The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
"Which is debt finance, not revenues, big difference"
Huge difference (small difference) but the subject was raising money. And getting a bridging loan because a MNC *owes* you money isn't in the same ball park as throwing your hat in the ring for another dodgy dilutive AIM fundraiser.
Maybe they've had the heads up from the people above?..
Proposed Change of Name
Strengthening Quadrise's positioning within Energy Decarbonisation
Quadrise Fuels International Plc (AIM:QFI), the supplier of innovative energy solutions for a cleaner planet, announces that the Board of Directors intends to change the Company's name from Quadrise Fuels International plc to Quadrise plc, and the Company's TIDM from 'QFI' to 'QED'.
The renaming of the Company is part of the Board's initiative to emphasise Quadrise's position in the energy decarbonisation space amongst customers and investors and to acknowledge the material contribution that the Company's technology solutions can make to reducing carbon intensity in marine, power and industrial applications. The move also sets the tone for future development of the Company as it continues to implement its strategy towards net-zero carbon energy solutions and carbon mitigations.
It is currently expected that the renaming of the Company to Quadrise plc will occur prior to the end of March 2023, subject to relevant filings being made with Companies House to implement, when the Company's TIDM will also change to 'QED'.
The Company's website will be refreshed at the same time, with updates reflecting the Company's decarbonisation strategy.
A further announcement in respect of completion of the proposed change of Company name will be made in due course.
Jason Miles, Chief Executive of Quadrise, commented:
"We are excited about the direction Quadrise continues to take as we establish the Company firmly within the energy decarbonisation process, with all the opportunities that present themselves for our suite of products. The new, simpler name and updated ticker reflects a dynamic environment and our ambition for Quadrise within it."
That is all.
The only issue going forward for the company is production. Can it produce sufficient quantity to cover demand if the testing is completed to the companies, industries, and its potential customers satisfaction. Their own RNS's have brought this point to bare and we haven't been informed if a solution to this problem has been found.
"Excluding discretionary project costs, the current spend rate of £240k per month (fixed plus development costs) is sufficient cash until end Q4 2023."
"Morocco refuelling opportunity (2-5 kbpd total)"
From the presentation: Annual General Meeting Business Update Presentation, 25.11.2022
So long as QFI conclude the fuel supply agreement within H1 2023, as planned, the cash runway should not be an issue.
16 January update:
"Quadrise expects a successful trial to be followed thereafter by discussions to conclude a commercial fuel supply agreement in H1 2023 as planned."
Worst case scenario: 2000 BPD at a small £10 per barrel to QFI is £600k per month. Outgoings are only £240k per month.
Which is debt finance, not revenues, big difference.
If they can show an executed contract for services rendered they can approach the debt markets for funding instead.
Yes, Salinger, true — plus, it's hard to predict how long it will take to seal agreements with customers and suppliers. QFI were quite bullish on rapidly getting the LONO supply-side agreements sorted out, and that certainly hasn't panned out in the timelines they anticipated.
And I agree with your second point (broadly), that securing the signatures for Morocco would be much stronger basis for another raise than our current status. The same applies same for LONO supply deals and getting POC and LONO sailing underway. It seems vanishingly unlikely that the company will be generating sufficient revenues within the runway available to avoid a raise — but they have plenty of opportunities to make the situation much less dilutive by delivering on their key project milestones.
“QFI may not need any cash, as Morocco just needs to go to a commercial supply agreement and then it has good revenues”
This is an absolute garbage comment from Brian McShaggis. He knows very well commercial contracts for Morocco supply will take many months to put in place after any successful trial. Then planning and engineering works to create fuel production. Many more months (6/9).
There is zero chance that income from Morocco can avert a fundraise.
At best the SP will lift to a more acceptable level where any placing does not dilute us severely.
Haggis is a shameless ramper, end of.
"The contagion is only relevant to those holding bonds that they are losing money on"
And only then if they need to sell them *right now*.
SR,
Agreed. The contagion is only relevant to those holding bonds that they are losing money on, so a few banks and institutions might lose a bit of money, but that is normal and it'll get absorbed by the big profits they have been making. That's the whole point of UK and EU forcing banks to have enough cash behind them to avert contagions like the SVB issue.
