Member Info for nastid

This was and has been my understanding of the rules, and therefore logically it had to be someone else, and if so, without a TR1, those under 3% or someone with a very large holding that hasn't triggered a crossover. I see no indication that Mr Black is selling. We don't know if Aviva is finished, or whether they will return to sell but it does lend to the argument that Aviva, as a policy, was drawing down funds based on a wider strategy/ruling.

I disagree, the executive order is to prevent perceived overreach by the EPA, it doesn't dismantle the entrenched policies that the climate change agenda has already driven. As we've seen recently, it's easier to sign an executive order, than execute it. California (and others) is also a very independent state, and a very large market. The intended Trump policy direction of travel is clear but any change will be years in coming, and or less successful than wished for. Besides, for me the carbon credit label is to do with a more compelling sales pitch, rather than relying on x amount of revenue specifically from the credits. I do agree that policies improving business activity would be more beneficial, than worry for carbon credits.

And if we take a longer term future margin, one they actually achieved before e.g. 35c Then very simplistically, with no costs stripped out etc etc, then we can see the monthly cash potential. 2.75ml * 0.35c = 960K+ 2.75ml * 0.20c = 550k+ It does show how even small movements in margin, have big yearly impacts. With previous high costs, a lot of that was swallowed up and some but I'd hope that any company that has that cash generating potential, and once the recovery process completely shakes out, that it has some money in the kitty.

I'd imagine if they haven't notified the market that they require cash, the corollary is that they must have enough working cash at the moment? Whether that is by the skin of their teeth, or a nice buffer, or if they want to raise more (including for capex), we can only guess. With the next figures we will see how much the cost efficiencies have filtered through.

If you search through the RNS pre-fire, you should find a small note here and there about margin. Indeed the margin was heading north of 35p at one point but due to the fire/market crash, that has dropped. My guess is improving from 20p now utilisation is increasing/Superfine sales ratio etc. Once the final figures are out, you should at least be able to calculate an approximate gross average. I don't think any company or CEO of said company, would release a granular picture of sales/feedstock acquisition. For a start, it's difficult as it'll fluctuate daily/weekly/monthly, especially if going on spot prices. Secondly, they will not give their competitors any advantage. With the improvements finally coming in Q4 16, then it'll be 2017, so results released in April 2018, when we get hold of a full set of data to see a better reflection of average margin. In the meantime, they may or may not make a small note of it a future RNS, if so, that could be a specific figure, or a simple statement saying it is improving.

Not yet. The last I remember, the future expansion plans were for 4 additional trains, for a total of 10. That would not be an insignificant share of the total market their in. They did have a lease somewhere in Mississippi but that was before the joint G&S deal. The two current scenarios are for a Canton expansion, or another location that benefits from untapped potential, maybe leveraging a G&S operational area.

predicated on the current monthly run rate, and an approximation over any one year. At those sorts of volumes, this is why I mention that small changes (margin... superfine vs baseoil ratio etc) can have big impacts. Obviously that works both ways but considering we were already at a low bar, and now the market has seen an improvement, I'd assume we're at least going in the right direction.

I believe we have 6 trains in operation. We're close to max output, currently from mem we're approx 33ml'ish. I think we can get to 36ml. (theoretical max being near 38-40) It's possible, as they did in the years with the old designs, that they continually squeeze more efficiency, so gain extra real output, rather than what's outlined on paper.

Not sure that needed two posts but lse has been a bit flaky on occasion these past few months.

Yes that was an update from April 16 This from Sept 16 "In May, the Australian business enjoyed one of its highest feedstock acquisition months since 2012 and since then has consistently sourced feedstock at an optimal level to maximise its profitability going forward. The focus is now on expanding the customer base and increasing the proportion of transformer oil sales."

Yes that was an update from April 16 This from Sept 16 "In May, the Australian business enjoyed one of its highest feedstock acquisition months since 2012 and since then has consistently sourced feedstock at an optimal level to maximise its profitability going forward. The focus is now on expanding the customer base and increasing the proportion of transformer oil sales."

I don't know what there is to understand? What's Betfair got to do with it? Mr Black is a non exec of Hydrodec, he was also a founder of Betfair. They can both be true, without Betfair having anything to do with Hydrodec. The reason it was sold, was to protect the core business, if it was kept within the organisation, even with extra investment, the risk would still be on Hydrodec as a whole. I assume the decision, although not taken lightly, was made to cut the losses, and do it quickly, rather than maintain the risk. Mr Black purchased the UK IP and assets, I don't recall Betfair having anything do with the proceedings. It almost sounds like, by inference, you are suggesting something untoward?

@stag: If you read my post again but this time more carefully, you will see I specifically did not make predictions about profit. I clearly outlined what I will be expecting and watching for, during 2017. You are being deliberately provocative, incorrect in your comments about Australia, and vague in other statements, whilst attacking the company's performance. I don't buy into this, everything is rosy but I also don't see it as you have described. You mention charts: I wish people would put less emphasis on charts at the moment; with the seller, the consequences of the recovery etc, we are in uncharted waters, to paraphrase the last statement. Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not saying they shouldn't be used, indeed Pre fire, this was a predictable share but my concern is if people swear that the chart says one thing, and then the sp (MM management) does something else, it creates an unnecessary disappointment. Repeat that a few times, and we get a whole lot of needlessly disappointed investors.

As to Australia, when you say below expectations, I think you also need to factor in the following context. Since the relocation, if I'm not mistaken, it has performed much better than it ever did pre US fire time. Australia is a much improved operation overall. I also thought it was more to do with the feedstock supply being below desired levels but temporarily (mid 2016), rather than the simple statement of Australia being below expectations. I'm really please about Australia, sad for the 20 employees that lost their jobs but in the past it was a below scale prospect, now it nicely adds to the bottom line, with I hope, future growth potential.

Good post LaVacheFolle, liked it. I didn't like so much your post stag :) if you don't mind me saying. I wont rehash old debates about the approach/timing/misfortune of the UK operations but no one, (with enough resources) apart from Andrew, stepped in to buy the assets. At least this way we still retain a 10% royalty on any future revenues from the new plant. It's a long way off but something for the future. I also don't buy into this, 'we need the next RNS to be stella', or the company is not quality. My personal opinion or expectation, after following this for a long time, is that 2017 will be the first full year (after the fire) of approaching more normal operations and working through the last stages of recovery. What I mean by that, is that we are still not there for margin, utilisation, Superfine vs Baseoil ratio, or full output. So I'm totally happy for this year to be around that story. Rather than one that states we should suddenly have cash falling from the sky. I'd be expecting far more for 2018 and some idea as to the US expansion plans. With that said, even small gains in those factors mentioned above, over a whole year, can have big improvements on cash generation. I'm confident that if the RNS continue to be positive, the Canaccord target is eminently achievable (short/medium term), given that we recently almost reached my short term 4p price.

Patience, rather than actual patients!

that's my point in my previous post. You only mention it's going no where, because people keep saying/assuming it's about to rocket. I say it's acting perfectly as expected, so the no where part doesn't come into it. There's no false starts as though it's trying to trick people, it's the MM playing the middleman, to create the best market for their spread commission. It will move up (not withstanding negative news) when a) the seller is really gone, b) when we get further news on continued progression. Simple.

have a seller, and until we get a notification, we have to assume that it can continue. Every time someone says that's it and the price must surely rocket, the same familiar pattern seems all to evident. This is being tightly managed, and some patients is still needed.