Costa

@xEBITDA From your mouth to gods ears

The seed for the MOASS has been planted. IYKYK $EOSE

@dmottco @FuzzyPandaShort stop making sense!

You’re a moron. Everyone knows incorporation is the last step of any business plan Cerberus does not deploy capital into fake projects. Cerberus has $60 billion under management and a fiduciary duty to their LPs. The 2 GWh firm capacity reservation has real economic consequences. If Frontier Power USA doesn’t develop real projects Cerberus loses real money

Eos Energy & Cerberus just sunk to a new low In the highest demand market for AI infrastructure ever, Eos had to invent a new customer, Frontier Power USA, 1 week before they missed EPS 1 major problem-🔋heads are smart enough to see through this BS

@Browpeak I just wanna hear about the technicals on how the batteries are operating

$eose bulls What’s the expectations from earnings? Revenues already been pre announced we so not expecting any surprise there? Margins? Or is that still a right off for line 1? I’m still having a hard time to find a catalyst that moves the stock. $flnc trades at ~1x 2026 rev $eose is trading at ~10x 2026 rev I just don’t think Eos is cheap by any means especially since they can’t prove their margins

@CompoundingTony Being on the construction side, if this was truly as catastrophic as some claim, you’d expect litigation, contract terminations, and serious noise spreading publicly throughout the industry. That’s usually what happens when a product is completely non-functional.

A thread has been making the rounds on $EOSE that's been causing serious FUD. I want to address it properly. And I'll start by doing something most bulls won't: agreeing with part of it. Viejas is a real problem. Full stop. Eos confirmed it themselves. Their own DawnOS post states that in the earlier BMS architecture, a single imbalanced module could take an entire string offline, stranding energy across every module it was grouped with. They engineered around it, oversized systems to compensate, and dispatched technicians. That is management publicly admitting the early architecture had serious flaws. The 5.5 GWh cumulative throughput metric also disappeared from earnings reporting without explanation. Management owes shareholders clarity on that. These are fair criticisms and I won't pretend otherwise. Now here is where the logic completely falls apart. The nuclear claim is that 0 out of 135 cubes at Viejas are performing to spec and all need replacement. Think carefully about what that would mean in the real world. If 0 of 135 units were completely non-functional, Viejas, a real company with real lawyers, would have terminated the contract and filed suit. That has not happened. Instead Viejas is in an active remediation program with Eos, replacement cubes have completed factory acceptance testing at Turtle Creek, and the project remains live. That is not the behavior of a customer whose product is worthless. "Not performing to original spec" and "completely non-functional" are not the same thing. The original spec was written before DawnOS existed. The old BMS architecture underdelivered, Eos confirmed that, and the fix is DawnOS plus hardware upgrades. That is a product problem being remediated. It is not a fraud. And the fact that Eos published the very post being used as ammunition against them? That is accountability. Companies hiding things do not publish technical whitepapers explaining exactly what went wrong and why. Then there is the question of sources. The claims are based on conversations with project managers, customers, and employees. Think about which employees reach out to a bear account on Twitter. Frustrated ones. People with grievances. And even when those conversations are genuine, a project manager at a single site does not have visibility into the full picture. Remediation timelines, engineering decisions, commercial negotiations happening above their level. People share what they see from where they stand, and that is rarely the complete story. That is not a representative sample of a 750-person organization. It is a selection bias that produces a systematically negative picture by construction. And then there is this. The position was 417,000 shares. It has been sold down to roughly 13% of that at prices around $10 to $11. The stock is now lower. Every post validating the bear case also validates that exit decision. That is not objective analysis. That is human psychology doing exactly what it always does. The executive compensation framed as red flags: a CFO base of $ 470K plus bonus plus stock at a Nasdaq-listed company running a capital-intensive manufacturing scale-up with 750 employees is a completely standard public company comp structure. That framing works on retail investors who have never read a proxy statement. It should not work on anyone paying attention. The whitepapers dismissed as fluff communications were authored by the CTO and contain measured engineering results: 3 millisecond full system response time, less than 4 degrees Celsius temperature rise under sustained AI inference load cycling, 78% round-trip efficiency maintained across hours of continuous dynamic cycling. Those are test results. Not marketing copy. The right question was never whether every single claim is fabricated. Some of what is being said reflects real problems. The right question is whether the Viejas remediation program works and whether Line 2 executes on schedule. That is where this thesis lives or dies. Everything else is noise. Pessimism sounds smart. It usually is, until the inflection point. Asking hard questions about Viejas field performance is entirely legitimate. The leap from "this product had real early problems" to "0 cubes work anywhere and everything is fraud" is not analysis. It is a narrative built on biased sources, a sold position, and retail psychology. Know the difference. $EOSE

