Interesting. You google a company in China of all places and declare yourself a winner in a debate that you yourself state you will never lose because your support will never sway. Circular logic.

If you can spare the time to convince a cynic like myself, I'd like to see a US example, or better several. I am sure there is one, but I don't think how that makes your viewpoint superior.

To make a long story short, our respective opinions are viewpoints and there is no winner, unless time has told the story. Your dismissive language will go a long way to sway your loyal following on this board, but it doesn't support anything.

Also, since your price point is 3-5 cents, I'd be interested how many of your successful US biofuel companies sport a market cap of $600m - $1B, which is the equivalent market cap based on the 21B shares outstanding (and that is being generous as of 9/8/09)

I just hope you are going to be around long enough for the both of us to compare notes on what unfolded here.

I think that is part of my point here.

Surely, if the margins for bio-diesel were 2.5 times those of regular diesel, wouldn't all independent existing retail networks create a distribution channel for it?

I don't see many bio-diesel lanes at Pilot, Flying J, or Loves, and I am sure those guys can do math, as well.

I tried to provide a possible clue to the question as best I could and as it was I who asked the "question" in the first place, it is obvious that I don't have an uncontestable answer.

I don't see your point in pointing that out.

I can tell you that I don't have a number, but what I can deduce from logic, I thought I laid it out there:

If you have a travel stop carrying both bio-diesel and fossil fuel based diesel, and then decides to stop carrying the biofuel and replace the lane with regular diesel despite an apparent demand, doesn't it stand to reason that the retailer (Knox) made less per gallon on the bio-diesel?

Why else would you prefer to take it out. Maybe that's a question to pose for your gnome.

I also take some offense to your cutting short my knowledge in this field, although you are being very sly about it. Let's turn this question around:

Why don't you name the biofuel companies that were wildly successful?

My 2 cents worth is that it doesn't work that way.

To give you some background, I am and have been a huge proponent of bio-fuels and my line of business is a major supplier to all of the major producers of Ethanol and Bio-Diesel among many others. My company experienced an absolute gold rush when the renewable fuels standard was first introduced and major funding flowed into the sector from everywhere. Biofuel IPOs were the new dot-coms. Delta-T and Fagen could cherry-pick which plants they chose to build and could even command equity stakes for the privilege of buidling and selling bio-refineries around the country.

I have long since wanted America to ween itself off the questionable regimes in the middle east that use oil as a major policy tool and therefore drag us into all kinds of messes, but let's not get too political here.

In my research for good investment targets, I stumbled upon a Knox Truck Stop in Dallas (Sylvan & Industrial) who sold Bio-Willie at the time. That was even before Durant was operational. (I assume EBOF sourced from elsewhere). However, after a while, Knox dropped the Bio-Willie brand and closed the lane, and upon my inquiry I was told that their margins were too thin, although truckers actually loved the stuff. Must be the good vibes and devotion to WN and the buzz created from that AM trucking radio show - Bill Mack or something alike.

Fast forward 3 years, for exactly that reason, plus lower manufacturing margins, the Biofuels industry is in shambles. Verasun, Aventine, BIOF, PEIX and bankrupt or teetering, only the really strong integrated grain marketers (Cargill, ADM, Bunge) are doing ok, and I suppose some of the co-ops are hanging in there, but only because they supply their own corn, which does not reflect true economics as they could sell to third parties at a higher spot price.

Bankrupt plants have been snapped up by the refiners and downstream marketers such as Valero as the renewable fuels standard still requires blending of Ethanol, besides, since the MTBE disaster, Ethanol is the only remaining oxygenate around. If you actually go into the chemistry, biofuels are gallon for gallon an inferior performance fuel, although I don't exactly recall the bio-diesel numbers. I am more of an Ethanol guru.

What is and has been a major takeaway from my involvement in the sector is that all the OTC and Pink Sheet players I have tracked in the biofuels sector have almost exclusively proven to be frauds and scam. Look at XNL, NSOL, OTD and the list goes on and on. Several companies we have done business with never followed through and if they did, blew up shortly after operations began. There were a great many snake-oil salesmen that fancied themselves "Energy Executives", and it showed.

Hopefully this helps you understand my position on this sector, and I already gave you many resons why I don't like this company in particular.

Let me preamble this by stating that this is an honest question, because I am very curious about the world:

I can't figure out why the margins would be greater selling biofuels. I don't think that you can command a price premium for it and the production costs per gallon are higher than fossil based fuels. Seems like lower margins to me.

Apart for my disdain for questionable companies and their continuing pursuit of taking advantage of underinformed and unprotected seekers of fortune, I am quite a happy individual.

