George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
EA Technology believes that, based on the information provided by Energetix and its own background knowledge and experience, the Energetix mCHP Unit represents a credible contender in the embryonic micro-CHP market and, as such, ranks alongside the various Stirling Engine and fuel cell developments. Yours faithfully EA TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Theres that word "believes" again. Having visited EA Technology website, struggling to see how they have any experience in mass production of precision engoneered components and assemblies. "EA Technology is a specialist in asset management solutions for owners and operators of electrical assets. Headquartered in the UK, our operations and customers are global with seven regional offices around the world. We originated in 1966 as a groundbreaking research and development organisation serving the electricity industry. We are committed to providing our customers with innovative products and services, consultancy and training which deliver tangible benefits for their businesses enabling them to create safer, stronger and smarter networks for today and the future" Given EA Technology and Flow were neighbours in Capenhurst, which surely cant be a coincidence, can anyone shed light on any relationship between EA Technology and whether any connection or interest was declared by EA Technology when they made the statement lending credibility to scroll based mCHP, when it is obvious scrolls present a very different far more risky manufacturing proposition to reciprocating sterling engines?
I can sell complete holding 7.6 mil 0.0211p but cannot buy any. I am actually surprised this has not been suspended with zero return to shareholders. Hence the reason I am holding possible zero or many times present price, so worth a punt for me, not a lot to loose as only bought at 0.016p.
We have initiated Volume Production, this is the big one Tony. Also, falsifying data for MCS.
"We have demonstrated significant progress towards the commercialisation of Flow's product division " Is this a tell from Tony Stiff - you would think he would proudly pick out the mCHP boiler because that was what the funding was all about wasn't it ? He seems to want to hide it within the products division. This place is now filled with two ghouls picking over the bones. It's like the ghoulies haunted house in Dale Street Liverpool. One once superior mind had better do something useful, and get on with his day - the sun is out, there is life out there !
30th April 2015.... Flowgroup, which is based at Capenhurst in Cheshire, has outlined plans to raise up to �23m to accelerate the development of its energy-saving boiler and lower production costs. Tony Stiff, chief executive officer of the Flowgroup, said: "We have demonstrated significant progress towards the commercialisation of Flow's product division, alongside the success of our Flow energy division.Tony Stiff, chief executive officer of the Flowgroup, said: "We have demonstrated significant progress towards the commercialisation of Flow's product division, alongside the success of our Flow energy division. "The board believes now is an appropriate time to accelerate the development and delivery of a range of low cost mCHP combination and system boilers. "These developments would significantly expand the number of homes that Flow mCHP boilers can be installed into and accelerate the rate of doing so; we believe the Flow mCHP combination version can be in production by H2 2016, a year in advance of the current plan with current resources." Ian Gillis and Mercy Mba of Hill Dickinson acted for Cenkos and Investec and Phil Barry and Ryan Tweedale of Atticus Legal acted for Flowgroup plc on the placing and open offer. Well, whether the energy division could be described as successful as it slowly laboured towards its first 100k accounts in 2yrs 8 months achieved in the later December, is debatable, but yes it was on its way certainly and a long way from its start with two or three phone operatives. Phil Barry the solicitor who was acting in the funding for Flowgroup resigned from 7 related Flow companies on the 30th November last year - the same day that Tony Stiff walked out gave up 14 Flow directorships. Biff you are not open are you ? You never categorically stated you were in the employ of Flowgroup - you never said how much money you lost in the rough - what the HELL is going on with you - I am open - do you want me to get my thick black leather coat on and jackboots on and start prodding you with my stick. Man up (as tm would say) and spit it all out... " WAS IS LOS MIT DIR - RAUS MIT DEINE GEHEIMNISSSE "
Good Morning Biff, but you have woken up as the gruffalo, so maybe gruff. I think I was a little harsh last night and there is a correctness in incentivising the board commensurate with performance. I look back infrequently, now ever since LSE did a secret hatchet job on posts - those old posts will be somewhere, but they did that in the cover of darkness night and is typical of how the market economy often regulates itself down the corporate blind alley hidden from all but the cronies. The teddy boy was just a ship in the night and I bumped occasional bows with him as I did with many. Stiff has come out of this thing poorly. He did buy more shares than the rest put together in the end and that will not save his neck if this thing goes pear shaped but it is an indication he believed in energy supply. I still keep an open mind until people like el.toro move their butts and start making the unseen seen. The degree of impropriety is paramount, and the wording of RNS's to my mind is fairly watertight. There was never a guarantee to produce a boiler that pays for itself but certainly one that produced enough electricity to make it reasonably viable. I cannot fathom that the board would think they could produce a phantom and actually get away with it or with a fake photo shoot. There is a lot of hatred here and possibly hateful creations, maybe it will all come out in the wash maybe not. Hutchings may have a future with his futurebay identity and with the old Energetix CEO Smith at his side, but my interest is to know the detail of what actually happened here. There was such a plethora of companies all connected - and I do not have the skill to unravel it all. Risks were not properly weighed up and too many jack of all trade ORC based solutions that went belly up. As I mentioned to you Nigel - the KISS mantra, at the bar, and on the night of the duck.
