Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
Yes, but that's under the assumption that it's a salary cut, not a temporary postponement or salary sacrifice that feeds in to participation to the fabled alternative financing or indeed some other means. The important point however is that overheads have been cut, as is evident through comparing the Prospectus and Q2 Results. Shareholders were screaming for it yet are still not happy... go figure.
It's easy to work out Bonum, before you start accusing others. Compare the Prospectus: $0.8M to Q2 Results $0.67M. Cash burn $0.13M, a very significant reduction that wouldnt be possible without cutting / postponing salaries. You can validate that by seeing how much was being spent on salaries each month.
The Prospectus states as of 31st May the company had approximately $0.8M. Suggests that the company have reduced their overheads. Indeed cash burn is noted at $1.02M for the 3 months ended June 30th. That's approx $0.33M/month IF it is an equal split across all 3 months. May actually be less than that now e.g. $0.2M/month
You have lost the plot and are absolutely paranoid. Moles, conspiracies and unsubstantiated theories.
As for anyone hounding you, you posted abusive and insulting comments about me and other posters. I replied once in about 2 months because I'm fed up with what is posted here daily. Not worth my effort. As i've said before, we will see who's right in the end.
Sub, with all due respect, sorry but no. If someone is posting false reports under a newly registered account with 100% history on attacking this share, then I will call them out on those false reports. The agenda is clearly evident.
Sounds like you've spun yourself a nice story here, Happy.
First of all, Baru has been GMD of NNPC since July 2016. Second of all, Baru requested acceptance of retirement after turning 60 but did offer to serve more should he be called upon. It wasn't a desire, but an offer should the need arise. And finally, do you refer to the same Nigerian Press that revealed earlier this year that OPL226 was to be revoked by Buhari, among a host of other licences, and that SOLGAS were to lose their rights to the licence?
Happy, Baru wasn't sacked - he turned 60 and therefore retired. Unless you call statutory retirement chaos?
What exactly hasn't come off? Hasn't come off yet, perhaps. Nothing has been announced but if a placing hits, then I'll grant you that. However, it hasn't, therefore the structure for financing is not yet known. As pointed out, until news everything is just speculation and noise.
Jeezo. Is that the mentality now? Happy to lose tens of thousands of pounds just to spite Arthur. I wouldn't even expect Harry on one of his more darker days to come out with something like that. Arthur's salary over the past year works out to be around $18k a month, taking in to account he contributed some $170k to the business, yet we're spending some $400k a month - about 5% of expenditure. A very good wage indeed, but hardly the answer to all our problems. I would of liked to see cost cutting across the board, directors and employees taking shares in lieu of wages. But then we go back to what has been discussed - how do you attract and retain a very experienced and professional team? It is not them that has in any way held this up. Could we have gotten a project like this or Liberia or Mozambique, dealt with Majors, without a team with significant expertise?
Who's putting him on a pedestal? You or sub, or anyone else for that matter, have no idea what I ask or question Art so you can stop acting like you do. The finger pointing and you should of done this and that is wearing pretty thin so last post for today. I have posted answers to questions here in the past. Everyone had an opportunity to make of it as they will, to promote discussion. Looking back I should of kept it to myself, and will do so in the future.
I have questioned him countless times this year. If he doesn't like it he doesn't answer or replies aggressively / defensively. As you may have noticed, I haven't posted any in a while and why should I if this is the response. Instead of blaming others for posting out of goodwill, why not send your own email if you have so many questions for him? Hindsight is a wonderful thing and only now we can look back and think we should of questioned more or thought differently. At the time, I interpreted Arthur's emails as did everyone else. No malice, no BS feeding and I got hopeful, as did everyone else.
Sub, you really are a clown. Are you seriously trying to blame me for your own poor choices?! Or how this share has performed?! Wow. Get a grip. It's not particularly hard to email someone and get a reply. Try it sometime if you get time to take off your tin hat. Don't like the content of what I post, filter me. Just like I'm going to filter you. Goodbye.
Two possible answers Harry, in my view. First is that that was the amount offered by broker given the position of the company. It is however almost exactly 20% dilution, indicating to me it was company that suggested it. Those on Twitter and cynical types will suggest it is because the company weren't offered more. I don't believe this. Second is that 'Plan A' has taken longer than expected and company need to maintain cash flow given expenditure is typically realised at the end of the month. A second financing will happen within the next month or so given the size of the raise. This has to be better than a equity raise at 0.1, or why not raise more. The release notes that concurrent to further financing is the conclusion of the performance bond. So, news of further financing will be inclusive of the performance bond or some other financing facility post performance bond and possibly approvals if they are one and the same. News in June is my bet
Definitely, Guitar. Always best to consider all possible events. However, those that would take a 50% dilution really need to consider the effect that would have on their investment and the implications of future pricing. That said, our wants and hopes are irrelevant. What will be, will be.
Absolutely not. 50% dilution?! It's possibly the second worst outcome we could hope for, short of going under. Why on earth anyone thinks that's a good outcome begs belief. The sort of overhang that produces would, as Oilberta rightly points out, kill all sort of shareholder value. Further, we have £3M worth of warrants to issue on closing of back end financing. Not only hit with an outrageous dilution for ops funding but also hit with further dilution at a much lower price for warrants than if Arthur go down a different route. In any case, I believe it to be a moot point and an unlikely scenario. I'm convinced it will be financing off the back of the performance bond or some other similar financing facility. Something akin to the back end financing term sheet - i.e. warrants issued upon closing or on condition of certain milestones. e.g. approvals recieved, project financing in place, production KPI.