Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Popgoestheweasel, I submitted a copy of the report to the Suffolk police. It clearly states that the boiler was not viable, and needed more time to resolve the numerous issues. Some of which were safety related.
Remember, Jabil was experiencing 100% failure. All this was noted after Tony Stiff stated that the boilers were in volume production, and were performing well.
The boilers were never in volume production and never generated anywhere near enough electricity to turn on a light bulb, let alone pay for themselves.
Jan and Don suggested further testing in employees homes to minimse bad press. I will not send anything to an anonymous poster on this chat board premium member or not.
Hindertondrive, having read many emails written by *****, I can state categorically that tm1978 isn’t the former MD. Writing style is way too different. ***** is an American, his style of writing reflected that. With regards to the rest of your post, you are a disturbed person. I have friends who are part of the gay and lesbian community and I find your post repulsive! It is hate filled.
I have never considered calling the police as I thought this would be an issue handled by the FCA or SFO. In any case, is there a national number to ring or do I just speak with my local police? I just got tired of people bashing the engineers and the former MD. Particularly knowing that the BOD was well aware of everything. The documentation does prove this. I guess people will stoop to the lowest level when they find themselves caught in their own deceit. The Jan and Don report clearly states the boiler was not production viable, they stated it needed months of internal testing and should not be sold. This information is clear in the report. As to weather the boiler existed or not, well it never existed as a production model, only as a poorly functioning prototype.
I don’t know what was in his contract. He left, and I don’t think Flow announced anything and the BOD did not want the adverse publicity. Lots of executives are tied to confidentiality agreements, maybe he has one. I do know for certain that he was ethical. I have no plans to do anything. Should a court case arise, I am certain I would be called to present any information I have, which I would do.
I am one of those ex-employees so hated on this board. I worked in FP for a while which included the time the MD left. ***** was a focused person and did not like BS. He found out the hard way about the boiler design and the fake data, and he wasn't going to let it slide. He told us once that he told the entire BOD that they had been bullshitted by Geoff and Adrian. The boiler was never ever ready for production. As I said before, the two consultants (friends of Henry Cialone) that came in to check up on him and the progress of the boiler, came to the same conclusion as *****. I think another poster has already made that report available. I do have the written evidence, project reports and meetings notes. Many people did not like Tony Stiff, and many more disliked Geoff Barker. Anyone one of them could be posting on this board. I don't know who you are, should I assume you are Tony Stiff? Anyway, I don't think he cared after he left. He was happy to leave as he knew things would not end well for Flow.
Popgoestheweasel, ***** was paid off to leave. If he would have been sacked, I doubt Flow would have paid him. I told you before, he stated exactly what would happen to Flow as he knew all the previous work done in R&D wasn’t worth anything. He got Jabil in and set up the line to build the boiler, it was built to Barker’s design and it didn’t work. ***** told the BOD that the boiler needed a complete redesign, but that did not fit in to thr BOD’s plans and so they parted ways.
I was told Adrian did visit Preston Brooke and that he met with both Tony Stiff and Geoff Barker. I was Capenhurst based, so can't 100% confirm this. The technology was a long way off from working, and to raise money for a combi when Enginering staff knew it would be impossible to produce, as the current mCHP had yet to prove itself, was just a ploy to raise more funding to pay salaries and bonuses.
There were many good people at Capenhurst, and a few very stupid people (Geoff / Tim). The "Flow Battery" was a very good product, but the annual sales were not enough to raise the money the BOD wanted. The mCHP boiler was set to go into a market with 9m annual in sales. In the UK alone 1.7m boilers are sold each year. Tony Stiff was only familiar with the selling of energy, his interest in manufacturing was none. Henry Cialone was good at welding, but nothing else. They would not have know a good product, even if it hit them. Nigel Canham was just as bad. No clue about energy nor manufacturing, only hired to pump the share price. Hence Nigel pushing the combi, even though it was never even off the design stage. The team at Capenhurst was good and had a good product, but they were lost in the rush to push up the share price. I felt for a lot of the people there, and how they were referred to on this website. The only people to hold accountable are those whose names appear in the RNS. They were provided all the information, good and bad, and proceeded only to highlight the good.
Jalpa, you are correct about Cirrus Optimum. He was an engineer working on the scroll, who stated that the design including tolerances was not viable and could not be mass produced. The dry fire comments are also true. This was the result of poor design. This only came to light after the initial test units were installed. It was a race to recover and ensure no one was injured. The boiler failed tests at GDRF, and also Trillary. The BOD were well aware of everything, as reports were issued weekly and there were also detailed sub-reports. The BOD put us engineers in a very unethical position. This is why the MD and others left the company. Tony Stiff tried to lie about the reasons, but we all knew and Jabil also knew.
