Beam Global Investor Call Notes

The investor call with Beam Global (NOT an earnings call–that’s the end of March) just finished. Since I submitted a question to IR and introduced the company, I figured I should write up my notes. Reminder that the ticker is BEEM.

CEO and CFO were on the call. The CFO did not speak. Brief intro by Desmond Wheatley, CEO. Most of the 75 minutes or so was on questions.

I’m going to lump the questions into categories–which the company largely did, but these are not exactly in order. All questions were submitted ahead of time–no analyst questions unless they were submitted with the others. All questioners were anonymous to those listening.


Q: When will there be positive EPS?
A: Not going to guess at dates. They have a small float. It is “on the visible horizon.”

Q: When will ARC be sold in Europe?
A: They just completed the Amiga acquisition in Q4. Sales team hard at work. We will “see sales sooner than later.” The time to ramp sales in Europe will “beat the socks off the time it took in the US.”

Q: When will EV Standard be available? (My note: I’m not sure of the product referenced here, but I think it is the street charging via streetlight product they just acquired with Amiga–now Beam Europe.)
A: “Soon.” Because it already existed and had contracts and patents with Amiga, they are bringing it quickly to market.

Q: When will Amiga’s historical financials be disclosed?
A: When required. They closed the acquisition in Q4, so some level will be required in that report. More as time goes on.

Q: When will the factory start doing double shifts?
A: When the first shift is as efficient as possible and it is needed to meet demand. Occasionally they do run 1.5 or 2 shifts now, but Wheatley believes there are more efficiencies that can be achieved. He pointed out that they had 300% growth last year and absorbed that growth in the same factory.

Q: When will the volume push them to 10% gross margins?
A: Right now. They are there. It is the “current level.” That will show up along with the price increase in Q2 and 2H of this year. Then it will improve from there.


Q: OMG…EV sales are declining! How will that affect your business? (My note: There were several questions that boiled down to this.)
A: EV sales are still accelerating, just not at the same pace. It is still very much a growing market; it is still the future. Government regulations require it in some places (especially Europe). Beam provides infrastructure and infrastructure is playing catch-up. There will be lumpiness in EV sales. There will be far less lumpiness in infrastructure trying to enable that growth.

Wheatley pointed out that the EV sales (and manufacturing) slowdown was due primarily to the lack of infrastructure and cost. He made the point in as many ways as there were questions that fixing the lack of infrastructure was exactly their business. He has not heard or seen a single thing about a slowdown in demand for infrastructure.

He pointed out that the cost for EVs was currently close to equal the cost of ICE vehicles that were similarly outfitted. A lack of stripped down EV options, made them more costly when there were stripped down ICE options.

He then stressed that 47% of the current workforce in ICE vehicles is dealing with parts that are not needed in EVs. He sees the cost trends in EVs only going down with the cost of ICE vehicles rising dramatically.

Lastly, part of the infrastructure problem is not just charging stations but the ability of local grids to handle charging infrastructure. Their systems can be connected to the grid, but don’t require it.

Q: Government mandates/incentives for EVs slowing?
A: Not in Europe. The trend will take over in the US. It will have to. Will depend on the administration. But they are diversifying their revenue stream for that reason.

Q: Tesla vs Beam on fast charging?
A: First, most people don’t need fast, except on long trips. He thinks the majority of chargers will only need to be a medium speed as current owners charge at home or at work over a longer period of time.

Second, Beam doesn’t make chargers. They make the infrastructure that powers whatever charger you want to put into it. They are charger-agnostic.

Q: Are they being helped by the Infrastructure Bill?
A: Indirectly. There’s a trickle down effect from those who receive grants.

Q: What about disasters? You have chargers in California. How did they do with the recent atmospheric river rainfall?
A: Just fine. The ARC systems are designed to work in a flood of 9.5 ft and 160 mph winds. They have a system in the Caribbean that has already withstood 185 mph winds. Their CA units are just fine. P.S. EVs fare better in floods than ICE vehicles.

Q: What about places that don’t get a lot of sun? Can you operate?
A: Yes. It will still be cheaper than the alternative. Less sun means a smaller charge (fewer miles) for off-grid use, but the low cost compared to installed charging systems will still earn them business. And since their systems can be connected to the grid if needed, full charging is still available for less.


