Member Info for dustofnations

Financial year end is 30th June

I'm not sure this "Yes, Minister"-level absurdity backed up with angry claims of deramping is actually helpful for Quadrise holders.

I am certain OCP can handle the High Salad Commissioner of Uzbekistan and Quadrise MSAR trials at the same time.

History says that they don't really take like to take risks during the Ramadan period due to changed levels of staffing, altered work schedules, staff not necessarily at their sharpest. So, we shall have to continue waiting impatiently and see what happens next.

Yes, Utah is a very modestly populated state. It has about the same population as Wales, despite its much larger size (11x larger).

Finally, managed to get a Wales size comparison in! 😅

Quite a lot of mining and industrial activity in Arizona too, so might be a decent target.

We shall wait and see. They still need to prove they can get the two existing wells flowing at their target rates. Hope we hear more in the coming weeks/months.

Plus, institutions didn't get any warrants.

> Utah itself as it's hardly seen as an industrial state

What? Just one example: Kennecott Copper Mine (aka. Bingham Canyon Mine) is one of the biggest copper mines in the world. https://geology.utah.gov/energy-minerals/metals/

> most of the power generation is produced from coal,

Jason said one of their targets is using MSAR as a reburner fuel (aka. secondary combustion), which greatly reduces NOx and increases efficiency.

Also bear in mind that we're not stuck in Utah, if they can find customers in nearby states that should also be viable. For example, Vernal is right on the border with Colorado.

The major caveat, as usual: whether any of this will succeed is another matter — in the short term, it's entirely dependent on Lafayette/Valkor/HSO getting their wells drilled and flowing optimally.

I don't think there is an opportunity shortage, as much as executing on the basics for now.

Also, why keep writing Utah in capital letters. It's not an acronym 🤔.

Yes, for trials Quadrise are using HFO as a proxy for resid as it is much more readily available (and we already know that MSAR works using resid, so it would not be proving anything).

Commercially for bioMSAR, Quadrise can continue using HFO as the economics still work very well — the formulation can be optimised later by switching HFO to residue, but this is not where the majority of the savings come from in that product (i.e. the bio-component substitution is the main value driver).

For MSAR Classic, Quadrise needs a residual fuel source for best economics, so once they go to the commercial phase, they will need to secure cheap resid supply (e.g. from a refinery, bitumen source, etc).

That's where the Mediterranean hub that Jason mentioned could be particularly useful, as it may be able to supply OCP in addition to MSC with MSAR Classic.

Another spammer to filter, I suppose.

Totally agree @TechyRob. The institutional shares from the recent fundraising were admitted a good few days before the retail shares; there was an immediate surge in volume and very large trades.

I am speculating, but history says this was probably the Institutional Tarquins flipping their shares over to retail.

I still 100% believe in the Quadrise mission and technology, but we just need to recall Quadrise's brokers commenting during a podcast a while ago that Quadrise is an excellent trading opportunity for their clients. They don't see things in the same way as us; it's just a quick buck to them, versus our genuine belief in the good the MSAR platform can do.

If it were selling widgets instead, it would be the same for the Tarquins. Of course, that is allowed; it is what it is!

I will be so glad for Quadrise/us to see Leandra V sailing on bioMSAR. It will be a huge moment, validating the incredible time, effort, and money that has gone into pushing the MSAR project forwards.

Of course, a successful LONO would be just the beginning of the marine commercialisation journey for MSAR/bioMSAR, but no doubt it will be a milestone that proves we're a serious option that's ready to be deployed at scale.

We can't be guaranteed success, and there's always plenty of risk left. But, we're definitely in a better position now than in previous years.

As always, I hold and wait (impatiently)...

Not that I suggest anyone read too much into it, but the slides from the recent business update during the fundraising guide around half way into Q2 for the trial for the Sparkle Panama trials.

Source: Slide 12 of https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meeting/retail-offer/presentation.pdf

For those interested in technical details, here's some info: https://reddit.com/r/quadrise/comments/1iym7qy/quadrise_meet_sparkle_power_in_panama_to_prepare/mevkbt9/

No argument from me on the loyalty and LTH front; we've met many times at the AGMs over the years. Minor disagreement on this topic.

The company being forced to spend money from the recent fundraising fighting a shareholder about the fundraising would be the definition of pyrrhic, irrespective of who prevailed.

I hope it doesn't come to that.

The current market price is still a big discount and offers a great deal if you believe any of the pipeline is going to progress.

I definitely have a lot of sympathy for people whose brokers can't be bothered.

Some of those people had success with:

- Hargreaves Lansdown

- Interactive Investor

- AJ Bell

- IG (via email address after a lot of digging)

We've received samples before and know it can be emulsified. But, specific MSAR formulation tweaks will be needed once Valkor have optimised their simple fractionation facility (they intend to separate out the small diesel fraction). The remaining bitumen will be slightly heavier still.

Not disrespecting your experience, but it is a totally different industry, different company, and different region. I suspect Aramco is a more tightly run organisation (and if you chat privately with anyone who has worked with The Moroccan Client, you'll probably have that suspicion confirmed).

That said, I agree it's clearly not the top of their list, and The Moroccan Client has been highly profitable with their current way of working, so they aren't going to take significant risks to get MSAR testing on the schedule.

By that, I mean there's a material difference between something that scheduled because it's essential (e.g. safety critical maintenance; equipment overhauls to ensure they can maintain uptime; etc...) versus "offers economic benefit" (e.g. MSAR/bioMSAR).

Not saying any of the above to be a debbie downer: I still see it as being well worth pursuing, but just being realistic that business continuity is going to be a priority.

But, we aren't dependent on them, there are also several other projects on the go.

Of course, all perspectives welcome, that's what the discussion boards are for. Not that it really makes any difference to the outcomes!

I agree with what @Whiskyman and @SemaphorRed have said, but there would also be no legal way for NEDs to buy shares at the moment.

We have about 5 sensitive projects on the go at the moment and due updates in the coming months; NEDS will have the latest and greatest insider information on these projects, which would potentially put them at an advantage to everyone else in the market if they traded. Hence, it would be illegal.

Fingers crossed we get some updates in the coming weeks/months as promised...

Wash finger before signing, please.

Probably a technical problem on LSE side.

BTW, it's very common for additional stops to be added ad-hoc that are not on the official route to meet the needs of the company/customers at any given time, so don't be alarmed if extra stops are added/removed.

US cargo port congestion is pretty bad at the moment, so a route that doesn't have any (or not too many) US stops is likely beneficial to get those engine hours done more rapidly. But, as others have said, we can't assume she'll remain on any particular route until POC and LONO get underway.

My understanding is that the master contract (the 3-way signed late last year) obliges all of the parties to use reasonable endeavours[1] to complete their parts of the project. That means everyone should be taking the LONO project seriously and dedicating the resources required to push the project to a conclusion.

Of course, you can *never* assume anything, especially on AIM. But, it is a dramatically higher level of commitment than we've had before.

[1] Term of art in contract law: https://www.gannons.co.uk/insights/best-endeavours-or-reasonable-endeavours/