is... a buy and hold investor of dividend US and Canadian stocks
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.
Low volume just means that no one cares about this stock until there is some news to care about...
This information just came to light now. I doubt that JBI would have had the success it had raising funds if it had been known at the time (2009).
OPTT seems to go up on news. I don't like tech particularly. Been having a tough time lately, and does not pay dividends usually. I am more into gold-based stocks, mining, etc. With what happened last summer to metals/ commodity prices, it was picking low-hanging fruit. As long as the dividends come in... I will wait forever for metals to recover. If gold ever gets back up to 1800... I will do very well!
LOL... 800 shares exactly.... will sell half on news... double down again if it continues to go down..
Your number for Gross Profit for selling "processors" is Grossly overstated.
"That would result in a gross profit for each processor sold of $7 million"
Let me try to enlighten you. I don't know where you got that $1 Million cost from, perhaps what is on the books now for "Construction-in-process". That would represent the incurred cost on the equipment currently at a fabricator.
Cost..
Whatever is at the fabricator is only part of the solution. Whatever they sell, it has to be customized for the client site and that means Engineering and Construction work. Based on my experience the percentages on any job are roughly as follows:
- Construction - 20%
- Equipment - 20%
- Engineering - 30%
- Project management - 10%
- Commissioning -20%
Of that, JBI is only going to be bale to do a portion of it. They are not a Construction company, so can't do that. They are most likely an equipment supplier. In the last financial statement it was revealed that they have a set of drawings to support installation of their equipment. They would not do Commissioning, but would probably provide consulting. They would also provide Project management and Engineering.
We have the comment from Heddle that the processors are "75% Complete". The only thing that makes sense, given the number on the books for Construction-in-process, would be that he is talking about the status of the fabricated equipment alone. That is to say, they are 75% complete on the "Equipment - 20%" component.
The SAIC Study supports this. Their figure was 8.5 Million with an OOM estimate complete (according to the document). An OOM estimate is worth 5% of the total budget. That is an industry standard. That gives a total cost of 9 Million for a 3-processor cluster, with about 400k already spent. The rest of the figures they give, which is a further 2 Million for Engineering, jive with industry standards. A FEL2 estimate is worth 10%, a FEL3 (final detailed) estimate is worth 15% of the budget. That results in the 30% Engineering cost.
Now the SAIC study was done on Processor #2, and things have been improved. #3 is more modular and has some drawings (Engineering work) associated with it. OK, modularization is worth about 10% cost reduction in Construction. The drawings mean more Engineering has been done.
The SAIC study was for a 3-processor cluster.
So, based on that, the cost of an individual unit would have to be between 3-4 Million. The incurred cost to-date makes sense then.
Furthermore, if JBI is only an Equipment Supplier with their hand in other pots, I would further reduce that to 2-3 Million per processor. That fits with the over 1 Million they have on the books now.
Your 1 Million figure is ludicrous.
Revenue...
8 or 9 Million per processor? I am not even going to argue against it... there is no business justification for that kind of number...
Profit...
JBI make be able to make a $500k - Million or so, if the price you are quoting is cut in half. I don't even think that a processor is worth that much , based on what potential profitability there is. The above is based on a 20-30% markup, which is reasonable.
Not nonsense, I think we are actually saying the same thing. The estimate quoted in the SAIC Summary is for building a 3-unit cluster on a greenfield site. It doe snot include the cost of the actual land, just what it takes to fully construct and commission, startup the systems.
In terms of cost, you can't just divide by 3 because there are common systems for a 3-unit cluster. So I would guess that 1 unit would cost 3-4 Million to build.
My numbers are accurate and fit with the SAIC document as I have explained. They do say "up to", depending on how far JBI wants to take it or what is necessary. But, the figures they give are industry standard, so they can't be far off.
Once again, there is confusion about what the word "processor" means. I don't really care. All I care is what the entire system costs to get up and running, which is what SAIC was talking about. "Processor" sounds like a price of equipment, which may be what is being fabricated now. I have worked on jobs where vessels were fabricated from pure steel.
But, you have given me something to think about. JBI wold not be bale to do all the parts of the job, like the construction, so not all of whatever the final price maybe will go to them.