Q: Do you have an objective for deploying a certain number of units?
A: The TAM is every car parking space in the world. We hope to take a percentage of that. Conversations in DC have indicated that about 25% of charging there needs to be off-grid. They are really the only game in town for that.

Answer for a different question referenced the sales cycle being longer but the volume larger for the EV Standard (streetlight product).

Q: Do they have funding for growth? They have not used their line of credit. What circumstances would make them tap that.
A: There are institutions eager to fund whatever they need into the billions of dollars. So, yes, they can get whatever funding they need for growth. They would tap the line of credit if they got a very large order and needed to.

Q: What protection do they have from competitors?
A: Competitors? If anything, they are afraid of the lack of competition since competition makes everyone smarter. When that should come along, as it must, they will have the first-mover advantage.

Q: Will someone take them over?
A: “We get more attractive every day, even if we don’t get married.” His goal was value for shareholders. (My note: He did not seem averse to being acquired nor desperate for it.)

Q: Any threats to growth?
Biggest need is getting the right talent. The Amiga acquisition was a big help in that regard. He also named market sentiment as a threat because the business will be lumpy. That threat can be mitigated with enough diversification, which they are working on. “Fortune will favor the bulls.”

Q: What’s your moat?
A: Patents.


Q: What about recurring revenue? Is there any? (My note: This was the substance of my question. Clearly I wasn’t the only one asking.)
A: Correct that it does not exist now. Whatever the customer asks for, they get. Lots of that happening. Potential for recurring revenue in the future would be contracts for the maintenance and servicing for the EV Standard (the streetlight product) and licensing for networks of ARC systems. They are making plans to bring in additional streams.

Q: Will you be making more acquisitions?
A: Yes. They still have holes to plug in their offerings. They aim to diversify and if the right company comes along that can help them do that, acquisition is definitely on the table.

Q: Why aren’t they using debt for acquisitions? Why dilute shares?
A: Don’t want to be paying interest. They want to be first to the profitability finish line. Debt would be an obstacle to that. Being able use shares as currency is “one of the few benefits to being a public company.” We take advantage of that.

They have just 14M shares outstanding-very low float. No institutional investors are worried about them acquiring with stock. Larger institutions would actually like them to have a higher float. They are focused on share value. (My note: the lack of debt and low float was emphasized in several places.)

Q: Why didn’t Beam participate in the small-cap market rally at the end of 2023?
A: We’re not a small cap. We’re a micro cap. Look up “trends in micro caps” and compare that chart with ours.

Q: What is Sales & Marketing doing to diversify client base? Seems like all government contracts.
A: They had commercial contracts first. Covid wiped those out. Government came in. Commercial sales are now “roaring back.” They do not intend to rely on just one kind of client and work actively to diversify.

Q: (There were a number of questions about board members selling stock, using stock as compensation, why is C-Suite getting bonuses, wondering what incentives they were putting out to boost the stock price, stock deals, etc. These were countered with the reality of how it all works, the regulations that are in place, the need to retain good talent, and the checks and balances for making sure compensation is in-line with other similar companies. Wheatley pointed out that they are actually in the bottom 50% of companies for compensation.)

Session was recorded and should be available soon here.

My take overall: I thought the call was a good thing for them to do; but it also made plain that having analysts who cover the company/industry asking questions makes for more interesting and informative answers!

For me, the most helpful emphasis was that they are NOT a charging system. They are the infrastructure for charging systems and work with any/all chargers. I knew that, but have still drifted back and confused it in some of my discussions with others.

I think they have an incredible advantage and will do very well. I wish the CEO was more mission driven, and I wish he were more conversant with the tech. Maybe he is–there weren’t really tech-related questions. But true techies work that fascination into every conversation anyway. I’d like to know more about how they are innovating.

They seem to be innovating through acquisition, which is fine if they do it well. That seems to be the case so far and is not unlike a tiny Palo Alto in that regard (which has been a great performer for me). Wheatley is a strong advocate for the company, and I like that he stresses efficiency, discipline, and getting to profitability.

Happy to be in it for now, and am eager to see how it plays out. The opportunity seems both insanely large and obvious.

Long BEEM, 7.37% position at today’s close.


