires whilst retaining the cost and efficiency benefit of the restructure we executed just over a year ago. The cash outflow also improved compared to the prior year, with the total outflow being 52.3 million. The opening balance was 283 million and the closing balance 230 million. In this table, I have highlighted the key cash movements. You can see that the increase in inventories of 11.6 million was largely offset by the variations to working capital of 10 million. The increase in inventories only tells half a story too. The graphic to the right shows that a year ago we had less overall inventory and a larger proportion was raw materials. Fast forward to FY24 and we have processed 85% of all of our inventory into whip and finished goods and all to customer contracts. We also saw a reduction in provisions, which included us working through the project contracts we have, as well as releasing some provisions back to the income statement as efficiencies were found. We have invested a similar amount at 15.5 million to the prior year in capex and development costs, but you can see that the weighting has shifted from an even split of product development and production capability to a greater emphasis in the last 12 months on production readiness. As we look to FY25, product development will once again start to see a lift, among others, for our new Kronos stack platform. Lastly, we benefited in the year from £12 million worth of interest and a further £4 million of other smaller items. My final slide sets out the guidance for the current year we are in, FY25. We are now at a point of executing customer contracts as well as seeking to secure new customer projects such as Refine2. In doing so, we will continue to invest in the controlled and stepped scale up of the business as we go forwards. In terms of revenue, we are guiding to a range of between 18 and 22 million, another uplift on the results for FY24. This revenue number will once again be mainly due to Neptune contracts and not Trident contracts which, due to the customer site delays beyond our control, will now fall into future periods for revenue recognition. Without these delays, we would have been guiding to a range of between £35 and £40 million in a year. A further key metric is our contract backlog, meaning signed firm orders with customers which have not yet been converted into revenue. Our contract backlog is now growing quicker than we are recognising revenue. This is a very important indicator, as it confirms that we are growing a sustainable business. This is illustrated on the right-hand side, where we started FY25 with 80 million of contracts to deliver, and have already won to date 47 million of new contracts, which includes Refined 2, and will continue to grow that further. With our guidance revenue for the full year to deduct at the year end, our contract backlog will sit above 100 million at April 2025. We are guiding today to an EBITDA loss of between 35 and 40 million pounds. This is broadly consistent with FY24 when taking into account inflation. Having taken control of our overhead, the EBITDA number profitability is now a function of volume of production and sales orders contracted in any given year to increase fixed cost absorption. Lastly, we expect net cash to be in the range of 160 to 175 million at the end of the year, with a net outflow similar to FY24. Beyond the EBITDA guidance, we will be investing into CAPEX with further factory automation and our Kronos product development programme. We will also see smaller increases in working capital as we continue to build to contracts where revenue cannot be recognised in the same year. For me, there is a very different feel around ITM compared to 12 or 18 months ago. We have made significant strides forwards, and that is evidenced by our building and shipping of products to customers. We are also welcoming lots of customers visiting our factory here in Sheffield, and we are creating really positive impressions, be it from first-time or returning visitors. It isn't necessarily easy to reflect this in words, so we've prepared a quick virtual tour of Bessemer Park in Sheffield featuring two familiar faces to give everyone here a flavour of what our visitors get to see.

Today, ITM is significantly more capable than the company has ever been. Our path to profitability is no longer a question of capability, but now solely a question of volume of customer orders. The foundations we have laid will enable ITM to build long-term value, allowing us to invest for growth and drive attractive returns for all shareholders. In the meantime, our sales pipeline has been growing strongly, which makes me optimistic about what lies ahead for ITM and our industry. We are ready. Now we need more customers to take FIDs.

Thank you very much indeed for your presentation. Ladies and gentlemen, do please continue to submit your questions using the Q&A tab situated on the right-hand corner of your screen. Just while the team take a few moments to review those questions submitted already, I'd like to remind you the recording of the presentation, along with a copy of the slides in the published Q&A, can be accessed by your investor dashboard. I'd now like to hand you over to Justin Scarborough, Head of Investor Relations, to host the Q&A. Justin, as you can see, we've received a number of questions from investors, both pre-submitted and throughout today's presentation. If I may just ask you to read out the question where appropriate and direct it to a member of the team. Thank you.

