Member Info for dustofnations

For whatever reason I was unable to successfully buy any shares via Interactive Broker (IBKR). I ended up having to use ii for a smaller number than I wanted. Guess I'll have a look again on Monday.

I agreed: the fundamentals of the stock are still very good. Having previously held GWPH, you need to leverage the one thing that retail investors have on their side -- patience.

The reasons I have patience:
- it serves a real need (IDA is incredibly common)
- it has a niche that other products don't fill (highly tolerable oral product)
- its trials data is good
- it has all of the necessary approvals
- has good potential for wider use as alternative to cheap salts (i.e. potentially lower price over time, but much much wider market)

These are all signals that it should succeed.

The only questions are:
- how long will it take to get wide market acceptance and hence profitability
- will the company need to raise any additional funding to achieve point 1.

There was an excellent discussion on here previously that debt options should be available, if needed.

Either way, I'm willing to continue being patient. They have actually made a significant amount of progress on the launch in a short period of time.

Video from Shield CEO, Greg Madison, explaining progress thus far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V8kv5L1KbM

Liquidity is so low that I can't buy any, even at a small volume.

Always a reassuring sign when a company attracts and retains people of the calibre of Andrew Catchpole and Adrian Wildfire.

13martyn13: I have just received a response from IR that confirms what you quoted from the broker note as being accurate (re: Brian Groch having recently left STX).

Thanks very much 13martyn13.

I've contacted IR to confirm whether Finncap's info on Brian leaving is correct and will report back if I get a response.

Agreed redwineday, I think there's a well-established route of raising debt against approved prescription drugs, but (AIUI) it requires (1) that your drug is on the formularies of a large number of insurers, (2) promising prescription data, including absolute numbers and trends, (3) visibility/awareness of the product in the market.

If they continue pushing in this direction that route should certainly become open to them, if needed.

Not that I think it will certainly be required, given the transition to fully commercial terms on the prescriptions.

Morning all. Market seems to be looking at the US revenue figures, rather than appreciating the signing of deals with US health insurers, which is actually the key milestone for the period being reported. That is where all of the revenue will build from going forwards, and I think they really undersold that in the RNS.

p.s. where are you getting that information re: Brian Groch? His LinkedIn shows he still works at STX, but perhaps that's outdated?

I've seen the presentation - I was talking just about the oil element(s).

They refer to Asphalt or Heavy Oil, because which you end up with depends how much of the lighter fractions they take out (i.e. operating mode according to p14). The definitions also overlap a bit depending on who you ask they will claim different APIs, but it's not hugely important for my points.

I don't understand there to be a plan to concurrently produce multiple heavy streams -- irrespective, my points would still be the same re: diversification of oil sales.

Refer to p14-15.

My understanding from the latest interviews and documents is that there are two main projects:

(1) In-situ drilling campaign, to generate heavy oil in a short timeframe, producing meaningful revenues to cover some costs and establish various logistical and supply aspects of the business.
(2) Tar sands project, a project that will take 18-24 months to get running. Will use the PQE CORT extraction process, producing a bitumen; potentially with a small distillation unit on-site that will split into MDO and an even heavier bitumen.

As far as I can see, they are trying to hedge their bets and make commercially viable outlets for their products in multiple different avenues:
- The lighter fraction can be sold at premium to WTI
- The heavier fraction can be sold as bitumen for use on the roads during summer season, and some refineries may want it in limited volumes as part of their input slate because it's low sulphur (help blend down S levels). Heavy stuff generally sells at a fairly heavy discount to WTI as it needs a lot of refining.
- Looking to identify Quadrise MSAR & bioMSAR customers, because they could turn the lower-value heavy fraction into a high-value product that can be sold directly into the industrial and marine markets. This would bypass refiners entirely. However, they need to identify and secure consumers for this, which is what they are allegedly doing right now (as of recent interview with Quadrise CEO). This could also ensure the heavy portion is high value year-round, not just during road season.
- In-situ oil extraction will likely require some heat and steam generation; MSAR could be useful to make that much cheaper, rather than burning MDO or HFO.

By having multiple different options you protect yourself against a decline in that specific market (of course, always risks that apply to the whole energy/liquid fuel market).

Cost comparison of bioMSAR vs competitors.

On their LinkedIn page: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_shipping-energy-decarbonisation-activity-6897861430780268544-Aekq/

Some more positive and insightful coverage of ORPH's Covid challenge study -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50wzaK6JfGs - this time from Dr. Keith Moran.

BBC Science in Action podcast has coverage of the recently announced results of the covid human challenge study:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1l4z

Skip to 7m50s to hit the start of the interview.

I'm very sorry, I managed to post that on the wrong forums. I hope people find it interesting, anyway.

BBC Science in Action podcast has coverage of the recently announced results of the covid human challenge study:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3ct1l4z

Skip to 7m50s to hit the start of the interview.

BTW, they are quite active in promoting it -- e.g. https://bit.ly/3gmCvib

They've engaged a local agent in Mexico, which I think is absolutely the right approach. Whether it moves in the timeframes we need is another question, of course. But it looks like an extremely good fit for QFI's technologies.

Uh, an article from 2011 with no relevance to Covid-19?

The locations in Morocco that QFI are working in are generally fairly remote. Some of them are literally in the middle of desert.

I don't think there's any prospect of even the majority of them being provided piped gas in the foreseeable future.

Long time no see, DPExplorer.

> 1) would the OEM's sanction or approve use of biomsar fuel in their engines without at least a land based run to set up and tweek setting especially if they are advancing the point of fuel injection.

I wonder if they are going to do a mini-LONO (my terminology). That could be something like running a limited number of cylinders on bioMSAR, performing more frequent inspections and checks, etc, before approving it and launching into the full LONO process. This wouldn't necessarily be an idle/free vessel.

If something can be arranged between OEM, classification society, operator, insurer, and ship management then perhaps even the originally intended vessels can be targeted, and they roll in those cylinders one by one until it's fully running on MSAR?

Other options might be using an older and smaller vessel to do the initial testing.

Seems they think they have an idea. I hope they tell us what it is very soon - and get on with signing!

> 2) MSC would hardly have idle suitable vessels sitting around ? ( or do they) meaning that the set up and adjustments (advancing fuel injection timing) would have to be done on an in service vessel which would probably need to be done with OEM engineers onboard.

Yes, at the AGM they said they expected to use a rider team to do the retrofits. I think the availability of engineers isn't the big bottleneck; it's that the static testing facilities is booked up with testing for ammonia, hydrogen, methanol, ethanol, etc.

> and Jason doesnt mention if biomsar has been tested in a large slow speed 2 -stroke diesel.

Question was asked at the AGM, and no it has not. This was why they wanted to do static testing on an OEM's low-speed 2S rig before signing the final LONO trials agreements.