Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Pumpex,
I am lost
a simple question
I don't remember if it has been raised
If the AOT is available on October 15th, why would KM have to wait until December to have it's AOT for testing .........................................
Zerosum
I would think this figure comes from ALL STWA knows about the AOT at point of releasing this page... including 4 weeks of testing with TC.
Of course it must be an extrapolation because 1 AOT only increases flow in the order of 0,1% (to 1% if it is a chokepoint).
This is why the release of this 10/15% figure does not violates the NDA.
This is why STWA asked the investors to look up the website.
And do you believe in the science of the coalescer ? since you claimed many times you dont believe in the science of AOT
If today 50,000 shares are real sales, it represents 1 third of 1 thousandth of total shares. This tree is hard to shake !
As I have said before, the lease termination has had for effect to REALIGN (with positive wording) the end testing date to October 15th, which is what TC had in mind when the lease was signed (testing from april 15th to October 15th). As another poster pointed out, if there is a big order, there must be a big budgeting process, and budgeting comes with deadlines. Everything points to a big decision on October 15th.
Sano,
I don't think so. But I am seeing a pattern where you seem to want large sales happening. Am I wrong ?
Sano,
Think about it,
Why would TC make an "early" termination ? i.e STILL 4 months test instead of 6 months. Whereas you will conceded that 4 months is still a respectable length compared to 6, would you think they would make a 2 months shortening to save a ridiculous 60,000 $ x 2 ? plus the circonvoluted wording that their own shareholders will read ("successfully complete testing" which to me sounds like "complete a successful testing" but just a little more diplomatic and cautious).
No, the big picture reason is that TC has to order either 0 or 1 or 2 AOT or tens of them.
If it's 0, or 1 or 2 they would not care about negociating down the 4,3 M$ price (for a skid of 4).
But for tens of them, then they have to do it because they have shareholders and they are still in position to negotiate with STWA. They just need to make sure they wil get priority in procurement which I am sure is part of the negotiation.
Don't be so impatient. Your waiting will be rewarded...
Exactly. They canceled early because otherwise they could not include it into their bigger order. And they explained why they could do with "only" 4 months of testing (june 15th to October 15th): "we don't need the full extent of the lease to successfully complete testing". Yet they still need to wait for those 4 months of testing to finalize their future big order. Is it that surprising ?
The logic is simple :
To order this AOT into a whole set of AOTs, at a lower large order price, they had to cancel this individual lease, which imposes a price of 4,3 MUSD.
Note also that the October 15th date is the normal end of lease date had the installation been completed on april 15th as initially scheduled.
They HAD to cancel this lease on july 15th if they wanted to get a new wholesale price for this AOT, which, combined with the positive wording ("successfully complete testing") is a good indication about their future intentions.
Brilliant remark.
Now, what is the percentage of Dra in the oil ?
If it is 1%, then to suppress it means 1% flow increase which is enormous. If it's 3% then !!!!
Reading your post, I have thought about another indirect effect :
if you need 1 day to clean the oil from the Dra, you will have another flow increase equivalent. For example for a 5000 miles pipeline, and a 5 miles/hour speed/flow, the oil takes 1000 hours or 42 days to travel + 1 day to clean the oil.
So 1 day shaved from total transport/cleaning means another 1/43 = +2% flow increase equivalent.
The story gets better and better.
There is a flaw in your reasoning : why would they put their back against a wall on October 15th ?
a timely advice for ZERO
3 Things You Must Learn From Investing Guru Peter Lynch
2. Don't try to be a market timer
According to Lynch: "When stocks are attractive, you buy them. Sure, they can go lower. I've bought stocks at $12 that went to $2, but then they later went to $30. You just don't know when you can find the bottom."
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/30/why-peter-lynchs-investing-wisdom-is-as-applicable.aspx
exactly right, and that was the same thought experiment I posted.
If you need 100 AOT to get 10% flow increase, then 1 AOT will bring 1/100 x 10% = 0,1% flow increase. It is not noticeable, but it is there.
It is not an all or nothing effect, it is a cumulative effect.
If it were an all or nothing effect as you suggest : suppose you have totally outfitted with 100 AOT and you removed one, then according to your reasoning all the flow increase would be suddenly null.
It does not happen like that. If you removed 1 by 1 the AOTs, the flow increase will progressively diminish.
Alkaline, One possible reason for the lease termination notice : to freeze an availability date for STWA to be able to legally re-lease the 4 vessels to potentially 4 others NDAs companies needing testing. One of them could even be TC if they need to test 1 vessel only in another place. When one considers the time needed to install the one at KM, it could make sense.
Just my thoughts :
They do have to make extrapolations here.
