We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
I do wonder whether floating on a US exchange is what we really need to get the market's full appreciation of HVO's value. Another excellent contract.
MSC Leandra is owned by MSC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean_Shipping_Company
Previously called Seago Istanbul, she was bought from Maersk by MSC (in part) for these trials. It is the same vessel the MSAR LONO was undertaken on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean_Shipping_Company
Please read the MSC section of recent RNSes for more information on that. https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QED/proposed-placing-and-open-offer-gzsayckh5gzryiv.html
Yes. HAZOP means "hazard and operability study" and is an exercise designed to use the expertise from all available parties to understand risks, assess likelihood, and how best to mitigate those risk.
That will be conducted specifically against the proposed/actual designs of the vessel trial.
For example:
* Complete failure of specialist diaphragm fuel pumps
** Impact would be that vessel loses ability to navigate;
** Likelihood of event is Lx (i.e. assessed as less likely to more likely depending on manufacturer stats for pump);
** Safety severity is Sx (i.e. loss of navigation likely high severity);
*Come up with some mitigations to reduce likelihood and/or severity
** Use multiple pumps operating in parallel with excess pumping capacity so that navigation can continue either unaffected or in degraded capacity;
** Spares available, prepared, and easy procedures to allow rapidly replacement of failed pumps;
** Crew education;
** Carry 8 spares;
* Reassess likelihood & severity based on applied mitigations
** Likelihood now much lower mathematically as you have 8 pumps in parallel and plenty of spares, and you can survive down to 2 and continue safe navigation;
Totally made up example, but hopefully you get the idea... Idea will be that different parties bring different expertise and perspectives to the table and you can map out the risk and mitigate appropriately.
Once done, if necessary, modifications can be made to software, procedures, or even additional hardware installed.
Here's a nice YT video that gives a very short practical example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AqtX8oCpKI
There's no such thing as a HAZOP test. JM even replied explicitly during the IMC verbal Q&A section to your question about "HAZOP test" stating that it's not a test. It is a paper exercise and involves scheduling all of the interested parties into a meeting together.
Here's my transcription of the answer JM gave:
"
The HAZOP is done independently of the vessel. That is a paper exercise. It doesn't require the vessel to be in a particular position to do the HAZOP. It can be done remotely.
We expect that to be done early this quarter. Once we've completed it, we'll let shareholders know. It's a paper exercise involving Lloyds Register, MSC, the OEM (Wartsila), and ourselves to get that done. A similar process that we did before with MSAR.
The vessel was undergoing the modifications and changes until quite recently, so that delayed the exercise being completed, but we expect that to happen very soon.
"
This was outlined in detail by PharaohRocher a couple of weeks ago, for those interested in scrolling back to find his useful post on this topic (sadly LSE not great for finding historic stuff).
@NormanForeman — Yes, but you wouldn't be partaking in the fundraising then. Secondary market trades don't fund the company.
Just a reminder (speaking broadly) that your broker's deadline for subscribing will likely be a tad shorter than the official timeline in the RNS and circular, so don't leave it til the last minute to decide, or you may miss out 👍.
It varies broker to broker, but for mine it is "Latest Response Date: 23:59 20/07/2023"
IIs likely already took part in the first fundraising via the placing, and it tends to be aimed at NHW, IIs, insiders, etc.
Because AM is fairly new to the company and didn't hold that many shares, it made sense for him to request shares via the placing because if he used the OO, he would only have been guaranteed 1/8th of his existing holding.
As he massively increased his holding in excess of 1/8th of his old holding, he could have ended up with almost none of his requested increase.
And obviously, he wanted to give a vote of confidence in the company, and make use of a rare opportunity for insiders to purchase shares.
I think there's another explanation: a significant number of people I know who hold lots of QED shares have (either on the forums or privately) indicated they've sold down shares in order to fund their contribution to the OO.
Everyone's share portfolios and incomes are suffering at the moment, so people don't necessarily have cash/stocks to hand to sell down. So, selling and buying back is a decent way to achieve this. That does cause a small downward pressure on prices.
