Register
Login:
Share:
Email Facebook Twitter


EXCLUSIVE: Aura Energy #Aura to IPO Swedish Vanadium prospect


Quadrise Fuels Share Chat (QFI)



Share Price: 3.25Bid: 3.20Ask: 3.50Change: -0.10 (-2.99%)Faller - Quadrise
Spread: 0.30Spread as %: 9.37%Open: 3.31High: 3.70Low: 3.25Yesterday’s Close: 3.35


Share Discussion for Quadrise Fuels


Thread View

Please login or register to post a message on Share Chat.

Posts per page:

crippin24
Posts: 33
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.25
fyoz
Thu 19:10
as i have over 1000000 shares in qfi at an average of 25p.a % of a penny is nothing as far as i am concerned.i would love to see qfi become financialy viable.very doubtful though based on the past performance of the bod.s.how they still run this company i don,t know.if they were running any other company they would have been sacked long ago.which leads to the conclusion they are doing something right for somebody.but that somebody is definitly not the private invesor.
 
Fyoz
Posts: 496
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: fyoz
Thu 15:18
Crippin

That's not what you said earlier, you were going on about the company going bust, not being bought out

Nice wriggle though . . .

'18 months to go plenty of time for the bod to run qfi into the ground achieving nothing.go bust then rise like a phoenix out of ashes.belonging to another company.and the pi who paid for it all get NOTHING.'
crippin24
Posts: 33
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
fyoz
Thu 14:36
yes i do understand but whoever gets hold of qfi at a knock down price.obviously an offer will be made in the % of a penny price will own qfi and its property rights and still presumably its deal with azko stays the same.because a firm changes name or owners does not negate its responsibilitys or contract or intelectual property rights.as you said jointly owned not sole ownership to azko nobel.or perhaps im regurgitating same nonsense again.
tony213
Posts: 34
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: Re:27ben
Thu 14:18
Re tax loses - If it helps Accumulated tax losses of approx. £47 million, available to be carried forward against future profits.

from Company Announcements
Quadrise Fuels International PLC
Half-year Report
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
GooglePlus
Pinterest
MARCH 27, 2018Source: RNS
RNS Number : 9930I
Quadrise Fuels International PLC
27 March 2018
https://markets.ft.com/data/announce/detail?dockey=1323-13582129-4FR12BF2ISEMI2QCETTQOH8800
Tobythedog
Posts: 25
Premium Chat Member
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
Re:27ben
Thu 13:44
From what I recall - and please correct me if I'm wrong but QFI have something like £70M in accumulated tax losses and so any prospective buyer will not wait till the company goes bust (and lose the benefit of the tax losses) but will want to buy it before this point is reached.
foxm
Posts: 188
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: 27ben
Thu 13:22
Yeah, if the board let the company go bust so Maersk can pick it up on the cheap from the administrators, all of their shares will be worthless too. Maybe Hemant will be compensated for losing his 29 million shares with a couple of large suitcases filled with used £20 notes, DHL'd direct from the Copenhagen head office. That must be how it's going to work.
petergar
Posts: 421
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: 27ben
Thu 13:12
Fyoz - don't you be letting the truth get in the way of a good conspiracy story now!
Fyoz
Posts: 496
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: 27ben
Thu 13:05
Crippin

I've answered this before for you but you seem to ignore the truth and keep regurgitating your nonsense on here

Pay attention, the IP (intellectual property rights) are JOINTLY owned by QFI and Akzo Nobel (try googling Akzo Nobel so you can see what a massive partner they are). So in the event that QFI were to go out of business, Maersk can't just snap up MSAR for a knock down price because Akzo Nobel will then own it, and they know the value of it

There, do you understand now
iantobach
Posts: 2
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
Martin Verle
Thu 11:49
….. on LinkedIn Great article. A key benefit of MSAR is that there is no cutter stock which is the source of the majority of contamination incidents.

https://shipandbunker.com/news/world/640121-closing-the-gap-external-contamination-of-marine-fuels?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter-06/19/18
27ben
Posts: 35
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.70
RE: 27 Ben Wed 9.16
Thu 11:43
Hi MC,

The problem is we don't know or at least I don't know what the contractual agreement (to trial) MSAR was between Maersk and QFI!
Maersk probably had the upper hand in negotiations, so there could have been many clauses or sub clauses, which until such times they make a decision on their direction, we will never know. Maersk clearly own the trial data and will not release it.

I have only been Invested here for 5 years plus change and bought in and added on what was happening when IW was at the helm. It did then, and still does appeal to me as a great Investment, but am I frustrated with the time lag and decay on supposed contracts, yes really fed up and frustrated.

