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.
I've never seen a MM in real but I suppose they are normal persons who are doing their job. I am more flabbergasted at people who are selling their shares at such price and at such moment...
Thanks JT, I sincerely appreciate your posts. My English is not perfect (I'am French from Tahiti), so I don't know what exactly is the last paragraph's "it's over". I guess it's the holding down of pps. What I understood is very positive is that big buyers have been active behind the MMs. Buying has more meaning than selling to me at this stage.
Am I right to say that the differences between upstream and midstream are :
-Upstream : help increase the production
- Midstream : help increase the transportation ?
So benefit for a barrel of oil would be :
Upstream : x% of 100$
Midstream : y% of 7$
????????????
I enjoy their posts, but so far they have only reinforced my faith in STWA.
I guess it can be 7$ or 15$ to transport a barrel depending on the length of the pipeline.
PE = 10 is a conservative PE and thus applies to stable and stagnant revenue from a year to the next one. When revenue is on a steep curve, the market usually applies a PE on forward revenue (or in other terms the PE for the first years could be much higher than 10). Which means we may see a PS of 10 very quickly even though there have not yet been the corresponding number of contracts or pipelines fitted with AOT. The concept of "Fair share of additional revenue" is indeed imo the right way to market the AOT.
Sorry, some text was missing :
This is how I read this most important line :
Improved flow@ 7.5% 0.5625 0.84375 1.125
first figure of 0.5625 is for smallest pipeline (500,000 barrel/day)
0.5625 Million $ per day for STWA comes from operator revenue 7,5 M$/day per 7,5% improved flow
then you multiply it by 10% to have STWA share
then you multiply it by 365 days = 20.5 Million $ per year
P/E ratio = 10 so market cap is 205 so price per share is 1
SO 1 PIPELINE = PPS of 1$
7 PIPELINE = PPS of 7$
My only question is the 15$ revenue per barrel for operator, as Alkaline has written 4$/barrel in a previous study. Can you elaborate , please ?
New name account are additional so that make it 7 customers by 2017.
So price per share would be between 7.2 and 14.4 by 2017 depending on average size of pipeline
That's conservative and reasonable.
This is how I read this most important line :
Improved flow@ 7.5% 0.5625 0.84375 1.125
first figure of 0.5625 is for smallest pipeline (500,000 barrel/day)
0.5625 Million $ per day for STWA comes from operator revenue 7,5 M$/day per 7,5% improved flow per 10%
My only question is the 15$ revenue per barrel for operator, as Alkaline has written 4$/barrel in a previous study. Can you elaborate , please ?
New name account are additional so that make it 7 customers by 2017.
So price per share would be between 7.2 and 14.4 by 2017
That's conservative and reasonable.
I agree the shutoff valve where there is a U turn is key. While 3 days is a lot for just 1 AOT, there seems to me that they don't need to do this for each AOT, they could install the shut off valves at once and for all at all stations. Therefore the TOTAL downtime for all AOTs on the pipeline, would be 3 days. If the AOTs increase the flow by 10% (from 730,000 Barrels/day to 800,000 barrels/days), you would just need 30 days (3 days /10%) for the marginal increase of flow due to viscosity reduction to make up for the downtime. Very viable, Nothing to be scared of.
It is true that the flow out of the pumps must be turbulent by nature of the pumps, this is exactly why imo the AOT is best placed there after the pumps. The 180 degrees inlet AOT is not a problem imo because there are 4 chambers so the speed into each chamber is the fourth of the speed out of the pump, assuming all pipes have same diameter. Thus oil has time to be treated thanks to this lower speed. All very logical to me, which should not be a surprise....
I only own the stock since September 2013, I cant even imagine you could hold on for so long ! congratulations
JT, what you say about individual investors holding million of shares each : Could it be that, regarding the last 1 million block bought you were referring to, instead of an institution it could be an individual ?
Everybody understands that in a water hose, when you introduce a section with a HIGHER viscosity (for example a piece of cotton, that creates friction on the interior wall of the hose), the cotton would continue to travel, but will SLOW the water in the whole hose, and impose the same speed everywhere.
With the AOT it is the symetric effect. The AOT creates a LOWER viscosity section, that continues to travel in the pipeline, and the speed is HIGHER everywhere.
In the first case there is no "loss" of matter, and in the second case there is no "creation" of matter.
Why "impose" the same speed everywhere : because liquids are incompressible. It's like the wagons of a train : you put the brake on 1 wagon, the whole train slows; you lighten a wagon, the whole train speeds.
JT wrote this on another board. He is perfectly aware of what makes the underlying value of a stock, but he also knows what the market makers can do when volumes are low. Nobody here can pretend that we liked the price the stock was and the downtrend ... In case you did not notice the build up begun two days before the news release after photos were taken on the field by another intrepid shareholder...
Quote from JT :
Having momentum based on facts is so much more comforting than wondering "Why did ZERO run?" Like in 2012. There is absolutely no good reason why we were trading at this level, when so much ground was / is being gained by Gregg & the team making this business successful. They are successful & thanks to 321-Zero we have the proof!
Unquote
I like this last sentence particularly, that's the impression I get from the management :
Quote :
So the silence to me (while it may seem like a "lack of stock moving news" to others), is an indication that they are growing up and playing with the big boys.
unquote
the chart looks like a rocket launch !!!!!