You do know that your old posts are still searchable, don't you Tony? Anyone reading them will note the cosy relationship you had with TeddyBoy2. Try as you might, you cannot hide that. So FU, you lying POS. You ramped this share to high heaven. Your name is on the RNS, yours and that other FK Canham.
That old chestnut, and yes, even after checking all his back posts I could not find any real inconsistency in him. There were three possibilities but all sit a bit uneasy with me. It has made me far more suspicious of all posts on here and there is the extremely remote and far fetched quite laughable possibility that there are just two people that have ever posted on here, myself, and the creator of a thousand serpents. Alan Lovell has explained away the failure of the energy supply company, but has been quiet as a lamb about the boiler. Shareholders demand to know, and the boiler has held this company together for a decade plus and such had high hopes for it. I thought the Engie trials were possibly the start of a new life for it - but then there were always doubts - Jaydee1 and later magian and my own conversations with Ambassadors and the all change message I received in April 2016 which I stupidly misread. I voiced my concerns, but this was met by the usual wall of silence. I was always the outsider and you are either in the club or you out. I was never near to being accepted, and had to get all my info from deduction, leg work, and quite a bit of intuition. Octopus was able to manage 200,000 accounts with 90 personnel - how could Flow compete with that efficiency ? Flow had only 70 -75 percent fully internet registered, if my memory serves me, Octopus 100 percent. How can you sell white label boilers cheaply without full registration ? Adrian Hutchings may be completely genuine, but absconding like that. If he was so much better at research why on God's earth was he CEO running the ship at all. Richardson talked about the marvellous relationships at the top, but was that just back slapping croneyism and false smiles ? You look at all of the past and present BOD members and there are question marks about quite a few of them. Why such an inflated board ? Why the huge unrealistic salaries, given the companies financial health. Cialone and Spottiswoode, impressive CV's but could we afford them ? All we ever needed was three dedicated people. No remuneration committee either especially at the early difficult stages, as all the extra incentives that the board ever needed was the game changer - not extra shares. After all it was going to change the world ! It was to change lives or so we were told !
Ask TeddyBoy2, maybe he can FK up again and call you Adrian this time, instead of Tony. You're a FKNG joke.
Hallo, I am getting a bit tired of being Stiff and would quite like to be Hutchings now, can anyone help ? Hallo ?
Thanks Tony, but no one this absolves you from the misleading RNS. You're still FKD.
The Genlec module did not take off - Daalderop never ordered the 30,000 units it was meant to, so presumably the focus was on their own boiler the Kingston. I personally favoured the idea of a module - if you read all the tech, it seemed to have some advantages. Once you start making your own boiler, which I presume is hugely expensive, you have to keep it up to date and within the efficiency standards required. Between Jan 2104 to Dec 2016 the energy company gained a derisory 50,000 accounts - when the big opposition First Utility, and OVO were both doubling their numbers each year. Reason and fro what I heard - no money available so had to be organic growth. Had the company added 200,000 in this time, it would have got to the 450k profitability level. What a shame we might have had some worth. Tough decisions were needed, quick decisions, possibly some goose-stepping !