That makes their take-home even less. Thanks Rawnoc!!!
Your numbers on the Cost, Revenue, and Profit from a p2O sale are completely unrealistic. let me try to enlighten you. I don't know where you got that $1 Million cost from, perhaps what is on the books now for "Construction-in-process". That would represent the incurred cost on the equipment currently at a fabricator.
Cost..
Whatever is at the fabricator is only part of the solution. Whatever they sell, it has to be customized for the client site and that means Engineering and Construction work. Based on my experience the percentages are roughly as follows:
- Construction - 20%
- Equipment - 20%
- Engineering - 30%
- Project management - 10%
- Commissioning -20%
We have the comment from Heddle that the processors are "75% Complete". The only thing that makes sense, given the number on the books for Construction-in-process, would be that he is talking about the status of the fabricated equipment alone. That is to say, they are 75% complete on the "Equipment - 20%" component.
The SAIC Study supports this. Their figure was 8.5 Million with an OOM estimate complete (according to the document). An OOM estimate is worth 5% of the total budget. That is an industry standard. That gives a total cost of 9 Million for a 3-processor cluster, with about 400k already spent. The rest of the figures they give, which is a further 2 Million for Engineering, jive with industry standards. A FEL2 estimate is worth 10%, a FEL3 (final detailed) estimate is worth 15% of the budget. That results in the 30% Engineering cost.
Now the SAIC study was done on Processor #2, and things have been improved. #3 is more modular and has some drawings (Engineering work) associated with it. OK, modularization is worth about 10% cost reduction in Construction. The drawings mean more Engineering has been done.
The SAIC study was for a 3-processor cluster.
So, based on that, the cost of an individual unit would have to be between 3-4 Million. The incurred cost to-date makes sense then. Your 1 Million figure is ludicrous.
Revenue...
8 or 9 Million per processor? I am not even going to argue against it... there is no business justification for that kind of number...
Profit...
JBI make be bale to make a Million or so, if the price you are quoting is cut in half. I don't even think that a processor is worth that much , based on what potential profitability there is.
This is a gross overstatement of the potential from selling P2O.
"There are two nearly complete processors that could be shipped in a few weeks time should a purchase order be closed. A case can be made the estimated cost for the fabrication each processor is in the area of $1 million. That would result in a gross profit for each processor sold of $7 million. A sale could be announced at any time. "
Otherwise it is not badly written.
I agree that there is public information that the price is 8-9 Million. Any business justification that justifies that is far-fetched, but I am also selling my '82 z-car for 100k. There you go.
What public document do we have that indicates that there are serious negotiations? I think the only info on that has come from JBI.
Most importantly, how do you get a Cost figure of $1 Million? The best information on Cost comes from the SAIC Summary, which indicates a cost for a 3-unit cluster at 9 Million.
The only other information that we have is what was on the books for "construction - in - process" of something over 1 Million. I do not have the exact number. That would be the incurred cost for the 2 "processors" being fabricated for Units 4 & 5.
So how do you get a total cost of 1 Million for Units 4 or 5 completely up and running on customer site?
Well, I am not here to call people names. Readers can draw their own conclusions. If I was to do this kind of investing, which I generally don't, I would not take this document seriously no matter what JBI the company says about it.
I have the advantage of having worked in the EPCM industry. I have had these documents on my desk, and have contributed to them. I don't think anyone else on this board has that kind of experience. So, to me the SAIC Summary is a fairly well-written document, but I do not believe it to be authentic.
If you like, do a Google search on "SAIC Summary". I have seen these documents in Mining industries, engineering industries, etc, and when you do that search the SAIC documents come up as very technical. There is not much mention of NPV/ ROI analysis or assumptions used.
The JBI SAIC Summary is a very high-level document, spanning a 3-day audit, an OOM estimate, and an accounting pro forma leading to an awesome EBITDA figure!!
Let me ask you this; let's say that SAIC did a 3-day audit of the JBI process. Then they had a discussion with JBI, maybe with some drawings, and SAIC gave some preliminary figures on Cost. Then Matt Ingham prepared a proforma on the proposed investment to give to the whales. (Incidentally, there was a fundamental misrepresentation here regardless. That money was intended for the Florida development, not ongoing operations).
