Member Info for dustofnations

I think you're referring to AIM Rule 21.

AIUI, the 30 day closed period rules apply to the release of things like results (e.g. full year, HY, quarterly, whatever). But the company can define closed periods of its own.

If you are a director/employee and hold insider information that is market sensitive you can't trade at any time, as that is insider dealing/insider trading. However, Quadrise updated the market recently, and evidently the NOMAD has cleared it.

I don't think that project activity would automatically impose some kind of 30 days closed period.

Not necessarily, BC. They've already announced quite a lot of stuff is upcoming, and so market has been informed. E.g: they stated that Morocco trials should be occurring shortly, with fuel manufacture + shipping being the steps that are next/underway.

Of course, I guess it depends on what you mean by "a while". May be a few weeks yet.

lol he dropped £10k on QFI stock as a part-time non-exec chairman who has been with the company only around 6 months, and some still find a reason to groan!

I do not recognise the idea that MSC are spending $60-$100 million on the trials.

It seems entirely plausible to me that MSC bought the Istanbul and Bremerhaven because they are a good match for the bioMSAR/MSAR trials, but they also did it because they fulfil MSC's day-to-day business needs in their box shipping business, irrespective of whether MSAR/bioMSAR happens or not.

So, IMO, you can't attribute that money solely (or even mostly) to the trial of MSAR/bioMSAR by any stretch of the imagination. It's something MSC needed anyway, but perhaps the requirement for MSAR/bioMSAR trials guided their decision making in choosing these particular vessels over other ones. If that is true (which we don't know), I think it speaks very positively to how MSC see bioMSAR/MSAR, but I don't think it's a reasonable conclusion to say MSC are "[...] spending $60m-$100m to get the trials and LONO(s)"

That's true, Fyoz. However, one of the best things about tying up with the likes of MSC first is that fuel consumption in the box shipping sector is very 'top-heavy', with a modest number of monster boxships accounting for a considerable amount of total fleet's fuel usage. That means you don't need to convert that many vessels to be selling a vast amount of MSAR/bioMSAR.

And of course from a logistical and conversion costs perspective, a smaller number of large vessel is very economically effective.

No doubt once that low-hanging fruit is plucked, we'll look to expand into smaller vessels where the economics isn't quite as strong, but we've hopefully driven the cost down in terms of installation and logistics by then.

Exciting times if we can get over the LONO hump this time.

I hope you'll all forgive me for being a bit cheeky and reposting my recent MSC Quorum.

I think it still stands up after this announcement, and hopefully gives new arrivals a bit of context about the business and technical reasons that MSAR/bioMSAR should be a great fit for MSC's needs.

https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2022/06/13/top-10-reasons-msc-use-quadrise-msar.html

New Edison flashnote on MSC deal -- https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/moving-forward-with-msc-shipmanagement/31151/

Quadrise LinkedIn post about the MSC trials agreement
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:share:6957983664005619712

Many IIs are currently having to sell because their punters are trying to exit their funds. That's just the nature of the business and not necessarily reflective of the underlying individual companies -- although it can put downward pressure on the SP whilst that happens.

Either way, we're in a negative sentiment market, so we all need to factor that into the situation. It may be that the SP does not reflect the opportunity for a while.

Best to just follow the news and figure out the value we can derive from it. If things continue to progress well then at some point that commercial activity should be reflected via SP, dividends, takeover, or whatever.

Regrettably more patience is required; something QFI ULTHs have acquired great skills in over the last decade or so...

Literally buying the vessel that the MSAR trials had previously been done on shows that MSC is taking this project incredibly seriously and are investing serious money and resources into it. It's actually quite incredible.

They've stated previously that LONO will have to start from zero as one of the key parameters they are trying to measure is any excess wear of cylinder rings, cylinder liners, etc. Those are parts that are regularly replaced by the maintenance teams, so you need to do the trial in a single block to get meaningful data.

Please check out the picture showing the dates of transfer I found via the IMO website earlier this morning.

Wonderful news!

https://twitter.com/quorumzine/status/1552191195165630465

Okay, I'm going to be that pedant (sorry!). It's 'Miton', not 'Milton' (a sterilising fluid for babies).

Not to speak in Maersk's defence, but I suspect the specification of the vessel was Zodiac's decision, and they are taking what they can get from the chartering market, as it's under huge demand at the moment owing to the shipping capacity shortage.

There's no way for us to know whether Maersk will use only ULSFO on these vessels (to stick to their word), or whether they'll use HSFO despite their objections; I'm sure we know what they'll do when it comes to that level of zero-effort savings!

