Member Info for Lutra

It's also a big risk for anyone to have their wealth invested in the company that is also their employer. Just ask any RBS employees who lost their life savings and jobs at the same time, when things went downhill rapidly there! It's the ultimate in having all your eggs in the one basket! I would never criticise people for selling their employee-benefit shares.

Toneman, since I am in Scotland, most of the sites I was looking at will be determined by the Consents Unit in Edinburgh rather than locally, as the BESS output is added to the on-site Renewables output in determining whether it exceeds the threshold for local decision. Add in the fact that BESS is favoured within the National Planning Framework (and rightly so), there is very little opportunity for any meaningful local input. It seems that the Planners hands are also tied by the lack of clear guidance from the Chief Fire Officers and SEPA don't (or won't) cover "what-if" risks in their assessment of environmental risks from applications.

I was looking at our local planning portal this morning and was stunned by the number of BESS schemes that are currently going through the planning system. Essentially there is one for each windfarm and a few where it is just convenient for a grid connection. There is a pretty big market out there in UK alone. It's a pity we can't get the environmental impact assessments to place a greater significance on fire risks and clean-up risks for Lithium based BESS schemes!

Munin, that's an interesting perspective. But be careful - when I queried the calculation of NAV last week, my post was gone within half an hour!

I'm not sure it needed a specific RNS simply to announce the admission of the shares to trading? It was included in no less than five RNS, including the final approval by the General Meeting. Obviously the shares will be included in the next "Total Voting Rights" RNS in due course.

Is this not in reference to the 17m Placing Shares and 13m Rex Offer shares that did indeed appear around 08.00 yesterday? I got mine!

We are all just speculating here, but I'm not sure that Carillion has much relevance to SAE. In the context of a Labour Government in Westminster (creating an Energy investment vehicle in the shape of GB Energy, which it suggests would be based in Scotland) and the competing battle for votes in Scotland between Labour and SNP, it seems likely that any risk to UK's tidal generation development would result in both parties trying to outcompete each other to be seen as the "saviours" of the operation. In some respects, Ferguson Marine and Prestwick Airport might be more relevant comparisons.

I'm not sure SAE stand to gain much from the fund as such, but I think SAE (and the Maygen project in particular ) is politically important to both Labour and SNP. In some ways it is "too big to fail" in political terms, which gives it an interesting status that is difficult to value in cash terms. I also reckon that Labour will be under lots of pressure to be supportive to a range of marginal industries and to utilise the "freedoms" of Brexit to provide support that might otherwise have breached State Aid rules. Whether any of that is of benefit to shareholders remains to be seen, as it is entirely possible that state support is provided in return for a share issue and Government taking a stake.

And linking this thread with the "Barrister for the Prosecution" thread, that slide in the video showing total world electrolyser capacity versus orders is quite sobering! So I wouldn't want to place too much faith in the cited value of "Inventories".

If you look back through the trades info, there have been surprisingly few "365 share sellers". Looks like the vast majority of the individual investors whose IPO purchases were capped have retained their holding or added to it.

That is a very odd article which reads like an AI generated piece and has no technical content, so I'm tempted to view it as "fake news" - at least until it is possible to triangulate it and get further detail.

Yes, thanks for the added links. The news release from 11 June on TPET's website makes their interest and stake clearer ( https://ir.trio-petroleum.com/ ) but there is nothing shown in all this to suggest that the msar technology is a necessary requirement to be able to ship the oil from the site.

Can someone explain the link to QED here? Seems to me that he is talking about simply using old-fashioned heat rather than the QED technology. Ok, it is Utah, but apart from that, where does QED come in?

I wonder just how oversubscribed it was, though. I was scaled-back, but still got just over 96% of what I asked for, so I'm guessing they closed the offer at the point when it reached full uptake. This would have left them just slightly oversubscribed by the volume in the pipeline at closure.

Since I am a touch OCD on these things and hate odd numbers in my portfolio, I'm tempted to buy enough on the open market just to get back to a nice round number! :)

Gizmo, if you try to sell on your platform, it will probably allow you to do so on a "When Issued" basis. I think this means that the trade is technically not completed until the "REX" shares are formally admitted later in the week.

Allocation is now in my account, about a third of what I had asked for.

Looks like open trading won't start until 08.00 on 14th June.

RPI Opened at 3.63, but not sure when we will know the allocations!

This may not be good news for Versarien, though, since they don't appear to have any involvement in this work and the improved method is now patented. The original paper can be read here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07454-5

Is that not a kind of odd report? Although dated 27th May, it seems to be based on holdings before the recent fund-raise. It makes no mention of the UKIB, which I think is now the largest shareholder?