Adrian and Susan owned 37.22% of the total shares pre placing . The initial placing raised 5.4 million adding 33.3% of shares which gave a total capitalisation of 18 million. Adrian and Susan's shares were worth 25.04% so 4,507200 afterwards. When he stepped down from the board 2nd Feb 2013 about 5 months after Richardson replaced him as CEO. Less than three months later on April 30th Richardson leaves . He stepped d�As I stated in the 2011 report & accounts my skill sets are in technology development and with the Energetix team now focussed on building a product delivery business I now wish to concentrate my technology development expertise outside of the group�s current interests. Interesting that The founder and CEO both left at around the same time. Hutchings stayed on until November keeping and eye on things. He would have been there for 9 months with Stiff as CEO. They would have bumped into each other quite often - well more in Capenhurst. Adrian owned 9% of the share capital in February - no idea how much Susan had. In November the next year his shares would have reached about 9 million - did they not peak at 100 million. Maybe he would have sold before then. When did he sell ? Nobody seems to know or is in the slightest interested. Before the shares peaked he sold one house (which was a company correspondence address so presumably it was his) And the in April 2016 another larger house (which presume was his again) Both very interesting dates. For his current research business he does not use a residential address rather office address, and Nigel Canham never has. All these facts may be totally inconsequential but when a company fails and so dramtically, searchlights are inevitably out looking for all the players.
Don't you like giant jigsaw puzzles gruff ? I am trying to fit a few pieces together and form a picture. There are so many pieces. Some people are calling the whole thing about the boiler make believe - a giant story to rake in gullible investors. If that were the case who would stand most to gain ? Well the person at the heart of it. I have absolutely no concrete evidence to bring to bear but others say they do but nothing has so far been seen. I am just fishing in a lighthearted casual sort of way, and the picture I make may reveal intent or give clues - call it what you will - the inquisition ?
What are you trying to prove? That everyone is complicit? That it's not just you Tony? Does it matter, as when you go down the rest will join you. Now FK off.
All very cosy - everyone seemingly getting along but this belied the truth and the yes man approach was counter productive in a time of was and this what was needed at this time of war. Hutchings in another earlier statement had commented that more was to be made from the energy supply sold to customers than from the tech, and that was the other directors needed. So the weapons were frankly useless ! What was needed here was not the doffing of caps and the shaking of hands - no instead : sharp sticks, clicking heels, shouting in faces at a distance of a few inches. Yes the THIRD REICH APPROACH....hands around necks - feet off the ground... I shall eat now and may return at my leisure.
............[ it cut the feet orf] ........ Peter was attracted by the potential of the Energetix technology. �It was a completely new sector, with plenty for me to learn,� explains Peter. �I didn�t want to miss the opportunity to launch a potentially game-changing new product in the UK and then do a roll-out across key world markets � and take on the big established energy supply players. Perhaps that�s a legacy of my previous role!� �The brief for the job was compelling, and the chemistry with Adrian, Clare and Tony was ideal � they are an absolutely first rate team. The recruitment process ran very smoothly, and the pace was well sequenced. Andrew understood what the business was about and that showed.� Gearing up for success With a strong leadership team now in place, Energetix is gearing up for the next phase in its success story � the UK roll-out of the Kingston boiler in summer 2013. Peter and Tony have completed a �13.7 million fundraising, customer trials with the boiler are underway, and installation and maintenance partners are in place. �I don�t often praise advisors, but Warren Partners have continued to do an excellent job for us,� concludes Adrian. �Peter wasn�t on our radar before we engaged Warren Partners, but he was an inspired choice, as was Tony. We�ve now got a powerful combination of expertise, knowledge and enthusiasm to help Energetix fulfil its potential.� Posted by Jo�lle Warren on 02 December 2012