Thank you very much and welcome everybody to the results presentation today. The first question is in relation to what you mentioned on the front page of the release this morning and the path to profitability. Could you elaborate on what that path to profitability looks like from an ITM perspective?

Yeah, I'll kick off and then do jump in. There are two sides to this. There's the side which is about sales and generating income, but the second part is around controlling costs and being ready for those sales. As you've seen, we are absolutely ready to take orders and we have controlled costs very carefully over the last 12 months. So we are in a position where we can take orders. Now it depends very much on the sales mix as to what we need to do in order to break even. But it's very much around the Trident projects because that's the volume product and naturally Poseidon as part of that being a volume execution project. What we see is Trident project life cycles lasting for between two and three years in execution. And the ITM bit tends towards the end of that as plant has to be built first with stacks to arrive last. So we do see some time before we get all of the revenue recognized. The flip side of that is that actually we see cash milestones throughout. So we see a more positive cash generation profile before we see a break even in the P&L. In terms of volumes, I think we've said it before, but the number remains fairly consistent, which is we would need to execute 400 megawatts of Trident, give or take, depending on exact parameters of the contract. If we start to add into the mix Poseidon and Neptune, because more of the scope is with ITM, we start to see a lower volume of megawatts required for a break-even position.

Maybe I'm also adding a little bit. Thank you for that. So I think what is important to mention here is that we have gained control over what we can and must control as a business. On a project-by-project level, we are now profitable. So any new sales contract coming in will generate profitability on a project level. This means if we generate more projects and if customers take more FIDs, over time we will become not only break-even but a profitable business. and what is also important to mention is that we are no longer this is what idm had done previously we are no longer pricing in any future improvements of our product or cost on initiatives but we are selling at today's price with a profit margin this means any improvement which simon is generating on the technology side any cost down and we're working very hard on achieving cost downs is a further upside for us and meaning that especially you know andy talked about trident contracts being delivered throughout a couple of years Any improvement to the cost base of Trident during the project execution lifetime will further improve our result on a project by project basis.

Thank you very much. A question for Simon. At the time of the interim results in January, we spoke about Kronos. And Andy slightly mentioned it in his part of the presentation. Could you give an update on the development of Kronos and when we expect to hear some hard news on it? Sure. Well, we're on track.

Kronos is, of course, our larger capacity stack platform that's under development today. It's aimed at larger scale deployments and it builds on our existing strengths, but also all of our lessons learned in execution. and we're giving particular attention to design for manufacture to make assembly easier and more straightforward. We have a very tight collaboration with Gore, who are the membrane supplier, And together we are taking steps and evaluating features currently for that stack platform. And we're pretty excited about it. I mean, one thing I perhaps should say is that Kronos isn't going to render Trident redundant. We'll continue to manufacture Trident and technology improvements that Dennis referred to will be implemented in Trident as we move forward. So people can, existing customers, new customers can gain the benefit from that.

Thank you, Simon. What do you regard as your main USPs against your peer group?

Maybe you start on the technology side.

Okay. I mean, from a technology standpoint, we've explained in previous presentations why we have the leading technology, highest current density, giving operators the most flexibility for how they operate the equipment. We've got leading conversion efficiency. And as we have explained in Neptune 5, we are bringing the smallest footprint containerized product. So from a core technology point of view, there are many elements. We also have, of course, a very capable factory. We also have proven execution capability, and we're rapidly now generating data in the field, which is really driving customer confidence.