Thank you for the follow up on that question! Looks like they have their heads on straight, but I call his answer as more of a ‘story’ than I like. It’s kind of what I wondered, but then if their acquisitions lead to some form of reoccurring revenue…(say if the street lights could net meter and they make money whenever no one charging)…then I would get more interested.


I’m not trying to be facile, or rude, but isn’t this akin to saying, “We’re not a burger joint, we’re the infrastructure for burger joints.” So they’re a structure where charging can take place?? Can’t that be, sorta, anything?

The more important reason I’m not interested in this company is because of gross margins near (and historically below) zero. If you sell dollar bills for 90 cents, it’s not hard to generate revenue. Everyone will be a customer. Even Google.

I hope I’m wrong. Do you think this company is doing something special / hard to replicate? If they have a secret sauce, what is it?



Hmmm…I think it’s the equivalent of saying, “We build the infrastructure for gas stations, but we’re not a gas company. We’re neutral about which gas company uses what we build.”

To run with that analogy, now imagine that the new gas station infrastructure company can drive an entire station to a remote military base and, “in a matter of minutes, not months,” a single person can have it up and running with no digging or pouring concrete or grid connection. “No permitting, no construction, and no utility bill.”

Your car can still be charged by any company that you want. Your choice of charger will be pre-installed. They are just providing a fully-functioning station, powered by the sun, that is also fully portable.

Is your military base only temporary? You can pick up your charging station and take it with you to a new location. Yep, our station can be bought with its own trailer to move wherever it’s needed.

Would you like us to put our station in your parking lot? Guess what? You don’t even have to lose a single parking space. You can drive right up on it to charge your car. Company moving to a new location? You can take your station with you. It can charge up to six cars at a time and reach to twelve parking spaces.

You want a Tesla charger on yours? You got it. Rather have Blink? Or ChargePoint? Done. Beam installs your choice at the factory, drives it to your location, and it will be operational that same day, even if there’s no electrical grid within 50 miles.

This video is under 2 minutes and describes the advantages of the ARC product nicely.

The new acquisition that closed in Q4, now called Beam Europe, brings the technology and patents (and some early contracts) to have your car charged by parking under one of their streetlights.

When asked about their moat, the CEO answered with a single word. “Patents.” I can’t say how strong those are. In my initial thread @intjudo asked about patents and I provided a whole set of links. But evaluating patent strength is not my wheelhouse.

What I do know is that no one else seems to be doing EV charging via portable, solar stations right now, so even if another company can get around all the patents, BEEM will still have the first-mover advantage.

As for the gross margins, the claim on the call last night was that they were currently 10% (no longer negative) and that that would be moving higher in Q2 and the second half of the year as their price increases, scale, and efficiencies kick in. They don’t report until the end of March, so those numbers will show whether that claim is accurate.

It’s a micro-cap, so I understand why people might not be interested in a tiny company with very low margins. But the value proposition for the product seems abundantly clear to me–as well as to the large number of local and federal government authorities who are placing repeat orders.



Thanks for bringing attention to this company @JabbokRiver42!

Beem’s gross margins are expected to improve dramatically soon because of the acquistion. They acquired Amiga Doo (now called Beam Europe), and this company produces many of the necessary components in a vertical fashion, that Beem was previously outsourcing.

Normally I’d be skeptical of acquisitions, but this one seems excellent and the company has gone into excessive detail to explain why,

  • Amiga Doo was vertically integrated for the parts the need to produce
  • They own the real estate in Serbia for the factory so there’s no leasing/rent like they have in the US
  • Three weeks after acquiring the company, they are already able to produce the Arc product that Beem makes
  • There’s an enormous cross sell opportunity with the “Standard” product which is a solar power street light, they have a huge database of customers that are looking for solutions like Arc
  • There’s even more efficiences coming to the factory like a better highway being built nearby for faster shipping routes directly into Europe
  • They have aligned bonus incentives with the Amiga Doo team to encourage performance and the team stayed
  • The salaries they pay the Serbian workers are roughly 1/3rd of US ones, and the timezone change works well. US product managers send specs to the Serbian ones in the evening, and work is fully completed by the time the US workers arrive back in the morning
  • The factory itself is in a business friendly environment in Serbia and sounds like they may be getting some tax breaks
  • The price to acquire was 10M and it seems like a bargain

Having some experience with charging technology startups, I simply question the economics as it’s limited by Physics.

