Solid Power Stock

John Van Scoter from Solid Power is going to make a few slides, and we'll do some talk and hopefully, some more people come in.

Well, good morning, everyone, and thank you, Bill and JP Morgan for this opportunity. I'll just briefly touch on a few slides and not the whole deck that is available on our web page. But to introduce Solid Power and why we're so compelling to the industry, we have a leading position relative to sulfide electrolytes for all solid-state batteries. We've been working on this for over 15 years, have a very unique position relative to performance, relative to a wet process that scales and ultimately to the lowest cost. We are pursuing a capital-light business model, which has many, many advantages. We will not compete directly with Tier 1 battery manufacturers. And we have a very strong balance sheet now with over $400 million of cash, cash equivalents as of the close of last quarter.

As I mentioned, we've got a very differentiated manufacturing profile, very scalable, high yield and tolerates lower dry room burden conditions. And I think that it's one of the main attractions for our competitors moving forward. We also have a very unique capability relative to feedback loop.

In May of last year, BMW announced an all solid-state module based on our cells that we produced, 60-amp hour EV cells and integrated that into an i7 and drove it around Munich for a number of months to demonstrate real-world conditions. But that feedback loop, we continue to have in-house, so we can validate changes and improvements to electrolyte at the cell level, which is quite unique.

And then we've got an excellent global partner network with BMW SK On and most recently with Samsung SDI. Skip ahead to why solid-state batteries. This one right here. So what you see pictured there is actually the electrolyte in glass jars. That's what it looks like. And then actually at the microscopic level, you see it there pictured the crystalline structure. This will drive the next level of performance for batteries in energy density, in battery life and charging speed as well as safety. Again, we've got a very unique position with regard to that with 3 generations of electrolyte now available for our customers.

The market 5 years ago was still questioning how to do all solid-state batteries. There's really 3 ways you can do it with polymers, with oxides and with sulfides. We've been a long pioneer and evangelist of the sulfides because of their performance. They have the absolute best ionic connectivity and because of their manufacturability, very, very important, and their low cost. You see pictured on the right, a lot of names, all of which have sulfides now on their road map. So it's a strong validation of what Solid Power has been evangelizing and pioneering for over a decade.

In terms of why Solid Power itself, I touched on some of this already, but because we have been in the market and driving innovation for over a decade, we have one of the largest data sets, both in terms of electrolyte as well as cells. We're using that and harvesting that now using AI and machine learning to drive continued innovation as well as improvements in our manufacturing process. We have set up a pre-pilot electrolyte innovation center right next to our pilot line. We're using that at a small scale to rapidly make improvements and iterations and then migrate those into the pilot line. We did that most recently with Samsung SDI and BMW on the 3-way collaboration, did some major improvements on our processes as a result of that rapid iteration. I've already mentioned the feedback loop between cell and electrolyte as well as the manufacturing scalability of our process. Again, what makes us unique is we have a mature wet process at the pilot level compared to our competitors using a dry process.

And with our partner network, we've been working closely with BMW for over 9 years now, SK On for over 5 years and for Samsung SDI over a year. So on the left, you see where we're active today. We're migrating from a technology licensing collaboration, which is where our revenues have come from so far to electrolyte supply at the pilot level. And then we're building on the right-hand side, a partnership with a world-class partner in Korea to do the next level of scale up and then continue to advance our partnerships overall. We continue to primarily be focused in the EV segment, but we are getting interest in other areas like robotics, humanoids, mining and aviation and defense.

So we see a lot of synergies from the EV market into those spaces, but we'll be pursuing the same model there that we have in EV, where we'll be doing proof-of-concept and OEM partnership development and then introducing a Tier 1 battery manufacturer for the volume productions.

And lastly, this is our scale up in batteries. It is all about scale up and solving problems as you go to the larger and larger capacities. And so right now, today, we have a 30 metric ton facility in Colorado. That's a batch process. We're in the final stages of commissioning the continuous flow line there in Colorado on Phase 2. That will get us up to 75 metric tons in the Colorado facility. And then as I said, we're in the process of striking a joint venture partnership with a large conglomerate in Korea to do the next level of scale up, probably around 500 metric tons with a vision to go upwards of 20,000 metric tons with that same partner over the next 3 to 5 years.

So hopefully, it gives you an introduction to the company and where we're focused, why we're differentiated and where we're headed from.

Thanks, John. Feel free to stay there. We can just chat here, certainly can keep this open. But -- so we've hosted the company here a few years. And I think when you look back, the interest in the EV space has kind of ebbed and flowed and mainly not been as exciting lately. But solid state still moves forward and is actually now closer to realization. But I guess what drove the industry towards this solid state to begin with? And where do you think like Solid Power can create, you're in the material space, but where is the most value that can be created, whether it be selling materials, know-how for the production for your customers, qualification support or some sort of licensing or tech transfer agreement?

So I think if you look at the overall industry, traditional liquid electrolyte-based lithium ion batteries are asmetotically hitting their peak in terms of performance. And so the industry needs higher-performing batteries to address things like range anxiety, charge anxiety, those sort of things. And so all solid-state batteries really are unique technology to do that.

So energy density, cycle life, safety and then ultimately, cost at the system level, all we believe will be advantages of all solid-state batteries. Those are the pain points, I think, that SSPs are really addressing. In terms of what we bring to the party, we do bring a unique process capability in terms of that wet process for electrolytes in terms of the highest connectivity for the performance of the electrolyte. And then our intention is to be the absolute low-cost provider to the marketplace.

Yes. So there's been various next-gen approaches discussed, silicon anodes being one that's kind of being implemented, lithium metal, another sort of, I guess, advanced electrolytes. What are the trade-offs you see? And I guess, what is the right commercial time line that we should be thinking of for the various technologies? I mean, some like open of silicon anodes is already happening, but any sort of context there?

Well, I think those technologies you mentioned are uniquely enabled by a sulfide-based all solid-state battery. High-purity silicon anodes perform best in a sulfide all solid-state battery architecture in terms of energy density and performance.

Same thing for lithium anodes or anodelyst designs. Those are also uniquely enabled in sulfide electrolyte systems. So I think that we have, again, a unique position as those technologies mature and are introduced to offer higher and higher performance as a result of adoption of those.

In terms of time frame, we have to be ahead of the market. A lot of people are talking about 2029, 2030, early 2030s. But as a material provider, we have to be there in advance. We have to be qualified in advance so that they can be considered to be qualified for those SOPs. So we intend to have this joint venture partnership announced this year that will put us in a position to do the design and the construction of that next year to be in a position to ship up to 500 metric tons to Korean customers and other customers around the world in 2028, which would enable 2029, 2030 time frames for SOPs for small fleets.

So beyond that, we again envision that same partnership to go up much larger. The concept is a shell factory, and we would drop in 2,000 metric ton modules as the demand materializes going forward for a total capacity of 20,000 metric tons over time.