Personal opinion part:
The price difference is small enough that I don't personally see the individual benefit of buying now at a modest market discount outweighing the collective (and individual) benefits of contributing those same funds to the company to try to ensure it thrives.
I do fully understand those who have decided they don't want to get involved at all (as outlined in previous post).
Anyway, you do you! Everyone must make their own decision.
That's absolutely fine Wonga, everyone must make their own decision.
You must instead rely on everyone else to get involved and hope it protects your existing investment; that's the tradeoff you are making, and it is a weighing up that all investors must make. Everyone posting on here likely represents the position of some larger subset of the overall "silent majority" shareholder base than just themselves.
My tradeoff is that I'm putting extra money into the company and if it doesn't work out then I've made my losses a little bit worse. But, I've decided that's a decent decision based upon what I am seeing in the development pipeline.
We understand your position completely and although people like me *are* getting involved and believe it will enable the company to get over the line, I understand completely anyone who does not and you are not irrational for that.
HF14 -
Examples:
https://apply-for-innovation-funding.service.gov.uk/competition/1645/overview/3013bb72-ee5b-4fda-9baf-47da3910b144#scope
https://apply-for-innovation-funding.service.gov.uk/competition/1646/overview/be3642c8-80e9-445a-8366-49eae215577d#scope
https://apply-for-innovation-funding.service.gov.uk/competition/1647/overview/8f7f5f02-aae9-4e7d-9ce3-bea08eaeb9e4#scope
Perhaps a productive avenue could be for you to write to your MP and make the argument (politely) that biofuels such as MSAR/bioMSAR should be included in the future fuels schemes.
Say that a British company is a frontrunner that is trying to break through commercially with operators such as MSC, but you are concerned that UK is providing a much less favourable environment than competing jurisdictions like EU and US.
Point out some companies in those other jurisdictions, and note that they are getting green grants and subsidies unavailable here in UK.
I was asked to share this here as it benefit wider shareholder community. Thanks, QED Shareholders' Forums & JPM.
Permission was given by JM to share this.
----
Question:
Dear Jason
I have spent considerable time going through the recent IMC and Q&A answers to get a handle on things before deciding whether or not to participate in the open offer.
A huge factor for me is the current situation around the fuel supply for MSC and to be fair you did provide additional info and colour to this subject in your oral and written replies. However, your written answer to Q6 said that selecting a suitable terminal was a “work in progress” while at Q10 you said “There is a lot of associated engineering and permitting work already being carried out in parallel”
These two replies seem somewhat contradictory. In my head, permitting and engineering prep is normally site specific, so how can this work be carried out in parallel if you have not yet selected the terminal?
Can you please give me some clarity on this please as I do think it matters to shareholders. I will of course share any reply you give with other holders if that is your wish.
Best wishes, *
Jason’s reply;
“Hi *
Apologies if the responses below were unclear, we had 102 questions to deal with from the IMC event.
We have a shortlist of terminals located in a particular area, all of which have shared features – hence in areas where there’s commonality the engineering has started. Similarly with regards to permitting, this refers not only to the terminals themselves, but also the fuel and biofuel bunkering permits and accreditation from suppliers and government agencies which are largely independent of the exact terminal location.
I hope that this helps, feel free to share as required.
KR,
Jason”
- QED already secured £1.1M at the placing (mostly to institutional investors).
- Then, QED have an agreement to bring in ~$1.5M from Valkor when they secure the permits to proceed with their project, in addition to various other fees. That is obviously contingent on getting past the DOGM Board and DOGM without further delay, but we should find out what the next steps on that in August.
- What we are providing via the OO:
(i) helps existing shareholders avoid dilution;
(ii) lengthens the runway and capital available for project expenditure without needing to return to the market again;
(iii) puts new shares in hands of people who are less likely to trade and other shenanigans than shorter-term IIs.
