@Clio, fully agree that the Q2 webinar is really worth watching. I walked away feeling really good that my thesis is very much intact, with momentum clearly picking up and as Glenn summed it up at the end:

• "The strategic imperative for 2026 is coverting our pipeline into licenses"
• 1 x 50k TPA license will translate to $80-100m of license revenue

All the parts have come, and are coming, together very nicely. Patience is needed for this to translate into meaningful revenue. But once it does, the company's economics will expand in a very upward stepped manner.

Interesting also that only 2 analysts cover HZR - Glenn mentioned Euroz and Shaw Partners, with target prices of 70-80c (unconfirmed).

Here are my notes from the call.

RECAP OF HZR TECHNOLOGY

• Transform methane emmissions, which are 25% more harmful than CO2, into clean energy in the form of Hydrogen and high purity Graphite, a critical mineral
• The technology serves 3 markets (1) Clean Hydrogen (2) Critical Minerals - Graphite (3) Overall Industry Decarbonisation

FINANCIALS

Glenn made the point that cash burn is falling QoQ and YoY as the company has stripped out all non-essential spend. To confirm this point, I knocked up the following quarterly cash burn chart - a very nice picture indeed.

UPDATED CLEAN HYDROGEN MARKET

TAM of Hydrogen = 100MPTA, US$206b, effectively the equiavalent of the global Iron Ore market - this is currently all being addressed by Steam Methane Reforming (SMR), dirty, carbon intensive technology

Current industry emissions = 920 MT CO2

Well placed with KBR - leader in Ammonia and Methanol tech, deal flow in a good place with Steel

HZR is disrupting TODAY’s technology, not future technology - I think this is a key point as there are undoubtedly a lot of doubters with the failed attempts of green hydrogen.

KBR ALLIANCE UPDATE

The KBR Alliance was one of my key thesis aha moments as KBR is as gold star an engineering company as it gets globally. The COO Tom Coolican - I was impressed with Tom throughout - he gets this completely, updated:

• 1st paid study gives confidence that the KBR Alliance model works
• HZR is one of 80 technologies licensed by KBR to be used on its projects
• In execution phase now, following KBR’s playbook and metholodogies for developing and growing/scaling technology - this is KBR’s DNA and what the company is all about
• Strong cultural fit with KBR 
• Fully integrated into and leveraging KBR’s marketing machine

SALES PIPELINE

Pipeline of 51 active leads adds up to about 1.5MPTA - ~1.5% of global demand.

HAZER GRAPHITE

The Graphite update provided good clarity on how management is approaching HZR Graphite.

• HZR Graphite is a unique product, not standard graphite
• Strategy is to focus on large-volume markets with a genuine “drop-in application” with a target price of ~US$500/tonne ie, straight out of the back of the reactor, with no post processing, product can be dropped straight into the applications 
• Large priority addressable markets - Iron Steel manufacturing, concrete additives, asphalt binders - market is looking for low emission carbon products, to get away from high CO2 products which are post processed or from mined products
• Strong inbound interest for critical mineral applications - EV manufacturers, battery manufacturers, defence applications, high-value sectors - these are much more longer-term qualification processes and will require post processing
• Strategy is thus focused on addressing short-term drop in market followed by medium and long term post processing markets
• Not called out enough, but HZR Graphite is also very valuable from a low emissions perspective
• MOU with Kemira - promising properties for water treatment

A quick google on the current graphite market price suggests that HZR management is pitching Hazer Graphite at a premium to standard and very dirty graphite. The strategy and positioning makes good sense.

I‘ll add a third nod of approval for the webinar.

On the graphite front, I think the end user testing is going to be key on selling the speciality of the hazer graphite. It won’t be until those test results come through that hazer knows how much value it provides to a product (and how worth the premium cost is).

and me 4! I thought Glenn sounded very upbeat and with good reason as he has a good amount of cash in the bank to support him and the team at KBR to get a deal or two over the line. Tom also sounded professional and like he'll be driving hard for a result.

I do agree with Glenn's point about the macro tailwinds turning in favor of Hazer. Green hydrogen has taken a backseat, the idealogues in government are looking for practical decarb now and countries want to onshore industrial processes and are particularly interested in critical minerals such as graphite. All ticks for Hazer, when previously is was overlooked.

The one thing that peeved me about the quarterly - and it seemed like Glenn even double took on the first slide - when he said they are converting Methane emissions into hydrogen. They are not converting Methane emissions, they are converting methane, natural gas, a valuable commodity, not a waste stream. I don't know why they intro'd it in this way. I've never seen them do that before and its the sort of misleading hyperbole that puts me off. Anyway, unless I'm missing something hopefully we dont see that again.

All the positivity got me giddy and reminded me to sense check the economics - is anyone rational going to sign up to build these things? They used to do some work on cost of hydrogen in old quarterlies, but perhaps have put that away as commercial discussion mature. They used to assume a very low gas purchase price (US Henry hub) which benefitted their cost of hydrogen. Gas prices in the US has increased significantly in the last year (but this is a US phenomenon only, gas still cheap in the middle east and forecast to stay fairly stable in places like Korea / Japan). Anyway, in round terms while they used to talk about an NPV(10?) of $100-150M /project it now seems to be more like A$50-$100M and no mention of NPV, it could be undiscounted revenue? This may be to do with a KBR cut as well.

Anyway, I had a go myself, with a little help from chat gpt, but I did verify all the inputs. I've got no doubt you can drive a bus through this calc, but its good to have a starting point to compare the marginal cost of Hzr, electrified SMR (slightly more efficient apparently) and Green Hydrogen. I've clipped below my cost of hydrogen production for Hzr - 71c, eSMR $0.91 and Green H2 $5.20. So on a net operating basis (I've offset the graphite value from the cost of Hzr hydrogen), Hzr looks good. Enough room there for Hazer and KBR to skim a few million per project per year (20c x 50Tpd = US$3.6M per year - not that much, but convert it to A$ and times 10yrs and you're up around that A$50M mark). I haven't researched capex either, hopefully it wouldn't be too different between Hzr and eSMR but that's probably optimistic.

It's a leg to stand on - shaky as it may be!

@Longpar5 - yes on the methane emissions! That drove me absolutely batty. They'd never used that description before, and I'm sure they are quite aware of the difference. I did wonder later if perhaps the slides had been done by the investor relations people and someone had slipped in the word emissions (and Glenn just read over it).

They do usually include the comparable HZR vs SMR vs green and other options cost of H2 graph. I know I've seen it lately, perhaps in the previous quarter. Hopefully they'll show it again in the 1H report. From memory, the figs are similar to what you got - HZR and SMR more or less equal and the others significantly more.