Now maybe somebody (with or without JBI's knowledge) cobbled together that SAIC Summary based on that. When people are dishonest they have to convince themselves they are not actually lying, and that takes time. Why not? All the basic elements have happened to some extent. What is the big deal?
Is it any different than standing in front of a group of investors and saying that they were mere weeks away from commercial production? Just need a permit? $10/ barrel cost? $70/ barrel revenue? tape business making huge bucks in the meantime? Javaco and Pak-it providing a floor for the stock? Tankers parked outside ready to go?
I would say not. Just another in a string of half-truths.
If any senior executive of JBI were put on the stand, could they be accused of lying? I am not sure. They would definitely be uncomfortable.
Look at the sentence closely. What does "related to" mean? What is an "evaluation report"? The Executive Summary is the cover page of the report itself. Why does it relate to?
fyi... an OOM estimate is also known as a FEL 1 estimate. It usually is assigned 5% of the overall budget. In this case that would make for a total budget of almost 9 Million. In the document it states that a further 2 Million of Engineering effort is required. If you work it out... it works. A FEL 2 is worth 10% of the budget, and a FEL 3 is worth 15%. 2 Million is almost bang on.
SAIC could have told them that in 5 minutes.
An OOM estimate takes a team of 4-5 guys 2 months to do, not 3 days. Work out the math yourself at $100/ hour.
EBITDA is not their concern. EBITDA includes lots of stuff that is irrelevant like SG&A, R&D, all kinds of crazy stuff. The only person who would care is Ingham, and it would be very relevant for the Florida investment (which never happened).
So no, the document that we know is not credible. The reference was oblique, and based on that, they may be able to defend themselves in court if caught.
btw, where in your statement does it make a definitive reference to the document that was leaked? Maybe they were referring to something else... who knows. Do you?
Sure. I can't PROVE it, not much can really be proven here. But there is a lot wrong with it, of which I have given one example. So, if I were an investor, I would not pay the least attention to it, and I think that JBI is being somewhat dishonest in referring to it in PRs as it has. If they were totally honest, they would simply release the partial or full document. All we have is a Summary released on some hosting site on the internet. It is neither from JBI nor from SAIC, therefore is not definitely authentic. JBI has obliquely referred to it, not directly, and has not released the original.
I have no doubt that some work was performed by SAIC, likely a 3-day audit. However, the Summary we see goes into a lot of other areas which does not add up, including an OOM estimate and an EBITDA.
These are the points that are wrong in the SAIC Summary:
- An OOM estimate is typically 5% of any budget. SAIC would know that. If you work out the math at $100/hour, we are talking about a team of 4-5 guys for 2 months. And that fits with my experience. They did not do that in 3 days.
- There is a blatant error in the first paragraph where the author states that the full report is available from JBI. The report could never be available because it is confidential. The author would have known that, and reviewers would have caught that in a nanosecond. Also, the use of the term "White Paper' is not appropriate.
- Right after the OOM estimate they leap to the conclusion that a fantastic EBITDA could be achieved. EBITDA is an accounting number that includes non-project related numbers. That does not make sense. The only things of interest are project-related cash flows. Now Ingham, the CFO, could have created a proforma for the investors, but that did not come from SAIC.
All in all, for these reasons I don't think that the SAIC Summary as we know it is authentic. There are things that work well, like the engineering numbers, otherwise,,,, I don't think it is authentic.
Someone could easily have created it or doctored the original and released it the way it was released, and JBI maybe even could not be accused of lying.
How do you know that what was released is completely authentic? There is a lot wrong with it...
do you realize than an OOM estimate takes 2 man months to complete for a team of 4 or 5 people? It is not a 3-day exercise.
I can't believe that shareholders would not care. Don't you as a shareholder care how the shares of your company are used and as to what ends? It is your company. Even if they were Bordynuik's personal shares they were used to further Corporate goals. That is shareholder business. They were just personal shares on paper... blissful ignorance.
