🔋Tony🔋

Being able to think long term in a world full of short term thinkers is a huge advantage. Don’t get distracted by the 99%! $EOSE

Most expensive sex ever!

We received 15mm instead of the 150mm average in oct. That is now being caught up on apparently.

I see 40mm of rain a day for multiple days in a row?

I truly believe he does not want to do everything himself. But his brain forces him when he recognises stupidity.

Indeed. In a conversation he learns “is this how you do this?” And he feels it’s off, inefficient or plain stupid.

Exactly “Spectrum, towers, antennas? What? I’m not doing that! That’s not the efficient way of doing that”

One needs Discord for that?

These projects are aimed at 2030 right? So won’t become backlog for a while.

Let’s goooo😍

Reply: No. Final score: 1.5/10. Assessment is based solely on publicly available posts and replies from @dmottco (a blue-checked account with ~700 followers). No professional background, operating experience, or executive history is evident in the public record. Strategic thinking Limited and retail-investor framed. The dominant themes are short sellers, stock price action, PR/messaging gaps, and perceived silence after announced deals (NYSERDA, UK, Puerto Rico, utility meetings). Occasional notes on cost structure (elevated SG&A, R&D, automation not yet delivering headcount leverage) and the need for a clearer customer roadmap are reasonable investor feedback, but they stay surface-level. There is little evidence of thinking about technology commercialization risks for aqueous zinc chemistry, competitive positioning in long-duration storage, supply-chain realities, project execution at utility scale, or multi-year capital and talent needs. “If I were running the company my #1 objective each morning would be burning the shorts” and “all it takes is a clear roadmap with customers literally that’s it” are not strategic frameworks. Leadership qualities Not demonstrated. Public posts show a combative, reactive posture rather than the ability to set direction, build alignment, or manage complexity. There is no visible track record of leading teams, scaling organizations, or navigating the stakeholder set (customers, employees, board, capital markets, regulators) that a public manufacturing CEO faces. Emotional intelligence Very low. Replies frequently escalate to personal insults (“Fucking idiot,” crude remarks about other users). This pattern appears repeatedly when challenged. A CEO of a public company must manage continuous criticism from analysts, shorts, employees, customers, and media with composure. The public record shows the opposite. Capital allocation mindset Weak and short-term oriented. Suggestions include using company cash for buybacks primarily as a signal against shorts. For a pre-profit manufacturing scale-up that needs capital for capacity, working capital, and commercialization, this prioritizes market psychology over funding growth and operational improvement. Cost-cutting awareness (SG&A, overhead) is a positive observation but remains high-level. Ability to handle criticism Poor. Criticism of his views or the company is often met with immediate escalation rather than engagement or reframing. This is a material red flag for any public-company leadership role. Understanding of scaling a manufacturing business Superficial. He correctly flags that an automated line should eventually improve unit economics and that the current cost structure is a market concern. That is fair. There is no demonstrated depth on the hard parts of scaling novel battery manufacturing: process yields and quality, supply chain for the specific chemistry, certification and bankability for utility customers, project delivery risk, talent, or the capital intensity and timeline realities of moving from pilot to commercial volumes. Casual comparisons to Tesla/Elon posts do not substitute for operating knowledge. Bottom line @dmottco reads as a passionate, frustrated retail holder of $EOSE who wants more communication, tighter costs, and better stock performance. Those are legitimate investor complaints. They do not constitute evidence of the strategic, operational, emotional, or leadership capabilities required to run a public company commercializing and scaling long-duration energy storage manufacturing. Public posts do not support trust to run Eos Energy Enterprises. The score reflects the absence of relevant experience plus the presence of behaviors (especially emotional regulation and capital-allocation framing) that would be liabilities in the role. Private professional background is unknown and could differ; the public record alone does not.

High quality reply as usual. 😂 Since you’ve volunteered for the CEO position, I figured we might as well conduct a proper job interview. So I asked Grok to assess your qualifications. Prompt: > Please review the public posts and replies from @dmottco and assess his suitability to become CEO of Eos Energy Enterprises ($EOSE). Eos is a publicly traded company commercializing and scaling a new generation of long-duration energy storage technology. Evaluate his strategic thinking, leadership qualities, emotional intelligence, ability to handle criticism, capital allocation mindset, and understanding of scaling a manufacturing business. Base your assessment on actual posts, provide examples, and give him a final score out of 10. Would you hire him as CEO? Be objective and brutally honest.

Extremely happy you are not running the company! 😏

@groksalt I see you there! Calm down buddy!

Bryn? That you?

💯

Over four years and counting.

I’ve seen you change your convictions(and your name) many times in the last 5 years.

(4/4) So why am I still relatively calm? Not because I trust management. Not because I know the stock has bottomed. Not because I believe Eos is guaranteed to succeed. I’m calm because I understand what I’m betting on, why I’m taking the risk, and what could go wrong. I’ve learned that discomfort, uncertainty, and even serious doubts about management don’t necessarily invalidate an investment thesis. Sometimes they reveal genuine problems. Sometimes they create extraordinary opportunities. The difficult part is learning to distinguish between the two. And that’s why I keep coming back to the actual progress of the business. Despite all my criticism of management, I believe Eos is in a stronger operational position today than it has ever been. The stock price tells a very different story. Maybe the market sees risks that I’m underestimating. Maybe it’s simply unwilling to accept the uncertainty. Or maybe there’s a genuine disconnect between the price and the underlying business. I don’t know. And I don’t need to pretend that I do. I don’t need to be certain about the outcome to believe the opportunity is worth the risk. That’s the essence of how I approach investing. I don’t expect everyone to share my conviction or my appetite for risk. But I do think it’s worth questioning how much of our investment decisions are driven by what is actually happening in a business, and how much by the emotions created by its stock price. Because ultimately, the goal isn’t to feel confident every day. It’s to understand what you own, why you own it, and what would make you change your mind.

(3/4) Progress, promises, and time. 5. Progress matters more to me than promises. Management’s credibility can be restored. Not through another impressive presentation, ambitious guidance, or exciting announcement. But by consistently doing what they say they’re going to do. Quarter after quarter. Until then, I’ll remain skeptical of their promises. But I also refuse to ignore the progress happening in the actual business. Those two things can coexist. Eos can have unreliable management AND be making meaningful operational progress. The question is whether that progress is enough. And whether it happens fast enough. 6. Time is part of my investment thesis. Some people recently asked me whether they should sell $EOSE now and buy back lower. I’m the wrong person to ask that question. I understand the temptation. But I don’t know where the stock will trade next week or next month. And I don’t pretend to. What I do know is that constantly trying to predict short-term price movements can distract you from the very reason you invested in the first place. I would rather spend my energy understanding where a business could be in five or ten years than trying to predict what the market will do tomorrow. That doesn’t mean holding forever, ignoring new information, or refusing to admit mistakes. It means giving the underlying thesis time to develop instead of allowing every price movement to rewrite it. Time is not automatically your friend. A business can run out of money long before its opportunity materializes. But when the underlying thesis remains intact, time can be incredibly valuable. 7. What would actually prove me wrong? This is the question I keep coming back to with Eos. I have very little doubt about the long-term need for energy storage, the market opportunity, or the potential of the technology. I also see real progress in manufacturing. But none of that guarantees Eos will succeed. The biggest question for me is whether they can reach sustainable profitability before they run out of financial runway. And if they need more capital, what will that cost existing shareholders? Because you can be right about the market, right about the product, and right about the long-term opportunity, yet still lose money on the investment. That’s the risk I take most seriously. And it’s something I continuously evaluate.