- first 1 AOT only brings in the order of 1/100th of flow increase that a total outfit would do, so that is the biggest extrapolation that must be done,
- second, there are temperature changes during the 24 hours, so they can extrapolate those results to other ranges,
- third they already have a lot of tests points from previous testings, so they just need to verify the ones that fall in the present installation conditions.
I don't think that they need to verify all conditions before proceeding ahead i.e. acceptance and order. They just need to verify certain classes of conditions. In the future they will have other results like with the KM test.
with a spike at .655 or +28.8% ...
Something is missing ...
- the known lease only speaks about 1 skid, and its pricing,
- TC knew forever that if the results will be good, they will want to purchase tens of AOTs,
- the market value of 1 AOT may be higher or much higher if the testing is above expectation, and TC is price-protected only on 1 skid,
- the 10 to 15% increase in flow means it is "above expectation",
- TC knows they will need to lock this big order as soon as possible, because other companies are lining up and it could create delays in production,
- therefore the known lease appears insufficient to met this higher purpose (ordering tens of AOTs), and this fact has been known by both parties since inception,
- TC issues an advice about its "intent" to stop the lease/testing of this 1 skid on October 15th,
Could it be that in the NDA there be a provision to bridge the order of this skid to a bigger order ?
Zerosum,
I am on Ameritrade. If I did not consume all my margin from my blue chips (which is the case, as I don't buy on margin usually), I can then buy Zero on margin. Those zero shares are backed by my Coca-Cola shares etc..., that's how Ameritrade protects themselves.... Best.
Zerosum,
My account has 30 others stocks totaling 500,000 $ which are marginable. That's how I am buying on margin whatever I want including non marginable stocks like Zero. Best.
I did not intend to increase my position, by due to this pps, I bought 4 x 10,000 shares between last week and this week, on margin. Now I am going to stay put...I don't want to take over the company haha !
In term of shareholding, I like to compare STWA to a private company, with just a few shares playing around, which allows all of us all those entertaining discussions on the pps ....
oups, a buy of 40,000 ? ....
This reference to a budget for 2015 is interesting.
It is consistent with the fact that the deadline for the test has been advanced from End December 2014 (the natural end of the lease i.e. End june = acceptance date + 6 months lease = end December) to October 15th, thanks to the termination notice. Which brings back TC to their initial planning should the installation not have been delayed (april 15th + 6 months = October 15th).
It is also consistent with the fact that a big order must be budgeted by the managers in charge. Which leads me to think that the termination notice and the wording (positive wording) have received the OK of the top TC management.
Only a very successful 15 days testing could have motivated such OK from top management.
Why ? When a test delivers outstanding parameters, you know instantly that the device is working. Whereas when the parameters are just OK or So-So, you cannot draw any immediate conclusions about the device, the operational conditions, or the environment parameters. You avoid disrupting the testing calendar by issuing an early termination notice. You then have to take your time, even if it means not meeting the budget dates.
I am confident that the preliminary tests have had outstanding results, and that the logical outcome is an order either for 1 AOT or hopefully for a whole bunch of them, just in time for the 2015 budget.
maybe it's neutral but the link to the toilet paper is posted on top of this page ...
Deesil, this is perfectly consistent with what I believe : they are in the process of increasing the investor base, by addressing the institutionals. You are right, by strictly pointing on the official tests in this page (closed loop testing...), they are preparing the unveiling of TC as the company who will validate the technology.
Alkaline, I saw this page on the other board a few weeks ago. Clearly so much effort to write it indicates enormous forces at play. But there was not much reaction on the board, it reminded of the hit piece on seeking alpha ...
The notice of 90 days lease termination given by TC on july 15 2014 had only one purpose : to revert back to the timeline that they had in mind when they signed the contract in august 2013.
This contract stated that the delivery of the AOT was estimated no later than march 2014, which means "commencement date" on april 15, and end of the 6 month lease on October 15.
But because of delays, the installation was accepted only end of june (CC of august 11), which becomes then the actual "commencement date", and thus the end of the lease 6 month later is end of December 2014.
By using the 90 days termination option on july 15, TC just washed out those delays and reverted back to the date of October 15, as the date of the test ending.
As a side effect, by doing so, TC made a pledge of confidence in the AOT.
Very good reflexion.
The more "pitfalls", "problems", "fluff", "un-scientific" etc... the bashers can "find", the more it means TC and KM have done their DD, and the more we can be confident. Problem with a basher's work is that it is self defeating by its very existence.
The optimist case : STWA and TC are in NEGOTIATION, about sharing of testing results, order, number of AOTs, timeline for production/priority, price. Then, do you expect STWA to display hope, anguish, in the process, before the outcome ... or on the contrary restrain ? STWA and TC just agreed that STWA was "pleased" about the preliminary results (i.e. 4+ weeks of FULL SCALE testing) in order to alleviate the questions about the "termination".
So why are you there ? to save us ?
Flow and viscosity.