The interesting thing is.... what laws would apply? Is it an Ontario company/ Which state.? I think Delaware is a favored state to incorporate in, because of it's laws. There are lots of litigations in Delaware.
let's say that they doctored that SAIC Summary and masterminded it's release on the internet. Seems funny that they had that Press Release all ready to go same-day. Now there would some awesome proof of fraud.
This is an interesting discussion. A CEO is held to a higher standard. It is not a sufficient defense that he did not know. The standard is that he ought to have known. That is case precedent.
doubled down again.... still a small position...
Low volume is fine. I agree with you that those that are holding are not going to sell in the absence of any news or filings. They have made up their mind to wait. But when the filings do come, the content of them will determine what they do.
In the past, poor financial results have preceded massive selloffs.
Actually, your example about the baseball glove is a good one. I don't buy baseball gloves, but if that happened to me, I would consider returning it. Any major retailer will allow the return of an item that the customer is not happy with. As far as I am concerned that is a promise broken. Same with
- food ordered in a restaurant
- items laundered
- stuff on your car under warranty not working
- deficiencies on a home when you take possession
- almost anything...
good example.
I own an old sports car. One of the challenges is getting parts. Many times they are not the proper fit and don't work, resulting in wasted time and effort in attempting repairs. I ordered a heater core from the US. I took the whole dashboard apart in order to replace it. Big job. It turned out that the core was too big for the enclosure. I ended up using a hammer to get it to fit. It could not go in alt he way and the whole thing turned into a lump of twisted metal.
I called the manufacturer and they argued with me about it. I ended up having to go out and get the exact dimensions to convince them of their mistake. Finally they agreed to refund me. Their defence was "we have sold 20 of these in the last 2 years and not one of them has come back". Well, maybe so. It is still the wrong size... hopefully they fix it and no one else gets screwed. Since then I have encountered one other vehicle owner that the same issue.... it was their fault and I got my money back.
Same thing applies to the stock market, at least it should. Investors should feel that they have not received what they paid for with their JBI shares.
"Running a public company means the only way to raise money is by selling shares. Shares derive their value from hope and expectation. You can't convince greedy shareholders to buy shares if it doesn't look amazing, quick and easy...
... John did what he had to do to get us to this point. He's playing the game"
--- JBI Supporter
I rest my case.
Actually, that happened in a Seinfeld episode. Do you remember it? Some kid was bedridden in hospital. Kramer somehow gave him some piece of memorabilia. Then, he realized that it was very valuable and wanted it back. The kid said no.
So, Kramer promised the kid that his favourite Yankee player would hit a home run. The kid agreed that if the player hit a home run, he would give up the memorabilia.
The player failed at hitting a home run. It was only a triple or something.
Kramer Promises Sick Kid Two Paul O'Neill Home Runs
"The Wink," Season 7, Episode 4, Oct. 12, 1995
One overarching thing is that a buyer would need to do business with a company that can provide proper maintenance and possible ongoing upgrades.
Personally, because of the profitability issue, I doubt that JBI will sell any processors. At least, not on an ROI basis. Maybe for show, to make a company appear "green".
But they need to feel that JBI is a Going Concern. Right now it is not. Not reporting is a killer to any deal.
Maybe if it became a part of Heddle Marine, it might have a chance. But, it is going to be a sideshow for RH... not his main focus, and not complimentary to his business in any great way.
how?
Another unbelievable statement. You have admitted, not in so many words, that JBI is a scam and that basically JB was dishonest with investors. So you bring up the disclaimer. Now that is funny.
A judge would not care, btw.
Yes it is. Especially at the C executive level. I see this a lot in high tech (from where Bordynuik comes from) and have not seen it since in the capital projects business, where I have been for 10 years. I worked in a group at a high-tech player that got so sick of hearing baseless optimism from the leader that it became a joke. He got fired afterwards.
Please explain....
"If you think what I posted was an admission of a scam, you should also think the entire financial system in place is a scam. "
How so? What has the financial system got to do with anything?
When I started posting back in 2010, there was the first AGM in Niagara. I remember everybody coming out of there doing backflips and high-fives. It was quite a show wasn't it?