I'll probably get the manufacturing partnerships in a bit. But I guess you spoke to some of the advantages, but what would you say the key areas to overcome maybe not so much manufacturing, but from like a technical hurdle? Or is there really -- is that really not the case? It's more of a scaling matter at this stage?

From an electrolyte standpoint, it's scaling. But the cell designs themselves are still maturing. So to get to the target energy densities and cycle life, for instance, and safety at an EV size cell, I think, are still technical challenges that the Tier 1 battery manufacturers are grappling with.

We know that because of our work most recently with Samsung SDI. It was a tremendous collaboration. We learned a tremendous amount. They challenged us, but we could tell that their designs are still evolving to get to those target levels that have been demonstrated at small scale, but not at large EV size cells.

I mean, obviously, EV would be the kind of focus of this conference, but I think you've also mentioned interest from other areas like robotics, things like energy density seem obvious for EVs, but how should we think about the fit of these other markets versus EV? And I think auto is well known as having very long qualification time lines. What, if anything, would be different from a qual time frame or system level constraints for other markets?

What we like about the humanoid market is that a lot of the same requirements from the EV market are the same in the humanoid space from what we see so far. The pack size will be smaller, but energy density, cycle life and safety are really important to a lot of the humanoid market from the interactions we've had with customers. The difference is in duty cycle. And so that's the one thing that we still have to prove out, I think, with the Tier 1 battery manufacturers is the duty cycle associated with the expectations in humanoid. But otherwise, there's a tremendous amount of crossover. And we do think that the qualification cycles can be compared to EV. So it's not as big a market, but I think in terms of a proof point, in terms of an application that ASSPs really offer a differentiation on, it's very attractive.

I guess besides robotics and of course, EVs, what's the level of interest you see from other markets? Like you have large markets like data centers, you have critical markets like aerospace and defense. Like what would you need to see to prioritize these in the more structured relationships like you have with the 2 Korean entities?

Actually, mining, we think, is more near term. We have seen some interest in those areas that you mentioned, particularly in aerospace and defense. But those are crowded fields, and they're not ultimately a huge market from what we can see right now. I mean there's a lot of tension on defense right now with what's going on in the world for obvious reasons. But we think actually mining and a lot of the same attributes in terms of safety, electrification, et cetera, as the EV market could be very, very interesting.

And that's the same sort of just at a much larger scale for EVs, just the energy density.

That's right. That's right.

Okay. I guess coming back to manufacturing and commercialization, you had some good slides there. But I guess, where are you on this kind of continuous manufacturing pilot line today? And what are the kind of the key next gates, whether it be equipment acceptance, plant validation, start-up? trying to get a sense for where we are in the ramp to steady-state output.

So we started our continuous project based on a DOE grant we received in 2024, $50 million. We have been in the design and planning phases of that since then. We just in the second quarter, received all of the equipment at our location in Colorado for that and are in the process of completing the construction and utilities interconnect for all of the unit processes that are in that process with the expectation we'll be commissioning that in the fourth quarter of this year, which will allow us to start production in the first quarter of '27.

So we are on plan according to what we set out in 2024. We actually are under budget, which is a nice place to be. It is after customer support, it's the #1 project at the company right now in terms of execution and completion. But I look at it every month, if not more frequent, depending on what's going on in the project. There's a lot of weekend work going on right now to maintain production with our current line and not disrupt that while still complete the construction. But it's all planned out very well, and it's going well. I also would add that we've had no safety instances associated with that project life to date. And that's a big step for going into a brownfield facility, continuing to operate manufacturing for our existing relationships and then adding that capability into the facility.

It feels like you get asked this question on every earnings call, why not why not expand in the U.S.? And I guess, why is Korea the right location? Maybe you can ask that like so why is that the right location for the next step in commercial sort of scale production? And how do you think about the supply chain or geopolitical considerations when choosing partners? And we'll get into your partnerships in more detail.

Yes. Korea is just a unique battery ecosystem. You've got -- of course, the OEMs are there. You've got world-class Tier 1 manufacturer -- battery manufacturers that are there. You have a government that supports the battery industry very, very aggressively. You have national labs that you can collaborate with. You have just engineers, scientists, chemists, all that are very battery literate. You have supply chain partners for the raw materials that are very, very sophisticated and mature.

So that's why we chose Korea. It also is a place where we believe we can protect our intellectual property uniquely. And so from our standpoint, the demand is in Asia. Korea is uniquely positioned. Also, the geopolitical relationship between U.S. companies and Korean companies is strong compared to other options, if you will, from our perspective. So it's a good place to start. I believe that it will materialize in the U.S. at some point, but it's just not there today. So we're starting in Korea with an intention to come to the U.S. as soon as that demand materializes.

Tying back to auto. I think in my past sort of career, ISO 9000, 9001 have been -- those are kind of critical and pretty time consuming. But what does the certification change in practice for customers or for internal execution?

Yes. So we undertook this last year. We did complete the Stage 1 audit for ISO 9001 in the second quarter. We intend to have the Stage 2 completed in the third quarter as we speak with a certification by the end of the year. All indications are that we're on track to do that.

Now what it does for the customer is it gives them a level of confidence that we have the process controls, that we have the management of change controls, that we have the documentation and we have the repeatability so that they can make decisions to use our material and have confidence that it will not be a supply risk to them.

From an internal standpoint, we get tremendous efficiencies from it. We identify processes that we need to improve. We identify process owners, so there's ownership. We have regular reviews at the management level to continue to drive to consistent output for our factories. It is a stepping stone for any commercialization. I'm really pleased with where we are. It also will be key for this joint venture partnership in Korea. It's absolute table stakes to be able to be in a position with that certification to enter into a joint venture partnership like we're contemplating.

Yes. I just sort of last question. So I think I've talked about this in the past. Moving to, I guess, a continuous process makes a ton of sense, can limit maybe some lot-to-lot consistency of batch, but it feels like it also might limit your ability to make custom or change lines. But I guess how should investors think about the quality control aspects of the specs that matter most?

So the way we designed the continuous flow is we have unit processes now that are much more controllable compared to the batch process. So the type of equipments we're using, the type of processes that we have developed are much -- have much tighter control limits, much more gauge R&R. All those kind of basic manufacturing capabilities are much tighter with the continuous flow process.

The reason we know that is that we have actually done at a very small scale, a pre-pilot scale, use of each one of those new equipments in our electrolyte innovation center. And we've been developing the processes and doing the design of experiments and running the gauge R&Rs on those smaller equipments. The same manufacturers will scale up or have scaled up, and that's what we are installing right now in the continuous flow pilot line. So it gives us great confidence that we've demonstrated at a smaller scale, same manufacturers for the equipment at a larger scale and the same -- largely the same processes that we will be able to control much tighter our lot to lot and our output for the continuous flow line.

Let's move to some of the partnerships. So on the joint evaluation with BMW and Samsung, what are the next steps investors should be looking for, I guess, over the next 6, 12, 18 months?