I think you've basically covered it. Maybe on top, I'm meeting a lot of customers in our factory and the recurring theme or recurring feedback we get from customers is that they appreciate how much different the current factory feels, how much more real that is over some of our peers, especially when they can see actual plant operating data from our reference plants as well as in our test yard. In your part of the presentation, you explained about our testing capabilities. I think one very unique feature of ITM is that we can test stacks and Neptune containers under full load, including any safety case. So if a customer buys a product with us, for example, a Neptune two or five megawatt container, they can visit us obviously while we are producing that. But the main point when they're visiting us is to do factory acceptance testing, what we call customer witness testing. When they come to us, they can sit with us in the control room or they can dial in remotely. And then they can see their personal individual unit performing exactly what we said it would produce. And only once we have proven and once we have shown that the unit is doing what it's supposed to be doing, then the customer is signing off the unit and will take control of it and then we are transporting it to the site. This is something where the customers get a lot of comfort around the performance of the units and about the capability of ITM. And it has helped us a lot that we have recurring tests in our factory right now where we can invite new potential customers to witness also the testing of units of other customers currently in production. so that they can actually see in reality that the units are performing what they are supposed to be doing. Very different from some of our peers who only perform on PowerPoint.

Thank you Simon, thank you Dennis. On the subject of Neptune, the question is, can you give an update on our manufacturing capacity, and particularly in light of the information you provided on the SALS pipeline, which included a lot of Neptune potential products? On the subject of Neptune, manufacturing capacity, and particularly with regard to the data that was provided on the sales pipeline in the desktop.

It's a general question for all of us. As I had laid out in my part of the presentation, we are seeing a significant uplift in containerized demand, especially for Neptune 5. This product has landed extremely well, both because of its competitive price, but especially also because of its flexibility and compactness. For our own capabilities of manufacturing a Neptune 2 or Neptune 5, they are exchangeable. They have the same container size, 40 foot for the main container. So in the same space where we would usually build a Neptune 2, we can also build a Neptune 5. They're interchangeable. In terms of capacity, we have put a lot of focus on increasing the amount of Neptune units we can do in parallel, and we continue to do so. We are currently not at a point where we are running out of manufacturing capabilities in space, but over the next, I would say, 12 to 24 months, we see a lot of demand, and you've seen the snapshot for 26, 25 looks very similar in terms of Neptune demand. We are seeing a lot of projects being tendered for, which, if they're all materialized at the same time, could lead to, I would say, a limitation of the numbers we can produce against these contracts. That's why we have started to pre-produce some of the Neptune 2 units, and we are also starting to pre-produce one Neptune 5 unit now in anticipation of the big demand which we are currently tendering for. I do not foresee a bottleneck there overall, because if we flatten the manufacturing of the containers across the next two years, we can definitely deliver what our customers want. Some customers, and I said that in my part of the presentation, have very specific delivery windows for their Neptune units, which they need to adhere to. And that is why they are coming to us with capacity reservations to block particular production slots. Now the capacity reservation topic is an interesting one. And maybe if you allow me, I will just comment shortly on that one. Because capacity reservations in itself are a good thing, right? It means that a customer has basically selected us as the supplier, not just as one of many, but as the supplier of a project. And then they are typically pre-paying a certain amount of the contract price, which is then later discounted against the actual contract award. You've seen that with Shell Refine. Shell gave us a capacity reservation, which was paid, and this amount is now discounted against the actual Shell Refine 2 contract. You still need to be very careful who you give these capacity reservations to. There's a lot of companies Among them, a lot of project developers who have a very low likelihood of project realization, either because they're dependent on funding, which is sometimes difficult to achieve, and they have outstanding building permit issues. Some of them do not yet have an off-taker for the hydrogen molecules. In all of these cases, you need to be careful who you commit manufacturing capacity to, because whilst you do get a prepayment of the contract price, and whilst you can keep it if it is not being used and not materialized as a contract, you may still end up with a production slot which is not utilized, which would lead to a fixed cost underabsorption in your factory. That's why we are very selective in who we assign capacity reservations with, which means they need to fulfill some very important criteria. Among them, they need to have a confirmed off-taker, the company needs an industrial background, they need to have the financing in place or the balance sheet strengths to pull off the project, and they need to have, I would say, relevant experience in developing employing similar projects. So for us, the credibility of the customer is extremely important in that. If the customer cannot convince us of that, we would not do capacity reservations, but they would have basically to wait in line for the next container to be filled in.

