Member Info for havealot

It would seem to me that the d2w product is not suitable for plastic containers. My reasoning being that the contents would be lost on biodegradation. Since much of the plastic waste consist of plastic bottles of one kind or another, this would seem to significantly limit the usefulness of this product. Similarly plastic bags are often re-used and this would be seriously curtailed as well. I would be interested to know whether this aspect has been discussed on this BB.

Thanks to those who replied. Have now found the gloves.

Referring to protective gloves the annual report states that 'This innovative product, sold under the Protector Health and Hygiene brand, had been in development for two years prior to the launch in Wilko Stores nationwide.' I have not been able to find any of these gloves in the local Wilko store or for that matter on the Wilko website. Has anyone here been able to find this product.

Read Note 20. This is the difference between the conversion price of the Loan Note £0.48 and the actual share price on a specific date. In my opinion this is a 'paper' figure (limited to a point when share price reaches £2.50 at company's discretion). It has no real cash cost to the Company.

Thinking of investing - read this

https://guerillainvesting.co.uk/2018/03/26/bigdish-ipo-big****-market-spoof-app-avoid-like-salmonella/

Could anyone explain the following from note 3:

Following the capitalisation of research and development cost in 2017, the Group has changed the basis of research and development cost disclosure of amounts charged to the profit and loss account above. These costs are now disclosed on the basis of direct costs only, in line with the capitalised costs basis. In prior years, the costs were disclosed on a fully absorbed basis.

The impact of this change has been to reduce research and development costs in 2017 from £15.9m to £10.8m for Continuing Operations and from £17.0m to £11.9m for the total Group. Management believe that the presentation of consistent research and development disclosures provides more meaningful information to the users of the Half year financial information.

ENVIA needs to become cash flow positive before they can start to pay back the VLS loans. ENVIA need to become profitable and start paying dividends before VLS can get any return on their original investment. Neither of these are possible in the near term. Unfortunately since ENVIA are losing money, this leaves VLS between a rock and a hard place having to continue to support ENVIA and possibly putting more good money after bad. They cannot afford to let ENVIA fail. Hence VLS's need for more cash. Perhaps the directors will put some of their own money in this time around but I am not holding my breath. Vital information on ENVIA's performance (eg output figures) has been withheld from shareholders and without this information who would put more money into VLS.

How can you say the tech is sound? It has never been proved at scale. ENVIA was supposed to demonstrate feasibility of this process and currently ENVIA is losing money. In my view the technology has not been proved ECONOMICALLY viable and this is the real issue here.

Just do the math. ENVIA is losing money running at less than 50% capacity. VLS have been funding ENVIA but VLS are not able to do this anymore as they have no money themselves. ENVIA could well close if more funding is not found. Anyone doubting this situation should ask themselves why we have been provided with any output figures for ENVIA. ENVIA owe VLS £13m with no chance of this being repaid any timed soon.

Except in you example, �100000 will have been spent on buying back the shares hence market capitalisation should theoretically reduce to reflect this expenditure. Fundamentals have changed. Share price should not change as a result of buy backs - smoke and mirrors in the City?

I mean RNS.

They probably reached 200bpd on one day, maintaining the production rate continually or for that matter increaing it is another matter. Read the runs carefully.

I assume you mean RINS verified rns. I was referring to operational performance. RINS are a sideshow, relatively small subsidy in relation to cost per gallon upon which profitability will be gauged do the maths

Now we know why there has been no news on ENVIA for months. Results due in 3 days, they had to say something now. But no information on production from ENVIA to date which is what investors require. This problem could take months to fix meanwhile ENVIA most probably on less than half capacity and running up more losses. With no income from ENVIA or no repayment of loan, VLS will need more funds before year end. With a recent massively discounted (ie desperation) Placing, what chances are there of obtaining more funding. This share has been massively overhyped on this bulletin board for months now .

US Supreme Cout lifts gambling ban allowing individual states to allow on line gambling. Must be good news for this share

Timeliness of the results to be correct.

Retireby40 A very good post, but will not be well received by rampers on this board. News of ENVIA progress is very much required. By progress I mean news of profitability or at the very least free cash flow being achieved and the possibility of VLS getting some money back otherwise they are going to run out of funds long before any of these grandiose projects even get off the drawing board..

,Credit for progress made; will automatically follow any progress made. However what progress is being made by VLS in achieving profitability? News of ENVIA output ie barrels produced to date, would be a start. All David Pummel appears to want to talk about is the next big idea.

A proportion of R&D is claimed to be capitalised as was the case in the last F/Y report. Perhaps someone could explain why there is no recording of this expenditure in the cash flow statements under Investing Activities.

You conveniently forget amortised intangibles which substantially reduce NET capitalised development expenditure to 14% of total R&D expenditure (interims) and 17% of total R&D expenditure (finals). Amortisation of intangibles being $11.331m (interims) and $$18.201M (finals).