As an off grid enthusiast, with an EV, I’ve researched this in the past. If I arrive at my remote destination, how much charge over what period of time can I get from the sun, to enable me to get home? Several days.

The math falls apart and it becomes an expensive solution that adds little actual value for the cost of the infrastructure despite it sounding like the Great Green Solution.

I read above that the space required is small but you have to have some serious surface area for the panels to get the energy. I’ve seen parking lot shade screens built to hold panels in Arizona. Park all day and get a few percent gain in charge. Who is going to invest in that?

In fact, Tesla has modeled Solar Roofs on their cars and it’s not close to making economic sense.

For wide adoption, the value delivered (I.e. net energy) for the investment must be a win and I am highly skeptical that is possible given physics.

No doubt some public agencies will adopt it and some private enterprises seeking to Greenify, but wide adoption would require the unit economics to improve.

“We have patents”, I would counter with “laws of Physics”. Beware the snake oil salesman. This one stinks like a snake to me.


So, help me here, @MFChips. To non-physicist me, it sounds like you’re saying that physics does not allow for solar to be a viable alternative power source, period. Which doesn’t seem to be the reality.

Did the Tesla roof panels have a storage system, like Beam’s ARC systems do? Their first acquisition was a battery company. Do the info sheets on their website not make technical sense?

Do none of these current Beam Global customers understand physics? One would hope NASA does. It’s a long list. None of them can suss out a snake oil salesman? Even after going back for more units?

Not a lot of time for me today, but I’m having a hard time figuring out the difference between saying a solar EV charging unit can’t be effective “because physics” without also saying that all those putting solar power to use (with technology that is improving, and costs going down, almost by the minute) are wasting their time. Is the sun not also physics?



Sorry, but it seems to me that a lot of the criticism of this company comes from not having taken the trouble to learn anything about it. As I remember the US military (even the marines if I am remembering correctly), has been a large purchaser of their products because, as others have pointed out above, they can be mobile and produce electricity without being near any electrical grid, and tomorrow you can pick them up and move them somewhere else. I thought that the live presentation of the new European acquisition was very enlightening (it was in October, I believe, and the Beam CEO was euphoric). wpr101’s post above gives some of the info from that hour long tour of the new facility. Perhaps Jabbock River can provide a link to it.


Here’s the link to the video tour Saul mentioned of their new European facility–the acquisition that was Amiga and is now Beam Europe.

If you’d prefer to watch on YouTube, that link is here.



The reason for the low float is that they did a 1 for 50 reverse stock split in 2019. The share count has grown 10x in a decade.

This company has been around for a long time, but has changed its name from Envision Solar, so it’s a bit harder to track. While what they’re doing sounds nice, I suggest using to check out their company site back in time, as context. For example, this is from 2014:



Seems like they’ve had and have worked on these products for a long time.


Please note, by the way, that on the earlier thread I wrote:

I wasn’t saying don’t buy BEEM if you think it sounds like a good investment. I was saying this is a tiny company and don’t take a huge position. Their total volume yesterday, for example, was less than 100,000 shares. And those shares are only $7 per share, so we are talking about total volume trading for the day of only roughly $700,000. Just be careful.


For disclosure, I have a position but it’s less than 1.0% of my total active portfolio.


Relevant part of that investor video that @JabbokRiver42 on the margin increase they are looking to get starts at 29:30.

They are doing a live tour of the new Serbian facility they purchased. Here’s what Wheatley said,

In the United States we outsource all of this. It’s one of the largest costs contributors to the production of our products is sending them out to get sandblasted and to get painted. In this facility we will not have those outsourced costs. I’m certain that will we cut the cost of blasting and painting down to probably better than a third of what we are paying right now. That is a very significant contributor to our cost structure.

So you’ve heard me talking about improving our gross profits in the United States. We are cutting our costs in the United States. From day one starting here, our whole cost structure is going to be way lower and in a much larger market. For two reasons, just because it’s cheaper to operate in Serbia, but secondly because this company (Amiga Doo) will now own all this stuff, we don’t have to outsource, we don’t have to send it somebody else. They have skillsets and machinery to do it all in house.

