Some who weren't in attendance seem to have gotten the impression that the atmosphere and questions were hostile or badly received.
I'd say the vibe in the room was actually quite good.
Questions were tough, direct, and realistic; holders wanted to convey to the company their concerns about communication, timelines slippages, and lack of delivery. We also understand the limitations and difficulties of smallco vs bigco — but ultimately the funding runway only has a tiny bit of wiggle room left, so QFI need to find a way to get it done (without enumerating all of the suggestions that were made, many of which were reasonable and taken positively).
Several also wanted to reinforce that we (shareholders) all understand how critical the situation is, how much we want QFI to succeed, and that progressing Morocco and other smaller projects 'within the envelope' is key to ensuring any fundraising is done on terms that are beneficial to existing shareholders, rather than imposing punitive dilution.
On communications, a lot of it was just to ensure clarity, less ambiguity, and informing us promptly when guidance significantly shifts for whatever reason, rather than silent treatment. There's obviously a balance to walk between "running commentary" and "you'll find out N months later".
So, overall, I'd say the mood was 'positive very cognisant of risks, and we need to see execution promptly'.
Thanks to everyone who come along, the questions were really good and the group chats/Q&A afterwards with the team were very informative. As always, just colour, but it seems we're within spitting distance on Morocco.
Sorry, I must have been confused by someone called Hotfinance14 who made clear their contempt for the AGM and implied they were not attending:
"""
Heads up for those thinking of going to the AGM. Qatar play Senegal in the world cup at at the same time of the AGM.You may find the game a lot more entertaining.
"""
Not quite clear, are you attending to ask those questions, or saying you want someone to ask something on your behalf, or are you just attending virtually.
Hi 46G, thanks for sharing. A small tip: if you want to link to a specific post rather than just QFI's LinkedIn front page you need to click the three dots in the top right of the post you're interested in, and then select 'copy link to post'.
V72 - one important note omitted from that article is that Maersk's upcoming methanol boxships are all dual fuel [1] - so they are definitely hedging their bets.
[1] Second fuel likely being standard HFO/MGO/etc given the OEMs involved, but they omit an explicit answer from most of their publicity materials.
Nothing has been announced yet, so we don't know.
I can't really parse what HF is trying to say, so just to clarify my point -- we've commonly had business updates released on the morning of the AGM, typically as an "AGM Statement" or "AGM Update", etc. Disclosure of the latest status of each key project.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QFI/agm-statement-c19utsqdb6i06y7.html
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QFI/agm-statement-yp31iz6fm8lp0ck.html
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QFI/agm-update-08rxg060i0m1zfm.html
I would, of course, expect a big ticket item like Morocco trial completion to be RNSed separately should it be completed before that date; they won't hold anything back.
But if it's still "WIP" by the AGM (I hope not!), then you should see the latest info that in the AGM Statement. That's assuming QFI continue their traditional approach on this, of course.
AGM is on 25th, so we'll certainly get an update then.
I think they are simplifying the Morocco timeline disclosed in the results for this infographic.
If you refer back, there are various things going on in 2023 for Morocco (2 more site trials, deal refiner, etc), but they've condensed it in a way that loses event-specific granularity; you can see from the original that they don't all necessarily have the same time estimates. Site A trials and fuel supply are in a segment indicating that should approx be in 1Q23.
I guess they would need to do an RNS if there were any changes to schedule of these key projects.
Nice thing is that we'll get an update very soon as they'll update us at the AGM.
Agree with previous comments that MSC Leandra bioMSAR LONO is almost certainly not going to be supplied by TomCo/HSO/etc.
Others have already made good points around preferring a mature partner that is actually producing fuel today rather than awaiting approvals, the fact they are only doing a modest 4-well pilot at first, complexity of logistics from Utah, bunkering, etc.
A further bit of evidence is that JM was pretty explicit a few times during IMC that they are looking at supply from Netherlands to benefit from tax credits for biofuels, and to make use of well-established bunkering suppliers with all of the necessary permits to store and bunker large amounts of marine fuel. He mentioned this was a supplier that MSC had used before. So it ain't HSO/TomCo!
Just to be clear, I don't think anyone is denigrating TomCo/HSO. They should be a strong candidate in the future once the MSAR and bioMSAR LONO programmes expand to more vessels (e.g. additional Wartsila models, MAN engines, etc). By then they should hopefully have some significant volume of product coming out of the ground, thorough testing of bioMSAR/MSAR, rail expansion, etc.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with the idea that TomCo should succeed with their application.
People were just correcting your previous statements that all of approvals were completed yesterday and drilling could start.
The division (DOGM) said it will be a very technical process and requested various additional information. That suggests it's not going to be an overnight process.
More patience required.
The video is on YT @ https://youtu.be/FmetjUlELWY?t=17355
Skip to 4h:49m:15s if timestamp does not work.
Appears to be a holding company headed by SB and associates.
Hard to know precise details as Delaware corps are secretive.
https://www.bizapedia.com/ut/highlands-development-group-llc.html
Steve sometimes talks imprecisely/loosely.
Clarified version (after posting, I realised I had used "they" for multiple different parties):
That was my clear takeaway also, Wolferlaf.
AC/HSO needed the independent DOGM Board approval as one hurdle to cross (done), but they still need to get final approvals from the regulator (DOGM is the regulator, referred to mostly as 'the department' in the video). Important to note that the DOGM Board and DOGM are deliberately independent of each other.
DOGM indicated they are supportive and praised HSO/AC for 'bending over backwards to be helpful', but there's still some work to be done before that permit is decided/finalised, including following the UIC process.
As I understood it, HSO/AC already made their filings for all of these processes, but it will take time to review and to go back-and-forth -- it sounded like DOGM wanted some additional data/reviews in a few areas (water, literature review, etc).
That was my clear takeaway also, Wolferlaf. They needed DOGM board approval (done), but still need to get final approvals from the regulator. They indicated they are supportive, but there's work still to be done before that permit is decided/finalised, including following the UIC process.
As I understood it, they've already made their filings, but it will take time to review and it sounded like they wanted some additional data/reviews in a few areas.
It's because they wanted to file addendums to exhibits past the last date which they normally accept changes. So they had to request the chair accept the late changes for 'good cause' (i.e. must have provided a good enough reason). So it's just a procedural thing.
Is cup and handle a cricket thing?
Not really sure what else people can say that isn't pure tasseography.
As folk have outlined: QFI have had plenty of positive progress lately, yet the share price did not respond because of heavy selling from multiple IIs into limited liquidity.
SP appears to have corrected to a degree now that Miton and Canaccord are no longer major holders.
The following is a nicely written article from Vertoro's Dr Michael Boot on MSAR + Vertoro's lignin-derived crude sugar oil (CSO). It gives a little more technical insight into how the integration works.
I've reposted it on Twitter to hopefully give it a bit of amplification, so please do share it around:
https://twitter.com/quorumzine/status/1582309191536250880
Also on LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/innovation-news-network_vertoro-plan-to-decarbonise-the-shipping-activity-6988068682136485888-DFYK