Member Info for originalharrystamper

Hi SCoutS - I genuinely mean this when I say I really do appreciate your take and views on info put on this forum. As I am very 'pro' SUP I will seldom if at all post anything negative about the company as that could directly affect my investment so it is good to read the perspective from someone who isn't 'pro' SUP. As I post generally positive comments, links and info in a quest to increase the SP through encouraging investments from others, it stands to reason that others who post comments of a generally negative nature or ones that find issues/concerns etc.... can only wish to affect the SP in a downwards nature. I find this encouraging as I simply ask myself why? And then I tell myself the same 3 reasons; they want a lower entry price, they are a 'paid' deramper with the purpose of encouraging sells for third parties or the last one - they are simply bitter about a company for personal reasons and want to see them crash (often seen when someone has been previously invested and lost money). Anyhow, I'm still very happy to maintain my positive outlook on SAE and wait with quiet confidence for news of the successful (imo) EP and all that will subsequently follow! OHS

I find that with most RNS it is better to read through a number of times over the day to fully digest what has 'actually' been written. The more you read it, the more you can sometimes 'read between the lines'. In the case of Friday's RNS (and only in my opinion of course) it is quite obvious why Mr Reid has been appointed at this stage of operations - for Uskmouth. Look at the following statement from Mr. Reid and how he has worded it to differentiate between SUP and the marine part of the company:

"I very much look forward to playing my part in the successful delivery of the Uskmouth conversion project and the build out and commissioning of fuel production plants across the country. I am also relishing the opportunity to work with the Atlantis team to progress our exciting marine energy and hydro portfolios."

Hi Bob - I believe the main idea SUP is exploring s to provide nearby Data Centres as actual end customers. They have referenced this in a number of RNS and if you delve into some research at Imperial Park and cross reference with Newport Planning Applications, you will see there has been some very recent attention here......

And blue she goes

SCoutS - I wondered if you’d show up today, ha! As much as it pains me to say so, I actually agreed with your point about the timing being odd. But then I thought about it in more detail, reread the RNS and looked a little into the CEO...... I then saw Wigacoff’s post. Nothing more to add.....Wigscoff - Absolutely bang on with that post! SP had naturally dipped o the RNS but seems to be recovering well

Hi Phyl/Monopoly - Uskmouth has 3 x 110MW generators. The initial plan was to convert 2 of the systems to generate 220MW of power. They then changed the plan to a Phase 1 and Phase 2 system which made much better sense imo as it reduces the immediate need for the required 900MT/a of subcoal for both units. It also allows Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) to be up and running quicker which in turn will generate a cash income. Once Phase 2 is complete and generating, the 3rd unit an option as they have stated. No need to plan a 3rd conversion now and all the allocate additional costs etc..
that go with it when the 1st unit hasn't even been commissioned.

The Company intends to convert the first two units, comprising 220MW, on a phased basis as part of the planned Conversion project, while the option to convert the third unit remains available at a later stage.

29 June 2020 RNS

Hi Monopoly - it has been mentioned in earlier RNS but to put it simply - they’re only converting 2 of them. 2 x 110MW plants converted during 2 phases to produce 220MW power in total on completion.

Hi LUCAN, could you please highlight the part of my post where I described someone as a criminal? Many thanks

It’s called something....

You posted this 2 days ago:

As I said last week this is taking its final breath before it dies, the bod are nothing more than criminals and with only rampers dreams there's nothing more in the pipeline. I for one will be glad to see the back of it

Now you’re saying 7 bagger, load up now, RNS tomorrow! Shameful

I think ‘nofookinway’ is more appropriate to that 3p statement. You’re predicting a 7 bagger? How do you know an RNS is coming tomorrow? You should be banned from LSE for that single post alone

Morning Wenglish - I would counter argue that seeing the SP rise 400%+ from 6.5p to 30p in 3 months could be marked as an ‘over performance? Please forgive me but why didn’t you sell some of them for her on the 30p spike if you’ve waiting for them to break even for 2 years?

What I mean is, the 2,47m shares purchased took them just above 7% but they can accrue up to 7.99% without having to release another TR1

I don’t think it really matters why they are buying as long as they are buying tbh. They only have to declare when they cross a 1% threshold so they well have bought more than the 0.5% declared. This was a minimum alone of 2.47m shares so potentially they could have bought double that without having to declare above the 7% threshold.

Gainabit - have you read any of the RNSs?
60% Clontarf Energy plc
30% Petrel Resources plc
10% Ghanaian interests (Abbey Oil & Gas Limited)

Also look up 162group

Regular as clockwork. Another cycle of the pump and dump completed, just like I said. And now another bunch of new investors are now either going to sell at a substantial loss or wait for the next cycle and hope to break even

https://www.162group.com/

Cheers Phyl/OT.

shrey - take a look at this presentation as well - it’s dated from the time N+P were in a JV with SIMEC before Atlantis became involved but it’s still very informative and I think will pretty much answer all your questions regarding IP, patents etc...

https://daxi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Mark-NPNERF-Conference-Feb-2019.pdf

Have a look at this regarding the patent side of subcoal:

https://www.subcoal-international.nl/patents

And this to explain what is meant by ‘pulverised fuel’:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/pulverised-fuel

The key to the whole subcoal concept at SUP is to understand and differentiate between subcoal and subcoal PAF. I think that it is this concept where the IP is most important. It looks like the main hurdle we have had to get over through the SUP/NRW correspondence is the operating temps and flue temps due to the nature of burning subcoals specific pellet spec in conjunction with power station designs and specific burners. Herein lies the importance I believe as when we get the EP, it will be for subcoal PAF technology which is far superior in efficiency and calorific value than standard RDF/SRF in pelletised form (look up Waste Knot Energy and also biomass wood). Cement industry can burn standard subcoal (see N+P website) and other converted power stations can burn/incinerate waste in bag form or biomass pellet but no one has yet got the approval to burn subcoal PAF as far as I am aware. Therefore I believe that once we get EP, it will THEN open the doors to all other conversions who will naturally choose subcoal PAF over other pellets as it is proven tech that burns like coal, not just like an incinerator