I hope you will be ok if this is indeed 2/3 of your nest egg.

My friend, I can do the math on the balance sheet just fine, and what I see is a humongous net working capital deficit and tangible liabilities exceeding tangible assets by a good $30m. Nothing tangible has improved since the conversion in 2008.

In short, the balance sheet is just awful, and since we are speaking of comparions, can you see that 7 billion new shares were issued in the first six months of 2009 for cash and services,, and all the cash went to salaries and T&E.

No assets were acquired, no retooling of a plant happened, there is nothing in the financials that offers so much as a glean of a rosier future.

I am further shocked that you are now assuming the old 'just trust me' card. What is it that you know? How would you come by such information. Obviously it isn't deduced from the public realm, because we can all read and research.

If you think you saw something worthwhile in the financial, let's discuss it, but please drop the 'I have secret insights - you just have to have faith' card. That is so overplayed in the pinks.

I should open a truck stop immediately as there are apparently no costs in acquiring/producing the fuels you sell involved. The unfortunate reality is that the truck stop produced a loss, although it should eventually turn a profit.

Have you read the Balance Sheet, Statement of Cash Flows and the Equity Rollforward? The selling of stocks is for services rendered (= salaries) and the stock issued for cash (5 billion strong) has been eaten up by S,G&A expense aka Travel & Entertainment. A total of 6.8B shares issued that way to pay for $2.3m in salaries and T&E.

There has been NO investment in anything tangible. Per the investment section of the statement of cash flows, they actually sold some P,P&E and got some money back from a related party.

Not a single dollar was spent in the past 6 months retooling Durant, acquiring anything that can produce value or revenue in the future. Does that look like a company who is actively working on re-opening the dormant plant?

When will you guys realize that the dilution occurs for the sake of keeping the lights on at headquarters and to pay the salaries and perks of management? When have you heard of a pink-sheet CEO making $500k a year for years while running his company to the ground. Durant has not produced in almost 2 years, not a penny of revenue in sight. The Balance Sheet is so upside down, it is ridiculous. Take out "share-based compensation", which is nothing but unamortized equity compensation to execs, and you have $16m in asset compared to $49m in liabilities. Keep in mind the interest clock keeps on ticking.

Considering that these guys are making noise to actually launch EVLN to be a successful company, isn't it a nice head-start to work on a business plan if the salaries of all involved are paid for by the shareholders of EVFL.

This is EXACTLY the same thing we saw when AOOR shareholders got slaughtered to give EBOF a lifeline. History does repeat itself.

Although you raise a good point, I am reluctant to concede, because Willie's Place is basically the old Carl's Corner Truck Stop on steroids.

That truck stop had been in existence for decades (and has a very loyal following and clientele), thus I am not sure if 'start-up' rules apply. I firmly believe that it will eventually make some money, but I don't think it will support a substantial market cap for EVFL.

I can be totally wrong here, but I have always thought that retailing gasoline, or ethanol or bio-diesel for that matter, is a very low margin business. That market is already pretty well served by the likes of Love's and such. The fact that Willie's place is loaded up with $5m in debt does not help matters, because interest carves out much of the margin.

As to your other posts on debt reduction, nothing has actually happened in the quarter. The reduction of the Durant note occurred in the major exchange in 2008, and the "Net Income" is a tax play the amounts to a non-factor and also related to the exchange in 2008.

Comparing balance sheets Q1 to Q2 of 2009, you will note that debt balances are still by and large the same.

I think it is fair to conclude that no significant debt reduction has occurred in 2009, whereas the shares outstanding have swelled substantially.

Sounds almost as good as the time where Dennis shafted the AOOR shareholders by exchanging the LNG plant that is now PNGX from AOOR to then EBOF for an amount of shares that I can't recall (maybe 8,000,000), which is now worth 16,000. I suggest that all keep an eye on this particular item.

Also, what does this tell you about the 'true value' of EVLN stock, if 2m shares at a 'market value' of $10m are exchanged for something deemed worth $200k. Sure looks these guys are pegging that stock at $0.02/share

Someone else has mentioned this before, but it looks to me that DM is donewith EVFL and is moving his eggs into the EVLN basket. And so forth and so forth.

History does repeat itself if people fail to understand it.

He actually did, but here's the really sad part:

The hyping of the net income is a monstrous joke. Instead of having further reduced the debt load of the company (which he didn't if you take a look at the balance sheet), the net income is derived from reversing the accrued tax liability set up in conjunction with the gain on exchange of the LNG facility last year.

So this NEW AND IMPROVED gain, is really the same thing we already saw. Way to hype non-events. They weren't going to pay 17.6m to the federal government when they have accumulated losses of $208m. Slimy trick at best, deception at worst.