@x_times_1 the last time i felt this way, we got smacked in the face.... this time feels different... hopefully we see some improved field data, and an order

$eose $8 pre-earnings. $10-$12 post earnings. Lfg. Nfa/dyor

@bert_gilfoyle wait these things are real lololol i thought this was ai generated 🤣

Eos Clean Energy drinks. what?

@bert_gilfoyle tried them... had a metallic after taste

@JordanSolace @AlPutino That’s why line 2 is the end all be all in my eyes. It’s either we make it here or its done

$EOSE 🧵 Was at a bach party this wknd and coincidentally sat next to someone very interesting in the casino… friend on the trip who worked for a PE firm specializing in financing renewable energy projects…. (with connects to Eos gen2.3) I know lots of folks are upset with the q4 miss and relative quiet on the order front but let me bring up a few things nobody ever talks about. Before a single Eos batt gets installed.. the developer buying it has to close project financing. This means getting a senior lender, a tax equity investor, and an offtake agreement all lined up simultaneously. Every party does their own DD and anyone can kill the deal. Here's who has a say before a project closes: Senior lender sizes the loan to contracted cash flows, tax equity investor claiming the federal tax credit, independent engineers certifying the tech works, offtaker signs l/term capacity agreement, insurer provider wraps project. Everyone has to be comfortable. Independently. The federal tax piece alone is huge.. under the IRA BESS projects can qualify for the 30-40% ITC depending on location + domestic content On a $60M project..thats about $24M claimed in year1. The feds are funding nearly half a project on day1. That’s why it gets built. The operational cash flows alone don’t justify it. The tax benefits are the engine. Here's the catch..a tax equity investor will only participate if it’s certified by an independent Engineer.. engineers review field performance, OEMs balance sheet, warranty terms, chemistry etc… then sign off. That’s the price of admission.. without it.. you wont close. This is why the “eos tech doesn’t work” has a logical problem. Mn8 energy is GS backed. The supply agreement is for 750mwh. They have institutional LPs, their own lenders, and a rigoruous DD process… goldman backed firms do not stake their reputation +capital on tech they think has no chance to be bankable. Same with talen.. a $17B IPP. They would not put their CEO name in a PR for tech they don’t believe in IMO. Talens play is pairing eos w existing generation in PA to serve AI DC. They have the land, the interconnection, and the hyperscaler relationships. Doesn’t sound like a favor… it’s a calculated infra bet. And then you have frontier power. UK developer that submitted Eos tech to OFGEM.. the UK regulator in a competitive bid for the cap n floor program. 11Gwh of projects to round two using Eos tech. Under the program.. ofgem provides a rev floor..essentially the govt backstops the cash flow the lender will underwrite against The 228mwh firm order isn’t just a sale. It makes eos look much more viable since it’s being considered within regulated lender-backed frameworks … NYSERDA plays a similar role domestically.. when NYSERDA selects its tech thru competitive solicitation.. it backstops revs that senior lenders will underwrite against… A govt backed offtake is the cleanest credit in project finance… that is in our pipeline.. 🔑 So why is conversion so slow? Maybe bc the chain I just described – lender approval, tax equity, independent engineer certification, offtake, insurance can take 12-24 months from contract signing to commercial operation .. then layer in first of a kind BESS chemistry that has never been financed or deployed at scale… 🤔 These counterparties engaging tells me the tech has cleared initial DD hurdles, but scaling risk remains Nobody signs a 750mwh as a favor. Cerbs involvement likely improves access to financing counterparties.. but execution risk still exists. But adding a 3rd BOD member isnt a move you make from a company you are about to walk away from. Talented finance execs tend to do DD before joining as well. The risks are real. Mfg execution, runway, order conversion- not dismissing any of it. But the project finance complexities are under appreicated. Just trying to close that gap.

@GrassmanWilliam @nav7634 I appreciate them going with cheaper better beforming spiral duct work! Who says they spend unwisely!

$EOSE

@GrassmanWilliam @FreemyerGreg i wonder if all this additional material is for bad z3 batteries.

