Member Info for expatbrat

Exactly my point SD. It’s a study and little else.

The people moving the sp appear to agree with me.

No I didn’t misunderstand. It’s clear that this is just a ‘study’ and nothing like the ‘Advancing to Commercial Stage’ that VLS is pitching it as.
Straw clutching in extremis!

No mention of VLS in their press release?
Also a 4 year study? How many placing a between now and then?

Another example of how early VLS are, versus others who are building plants today.

Unfortunately, e-fuels are 10years+ away in terms of economic viability. If they are not improving their product, VLS will be at the back of the queue by then.

In front? Is that why Shell pulled out of the VLS project? I suspect Shell discovered they could do a better job themselves and invested in Enerkem instead.

They need to. Johnson Matthey and Shell both have small scale reactors and with their financial backing, may soon surpass the VLS reactor in terms of yield.

Don’t VLS claim R&D tax credits? Work can easily be assigned as R&D in order to generate tax credits to offset other operating profit.

It’s clear they are not actively working on technology improvements, but more along the lines of improving manufacturing.

Put simply, VLS ceased major work in R&D to focus on project development. The reason why they did this was due to a distinct lack of sales/interest in their technology. They are attempting to develop a waste to fuel plant/wood to fuel plant to demonstrate their technology in a commercial environment, in the hope that the market will see the potential and order their own Vls reactors.

Unfortunately, the pace of such activity is slow. Other developers mentioned here have demonstrated their ability to build plants and are moving ahead.

Vls should revert back to their R&D activity and stop trying to be project developers. They’re clearly not good at it.

I’ve been here since this share was up in the 40’s and my message then was as it is today. Poor track record in management, fund raising and project development.
Nothing has changed. No demo scale testing, no investors, no money, and multiple placings. The only notable achievement is getting planning permission on a site that has a high flood risk.

Mandates will help those companies who have a solid history and background. Not those that are trying to run before they can walk - or have even attempted to walk.

Still here and still very accurate in my analysis.

Investor money targeted for construction will flow to those companies that already have commercial SAF plants elsewhere.

Investor money targeted at small scale demonstration will flow to those companies that have large growth potential.

Unfortunately, VLS does not sit in either category.

They will get the GreenSkiesGreenFuels money now doubt but this will just keep the kettle boiling for another 6 months, then it’s back to the AIM guys fir another dilution. Meanwhile the CEO take home £500,000 in wages.

Ok. The FT tech is tried and tested. In fact Its currently in service around the globe.
Unfortunately, the waste to fuel process is far from tested by VLS and probably remain a CGI image for the foreseeable future.

Can you advise what is ‘tried and tested’ as far as waste to jet fuel, as VLS is concerned?

I’d say the funding coming from the latest grant award is paying for more executives. This is simply a show of force. My reckoning is that their failure to secure funding is a reflection of poor quality management. They are bolstering their board to try and placate concerned funders.

Thurg. You’ve obviously never been exposed to the challenges of project financing. It’s irrelevant which Council you’re on on who you’re snuggling up to. That will only get you so far - in this case, it’s worked to enable VLS to secure free money from the Government.
However, when it comes to the crunch, the banker who is writing the big cheques for building the thing, will asses the risks in far more detail. This is where VLS will hit a wall whereas the aforementioned, with their commercial plant operating in other geographies, will get the construction capital.

As another example, there are dozens of waste to energy plants in the UK which get no further than planning permission and this is with proven technology. The banks asses the risk of the company and its experience, not just the tech.

Thurg.
Lanzatech, Fulcrum, Lanzajet, Nova all have commercial plants elsewhere. Alfanar is a billion dollar Saudi company.
Velocys has a CAD drawing.

I think the road you’re referring to is a dead end.

There is some stiff competition in that list. I see BA are mentioned repeatedly. This will make things very hard for VLS to ‘on board’ their illusive investor going forward. Not the only game in town anymore and arguably, the least sexy of all of them.

Given it’s summer recess as of today, expect more Gov announcements. My expectation is an announcement on mandates and also the GSGF competition outcome.

I suspect it’s a foregone conclusion that some competition money is coming their way. VLS entire business model is based on other people’s money and they probably spend quite a bit on lobbying and bid writing to ensure the free money keeps coming in. My guess is about £3m.

There were some massive SAF announcements yesterday that should have sent this share north, but here we now are, knocking into the three’s and going beyond the 12 month low.

I’m personally surprised at the drop given SAF has been high lighted so much this week. Clearly, the market is looking at the company rather than the market they are trying to leverage.