Sales P20 3rd Q 189,634
Cost of Sales $ 188,958


It remains to be seen if they can ever be profitable with this "wise choice"

Looks like that raw material/plastic can be quite expensive:
Raw Materials 81,971

Sales P20 3rd Q 189,634
Cost of Sales $ 188,958

Inventories, which consist primarily of plastics and processed fuel at P2O, are stated at the lower of cost or market.

Whatever happened to getting it for free?

http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=8549197

It appears JBI is now admitting that their "cost to procure" feedstock for the right types of plastic is significant, which is consistent with the slides from the AGM showing this as a critical element to their success.

Sales P20 3rd Q 189,634
Cost of Sales $ 188,958



For our P2O business, cost of sales consists of costs to procure the appropriate material for our processors as well as the costs of our Canadian Recycling Facility for processing and delivery of waste materials. Additionally, we incur costs to operate our P2O processors in Niagara Falls, NY.


These costs related to procurement, processing and transportation of material feedstock can vary greatly depending upon the type and quality of material, distance from our facilities and pre-processing required to prepare it to be fed into our P2O processors. As we continue to grow and have a need for more waste material, we will continue to refine our process and processing abilities in order to improve throughput and improve our cost structure.

Our longer term strategy regarding this feedstock is to identify sources and channels at a significantly lower cost than paid during the quarter, in order to not only maximize revenues and processor up-time, but also to maximize our gross profit


http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=8549197

Our longer term strategy regarding this feedstock is to identify sources and channels at a significantly lower cost than paid during the quarter, in order to not only maximize revenues and processor up-time, but also to maximize our gross profit


http://xml.10kwizard.com/filing_raw.php?repo=tenk&ipage=8549197

Hopefully, Kevin raises the transparency bar in this coming Quarterly report, with a thorough report on the status of all processors being assembled at the Niagara Falls plant, along with the current production uptime per completed processor, the following Q's anticipated uptime per completed processor, status of petcoke removal, RKT, what modifications were needed that caused the weak second quarter production/sales and the status of those mofifications.

IMO, silence or nothing of substance - is a slapp in the face to transparency.

When it was reported that Kevin Rauber said at the AGM that there would be an update soon, who thought, what he meant was when they report the ending 3rd Quarter in November? I thought soon was sooner than November for some reason.

As far as "filling tankers" I think I may have heard that one before, same with "serious cashflow".

Here's to substance and transparency.....cheers!

Great question, I'd really like the answer as well - Anyone?

Host: John, when would you hope to start posting sales?

JB: Now. This week.

Host: Actual revenue?

JB: We’re filling tankers at the site now.

Host: What about serious cash flow?

JB: Serious cash flow – you’re looking at a quarter out, really. So you’re looking at Q2.



When second quarter 2011 was finally reported, the serious cash flow he alluded to came in at 81K and described as P2O: through revenues derived from the sale of fuel outputs and processing and recycling of waste materials (cardboard?)

I'm glad I didn't buy and "hold" that play.


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390011004691/f10q0611_jbi.htm

You and I, it would sure be nice to know the truth about what happened second quarter.


I dislike the lack of transparency that you are driving at.

From reported Quarter two earnings.

You left out this part "does not require further modifications" it would be interesting to know what happened from not needing any further modifications, to what appears to be almost dead in the water for the second quarter.


"The second processor was fully assembled from rack modules in approximately 8 weeks. The second processor was debugged within two weeks of assembly. Remarkably, only two components required replacement during debugging, due to the fact that these components were deemed non-functional upon arrival. The second processor has been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor does not require further modifications and therefore our focus going forward is to maximize fuel sales and build more processors."


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012001206/f10k2011_jbi.htm

The SAIC test was a 3 day period from April 25-27.

According to another poster, IR said they spent 3 weeks "getting it just right" even if we wipe out all of April for getting it just right, then what happened to the other two months in the same quarter? The second quarter report only shows 179,420 in sales which were still being combined with cardboard recycling at that time.

The company says that they have 75% up time, there were 61 days in the remaining Quarter without counting April, or as the company claims 46 days of uptime. 46 days at $11,968 each would equal $550,528 for just processor number two running "just right".

