Member Info for thurgarton

XPB: It did - just. That's 73 posts in the last 30 days, careful you don't get carpal tunnel syndrome.

XPB: Do you have any connection with Char333 who seems to have similar tendencies and is an all too frequent (and unappreciated) poster on the RDSB chat board?

XPB: If you had bothered to read the link I posted last week, you would be well aware that, whilst there is currently no mandate to include a %age of SAF in aviation fuel by 2025, the EU has stated both collectively and by some individual nations (France, Germany) the desire to include SAF as soon as sufficient supplies become available. It is therefore reasonable to assume (as most of this board seem to have done) that there is a demand for the ALTALTO product that has a political basis. Try this link if you have the time between posts!

https://www.iata.org/contentassets/d13875e9ed784f75bac90f000760e998/safr-1-2015.pdf

XPB: Try www.IATA.org - the intent is certain!y there as part of the UK undertaking to achieve net zero carbon by 2050. I note that you didn't bother to advise on your current holding which, I would presume from the tenor of your more recent posts is zero. Much speculation and some reasonable suggestions from posters but there is no solid information available on progress of the ALTALTO project and making guesses in a vacuum is, IMHO, a nugatory exercise. I note that you have posted on this board 69 times in the past month which seems somewhat excessive in terms of time and effort when you repeatedly claim that the company prospects are non-existant and that you have no share holding . Have you nothing better to do?

Despite all the negative posts from XPB and others based on past performance and an incomplete knowledge of the issues (AFAIK Velocys have never made any direct comment on the problems at ENVIA or what solutions they came up with - why would they given the degree of competition in the sector), it is clear that Velocys have managed to convince Shell, BA and HMG that they can do this. They obviously need to convince potential financers as well, and that remains the big issue. Nothing of note seems to have come from the arm so we will all have to wait until the FEED is completed to get a true perspective on future prospects unless the company deigns to enlighten us on progress to date which, given past PR performance, does not seem likely.

XPB: some things are inevitable, and a downbeat post in advance of the agm by yourself was one of them. Did it contain any things we didn't already know - of course not. Did it add anything useful to the debate - of course not. Why not wait until after the event and post comment based on that rather than regurgitate the same old dogma.

XPB: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! Are you by any chance a fan of a certain well known Republican figure with a poor grasp on reality and a constant urge to resort to Twitter whenever he feels slighted? Hopefully he will be history after the November election, .............................

XPB: " Instead of getting upset with my posts, please make an attempt to counter my arguments." I've tried that - all you do is move the goal posts if you don't have a valid argument.

XPB: Not denying that its you selling off your shares one at a time then! Of course COVID is a risk IF the world demand for green fuel is significantly reduced, but seriously even you cannot believe this to be true in anything other than a very short term view and the ALTALTO project is not short term. As to your other comment, we all know what you often (perhaps all too often) state, we are just not convinced that it is fact based rather than self-interest based.

XB: Oh, really. IMHO your inference that COVID is a major uncertainty that has a significant bearing on whether the ALTALTO project goes ahead is a huge and very malodorous red herring. Could you also detail the "Many steps to be taken/proven before any notion of financing could be entertained" as it is quite clear that Velocys and its various partners are not of this opinion and will doubtless say so next week. This just leaves your view of the current SP, which, if it is based on your other views, would also seem questionable. BTW it is not by any chance you that has been selling off your holding share by share in recent days?

One share at a time?

DAK if it is possible to report this ridiculous activity to LSE in the hope that they can trace and remove the moron responsible.

What is going on is absolutely crazy. Obviously the MMs have an agenda that is causing the attempt to manipulate the price and keep it below 8p. Question is are the MMs under any code of conduct that should preclude them from such practices, and if there is, why hasn't it been invoked. VLS can hardly be pleased with what is going on.

Those who have long been a follower of this share will be all too well aware that Velocys' biggest shortcoming has been the lack of information emanating from the company. The absence of any hard facts regarding progress on FEED, the Altalto partnership with Shell and BA, the F4C funding position and almost any news on the Natchez site has given rise to a great deal of speculation regarding the future viability of the company. One assumes that the company keeps an eye on boards such as these, especially when some seem to earn a living by posting negative conjecture there. There is the thought that, as long as the big investors are happy (as they seem to be) with things, Velocys are content to allow us poor PIs to be treated like mushrooms whilst the MMs on AIM continue to make money from the rumour spreaders on both sides (most of us know who you are). Dare I suggest that some decent PR on the part of the company might reduce the problem which seems to afflict this board.

For those of you too lazy to lokk for yourselves, the 2nd Company is LanzaJet UK Limited. The Ricardo F4C web site is back up if you require further information.

Grasp wrong end of stick firmly and then express your opinion. The plant/company in question is not the Nachez site in USA but rather the other recipient of the F4C award from HMG. Ricardo F4C web site currently down for maintenance. Google it when it returns and you will find the answer to your question. I cannot be bothered with people who fail to DYOR and then come out with a load of rubbish.

XPB: I think you have summed up your position perfectly. However, I consider it to be a somewhat short sighted position in that you seem unable to countenance any possibility that the opinions of others that have shown rather more belief in the long term prospects for the company - in this I include HMG, Shell, BA to name but a few - might be right.

XPB: I presume from the tenor of your most recent missive that have decided not to buy back in for the moment. It is obvious from your (far too) many posts that your principle purpose in posting is to provoke an adverse reaction from the board. In this, I must admit, you have been very successful. However, as I understand it, the principle purpose of this and other such boards is to impart useful information to PIs who are interested in the concern involved, not to wind up others by posting inflammatory disinformation. You wouldn't want to be compared with a well known American businessman who has aspired to a job that would appear to be far beyond his competence level. or would you?

The figures would indicate that Amati ditched around 4million, and Landsdown took 60 million of the 400 million on offer to IIs. Ruffer took 88 million and the directors 2 million. That leaves a lot of those shares (around 250 million) unattributed. 3% represents around 31 million so any buyer buying less than that would not show up on the AIM 26 list. DAK if it is possible to find out who else bought in?

Velocys have updated further the AIM 26 facts sheet:

If I’ve done my sums correctly the old share total was 643,756,100 and the increase was 419,999,957. This represents a %age increase of 65.24%.
The following shows the old and new holding as %age and an indication of the total holding now
Ervington 21.4%, 12.9%` unchanged holding
Landsdown 21.2%, 18.5% Holding increased by 60 million
Hargreaves Landsdown 11.5%, 6.9% unchanged holding
Amati 10.4%, 5.9% possible decrease in holding of 4 million
New: Ruffer 8.3% =88 million
Old: Interactive Investor 4.5% which now equates to 2.7% so they may still have the same size holding but obviously did not participate in the offer.