Member Info for stokey12

I note that yesterday CWR, VLS, ITM and PHE were all up so it may be that yesterday's increase in the share price may have been part of a sector wide price rise. AFC bucked the trend and was down.

sb1987uk - In relation to your 19.15 post of yesterday I do not think anything turns on her being shown as a neighbour comment. Youwill notice that tehre is a comment from somebody in London whihc is also shown as a neighbour comment. I think the classification neighbour comment means that it is not from a statutory consultee.

thurgarton - In relation to your 11.33 post Highways England in their initial response put a response of non determination until 4 March 2020 it was not a recent move. It would be interesting to see if the planning committee does deal with the application before 4 March as it is outside the statutory time limit to reach a decision.

I am considering investing in this but am still doing checks to satisfy myself about it. One concern I have is over the planning permission. If you look at this link http://planninganddevelopment.nelincs.gov.uk/online-applications/centralDistribution.do?caseType=Application&keyVal=PUW79ZLJH1F00. If that does not work then from the North Lins Council website the application reference is DM/0664/19/FUL. In particular the comments under documents from Highways England and Cadent if I am reading the comments correct both ahve put temproory blocks on the grant of planning permission which would effectively prevent the application being granted before Q2. If this is the case what effect would this have on the project?

Wolveshaveeyes - Thanks I think I best t\ke this over to the VLS board before any justified complaints about improper posting.

I cannot recall who first mentioned this application in North Lincs. It looks like it mght have difficulties which would be good for PHE due to the amount of waste plastic that they want to process on a daily basis. Both Highway England and Cadent have put temprory blocks on the planning application. Also I have noted a discrepancy between the amount of plastic being delvered and the amount being processed. I am not sure if they will get planning permission but I would appreciate comments on the technology they are using. The link to the application is http://planninganddevelopment.nelincs.gov.uk/online-applications/centralDistribution.do?caseType=Application&keyVal=PUW79ZLJH1F00. If that does not work then from the North Lins Council website the application reference is DM/0664/19/FUL

redleader1 In relation to your 12.24 it is my understanding that moey held in an ISA is free of CGT when withdrawn regardless of who the provider is. However the limit is £20,000 per tax year so if you have an ISA with HL and you have used up all of your £20,000 allowance you cannot pay anymore into it. The exception is if you were to transfer your entire ISA from another provider to your HL ISA.

sprogbarnes - Yellowf1 has been on this board on and off for a while he has always been critical of PHE. If I recall correctly from his posts he invested at around 0.4 and sold out at around 0.62. From his posts I would class him as atrader not an investor.

Yellowf1 in his 07.31 post from this morning raised an interesting point assuming that the customer referred to in the quote was W2T. If Ellesmere Port has planning permission and any necessary environmental permit why did matters not go ahead with Ellesmere Port. Had this be done there is a good chance that we would have had a working DMG unt. This raises questions about W2T's competence assuming that W2T was indeed the client mentioned.

Piltick - In relation to your 11.50 post I do not disagree with anything you say. However, it has to be borne in mind that Peel is a party to the collaboration agreement and has shown a willingness to provide assistance with help wth fundng so it is possible that they would assist with the funding under any scenario that would allow the project to move forward.

In respect of your point about the current development agreement with W2T in the event that the aquisition agreement does not get competed for any reason then it is open to PHE to give W2T 90 days notice to terminate the agreement so as to regain the marketing rights.

Wolveshaveeyes – In your 20.24 post of yesterday you asked amongst a number of other things what would be the implications for PHE if the shareholders did not agree to the acquisition of W2T. There are two schools of thought on that question. First you have those who say that the share price will drop to the 0.2p price range and that PHE will wither until the administrators are called in. Second you have those who believe that while PHE’s growth would be slower but it will survive and gain customers.
I am not going to tell you which is right I will leave you to make your own mind up on that but a couple of facts to keep in mind. Firstly, the development at Protos is being done under the Collaboration Agreement between Peel, PHE and W2T. This agreement is a separate agreement to the Acquisition Agreement. Also, as W2T has a long lease of the land on which the DMG unit is going to be built there is no reason why the DMG unit at Protos cannot be built even if the merger does not go ahead. All the parties to the Collaboration Agreement would still exist. Secondly the annual differential in price between the gate price that PHE will charge to take the plastic and Landfill charges is by my calculations in the six figure range. It would benefit waste management companies to use DMG units as opposed to sending to landfill. Finally, you need to remember that at the AGM it was stated that of the 24 customers that it was in discussions with eight were major recyclers so PHE has it would seem a strong base of customers to build on.

Newboy58 - I notice that in the past when wehave had to wait along time for news it has tended to be worth the wait. Hopefully it will be the same this time.

Piltick - In relation to your 15.24 post I am not sure that is right. The board was confident to come to an agreement in principle in December last year without planning permission in place. I therefore cannot see why they should not be able to ask the shareholders to agree to the acquisition on the same basis that they reached the agreement in principle.

Newboy58 - In respect of your 09.31 post I would disagree with you on whether the DMG unit is carbon neutral. The DMG unit does as you have said create a small amount of CO2. However there are a number of offsets that need to be taken into account. In particular the reduction in CO2 emissions from diverting the waste plastics from landfill. Also the reduction in CO2 emissions from not using carbon based fuels to create electricity. In addition when used to create Hydrogen it is in fact carbon negative when you factor in the reduction in CO2 from using hydrogen instead of petorl or diesel to power a vehicle. I am not sure if you would get a greater reduction in CO2 if you were to use a fuel cell instead of the genset to create the electricity.

rubert22 - In relation to your 10.38 - I think you will find it is the mean price based on the lowest expected selling price for hydrogen using the DMG system of £5 and the current price of £10. I personally use the £5 figure in my calculations.

Boo80 - In respect of your very interesting 10.12 post you ask me about the Chairman whose name you could not even remember. I cannot say what he does on a daily basis as far as promoting PHE is concerned but that does not mean that he does not do anything to promote PHE.

Can I ask you to clarify something from your post ou said that 'Harold white (W2T) has been doing more work to introduce and drive this company forwards and don't forget he has a very large shareholding in this company already' I presume that this shareholding is below 3% as he is not on the list of significant shareholders.

I would point out that W2T in some of it's statements seem to cause confusion as to who owns the DMG technology and it is this confusion which is I suspect in part behind Peel and possibly others asking for a simplification of the structure. This simplification can be achieved by PHE giving 90 days notice under the representation agreement to terminate it. One of the things I would be looking for in the shareholders circular is an explantion as to why this route was not chosen.

Manabouttown - Thank you for your post of 18.10 with all due respect I will post as I feel fit. As to any discussions I may or may not have with anyone connected to PHE or W2T that is a private matter and I am not going to say what if any conversations I have had.

Kenny100 - I would rather not they give me a headache.

Boo80 In response to your 17.09 as far as your criticism of the Chairman is concerned I find it inconsistent to the circumstances of when I first met him which was not at the AGM. Also I thought he was a Non Executive Chairman so would not be involved in the day to day running of the company. With your intimate knowledge of PHE you would of course recall that originally David Ryan was the Technical Director not the CEO he was promoted to CEO in February last year. So even if he was bought into the company by W2T it was for his technical engineering skills.

The government has introduced a new Environment Bill in to the House of Commons today and can be found here https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0009/20009.pdf. Of note is Part 3 on Waste. Also there is a provision which I have not read on Biodiversity gain as a plannng condition.