20 TPD, 109 BBL's per day at 109.80 per barrel = 11,968 in revenue per day, or $550,528.

JBI reported P20 sales that included cardboard sales at 179,420 for the second quarter. I believe the last time they broke out cardboard sales was the 3rd Quarter 2011, at that time cardboard sales were 55,075.00.

Assuming no cardboard growth, backing out the last reported cardboard sales would leave 124,345 for second quarter fuel sales. We know during the SAIC test according to the company they successfully made fuel for three days straight or about another 36K of fuel.

We didn't learn that processor one was broke until the AGM by the new CEO. JBI signed the 1st Quarter report on May 15th 2012, with no mention of processor one being broke, so let's just assume that it broke the day after he signed the first Quarter report, that means it had about 34 days of uptime out of 45 (75%) prior to breaking or 406,912 of fuel production that should have been made according to JBI's statements.

JBI reported 179,420 in P2O sales for the second quarter, backing out previous reported cardboard sales roughly 124,345 in possible fuel sales, from what should have been 406,912 for processor one, again, assuming it broke the day after JBI signed the 10K. Procesor number two made fuel for three days in April worth roughly 36K and should have made 550,528 more for the remaining quarter.

Both processors should have made a total of 993,440.00 with 75% uptime.

Instead they reported P2O sales of 179K with roughly 55k in cardboard lumped in.

If we go further and speculate that procssor number one didn't run during April because of the SAIC test that would still leave 2 weeks to the 10K which reported no problems with one or two, or 134,640 for number one, and what should have been 586K for number two in quarter two, or 720,640 in total.

It's been reported by others who attended the AGM that even with the current petcoke design the processor is good for 75% uptime.

If the design was good enough for 75% uptime, then what happened in quarter two that resulted in roughly 125K in fuel production out of a possible 720K, after spending almost a month getting processor two "just right", while shutting processor one down for the test, and with processor one possibly breaking the day after the 10K?

With 75% uptime JbI only needs 108 tons per day, which is less than the previous call of 150 tons per day.

Just keeping it real.

What worries me is that Kevin Rauber must have approved the very slides that used the word critical. If he didn't think it was critical then why use the word?

I'm only questioning getting 150 tons of the right "type" for free on a daily basis. See slide 40:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012003969/f8k072312ex99i_jbi.htm

The word "critical" was mentioned only one time in the AGM slides and it was in regards to the procurement of plastic feedstock. When I think "critical" i'm thinking life or death, I'm willing to bet that JBI might feel it's life or death for them as well.

I didn't say there was no plastic in Niagara Falls or anywhere near there, or no businesses that use plastic in the NY state.

What I did ask was "where are they going to get 150 tons per day of free sorted plastics in the right type and quantity that's critically needed to feed the beasts for the Niagara Falls facility?"

Not only does JBI feel this is a "critical" aspect of their success, so do I.

Now I admit I wasn't at the AGM, but others at the AGM admitted to hearing that they may pay for plastic. Some are now saying, and now want everyone to believe that JBI only meant that they would pay to have it shredded elsewhere - if it were cheaper to do so.

I personally, don't believe they have the supplier commitments already in place for 150 tons per day of "free" plastic for the Niagara Falls facility. I may be wrong, and I'd be happy to be wrong, but it's what I'll continue to believe until the company says and proves differently.

I'll say it again if the company announces 1 and 3 being completed, it will ring hollow with me - without any confirmation of the needed supplier agreements for "free" plastic to the tune of 150 tons per day.

There is no way they can be profitable at all if they are paying 40 cents per pound for plastic that's delivered, sorted and shredded into the right types and quantities needed.

120 TPD of plastic at 40 cents per pound, would cost $96,000 per day for plastic alone.

120 TPD = 654 Barrels of fuel at 109.80 per barrel equals $71,809 in gross earnings. Leaving a loss per day of roughly 25K, while not even figuring into all their other costs involved, labor etc.

In this example, they can only break even at a cost 30 cents per pound, with no other costs. However, we know that there are plenty of other costs involved by looking at all previous 10q's and filings.

Thanks for jogging my memory, however, I wouldn't clasify it as a completely meaningless question or discussion.

