Member Info for dustofnations

I don't believe the purpose of the call was to provide short-term SP support.

It was more about answering SH's questions about the long-term trajectory of the company, and explaining why it could make sense to continue supporting the company given the pipeline.

For example, they explained why an O/O was the approach taken for funding, and why they specifically chose to raise the amount they did. They also outlined what options may be available for future fundraising.

I'm not going to recommend any course of action other than to suggest folk listen to the CC recording, if they're inclined.

I fully understand that some may not feel it is appropriate for them to participate.

As requested by Sammagmil, I'm linking the quick summary I did on the forums -- https://bit.ly/2S6lJq1 (main thread is on the QFI Shareholders Forums, but I copied it over).

Hi All,

Just finished tidying up my 2018 AGM coverage: https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2018/11/30/quorum-live-2018-agm.html - same page as before, but I've fixed some typos, clarified a few bits, and improved the layout a touch.

Hope it's interesting and informative -- and adds something to the excellent précis by iantobach

Here's to hoping QFI continue the good progress indicated with recent RNSes and the AGM.

Adding my coverage to the list:

https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2018/11/30/quorum-live-2018-agm.html

It's still very rough at the moment, as I've been typing it up over the last few hours (on train back home now!).

What an excellent bunch of people QFI LTH's are, truly.

Also, sorry I didn't get to chat to you ianto! Next time :)

@videodawn Limetree Bay (LTB) Refinery St Croix was mentioned in the last QFI investors call, so there certainly seems to be some interest from the QFI side -- whether that translates into anything is another question.

Your questions and concern mirror all of mine/ours: Is there a suitable heavy residue (volume, chemistry, price), and is there the right sort of demand to reassure partners that they should invest (power, marine, etc)?

If you review the LTB Refinery approval documents, you'll notice there is substantial on-site power generation capacity, and the fuel expenditure was one of the key reasons the Hovensa site was shuttered (i.e. even petcoke was uneconomical after all costs were factored in).

AFAIK, LTB could ramp up and down certain elements of their refining systems (e.g. petcoke) to provide a residue stream for MSAR if needed; but we simply don't know and are just theorising.

At any rate, looking forwards to the AGM to see what we can glean.

BP have been announced as supply and offtake partner at Freepoint Commodities & Arclight's Limetree Bay Refinery at St. Croix:

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/limetree-bay-refining-and-bps-supply-and-trading-arm-reach-definitive-agreement-regarding-the-restart-of-the-st-croix-refinery-300752125.html

""
Limetree Bay Refining, LLC ("Limetree Bay Refining") announced today that it has reached a definitive agreement with BP's supply and trading arm - for tolling, supply and offtake of the restarted refinery located at Limetree Bay, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. This announcement follows on the press release issued on November 4, 2018, which communicated that the parties had reached agreement in principle. Limetree Bay Refining anticipates completion of the restart by late 2019.
""

For those behind the times, Quadrise announced a MOU with Freepoint Commodities in July of this year:

""
Under the MOU, during the next 24 months the parties plan to jointly investigate and pursue selected MSAR® project opportunities in the Americas, with a number of identified counterparties, and in Asia on an exclusive basis with the goal of entering into commercial agreements for MSAR® production and supply arrangements with fuel producers and consumers.
""

We have no idea whether QFI will have future involvement in the Limetree Refinery project, but we're keeping a close eye on things.

Hat tip to rob79, steven, and ianb on the Quadrise Shareholders Forum.

Maersk invest $80m in scrubbers. Check it out (See page 7 and 15): https://prlibrary-eu.nasdaq.com/Resource/Download/bd3ff691-2148-4d37-8185-9efbe24256fe

Maximum prices we've seen quoted are about 5M per scrubber, but 3-3.5M seems the going rate for VLCC and ULCC with larger orders (EEE being large, so expect towards the higher end).

So, various folk (inc me) guesstimating in the range of 16-23, assuming very large vessels.

With thanks to the usual suspects on the QFI Shareholders Forum.

Paul Gunton (author of the article you linked from August) no longer contributes to mPropulsion, unfortunately. However, he's now a substantial contributor to shipinsight.com which has a lot of original writing.

