Promoting the Wrong Metric and Failing to Publicize Lucrative Markets HyTerra’s website has highlighted the results of test wells by publicizing the percentage of hydrogen recovered.  When I started following the website, the hydrogen percentage claimed from the first test well, Sue Duroche 3, was advertised as 97%, with the remaining 3% consisting mainly of helium.  The most recent iteration of the website claims 92%.  In the September 15, 2025 Drilling for Hydrogen Conference Presentation, the figure presented for Sue Duroche 3 was “up to 96%”.   There was a good deal of excitement when the 97% figure was released, based on the possibility that such an elevated purity of hydrogen might allow delivery of hydrogen without further refinement. I’m not sure that ever was the case, at least for electrical power generation and probably for most industrial applications.  Little by little the purity percentage dropped as additional readings were taken. In the results from the next two drill sites, Blythe 13-20 reported 16.5% hydrogen and 4.4% helium, and McCoy 1 reported 83% hydrogen.  The ASX Release of October 8, 2025 reported the hydrogen concentrations as Duroche 3500 ppm, Blythe 3600 ppm, and McCoy 170 ppm.  Why the ppm statistics vary so much from the percentage concentrations reported is not explained. To an investor, great results from the first test well and declining results from the next two wells looks like failure and may be responsible for the low share price.  The website also makes a big deal about the 3% helium found in Sue Duroche 3.  If subsequent test wells do not find helium, that looks like failure as well. Highlighting the concentration percentages is the wrong approach.  What matters is not the concentration percentage but how much hydrogen is in the deposits.   I understand why the percentage figure is reported because that measure is included in every geologic report on the Nemaha Ridge I’ve seen.  But if McCoy contains 100 million kilograms of hydrogen at 83% concentration and Duroche has 50 million kilograms at 92% concentration, then there’s more money to be made by pumping out the hydrogen in McCoy.  The problem is that the total amount of hydrogen in a particular deposit is unknown, although some forms of radar can provide a rough idea. My recommendation would be to drop the concentration percentages and highlight the fact that subsurface hydrogen is the cheapest form.  Deemphasize renewables and climate change, as that can be the kiss of death in the US right now.  By now, everyone knows that hydrogen burns clean. Say that HyTerra’s objective is to offer cheap hydrogen for electrical power generation and industrial applications. Promote the thousands of acres of leases.  Promote the idea that when natural gas starts to run out, hydrogen will be the fuel that industry turns to. If possible, develop and publish an estimate of the current market value of all the hydrogen in the deposits covered by the leases.  Qualify the statement properly, i.e. contingent on development of methods of extraction, purification and delivery.  Investors like a nice round number like Comstock's $100 billion. HyTerra notes that they have already picked up the recommendation to focus less on the renewable aspects of subsurface hydrogen and more on their ability to compete on price.  Certain recommendations like the one about estimating the total value of the hydrogen in the ground could violate ASX disclosure rules until they have completed additional work needed to back up such a claim.  I noted that an estimate might not be possible, but am glad to know that it may be possible when HyTerra completes the necessary studies.  The total value of the hydrogen in the ground is a much more significant statistic for investors than the purity percentages.  I find it interesting that HyTerra did not reject the idea outright.  I suspect they have a pretty good idea now, or else there would be no reason for the push to expand the the number of acres covered by leases from 9607 in 2024 to over 80,000 in 2026.