Graham Wales, we worked in Capenhurst and Preston Brooke. Tony Stiff was in Ipswich. We sent weekly reports to him and other members of the Flow Board. These reports detailed out the status of the boiler and issues that we were addressing. We never took money from shareholders. We worked very hard to resolve and rectify all issues we were encountering during trials and testing of the boiler. And we were under tremendous pressure as Stiff had announced to the market that the boiler was in volume production. This statement is false. We never went into any type of mass production as the boiler was not reliable; it would fail within a matter of hours. I don't understand how you could accuse us of taking shareholders money. We were being paid to check, test and redesign the boiler. Soft launch, VAT, Brexit, etc... All excuses to hide the problems and failures of the boiler. The Board was aware of everything from way back 2013/14. Yet, check out the videos of Stiff pushing the boiler.
CAT has never changed. Jabil would never had stopped production for a maybe issue. Geoff Barker thought up using the possible VAT increase to cover the boiler failures. Yes, VAT was used to cover boiler faults. This is documentated.
Popgoestheweasel, the boiler was a lie from the start. We can say that now, as before we were held to our contract. The BOD was well aware of the failures, but ignored the reports from Engineering and went to market stating everything was fine. VAT was also a lie. Geoff Barker came up with that to give Stiff a way out as the boiler was and still is a failure. The technology was never proven to work and it needed a complete redesign. Something the BOD neglected to tell the City and Shareholders. All documentation is available and will be posted on various websites.
You are very quick with accusations, Graham Wales. I worked on developing the systems to get the boiler to work. We needed more time and a rethink of the design, as it wasn't for for purpose. I did not raise money from shareholders, I was an employee doing my job to the best of my abilities, and providing factual data and results. We could not come clean as you stated, we were under contract. We provided the data and results to the Board. They reported to the market what ever they wanted.
The confidentiality agreements were standard issue. These are detailed repoets and I do not feel that copying and pasting them would be the best way to release them. They need to be released according to a timeline of events. The truth was always given to the BOD, the reports will confirm this. The BOD decided to ignore the facts about the boilers issues,and proceeded to paint a false picture of the truth. All BOD members were made aware of the boiler not being viable.
Whom ever was the poster that suggested a Flow Products Facebook page, please set it up. Many of us would like to post data, reports, and general information that will provide everyone a clear view of the boiler and what the BOD knew. We are no longer bound by confidentiality agreements.
Tony, and you wondered why none of the staff in Capenhurst and Preston Brook didn't like or respected you. Once you are caught in your own lie, you resort to all manor of deception to try and save yourself. You hated coming to Capenhurst and dealing with us lowly engineers. Couldn't take that we were much smarter than you.
AS I said, the shredders didn't get everything....
You heard that from Stiff, you should have asked the engineers and Jabil. He needed a fall guy and we knew it. ***** even told us that would happen, as the BOD needed an excuse for failure. Jabil hated Stiff, he screwed over. With regards to 24 hrs a days for two years...please. Never lasted longer than 2000 hours in isolation. Meaning not part of a boiler, only testing on its own in ideal conditions. 600 watts under ideal conditions. Not the 1k stated by Stiff. Again, all can be proven.
He was no mother Theresa, as he pushed us hard and quickly got prototypes completed. He sacked several people, and also ended the contract with the Chinese scroll supplier ( Barker wasted millions on it). He couldn't stand BS and this is where he fell foul of the BOD. The weekly reports were accurate and painted the true picture of the boiler status. There were no boilers that worked for more than a couple of days. And that was at producing only 200watts. far less than the 1K stated by you. Tony, Tony, Tony.... no one in Flow Products respected you or Canham. Neither of you know anything about manufacturing, and those of us who do, hated your interference and lack of morals. Again, all the above can be proven.
The reason ***** came to an agreement with Flow was, as he put it to us, he told the BOD the boiler design was inherently F*****, and that they needed to start over and make that known. Went down like a lead ballon to the BOD. He saw through the BS of Barker, then Head of R&D. each time progress was made another issue arose. Ask yourself, if the boiler was tried and tested, how come none of these issues were corrected prior to production? It was because Barker and Whitchurch had no clue about engineering and design and designed a useless product. Oh, and I can prove the above.