Also, did you notice that Willie's Place actually incurred losses during the period?

The sad part is that we are talking Financial Statements for a period that has ended 60 days ago. For the salary that a cetain CFO at EVFL commands, one could at least expect that he has his ducks in a row, particularly given that the company is mostly dormant and does not have mcuh economic activity this side of S,G&A and T&E expenses.

To top it all off (and don't think that was an accident at all), they'll let pinkland know that the income is actually higher 57 days after quarter end. What could have possibly have happened in late August that will have an impact on the income statement for the three months ended June 30, 2009?

Did they finally get around to opening quickbooks?

As a matter of fact, the Renewable Fuels Standard (the 'Mandate') can be met with existing manufacturing capacity for at least the next couple of years.

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/locations/

Obviously, the bulk of this capacity is corn based, so the spoils will belong to whomever will be the leader in the cellulosic field.

There are some good resources on the RFA website, and you will find that it is unlikely that a small player like EVFL with a R&D spend of $0 over the past 3 years can be considered a leader in that space.

I am happy to notice that you are digging deeper. That's the story I have been trying to relate to the board.

Too long a story...

I once invested here and just like to see how this one unfolds. I normally just contest the most outlandish claims.

Basically just messing around while doing some work. Remotely logged in excel models run realllly slow on weekends...

Time will tell, my friend.

Wish you all the best.

Just don't close your eyes to relevant information because it was brought to you by someone you don't agree with.

I guess I came off too harsh by calling you a joke, but I do feel that if there is an ongoing educated conversation about biofuels, I'd expect that the participants in such discussion have at least heard about several well-publicized bankruptcies in the industry that add some perspective on what has happened to some of the most well-ran,well funded corporations.

For full disclosure, I spent several months providing financing to companies in this space and have seen the best laid plans go to waste. I have travelled to several facilities (mostly ethanol, only a few bio-diesel) and have been to a few RFA sponsored meetings. Always looked out whether DM or EBOF are in attendance, but never had the pleasure of meeting them.

To make a long story short, recently I am spending much of my time sifting through various bankruptcy filings trying to recover what we can.

The mood has been pretty grim, although we do see crush spreads improving. If you say that I am negative, it is because that's how the industry is feeling.

My feeling is that this company is a two-bit player at best, and although we don't agree on this outlook, my opinion is just as valid as anyone else's who speculates on this board.

Verasun had a huge IPO to the tunes of 100s of millions of Dollars, so did AVR. They had multiple 100 mgy ethanol plants going.

Pacific Ethnanol was backed my $40m from Bill Gates.

Biofuel Energy had a big international banking consortium lead by BNP Paribas behind them.

I do believe that surpasses what we are looking at. The best this company can do is to get 215k from Harbormaster Fund.

Don't question my DD. For you to claim you know the biofuels industry space and never have heard of Verasun and Aventine is a joke. They were the biggest publicly traded players this side of Cargill (CORRECTION - Cargill is privately held) and ADM. Speaking of which, these two only survive because of their huge corn marketing operations and logistical operations.

Here's a strong looking management team that failed.

http://www.worldenergy.net/about_us/senior_leadership.php

These guys had a better business plan, more funding, more connections, an up and running facility and so forth.

As a matter of fact, google the biofuels energy industry for bankruptcies.

Verasun, Aventine Renewable Energy, Pacific Ethanol, World Energy, Biofuel Energy Corp (is teetering)

Tough sector

Master, just like the last time we had this conversation, this 12m is not a cash gain. It can't be used for a buy-back.

How did all these companies work out for the average shareholders?

I don't see the point of using these valuation techniques if there is no revenue or NOPAT from operations. What good is a P/E multiple analysis if it is based on non-recurring events?

All of these 'earnings' are debt forgivenes.

There is actually a pretty strong hint in the financial statement announcement that the more sophisticated investor might want to pick up on:

I concur with Techlover that actual revenues will be on the small side - the only existing source being Willie's place.

Thus the 'earnings' are going to come from further reductions of debt. While that might look like a good move on first sight, the more important morsel here is what would motivate the debt holder (counterparty) to forgive the loans to EVFL. Out of the goodness of their hearts? I rather doubt it.

Would your mortgage holder offer you debt forgiveness if you have means to pay or are expected to have the means to service your mortgage in the near/foreseeable future? Obviously not. In these trying times, I have only seen debt reductions where absolutely no recovery is anticipated.

You can rest assured that the debt holders have far more insight into the strategic plans of EVFL and DM's plans of raising funds for growth and expansion in the future, and the fact that they walked away from the notes makes me think they saw nothing of substance here.