We expect with the natural closing of the Phase 1, which is very productive from all party standpoint, but certainly from our standpoint, we'll migrate to separate agreements with the 2 entities to take the next phase of collaboration. We've got a long-standing relationship with BMW. They're going through some changes internally. We've got now a standing relationship with SDI. They've got some new requirements for things outside of EV. And so what you can expect is a continuation, but an evolution of our collaborations with those parties individually.

Maybe on a similar vein, SK On was kind of a -- is and was kind of a key partner as well. You've completed the line installation agreement and received the milestone payment. What -- I guess, for any like next steps, what does success look like there?

So we're in early stages of discussion to answer that question, Bill. It's really premature to say where that's going to land. But it's clear that they need our continued support to run their line. We did hand it off and that was successful, as you said. But now they've gone through a lot of changes as well. And we're talking about supporting them in running that line as we go forward to mature their design.

So I kind of talked about it before, but given sort of uneven EV demand backdrop, especially maybe in the U.S. and maybe everywhere ex China, although Europe appears to be better. Where are OEMs focused on? And I guess, are you seeing any changes in other sort of opportunities within the space?

Well, we talked about the humanoids. I think that's probably the most significant one that we see right now.

But even in the EV space, any -- Ford was an already partner, but is there other sort of opportunities? Because I think you've also been doing sampling over time. Is that still continuing?

Yes. We've got a lot of sampling going on every week and a lot of repeat sampling. A lot of people are maturing their cell designs, and it's taking time. But we're able to customize our electrolyte characteristics much more rapidly than other competitors. And we've been doing that in responding to the continued sampling. We do hope to be in a position to announce some more partnerships like we have announced with BMW and so forth moving forward. I'm not in a position to add any more color on that than that at this point. But we've been definitely sampling with some good success in terms of developments with multiple EV OEMs.

But in the meantime, it sounds like robotics has sort of taken on a more urgent approach.

I think that's a fair statement.

Okay. I want to kind of come back to the business model a bit -- and you pointed out some various means in the model. But how should we think about the model over time between electrolyte supply, collaboration revenue, licensing? How should investors view this over the longer term as being sort of the primary driver or drivers?

Collaboration revenue will be going down, has gone down, will continue to go down and electrolyte revenue will go up. So we're in a transition right now because we've had some very nice revenue streams from the collaboration. It will probably take us 1 to 2 years to go through that transition. It depends on how the demand unfolds for these early SOPs for robotics and for EVs.

What about licensing?

Don't expect that's going to be a big part of our revenue profile moving forward. And that's different than the past. In the past, we thought that was going to be a much higher percentage. But I think given our shift to this capital-light business model and focus on electrolytes away from cell manufacturing, we really transitioned a lot of that royalty revenue into electrolyte revenues.

I alluded to earlier with the batch or the continuous process, but continuous. But I guess, when you think about supporting a broader partner network, how do you balance customization versus standardization in the electrolyte formulations as you scale?

So a couple of years ago, when I asked that question, I'd say, look, we've got a large, diverse set of customer requirements. So there'll be a lot of customization. We still do see some of that. But for the larger players that we're engaged with, we're seeing a more centralized common set of requirements that are emerging. And that's just been literally in the last 6 months.

So what we plan to continue to offer is based on all that learning, some standard product offerings that represents addressing these convergence while maintaining the ability to customize for the folks that are still experimenting with cell designs.

Maybe coming to kind of capital allocation. The team has a good liquidity position. How are you prioritizing capital allocation across the continuous line, the Korea or other JV activities and commercial build-out?

Well, we've really had the continuous line as a high priority, but work that we'll do in the second half year, that will go down. The capital requirements on that will go down. But the capital requirements to support the joint venture in Korea will go up. So we'll actually be shifting from the continuous flow capital to JV capital as we go through the next year. And then we do -- I intend to build out the commercialization team much stronger than we've had in the past given the progress we've made on the technical fronts.

Now is the time to go ahead and grow our business development team and explore these other markets more aggressively. And I intend to do that in the coming 6 to 12 months. So that will be coming up higher than the past as well in terms of capital allocation.

If we think about the operating model, assuming electrolyte supply is a long-term model, what does the margin structure look like? And does that vary between automotive versus maybe some of the newer microbotics?

Yes. Certainly, other markets beyond EV seem to be less price sensitive than EV. But we have a cost road map through the scaling to effectively compete with very nice margins in the EV space, but it all comes back to scale. And so that's why this JV partnership is so important. It's why getting to these larger and larger module capabilities is 3 to 5 years.

And I guess maybe just sort of wrapping up, what are the key catalysts for investors to look for maybe more broadly in the battery space, but maybe obviously for you more specifically for Solid Power.

So in the broader market, I think continued demonstrations in vehicles and in these other markets like humanoids is really, really important. I think independent verification of performance is really crucial to the industry for credibility as we go forward in these other applications. And then, of course, hitting scale milestones is crucial.

From our standpoint of Solid Power, specifically, I think, measure us by the completion of this continuous flow project in Colorado by the execution of this JV partnership in Korea, by completion of the ISO 9001 certification and then additional partnerships as we go forward, not dissimilar to what we've done with BMW in the past.

Great. Well, let's -- to wrap up a few minutes for kind of wrapped up my questions, but I appreciate your time here this morning, and good luck. We look forward to following the future. Thanks for sharing that.

Thank you, Bill.

Thanks.

Thank you. second quarter 2026 earnings conference call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. If you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star then 1 on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, please press star then 2. note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Charlie Van Goethe in Vesta Relations.

Please go ahead.

Thank you, Operator. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I'm joined on today's call by Solid Power's President and Chief Executive Officer, John VanSkoder, and Chief Financial Officer, Linda Heller. A copy of today's earnings release is available on the Investor Relations section of Solid Power's website, www.solidpowerbattery.com. I'd like to remind you that parts of our discussion today will include forward-looking statements as defined by U.S. Securities Laws. These forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. Acceptance otherwise required by applicable law, solid power disclaims any duty to update any forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances. For a discussion of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in today's forward-looking statements, please see Solid Power's most recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which can be found on the company's website at www.solidpowerbattery.com.

With that, let me turn it over to John Banskoder. Thank you, Charlie, and thank you all for joining us today.

We delivered another quarter of strong execution, advancing key strategic initiatives, and reinforcing our position as a leader in solid-state battery materials. During the quarter, we improved the performance of our electrolyte through work under the Joint Evaluation Agreement with Samsung SDI and BMW, while providing electrolyte shipments to support their development activities. Based on performance and cost, we are optimistic about continuing to work with Samsung SDI for potential use of our electrolyte in EVs and other potential applications of ASSB technologies. We remain committed to supporting our partners as they advance towards commercialization. Turning to our electrolyte manufacturing roadmap, we continued to advance discussions with prospective joint venture partners for commercial-scale electrolyte production in South Korea. Korea remains one of the most active markets for all solid-state battery development, and We believe a partnership with an industry-leading company would accelerate market adoption. while providing manufacturing scale and market access. We're pleased with the progress of these discussions and believe they reflect growing industry interest in our technology and commercialization strategy.

