Member Info for foxm

https://cvbj.biz/ecuadors-largest-refinery-will-have-public-private-management/

This decision seeks that private investment serves to improve the quality of refined fuel.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-refinery/ecuador-seeks-private-partner-to-invest-in-esmeraldas-refinery-idUSKBN24B34A

The purpose of the deal would be to improve the management of the facility and the quality of the fuel it produces.

The ministry did not give a timeline on when it expected to strike a deal with a potential partner.

The refinery mentioned in the presentation -

https://www.europeworldnews.com/ecuador-approves-the-exceptional-involvement-of-the-private-sector-in-one-of-its-major-refineries/

Therefore, the selected private company must carry out the studies and investments necessary to improve the infrastructure, as stated in the decree itself. Among them the best of the efficiency of the plant and the reduction of emissions.

Former Minister of Energy Fernando Santos has indicated that this new initiative will make it possible to make better use of the waste from refining.

"waste from refining" = Residue / Bottom of Barrel ??
private sector = probably Freepoint Commodities + us

https://spe-ecuador.org/video-webinar-aplicacion-de-combustibles-emulsionados

Video Webinar Application of Emulsified Fuels

On August 6, the SPE Ecuador Section and the participants were able to learn about emulsified fuels and their application for Latin America and, specifically, for Ecuador. Thanks to the presentation of the Project Engineer of the Quadrise company, Matthew Bridgeman , who emphasized that the application of emulsified fuels is a clean solution to a global problem, which has economic and environmental advantages.

The president of the SPE Ecuador Section, María Augusta Cueva , welcomed all the participants of the Webinar, thanking Quadrise and Eng. Matthew for their presentation given the importance of this technology for different applications of emulsified fuels.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rksSX2JNBmNuYTVboDD3nPKIsGVO8YOG/view

AGM presentation pdf

https://www.shorturl.at/xyFG3

Fyoz, I'm not suggesting that, don't put words in my mouth. I'm not disputing that there is some positive news in the RNS, the Morocco agreement included in that. But as usual Kirk sneaks in a few stinkers later on. He's good at that, it's his forte. For me personally, there was as much negative news in there as there was positive. A rather disappointing mixed bag as usual IMO, especially given Mike's comments in the January video interview that 2019 would be the year they deliver. It doesn't look like it to me with 4 weeks to go.

http://tiny.cc/5m90gz

It's a trial which will lead to a larger commercial scale trial if successful, not a trial which will lead to a commercial contract. 16 grand - that wouldn't even pay Mike's wages for a month. Or Jason's.

"Why continue to hold if you're not happy?"

Because I would have to realize an eye-watering paper-loss. The longer this goes on though, it will probably become inevitable.

Fyoz, it's a 16 grand pre-trial, if that's successful we go for another bigger trial. Whoopee. It's like a small cherry on top of a cake made of horse manure. For me, it doesn't gloss over all the less than positive news underneath.

Freepoint - not a lot happening, so much for them being a game-changer, for "fast-tracking" all these projects. Remember that? Redliner - miles from anything significant, as expected I suppose. European Oil Major - no progress, need a customer which they still haven't found. Maybe this is a direct result of - YTL Power Seraya, MOU terminated. Marine - nothing much happening for another 4 months at least, so much for IMO 2020 being an enabler. KSA - still talking. Kuwait - sounds like more delays, still waiting for info. Bitumina - they're STILL looking for suitable consumers. China - can't really compete against coal and gas for power. Looking at marine sector, but COSCO aren't big scrubber fans, they're only installing 23 of them. Merlin - no real progress.

There's your jam, another massive pot of the stuff. What a dog of a company. Mañana, mañana, mañana. Excuse after excuse after excuse. I hope Mike gets butchered at the AGM. He's lucky I won't be there.

Indigo, the comparison to Orimulsion is completely valid.

http://tiny.cc/b4jcgz

MSAR is Orimulsion Mark II, it was Jason and Bernard who spent 10 years in Venezuela making the stuff for BP and PDVSA.

"The reason why it hasn't happened is that it's very difficult"

Indigo, we've heard that for a while and I'll admit that even I used to believe it, "It's a very conservative market, it's difficult to get these big companies to change." But I've recently realised that it's a load of old tosh.

The Venezuelans, that's right the Venezuelans, not the most advanced society on the planet, in fact it's probably close to slipping back into the category of third world country, they managed to flog more than 60 million tons of emulsion fuel. Now Orimulsion is vastly inferior to our amazing product, but they still managed to find various customers for it in at least 6 or 7 different countries around the world, so it can't be that bloody difficult, can it? But after almost 14 years QFI still haven't managed to sell a single commercial barrel of MSAR, which is an infinitely better product than Orimulsion was. It doesn't add up, it doesn't make sense. It can't all be down to bad luck, disputes with the electricity company, hitting a buoy. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune seem to follow QFI wherever it goes.

For me the buck has to stop with the management. They've had a commercially viable product which they could sell since the day Quadrise was set up, but have so far completely failed in the last 14 years. It's a simple as that really.

I'm giving them until the end of January, if I don't see absolutely CONCRETE progress in the next two and a half months, I'm out. A commercial contract, a huge trial announced in the Middle East, something along those lines and I'll be satisfied. But if the share price isn't significantly north of here by then, I'm selling up. Kirk said towards the end this video back in January

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juo0QqsdV9k

that 2019 would be the year they deliver. I'll give him one months grace after that. I've had enough of his broken promises.

"IF Maersk go for it(they have got to be daft not to) MSC will surely come on board also."