Refer to the circular for full information. https://wp-quadrise-fuels-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2023/07/Circular-to-Shareholders-Placing-Open-Offer-July-2023.pdf
Last bit got chopped off:
> So, overall, there's a lot still to play for. And I feel it is worth making a modest investment to give it a chance to make it over the line, and finally return some value to incredibly patient LHTs.
Thanks for the views, everyone.
After the RNSes, IMC, and Q&A, I've decided I will take up my allowance in this raise. I believe a few key projects are close to execution, and it makes sense to protect the existing (over)investments I've made in Quadrise and see it through.
To put it up front, in my view, the criticisms of the team's poor performance in certain areas is valid (re: strategic customer engagement, negotiations, complex project management, etc), and I hope they have taken that on board and will bring in the required skills as soon as possible. Perhaps that will be on the board of directors, or via full-time employees. There's been too much of a "must be a ChemE" focus at QED, and I believe they've left skills gaps in bizdev areas that are non-technical and don't require deep knowledge of surface chemistry!
I also accept that covid put the brakes on things over the previous couple of years. We shouldn't discount that when thinking about delays.
All things considered, I think the calibre of partners we have is high. Especially for MSC. MSC have purchased and overhauled a ship to undertake the trials, which is a considerable investment. The credibility we can gain by successfully executing those trials and entering into a commercial relationship cannot be overestimated. The economic, market, and regulatory conditions are extremely well-aligned to our product, so this is the best opportunity we'll ever get.
In Morocco, despite our best efforts to shoot ourselves in the foot, things are still on track and this looks like a fantastic opportunity to establish a large commercial contract with scope to expand into additional sites; it also offers the tantalising prospect of re-establishing a relationship with Cepsa for long-term supply in the Med region. Naturally, this could also benefit the marine programme in the long term, but also open up other industrial opportunities in the Med and North Africa.
In Utah, I suspect there's been too much trust of Mr Byle's/Valkor's optimistic timelines, but there's little doubt as to the scale of the opportunity there and that it is an excellent fit for our technology. I am intrigued to see whether Valkor can get these local users using MSAR/bioMSAR, because it will be a while before the railroad is completed, and even longer before the marine programme is mature enough to regularly justify sending vast quantities of MSAR/bioMSAR via rail for bunkering in LA or Houston. It would also be wonderful for us to have some active projects that potential customers could come and visit to see it in action for themselves.
In South America, the projects are interesting, but historically we've had problems converting into commercial because of the complex politics in that region. So that's a "let's wait and see" for me, and I'll be delighted for any of them to progress beyond trials. It seems a good fit given the energy and economic dynamics in the region.
So, overall, there's a lot still
It's in the RNS, see the table: https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QED/placing-results-open-offer-posting-of-circular-13gt0wap07uns9f.html
Andy has dramatically increased his holding.
JM is taking up approximately his allowance in OO (touch less, not material).
Laurie, Phil S, and David are applying in excess of their allowances.
Phil H acquired his first tranche of shares.
You can do whatever you like, of course, and nobody would begrudge you that.
But, the idea is that you are acting to protect your investment instead of guaranteeing a loss.
Hi All,
I've made a cleaned audio-only version of the IMC. I have also slowed down the audio by a tiny fraction, as it makes Jason easier to understand.
I found it useful to listen again, as there are quite a lot of details I missed first time.
https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/audio/12-july-qed-imc-cleaned.opus
@Wazaaa: circular page 6. Your broker will usually have narrower windows by a day or two; they'll advise you very shortly, no doubt.
"1 Open Offer Share for every 8 Existing Ordinary Shares held on the Record Date"
Record Date was 6th July 2023 @ 18:00.
However many shares you had at the date and time above, 1/8th of that amount should be the entitlement (guaranteed number of shares you can acquire if you wish).
You can still always apply for excess if you wish.
Check out the circular: https://wp-quadrise-fuels-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2023/07/Circular-to-Shareholders-Placing-Open-Offer-July-2023.pdf