RE: Shareholder report2 Apr 2026 12:09
Thanks @WongaFC for the kind comments. It does take a lot of time and effort; we're still stubborn enough to write content such as this by hand, rather than leaning on AI.
Your question:
"""
Why I wonder, "what is the future" is because we seem such a (comparatively) tiny entity, trying to become blue chip size. I am of the firm belief that in order to fully maximise the opportunity we will at some future point be subject to a buy out offer from another behemoth of a company. Even with our expanded workforce, we're simply way too small and the opportunity could demand scaling up at a rate well beyond us.
"""
Putting aside acquisition for a moment... I think the strategy to address human resource constraints is roughly:
- Maintain a primary focus on marine (not a surprise given we brought a marine CEO on board). Additional marine opportunities can hook onto the same existing infrastructure we're establishing for MSC without much overhead on the Quadrise side. For example, serving an additional marine client from Antwerp would be easy, as there would be no additional logistical or infrastructural requirements. Industrial projects tend to be a bit more custom.
- Prioritise bolt-on opportunities in industrial and power that can establish common fuel production for marine. This includes 'keystone' projects such as Morocco, and mid-sized ones like Panama; this should greatly reduce logistical complexity and logistics by taking advantage of common fuel supply.
- Where possible, use partners to do heavy lifting on resource-intensive/human capital intensive tasks such as retrofitting marine vessels for MSAR. Instead of our teams doing the PM, logistics, planning, etc, this would be delegated to someone like Auramarine, for whom this is their day-to-day specialism. That will hugely reduce the load we're bearing in-house.
- For fuel production and operations: depending on the model this would vary slightly. If it's pure licensing, then the client is responsible. I fit's tolling or BOO and we have operational responsibilities, then we would use partnerships/contracting where possible. For example, at Cepsa San Roque, the MMU's day-to-day operational team was a specialist operations company, with oversight by Quadrise (often remotely).
On a personal level, I do agree that at a certain point it may make sense to accept an acquisition by a large and well-heeled suitor. But the company should always plan to stand on its feet, which will put us in a better position for any acquisition. But, we didn't discuss anything about this topic at the meeting.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