Based on the progress we've made to date, we remain on track and expect to announce a joint venture by the end of the year. Execution of our continuous manufacturing pilot line remains on schedule and represents one of the most important milestones in our commercialization journey. During the quarter, we advanced installation of major process equipment, piping and electrical infrastructure and are preparing for equipment acceptance testing, which remains on track for completion in the third quarter. We continue to expect plant validation and operational start-up in the fourth quarter. This pilot line is designed to demonstrate the scalability and efficiency of our proprietary wet process technology and positions us in the transition from batch to continuous production, an important step towards commercial scale manufacturing. Operational excellence remains a core priority as we prepare for commercial readiness. During the quarter, we successfully completed Stage 1 of our ISO 9001 certification process and remain on track to complete the Stage 2 audit in the third quarter, with certification expected by year-end.

Achieving ISO 9001 certification will further enhance our quality systems, strengthen customer confidence, and support the commercial readiness of our electrolyte business. Finally, we successfully completed the Line Installation Agreement with SKON and received the associated milestone payment during the quarter. This accomplishment represents another successful milestone in our collaboration and highlights our ability to execute key customer commitments while supporting the advancement of next generation battery technologies. We're currently negotiating with SKON regarding a new collaboration agreement, which we believe underscores the growing demand for our technology and reflects our continued commitment to expanding strategic partnerships that drive long-term value. Overall, we are pleased with the progress achieved during the quarter. We continue to execute against our commercialization roadmap across our customer programs, manufacturing scale-up initiatives, strategic partnership discussions, and operational readiness efforts. We believe the momentum we are building today positions Solid Power to capitalize on the significant opportunities emerging within the all solid state battery market and create long-term value for our shareholders.

With that, I'll turn it over to Linda to review our financial results and provide an update on our financial discipline goal. Linda?.

Thank you, John. Year to date revenue totals $2.8 million reflecting our ongoing progress under the U.S. Department of Energy Assistance Agreement and revenue from our collaboration agreements with SK ON. During the second quarter of 2026, our revenue was negative $300,000. Current quarter revenue was impacted by a reversal of revenue from the first quarter of $1.2 million, driven by a change in our assumptions within certain milestone payments connected to our SKON research and development license agreement. As we continue advancing our commercialization initiatives, operating expenses were $30 million during the second quarter, compared to $29.4 million in the first quarter of 2026. Expenses remained well controlled and are generally consistent quarter over quarter, despite continued investments in technology development, customer programs, and manufacturing scale-up activities. Operating loss for the quarter was $30.3 million, and net loss was $23.8 million, or 11 cents per share, reflecting our continued investment in long-term growth opportunities and commercialization readiness.

Capital expenditures totaled $6.3 million during the quarter, primarily related to construction of our new continuous electrolyte production pilot line. This strategic investment remains an important milestone in our manufacturing roadmap and is expected to play a key role in demonstrating our scalable, commercial-ready production capabilities. Turning to our balance sheet and liquidity, Solid Power's financial position remains a significant strength. We ended the quarter with total liquidity of $419.3 million, providing substantial financial flexibility and significant runway to execute our strategic priorities. In addition, contract assets and accounts receivable totaled $3.2 million, total current liabilities were $17.2 million, and we continue to have no debt, reflecting a healthy balance sheet and a strong liquidity profile. Overall, we remain focused on disciplined capital allocation while continuing to invest in strategic initiatives that support long-term growth. We believe our strong balance sheet provides financial capability to execute our commercialization strategy and support our customers' development programs.

I will now turn the call back to John. Thank you, Linda. In closing, I want to thank our employees, customers, partners, and shareholders for their continued support and confidence in Solid Power. The progress we've achieved this quarter reflects the strength of our team, the value of our technology, and our disciplined focus on execution. As we look ahead, we are entering an important phase of our commercialization journey. With strong customer and partner engagement, continued advancement of our manufacturing capabilities. robust balance sheet and growing commercial opportunities. We believe Solid Power is well positioned to deliver meaningful milestones and create long-term value. While there is still important work ahead, we are encouraged by the momentum we are building and remain confident in our ability to execute against our strategy and advance the adoption of all solid-state battery technology.

Thank you for your time today. We look forward to updating you on our continued progress in the quarters ahead.

We will now take your questions. Operator? We will now begin the question and answer session. If you ask a question, you may press star then 1 on your telephone keypad. If you were using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. The first question comes from Jake Sikelski with Alliance Global Partners.

Go ahead. Hi, John and Linda. Thanks for taking my question. So just starting with the continuous line, are there any major items that you're still waiting on delivery of and how should we think about the ramp up.

there to capacity in the coming quarters. Good to hear from you, Jay. Thank you for your question. We do not have any major equipment outstanding. The last major piece was installed. It's the rotary kiln. That was done in the May timeframe. So, So all equipment is in-house and in the process of being commissioned or hooked up, I should say. And then commissioning, as we have indicated, will start in the fourth quarter to be completed by the end of the year.

The capacity for that one line is 45 metric tons once it is fully commissioned, and we expect to output from that line in the first quarter of next year.

Okay, that's helpful. In switching gears to the ISO certification, you touched on it earlier. Can you just provide some color on the progress here and maybe the specific steps or milestones you need to reach?.

by year end to kind of achieve that target for phase two? Sure. We started preparing for this audit beginning of last year, believe it or not, and the team assembled all of the outstanding specifications, work processes, and so forth that we needed to put in place in time for the stage one audit. reported we completed that one day audit in the quarter it was very successful there are no major findings there's some minor things that we're following up on and we're getting ready for in the middle of this month the stage two which is a much more intense audit it's a three-day audit and we'll have all of the subject matter experts and process owners that will be available those three days with the auditor it's quite intense and But we're getting ready for that. And because there are no major findings in the stage one, we feel quite confident that anything that is called out in that stage two, that we will have time before the end of the year to complete those items, report those back to the auditor, and get the certification.

Understood. Okay. And then just lastly, you know, on the new collaboration agreement that you're exploring with SK on, to the extent you're able to, are you able to provide any details on, you know, what the framework of a new collaboration agreement might look like at this stage, or is it a bit too early there?.

Yes, Jake, I'm sorry. I wish I could report out more. I really can't right now. It's still early stages. So, I think next quarter we'll be able to give you some more color on that. And certainly by the time we get the agreement in place, we'll be able to give you details on that. But right now, it's really in the very early stages of discussions.

Fair enough. I figured I'd try. I'll hop back into you. Thanks again. Thanks, Jay. Thank you.

The next question comes from Samir Joshi with HC Wainwright. Please go ahead.