Thank you Dennis. There you mentioned specific criteria on projects and also during Simon's part of the presentation he spoke about the extensive audit that was done by Shell. Could you provide a bit more sort of colour in terms of what that audit looked like?

Yeah, can I start? Well, Shell has a very detailed and rigorous process, that's the first thing to say. When it comes to large scale projects, this is a very intense and detailed process, very different to the smaller scale or pilot projects. We have had an extensive exercise with Shell for a long, long time. We've covered everything from lessons learned in the execution and operation of RefineOne. We've had physical audits here in the factory, looking at our manufacturing processes and the controls we use in and around our general operations. They've also assessed our technology, both here in the labs, in the test yard, and also by having the latest generation of Trident stacks deployed into RefineOne. So we've had very practical hands-on experience So, I mean, generally, they've been looking at every aspect of ITM and our ability to deliver a large-scale project. So there's not really anything that they haven't touched or inquired about as part of that process. So while it's been detailed and a lot of work has gone in from many people to do that, there is a sense of pride, actually, of coming out the other side. These decisions aren't taken lightly, correctly so. And we're delighted that we've got through that process and we're working well together with Shell and Linder on the project.

Yeah, I can confirm that. Maybe in addition, we're talking a little bit about the hybrid stack upgrade. I think this is important on various levels. So I think we previously spoke about the hybrid stack upgrade having delivered 10% efficiency increase in the RefineOne plant. That in itself is great and that in itself has motivated other customers to do hybrid upgrades as well. However, it also says something else. The inherent promise you get if you buy a PEM technology plant is that over time you can exchange stack generations. So if you buy a Trident stack today, then I would say in a couple of years there will be a lot of technological improvements. Over time you can then just buy the next generation, put it in your plant and it's still working and it's working better. Now, a lot of companies, basically everybody has been talking about that, but we are not the only one who has actually pulled it off in reality. We're the only company who has ever brought in commercial scale a new generation technology into a previous generation plant, delivering a 10% efficiency improvement. So this was another element which has convinced Shell, but which is also very important to other customers, Because they see our capability of, if they buy a plant today by us, they will profit if they upgrade from any innovation we do to our core product lineup over the years to come. And at any given point, they can transition to the next stack generation and get a higher performing plant as somebody would who's buying a new plant from us. This is something which is really important to customers. They're not locked in with, I would say, an older technology for a long period, but they can always upgrade.

Thank you, Dennis. Could you provide an update and a comment on our relationship with Lynda?

Yeah, I can. I think, you know, the proof is in the pudding. That's what I learned here in the UK. And I think one important proof point has been Refine2. Refine2 is a project we are delivering together with Lynda Engineering for Shell. And I've also shown in my part of the presentation how the Lingen plant looks like as a vendor. Linde and ITM have a joint offering, which is very mature in the market. Linde has developed their so-called high-perm module, which is a 10 megawatt, very mature standard solution around our core technology, and we now have a track record of deploying that to some of the most prestigious and some of the largest projects in the world. We are tendering for a lot of projects together in the market, especially in markets where Linde has a very strong footprint, obviously. So I would say the relationship is very constructive, it's professional, but that does not necessarily mean that it's always easy. I think we are both two companies, two different companies, we're working closely together. There can be one or the other dispute at times, but I think we have found a way to positively work together, also through some of the previous project delays which happened before I joined ITM, and I think we are now in much more steady waters. And I think that we have now a site not only 200 megawatts for RWE, but another 100 megawatts for Shell is a very important evidence and proof point here. And we're hoping for more projects together. I mean, as I said, we're tendering for a lot of projects right now. And I think we have a very convincing offering in the market of a proven combination of a strong technology company and a very experienced and mature EPC organization.

Thank you. Slide 20 was the guidance slide. Andy, could you give some indication over which years you expect the 105 million of revenues to be recognised over?

