Member Info for Fyoz

"As demonstrated by most of your pathetic and continual dribble"

'drivel' surely? But I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment 😆

Hf14 "At the interview Peter would have been told no more than what we have regarding the MSC trial."

Err, NDA's

"I’m just surprised the CEO of MSC hasn’t poppped in at some point and said ‘get this sorted by next week as we want that trial started asap. It will save us millions in fuel costs’"

Yes, but just playing devil's advocate, they only have that first mover advantage for a brief time, only until it's available to their competitors as well, thereby levelling the playing field again. And they've had the costs of validating it. I'm beginning to suspect there's an element of this involved, and as others suggested recently, we might not see any real movement with marine until the IMO deadline looms closer. Hope I'm wrong, but it's why I'd like Panama & Honduras to take priority now. OCP and have been 'fence sitting' too long now, we should concentrate on power gen. I did fancy Utah as well for the front runner, but it seems circumstances have been against that. Quick question, would Valor produced MSAR need a LONO because it's not come from a refinery?

"Just my attempt at a humorous reply to Sharpey’s post ref increase in volume needed….."

Fair enough mate, I thought for one minute you might be American, which would explain you not being sure 😆

You only suspect?

"One woul;d expect that for the OEM to get results they need to do some testing."

Not necessarily, MAN may have had their own people there to witness the trial, and the subsequent inspection of the equipment. They'd then just need to compile their own report and have that reviewed along with the data, by whoever is doing the approval

But that's not negative enough is it?

Fair point made by Tobythedog. However, I've donned my super rose-tinted glasses though, and think that because Quadrise are specifically mentioned in the advert, along with the requirement for business level Spanish, I've jumped the gun and bought more (245,899 at 10:52) on the strength of this discovery (great work Rob79). Won't be the first time (or probably the last) that I might be too hasty and wrong, but to me it just feels like a ticking time bomb is about to go offf

"you and the rampers shouting buy buy buy are the reason a lot of investors are now down"

Anyone who buys shares on the strength of comments made by anonymous posters on internet bulletin boards is a gambler not an investor

"neg heads" 🤣🤣🤣

The Prof and his team are building a business. At this stage it's not their role to manage the SP, that will take care of itself down the line. Just remember, he doesn't draw a salary, but he has 350m shares, so he's alligned with shareholders. I'm happy to let him carry on building the company

"If it were easy to get that oil out in Utah, it would have been done before"

According to google Utah is the 9th largest oil producing state in the US. I think the economics are very challenging though, cost of extraction, transportation and refining probably only make it profitable with a high oil price? Isn't it the case though that Valkor are hoping to skip the refining part, and by using QED's process, produce low sulphur marine fuel, which should be highly profitable if they can axchieve it?

Genuine pro: It appears that Valkor have finally got their oil to flow so hopefully a decent sample will be winging it's way to the QED lab soon

Kind of pro: not retraction of any kind regarding the misleading wording of the marine trial on LinkedIn

It's probably unrealistic to expect an RNS on a Monday morning, given that lawyers probably have to be coerced to work weekends, but if our head of marine's faux pas article saying the trial 'has' taken place is not to become a really bad joke, maybe a decent explanatory RNS tomorrow? I've been pretty chilled about 'guidance' in the past, but we're running out of Q3 very quickly now, so if it's going to be this year they need to get a move on with getting those signatures on paper, pronto

" Not sure they would issue an RNS for every typo made in a published piece of journalism"

Except that it's not journalism, it's an article written wholly by our head of marine

"I’d respectfully suggest Fyoz that no RNS is required. This article was produced on 12 Aug "

Yes, but the LinkedIn article was published today

This is sloppy grammar at best, at worst it's deliberately misleading to say that the sea trial with MSC has taken place. And it's not 'creative journalism', the author is our very own head of marine. I think Quadrise need to issue an RNS now to clear up this ambiguity, which will probably trash the SP yet again

My trade so definitely a buy

No real reason, I just feel the pressure is building and something good might happen soon. Sparkle results for one?

"We could be waiting a few months for the Sparkle results then."

Or we could get them tomorrow

Pathetic attempt HF

What's with all the 'well if this hasn't happened next year we're doomed' posts? Why make forward looking negative posts if you're genuine holders? Bonkers behaviour! Can't we be allowed to enjoy this weeks small victory without the 'yeah but what about MSC?' claptrap. I can imagine some on here would win the UK lottery and then complain that it wasn't the Euromillions, give it a bl**dy rest for a day or two

"I wonder what he will be actually doing as the 3 main projects are at a standstill."

Oh dear Hottie, must be so frustrating when the SP goes up despite your constant bashing 🤣