Hey, good afternoon, John, Linda, Charlie. Thanks for taking my questions. Good afternoon. Hey, good afternoon. On the joint evaluation agreements with Samsung, STI and BMW, are there any new agreements next steps that we should expect in this year and then in the future, you can just lay out what we should be looking out for would be helpful.

Yes, and as reported, Samir, we expect that the original Phase 1 contract will expire at the end of September. that we will continue to collaborate with both parties as we go forward. We are in the process of discussing what that will look like right now with both parties, but we expect, based on the significant performance enhancements, quality enhancements that we achieved in Phase 1, along with the long-term cost roadmap that we have with our WEP process, that we'll find a way to continue. to collaborate and to work with both Samsung SDI and BMW on an ongoing basis.

Okay, thanks. And then on the electrolyte production partnership that you're looking for in the Republic of Is there, and you have indicated that you would achieve it by the end of the year. What gives you confidence? Like if you could give us, provide some color, how we can get that confidence as well.

Yes, we have three parties that we've been actively discussing with for some time. All signs from all three of them remain positive. One of them we've advanced, though, quite far along with the draft term sheet, actually, that is in discussion right now with one of the parties. So that's what gives us the confidence that we'll have something done here in the short term and certainly by the end of the year.

at the end of the year. Sounds really good, thanks. And then this last one, we understand the reversal of certain revenues because of the revenues Was there any direct costs also that were associated with these that were reversed?.

and that are reflected in the income statement? No, the revenue under these agreements is recognized over the contractual term of all three agreements in a revenue recognition model. adjustment that we made is non-cash. It doesn't represent any sort of obligation or a cash-out flow or any cost related to it.

Got it. Thanks for that clarification. I will step back into it. Thanks.

Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Colin Rush with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Thanks so much guys. Could you talk a little bit about how you're tracking performance of the material and cells as you move forward with these arrangements and what that can do for your cost profile?.

Sure, sure. Good to hear from you, Colin. Yes, as I think you know quite well, we're still in the early stages of cell design. Our customers, our continuing to evolve their cell designs, their chemistries, their binders, their solvents. And so a lot of the work that has been done is around improving our performance in their chemistries, number one. Number two, we focus very heavily on quality, so lot to lot consistency, and the tightness of certain specifications that are really, really important. to our customers, things like particle size, et cetera. Each customer seems to have their own requirement there. So we're focused very heavily on controlling that and delivering to their expectations.

Long-term cost, we believe we have a structural advantage with our wet process. We've done a lot of work through the joint venture partnership work with potential partners in Korea that have dry processes, and we've been able to actually benchmark our long-term roadmap against underprivileged. equivalent capacity output for a dry process and again we believe quite strongly that we have a structural advantage there so that would be my comments on the performance as well as long-term cost roadmap we intend to be the cost leader as we go through our commercial commercialization phase and I.

up into RAM. Excellent. That's super helpful. And then I guess the second question is really around customer development in the US and potential for manufacturing domestically as we see an increased level of regionalization around the battery space. And obviously, you guys have multiple options and multiple opportunities. you know, internationally as well. But just curious about the development of domestic customers and what they're looking for from a production perspective.

Yes, six months ago we started getting signals from the humanoid robotic companies, and since then it's picked up quite considerably there. There's a number of U.S. players that are expressing interest in all solid-state batteries because of the advantages in energy density, safety, and charge rate. So I would say some of those discussions are advancing with some of the leaders in the space right now domestically. We still do not see any domestic manufacturing of cells at that scale, but that could change with the coming quarters. But we definitely have seen an uptick in humanoids since we last produced them. reported. We also have gotten a small amount of interest from defense and aerospace markets in the past quarter.

That's super helpful. Thanks so much, guys. This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back to you.

over to John Banskoder for any closing remarks. Thank you for joining the call today and for your interest in Solid Power. We look forward to updating you again next quarter.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation.

This live transcript is auto-generated without human intervention or review.

[Call has ended.]

Good day, and welcome to the Solid Power Q1 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded.

I would now like to turn the conference over to [ Charlie Van Gucht ], Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I'm joined on today's call by Solid Power's President and Chief Executive Officer, John Van Scoter; and Chief Financial Officer, Linda Heller.

A copy of today's earnings release is available on the Investor Relations section of Solid Power's website, www.solidpowerbattery.com. I'd like to remind you that parts of our discussion today will include forward-looking statements as defined by U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events.

Except as otherwise required by applicable law, Solid Power disclaims any duty to update any forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances. For a discussion of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in today's forward-looking statements, please see Solid Power's most recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which can be found on the company's website at www.solidpowerbattery.com.

With that, let me turn it over to John Van Scoter.

Thank you, Charlie, and thank you all for joining us today. We delivered a productive first quarter, marking steady progress across our key operational and strategic priorities. Starting with our partnership with SK On, we completed site acceptance testing in early April, marking the final milestone of the line installation agreement for SK On. We believe achieving this milestone underscores our commitment to supporting our partners' ASSB efforts.

With this accomplishment, we're very pleased that there are now cell production lines using our technology on 3 continents. Here are our facilities in Colorado, BMW's facility in Germany and SK On's facility in Korea. We also continue to support our customers and partners in their development efforts through delivery of our electrolyte. We provided Samsung SDI with electrolyte under our 3-way joint evaluation agreement with BMW and continued sampling with other customers during the quarter.

Turning to our electrolyte development road map. We believe installation of our continuous electrolyte manufacturing pilot line will represent a critical inflection point in our path to commercialization and a clear differentiator for Solid Power. With factory acceptance testing for all key equipment complete and construction underway, we are laying the groundwork for commercial scale production.

Once installed, this line will enable our transition from batch to continuous processing, supporting near-term customer programs and driving expected cost savings relative to today's processes. The line is designed to allow us to derisk and optimize processes in advance of full commercialization. Importantly, we believe our wet processing methodology for electrolyte production offers scalability, yield and capital efficiencies relative to traditional dry process methods.

We also continue to explore potential partners with processing, scaling capabilities and capital to support construction of a 500 metric ton electrolyte production facility. We anticipate additional demand for sulfide electrolyte in Korea and are considering a potential partnership for commercial scale production in Korea. We are evaluating multiple potential partners and are pleased with our progress to date.

With respect to our final development goal, we continue to leverage our Electrolyte Innovation Center, or EIC, and cell capabilities for product and process development during the quarter. Through this development work, we're executing against our objective to continually deliver differentiated electrolyte products and secure long-term customers.

With that, I will turn it over to Linda to review our financial results and provide an update on our financial discipline goal. Linda?

Thank you, John. I'll start with our first quarter results, beginning with revenue. During the first quarter of 2026, we generated revenue and grant income of $3.1 million, driven primarily by the progress towards the site acceptance testing milestone under our line installation agreement with SK On and performance on our assistance agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy.