$EOSE 🚨 FELT DELIVERED 🚨 14,064 KG of felt delivered to EOSE on 4/29/2026. @FreemyerGreg

At least 30% of all government spend goes to fraud. At least 20% is just wasted. Tax revenue is not the issue - spending is. Fuck these people.

@NPianosi @PoweredByEos we will see them once line 2 is up

@PoweredByEos Ok, but where are the big orders promised?

Attention Eos Shareholders! Proxy voting is now open through June 2 and the Board of Directors recommends voting FOR all five proposals! Vote using the instruction form provided by your broker and visit proxyvote.com to have your voice heard. For information on the five proposals to be voted on at the annual meeting, visit the Annual Reports & Proxy Statements page of the Eos IR website: investors.eose.com/financials/ann… For information on how to vote, visit the Annual Meeting Resources section of the IR Resources page of the Eos IR website: investors.eose.com Every vote matters, and your voice adds real weight.

I have two stacks on my desk. The left stack is financial disclosure forms from members of Congress. The right stack is waivers for members who filed their financial disclosures late. The right stack is always taller. On Wednesday morning, I watched a soldier get arrested on CNN. I am a Disclosure Analyst for the House Ethics Committee. I have held this position for eleven years. My job is to receive the forms, verify their completeness, and file them. I do not investigate. I do not flag. I do not refer. I file. I have a lanyard. The lanyard says ETHICS. The soldier's name is Gannon Ken Van Dyke. He is thirty-eight years old. He was stationed at Fort Bragg. He was Special Forces. In December, he created an account on a prediction market called Polymarket. On January 2nd, he bet $32,500 that the president of Venezuela would be removed from power. On January 3rd, he helped remove the president of Venezuela from power. He collected $409,881. He has been charged with five federal crimes. Commodities fraud. Wire fraud. Unlawful use of confidential government information. Theft of nonpublic government information. Unlawful monetary transaction. The Department of Justice called it "the first-ever insider trading prosecution on event contracts." I watched this on the television in our break room. Then I walked back to my desk and processed a late financial disclosure from a member of the House Financial Services Committee who purchased $250,000 in bank stocks eleven days before his subcommittee held a closed-door hearing on proposed capital reserve changes. The filing was forty-seven days late. The STOCK Act requires disclosure within forty-five days. The penalty for late filing is $200. I waived it. I waive most of them. In 2021, fifty-four members of Congress and senior staff violated the reporting rules. The fines were minimal. Most were waived. I have a form for the waiver. The form has a box that says "Reason." I write "administrative delay." In ethics, "administrative delay" means the member's office forgot and then remembered when a reporter called. My approval rate is one hundred percent. In any other field, that number would trigger an audit. In mine, it is called thoroughness. Let me show you what I processed this year. January. A senator on the Armed Services Committee sold defense contractor shares worth $1.2 million. Three days later, his committee received a classified briefing that the Iran campaign had exceeded its projected cost by 340%. The stock dropped 8%. He filed the disclosure sixty-one days late. I calculated the fine. $200. His chief of staff asked if it could be waived. He did not ask what the senator traded on. Nobody asks that. The form does not have a field for it. I waived the fine. The senator's portfolio returned 23.4% in 2025. The S&P 500 returned 16.8%. February. A representative on the Energy and Commerce Committee bought pharmaceutical stocks worth $400,000. Two weeks later, her committee advanced a bill that would extend patent exclusivity for the exact drug class she purchased. The stocks rose 14%. She filed on time. There was no fine. There was no investigation. There was nothing to investigate because buying stocks in companies regulated by your own committee is not illegal. It is legal. The STOCK Act made it legal by making it disclosed. In Congress, disclosed means legal. In my office, legal means filed. March. A member whose spouse manages a portfolio worth $9.2 million reported forty-three separate transactions in a single quarter. Twelve of them were in sectors directly affected by legislation the member co-sponsored. The timing on eight of those twelve was within a two-week window of committee action. I logged all forty-three. None were flagged. We do not flag. We file. I asked my supervisor once what would happen if I flagged a filing. She said we do not have a form for that. I never asked again. In 2020, I processed 847 disclosures. In 2023, 1,211. In 2025, 1,614. The number of enforcement actions in each of those years was zero. The numerator changes. The denominator does not. I want to tell you about the soldier again. He made $409,881. He tried to delete his Polymarket account by calling customer service and saying he lost access to his email. He moved his profits into a foreign cryptocurrency vault and then into a new brokerage account. He used his real identity. He placed