Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
Oops ! Damn the lack of edit function ;-<
Should have read ..."Ergo, there's no likelihood of demand for high-end coal power technology DRYING UP."
ATB
Hi all,
This a bit out of left field, but agree Hanno and CMEC could/should have seen this coming.
(1) GE has legacy business commitments to meet for the foreseeable;
(2) China 's own use of coal in its energy mix is still approx 50% and projected (by its own people) to decrease to a still significant 35% by 2050...of what will likely be higher overall energy demand. Ergo, there's no likelihood of demand for high-end coal power technology.
(3) There's a business opportunity for someone to pick up GE's legacy business (Siemens/Alsthom buy back ?) , if Trump won't countenance a sale to the Chinese (logical buyer), he'll have to compensate GE in some way, bigly.
(4) There's an election coming up. If the Dems win, GE is screwed : coal. If Trump wins, GE is probably screwed : in bed with China.
Tough call. Neutron Jack would not be happy. But money usually talks.
IMO/ATB
Very bullish statement, normally companies don’t say this unless they have a partner waiting in the wings to replace..?
Surely when GE offload the coal tech business whoever buys it will want the existing order book so most likely we will keep the same tech, it will just be supplied by a "new name" company. Plus this could take years so in the mean time they have said they will continue to support existing customers so our plant maybe constructed before they complete their exit plan anyway.
Chinese would also build it significantly cheaper than GE
Chinese probably would and could get things move quickly, when it starts.
Very good point humpalumps. I actually hadn't factored in the potential impact of trade wars from having US and Chinese involvement. The more cross border politics involved the more potential for disaster, especially if Trump gets relected and the d*ck swinging continues for another 4 years. If this can become fully Chinese we may well be "full steam ahead"
More I've thought about this the less I'm bothered with it actually. Might come out stronger if GE want to pull away would mitigate any future damage of trade wars as well having it all Chinese.
Scott Fletcher will be on phone to GE CEO :)
Thanks Newer, actually thats probably the most important line of the RNS.
And...
All critical Project work streams, including the historical cost audit and tariff negotiations, continue to progress positively.
Panic over - chill out everyone.
"Should the Project need to replace GE in its role as the technology partner the Company is confident that in conjunction with CMEC it can source a new technology partner and it is not envisaged that such a process would have a material impact on the Project. "
Damage limitation ?
Says shouldn’t be a problem so hope this is correct