The SEC was not there. Representatives from the exchanges and OTC were not there. Bordynuik stood up and told a story. The audience believed it. Some got their friends and family involved in it. Word of mouth. There was a tanker outside, looking ready to go. Everybody thought that they would be making money from P2O within weeks, and that the tape business was going to provide a nice profitable business while they waited.
There are other things, like this...
http://www.wallstreetreporter.com/2009/12/jbi...interview/
Bordynuik made certain representations, which were relied upon by stockholders, which were not true.
This is misrepresentation or fraud. All it would take is to get JB into a court of law, put him on the stand, and ask a few simple questions. Did you say this? Here is the transcript, did you promise that? he would be done.
Do you realize that when people are enticed into things, like having dinners bought for them, etc, that that is termed "luring" and makes the misrepresentation stronger? That was quite the party at the AGM wasn't it... what a great time... was there free booze? Not like the last one eh.. bare bones and all.
I was involved in a misrepresentation case once. It has to do with a Salesman being hired and what was said at the hiring interview. The hiring manager promised great things. Said that it was going to be a "banner year". Well, when he got on board he got leads that were 2 or 3 years old... bottom line was that the business was attempting to restart and there had been no marketing done. That manager put his hand on the Bible in court, and the judge was just looking for him to lie. He was on the stand... and when asked directly about the representations he made... he came across as the liar he was... the person that had been hired won handily.
Shareholders should be looking to bust Bordynuik and bankrupt him. He lives in a nice house, has been taking a nice salary (contrary to what he said would happen, remember value-based management??) Shareholders should want his house and his car, anything of value. Plus his bank accounts emptied.
Bordynuik would have to get a real job. As far s I know he was an IT Guy. He was never in "Research and Development". IT groups don't have R&D. It is not an IT job title. R&D is R&D.
JB is the kind of guy that comes to fix my computer and get it working so I can do my work. That is all he is good for.
If he was bankrupt, he would have to turn over any income over $1800/ month to his creditors. For 2 years. And it would stay on his record for 7 years.
That is what shareholders should do.
Why are shareholders in this predicament in the first place (being down on a stock).
The answer is that you did not want to sell when you first realized that you had been had. It wold have occurred shortly after that first AGM. It became apparent that the tape business was not what it was purported to be. That was an outright lie. It required JB personally to do it. Not what you were told.
Then DOMINO!!!! one thing after another
- pak-It was a joke
- media credits were a joke
- Javaco was a joke
- tape business was a total joke
- processor #1 can't make money
- Processor 2 can't make money
- Processor #3 can't make money
And I am not even trying...
Sometimes it is best to simply blame yourselves for your misfortune. You got had.
And what do the financial markets have to do with anything?? I can't wait to hear this.
This post is worthy of being repeated?? What this is is an admission by investors that JBI is a scam. You should be focussing your efforts on trying to get as much money back as you can.
~would agree he has made optimistic statements, but just because they haven't happened yet, doesn't mean they won't happen in the future."
If Bordynuik has made optimistic statements and misled you, you should be upset and want your money back. ?? Is this not true with everything else in life? Houses, cars, clothing..,. You should take him to court and sue him for misrepresentation. You would win.
~. If the makers of the first hard drive said their device will be capable of storing 1GB of data, but their first design only stores 100MB, would you say that technology wasn't worth investing in because they haven't achieved their stated goal?~
Yes. It is not an R&D budget. It is your money. you were misled.
~Running a public company means the only way to raise money is by selling shares. Shares derive their value from hope and expectation. You can't convince greedy shareholders to buy shares if it doesn't look amazing, quick and easy.~
WOW.I have never read such a frank admission of poor investing and running a successful scam in my life. You are basally saying that investors here were sold a bill of goods. Lied to. Misled.
~Do you think JBI would have raised even half the money they did by saying only their "safest" expectations. John did what he had to do to get us to this point. He's playing the game. ~
Exactly. He just wanted investors money, and does not really care about the outcome. I could have told you that back in 2010 when I started posting here. Now you realize it, and your best answer is that you are going to wait and see what happens next?? My answer to you is... not much.
The only thing I can`t believe is that Heddle is mixed up in all of this.
I will double down on tis one. I notice that it really jumps on news. Will sell in an eyeblilnk when it jumps, at least partial... hopefully it will make it long term... bur it has a real sawtooth chart...