thirteen bets. Every single one was connected to an operation he personally participated in. In my eleven years, I have processed disclosures from members of Congress who traded on: Pending FDA approvals they learned about in committee. Defense appropriations they voted on. Trade policy they negotiated. Pandemic response measures they drafted. Interest rate decisions they were briefed on before the public. None of them have been charged. None of them have been investigated by the Department of Justice. None of them have been referred to the SEC. The STOCK Act has produced zero prosecutions since it was signed on April 4th, 2012. Fourteen years. Five hundred and thirty-five members. $635 million in trades last year alone. Zero cases. My daughter asked me once what happens when someone breaks the rules. I told her we write it down. She asked what happens after that. I said it depends. She was nine. She is twenty now. It does not depend. Nothing happens after that. The soldier made $409,881 and faces decades in prison. Nancy Pelosi entered Congress in 1987 with a portfolio worth approximately $785,000. It is now worth $133.7 million. That is a return of 16,930%. The Dow Jones returned 2,300% over the same period. Professional fund managers who beat the market for three consecutive years are considered exceptional. She has beaten it for thirty-seven. If a hedge fund produced those returns, the SEC would subpoena the records on a Thursday. She produced them from a building with a chapel and a gift shop. She announced her retirement last year. No investigation was opened. No disclosure was flagged. Her filings were on time. In my office, on time means compliant. Compliant means closed. I want to tell you about the fine. $200. That is the maximum penalty for violating the STOCK Act's disclosure requirements. $200 for a member of Congress whose portfolio gained $4.7 million in a single quarter. I calculated what $200 represents as a percentage of $4.7 million. It is 0.004%. I could not find a comparison that made it meaningful. It is less than the price of the parking pass in the Rayburn garage. It is less than lunch at the members' dining room if you order the crab cakes, which I am told are excellent though I eat at my desk. Since 2012, thirty-one bills have been introduced to restrict congressional trading. I keep a list. The list is longer than the STOCK Act itself. On March 5th, 2026, a representative from Michigan introduced the thirty-second. He called it the "No Getting Rich in Congress Act." The bill would prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, and their spouses from trading individual stocks, cryptocurrency, futures, and commodities while in office. The bill was referred to committee. The committee has not scheduled a hearing. The committee is chaired by a member whose spouse executed $2.1 million in trades last year. The bill will be reviewed. In my office, reviewed means read. Read means acknowledged. Acknowledged means a status has been assigned. A status is the absence of an action that has been given a name so it looks like one. The soldier used classified information to make $409,881 on a prediction market. He has been charged with five federal crimes. The Department of Justice announced the case on the same day I processed three disclosures from members who traded on committee knowledge worth a combined $3.8 million. The difference between the soldier and the members is not what they did. It is the building they did it in. He did it from Fort Bragg. They did it from the Capitol. He used a prediction market. They used the New York Stock Exchange. He bet on a military operation. They bet on the legislation they write. He did not write the law. They did. They wrote the STOCK Act. Then they funded its enforcement at zero dollars. Then they set its maximum penalty at $200. Then they gave my office the authority to waive it. Then they traded $635 million. The soldier flew to Caracas. He breached a compound. He put his body between a mission and a bullet. The people who ordered the operation were in a building with a credenza and sparkling water. They did not go to Caracas. They went to their brokerage accounts. The soldier made $409,881 and is now in federal custody. The people who knew what he was going to do before he did it made more and filed less. His prosecution is not a failure of the system. It is the system. One conviction per decade, at the lowest level, so the briefing slides can say enforcement exists. The $409,881 is not the crime. It is the cost of making $635 million look supervised. In my field, we call this self-regulation. The soldier's Polymarket account has been frozen. His military career is over. He will spend years in federal prison. My office will process every congressional disclosure filed this year. Every trade logged. Every $200 fine calculated and waived. The system is immaculate. Fourteen years. Zero prosecutions. $635 million a year. A 16,930% return. I have not leaked a document. I have not filed a complaint. I have not deviated from the process one single time. The process was written by the people whose forms I process. As long as the disclosures go up and the cases don't, my performance review says I am meeting expectations. My lanyard still says ETHICS. In eleven years, nobody has asked me to define the word.