The initial brief to Andrew in summer 2011 was to find a business development director with the potential to take on a wider remit as the business grew � freeing up Adrian to concentrate on technology and product development. The board was looking for someone with broad skills, an entrepreneurial approach and an outstanding track record in the energy industry. From a strong shortlist, Tony Stiff proved to be the ideal candidate. Tony had built and exited four businesses in the sector, including leading independent energy supplier Atlantic Electric and Gas. A year after retiring as a main board director at Bglobal plc, the AIM-listed smart metering company, Tony was ready for a new challenge. �I�d had a lot of calls from head-hunters but this opportunity really interested me. The chance to help take Energetix from a start-up position and fully exploit its technology in a market with huge potential was an exciting challenge,� says Tony. �Initial meetings with Andrew then Adrian and chairman Clare Spottiswoode all reinforced my enthusiasm for the role, and I was desperately keen to take it on. Andrew was very good at providing feedback, and keeping me appraised of the position throughout the process. Sometimes, your enthusiasm can wane if you don�t hear back or know how the land lies but that certainly didn�t happen here. Warren Partners is an ideal choice for an AIM listed PLC, as you get to talk to senior people like Andrew � not always the case with a large consultancy.� Tony made his mark straight away at Energetix, using his expertise to set up its Kingston Energy dual fuel supply business, based in Ipswich, and to progress plans to market the Kingston CHP boiler to the domestic market. Challenging board thinking To manage the manufacturing and supply of the boilers, the Energetix Board turned to Andrew again in spring 2012. The original task was to find a chief executive for this part of the business, but some innovative thinking and discussion with the board led to a different solution. �By challenging our requirements, Andrew made us think again about the scope of this role,� says Adrian. �Logistics, supply chain delivery and customer service expertise were essential, but we�d assumed candidates would come from the boiler industry. In fact, Andrew looked much more widely and found a candidate from a totally different sector, who crucially had the potential to take on a broader Group Chief Executive role.� This was Peter Richardson, the man who had helped to build Dyson from a �45 million turnover UK vacuum cleaner company to a billion pound business selling products in 64 countries. After nine years as Chief Operating Officer at Dyson, and a career that had included senior business development roles with Coca-Cola, Colgate-Palmolive and Cadbury Schweppes, Peter was attracted by the potential of the Energetix techno
PERSON(S) INTERESTED IN 3% OR MORE OF THE ISSUER'S CAPITAL, EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE ISSUED SHARE CAPITAL BEFORE AND AFTER ADMISSION: Name Percentage before Percentage following Percentage following Admission Admission and EIS Placing General Placing Adrian Hutchings 23.12....................... 21.73......................................15.69 Axiomlab Group plc 26.11........................24.10......................................17.82 Susan Hutchings 14.02........................ 12.94..................................... 9.35 Geoff Barker 5.83......................... 5.38....................................... 3.89 Richard Henry Smith 5.80....................... 5.36........................................ 3.87 Merrill Lynch Investment 0 ........................... 0 .......................................... 10.00 Managers AXA Framlington 0...............................0 ............................................ 8.33 Invesco Perpetual 0............................... 0 ............................................ 4.17 This is easier to read in layout. My maths is completely out on Hutchings' pre value - It is a lot less and I will have to reconfigure.
