Member Info for stokey12

UserSteve In relation to your 06.26 post on your last point I note that the claim does not specify any sum for damages. However it does ask for a jury trial and this is a potential worry. Unless you have a jury of twelve businessmen who understand patents a jury might simply agree with the plaintiff as it is the easiest to understand. US Juries can be very generous with the money of corporations.

Jmc_mcr In relation to your post of 16.15 the PHE twitter account is @PowerHouseEG

Longtermpete - In relation to your post of 15.23 I am not too keen on indiscriminate promoting of PHE because it can backfire on PHE. This would happen if the impression is given that PHE cannot afford its own marketing. In that case it might beg the question as to whether it is sound company. My view is those on twitter could in response to an appropriate tweet mention PHE or retweet to PHE. Also at events lie tomorrow's webinar asking questions supportive of PHE.

I have just seen a tweet from the leader of the house the only statement in the commons tomorrow is from the Defence Secretary. I am not sure when it was said that an anouncement will be made on a hydrogen strategy before the summer recess but it does not look like there will be one until September at the earliest now. There could be a change but the position as of now is the house will rise tomorow for the summer and no statement is planned.

For those of you who would like to make ajudgement on the patentinfringement claim based on facts the claim can be found here https://jmp.sh/f9yDE9E

TakeAimFire - In relation to your 11.51 post I am not sure that any placing is imminent. PHE has stated that it has funds into Q4 this year so it is possible that if there is a placing it might not be until next year. I suspect that the timing of any placing will depend on when and how many exclusivity agreements are made.

It has just been stated that there will be a white paper in the autumn which will feature hydrogen

Iaingotaclu - As this is a phase 2 trial and as i understand it the results are initial results and have not been peer reviewed I am not sure that MHRA or FDA approval will be this week. Due to previous issues with rushing vaccines out I suspect that MHRA will await the peer reviewed results before considering fast tracking this.

I would estimate that the question on Hydrogen to the BEIS Ministers should be reached at about 10.15 as it is the last question. Also among the written statements being made today is this one Tuesday 21 July 2020 OP No.87: Part 1WRITTEN STATEMENTS7WRITTEN STATEMENTSSTATEMENTS To BE MADE ToDAYSecretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy1. Energy Infrastructure Planning Projects. I wonder what the Infrastructure Planning Projects are. I will check back at 11 to see if the statement is up. No statement from the Prime Minister is currently on the order paper but I will keepchecking the leaderrof the Commons twitter feed in case of changes.

Just saw this https://twitter.com/mvbooks2/status/1285420357319643137 it is close enough to Parliament that they might take notice and do something

Dr.Anomaly If the government is going to announce teh strategy in the Commons before the summer recess then it wil be tomorrow. The Leader of the Commons has already tweeted the minsterial statements for today and it is not one of them. Making the statement tomorrow would tie in with questions to the BEIS Ministers tomorrow. My take on news is

August - AGM we would have to formally approve the appointments of Myles Kitcher and Tim Yeo as Directors as they were appointed since the last AGM. Also we may have an amendment to the articles of association to allow for virtual general meetings. The AGM is likely to be virtual but that is using a temprory statutory provision.

September - Interim results are due for the six months to 30 June. Also Peel might give an update on Protos and in particular the timeline for completing the building of the Protos site.

Over the next six months we might get news of other agreements along the lines of the one with Peel.

Zodiac123 In relation to your 08.52 post whether it is time to buy more is something only you can decide. This may be a no news drift so might go lower. Then again it might be something else. Best thing to is to make adecision on a entry point either a day or a price then stick to it.

I am not a shareholder but if I had the funds available I would be buying this share. I sit on an Area Prescribing Committee and if the results are proven after Peer Review then I would expect this drug to be fasttracked. Results from a double blind trial are the best you can get so this looks like a good result.

Rooky In relation to your 07.17 post I think ths is in fact a reply to a different post. I take your point I think there is a lot of frustration over this but it is one that is shared I suspect with the shareholders in all gasification companies.

On Tuesfay BEIS Ministers are answering questions in the Commons of particular note is Q.38 from Member for Bath who asks 'What steps he is taking to grow the UK's hydrogen economy?' There are also four questions on a green recovery. Tuesday is also the last probale date for any Prime Ministerial statement on a hydrogen strategy.

Rooky - In relation to your 16.59 post and yellowf1's 17.48 post the issue is not company specific it is to do with gasification technology in general. As Policy Connect noted in their report Time to Waste gasification when used in energy from waste is not as yet widely used at scale. This is despite a number of American companies advertising gasification solutions. I note in this regard the US Department of Defense have invested heavily in a company which vaporises waste at a temperature higher than PHE does to ceate hydrogen. This company has been compared favourably compared to PHE by yellowf1.

I also note that EQT also uses gasification and has similar issues with manstream media exposure. Wednesday's webinar is a good opportunity to raise the profile of both PHE and gasification generally.

Dr.Anomaly In relation to your 13.51 post I think you may be wrong on your 2020 financial year loss figure. The 2019 Total Comprehensive Loss for the year was £1,705,934 (see page 47 of the annual report.) If the expenses are the same you need to deduct £500,000 Peel exclusivity agreement, Protos related engineering services of £160,000, £285,000 in exercise of warrants and £195,708 in tax credit received in 2020 but relating to 2019. That would mean PHE will have £1.14m in income this would give a total comprehensive loss in 2020 of £565,934.

I am not sure what the reference to 40% in operating cost relating to the W2T takeover is but any costs relating to the takeover would be contained in the administrative expenses as far as I am aware. PHE would therefore only need two further exclusivity agreements this year other than Peel tomake a profit in 2020.

yellowf1 In relation to your post of 13.46 if you look at the countries concerned and then read the projected market as shown in the Longspur report from earlier this week you will see the answer. By signing the agreement now they get exclusivity for an important market that will give them a steady income stream. It is the prospect of possible future earnings that makes it worth the risk.

SprogBarnes - In relation to your 12.06 post I do wonder how many licensing deals will be made this year and how much they will pay for the exclusivity deals. I think there were four countries/areas identified in the annual report. Japan is unlikely to sign a deal before seeing a fully working DMG unit. If the others do sign then PHE will have the equivalent of a years running cost if they all pay the same amount as Peel.

muscorum - I have not been checking so do not know but have no reason to expect they have not.