Member Info for Fyoz

My point is the trial is due to start in Q4, we are still in Q3, so why are you claiming it is being held up by QED?

"It is sown to Quadrise to get this fuel agreement agreed."

From the July presentation:-

'Prepare MSC Leandra, finalise 3rd party fuel supply and associated agreements, permitting and fuel supply equipment' are all listed for Q3 2023

Again, where is your evidence that QED are holding things back?

HF14 "the fuel agreement is holding up the trial and under the framework agreement QED are supplying

the fuel."

From the business update RNS in May:-

'Discussions with third party fuel suppliers for the Proof-of-Concept and Letter of No Objection trials on board the MSC Leandra are progressing positively.'

Maybe you want to write this down, 'third party fuel suppliers'

There are over 50,000 vessels in the global merchant fleet. We just need a successful trial on one of them, followed by a licence agreement

That will be the crack in the dam

Heed my words . . .

"Anyone who bought in the last six months was a mug for not heeding my words."

Illuminate33 bought in last month at 0.9p but according to you he's a mug

Better to post nothing and be thought of as a fool than to post like you do and remove all doubt

"MSC must be very frustrated that Quadrise are holding them back in starting these trials."

Please explain how you reached that conclusion? I thought it was at least a tripartite agreement, but you assume QED are the bottleneck

Hopefully the new pump has been bench tested to way in excess of the working pressure 🙄

"JM is holding everything back"

Where is your evidence for this ridiculous statement?

"They must be loosing patience with Quadrise mind who can't seem to organise anything at present"

Surely it's a collaboration, effectively entering new territory for each company. I'm sure MSC are just as committed as QED are, but it can't be easy convincing a refinery to disrupt it's production schedule, just to enable a 'trial' to go ahead. Especially given the history of the Maersk betrayal and how we and CEPSA we're shafted. Right now our company needs the most support and tolerance we can possibly show, otherwise we might as well just sell up, and dream of what might have been

"Big mistake mate….."

Why? He bought in at 0.9p so he's in profit. Whether or not he makes the big gains he's hoping to make is yet to be proven, likewise it's yet to be proven to be a mistake, big or otherwise . . .

We were trading at about 40p during the dizzy days of the Maersk POC and LONO trials many moons ago. Since then we've suffered approx 100% dilution, so you could argue that a similar situation with MSC could return us to say half of that high. But of course a lot of disappointment has followed since those days, and many potential investors will be waiting for firm contracts before buying back in. However, the potential is still eye watering, so a couple of decent signings will (in my opinion), start an upturn that could still give the patient holders a very profitable return, especially from where we're sitting right now. Oh yes, and if that were to happen, don't expect any of the doom merchants to come back on here to admit they called it wrong, not a single one of them

"get real and grow some backbone!"

Yeah let's sack everyone, that will make the cash last a lot longer . . .

"They simply must make a move to defer salaries or implement a salary swap system so that the cash runway is extended."

And the key staff leave for safer jobs just when we need them the most

Get a grip, now is not the time to mess the employees about

"The client simply will not tolerate it."

And you know that for sure? 🤣

"I meant 'during these failed trials'"

The trial hasn't failed, the pump has. The trial has been halted and will eventually resume

Once the results have been analysed we'll find out if it succeeded or failed

The accountants listed on the website are Azets (they're the auditors as well), a top 10 accounting firm with over 7,500 employees. Hard to believe that such an experienced outfit would have completely lost all the records, but I suppose in a digital world it is possible. So, are they going to own up to their negligence and do the right thing, or are they going to prevaricate, and hope they can somehow wriggle out of a large compensation payout? You'd think there'd be safeguards in place for this kind of event, some kind of arbitration to determine the compensation owed? But if INFT can show this has prevented them from clinching some kind of deal, then it could develop into a long drawn out legal bunfight

"I have highlighted the average salary is too high in my opinion."

They're not in 'normal' employment though. They're on the same countdown as us. Would you stick around at a place where you might be out of a job in 12 months time if the orders don't come in? How do you keep the right people, to help land those contracts, if you don't incentivise them to stay?

"which would result in a mcap of ~750 Million £, the net income of QED would at least need to be around 200 Million per year "

So you think a PE ratio of 3.5 would be correct?

I like the first 6 words of your post the best 🤣

"Who decides on the 2.5p price."

It's probably a predetermined formula, 2.5 times the weighted average price over x days

Didn't we all get warrants at 7.5p or something like that at the last fund raise? Shame they awarded themselves 'easy target' options yet we didn't get likewise as warrants. This company really does appallingly at creating shareholder value, sincerely hoping I'm proved wrong some day, hopefully it's imminently 🤣

"these dealing sites should at least show details of where the cash is up until the time that the granted amount of stock is paid for and any balance returned."

I did mine on the phone to Barclays, the agent took me through the whole process, explained my options and informed me how the money is now ring-fenced until the shares are allocated. I've had my issues with Smart Investor in the past but they were great yesterday