Back of fag packet calculation. The graph on page 2 of the General Meeting presentation, MSAR Economic Viability, seems to show the savings from MSAR vs HFO as steady for the next 18 months, about $140/t. For the end user, let's say 35% of the savings for them, so MSAR would be about $50/t cheaper to buy than HFO.

250 MSC ships + 140 Maersk = 390. If all those ships burn on average 100 tons HFO a day, that's 35,000 tons a year.

35,000 x 390 x $50 = $682.5 million a year in savings, or $1.75m per ship. Very daft not to.

"IF Maersk go for it(they have got to be daft not to) MSC will surely come on board also."

From the Annual Report -

"We have continued our discussions with Maersk in relation to the Royalty Agreement and related future MSAR® opportunities."

If MSC did also use MSAR, presumably Maersk would make money from it via the Royalty Agreement.

On the first page of the recently released Annual Report, Maersk Line are now included in the map of Project Opportunities, so that would suggest they have already knocked on QFI's door. We have worked with Lithuania and Canada in the past, but they are not shown. If the Maersk project wasn't now currently active, why include them?

http://tiny.cc/w37agz

Maersk forced to change course in global race for environmental gains

https://shippingwatch.com/secure/carriers/article11752841.ece

While Maersk is publicly criticizing the exhaust gas cleaning systems, the group has still begun to install them on a large scale. Smart choice, say analysts.

In the fight to keep costs down, A.P. Moeller-Maersk has begun to install numerous of the exhaust gas cleaning systems, scrubbers, which the group has in the past otherwise severely criticized.

Scrubbers represent one of the methods to ensure compliance with the shipping industry's new environmental regulations, which are set to come into force at the turn of the year. The other option – which Maersk as been advocating – is to bunker cleaner fuel.

"Maersk has been forced to change its stance on scrubbers, and this gives a good idea of what they think about the cost savings that can be achieved by installing them," writes Alphaliner analyst Tan Hun Joo in an email.

The shipping industry is competing on paper-thin margins, and the savings achieved by installing scrubbers compared to the use of cleaner fuels can produce solid gains, as it looks now.

"It looks like they, by choosing scrubbers, gain a significant competitive edge compared to those opting for low-sulfur fuel," says Johan Eliasson, analyst at financial firm Kepler Cheuvreux.

Installing a scrubber requires a one-off investment of USD 5-8 million. On the other hand, it turns out that fuel with low sulfur content costs around USD 200 more per ton than the traditional heavy fuel that one use on ships with scrubbers installed. And this adds up.

According to Alphaliner, Maersk plans to install scrubbers on around 140 of its ships. The number, which Maersk declines to confirm, is far higher than previously estimated.

Even though Maersk currently plans to install exhaust gas cleaners on a smaller part of its combined fleet than many of its competitors, the shipping group still holds a strong card to play.

This is because Maersk has formed an alliance with Swiss-based MSC, which is betting big on scrubbers. On the biggest and most important trades, the two shipping companies share costs for fuel and slots on their ships, and Maersk benefits from this.

"On the big tradelanes, the alliances that sail with scrubbers will determine freight rates," says Eliasson.

Maersk is in a silent period ahead of publishing its interim report, and as such the company declined to comment on this story. But CEO Søren Skou acknowledged the large financial benefits of scrubbers in relation to its second quarter results. At the time, he also said:

"We have always been very clear that we're not very excited about scrubber technology."

https://theloadstar.com/maersk-may-be-on-course-to-lose-its-crown-as-the-worlds-biggest-box-carrier/

“Look at the scrubber situation – MSC came out at the start with Mr Aponte saying fitting scrubbers to comply with IMO 2020 was a ‘no brainer’, while our guys decided to go down the low-sulphur fuel route, and we have been caught out,” a senior Maersk manager told The Loadstar recently.

https://shipandbunker.com/news/world/902771-imo2020-only-one-top-ten-box-carrier-is-not-opting-for-scrubbers

"MSC leads the pack with confirmed orders for about 250 scrubbers, followed by Evergreen with some 150 units and Maersk with about 140, including both on owned and chartered ships," Alphaliner says in its latest Weekly Newsletter.

https://shipandbunker.com/news/emea/646805-imo2020-an-opportunity-for-quadrise-says-mike-kirk

Forget financial year, I'm thinking more calendar year.

"In Kuwait, our agreements with Aleph and Hawazin have positioned Quadrise to build on the work we had already concluded successfully in 2018 to demonstrate our technology to key participants in the local refining market. We are jointly building on this strong base and look forward to DEMONSTRATING SUBSTANTIAL PROGRESS DURING 2019."

I also expect to hear more about KSA and Morocco before the end of the year too. There must be a good chance the share price will be back in double figures by January. It could be an interesting 2 or 3 months ahead. Not before bloody time.

They don't need a minimum amount of votes for this to pass do they? Just a majority, regardless of the number of votes cast? I presume a lot of people will abstain or be unable to vote, and I doubt that there will be very many shareholders would vote against the resolutions. So I guessed that the General Meeting was just a formality, a bit like passing the resolutions at every company's AGM. A lot of it is just done on a show of hands at AGMs, never worked out how that can work since I might have 50,000 shares and the bloke sitting next to me might have 25 million shares.

I've checked on the Selftrade website, I don't have the option of voting online, I found this in their FAQ though -

Can I exercise my voting rights at a general meeting?

If you wish to exercise your voting rights in respect of any investments you hold, you should contact us on each occurance to request this. Please provide us with as much notice as soon as possible prior to the meeting and we will work on a best-endevours basis to exercise your vote on your behalf. Further details will be provided on what is required at the time of each request.

Given the abysmal service which they normally provide, I can't see them trying too hard to exercise the vote on my behalf.