@CompoundingTony @nav7634 @musaibnmaymun Stop making sense

What are you trying to accomplish by voting “no”? They are not cashflow positive yet! Debt would be the alternative route and is a more expensive option, hurting your holdings even more. Buying into a company like $EOSE is to fully expect dilution until they are CFP. So you should probably not have bought the stock in the first place. But don’t complain about it now.🤷🏼‍♂️ Accept it or move out. Don’t vote “no” that won’t help anybody! If you are invested in this company for the long term… give them the tools they need to succeed! 💪🏼

$EOSE thoughts? I'm tempted to vote no on the increase

@JordanSolace Great setup for $EOSE but not a layup. 25yr vs 15yr contracts and conservative RTE assumptions give zinc a bid advantage. Non-price scoring like safety and permitting also leans their way, especially upstate. None of it matters if they can’t deliver on timeExecution is everything

$EOSE NYSERDAs bulk storage awards are imminent. 3000MW across three procurements starting with 1000MW first round. 30Gwh of Proposals. VERY competitive procurement cycle…. This is why the ball is in our court.. 1-Non Li gets a 25 yr contract and Li ion gets 15. The extra decade for alternative chemistries is a structural financing advantage. Longer contracted cash flows means lower cost of capital -> lenders will advance better rates and developers will bid lower prices Eos zinc would get the full 25 yr tenor and has the advantage when it comes to price. NYSERDA assumes 65% RTE for Non Li chemistries and 85% for Li ion. Eos has RTEs in the mid 80s when we get to 6+ hr duration discharges based on previous earnings presentations.  Indensity and modular level battery BMS should only make the batts in the field more efficient relative to string level mgmt where the system is only as effective as its weakest cell. 2-NYSERDA is modeling Eos to get less revs than it actually would in operation. Devs probably know Eos economics should be better than what is being modeled (65% RTE)… so they can make more attractive bids (essentially asking for less subsidy)… You can almost view this as a hidden margin sophisticated devs can exploit at bid time. 3- Zinc being non flammable, no thermal runway, no peer review requirements, no fire dept training burden is also huge bc NYSERDA score is 40% NOT dependent on price. 🔑 Project maturity, permitting, status, safety planning, and community engagement. All the shit that isn’t price or efficiency. Every one of those subcategories is a category where Li ion carries a risk that Eos doesn’t. In upstate NY.. 35% of capacity must be sited.. rural fire depts UNLIKE NYC don’t have the resources to deal with li ion fires. You cant smother them nor apply just a little bit of water for a few hours. You need continuous flow for MANY hours sometimes days to make sure the (Li ion) fires don’t reignite. These advantages will compound… the 25 yr tenor in the 8 hr bucket, that same 8hr bucket exclude pre commercial competition 🔑 , the fire code is a massive drag on Li ion. These aren’t isolated wins… these all stack in the same geography and same duration tier. BINARY.

@Linklevosstwins @nav7634 Welcome to manufacturing

@nav7634 I hate this company lol such a constant shit show of barely surviving

@OBGInvestments NYSERDA 😈😈😈😈

On one hand, my brain tells me that $EOSE is going to trade in a range for the next couple of months. On the other hand…. My eyes see that massive gap between $7 and $10 After hours activity like we’re seeing now reminds me of times when traders are entering and at the very least, we get a nice push to the upside. Let’s see if that gap acts like a 🧲

@PeterPiperReady throw sorokin in there to, just to sweeten the pot

if the islanders miss the playoffs, would you start to recommend a possible trad with the Sharks that involves the following? To #FutureIsTeal -Ryan Pulock/Adam Pelech -Bo Horvat -2027 1st To #isles -William Eklund -Quietin Musty -Shakir Mukhamadulin -2026 1st

@JordanSolace This is under the assumption that the batteries are working and everything is going to plan. 🤞🏼🤞🏼🤞🏼

$EOSE If Z3s are cycling in the field… running… and that field data is going higher 👀 Check off the ability to perform in the field similar to how the product is marketed…. Bc delivering at scale isn’t easy. Then check off the economic viability of the battery later this year… (bc that’s what the street cares most about right now)… then you can toss your bear case in the garbage Gotta flip margins.

@IslesDen Where is seeker

lol well would ya look at that. Get an established professional behind the bench, and to the wing goes Brayden Schenn I don’t come from a background as a fan of questioning the coach. We’ve just had Lane Lambert and Patrick Roy since I’ve been on here. In Pete I TRUST. #Isles