Sure. So that's the 105 million of contract backlog that is not expected to be recognised within the current financial year. I mean, I should say on the guidance for this financial year, that is purely related to contracts that are already signed. So with some net-chain products being built to stock, we could see an upside in the year, but we are sticking very carefully to what we have contracted and within our control. That same approach will be taken with that 105 million of backlog beyond FY25. Some of that is tried in products. We are expecting it to go out into future years. And so we're being careful that we disclose exactly the timing of that when we have control or at least a higher level of visibility.

I think it's important to reiterate what you said in your part of the presentation, Andy. If you want to build a sustainable and resilient business, it's important that your backlog of contracts, so not what you have in your sales pipeline, but what you've actually signed as firm orders, is growing quicker than the revenue you generate. Because over time, your company will grow, right? If you have spikes in revenue, which are basically eating up your order backlog quicker than you can generate new order backlog, you're running into problem territory. Right now, we are seeing the opposite trend. Our order backlog of firmed-up orders is growing significantly and much quicker than our revenue, which is the more important indicator. I mean, you presented that some of our projects would run for three years, and only then we would recognize 100% of the revenue at the very end of the contract. So in such kind of scenario, which we are in, I think revenue is not the most relevant indicator for company growth. I think contract backlog is the most relevant indicator. And that's why I think we will shift focus also a little bit to talk more about contract backlog and how many orders we still have in front of us to execute.

Thank you. Has your view on the UK outlook changed or improved in the context of the recent library election win? I think improved.

In principle, it was important that the new government, which came in, the Labour government, is continuing on the funding programs which were started before them. The so-called HAARP programs I also introduced in my part of the presentation. Because a disruption to that or complete new program would have basically delayed a lot of projects which are currently close to FID. So I think for us, this continuity was really important. And we are also welcoming the labor government's strong drive towards energy transition. And I think there's a lot of ambitions right now, which we are obviously welcoming a lot. Then again, I think in the end, we will have to wait for outcomes of that. In the end, the only thing which counts for us is do we get contracts signed with customers? So do any regulatory or funding changes by government lead to actual contracts? I think so far, everything I've seen from the Labour government is pointing in the right direction. But again, let's wait and see over the next couple of weeks and months how that is then materialising into actual orders. But so far, I think very positive.

Thank you. Next question is, a number of our peers have announced licensing agreements to facilitate entries into various markets. Can you give an update on your approach and view with regard to licensing?

Licensing in itself remains an interesting model, I would say. It's not our preferred model. Our preferred model is to be the manufacturer of the equipment. I personally believe that if you want to be a technology leader and if you want to, in the positive sense, dominate a market, you need to have very tight control over your supply chain. So where you buy your products from, how good is quality? Also, if quantity goes up, you need to make sure that you have internal processes under control and so on and so forth, right? Because you want to build up a reputation with customers, you want to generate field data. If now you have a lot of licensing deals with different companies producing two different qualities and potentially different supply chains, you may end up in a situation where your reputation is damaged if the quality of your products does not live up to expectations. So I'm generally a bit careful with technology license agreements. I would not rule out completely that this could be an option for ITM for very specific world regions. But right now, our focus will remain on being a manufacturer. being the manufacturer of electrolysers and to produce the world's best electrolysers and deliver them to our customer.

Thank you. A couple of financial questions for Andy. That's okay. Within the gross loss explanation in the release this morning, does the cost of quality of 3 million relate to testing? And what does customer contracts of 4.2 million specifically refer to?

Okay, so it's good that we've split those two. So the cost of quality is around our manufacturing processes. And if you looked at that over the course of the year, you saw a taper as we brought in better automation and better control around our manufacturing processes. as evidenced by that Shell DD process. So that is the cost of excess manufacturing costs, which are not making it into the products, but far smaller than they were a year ago. In terms of the 4.2 million projects, that is where project forecasts have increased. And the important bit there is, We are actually seeing a slight reduction in the cost of production within the operations, where we have seen extended costs is actually the on-site work and us being actually present on site for longer than expected. So those are cost forecast increases in the year. There are still opportunities to mitigate those going forwards, but that will really depend on how much time we spend on site ultimately.

