Member Info for 1yrless

Sad to say that was the worst investor presentation I've ever seen. Was really hoping for an honest and positive update. I was hoping to get a real understanding as to what is causing the delays and a clear route to resolution. The technology did not help, but not down to Quadrise.

Have been in this share for 13 years and think us long term sufferers deserve better. I think the should redo this presentation in a month's time and include some customer videos, to demonstrate they really are on side.

This is not helping their credibility

Maybe too simplistic but my take is the primary reason for delay in MSC signing is waiting until we have sufficient refineries etc. ready to sign and lined up for the future for a material roll out of MSAR and possibly bio MSAR. Otherwise why undertake the trial, wasting time and money. This makes what looks like a simple signing ceremony a complex alignment of major companies caught up in chicken and egg /first mover arguments.

In summary, we obviously have the engineering skills to engage at the top level of their opposite numbers. We have always lacked the business development skills to get the deals over the line in a timely manner. That doesn't mean the deals won't happen, it means that risk and timescales increase.

Personally, I still believe, after 13 years invested, that we have a game changing product. Even more so given the bio work. We desperately need other skills in our company in order to forge ahead.

Quite right, they wouldn't but my point is that without the right sponsorship we are at the mercy of a major organisation's sign off processes that likely involves multiple parties who know little about us = stop start delays.

Re. binding agreement, if it's a framework contract, unfortunately that doesn't necessarily mean they have to call off work with us.

My theory on MSC is that we have the engineers on side (we talk their language) but have failed to get sufficient exec sponsorship to navigate their sign off processes. I would have hoped to have a board level sponsorship on our side, think of the impact we could have on MSC's bottom line!

This would reflect that we need a top quality sales executive who is willing and able to navigate MSC's organisation and make the case to a broad, influential audience.

25% A) MSC Trail starting in Q3?

5% B) Morocco Commercial MSAR trail starting in Q3?

50% C) Sparkle power trial happening in Q3?

25% D) Utah delivery of samples+ Delivery MMU in Q3?

Only on reflection did I realise I had become so negative, need far better comms and honesty (stop giving dates you know are overly optimistic) from the bod

Couldn't agree more re. "roller coaster". Been in since 2012; highest price paid 34.75 bought 23,000 shares for £8,000; lowest price paid 1.18 bought 40,000 shares for £480.

I'm also ok with daily fluctuations on no news. Hoping my challenge will be when re reach reach a stage where the share price is > 15p but the company is still pre substantive revenue. Do I then start to cash in or wait for the big bucks? Obviously, a whopping takeover could make the decision an easy one :-)

I believe Sulnox use water in oil technology (their website talks about Fine, evenly-spaced water droplets in the emulsion) whereas MSAR is oil in water.

Many thanks for sharing. If we take the wording literally then this is good news as it talks about signatures, suggesting the contract wording is agreed.

I have been closely involved in getting many multi million pound contracts over the line and, when dealing with big companies, you are stuck with their approvals and sign off processes. There are likely to be multiple levels of sign off, possible exec briefings and possibly governance meetings. QED will have little, if any, influence over this. We don't know how far through the process they are, so we could hear any day.

Just watched the AGM video, hints of oil major involved and at the end Jason mentioned needing a bio certificate for Holland. Who might this be? 🤔

Hi, is the WhatsApp group open to new joiners. Despite having written off FRR I can't quite give up hope that something good will come through. Thanks

ohh, and also limited cover re. IPR, trade secrets, know how etc.

In terms of working without a contract, should a deal not be ultimately signed; there's the obvious financial risk that we may be unable to recover any costs, there's a risk that with no liability parameters agreed then should there be a claim (e.g. a fire caused by QFI kit or people) then liabilities would be uncapped. There's also the opportunity cost in that we are using resources that could have been better used elsewhere.

The board need to weigh up pro's and cons and decide on how far to go without a contract. Personally I think that we should not do much work (maybe focus on long lead time, low cost, low risk work) outside of a contract as doing so takes the pressure off getting the contract agreed.

My take on the April agreements:
-Morocco: assuming we now have good sponsorship, should be relatively straight forward to agree an adendum
-MSC: the most complex deal so lots of potential to slip but should be a matter of time
-Utah: its all down to where we are with the end users, I feel Jason could have said a lot more about this but chose not to.

So, I'm expecting one deal to be agreed (given how they pushed April in the call), two would be a bonus, three very unlikely. V happy to be wrong and we bag all 3 :-)

The thing is we have already tried the "streamline" approach, with Maersk & Saudi, didn't work out well. I remember the firm at the time boasting of multiple other opportunities that they were too busy to pursue.
Hence the move to pursuing multiple deals in order to land one and build some foundations for QFI.

Looks like the politics in Mexico are even worse than the UK! The concern for me is that no matter how strong a case we have, it will only play out if the politicians allow common sense to prevail. Hopefully they will see that we have something that plays strongly with their agenda of reducing imports of refined products.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKK0UtZI0FU

Well done to all, especially the great researchers. It feels like we need a big break to turn things around - facing off to the Georgian Gov is not ideal but what choice is there?
Have added my £20, to help the cause.

and the thing that jumped out to me was that Hope made no attempt to separate his two, naturally conflicting roles. E.g. He used his Outrider email account when both stating an Outsider position mixed in with his Frontera Director position.

To protect himself he should have used a Frontera, or neutral, email account and confined himself to speaking as a director of Frontera. When stating Outsiders position he should have stepped aside and let a different Outsider director cover it.

I think he has put himself into a position where he has confused his two roles meaning that he has inconsistently aplied his fiduciary duties.