Operating expenses were $29.4 million for the quarter compared to $30 million in the first quarter of 2025. This decrease was driven by timing of supplier and material shipments relating to our development activities. Operating loss was $26.3 million and net loss was $13 million or $0.06 per share. Capital expenditures totaled $1.7 million during the quarter, primarily representing costs for construction of the continuous electrolyte production pilot line.

Turning to our balance sheet and liquidity. Solid Power's liquidity position remains strong. We ended the quarter with total liquidity of $435.3 million due to the net proceeds after fees and expenses of $121.3 million raised through a registered direct offering in January. In addition, contract assets and accounts receivable were $12.7 million and total current liabilities were $17.1 million.

Overall, we remain focused on maintaining financial discipline while continuing to invest appropriately in our technology development and process improvements, and we believe we are well positioned to support our strategic priorities throughout the year.

I will now turn the call back to John.

Thank you, Linda. In closing, I want to thank our employees, partners and stakeholders for their continued commitment and support. We're executing on our objectives with focus, and I'm confident we're well positioned to deliver meaningful progress through 2026. We'll now take your questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from Colin Rusch with Oppenheimer & Co.

Could you talk a little bit about the potential for partnerships in North America that you're starting to see move forward given the amount of capacity that's underutilized right now for the auto space and a substantial amount of legislation and kind of government involvement in terms of tariffs and the NDAA compliance for military applications that I'm sure you're seeing some level of demand for at this point. But just curious about the potential for you guys to look at partnerships and potentially start bringing something forward that we may not be thinking about just yet.

Colin, thank you for that deep question. I'll be honest with you, the demand that we see right now is really coming off the peninsula in Korea. We have yet to see, despite all the things you described, anything really substantial here in the States. If we go back a couple of years, that was very different. We actually plan to do our original DOE plant here in North America. But with the changes in the landscape here in North America, we shifted to just the SP2.5 and then shifted to partnerships in Korea. We certainly are well positioned should that change to come back and revisit that. We'd very much like to invest here in North America. But right now, we just don't see the demand.

Okay. Perfect. And then can you talk a little bit about the capital efficiency that you guys are enabling for your customers at this point? I know it's substantial, but would love to get any detail you guys might be able to share on that.

Okay. Colin, it's Linda. On the capital efficiency, there's really a two-pronged approach to that. There is [ first and foremost ] on SP2.5, that's bringing the continuous processing, which is necessary for commercialization down the road, a commercialization scale. So we are shifting from a batch to the continuous processing. So we expect that line to be commissioned by the end of the year and are on track for that.

The second is the actual processing technology that you use for electrolyte. And we use something known as wet process technology. That is able to -- there's a variety of advantages to it from dry room utilization to size of the equipment that all leads to a very significant capital expenditure reduction by using that as well as yield and other improvements to that as well.

So between that and with the electrolyte production versus cell production, that in itself has tremendous capital efficiencies. So amongst those 3, we feel like we're very well positioned to be able to drive cost at the commercial scale.

The only thing I would add, Colin, is around the wet processing, that's one of the reasons we're getting, I think, such a strong uptake with potential JV partners in Korea. They see the advantage that Linda just described in terms of the capital efficiencies and so forth. So it's just, I think, a leading indicator of the advantage we have with our process.

The next question comes from Amit Dayal with H.C. Wainwright.

Linda, sorry if I missed this, but can you maybe walk us through the CapEx for 2026?

We actually don't break out in our guidance the CapEx individually. We did for Q1 for our CapEx. On terms of that, we had $1.7 million on that. But that also includes the amount of the reimbursement from DOE that would be considered. So it's actually larger, but the net impact would be $1.7 million. The largest capital expenditure that we are making in 2026 is our [ SP2.5 ], which we do have the grant money goes against that on our financial statements.

And then what are the next steps with SK On from here, this post site acceptance, how should we expect things to proceed from this point?

Amit, John here. Yes. So we view our relationship with SK as a long-term relationship like our others with BMW and so forth. So I think it's a multiyear as we go forward, but we'll be transitioning, supporting them running the line from this point forward. To this point, well, prior to SAT completion, we were running the line in their facility. So now they've taken that over and they are running the line, but we'll bring in our experts as we need to, to support their development efforts on their cell moving through this year and on into next.

And then transition to ultimately an electrolyte supplier agreement with them. We do have an R&D electrolyte supply agreement as part of the 3-part agreement we did in 2024. But we would expect once that's completed that we would transition to a long-term supply agreement with SK.

Okay. And then on the electrolyte supply agreement, John, like what is the time line? Is it 6 to 9 months or a little bit sooner than that?

It's multiyear. It actually goes out through '27. It's for a total of 8 metric tons. So however long it takes them to consume that, I guess, is the way I would encourage you to look at it as opposed to a time frame.

[Operator Instructions] This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to John Van Scoter for any closing remarks.

Thank you for joining the call today and for your interest in Solid Power. We look forward to updating you again next quarter.

Thank you. The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect. Thank you.

Good day, and welcome to the Solid Power Fourth Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded.

I would now like to turn the conference over to [ Charlie Van Gother ], Investor Relations analyst. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I'm joined on today's call by Solid Power's President and Chief Executive Officer, John Van Scoter; and Chief Financial Officer, Linda Heller. A copy of today's earnings release is available on the Investor Relations section of Solid Power's website, www.solidpowerbattery.com.

I'd like to remind you that parts of our discussion today will include forward-looking statements as defined by U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. Except as otherwise required by applicable law, Solid Power disclaims any duty to update any forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances.

For a discussion of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in today's forward-looking statements, please see Solid Power's most recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission which can be found on the company's website at www.solidpowerbattery.com.

With that, let me turn it over to John Van Scoter.

Thank you, Charlie, and thank you all for joining us today. We made strong and meaningful progress in 2025, marking an important year of execution for Solid Power. At the outset of the year, we set clear near-term objectives to drive continued innovation and performance in our electrolyte technology, advance our electrolyte development road map, ramp sampling activity while identifying and engaging long-term customers, execute against our agreements with SK On and maintain a disciplined approach to capital and spending.

I'm proud of our progress our team delivered across each of these priorities. Throughout the year, we translated strategy into tangible milestones and strengthened our technical foundation. Collectively, our achievements in 2025 advanced our path towards commercialization and positioned us to enter the next phase of growth.

Starting with electrolyte sampling, we continued our sampling efforts and saw demand for multiple generations of our material from both existing and new customers. In October 2025, we announced a joint evaluation agreement with Samsung SDI and BMW to advance the development of all solid-state batteries. We view this agreement as validation of our electrolyte sampling efforts. After announcing the agreement, we began executing under the agreement and providing electrolyte to SDI for use in the joint evaluation activities.

Turning to our electrolyte development road map. We made progress towards installation of our continuous electrolyte production pilot line. In 2025, we finished ordering long lead equipment and conducted detailed design for the line. We expect to install and commission this line by the end of 2026. This line is designed to support small volume customer programs and allow us to learn and optimize the manufacturing processes ahead of full commercialization.