Thank you. I suppose this is a general question in terms of the development of electrolyser supply chains, how they're developing, and do you see any particular areas of weakness that may impact ITM going forward?

Maybe I kick it off and then you take over. Sure. I think in principle, what's very evident is that more and more companies are taking the electrolyzer business serious. I mean, the market is growing, right? It's growing quickly. Over the last couple of weeks, we have seen some very large FIDs, some of the most Some of the biggest projects were just recently decided, mainly in Europe. So with every decision of a large customer to take FID and then to invest into these kind of projects, more and more credible suppliers trying to take part in the supply chain, which will lead to competition and ultimately to higher quality and a decrease in cost and price by suppliers. I think this is a development we are seeing already, which is very helpful. In particular, I think, and you can comment on the goal relationship, but having very large companies with a lot of capabilities entering the space and partnering with OEMs is very important. After I joined IDM, I put a lot of emphasis and focus on our supply chain and on forming strong partnerships, something which is already paying off.

Yeah, just to pick up on that, I think Gore is a good example. There are a number of key suppliers and we want to be working very closely with them. And, you know, often it's not just as straightforward as finding a supplier and buying what they offer. There's a lot of work to do to get the most out of those components and make sure that everything meshes together well in your manufacturing and your overall process. So having a deeper relationship with key suppliers has been really important to us and I think that's working well and paying dividends now.

Thank you. There are multiple questions pertaining to the 500 megawatt capacity reservation as well as the 200 megawatt partnership with Hygen. Is there any guidance or insights you could give and provide with regard to those two big announcements?

I mean, I'll start. I guess the 500 megawatts is around us receiving contracted orders between now and 2028. We're not going to disclose partners necessarily. We're not in a position to do that. But it's real vindication of the work we've done in the last 12 months and the confidence that people have with ITM. So a real positive. With Hygen, there's two phases to that, but it's very much linked to the UK government funding rounds, and I guess where we see Hygen as a very ambitious company, one that's really trying to change things in the UK, and one where we see a Made in the UK sticker as having value to the UK. Yes.

I think that covered this. Just for completeness again, so high-gen is not a capacity reservation. That is a preferred supplier relationship for PEM electrolyzers. The 500 megawatt one is a capacity reservation as was the share refined 100 megawatt before turned out to be a real FID then.

Thank you. There are a number of questions about the US market and its development with a lack of clarity on policy tax credits. Is there any insights or thoughts that you could provide regarding the outlook for the US market and ITM's role within that?

I think the current development is confirming that we took the right approach. I think we were one of the very few in the industry who did not announce a large investment into a factory in the US. This would have been premature. As I said in my part of the presentation, we are typically investing and growing in markets where there is significant anchor demand, which would justify an investment. Right now, we do not see that anchor demand being there. I mean, not many project decisions have been taken. There are a lot of very big numbers being talked about when it comes to hydrogen hubs, funding and so on and so forth. And we had some very good discussions with potential customers for projects. But I think in terms of maturity of project discussions and where we're heading, I think Europe is still leading the way significantly. And also, when you look at the pie chart, which I was showing on the sales pipeline slide, I think 17% was rest of world. This included US. It's the much smaller share of projects still in which we foresee to be materialized in the US. It stays an important market, though, right? I mean, it has a lot of potential. The IRA funding is very interesting. There's a lot of movements by companies, but this has not yet translated into a lot of projects. And I can just come back to, for me coming from an industry where it's about signed orders and building stuff which actually works, the only thing which counts is signed contracts. Everything else is hot air for me.

Thank you. That concludes our Q&A session. What I would just finally say to people is that I will endeavour to answer the questions you submitted via IMC, or if you've got any specific questions, then just contact me directly and I'll reply over the course of today and tomorrow. Thank you very much.

Fantastic. Thank you all for updating investors today. I'd like to remind you that before closing this session, you'll be redirected to give your feedback, which will only take a few moments to complete, and it's greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team of IT Empower, I'd like to thank you very much for attending today's presentation. That concludes today's session, and good morning to you all.