Member Info for expatbrat

Why are you still here, commenting? Do you not have anything better to do either?
Feel free to ignore my posts. I'll continue to post facts and clear up misleading statements.

btw, the post from Myrtleman was good. I'll give him some credit for that.

Well they something to spend their £20m on....

You lot are somewhat uneducated when it comes to Pensions. Shocking naivety.
I'm happy none of you are managing my portfolio...!

SP - if you think investment house will throw pension money at unproven technology, then yore not quite as sharp as you occasionally make yourself out to be.
Pension schemes have to invest their members money in low risk assets - it's other people's money they're investing, and the scheme trustees take their role seriously. Those assets have to pay their members pensions way into the future, and they can't afford to take risks losing any of that money.

yes thurg, a typo.
I think the excerpt i have chosen in this instance firmly supports my argument in its entirety! Happy to be shown evidence from Dishys recent pitch on the topic of .leveling up. that would support a VLS project.

Meanwhile, despite an apparent glowing outlook for VLS based on the Rishi speech, the sp has moved down. Maybe we'll need to wait for another McNulty tweet as the words from the Chancellor of the Exchequer do not seem to affect the sp.

Sums a lot of things up nicely!

The leveling up denouncement is for improvements to towns, cities and villages and their respective vista and functional development. The intent is for people to be happy where they live.
Quote"
This is about funding the infrastructure of everyday life,” said the chancellor. “A new bypass, upgraded railway stations, less traffic, more libraries, museums and galleries, better High Streets and town centres. This government is funding the things people want and places need.” Unquote.

Its not for building unproven jet fuel plants!!!! Its ridiculous to even think that this initiative could be directed to such projects. A real sesne of desperation here from the rampers.

The NIB might have legs but this is a bank and not a charity. It'll still have lending conditions that need to be met.

As usual, you attempt to answer the easy questions and ignore the harder ones, such as the real time example of financing challenges associated with Bayou.

Thurg. From your link:

Our objectives for projects within the competition are:

Technology demonstration: deliver meaningful technical, route to market, and/or supply chain innovation.
Fuel production: produce a sufficient quantity of fuel for testing or sale at a scale appropriate for the fuel type.
Commercial potential: have a clear strategy for commercialising the technology and the products, demonstrating the potential for significant value to the UK.
Emissions reduction: demonstration of significant greenhouse gas reduction vs fossil fuel, and the highest standards of sustainability.
Project execution: bring together a team with the necessary expertise and experience to deliver the project according to its objectives.

This competition is aimed at developing commercial readiness. This is why Kew have their money already, as they are building demonstrators now.

VLS are going straight to commercial scale, so their share of stage 2 construction money is probably years away. If you care to read a recent report from Ricardo, you'll see that the F4C was lacking in areas of commercial scale project support as this was not the original intent, as can be seen by the description above.

Thurg. The F4C concept is for early stage, risk funding and you know this. Several of the recipients are small scale, demonstration scale projects. If such amalgamation was as easy as you infer, explain why Bayou still isn't off the mark, after several years trying? Its these risks combined with a lack of experience with the company itself. It'll be the same story for AltAlto. I feel sorry for VLS. They need to build a big plant in order for it to be economically viable, but don't have the money to build an uneconomically viable smaller one first and prove to the investment community that it'll then work at the larger scale. Rock and a hard place.
Now, if they'd been here before and had the experience of overcoming such challenges (like Lanzatech, Red Rock, Enerken etc) they may get interest however this lack of experience combined with lack of proof of concept will continue to weigh.

Youre missing one key point. The project VLS is proposing has not been done before and is unproven. Now is not the time to be risking tax payer funding on projects that have not been demonstrated. This key fact about VLS will become very clear (probably already has done given how Bayou has repeatedly failed to raise funding) and funds will flow to those who have a proven commercial scale process.
Funding will however flow to smaller scale projects to help develop the technology at a small scale first, before building large, exceptionally high risk commercial scale projects.

Thurg:

" XPB: Once again you seek to dispute press releases by Velocys without offering any evidence to support your case. Have you been watching the Giuliani press conference by any chance?"

If you care to look at the press release now, you'll see that they've corrected the misleading statement and added "as part of an integrated solution.." That now clarifies their the technolgy does not reduce emissions by 70% in its own right.

Good to see FACTS being recognised.

Keep going with the put downs. They are not working.

Like they have been doing for Bayou....for about 4 years?

Agree with your list Sense. But in terms of 'Groundbreaking' developments, the financing will be key. Everything else will just blip the SP. Look at the last 12 months. Lots of little announcements (apart from the confirmation of Planning which is a key milestone) and lots of short lived blips.

I don't think VLS will see much more from the F4C for a while, other than maybe a few 100k advances. Remember that Stage 2 grants are for Construction.

FEED is an outsourced task. All it does is define the costs. Think of it like seeing a picture of a nice meal in a magazine but you have no idea how to cook, have ever cooked before and have little in the way of knowing how much it costs or how long it takes to make.
Find a contractor, pay them (a lot) and they will give you the costs.

Completion of FEED will be one of those snippets i refer to. Completion of FEED doesn't mean the plant will get built.

Project Financing is the key - no project finance, no plant.

The only meaningful development coming up is the securing of finance to build the plant. If they get that far, that wont be until 2022 at the earliest.
There will be news snippets that may buoy the sp between now and then, but these will be short lived.

As for reducing operational losses. This is simply a consequence of dropping their technology development and focusing on project development. If they'd reduced losses by 50%, whilst maintaining an original course, then that would be impressive, but this is not the case. Project development is cheap compared to technology development, hence the savings.

They are a great technology company. But they have no experience developing projects, so they have a lot to prove before they are considered great in such a regard.

Are you still up? Or have you popped back down to get your favorite teddy bear? Off you go. It’s well last you bedtime.

Thurg. An admirable attempt. Unfortunately you inadvertently raised a very valid point. Neither plant has been funded despite, in the case of Bayou, serval years trying to ‘on board’ that seemingly illusive partner. Meanwhile, Red Rock, Lanatech, Fulchrum and others mandate to do just that and are building plants.

But that’s a whole other topic for another day.

I look forward to seeing suitably amended press releases and website pages.
Hope you enjoyed the game.

Pathetic. When you make personal attacks, it means you’ve lost the argument. Just like Donald Trump does.

The fact is the Bayou facilty is a diesel plant and the entire business model will have no doubt been based on diesel. Just like AltAlto is based on Jetfuel. Either plant can produce either product, but will need a redesign in each case.
Your Report extract backs this up perfectly : the report sentence is written in the context of a diesel plant, that goes on to point out that it could make aviation fuel.
I’ll refrain from calling names as this is the realm for insecure people, however the fact remains that Bayou is a diesel plant until VLS state otherwise and will remain diesel until the PROPOSED bill gets passed, if it actually does.
Now get back to your school work and stop making a fool of yourself. I genuinely thought higher of you.

Symbios. Read the press release. It’s misleading, deliberately or not.