Are you suggesting that they are going to ship or transport all that plastic from Florida to the Niagara Falls facility? My main question still stands, where are they going to get 150 tons per day of free sorted plastics in the right type and quantity that's critically needed to feed the beasts for the Niagara Falls facility?

Without knowing what they are paying for this presorted, shipped, shredded plastics it's not just simple economics.

What if they're paying 40 cents per pound for such, what would that do to margins?

I believe the monofills are filled with one type of material, and that material would be raggertail. If the monofills are filled with only raggertail, then they would still qualify as a monofill. Just like used tire monofills also contain tires with steel belts in them.

Perhaps a better understanding of papermill plastic waste would make that more clear for you.

Raggetail is the only plastic waste RKT produces, IMO. "Bales are put into a vat called a hydropulper, a large vat of warm water. This turns the baled material into a pulp slurry. The pulp slurry is cleaned by removing extraneous materials. The metal strapping that holds the bales together and plastics are removed by a ragger. These materials are wound together producing a waste
product called a raggertail."

http://virginiawoodflows.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/rock-tenn.pdf

Are you suggesting that they are going to dig up said monofill's full of raggertail in Florida or elsewhere and truck the contents to the Niagara falls facility?

My original question was:

Jbi's slide presentation called the procuring of the right types and volume of plastic "Critical to success" any idea how they are making out with getting supplier commitments in place, other than RockTenn - as currently it's only "critical" for the Niagara plant?

They can place all this new and shiny equipment in Niagara Falls and that's great, but where are the supplier commitments for 150 tons per day of the right types and quality plastics coming from?Any announcement that 1 & 3 are completed without a announcement of the plastic commitments for them, would unfortunately ring hollow for me.



Then why do you suppose the SAIC test for the Florida project used "waste plastic feedstock" rather than "raggertail". If the Florida project is a RKT location wouldn't validating raggertail been more accurate?




In the 10 year agreement with RKT, the portion about who owns the steel was unfortuanately redacted, so it's anyones guess. My guess is if JBI had the rights to the steel, then they would have been happy not to redact that section, don't you agree?

I prefer reality as well.

So they would only pay for a "tiny bit" if more profitable than free? How is anything more profitable than free, you mean to tell me they can't shred plastic competitively?

Odd logic, they would only pay for a "tiny bit" if it was more profitable, why wouldn't they buy it all if it was more profitable?



Then that raises an interesting question, if it was truly based on a RKT location and free raggertail plastic, then why didn't they use raggertail for the test?

Whats really funny is it sounds like the yellow ladder might be in the way after all, I'm hearing that number three is going in the new building.....hmmmm

Nice pictures the other day, the processor equipment looks quite impressive. Hopefully, one day soon they will get one to operate at a consistent basis.

I like many others here believe P2O works, however, it has yet to be proven to be viable to me and in my eyes. I will not put blind trust into the SAIC report, when I'm not sure of the "assumptions" they made to come to their conclusions. If the "assumptions" were made with getting "free plastic" their assumptions could be wrong, and we may not be able to rely upon them.

According to the company itself, in their own words and slides they basically say they may pay for plastic to get the right type of plastic needed, in the right quantities. In other words they may not always get it for "free" as you suggest and as SAIC may have assumed.

Do you have any knowledge that JBI is currently receiving upwards of 150 tons per day, or that it already has supplier commitments for such in place?

Jbi's slide presentation called the procuring of the right types and volume of plastic "Critical to success" any idea how they are making out with getting supplier commitments in place, other than RockTenn - as currently it's only "critical" for the Niagara plant?

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012003969/f8k072312ex99i_jbi.htm

I know it's been said a million times over that 30 million tons per day gets landfilled. However, it gets landfilled because of the cost or inconvenience of separating. The problem lies with paying someone to get it sorted/separated into the right types and quantities delivered, and thus making it potentially too expensive to process profitably and be viable.

What does paying for plastic do to their margins, or SAIC assumptions? Can you (or anyone) find the types of "free" plastic needed, that will also get delivered for free at the Niagara plant in the 150 ton per day quantities’ needed, and post a link to such? I've looked and I can't find any.