I do however feel that it will be the best Investment I ever made, and I think there is massive scope to build business. We are in one of the most conservative sectors in the market. Nothing is decided on quickly and as usual competion antics always take priority in the boardroom.
manycats
Posts: 29
Opinion:Hold
Price:3.70
27 Ben Wed 9.16
Thu 11:24
This is quite possible and I hope this does come off as I have too many of these if they fail.
My question is however, Why not rustle up another shipping firm and get a trial or LONO with the new firm. Surely this is something that the directors would look at doing. That would give us other outlets to sell to. You would think there would be a market for our product. Anyone have any thoughts on why we do not have other connections to trade with yet? Or what can or is being done to create a successful business here?
Interested in all thoughts on this as I don't like to lose money as it is bloody hard to earn in the first place!
TheOrns
Posts: 285
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.31
RE: 27ben
Thu 09:09
It does seem like they were hoping QFI would run out of money and they could pick it up for free.Not sure how the patents would work. Hopefully they can get a signature so the overheads are covers it will make a massive difference.
crippin24
Posts: 33
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
27ben
Wed 19:29
so the basis is maersk has deliberatly tried to ruin qfi,by keeping report secret.as i have said before on other site maersk has no business ethics what so ever.and qfi should never had anything to do with them.they are corporate corsairs and will ruin any company in the blink of an eye that makes profit so they can take it over and have all profit for themselves.stay well clear of maersk.
petergar
Posts: 421
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
Dropping
Wed 19:27
Price seems to be consistently dropping again.....back to where it was a few weeks back.
crippin24
Posts: 33
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
less options
Wed 13:43
assuming the fines problem isn,t as bad as it is said.what shipping company is even going to bother taking the risk of using it.so it looks like scrubbers are the only option.and if shipping companies have fitted scrubbers.msar is the cheapest cleanest fuel to use.seems like a no brainer to me.18 months to go plenty of time for the bod to run qfi into the ground achieving nothing.go bust then rise like a phoenix out of ashes.belonging to another company.and the pi who paid for it all get NOTHING.
DPExplorer
Posts: 526
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
RE: low sulphur and engine damage
Wed 12:19
Hi Tony,
In the case of jerk type fuel pumps used more on auxiliary engines (More so in the case of diesel electric power plant on Cruise ships) the actual fuel being pumped is also the lubricant.

A new approach for cylinder liner lubrication on large slow speed engines however has to be included to mitigate the changes (lower sulphur) in the fuel.
iantobach
Posts: 2
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
RE: Catastrophically Destructive LSFO
Wed 09:36
tony213
Posts: 34
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
low sulphur and engine damage
Wed 09:32
One must presumably assume if the insurance companies and the shipping companies are aware of these facts then either they should nil and void any insurance cover over the engines or prohibit the fuels or insist they can only be used providing you take ancillary measures to work in conjunction with these fuels (may be additives as lubricants - i am not technically minded in this field to say what we may need) .
DPExplorer
Posts: 526
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
RE: Catastrophically Destructive LSFO
Wed 09:20
Agreed PH
As you may remember I posted on the forum some years ago that I experienced excessive wear on jerk type fuel pumps using MGO with low sulphur at 0.05% wt from an expected wear life (according to Wartsila schedule) of 40,000 running hours down to 16,000 running...... expensive wear
27ben
Posts: 35
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.26
RE: Catastrophically Destructive LSFO
Wed 09:16
Cheers Prep.

This to me confirms that Maersk like MSAR, stopped it from becoming a sellable commodity on the open market, and will turn full circle just as the industry is in full panic, as the deadline creeps up. They then announce that they made a mistake and are now going down the scrubber and cleaner fuel route.

They are well ahead of the competition in that they have data they are satisfied with ( still not released) so sit back, let untestested low sulphur fuel wreck half the global fleet, then flip a last minute ace!
PreparationH
Posts: 1,719
Opinion:Buy
Price:3.26
Catastrophically Destructive LSFO
Wed 09:04
With thanks to Vince72 on the forum..

"Oil major Exxon Mobile has recently reported to the global shipping industry that its catalytic fines resulting from blending low sulfur are causing catastrophic damage to marine engines. After mentioning the first technical deficiencies of the low sulfur use in the marine insurance industry, the relevant technical reports appeared in the overseas classification society, and the fuel supply company officially recognized it. "

http://m.shippingnewsnet.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=24953 a bit of translation may be required ;-)

You couldn't make it up really, perhaps a LONO would've been a good idea :D
Rob79
Posts: 415
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.40
RE: Rob79
18 Jun '18
Tony,

As MexPete says.

Here is his bio on the website:

http://www.quadrisefuels.com/about-quadrise/our-people
MexPete
Posts: 11
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.40
RE: Rob79
18 Jun '18
Head of Projects at QFI.
boyporche
Posts: 1,260
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.40
Rob79
18 Jun '18
Hi Rob can you remind me who Mark Whittle is please.
Rob79
Posts: 415
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:3.40
Texas Conference
18 Jun '18
On 26th September Mark Whittle is presenting under the 'Meeting IMO Regulations':

http://www.hpirpc.com/events/irpc-americas-2018/custom-17-681aeb2992784599a1873aaa7492994a.aspx




Share Price, Share Chat, Stock Market news at lse.co.uk
FREE Member Services
- Setup a personalised Watchlist and Virtual Portfolio.
- Gain access to LIVE real-time Regulatory News (RNS).
- View more Trades, Directors' Deals, and Broker Ratings.
Share Price, Share Chat, Stock Market news at lse.co.uk






Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.