I'm flattered by the 'rumours' of having Ian as my alter ego, I'm not sure he would necessarily think the same. As to the lease agreement, I really don't get your suspicions that it's some desperate act. It's not quite my read on the matter. Surely as a business if you were undertaking a project that inherently has execution risks, you wouldn't lock yourself into a contract, if you had the be flexible if and when circumstances require you to be. Agreed, we still need the shake down on the numbers once they have aligned the two UK businesses, and refocused the strategy. Personally I'd be happy for a balanced picture with the eye on the main project goal. I'm confident that the US will be profitable, I might have lower expectations than 'big money', I'm not sure this is realistic in the short-medium term.... but the joint partnership does look like they have set their sights on significantly increasing their market share in an increasingly competitive arena. The key will be to have differentiators, quality*, carbon saving etc. * Do current providers in the UK come near to the proposed quality or proposition put forward by Hydrodec, i.e the complete chain from collection, processing to product delivery? These questions need to be answered, rather than vague comments. At least in Whalen's case, I think I've already posted before when the subject previously came up, is that they produce group 1 and base oils that are good for mixing in lower quality applications. This does not match Hydrodec. The other side to this is that if Whalen can turn a small profit, then logic dictates that Hydrodec have a good chance to replicate this but on a larger scale. The Australian economy is suffering a bit with the collapse in commodity prices and demand but their real estate investment, house builds etc, are still good although off their peak... which does drive energy needs and related infrastructure.... I'm hopeful something will come of their association with SOR in the longer term.
RE: Nast(id)y Rumours
Nastid, there are plenty of rumours that Nastid is actually Ian Smale's pseudonym, which would explain a lot if it were true but for all I know it could just be a rumour. I have previously posted my 35+ years experience in this market but I'm not employed by anyone who has an interest in this field. As for my take on the lease announcement, I thought it was strange to say the least. As lone_groover rightly states it is just an option, which is subject to planning, financing, a good business plan and no easterly wind! It struck of desperation really, similar to - I've bought a lottery ticket and so I stand a chance of winning. Future don't collect waste oil, not one drop, but then again neither do Whelan Refining and they operate to capacity simply by buying the oil from others. The only re-refinery in England, operating since 2007 and processing 40ktpa. If Hydrodec can pull it off that would be great for everyone with shares but it won't change my lifestyle. However, they need to get a move on. The Hydrodec (UK) Ltd numbers may have been hidden in the plc figures but if you pull them from Companies House you will see the £3m operating loss for period ending 31 December 2014, most of which occurred before the oil price drop. Eco-Oil also lost up to £1m. I don't see how cost savings of £1.8m pa from redundancies can change the overall position. I previously said I would hang in till the year end but unless Canton starts to make big money real soon, by the time Sec of State grants permission, there will be no money left to build the plant and lenders won't be queuing up to lend to a loss making business. This isn't being negative it simply shows that experience is not fooled by cosy podcasts
Apologies in advance as this is your first post but you sound exactly like Robin, a post that sounds like a genuine comment but is slanted to say that there might be something wrong. It's awfully strange that all of a sudden brand new posters who have registered yesterday are talking about something that literally doesn't exist on the internet, or at least provide any useful details. I'm not usually so cynical but I have my suspicions that one or other poster is for example an employee(s) from a competitor (EOS) that was vilifying Hydrodec in support of the protesters, on the website of the defunct liberal democrats a while ago. Maybe people can either provide the details they seem to have or dig out anything extra. As lone_groover mentions it's just securing the lease if they meet certain criteria, namely time limits.
I think you will find they have announced an OPTION for the lease of the land.
I saw that Hydrodec have announced that they have secured the lease on the land for the re-refinery to be based in UK; however we don't seem to have seen any benefit in the share price - does this mirror the level of confidence that it will actually get built? Future do seem to be ahead of the game, they have a permit, they have existing planning but they don't have any collection infrastructure? Thoughts?
Hence why I said they must have another partner, or in this case owner. I keep my ear to the ground but I don't pretend to have every fact on hand. There still remains no details about target market or product type. I still don't see any expertise or experience in the oil refining industry... which might be detailed somewhere but on cursory inspection, I cannot find this. They also need the feedstock channel, again they may have this but I couldn't find any mention. Any further information is welcome. For anyone interested Future is held in a holding firm ClearCircle Environmental, which in turn is owned by investment firm one51 ClearCircle Environmental is 100% owned by One Fifty One plc (One51), an investment company with interests in recycling, renewable energy, infrastructure, food and distribution. One51 are also in a phase of reducing their debt pile which was pretty big until recently, they've reduced it to around 8 million.
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.