March 16th 2012

Is this official enough?


"The second processor has been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor does not require further modifications and therefore our focus going forward is to maximize fuel sales and build more processors."


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012001206/f10k2011_jbi.htm

It appears that the following quote from IR is at odds with the language in the improperly released SAIC Executive Report:

When IR was questioned if the report could be released IR responded with:

JBI Investor Relations

Subject: Re: SAIC report
Sent: Wed, Aug 15, 2012 1:32:39 PM

"The SAIC report will not be made available to the general public due to the fact that our agreement with SAIC does not allow for it."

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=28342921

However, in the Executive report it says "The end result of our work is a White Paper, which can be obtained through requests to JBI"

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=80458212

From, SAIC "does not allow for it" to "which can be obtained through requests to JBI"

It appears to me, and it certainly looks like SAIC was allowing it to be released after all - with just a simple request to JBI, and leaving it at JBI's discretion to release or not.

Does anyone else remember a post quoting IR as saying that JBI couldn'r release the SAIC report, as they were resticted by SAIC from doing so?

What percentage of driving is done at night by the trucking industry as a whole, is irrelevant to what it appears JBI is allowed to do during the allowed business hours of 7am - 6pm, Mon-Sat, per the DEC.

Section 14. Hours of Operation

"According to Section 7.1 of the Engineering Report (see Solid Waste Management Permit Condition 5 of this permit), hours for receiving waste plastic, transporting Naptha or reisdue will be Monday to saturday, 7am to 6pm. The pyrolisis portion of the facility may be operated 24 hours a day and 7 days a week."

So my understanding is that there are no trucks allowed in or out before 7am or after 6pm. So hopefully, there will be trucking activity during the day, which is the only time they are allowed to do so.

You would think the petcoke issue would have scaled up equally as well, and not come as a surprise to anyone. You would think this would have already been accounted for, since they had already previously made runs at the higher rate.

In December they ran the Stack test at up to 3958 lbs per hour, so they should have been aware of the amount of petcoke produced at those rates.





"The stack tests were conducted at feed rates of 3,258 lbs/hr, 3,233 lbs/hr and 3,932 lbs/hour respectively. Ultimately, the test results proved that emissions decreased with increased feed rates, further validating that P2O is a highly "green," clean and scalable process. The addition of the pre-melt system, which was designed and installed in Q3, greatly improved feed rates for the process."

http://www.plastic2oil.com/site/news-releases-master/2011/12/07/jbi-inc-successfully-completes-its-final-p2o-stack-emissions-test




John signed the 10K which on March 13th said:

"The second processor was fully assembled from rack modules in approximately 8 weeks. The second processor was debugged within two weeks of assembly. Remarkably, only two components required replacement during debugging, due to the fact that these components were deemed non-functional upon arrival. The second processor has been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor does not require further modifications and therefore our focus going forward is to maximize fuel sales and build more processors."


http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012001206/f10k2011_jbi.htm



"The processor does not require further modifications"

They previously ran it at over 3900 lbs. per hour in December.

Why didn't they know in advance that it needed further modifications to produce at the rates they were trying to get approved, with all their experience scaling up?

This is a huge surprise to me that further modifications are needed, and another huge dissapointment/delay.

This changes everything we've been told.

You can make phone calls and ask questions, the important part is who's giving the answers. Did this information come from within the company or just another shareholder?

If it's coming from reports of shareholders seeing parts moved into the new building, then isn't it possible machine three is being built in the new building only to be moved in it's modular form into the old existing building after completion?

Where are you getting this info, or are you just guessing?

We've been told for years that there was plenty of room for three processors in the original building. In fact, this past February JB said the new building was for fabrication, and that number three was going on the side of number two. In fact, he basically said that they took apart number one, and shifted it down so they could get the other two processors in.

How are they going to run processor 3 in the fabrication building, when they have refused to weld in the proximity of a working processor in the past?



Edit: Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were implying that the new fabrication building was going to house number three. Somebody started that rumor not to long ago.

February 27th, John announced the "completion" of processor number 2. In the same conference call, John also said -- "We effectively had to shut down the first processor to work on the second one at times, which was a frustration for everyone. However, we're over that, and we're off and going."