I’m glad to see Desmond Wheatley going on tour and getting the word out about what their company does. Being in the microcap sector, and not seemingly having promotion from investment banks, this company has gotten hammered price wise in a way that does not seem to correlate properly.

Let’s look at the numbers and what the price of stock was when they reported these numbers.

There last three years of Q3 revenue have been 2M → 6.6M → 16.5M. So revenue has increased 725% in a two year period, and 149% in a one year period.

What did the stock price do over the same time?

When they reported $2M revenue the price per share was $26.54 and had just come down from an all time high of $73.78 back in December of 2020. When they reported 6.6M revenue, the price was $19.15 per share. And when they reported 16.5M of revenue in November 2023, the price was $5.72 a share!

This is why the CEO needs to get the word out, and has mentioned micro-caps in general are at 10 year lows.

Somehow this company got hyped up at the end of 2020 to reach $70+ a share back when they had about 1 million dollars of quarterly revenue, and now we are at $7 a share with 16.5M revenue and still growing.

Lastly about this specific conference that the original post is about, this interviewer Scott Gordon seems openly hostile to Wheatley towards the end with a line of absurd questioning towards the end that I have never seen any analyst do to any CEO like this before. This is why he is replying promptly with things like “We have patents” and other abrupt answers. To give you an idea of what this analyst was asking we have,

  • The board of directors sold shares of stock several quarters ago, why have they not replenished these sales with the stock trading at all time lows?
  • Stock was sold last July for a discounted price. Why was it not sold at a premium like previously discussed?
  • When stock was sold via Maxim, why did management choose not to tell the investment bank to contact key large investors to be taken over the wall so they participate in the offerings? Institutional investors are key to defending to supporting the stock when it drops, especially ones that are big believers in the technology.
  • Why did management choose to not tell the investment bank to contact key large investors?
  • Does management have a true handle on the cap table and where the stock is being held?
  • Management brought cash on the balance sheet from selling stock at a discount in June. As a result, management appears to be disincentivized to engage in supporting higher stock prices. Now that the money is on the balance sheet, what incentive does management have to promote a higher stock price?
  • Why are cash bonuses being awarded to C-suite management all the while long term shareholders continue to see consistent declines in stock and face dilution events to the stock?
  • What is Beam sales and marketing doing to diversify its customer base? Being so heavily reliant on the massively indebted governments as your only key clients is very dangerous.

This analyst literally seems to be asking why did you not have the investment banks pump your stock price by advertising to institutional investors. And not just one question like this, he seems oblivious to how the stock market works in general. Having “massively indebted governments” as customers being very dangerous is a twisted take by analyst.


I’ll just add to @wpr101 's comment about the quality of the questions that this call was open to any investor. There may well have been actual analysts asking questions, but they were all anonymous as presented and any random person could, and was actively encouraged in the release about it to submit a question. Random, non-analyst person me submitted a question and had it answered.

So, there were lots of questions from people who appeared not to know how public companies work. This was not a typical analyst-based call. It could well have been a series of questions on Reddit.

Like @wpr101 , I give props to Wheatley for doing it, and I don’t ding him for abrupt answers to clueless questions. Those come with the territory of doing an AMA session for any investor who can send an email.



A Tesla automobile is a giant battery on wheels. Tesla is probably the foremost battery technology company in the world. Not too far behind in the manufacture of solar panels. Plenty of companies have looked at EV versions of RV trailers that are covered in solar panels on top etc. The physics limit how much energy can be produced and stored. And that then plays out in the economics.

A single solar panel produces about 2kWh of energy per sunny day.
A configuration of 9 panels can produce 18kWh per sunny day (this is liberal).
The most popular EV by far is a Tesla model Y, long range, which has a battery of 75kWh. So it can produce enough energy to provide 25% charge to a Tesla Model Y.
Which I’d argue is plenty of many applications, but at what cost? Nearly all Tesla drivers charge overnight in their garage.

The cost of Solar has driven down but the cost saving have decelerated the last several years as tax incentives have started to abate. Battery future cost models are highly debated. The structure shown above is an expensive structure designed to pass wind-load requirements. This looks like a very expensive solution to build.

A grid-tied solution such as Freewire’s accomplishes the same without the expense of the solar, and allows a full charge in a very short time. You could do multiple cars per work day, and so perhaps you charge 4-8 cars in a day at the same rate as this solar solution. The unit economics can thus justify digging up the parking lot to run wire.

