Member Info for bonzoful

Very grateful for the information gleaned by others and posted here. I see the potential and am enthusiastic about the prospects over 3-4 years as revenue becomes visible and the opportunity to tackle accidents from fatigue, alcohol and drugs is appreciated.
In the longer term I wonder how much of the car market is going to be won by Chinese car makers about to sell electric cars with comparable ranges to, but for less than ice cars. PM says in the investor presentation Seeing machines is not engaging with China. Is that going to prove a problem in a few years time?

Given the possibility that Nanoco cfqd may end up in sensors for automobiles, some may be interested in Qualcomms presentation today. https://twitter.com/Qualcomm

I am fully committed to SEE. The one reservation I have is how are car owners to be persuaded to pay for DMS. Regulation is one answer, and still years away. Benefits is another: not killing your loved ones, maybe. Health benefits for you, even better. The case for SEE will be even stronger when there is a clear answer to Why pay for DMS?

The article reports an announcement from COP26 on sustainable airline fuel planned for Wednesday. I suspect this is likely to arouse more interest in Velocys.

Ddubya
The reason for the delay was addressed in yesterday's presentation. As some of us suspected it was covid impacting on the staff of the auditors .

The references to the third work package, leading to work in the short to medium term, infrared and an important European customer suggest this another step towards possible commercial production in H2 2022 (FY 2023). There is a lot of activity in rolling out Driver Monitoring Systems at present and this is one possible use for this work. Qualcomm appear to be capturing a lot of the market working in partnership with Seeing Machines. Or so contributors to the SEE chat room suggest.

2 million bought this morning so far. That will deplete the brokers books so they will need to rebuild them. Things looking up.

There may be news about they want to tie in with announcement. Conceivably the audit team may have been affected by the virus. The reassurance the Board is not aware of any audit issues is helpful.

As Shell introduce DMS across their fleet other companies with fleets will have to follow suit. Directors have a responsibility to identify and manage risks, driver fatigue and distraction is such a risk. Seems to me Directors could, once DMS is widely known to be available and useful, be at risk of being held negligent if they don't introduce DMS.

Many thanks for your analysis. I am persuaded by your arguments and over the last year have invested here. My only larger investment is in Nanoco which, it claims, has had its technology stolen by Samsung. Nanoco will take years to establish its intellectual property rights in court. Before delivering a handsome bonus to long term investors. Despite the intellectual arguments it may yet be years for the benefits of SEEs work to be recognised. I shall use the interregnum to stock up within levels I can afford and recognise the risks of IP theft and being undercut. I think the share price will move when insurers and/or car hire firms recognise the benefits of DMS in lower premiums.

Report in FT suggests Apple may be turning from producing car to enhancing drivers ****pit experience. Elsewhere DMS and infotainment seem to be linked. So conceivable that Apple may prove interested in SEE at some point.

I agree the UK is missing opportunities (in hydrogen and in tidal and wave power); see countries without major fossil fuel companies moving faster and suspect oders will first come from them: eg South Korea, Japan, Germany, Denmark. I am encouraged by the reason Maersk gave for ordering ships capable of running off both fossil and other fuel: because some of their customers want a zero carbon supply chain.

Brilliant idea to make green hydrogen from Niagra falls. Sadly the UK does not have such a dramatic source of hydro power. But generating green hydrogen ( and inserting it into our gas network) by submerging generators in our main rivers and off shore tidal sites could provide a massive reduction in the UK s impact on climate change for a one off capital cost funded at interest rates near an all time low. (Trials announced earlier today suggest up to 20 per cent of the gas in our networks can be hydrogen with no changes to our gas appliances.)

Important to have the politicians onside. The technology is sorted. The politicians in USA, UK, and major corporate partners in Japan are onside. The demand from airlines and their consumers is there. Just the price for SAF and finance to sort. If the price is right the finance will be there. And I think consumer demand for action on carbon emissions from aviation is strong enough to ensure that one way or another the price of SAF is good enough to get the finance in.

I agree.
This afternoon I have considered why it is the UK government has an energy policy I do not believe in. I worked for HMTreasury for a couple of decades and found spending departments tended to reflect the views of the interests they got their information from: in DEnergys case BP and RS. I know a few ex employees of those companies who do not believe that moving to renewable energy will sustain the corporate overheads they are used to: so their prospects are bleak. I suspect we will find that countries without large fossil fuel companies (South Korea, Japan, Germany, Denmark come to mind) will find their way forward more easily than countries where fossil fuel vested interests are given a fair hearing. Which is a pity. The UK has some of the best wind and tidal resources in the world. If we committed to those industries to drive forward to a fossil fuel free economy we could gain competitive advantages in the new industries that are arising now. And bring forward a world of cheap, carbon free energy.

Hydrogen for industry and eventually, shipping looks likely. But is not sufficient to address the question how electricity to warm homes in a cold snap is brought into cities like London. Not much renewable energy generated here. I think you end up believing the UK Government's approach that we will move to heat exchange pumps, better insulation and hot water tanks or you see a role for hydrogen in shifting energy from where it can be generated renewable to where the demand is.
My view is influenced by the significant fall in the cost of producing renewable energy over the last decade. I see lots of new ideas for reducing those costs further. So in a decade green hydrogen will, I believe, be competitive on price. And before then lots of us will want to support it to limit our contribution to climate change.

As we already have a good gas distribution network I reckon it will be used for something: the National Grid are trialling running hydrogen through it. The big problem with relying on electricity too much is heating our homes in cold snaps. Though this is current policy I don't believe the NG capacity problem is answered. And nor do I believe heat exchange pumps adequate to heat our aging, poorly insulated homes. Many newer flats will not have the hot water tanks required. And many of us flat dwellers will be reluctant to give up space for them.

ITM Motive plan to roll out more hydrogen fuelling stations. I suspect (a) the roll of electric in the UK will be limited by the National Grid's capacity to transmit power into the cities and (b) the shift to Hydrogen will be helped by some consumers and companies wish to support carbon neutral companies: the reason Maersk gave for ordering ships that could run on non fossil fuels.

A potential new investor would have to do a lot of research to understand why Nanoco is such a good bet. There is no significant revenue nor likely to be for a couple of years and the court and patent office proceedings are opaque: though we benefit from lobo's updates ( for which many thanks). Many of us already have sufficient exposure to Nano. So the share price is likely to drift down as some have to sell. But we will probably have to put up with that for a while.
There must be comparable shares out there. I offer SEE as an example. The LSE chat board makes clear why. If other Nano longtermers believe in the prospects of other shares in technology companies comparable to Nanoco (technology start ups) I for one would be interested to dmor on them.

Prompted by Bilboburgers pertinent focus on orders it seems to me the main driver, across UK hydrogen companies, at present is private companies' desire to demonstrate a zero or low carbon supply chain to their own consumers. Maersk explicitly identified this when commissioning new container ships this week ( see RNS from CWR of 25 August). VLS focus on low carbon sustainable aviation fuel with partnerships in Japan, US and UK. Both shipping and aviation are substantial markets where consumer preferences are likely to impact on the fuel used in the near future. It would be good if there were, for ITM, an equally clear substantial market sensitive to end consumer preferences.