Member Info for thurgarton

XPB: That doesn't really answer the question - why would Velocys press on with two major projects if they did not believe that they had sufficient funding and backers available to carry them through. You are just posting a theoretical cost based on your beliefs which is irrelevant to the issue of how Velocys is funded.

XPB: I would think that Velocys might have sorted this before proceeding with the two major projects they are involved in. What makes you think otherwise?

XPD: Her name is Constance - hence my comment! I obviously read the documentation more carefully. BTW the Drainage Board are now happy (latest document added today)!

XPB: You mean that you hadn't met her previously! Are you suggesting that her objection (the only one from a private individual that I have seen) was arrived at without your input. BTW, how do you know that she is a beer drinker?

The latest document (5 Feb) would appear to have been inspired by XPB! Highways England suggest that they cannot make up their mind until 4 Mar, and Cadent having said in July that they did not object, have raised an objection six months later. Meanwhile the Council suggests that all will be decided by 23 Feb. I therefore quite understand your problem. I suspect that there will be yet another delay but I am of the opinion that the pressure to provide such a facility from the Establishment is such that planning permission will be granted, albeit with conditions. It would seem from the latest SP develpments that investors agree with that view. You may need to make up your mind quite quickly!

XPD: Why should I? DYOR without the blinkers and see if you can work it out.

XPD: So why do you persist. We all get where you are coming from. We all get the points you so repetetively make. We have all (I hope) done our own research, formed our own opinions and taken our position accordingly. We all know yours and mostly do not set great store by it. You cannot surely disagree that there is a need for the product Velocys seeks to produce. As in all new and untried technology there has to be a risk/reward assessment. There is undoubtedly a demand for the end product. If Velocys and its partners succeed there is undoubted long term profit to be made. It is all a matter of belief. You obviously have none. Others are prepared, to varying degree, to disagree.

XPB: Do you promise to go away once you've had your "cheap win"? And what "good news" are you predicting. Surely not that planning permission is granted and F4C is awarded. Such news is likely to give you a fit of the vapours. You have been making your negative case for ages and everyone who reads this board regularly will be all too familiar with your position. You may be right, but then again you may not. Just please stop posting until you have something concrete to support your opinion.

XPB: And with this view you bought shares in the company. Do explain your logic.

XPD: Have you looked at the two CADNET documents posted on 29 Aug? Seems that they have no actual objection but are merely (and at the last minute) making sure that their interests are protected.

XPD: As usual you have selectively chosen to post that which supports your case without bothering to properly read what has actually appeared on the web site. The "email from agent" dated 30 Jan are interesting since it is later than the CADNET docs but does not refer to them. Also interesting is the glaring display of NG inefficiency in that it received the application details and responded to same last August but has only chosen to make the holding application now. What is also interesting is the fact, clearly stated in the letter, that they will only take action if there are no other reasons for the application to be refused and would "endeavour to respond" within 21 days. NE Lincs CC have delayed the decision for this period which implies that CADNET has been asked to carry out the assessment because there are no other reasons to refuse the application.

XPB: Pot, Kettle, Black?

XPB: So why have you bought shares in VLS? Anyone who has followed this board for any lenght of time is all too aware of your position and to buy shares in a company you obviously despise reeks of hypocrisy.

Apparently somebody emailed F4C. The reply was as follows:
"Thank you for your interest in the F4C programme. Please note that we have recently published an update regarding the programme at hxxps://ee.ricardo.com/transport/case-studies/f4c. The Department for Transport are committed to the Velocys and Lanzatech projects. The projects remain shortlisted and as such, the Department is reviewing progress to ensure that they achieve programme eligibility criteria in full before progressing to grant award status. We hope that the information above is of some assistance to you. Many Thanks, F4C Project Team Webpage: ee.ricardo.com/F4C Email: F4C@ricardo.com " . I take that to mean that if you get planning permission we'll give you the money.

Considering that the SP is currently 70% higher than it was at the start of the month based on almost no news save that the Planning decision was delayed until the 1st Feb, what exactly did you expect. Solid news either way is likely to have a massive impact on the SP - patience is a virtue and it would seem that the IIs are of the same mind.

Of note in the post was the comment of Niel Hargreaves that the Immingham project is subject to "planning permission and financing". The implication would seem to be that the granting of planning permission would generate the necessary financing. Velocys obviously consider themselves to be a viable concern, as apparently do Drax, otherwise why bother with nugatory discussions. Doubtless XPB will have a contrary view.

XPB: I thought from your many previous utterings that you believed that Velocys would not get any further F4C money. What changed your mind?

As I said, inbuilt bias!

XPD: The penny certainly hadn't dropped when F4C awarded an initial payment to Velocys - what makes you think otherwise now (apart from your inbuilt bias). I think I prefer my interpretation to yours, a decision that I doubt you will find surprising.

XPB: You're at it again! The link you quote only designates £6.5m of the £20m due to be allocated by F4C, which leaves £13.5m to be allocated under the scheme. Your natural pessimism has once again led you to paint the worst possible picture. It would be pretty stupid of F4C to announce any award to Velocys before the planning permission issue is settled and therefore for Velocys not to feature at this juncture is totally understandable. A little less pessimism and a bit more logical thought on your part might raise your credibility level from its current abysmal level.