In addition, should EVFL actually have a viable business plan, where are they going to find capital to make the plan a reality. I should hope that the federal funding card is off the table. If our government is pumping funds into failed ventures and to CEO with track records such as this, god help us all.

There isn't much to see unless you like to grab a bit at Pei Wei, which is right under their offices. It's a nice new building which featurers offices above a strip mall, and for which the company is selling way too many shares to be able to afford the rent. Knox/Henderson area is pretty hopping.

I prefer my start-ups to rent low-key digs. It tells you a lot about character.

Nothing like a 50 mile detour to fill up the ole' truck.

Arlington is actually neither on 35W or 35E.

So you finally step up to the plate.

Let's get to it: What that note in the filings numbers means is that they basically exchanged the LNG Plant valued at $15m for the foregiveness of $90m in debt to the noteholders of the original convertible notes. It was transferred to PNG, which is 100% owned by the noteholders.

Why would the noteholders kick in 74m of cash on top of giving up a claim to $90m?

This resulted in the 74m gain. The noteholders exchanged something of lesser value than the face value of debt, most likely because they believe that this is all this company has.

From an accounting perspective, reducing a $90m liability and only giving up a plant valued $15m results in a NON-CASH gain. If cash would be exchanged, the transaction would result in some sort of receivable, or another asset. However, there isn't one on the balance sheet.

You may not like me, but you can rest assured I am right on the accounting. Please note that the statement of cash flows subtracts the non-cash gain right out of section on operating cash flows.

Please add the question of whether the company anticipates to collect 74m from this transaction to Snowgoose's list. If you don't like my answer, let's get it from the horse's mouth.

It would. To be honest, it wouldn't hurt me a bit if you guys all make a fortune off this stock. I have been wrong before in my life. I will be wrong again.

What will you do if the share price stays where it is and the O/S quintuples and eventually reaches 100B?

That was an excellent argument made in a mature and logical manner.

You really showed me this time.

My facts are not backed up? They are backed up with SEC filings made by this company? I even inserted the link.

Have you ever read they Ks and Qs?

Then please refute them. Line by line.

I can honestly state that I have not posted anything that isn't already in the public realm. I have no desire to argue with you guys until kingdom come but I will leave you and the others with one thought:

When the next quarterly filing for EVFL is released and there is no $74m in cash, I will expect an apology from you.

Talk to you then.

Just because I caught you in a lie twice?

Since you are clearly the superior individual, why don't you refute any of my posts?

All I post is publicly available information, all of your posts are hypotheses, conjecture and innuendo.

I knew you'd resort to character assasination eventually. This is usual the last argument remaining in a pumper's arsenal.

I guess I need to find a better job, since I only post 100 posts/year. I won't be able to change that flat for a long while.

These are all pulic posts.

Love your insinuations.

So are you going to answer to any of my factual posts or are you just going to try to assasinate my character?

I don't get how most people don't read financial filings and research the past of a company they invest in.

For this company to gain access to federal funding, or for this company to be at the forefront of commercializing cellulosic ethanol in a shack at Moses Lake while multinational conglomerates are struggling to develop these operations at a commercial scale is just beyond me.

All these DOE figures on an advisory board may sound nice, but this company once had the pre-eminent spokesman for bio-diesel in Willie Nelson on board and managed to drive him off with the insatiable greed and incompetence of Management.

They may be able pull a rabbit out of a hat here, but the sole beneficiary from it will be DM and his gang, who have screwed with the hopes and dreams of investors of AOOR/EBOF/EVFL for the past three years.

Allow me to share my thoughts on this potential merger.

What we have here are two companies that already share a common managment group, so if the intent is to align the goals of both organizations to make something happen, a merger is not really necessary or beneficial. Same goes for company resources, which EVLN doesn't have. As I stated before and suppported it with a financial statement link, the company brings $881 to the table.

To put the merger proposal in layman's terms, if you and your wife both own individual free checking accounts, and if you then decide to merge these into one account, did this in any way increase your net worth?

Stop LYIMG about the $74m.

That paper gain was already included in the Q1 quarterly filing, and it still resulted in a cash position of $3,000.

Please read filing below for confirmation.

http://www.pinksheets.com/otciq/ajax/showFinancialReportById.pdf?id=22259

I have already corrected you on this very obvious lie before, the fact you repeat it clearly shows what you are all about.

"Feel free to add or subtract from this"

I am not sure why you are upset? I am not trying to pick a fight with you.

You asked for feedback, I gave you some. I subrtracted from your comments as your post invited me to do.

My feeling is that your thoughts are far-fetched. If that is insulting to you, don't blame it on my social skills.