Member Info for Whiskyman01

Projection, the irony.

I know Brian Ten-Handles from old as do many on here. He’s a professional trader masquerading as a simple investor. He fashions himself on the Pied Piper, worked for him first time around. Not so much now as enough are wise to him. He lives on his own little island in a basement made for one.

Your history is well known Brian/stock cheque/ illuminate and dozens more logins. Your posts are visible on a daily basis, no need to look them up.

How’s the basement?

I will Brian. So is today a 2 pizza day?

The last two posts speak for themselves, nothing else I need to say.

Illuminate/stock cheque doing his usual diversion attempts, he’s a one-trick pony. Ramping trader with multiple logins, ramp on the ups, silent on the way down. Rinse and repeat.

“Slander”…that’s defo a Bwian word. We do need more serious posters, maybe some who use emojis and talk ramping garbage each time they post a message.

How’s the wrist by the way?

You still in your basement, Brian/illuminate? Three screens, some empty pizza boxes, and a sore wrist.

“Cue Whiskey (my favourite shorter) to pour cold water and attack etc.. blah blah.”

Keep trying Brian/Stock Cheque/illuminate/Haggis/Saville Row………your cover is well and truly blown.

“Many of us have been waiting for the massive shareholder returns for over a decade, so a week month or even months to get MSC sign off isn't going to make any difference to us.”

I smell shyte…

Name the last time QED were ahead of the game Stock cube? Next time will be the first, that’s a fact.

You’ll note how laden his posts are with “could” and “might”. Ramping FOMO garbage as always.

“As i have stated we will have an update at the IMC that is due early July.”

Where is it stated there will be an IMC in July?

“So potentially pushing 18M per year revenue.”

I don’t think Morocco is anywhere near that level of revenue. Again, from memory, Jason said Morocco would just about cover QED annual running costs. Ultimately, it depends what sort of deal they can strike if/when it comes to commercial roll out discussions. Even so, it will most likely phased in over a period of time.

Jason has said previously that total consumption from the main target sites could be met by the output of 1 MMU. A single MMU can produce about 1000 tonnes per day (350,000 annually), so that gives a pretty good ballpark figure for maximum potential volumes in Morocco should they use MSAR on all kilns at site A and site B.

Excellent point PR. Orimulsion was first generation msar designed for immediate use in power plants. Minimal chemicals used as not required for long term stability.

MSAR/Biomsar has evolved enormously since then and is designed to remain stable in ships tanks for years. Because of its structure and use of specialist surfactants, it dissolves quickly into the water.

Of course, over a long period of time it will settle on the seabed, but by then it has been spread over a huge area thereby reducing concentration levels. Again, over time, natural processes break down and render harmless the minuscule particles of residue.

Compare the above with HFO which forms enormous devastating slicks on the surface, polluting shorelines reefs and natural habitats and killing huge numbers of wildlife.

Nobody is claiming msar is “good” for the environment, best by far to have zero oil product leak into the ocean, but by comparison to other fuels, msar is a quantum level less destructive and costs of clean up would also be on a different level.

FOMO needs to update his research methinks.

“still expected to go ahead in H2”

As it was by 31st December 2022, all of 2023, Q1 2024, then Q2 2024, now it’s H2 2024…what’s the next number in this sequence? Stock Parrot pumping the FOMO as always.

Agree DoN, forgot about the 10 year extension etc. Biomsar is a completely different fuel and IP from the MSAR2 used in the Maersk LONO. As such it would be doubtful in the extreme that Maersk royalty applied to it. However, MSAR is part of the PoC trials and hopefully future lono trial too, so perhaps some clarity required in this area.

Maersk and QED were joint developers of MSAR and MSAR2 as it was later called. The royalty agreement is one thing, which dealt with Maersk share of sales to third parties post roll out, but what was achieved during the joint development agreement could be something Maersk might choose to argue over, ie they helped develop the fuel as part of an agreement and are therefore entitled to a share. Legal positions are rarely clean cut.

Would Maersk actually go to court over it? Who knows, but as a prospective new partner as in MSC and Cargill, they’d certainly want the position clarified legally before committing I should think.

The awaited “contract” will definitely be limited to trial fuel supply, how could it be anything else given it’s a trial. However, Cargill aren’t here for the trial and hopefully neither is MSC, so before entering the trial arrangement they will most likely negotiate a pricing/supply framework for post lono supply. None of this is of any value to the players unless it goes commercial so it’s logical to discuss commercial framework now rather than do an expensive trial and then find you can’t agree on the basics. As to who is holding it up? Most likely Cargill wanting to be sure it works for them going forward. Although I don’t buy into the delays being entirely legal in nature, I’m sure layers haven’t helped the process timelines.

How can they be encouraged to use these fuels when they’re neither approved nor available? Cart and horse in correct order.