Member Info for bluerill

A the risk of repeating myself, here is a very recent faux-expert, sadly typical comment which explains my reluctant arrival here:

'...My previous comment at 16:19 applies.
I accept there is a market for VRFB, does Invinity actually have a product that's competitive in this market?....'

Again, Invinity is a market leader, if not THE market leader, in this nascent space. The challenges here are the market's continued development relative to Li Ion, and execution by new management, and NOT technology. If you don't understand that, you're not 'entitled' to anything.

excuse me? what exactly would that be?

Nope, I'm on retainer. 10 grand a month to mock as many humourless trolls as possible. Just doin my job

Ha, my greatest hits! I'm busted. You've proven beyond any doubt that......I have bottomless reserves of creativity in describing your numbnutiness. Scream at me some more about how I must be plant because I'm really mean to you.

'....One major trick is for the pump and dumpers to call genuine shareholders names and try to elicit a response...' Every time I post something, I move further away to avoid this dude's spit zone, but its never enough.

And then here are the complete known works on the relevance of the subject to this bulletin board (list can also be used to cover the extent of this towering knob's knowledge of the stock market, battery storage or sentence structure):
.
.
.
.
.

Useful blog on mental illness: screaming into the void:
https://screamingintothevoid.ca/category/mental-illness/

Great article explaining projection, the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.
https://emotional-intelligence-training.weebly.com/treating-psychological-projection.html

Making what up? Certainly not my diagnosis of your mental capacity

Do you think that just because a meeting takes place that that implies that privileged information is exchanged?? Are you high?

ScoutS - your entire post is again such a heaving mass of ignorance delivered with the breathless confidence borne of that ignorance, that it's impossible to know where to start. To take just one: your drooling obsession about me having met management. Do you have any idea how moronic you sound? Larger individual shareholders, market professionals have meetings all the time with company managements, especially in smaller companies, organised around everything from pre-fundraises to company presentations organised by wealth managers. In that context, I have indeed met a number of times the old Redt execs as well as the new team post-merger. So have a lot of larger shareholders. Just because they haven't yet reached your care home, doesn't mean it isn't a routine occurrence. Crikey, take a pill.

yellow, you must be so accustomed to people asking you to leave that you seem to think I did as well. Stay, go, I could care less. What I do care about is to see that you stop using this message board as free therapy. As I said, if you post, you need to know what you're talking about and being an aggrieved 'LTH' is not a qualification that miraculously makes nonsense suddenly meaningful. Since you don't seem to understand that, I expect you will be seeing a lot of my 'prepared' posts for a while (prepared script?? That's clear, well-written prose, you numbskull. You'd recognise it if you read a book once in a while). In fact, I might say the exact same thing of most of what you tend to share. Seems they're always some dour combo of 'look how much the share price has fallen' + 'no one can understand my pain' + 'don't look forward, the past is prelude.' Seems pretty boilerplate to me. Finally, I think its pretty rich for someone who routinely misstates IES's product status and doesn't understand the cost superiority of flow in larger-scale, longer-term projects - and that was just from your most recent fur ball - to think he can just declare what I do or do not know about anything.

I guess I should say that I am responding to Yellow. For the other fella with the ridiculous nickname, all I can say is I'm not a therapist.....First, being articulate or not has nothing whatever to do with anything. Unfortunately, that was the highpoint of your post. You are so poisoned by the company's and share price's past performance that you don't seem to have the vaguest understanding of, well, anything to do with the business (for heaven's sake, you don't even understand that IES's product offering leads the industry currently), and yet you clearly feel justified in burping up any old nonsense because you've lost some money and you're soooo very angry about it. Of course the very basis of your question defeats it. The problems at RED are far more complex than your primitive need to reduce it all to Scott Macgregor's mismanagement or whatever your paper thin understanding here dictates. In fact, the new management team is a very big deal indeed. The Avalon-team is far more professionally organised, with a huge focus on securing new business, and it is actually starting with a pretty promising, combined order book, very much including the business brought over from RED. In fact, perhaps only one of the legacy deals in RED's order book was deemed structurally unprofitable. The rest Larry seems confident can be made profitable or at least break-even within the new structure.

Oisin has made £2.755m since closing his deal with Martin.
Toscafund, which manages much of Martin Hughes' wealth, have made roughly £6.6m over the same couple of days.
But neither of those windfalls come close to matching the pure, undiluted joy, felt by everyone here still tethered to their humanity, in knowing just how consumed with jealousy Jabba surely is. Oh, and everyone, because they still some personal wealth and weren't forced to move in with their parents, also saw the value of their holding go up 50% in the past week. So there's that.