With respect to SK ON, we continue to execute under our agreements, a research and development license, a line installation agreement and an electrolyte supply agreement. These agreements are designed to enable SK On to develop solid-state cells based on our technology and to operate a pilot cell manufacturing line using our electrolyte. In 2025, we completed factory acceptance testing and near completion of site acceptance testing at SK On's facility. This progress demonstrates our ability to deliver against key technical milestones and support our partners' ASSB efforts.

Moving on to electrolyte innovation and performance. During 2025, we deepened our understanding of our electrolyte performance, identified process engineering and electrolyte improvements and work to tailor our electrolyte to meet customer specifications. We made this progress through our focus on enhancing feedback between our cell and electrolyte teams and productive customer feedback. Additionally, our cells and solid-state battery technology were demonstrated in a BMW i7 test vehicle in May 2025. BMW's introduction of this test vehicle marked a meaningful achievement in our partnership, and we're proud of our role in this accomplishment.

With that, I'll turn it over to Linda to review our financial results and provide an update on our financial discipline goal. Linda?

Thank you, John. We delivered revenue of $21.7 million in 2025, an increase of $1.6 million compared to 2024. The year-over-year growth was driven primarily by work performed under our line installation agreement with SK On, reflecting continued execution against our customer programs. Operating expenses for the year were $122.6 million compared to $125.5 million in 2024. The year-over-year decrease reflects our cost discipline partially offset by investments in research and development as well as equipment purchases and services performed in support of the SK On agreements. Operating loss for 2025 was $100.8 million and net loss was $93.4 million or $0.51 per share.

Turning to capital expenditures. 2025 CapEx totaled $10.2 million, primarily representing costs associated with planned construction of our continuous electrolyte production pilot line. Cash investment, which is comprised of cash used in operations and capital expenditures totaled $84.5 million for fiscal year 2025. This came in at the lower end of our revised cash investment guidance, reflecting our continued focus on prioritization and disciplined capital allocation.

Moving to the balance sheet. Our total liquidity as of December 31, 2025, was $336.5 million, an increase of $9 million compared to year-end 2024. As of December 31, 2025, contract assets and accounts receivable were $9.6 million and total current liabilities was $16.8 million. During the fourth quarter, we raised $56 million of net proceeds under our at-the-market or ATM program, bringing total 2025 net proceeds from the ATM to $88.8 million.

Looking ahead, we expect 2026 cash investment, representing cash used in operations and capital expenditures to be in the range of $85 million to $100 million. This outlook reflects our continued focus on investing and advancing our electrolyte development road map, including commissioning our continuous pilot line while maintaining financial discipline and preserving liquidity.

I will now turn the call back to John.

Thank you, Linda. As we look ahead to 2026, we remain focused on disciplined execution, continued advancement of our electrolyte technology and maintaining a strong financial position as we work towards commercialization.

First, we intend to strengthen relationships with our partners through continued execution. In 2026, we expect to continue providing Samsung SDI with electrolyte under the joint evaluation agreement while also continuing to develop our technology and pursuing electrolyte innovation. We also expect to complete site acceptance testing of the SK On line in the first quarter of 2026. Following site acceptance testing, we plan to work with SK On to conduct validation activities for the line and begin delivering electrolyte to SK On to support the validation efforts.

Second, we will continue executing on our electrolyte development road map. We expect to commission our continuous electrolyte production line by the end of 2026 which we designed to expand our annual electrolyte production capacity to up to 75 metric tons. This year, we also intend to pursue a potential partnership for commercial scale electrolyte production in Korea. To complement our technical expertise, we plan to evaluate potential partners with process capabilities and capital to support construction of a facility capable of producing up to 500 metric tons of electrolyte annually.

Third, we are focused on advancing our electrolyte product competitiveness. During 2026, we will continue to enhance our understanding of how electrolyte performs relative to other sulfide electrolyte products to enable customer success in utilizing our electrolyte. We believe this will support our efforts to develop competitive differentiated products and secure long-term customers. To support these efforts, we will utilize our Electrolyte Innovation Center, or EIC, to develop, improve and test electrolyte manufacturing processes as well as electrolyte products. We also intend to continue focusing on our cell research and development activities on improving our understanding of how and why our electrolyte performs in the solid-state cell and using that knowledge to help our electrolyte customers improve their cell development.

Finally, we expect to remain fiscally disciplined. We believe maintaining and using our strong balance sheet to best position Solid Power to reach commercialization is critical for our success. During 2026, we intend to balance extending our runway through financial discipline, with investing appropriately in technology development and process improvements. In support of this objective, we successfully completed a $130 million registered direct offering last month which further strengthened our liquidity and enhanced our strategic flexibility. We believe this capital positions us to execute on our objectives while preserving optionality as we progress towards commercialization.

I would like to thank our employees, partners and stakeholders for their continued commitment and support. We remain focused on disciplined execution and look forward to continued progress in 2026.

We will now take your questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Colin Rusch with Oppenheimer.

We know that you've been able to produce a set of incremental volumes of material and truly are collecting a fair amount of data around that process. Could you talk a little bit about your cycle times and evolving the manufacturing process at this point? And what other levers you have within the platform to continue to accelerate some of that development?

Thanks for joining, Colin. Sure. We've run a variety of batch sizes, which will directly affect the cycle times. We have a very rapid turnaround in our electrolyte innovation center. In that center, we do 2 kilograms or less depending on what the customer request is but we can turn those batches in days. When we look to the larger batch sizes, and we typically run between 40 and 50 kilograms in our current SP2 batch facility, and the cycle times on those run approximately a week, again, depending on batch size and the specific parameters that we're trying to control.

Excellent. And then as you look at the different form factors that could deploy the technology at the cell level, could you talk a little bit about efforts that you're seeing on the horizon and interest that you're seeing from incremental customers to diversify some of the form factors you're working on?

Great question. But quite honestly, Colin, we haven't seen a great diversification yet, although we could envision as some of these newer segments beyond EV are considering all solid-state batteries that they could take prismatic format or others. Right now, it's primarily pouch across all of our engagements with primarily EV customers.

Our next question comes from Chris Pierce with Needham.

Just one. I guess if you're talking about -- I just want to make sure I heard you right, the SK On pilot line is up and running by the end of 2026. And what is that -- how should we think about '27 and '28 as sort of we hear more about ASSB batteries in these vehicles and sort of not in the United States part of the world, but other parts of the world. I guess should we think of '27 as a jumping off point? And if we do think of '27 as a jumping off point, against the burn that you kind of guided to for this year, should we think about you guys as having enough capital to get to that jumping off point? Or is there still too involved in here to sort of have certainty around that?

Chris, again, thanks for joining. Great questions. I'll take the first part and then let Linda address the second burn rate part of the question.

