Member Info for Gitfinger

Bumble. The general understanding is that nameplate capacity is the rate at which the generator can provide power on a SUSTAINED basis. Is this your understanding?

Mucksy
It's what's called a post balance sheet event, which can have a bearing on how auditors look at the treatment of certain expenditures in the accounts, i.e whether they should be capitalised or released to the P&L. In addition, there is the issue of income recognition, and it could be that the company had accounted for the income on the basis that the unit had been delivered, but when the deal was amended (for whatever reason) then this aspect also needed to be reviewed.
It is the reason for the alteration to the terms of the contract that concerns me, because it just doesn't make sense to give away shareholder value unless the other party to the contract has some kind of leverage, for example, the unit supplied has not been able to deliver its contractual nameplate capacity (oh, look, there's that word again)

Yup, back on this old chestnut again!
I see that the original RNS states that the company will provide a unit with a nameplate capacity of 100KW.....anyone know what nameplate capacity means?

Bumble
About as much substance as you're going to get from the AGM presentation. Go on, treat yourself, ponder over why the company gave away 10,000,000 shares when they didn't need to, assuming the ABB unit hit the required performance metrics. When you've duly pondered, perhaps you could share your considered thoughts with us.

And actually, after you said you wondered, you then said that you had been given a possible explanation, which you declined to share, you then went off on a tangent saying that you never said you got the explanation from AFC (which was never suggested in the first place) so all I'm really doing is calling you out for making a statement and then failing to back it up.... Not bluster at all, just wondered why you refuse to support your earlier comment, but I must admit, I feel that the fact that you have resorted to the "na na...I know and you don't....look it up would indicate a singular lack of substance on your part.....noting new there, then.....

Alt
If I'm so thick, then please spell it out to me, otherwise we might all just think it's another piece of made up twaddle with no basis in fact. Challenging me to research something that you apparently (or at least, the bloke you spoke to) already know the answer to is all just a bit weird.....how can you claim the intellectual high ground if you're not prepared to back up your statement?

Alt Muddle.......No, I haven't given any thought whatsoever about the matter of testing, why would I? Look at the evidence, a change in narrative, coupled with a 10 million share giveaway (at your expense) which, assuming the company had met its performance metrics, wouldn't have had to give away (as they would have been contractually entitled to the moolah without having to give the shares away) , and its' clear that there's something amiss, why waste my time when the above narrative holds water so well......unless, of course, you can explain the reason for the £2.0 mil giveaway.....

I can see that name badges wont work, because it would just end up in a big ruck in the car park (Bumble's already getting a bit touchy, you can tell that because he's losing his "voice of reason" persona that he thinks makes his ludicrous apologist stance look credible) ......why not just wear a badge with a smiley face if you like the happy place, or a glum face if you just expect another whitewash and load of spin......Does anyone actually believe that attending this annual propaganda fest makes their position on this board any more credible?

So who's going to the AGM then?
Is everyone going to wear a badge with their poster name on it?

Mc Rampup
You simply don't have a clue about what auditors do, do you? It's all a load of cut and paste rubbish to deflect away from the fact that the auditors simply didn't like the accounts as presented to them. No doubt they had issues over income recognition and also capitalisation of R&D costs for products that have either failed commercially, of haven't met their milestone performance requirements (10,000,000 free shares, anyone?)

Aaron.......You're really just coming out with a load of white noise drivel now......I have evidence of a a company reaching out to the AFC via their website and receiving no response. I have offered to share this evidence with Alt Muddle, but he doesn't wan to see it. You pretend to know of some one who has got the red carpet treatment form AFC, but don't appear to want to share details, and you're shouting about proving me wrong, and in evidence, you use the comment I made about you "just making it up" Hardly a compelling case to support your argument when no one has seen the evidence to the contrary.....The supposition that the company I referred to is "tin pot" is arrogant in the extreme, you have no evidence to support this statement, so again, it's just another case of you shouting at the wall......try getting a grip and stop trying to shout everyone down, simply because they don't agree with you.

Mumble
I really don't give a flying fart about where you heard your make believe stuff from, an really cant be bothered to do any research to find something that might just have a tenuous link to support your random rose tinted hypothesis.
Simple fact is, the company had a deal with ABB, if the company COULD deliver in accordance with the contract, then they were CONTRACTUALLY ENTITLED to receive the second trance of funding as INCOME. This is NOT what happened, in a change to the contractual terms, ABB paid £2.0M, and in exchange were GIVEN 10,000,000 shares in the company. Perhaps you could let us all know your views on the commercial justification for the alteration to the contract, because from this side of the fence, I can't see that many positives.....

Aaron
Absolutely happy as Larry, toddle along now….you must have some people out there who you want to threaten with violence…….

Bumble
No one ever suggested you got your made up explanation from AFC, you dreamt that one up. I simply asked you to provide support for your comment. The fact that you appear to have got the so called information from some random bloke kind of proves the point that you just made it up….
What’s all of this testicular about testing the L series? This has nothing to do with this conversation….oh, L series, is that the one that’s flying off the shelves…not…..

Bumble
But if you won’t provide the evidence, why should anyone believe you?
As I said, meet up at the AGM, show me the evidence from a genuine expert and I’ll believe you, but until you do, I’m afraid it just looks like more of your usual apologist drivel…..

Aaron J
Simply post an example where I have. Been proven wrong…..big words from a small appendage merchant who’s not prepared to back it up…..but like the other apologist who states things and then can’t / won’t back it up when challenged….I will back up anything I state with evidence if required…..that’s the difference between bully boys (which, baring a few the Ubers are) and decent human beings….

Aaron J
Example please.......................

Bumble
You just made the bit up about the alternative (non negative) meaning of the migration to "cumulative"

Arron
You've just made that up..............

BB
How about we meet up at the AGM. I'll bring a copy the enquiry to the company (which still hasn't been responded to) and you can bring along your explanation of the change in narrative to show cumulative as opposed instantaneous 100KW delivery.....