Very kind. So do I. In that spirit, let me share a thought inspired by one of the obsessions of many on this board, most prominently my newest rabid antagonist: If shareholders truly believe that the original sin of RED management was over promotion and and a concomitant land-grab approach to signing deals without proper due diligence and economic rigour - an over-arching critique with which I generally agree as well - don't you think it is rationale to assume that a new management team, born in the teeth of a market meltdown, might just be determined to reverse forever the mistakes of the past by putting their heads down and pledging to communicate with the market only when they have real, verified, profitable business to announce? Even if that risks overdoing it in the near term to the point where shareholders begin to feel neglected? Just a thought....

Ha, I expected a couple of knobby responses, but you managed to exceed expectations already. That screed was dripping with so much mindless commentary, it was almost creepy. Fortunately, I have my PhD in dealing with muppets like your fine self who think having held a share for a certain period of time, lost money and are really, really angry about it is some kind of analytical qualification that somehow inoculates you from, you know, having to know what you're talking about. Who do I think I am? I'm your worst nightmare. Someone who understands the company, its business, its history and the stock market better than you do and doesn't give a hoot about your clearly desperate need to share your pain. I've read a brief sampling of your posting history and girlfriend, you need A LOT of guidance.

As for your tasmanian devil rant about my sudden arrival being clear evidence that I'm a 'paid ramper' (ugh), I'll try and pretend like that somehow that isn't the product of the fevered mind of someone that hasn't the first clue how equity markets work, and instead just tell ya 'nah'. In fact, I've held IES well back to when it was plain old RED, have met previous and current management on several occasions and lost my share of dough here. Though it is not my first time posting as I said earlier, the reason - though I clearly don't owe you one - I'm showing up now is because I've judged it the right moment. I made a similar decision to engage on the board of that African 'gas' company you managed to misrepresent at what I considered an equally auspicious moment in its history. Now, 3 years and many, many, many vanquished trolls later, that 'failing' oil company is the best performer on AIM over that period.

Time to up your game chumly, or get out of my way.....

I have posted some on Invinity after the merger and plan to help guide this board more in the future. For me, I have no problem in principle with anyone who posts with their spleen like Yellow1. However, I do have one rule: you have to know what you're talking about during those rare moments when you stop b*tching about the past and comment on the current business or industry. On that, you and others here need to understand first that IES may indeed have some larger 'competitors' but to blithely claim that several are 'better', is patently untrue. In an admittedly nascent market niche, IES is as close to a market leader in the space as there is anywhere. And don't get me started about your ridiculously oversimplified argument on the cost comparison between LI Ion and flow. I remember schooling you on that months ago but you don't seem to have taken it to heart. Shame. Finally, the way you drone on endlessly about the importance of IES booking first sales, you would think that you're the only person on earth who has had this searing insight. Note to you: you're not, so you stop yapping about it already.

Now on to more important stuff: Last week the California’s Energy Commission announced the results of GFO-19-306 which was a review of how much long term energy storage was needed with long duration and non Li Ion. This solicitation will focus on demonstrating the value of energy storage technologies that can support different customer needs, including for grid outages. The solicitation will have three groups focused on non-Lithium ion technologies that can provide a minimum of 10 hours of energy storage and one group will focus on any energy storage technology for residential new construction.
Group 1: Demonstrate non-Lithium ion energy storage for 10 hours or longer at a minimum rating of 400 kW ($10M total; $5M - $10M per award);
Group 2: Demonstrate non-Lithium ion energy storage for 10 hours or longer at a minimum rating of 50 kW to support Native American Tribal communities ($4M total; $500k - $2M per award);
Group 3: Demonstrate non-Lithium ion energy storage for 10 hours or longer at a minimum rating of 50 kW to support disadvantaged/low-income communities ($4M total; $500k - $2M per award);
Group 4: Demonstrate energy storage to support a minimum of 15 new construction homes in three climate zones (a minimum of a coastal climate zone, central valley climate zone and a northern California climate zones) to support Title 24 Joint Appendix 12 compliance ($2M total; $500k - $1M per award).
Now that is all in the public domaine but what we cant yet know is who will win what and how much - but there is a $20mn order for Non Li Ion energy storage and I'm hearing that IES has been part of a consortium with the best product. The orders should be announced relatively soon and though not game-changing, I reckon IES have a reasonable chance to realise $5-7m for their part of this order. Stay tuned