He also said that they had processed 1.4 million total lbs to date.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=72760640&txt2find=1.25

So, if one were to believe everything John said on Feb.27th's conference call:

1.) Processor 2 was complete
2.) They could now run number one without shutting it down to build.
3.) 1.4 million total lbs processed to date.


On March 16th John signed the 10K which said:

"As of March 13, 2012, we have two fully-permitted and operational P2O processors at our Niagara Falls facility."


Processor 2 – Modular and Standardized:

"The second processor was fully assembled from rack modules in approximately 8 weeks. The second processor was debugged within two weeks of assembly. Remarkably, only two components required replacement during debugging, due to the fact that these components were deemed non-functional upon arrival. The second processor has been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor does not require further modifications and therefore our focus going forward is to maximize fuel sales and build more processors."



If one were to believe everything in the 10K:

1.) JBI had two fully operational P20 processors.
2.) The second processor had been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor did not require further modifications.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012001206/f10k2011_jbi.htm

On May 15th John signed the 1st Quarter report with no mention at all that processor number one was broke or compromised. He did say that "During the quarter, the first processor was run during January until we began full construction on the second processor. For safety reasons, running the processor during construction and metal fabrication is not done. At this time, the first processor was shut down for a full safety and maintenance check"

"During the last week of February, we began the production of fuel from our second processor. At this time, we began testing, fine tuning and performing a full evaluation of the processor, its individual components, the systems designed to run the processor and gathering and monitoring significant amounts of data on all aspects of the system. This testing and monitoring resulted in confirmation that the processor was functioning in the way it was designed, the system and design worked in accordance with our design specifications and the computer systems designed to operate, track and evaluate the system were operating effectively"

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1381105/000121390012002574/f10q0312_jbi.htm



On February 27th, John reported that 1.4 million total lbs had been processed to date. On July 23rd the total grew to 2.3, a difference of 900,000 lbs.

So, from Feb 27th - July 23rd, JBi processed 900,000 lbs or 450 tons of plastic.

John didn't disclose processor one was broke on May 15th when he signed the 1st Quarter report, so let's assume that processor one broke the day after he signed it. This would have given processor one 78 days to run or 1,872 machine hours. Processor number two had from February 27th to July 23rd, or a total of 147 days or 3528 machine hours.

Total possible machine hours for processor one and two, from Feb 27th - July 23rd was 5,400. JBI processed 900,000 lbs in this time frame -- at 2,000 lbs per hour, would equal 450 machine hours out of 5,400 possible, or about 19 days out of 225.




So from Feb 27th to July 23rd, the processors averaged an uptime of around 8-9%, which is not even close to the 75% uptime that the company recently reported in their 10K, or even close to what anyone should have expected after:

1.) The announcement that Processor two was complete.

2.) They could now run number one without shutting it down to build processor number two.

3.) "As of March 13, 2012, we have two fully-permitted and operational P2O processors at our Niagara Falls facility."

4.) "The second processor has been converting plastic at 2000 lbs/hr and producing fuel since it was initially debugged. The processor does not require further modifications and therefore our focus going forward is to maximize fuel sales."

5.) "During the last week of February, we began the production of fuel from our second processor. At this time, we began testing, fine tuning and performing a full evaluation of the processor, its individual components, the systems designed to run the processor and gathering and monitoring significant amounts of data on all aspects of the system. This testing and monitoring resulted in confirmation that the processor was functioning in the way it was designed, the system and design worked in accordance with our design."




The current reality from reported numbers is around 8-9% uptime, from a previously disclosed 75% uptime, from the time period of Feb-July, and from " does not require further modifications" and "functioning in the way it was designed" -- to back to the drawing board all over again.



This is all just my honest opinion.

Thanks to IHUB and the Admin's for bringing the JBI board back online.

Hopefully, with the new and improved JBI board we can "keep it real" going forward in a civil manner. I know that I'll be trying my best.

First, I want everyone to believe that I really want JBI to be the real deal, and solve the world's plastic problems while making millions for everyone. However, I'm having a real hard time believing that they have it solved, with all the false starts, the lack of serious cash flow previously claimed by JB on TV, and the lack of ever getting just one processor running at the claimed rates for any long consistent basis.