That was U.S. not Canada.. 32,500,000 Ordinary Shares of 5p each at a placing price of 40p on 15 August 2006 comprising 30,000,000 existing Ordinary Shares, and 2,500,000 EIS Placing Shares. 12,500,000 Ordinary Shares of 5p each at a placing price of 40p on 16 August 2006 under the General Placing CAPITAL TO BE RAISED ON ADMISSION: �1,000,000 to be raised upon Admission by way of the EIS Placing �5,000,000 to be raised on day after Admission by way of the General Placing FULL NAMES AND FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTORS AND PROPOSED DIRECTORS: Alan John Aubrey - Non Executive Chairman Adrian Charles Hutchings - Chief Executive Officer Richard Henry Smith - Chief Financial Officer Anton Cecil Elsborg - Non Executive Director Proposed: Bryan Mark Gray - Non Executive Director PERSON(S) INTERESTED IN 3% OR MORE OF THE ISSUER'S CAPITAL, EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE ISSUED SHARE CAPITAL BEFORE AND AFTER ADMISSION: Name Percentage before Percentage following Percentage following Admission Admission and EIS Placing General Placing Adrian Hutchings 23.12 21.73 15.69 Axiomlab Group plc 26.11 24.10 17.82 Susan Hutchings 14.02 12.94 9.35 Geoff Barker 5.83 5.38 3.89 Richard Henry Smith 5.80 5.36 3.87 Merrill Lynch Investment 0 0 10.00 Managers AXA Framlington 0 0 8.33 Invesco Perpetual 0 0 4.17 NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PERSONS TO BE DISCLOSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SCHEDULE 2, PARAGRAPH (H) OF THE AIM RULES: If you do the rough math it looks like pre the EIS placing the company shares were to the value of around 2,050,000 pounds and Adrian Hutchings and Susan Hutchings weigh in at about 760,000 (37%) and their holding dilutes to 25% after the million from the placing is added.
Daft as a brush - to make the conclusions you have - I do not suggest in any way you are daft in the general sense. you have put up some valid opinions and with a lot of raw, bold, colour - and not many could shake my hide the way you have. You have spoken for all us investors !
362. Directors are required to declare any interest, direct or indirect, that they have in an existing transaction or arrangement entered into by the company. This section only applies to transactions or arrangements already entered into by the company. Section 177 (duty to declare interests) applies in the case of proposed transactions or arrangements with the company. 363. The director does not need to be a party to the transaction with the company in order for a declaration to be required under this section. For example, where the director�s spouse enters into a transaction with the company that may (but need not necessarily) give rise to an indirect interest on the part of the director in that transaction. 364. The declaration must be of the nature and extent of the director�s direct or indirect interest. 365. If the director has declared his interest in accordance with section 177 at the time the transaction was proposed, and before it was entered into by the company, the director does not need to repeat that declaration once the transaction becomes an existing transaction to which this section applies (subsection (1)). 366. Furthermore, a director need not declare any interest: - that cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to give rise to a conflict of interest; - that the other directors already know about, or ought reasonably to know about; or - that concerns the terms of his service contract, considered (or to be considered) by a meeting of directors or by the relevant committee of directors. Failing to comply can result in an unlimited fine A lot of tech investors sometimes want a seat on the board. Cialone was not initially an investor to my knowledge, however if he was promised a seat on the board with expenses and chaired the remuneration committee. It could all have been totally above board and I certainly am only raising hypothetical questions which I feel are relevant to ask when a plane goes down. It seems a bit of a luxury to me to have a director chairing the remuneration committee who lives in Canada. The committee usually meets 2/3 times a year at the Secretary's behest - and to decide on CEO and board member/ employee incentives/benefits. Maybe he did not come for these as a quorum of two were only needed. There were three directors as I remember but forget who they all were. I am in the dark on all the detail of the patents (2003) - and may well be firing blanks !
So guffalo, you are a past investor like myself, I gather from your post anyway ie lost money rather than salary. If you are connected to Flow you are not going to tell. We have a lot in common you and me guff - we share the same uneasy regret and at bad times, the same financial nightmares. We should get together for a chin wag. There is only one subtle difference between you and me and that is, quite simply, that you are daft !
Who the FK do you think you are, you arrogant assh*le. You failed FKNG CEO, scrambling for a way to pass the blame. FKNG hilarious now. You have never answered one FKNG question. And you're so stupid you think everyone posting is somehow connected to Flow. Most of us are ****ed off at having hard earned money stolen from us by you. So again, FO
What was your position in the company, Guff were you on the research side ? If so you will find my report good cocoa reading. Tell bird Guff to take a night out with the gals and give you a Morgo break - taken an early night and settle down in bed and read my lips. You won't tell us will you ? Your job, your connection to Flowgroup ?