SK On has specifically -- when they did their ribbon cutting at the pilot facility last year stated that they wanted to have SOP for their batteries in 2029 and that's a 1-year pull-in from prior public statements around ASSBs. So I would envision -- I'll let SK On talk to the details, but just knowing what we know about the time and takes to get from where we are to 2029, I would expect 2027 to be, again, a strong development year at the cell level and then probably '28 being more mature leading up to the SOP in '29.

And then, Chris, in terms of our runway, you have seen us shore this up. We did give guidance for this upcoming year of $85 million to $100 million in terms of cash investment. And then if you look at where our ending liquidity is plus with our proceeds from the RDO, we think we're well positioned to be able to work with our partners and be sufficient on that, but we are continually looking at our runway and ensuring that we can be there for our partners.

Our next question comes from Jake Sekelsky with Alliance Global Partners.

That last question a bit. Looking at the pilot line and the strengthened balance sheet, are you able to leverage the balance sheet at all to kind of accelerate the time line for the line? Or is it less dependent on capital availability.

Well, Jake, it's Linda again. I believe we are in a good position in our balance sheet that if there were to be an opportunity that would allow us to shorten the time line to be able to be in commercial production. We certainly are there. We can make those long-term investments at this point in time. Obviously, we will continue to be opportunistic in the capital markets and as well, focus on our own cash burn so that we should be in a good place.

For clarity's sake, though, the line is installed in SK On's facility in Korea, and they will begin running that line by themselves largely with our just support once SAT is completed. So any additional capital improvements or those sort of things will be their responsibility for that line. But as Linda said, if there's something that we could do to assist, we'll certainly consider that moving forward because of the strength of our balance sheet.

Got it. Okay. That's helpful. And then just on existing partnerships, can you just touch on any upcoming milestones you might keep an eye out for as those processes move forward this year?

Well, I think we've established through the announcement last fall with BMW and SDI, our preferred approach moving forward to expand these partnerships where we are dealing directly with the OEMs to create the demand in the platforms, but then really have the Tier 1 battery partners step in and provide the batteries with us providing the material and some of the expertise to achieve performance targets. So that's our preferred model going forward, and we would like to duplicate that in other areas as we move forward.

I would also, though, point to the comments earlier in the prepared remarks, and that is around our intention to explore potential JV partnerships around the electrolyte manufacturing in Korea with a target of a 500 metric ton annually capacity through a partnership with Solid Power bringing the technical expertise, the IP, the process knowledge and then relying on the partner from a manufacturing and capital standpoint. So that would be the other partnership that I would point to for 2026. I look for some developments there as we move through the year.

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the call back over to John Van Scoter, President and CEO, for any closing remarks.

Thank you for joining the call today and for your interest in Solid Power. We look forward to updating you again next quarter.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.

Good day, and welcome to the Solid Power Third Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to [ Charlie Van Gother ], Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I'm joined on today's call by Solid Power's President and Chief Executive Officer, John Van Scoter; and Chief Financial Officer, Linda Heller. A copy of today's earnings release is available on the Investor Relations section of Solid Power's website, www.solidpowerbattery.com.

I'd like to remind you that parts of our discussion today will include forward-looking statements as defined by U.S. securities laws. These forward-looking statements based on management's current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events.

Except as otherwise required by applicable law, Solid Power disclaims any duty to update any forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances. For a discussion of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in today's forward-looking statements, please see Solid Power's most recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which can be found on the company's website at www.solidpowerbattery.com.

With that, let me turn it over to John Van Scoter.

Thank you, Charlie, and thank you all for joining us today. I am pleased to provide an update on our 2025 operational goals since our last earnings call. First, we recently announced a strategic collaboration with Samsung SDI and BMW under a joint evaluation agreement. We believe this collaboration represents a vote of confidence in our technology and the potential of solid-state batteries.

Under this arrangement, Solid Power will supply sulfide-based solid electrolyte to Samsung SDI, which Samsung SDI will integrate into separator and/or catholyte and use to build cells, in each case, subject to achievement of technical requirements. These cells will be evaluated based on performance parameters and requirements to be agreed between Samsung SDI and BMW Group.

Ultimately, Solid Power, Samsung SDI and BMW aim to develop and supply all solid-state battery cells for integration into a next generation of evaluation vehicles.

Together with Samsung SDI and BMW, we look forward to driving innovation in all solid-state battery technology. In addition, we believe this agreement underscores our electrolyte sampling efforts and our focus on identifying long-term customers. This quarter, we continued to execute on our agreements with SK On. We conducted site acceptance testing of the SK On pilot line, which remains on target for completion by the end of this year and is another key milestone under our line installation agreement with SK On.

During the quarter, we also made progress on our electrolyte development road map. We continue detailed design work for the planned installation continuous manufacturing pilot line for sulfide electrolyte production at SP2. We expect detailed design to be substantially complete later this year, with commissioning on track for 2026.

With that, I'll turn it over to Linda to review our financial results and provide an update on our progress towards achieving our financial disciplined goal. Linda?

Thank you, John. I'll start with Q3 and year-to-date results, beginning with revenue. During the third quarter of 2025, we generated revenue of $4.6 million compared to our Q2 2025 revenue of $7.5 million. Revenue recognized this quarter was driven primarily by our SK On agreement as well as our government contracts. This brings revenue year-to-date to $18.1 million, an increase of $2.4 million over the same period in 2024.

Operating expenses for the third quarter were $29 million, a decrease of $4.4 million compared to our second quarter of 2025 at $33.4 million. The reduction in expenses for the third quarter was primarily due to the nature of the work performed under our SK On agreement. The third quarter was labor focused in preparation for site acceptance testing whereas the second quarter included significant equipment purchases for factory acceptance testing.

Operating loss year-to-date was $74.3 million and year-to-date net loss was $66.4 million or $0.37 per share. Capital expenditures totaled $0.6 million, primarily representing costs for the construction of our continuous electrolyte production pilot line.

Turning to our balance sheet and liquidity. During the quarter, our cash used for operations and capital expenditures was $14.9 million. This brings our total year-to-date cash investment to $61.2 million. Total liquidity increased to $300.4 million as of September 30, 2025. This was primarily driven by proceeds from our at-the-market offering program as well as cash received from our government contracts.

In addition, contract assets and contract receivables totaled $7.2 million and total current liabilities were $16.6 million. During Q3, we remained fiscally disciplined focused on realizing efficiencies and reducing operating costs while driving technology development and innovation. As a result of these efforts, we are revising our expected cash investment to $85 million to $95 million in 2025.

I will now turn it back to John for some final thoughts.

Thank you, Linda. In closing, we're making progress towards our strategic objectives, and I'm excited about the potential of all solid-state battery technology. I want to sincerely thank our employees, partners and stakeholders for their continued dedication and support.

We will now take your questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to John Van Scoter for any closing remarks.

Thank you for joining the call today and for your interest in Solid Power. We look forward to updating you again next quarter.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.