I have never minded asking the tough questions, and always stated my opinion in my quest for the truth.

I never believed there ever was a good enough reason to "juice" things up and have always wanted to just keep the discussion real/honest. The more and more juice I saw/see has only led me to believe all was/is not well.

Hopefully, the new CEO Kevin Rauber will be honest and transparent going forward. I also hope that was the last quarter with cardboard recycling earnings mixed in with the companies fuel revenue, and that he "keeps it real" going forward, sets realistic expectations and then meets them.

However, I realize this may not be easy for Kevin to do if John tells him things are "completed" when they're not.

I honestly believed when John said their commercial building was completed, that it would have had a cement floor already poured and set -- one in which to bolt the processors onto. I don't think I was the only one surprised to find out there never was a floor until 6 weeks prior to the AGM, or months after the building was said to have been completed. Hopefully, Kevin is not met with similar surprises.

This question is really bothering me, one in which I don't have a plausible answer for.

If JBI spent 3 weeks getting processor number two "just right" for the test with SAIC and it ran perfectly for those three days, then what happened afterwards that seemingly prevented them from continuously running it at 75% uptime for the remaining quarter and selling it?

The SAIC test was a 3 day period from April 25-27.

According to another poster, IR said they spent 3 weeks "getting it just right" - ok, so that wipes out the first 3 weeks in April.

April was the first month of Quarter two, my question is, if the processor was finally "just right" and running perfectly, then what happened to the other two months in the same quarter? The second quarter report only shows 179,420 in sales which were still being combined with cardboard recycling at that time.

The company says that they have 75% up time, there were 61 days in the remaining Quarter, or as the company claims 46 days of uptime. 46 days at $11,968 each would equal $550,528 for just processor number two running "just right".

20 TPD, 109 BBL's per day at 109.80 per barrel = 11,968 in revenue per day, or $550,528.

JBI reported P20 sales that included cardboard sales at 179,420 for the second quarter. I believe the last time they broke out cardboard sales was the 3rd Quarter 2011, at that time cardboard sales were 55,075.00, so let’s say cardboard sales have slumped 10% since then, let’s use 50k for cardboard sales for the second quarter 2012.

That would leave 129,420 for second quarter sales. We know during the SAIC test according to the company they successfully made fuel for three days straight or about another 36K of fuel.

We didn't learn that processor one was broke until the AGM by the new CEO. JBI signed the 1st Quarter report on May 15th 2012, with no mention of processor one being broke, so let's assume that it broke the day after he signed the first Quarter report, that means it had about 11 days of uptime out of 15 (75%) prior to breaking, let’s go further and say out of those 11days it only ran less than 1/2 or 5 days. That would equal around 60k of fuel.

So finally, if we take 179k of income for the second quarter and subtract:

55K for cardboard
36K for fuel made during April's SAIC test
60K for fuel made by processor one prior to breaking

This would leave only about 28K of possible earnings for May and June, with processor one broke and processor two running just right, from what should have been $550,528.

I just don't get how the numbers are so far off; from everything we're being told? JBI already disclosed they have several customers for their fuel, and I believe they book earnings at the time of delivery?

It simply appears to me that processor 2 is still not running just right, or there's another problem somewhere.

Thoughts?

As always, this is all just my humble opinion.

The only problem with his "forecast" is that it's tied to all the BS that JB is feeding him.

Remember this whopper?


April 27, 2011

Host: What about serious cash flow?

JB: Serious cash flow – you’re looking at a quarter out, really. So you’re looking at Q2.

I wonder how many more free shares will be given out going forward?


Michael Dorrell received 375,000 free shares due to the make whole provision in the pipe he participated in.


Just dilutin'

Right, RKT screens all the rocks out from the dirt they use to cover the raggertail with, of course, cause that makes perfectly good sense.

Exactly, the monofills are nothing but another "PIPE" dream.

So this is a process that accepts wet dirt,rocks and clay as well? I think this is going to muddy things up just a wee bit.