So that was a loss of $14,200. Your Cost Basis is 10k+10k = 20k. You got $5800 back (=20,000 X .29/ sh). loss = $14,200.
i guess if there were more demand for JBI shares the evil MM's would not be able to play their tricks, wouldn't they? Pretty simple..
Just you saying that means that you are not a trader. Everybody has to be a trader at times. You have to be able to sell and take a loss, or accept a gain when you sell, ie., without looking back if the stock goes higher after. And likewise if it goes lower after you buy it.
What about... first company to actually make money doing this might just eke out some kind of a profit.
Runner up probably screwed.
Any observer's merriment directly correlated to mgmt's ability to outlast their money (which came from investors btw). The only thing they are outlasting is their bank account.
Risk ratchets exponentially as the stock price falls exponentially, usually resulting in efforts to DCA, which are futile, and incur ever exponentially increasing losses.
"R&D success" is just a term like "Flagship". Means nothing. THey have failed a sa business at being profitable. Anybody can build a pyrolysis machine. I probably could if I put my mind to it.
Investors would have been better off if Bordynuik had not built the processors and spent 60 Million. Investors will never get that money back. If they could have gotten it back, that would have been known before the majority of the money was spent. That is called ROI analysis and basic honesty. At this point it is unrecoverable.
And not just on the machines. SG&A as well. 2.5 Million per quarter for 5 years, largely unaccounted for. Gone. Nowhere. I am surprised that investors are not asking questions as to where the money went, non-cash or not.
I know. I certainly wish they would have gone teats up. Investors would not have lost all of this money.
AM is trading at tangible book value, because of the impending end of the Ford deal. Investors can't lose either way.
"I still would like to see cell telephone towers in isolated places powered by wave energy.
"
I agree. That would also help the movie industry. Imagine a movie where someone makes a cell phone call from some remote place where obviously there is no cell phone network, and the camera quickly pans to an Ocean Power sonobuoy.... LOL.
Best example... Tom Cruise/ Cameron Diaz in Knight and Day.
That may be true Kool, the problem is that this is the polar opposite of the original business plan/ premise, of JBI. Originally, they were going to become successful by making and selling fuel, and they made some great promises, like being able ot make fuel for $10. Turns out not to be true. So this change in the game plan seems a bit too convenient. Yes, one can argue that free feedstock from the buyer makes it profitable, but the numbers are very difficult to work out for an investor. Almost impossible. It becomes an empty promise, a blanket statement.
Investor sneed better numbers to assess whether or not this is economically viable, even if free feedstock is provided on customer site.
~profitability isn't *required* and hasn't been with the *evolution* of P2O's flagship processor ~
That is ridiculous. If profitability is not required, it will not get big $$ either. The price could be measured in 6 figures, not 7.
Why would companies waste money on things that are not profitable?
There has not been such information released on the catalyst. JB found it on an old tape from the è70s... LOL. btw, Why don`t you do an analysis of the technical paper that Bordynuik wrote. You can find it on this site as well...
I refer you to the IsleChem report. If you search this board, you can be sure to find it, or look in one of zardiws DD posts. I think thee is zero chlorine.
Well, I don't do this type of investing. I have had success with it in the past, but always based on objective research. The information that came my way that came to fruition was not paid for. But I agree that if your timing is right with these things, it is possible to get rich. It is just a very tough game to play, and usually you will be too late and get creamed. However, if you think the timing is right, go ahead. I have not been following this stock and my immediate reaction to it is that it may have potential and is more or less mediocre.
You know what is one sure sign that there is bullshit? They are talking about stock bashers. Everything else may be OK, but that is a sue sign that they are being deceptive. If they have to rely on message boards, they are not a real company, and one look at the financials proves that.
If you rely on paid advertising and promotion, on average over the long run, you will lose money... IMO. Somehow you have got to be objective and apply some objective analysis.
This kind of stuff just gets to be too much of a bother after awhile. I have the kind of portfolio that takes, as one poster put it, "years to build". But, I have a few years to do it, and it works for me. About 30% last year. That is fine..,.
GLTA