QFI may not need any cash, as Morocco just needs to go to a commercial supply agreement and then it has good revenues. If it wants to top up cash after that, it will have loads of options for funding, as the risk level will plummet.
"On a serious note , if the markets go tits up as a result of the Silicon Bank default and contagion soreads,then Qfi are going to have a really hard time with a fund raise unless we have some concrete news on a lot of fronts."
No, none of this is true. The contagion would have to spread to a pretty unimaginable degree. And you can then say that about anything
I have seen this ships too when I started reading abbaut ammonia and shipping today.. but as I said, everything is possible on a paper, but between ammonia ready, ammonia usage and first accident there are big questions in the air… I still can not believe that ammonia as a fuel is so good that someone take the risk of accident in account… https://nj.gov/health/eoh/rtkweb/documents/fs/0084.pdf
On a serious note , if the markets go tits up as a result of the Silicon Bank default and contagion soreads,then Qfi are going to have a really hard time with a fund raise unless we have some concrete news on a lot of fronts.
Its gonna be batten down the hatches time.
===
Utah - copy and past of business update in Jan
MSC -- copy and past of business update in Jan
Americas - copy and past of business update in Jan
===
My favourite copy is Lavazza
My favourite past is tagliatelli
Nejc
The first Ammonia ready ship was delivered over a year ago.
https://www.offshore-energy.biz/worlds-first-ammonia-ready-vessel-delivered/
Then there's this one:
https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/news-content-hub/mol-and-mitsui-win-aip-for-ammonia-powered-bulk-carrier-74739
There's a few others on the build too. VARD have a design for a Fuel Cell powered coaster that runs on cracked Ammonia.
MAN, Wastrila etc are redesigning engines to run on Ammonia or a blend including Ammonia.
So the designs are already out there.
However, Ammonia and Methanol are not going to displace MSAR and bioMSAR in container shipping for a couple of decades, due to the lack of global bunkering for those fuels.
Haggis I have read the report and the risk is not jet under control, there are just written some hazards and some solutions with references on other industries.
From this industry (productions plants) I come as designer, so I know how to deal with in a Plant design or transport. But there are two many risks involved on a ship with the combination of personal, movement of ship, …. I know there is transport going on, but this is a special ship, with high skilled personal under controlled routes, ports….
I really do not see Amonia as a fuel on any ship. It would be to complex design, to high risk, to expensive…. So the industry will not implement it if they can produce synthetic diesel for comparable amount of energy and same sources.
“MSC trial would be progressing on several fronts. Just because the ship is not in dock for the work needed, does not stop the many other work streams from progressing.”
Really? Can’t say that’s been my experience of QFI over the previous decade or so. More Haggis fluff.
Interim results last year were announced on 28 March, and in 2021 on 29 March.
Going by the update on 23 February, the Morocco trial should definitely have started but might not be completed by month end, although it's quite possible that one of the fuels will have completed it's trial I'm thinking maybe not, and certainly not both, as QFI said ".... the Company is now finalising the trial schedule with the client and anticipates fuel trials to commence prior to the end of Q1 2023", end of Q1 being the end of March of course, so may not start until close to the results date, unless the client can/will fast track them.
MSC trial would be progressing on several fronts. Just because the ship is not in dock for the work needed, does not stop the many other work streams from progressing.
Utah, TOM have extended their deal deadline to 31 March (a shorter extension than previous one's suggesting the deal is very close to sign-off), so there could be good news on that front close to the results (or hopefully a lot sooner).
Other projects have probably not moved much since the business update of 16 January, but there could always be a surprise.
'Don't think your expectations influence much.'
100% correct.I don't expect them to infuence anything.
Nejc,
There are no issues with Ammonia that are not already dealt with in the industries that currently use huge amounts of Ammonia, such as fertilizer and petrochemicals.
https://www.emsa.europa.eu/publications/item/4833-potential-of-ammonia-as-fuel-in-shipping.html
I am sure this question has been asked and answered, I would be grateful if someone maybe Dust ranked msar and biomsar against all the other options available to the shipping industry.
"I am expecting :"
Don't think your expectations influence much.
“Time to get my questions prepared for the IMC”
I’m sure Jason is shaking in his slippers as we speak!