I automatically get skeptical when told “but patents”. The tech world is littered with companies awarded patents they claimed would transform them, before the crash and burn. I would be very surprised to learn that they have some sort of breakthru technology edge.

And lastly, I will note that when I warned people about TJ Rodgers during the Enovix hype I got similar responses but later several thank you notes. Same happened with Aehr. Some microcaps can go to 100x, I just don’t see any breakthru technology here, or really any novel ideas beyond what I’ve seen from many back-country camping enthusiasts. I’m a strong advocate of solar power and would like to see subsidies continue so we can rid ourselves of carbon fuels. I’m a Tesla owner and huge EV advocate. But I see this product as an expensive niche product with limited applications beyond remote applications (military, oil fields, mining, …) and Government entities making green statements at any cost.


Not supporting or rejecting BEEM, but just putting some numbers together. BEEM states their unit has a generating capability of 16 kw-hr/day (not sure how many hours of full sun went into the calculation). A Tesla consumes about 300 w-hr/mile. This suggests the BEEM unit will support something over 50 miles of driving per day. Practical for a home owner, but seemingly insufficient for a commercial installation.


I looked at the info sheet on their ARC2020 on BEAM website. It says their unit will produce 4.4 kilowatts (4.4kW). I assume this is under ideal conditions, meaning sunny day, the unit facing the sun and CLEAN (not dusty like everywhere in Afghanistan). IMO, it makes sense to scale down at least half for non-ideal.

Assume a Tesla battery charges to 75 kWh.

75 kWh divided by 4.4 kW equals 17 hours to charge under ideal conditions.
How long is the sun up where you are? Longer in summer, less in winter. How clean are your panels? Do you have water to rinse and squeegee? If the thing has a tracker that centers focus on the sun through the day, you may get a full charge in 1.5 to 2 days under ideal conditions when there are day/night transitions. 3-4 days non-ideal conditions.

An average home uses ~28.8 kWh per day (US gov energy info administration).
These things may work well for deployment when your soldiers/sailors are camped in not-too-hostile conditions and need power for lights, computers, light cooking etc. A bunch of them for a field hospital maybe. Kinda pricey I would imagine. And if the alternative is gas generators, well you need the gas around anyway for those non-battery military vehicles.

It may be that the military is buying these to try them out and keep the technology alive while it matures. It seems like an expensive replacement for generators IF you already have petrol fuel. But the instant setup and operation is worth something.


It looks to me with less than 20m in quarterly sales and roughly 4m in quarterly OpEx, that even a 20% gross margin would only result in break-even for this company.

I mention this as a word of caution. There is so much risk here that this company just won’t be able to produce these things cheaply enough to be profitable. Of course there’s demand – there’s a need. But the fact that this obvious demand hasn’t been met, years ago, maybe by Tesla themselves, seems to indicate to me that it’s just a tough business to be profitable in.

Just my $0.02. I will be happy to be very wrong here, but I really think it would be wise to heed Saul’s advice (from a while back) to keep this a small position, if you must hold it.



We will see on profitability. The claim they have made is that they will turn profitable this year.

In the video tour of their new facility in Serbia (that Saul has referenced and I’ve linked before), Wheatley stresses that having bought not just the company but their entire manufacturing plant and acreage will be a huge boost to profitability.

Most of what that new plant manufactures has had to be outsourced to third parties from their San Diego facility. Now they can make almost all of it in-house, which he predicts will be a game changer for their margins and ability to turn a profit more quickly.

They don’t have a lease, mortgage, or other debt; although they have lines of credit available and the CEO claims they have many eager to fund expansion if needed.

Of course they have to prove it.

I am, admittedly, poor at keeping positions small!



@JabbokRiver42 Did you read @ibuildthings note above? The math with respect to charge rate just doesn’t add up for this things. Even if he’s off by 50% (unlikely), it still looks terrible.

OK, they might garner some sales from a military unit somewhere. Hopefully, one of our branches or at least an ally - which begs the question, do you know if they are constrained by export controls? One would expect that they are, but if not, does that mean our government doesn’t see this equipment providing a tactical advantage on the battlefield?

I have no position in Beam and I intend to keep it that way, but for your benefit, I hope I’m wrong . . .