@Fyos -- On the QFI Shareholder's Forums what you are suggesting is certainly considered to be a credible medium to long-term prospect (St Croix is anticipated to be in action by late 2019).

Various folk are also floating the possibility that residue from St. Croix refinery could be used for the Jurong Island power project (PowerSeraya, Singapore) -- the subject of the recent MOU renewal.

Way back in 2005, PowerSeraya converted 3*250MW gensets to use Orimulsion (they are still active), and imported the product all the way from Venezeula -- so a long transport distance for product or residue doesn't seem implausible.

However, Singapore has a huge amount of refining capacity nowadays, much of it in the vicinity of Jurong Island itself, so we'll have to wait and see!

I realise that's more questions than answers. However, forum folk seem pleased to see FP getting involved in projects that appear to have synergies with QFI's business model.

But, to caveat all of this, all of the forum folk are fully aware of the current situation, and are extremely realistic about QFI's prospects. Nobody should take the research, ideas, and speculation as being high certainty -- at the moment we have very little visibility into QFI's project pipeline.

(I know most of you realise this, but always worth mentioning to avoid people worrying about misleading)

ROFL, the badly coded censorship mechanism starred out part of the domain name. Here's an alternative link:

https://on.mktw.net/2AVciUh

As you folk probably know, Freepoint have a share in the St Croix refinery. Its reactivation seems to have been accelerated, with supply and offtake agreements signed with an oil major (identities to be announced shortly). Full operations are expected by late 2019.

https://www.marke****ch.com/press-release/limetree-bay-refining-reaches-agreement-in-principle-on-restart-of-st-croix-refinery-2018-11-04

The report does not appear to be available online yet

Hi noosking, I noticed you'd accidentally posted a few duplicate messages earlier today; perhaps the moderators accidentally deleted an extra one?

I guess you mean the annual report?

The annual report is typically released early-mid November -- however, QFI released the results very early this year, so timing of previous years might not be predictive.

I'm pleased to share the latest Quorum Newsletter, "Quadrise yearly report released amid IMO 2020 upheaval".

We've got a range of QFI-related news and analysis, the latest relevant marine developments, plus a couple of (hopefully) interesting editorials:

https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2018/10/01/quorum-fourth-edition-quadrise-yearly-report-released-amid-imo-2020-upheaval.html

Here's a link if you're interested in reading the original. It's quite terse:

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/quadrise_fuels/rns/regulatory-story.aspx?cid=1580&newsid=1180202

I might be misinterpreting what you're asking, but: MSAR is extremely cheap, even compared to HFO, so operators can quickly recoup the cost associated with the scrubber + MSAR installations via the per tonne discount offered by MSAR. You're looking at well under 1 year payback period, which is phenomenal.

So, the rationale for scrubbers is access to HFO plus pre-compliance with future particulate matter regs. This rationale is even stronger with MSAR.

But, companies need to take the leap and try it out. The interview with MK implies there has been plenty of interest, but we shall see!

Rob79, Panos, and others on the forums:

Maersk have now indicated they will adopt scrubbers for a limited number of their vessels, as part of a blended approach to IMO2020 compliance.

https://shippingwatch.com/secure/carriers/Container/article10861248.ece

This is a u-turn from only a matter of weeks ago

Come onto the Quadrise Shareholder Forums if you want a bunch more info!

And many thanks to Rob79

Copying my summary over from II forums.

https://www.bunkerspot.com/global/46667-global-quadrise-fuels-international-buoyed-by-hike-in-scrubber-demand

Summary:

MK claims Quadrise are seeing a substantial uptick in interest for MSAR, and that the regulatory and economic environment is very positive for the product. Further, a large number of high fuel consumption operators have adopted scrubbers, and procrastination is finally making way for action.

MK thinks that Maersk and co have been reluctant to use scrubbers due to concerns about compliance (i.e. emission cheats).

Further, recent fuel contamination incidents should make MSAR more attractive, as Quadrise has tight QC and end-to-end control (i.e. no brokers blending dodgy fuels together with no chain of control).

Payback period for a vessel retrofitted for MSAR + scrubbers should be 6 months to 1 year (shout out to my estimate in Quorum 3 for being in the same ballpark) - low cost, low risk.

“We look forward to being able to provide updates as we go through the rest of 2018 to 2019”