It's obvious from the lack of earnings the system can't even handle petcoke, now it's supposedly going to handle rocks,wet dirt and clay?

I prefer reality.

This monofill plastic is far from "no costs", crews will need to dig,move,wash,dry and shred it. Those are real costs and the costs will be far from free.

All the plastic JBI gets is dry and stored indoors, show me any link that says they can handle wet mud and rocks.

Yeah "no costs" because this monofilled plastic will just dig,move,clean and dry itself up.

Wow just wow!

I'm not interested in placing any large "investment" with a known Sociopathic liar.

Jb has had every chance to prove the process, yet amazingly for someone who alledgedly has the crown jewels for turning plastic into fuel at a cost of $10 per barrel - he refuses to prove it.

Instead of shouting from the mountain tops while proving his solution he dances around it, while obscuring all earnings reports with the cardboard recycling income.

Instead of being transparent as earlier promised, one can only expect that this will probably, only be further obscured with fuel purchased to blend - in the near future.

If the SAIC report was everything he claimed it to be, he would have certainly released it. Anyone with any kind of brains at all would have made the report public, while redacting any confidential formula - to effectively stop all naysayers in their tracks.

I don't believe for one minute that this was a requirement made by SAIC to not release a paid for report as IR claims, and instead I believe he's still hiding something he doesn't want others to know.

The company doesn't even go as far to quote SAIC saying the process is viable, in fact they don't quote a thing, instead they hide the report while saying they were happy with the results, and it's their (JBI's)opinion it's viable.

I stand by my earlier comments that the SAIC report isn't worth squat, as it only shows what the procesor can do after 3 heavy weeks of cleaning "to get it just right". What happens after 3 days of running with all the new and alledgedly, never before discovered petcoke fouling problems, etc?

Before he alledgedy knew about the - never discovered before fouling problems (fouling issues weren't disclosed until the AGM 2012), he claimed 75% up time.

You can probably kiss the old uptime percantages goodbye, with these newly discovered problems, without a new solution. So what's the new current uptime without a new solution - 3 days, after 3 weeks of heavy cleaning?

Don't you find it odd that he only discovered the petcoke fouling problems in the second quarter of 2012, after announcing the commencement of commercial comprehensive fuel prodution in 2010?

All of that coupled with all the past lies from the company, leads me to believe that this company is not investable at this current time, if ever.

I wonder how they're making out securing the right feedstock in the right quantities, at no cost, delivered to them for free, to the tune of 140 tons per day?

From the companies own statements and AGM slides, it's critical to their success.

I guess a personal month long vacation is more pressing.

They were only there for three days, what part of that are you not understanding?

3 days doesn't validate squat.


"SAIC was present at the Company’s Plastic2Oil facility in Niagara Falls, NY over a 3-day period, April 25-27, 2012"

They were not there for the cleaning that took place three weeks prior to "getting it just right" and according to JBI they were not there after the 3 day run.

So, I stand by my statement that this report isn't worth squat, it only validates what the processor can do after 3 weeks of cleaning out the petcoke, etc. The report doesn't validate the total uptime for the processor over any length of time that's more than three days, or the quality of the output after any cleaning that's less than 3 weeks - which is where the problem most likely lies.

What is it you don't understand?

I know plenty about JBI. I've been following this story and the excuses for almost two years, and I know "Honest John" has yet to prove the processors are capable of producing at the rates and costs that he has boldly claimed year after year. It's always right around the corner and excuse after excuse, tic toc, stay tuned - blah blah blah.

I know for a FACT he hasn't been "completely" honest and there's a reason he's being sued for FRAUD by the SEC and possibly the DOJ.

His incredible technology hasn't proved to be anything but a "PIPE DREAM" as of this date.

Just keeping it real.

I could give two Sh!ts about Agilyx, as I'm not affiliated with them and couldn't invest in them if I wanted.

FYI, the only topic I'm interested in is JBI.

How long can "Honest John" keep his backers, that's the real question?

The comment was made by more than one reliable source, one of which is pro JBI and has actually run JBI's fuel in his lawnmower.

"Apparently I have his address because my messages have not bounced, but so far he has not responded to messages. He did say he would be on vacation in August."