The reasons why the price did not sustain in the past are, in my opinion, the fact that first there may have been doubts on the delivery of the AOT, and second, more subtly, what can make the "public" believe that this delivery, if effective, will be surely followed by an order by the customer and by a general acceptance by the industry.
The delivery is now effective, and from now the level of the pps and its sustainability rely on the beliefs to the second question.
There are several new positives compared to the last pps spike :
1- the AOT not only is delivered but is "real", massive, complex, with the impact of the pictures,
2- it has been made by 19 companies, and while this has been said in the SHM, it will now have more meaning in the mind of the public,
3- it has been made to the requirements of the "customer" during many months, so this must surely mean that it will work,
4- the "customer" will now be known by the public although STWA has always respected the NDA (note that not an inch of the customer's pipeline appears on STWA's photos) and the aura of the customer will benefit to STWA,
5- now that things are real, people will have to believe the effects of viscosity reduction and the possible enormous economic impact, whereas before, it was just "academic science"...
6- 60,000 USD/month/unit provide now a real basis for future pps calculation by analysts, and the results can be very high.
Of course, their must be solid revenues someday, but in the meantime, it is the story, and the prospective revenue that can sustain the pps... and we must admit that everything looks pretty impressive right now.
Note that sentence in the release : ... that last week the AOT Midstream recently fabricated to the specifications of our customer ....
Ha HA funny
problem solved, thanks
Letter of John Templeton, one of the greatest investors of all times, to his customers, june 1950
--------------It is interesting to note that the wide decline in stock price yesterday took almost 4 billion dollars off the paper value of all stocks on the Stock exchange. However, the total shares which changed hands yesterday represented only 7/40th of 1 percent of all the shares listed on the exchange. Also, it is interesting to reflect on the fact that , whereas 3,910,000 shares were sold yesterday, there were also 3,910,000 shares bought yesterday; and possibly the purchasers may be more intelligent than the sellers.------------------
So now, everybody agrees on my post of last week :
Quote :
Each time you increase the efficiency at one point ... you increase the flow of the whole pipeline. It's a cumulative effect, beginning from the first AOT installed.
Unquote
Congratulation Alka to have got confirmation from Dr Tao.
Myrka,
Suppose you have a pipe with a length of 3 miles. The liquid of viscosity V has a flow rate of F thanks to the pump at the beginning of the pipe.
You miraculously change the viscosity of the 1 mile in the middle from V to 0.
You then have a system equivalent to 2 miles at viscosity V, right ?
The pump is the same. So the flow should be higher than F, no ???
Myrka, Alkaline,
Whatever the outcome of this discussion, I am proud to be a fellow shareholder with you : we don't just want to get rich, we want to know why exactly we got rich ...
Myrka, Alkaline,
Sorry for late reply, I was fishing in the Tahiti lagoon...
Re your water hose comparison. What you say below is true :
Quote
As far as b) is concerned, try this: take a standard 5/8-inch diameter water hose, cut it in two. Using 5/8-inch to 1-inch adapters, install a 5 foot length of 1 inch hose in the middle. Run the water through it. The water entering the hose will have the same velocity as the water leaving the other end (same flow rate).
Unquote
BUT : this NEW flow rate with your new system, is higher than the case a) because your new system (system b) is less punishing to the water flow, because it has a section that is wider, so less friction at less on part or the travel.
So the following is untrue : Quote/All that work for nothing./Unquote
Yes, the liquid in a pipe has always the same flow (volume/unit of time) because all liquids are (almost) incompressible and they have integrity (no empty space, no void). SO : if a portion of the liquid "wants" to go faster (in and just after the AOT), it is "pulling" the liquid upstream, and "pushing" the liquid downstream, so that there is never a void in the tube.
Only one AOT can change the flow of the whole pipeline. It will not be a dramatic change, unless it is at bottleneck point (a point where for any reason, the flow rate is facing challenges : a slope, a sudden drop in temperature, disturbance in the flow, or (highly improbable) a temporary lower diameter).
So first put the AOT at those points, then put it everywhere.
Each time you increase the efficiency at one point (or segment of the pipeline : length of segment = V (speed) X time effect of the viscosity reduction (several hours)= approx 40 miles) you increase the flow of the whole pipeline. It's a cumulative effect, beginning from the first AOT installed. Priority order would be : first, place them at bottlenecks, then on regular spaced points (40 miles) of the pipeline, then if the engineer has calculated that the pipeline has even more potential (ie can accept more flow at the lower viscosity, given the diameter of the tube), go see if the source can be increased (feeder lines) by placing mini AOTs.
Impact of 1 AOT on the flow of the whole Pipeline
Bottleneck case : imagine at one point of the pipeline there is a bottleneck. Imagine a water hose full of water but at one point there is a stone partially blocking the hose : the flow on the whole hose is impacted (upstream and downstream): the flow (volume per unit of time) is smaller even though the quantity at the reservoir (beginning of the hose) is unlimited. When you remove the stone (which is equivalent as changing it in water, or reduce its viscosity) the whole flow on all the pipeline is increased. This is why the AOTs are to be installed first at the bottlenecks points where the impact is major. No law of physics is broken, the AOT can proceed ...