Just a couple of final thoughts on this general topic pivoting particularly off of Winnifrith's comments today. First off, once again, Tom Winnifrith is not a good actor generally and it pains me to be on the same side of any trade with him. Still, when he's right, he's right and all that. I've been around even longer than Winnifrith and I can't ever remember a transaction of this size and scale by a small-cap executive in his company's listed shares either. Ever. As a result, the 'information effect' of this cannot be over-estimated. Not only has Oisin himself sent the strongest possible message to the market regarding his confidence in the company's short- and medium-term ability to generate cash and return consistent, material dividends, but as mclean highlights from today's interview, that information effect on the Firm's prospective dividend policy is further significantly magnified by any credit provider that would back the transaction. I know that has already been highlighted by several others already, I just wanted to add my 2p worth and frankly, this point really can't be made often or strongly enough.
A final, related point that has not been featured much however, was touched on by a clever poster on Jabba's home board, and it may help explain why we're not hearing from certain empty barrels over here at the moment nor of course, Jabba himself on advfn. The essence of the point is this: Jabba is no ordinary troll. This is an individual or individuals (one theory is that he may be 2 embittered souls) who has engaged in a multi-year campaign mostly on another message board comprised of misinformation, lies and baseless accusations - often posting (or just pasting old rubbish) half a dozen times a day, 5 days a week - in a seemingly inexhaustible effort to smear the company and its management, often revelling not just in seeing the share price fall but also in the knowledge, which he is frequently gleeful in pointing out, that others might be suffering significant personal loss. I began posting here during the suspension over 3 years ago which ended in the extraordinary deal for OML18 because I was genuinely shocked by his utter shamelessness in spreading misinformation. That person doesn't want to just see this company fail and the shares go to 0, that person wants to see Oisin Fanning ruined in every way, but particularly financially. That person - and any other posters on various boards that may in fact be him or affiliated with him - is I suspect, in complete and total shock at the moment, unable to speak or even rage-post. And NOT because the share price has had a minor rally, but because he realises that, with this massive share purchase, his mortal enemy will never experience the financial ruin he seems to so crave but is now in fact, set for life. Bit of a stretch perhaps, but this is a creature that mocked a poster's fears for his daughter during the early days of Covid19, I believe he is capable of anything.

Sorry bs, I do tend to think in full sentences, even paragraphs sometimes. Maybe you've heard of them

Really? I mean...really? After all that effort to explain why what you had written was a nonsense and gave you a roadmap for recalibrating your crooked thinking, that's all you've got? People are being mean to you and, oh by the way, you've had tremendous success (funny how touting one's unprovable trading history becomes a go-to move for guys I 'argue' with) despite that? Really? Sheesh. On your bike.....

Understand first that your 'evidence' undermines your point completely, though you clearly hope by declaring it so confidently will make it seem otherwise. As Timbremner suggests, we can almost dismiss it outright. You obviously have no experience whatever with funds, particularly hedge funds, that go through the type of exigent market conditions and resultant shocking monthly performance that tosca clearly did. Not only is every 1m quid important, never mind 20(!) , but even more important is that the senior portfolio managers have to be seen to be doing active triage at all times in order to demonstrate clearly to existing and potential new investors that they are taking the situation seriously. But way way way more important, shelve your unfounded confidence for a second and really look at the transaction that took place: 21% of the company was sold from an informed investor to an even more informed investor AT THE PREVIOUS DAY'S CLOSING PRICE. Especially if you're right and tosca was a motivated seller who had lost faith in the company, don't you think the buyer - the CEO of the company who was nevertheless buying the shares for his personal account(!) - would have demanded at least a token discount to the current price, particularly as the shares had - including the dividend - just enjoyed a 150+% bounce? After all, every halfpenny would have represented a £490k savings directly in Oisin's personal pocket! Don't you think that if Martin were in the position you describe, with an interest in selling a massive position in an illiquid company quickly, he would have been more than happy to give even a 2p discount to get the trade done (or better asked, who in the hell do you think has the leverage in this scenario)? I can tell you for free, mainly bc I've been on both sides of that type of transaction, that the answer to that one is 'duh...of course'. Ergo, Q.E.D., to wit: dontcha reckon it's just a tiny bit possible that in fact, at the very least, this transaction was MUTUALLY agreeable? That maybe, just maybe, that in addition to tosca's situation, Oisin also WANTED this transaction and perhaps had even been pursuing toscafund over time to reduce its holding and sell him a stake? Thus, after a period where the Fund had been severely stressed, the shares had performed particularly well and provided a handsome dividend, where tosca could still maintain a super-controlling stake as SLE sets about to pay regular dividends, but where Martin could sell to a super-motivated actor, it was an auspicious time to do this bargain, and as a result of that mutuality of interests, it got done at a 0 discount? Once you realise the logic of this possibility, you then open your tiny mind to an even greater one: that maybe this transaction was in fact MORE demand-pull, than supply-push.hm