Member Info for expatbrat

Vls do not have the balance sheet or credibility to build full scale plants.
They should really focus on their core tech and stop trying to accomplish something they are not qualified to do.

The market doesn’t agree with you Thurd. Back down to pre grant announcement price.

Yes. But VLS equipment costs are in the last stage, so years away from having any impact on the current P&L.
Keep trying.

I’ve read the grant details on the Ricardo website.
It appears that this grant is paid over 3 years. Interestingly, it also shows that you are able to use the grant to buy machinery/equipment in the last stage.
Given VLS had already commenced FEED, and knowing from experience that a FEED costs in the order of £9M, one can assume that the lions share of the £27m won’t be seen until VLS start buying equipment. So clearly, the effects of this grant on the ongoing support of VLS most likely isn’t what it’s being made out by them to be.
This may explain why the share price is now back to where it was last month.

Thurd,
It’s wouldn’t be the first time HMG has backed a dud.
It’s all the apparent conditions which govern this grant to VLS. The money does not appear to be usable until the match funding is in place.

I’m going to quote and paraphrase a post from another thread/board. It fits VLS perfectly.

You have to remember that VLS doesn't provide a complete technical solution for its product. It delivers the black box core technology and ancillaries but still relies on other contractors to provide the 'balance of plant' and civil works. Investors then need to assess the technology commercial track record which is non existent at this time. These all result in challenges for financing. It's hard enough to reach close on projects even with mature technology so it makes it that much harder with VLS’s back story and current commercial track record.

End.

As expected, a bump. However as pointed out, this is conditional on securing match funding so isn’t in the bank as yet. If the match funding doesn’t turn up, then no Gov funding.

Of course they will be one of the recipients of the funding. Unfortunately, reciept of such funds does not change the fundamentals - No development experience, poor performing leadership, etc etc. it’s a lifestyle company, paying executives from the proceeds of grants and dilutive offerings.
Where is the revenue? Where are the backers?
No doubt the Sp will see a bump from the announcement , but it’ll be short lived.

VLS is not a SAF manufacturer. It’s a technology provider.
Other players in this arena are bonafide project developers and have the skills needed to raise serious money and deliver large scale projects.
VLS clearly does not possess either of these skillsets and should stick to what it knows best - technology development.

Based on the current situation, I doubt it’ll ever get built.

How is this an announcement?! They’ve simply rejiggered the numbers. It’s desperation in the extreme. Doesn’t change the fact that they seemingly cannot finance the plant or the UK plant for that matter.

@nlondon, we’ll Bill Gates seems to think so…

https://fortune.com/2022/10/19/bill-gates-grant-lanzajet-sustainable-jet-fuel-cheap-as-fossil-fuel/

Lanzatech is going public via SPAC. Lanzatech is a technology company, just like VLS.
Lanzatech was founded 12 months earlier than VLS. VLS has not made any tangible progress in over a decade, meanwhile investors are clambering all over Lanzatech.
Seem like a fair comparison to me. Reality hurts.

Meanwhile, VLS competitor bags half a billion $, possibly $1bn.

The commercial savvy gulf between VLS and its peers is colossal.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/carbon-recycler-lanzatech-strikes-financing-deal-with-brookfield-2022-10-03/

This is less about the macroeconomic situation both in the UK and the US. This is more about VLS to deliver on projects they’ve been bleating on about for years. The fact is that other developers, some established not that long ago, have made material advances. VLS are stagnant. I just don’t think investors or funders like them - for whatever reason.

This really doesn’t come as a surprise. Virtually zero revenue, living off the proceeds of share issues and grants with no real progress to speak of.
They may have technology, but nobody worth their salt would buy their equipment, as you’d never be able to confidently assume they’ll even be around by the time you’re expecting delivery of said equipment.

Back to the 3’s

@loosely…

Its first plant, to be located in Louisiana, will gasify forestry waste to make syngas and then use FT chemistry to get to renewable diesel. The equipment, licensed from Johnson Matthey and BP, is expected to produce about 32 million gal per year starting around 2025. An undisclosed West Coast fuel distributor has signed a 20-year agreement for the plant’s output.

@loosely.

https://advancedbiofuelsusa.info/flying-the-low-carbon-skies-on-sustainable-aviation-fuel/

Let’s have a market assessment for SAF developers, and how VLS stacks up with their progress in similar timescales:
Red Rock Biofuels - commercial plant under construction
Lanzajet (2 year old spin off) - commercial plant under construction
Fulchrum - commercial plant in commissioning
Strategic Biofuels (3 year old company) - bond allocation of $1.1bn

Velocys - a computer graphic of a commercial project and £2.3m from a Gov grant.

I think ‘lagging behind’ is an understatement.

@wilco. Who said anything about competing for the same funds? It’s clear to me that others Al have the ability to raise funding/finance (wherever they are based), yet VLS seems to constantly fall short, or in fact looses funders such as Shell.
Surely you must wonder exactly why this seems to happen over and over again? The only execration to this is a few million from government grants…