Thanks everyone, it's greatly appreciated. The main author of the report was @Burble61, so main thanks go to him on this occasion, but the exercise as a whole was a team effort.

As for Quorum, I've been writing that since 2018 now... I never expected it would be 2022 and we would still be awaiting our first commercial action. Then again, I would never have predicted a global pandemic and a war in Ukraine, either.

I do really hope we're heading towards the "end of the beginning", where we can start thinking more concretely about commercial aspects of the business, rather than just hoping we can get trials rolling.

Firstly, thanks to everyone for your thoughts. Glad to have overwhelmingly positive feedback -- it's greatly appreciated, as we've obviously got to take time off work, and pay to travel from all over the country & beyond to visit. A few made acidic and unkind comments, but that's just one of those things with large communities.

From my perspective:

- Morocco looks very strong, they're now with "The A Team" at the client who are keen to get it done. This is my favourite to get over the line first in any meaningful way. It's modular, so can be rolled out one piece of equipment at a time in a way that is low-risk to the client. If you consider that they have a fleet of rotary calcinators, this recipe can be multiplied out N times for however many they have (lots, if you do some digging).

As others have commented, I hope they are able to execute expeditiously, as there is still the spectre of Covid, negative market conditions, war, etc.

But the economics are utterly compelling for these kinds of companies, and they don't have an easy option to change to any other fuel for these kinds of plants -- especially the remote ones.

- The team believe MSC is still on schedule in terms of the LONO trial initiation, but there's an alteration to the plans that 'will become clear soon'. Intriguing, and reassuring that we're generally still on track. Not sure what said alteration is, but hopefully it's a positive one! It's clear the various layers of bureaucracy are taking a while to chew through things and give their tuppence. Still huge for the company if and when it comes through.

- Utah - still not 100% clear what the plan for MSAR is, but the assay data is arriving and I guess that should prompt decision-making sooner rather than later. Seems they need to firm up their plans a tad. Still very promising, but some key moments coming in next few months, by the looks of it.

- Panama/Honduras - still early days, but if/when they get a trial, this should move fairly quickly. Always feel there's a bit of an unknown factor with customers in those regions. But the fact they are IPPs (independent power producers) makes me think it's more likely to happen than with a parastatal organisation.

- Mexico, etc - need a breakthrough on political level. I put this into "future" category. I'm sure it will become more plausible once MSC and/or Morocco pop.

So, I think there are some key weeks and months coming up now; with the financial market conditions being scary there's plenty of risk that needs to be considered. But, I think QFI have a much better chance to access advantageous/conventional finance if they can execute MSC and Morocco commercial deals within the existing funding envelope.

I got the sense they were very keenly aware at how much they have overrun guidance and that it's not a good look. However, it seemed that some of the deadlines had allowed application of appropriate urgency to counterparties to 'make a decision' (insert vulg

Hi everyone,

I've reformatted the content of the report into the usual Quorum format; you can access and share the report below -- "MOD-BoD 2: Putting the queries and concerns of the retail shareholder community to the QFI leadership team":

https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2022/07/21/renewed-retail-investor-discussions-with-qfi-team.html

Particular thanks to @burble61 who was the main author of the report.

Vince, it also looks like an account with fake/purchased followers as they are completely incongruent with the supposed topic (most not even in UK by the looks of it). I agree with you that it's a weak pump/ramp attempt.

Many of these kinds of troll and pump/dump account purchase followers in order to appear more popular than they really are and cause the Twitter algorithm to give them greater prominence.

Re: Morocco, we know the trial needs to be executed first before entering the commercial negotiation phase is initialised. Therefore, it is surely impossible for what this account says to be true, as the preceding step hasn't finished yet...

... the kinds of questions people have been *asking*. Sorry, it's getting late!

Furrylugs -- the order and contents of the précis on the QFI Shareholders' Forum is *not* the same as the 'précis of the précis' that DevonianExile has written here.

What you are assuming about Morocco is wrong in just about every aspect. Please check out the original, and/or wait for the full report.

As semaphorRed has pointed out, this will not be material info -- just colour, reemphasis, clarification of existing points, dispelling of various theories/assumptions, etc.

Basically, we're spending our own money and time to travel across the country to give retail investors the same kind of access and Q&A enjoyed by institutional investors. We're genuinely trying to do this for the benefit of everyone, and we scour the forums for the kinds of questions that people have been answering (as you will likely already have seen reflected in the précis, and more so in the full report) .

Please give us a chance to finish putting together the report before you reach conclusions. Your patience is really appreciated as we have real-world stuff to get on with at the same time.