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.
Thank you. Yes, with new nuclear power generation off the table for the foreseeable future, as well as decommissioning, it certainly does change that playing field.
Ok, that's enough for me. Good night all.
I was referring not to what you said but to a statement you made. I was commenting on your point about listening to those with opposing opinions. I agree with the point. I was simply pointing out though that sometimes it pays to ask what if any axe the opponent may have to grind with the company that may be motivating opposition and whether their points are fair and objective or are they just cherry-picking info that supports their argument.
Everyone has their price. Word is IPPs are done too. Looks like smooth sailing ahead.
Then you have probably made about 10x on your investment - wow that's sad. What was the return of the S&P 500 during the same period?
Folks, those of you that know me know I don't do fluff PRs or P&D. From what I understand some folks are simply trying to help raise awareness of the company and FACTS pertaining to its business and business prospects. I get tons of complaints from people that are upset that not enough people know about the company. I know Laurie for years and every time she has taken a position in LLEG that stock has gone up. I can also tell you that from my dealings with her she has always been a person of integrity. So please don't paint everyone with the same brush. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Best,
Mike
Exactly
First of all, we are not a "public traded company" under the '34 Act. That is significantly different than our current status on the pink sheets. Once we start filing with the SEC we will be a "public traded company."
Secondly, I simply said that would be an option that I would consider if our filing with the SEC did not have a positive impact on our valuation - which in my personal view I think it will. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Hopefully that's more clear.
By the way, loads of "CEOs" have fired thousands of employees in the interest of "enhancing shareholder value." I think that's far more outrageous than anything I could possibly write on a message board. Berlin and other projects we are developing are probably going to create hundreds if not thousands of jobs including secondary and tertiary impacts and I'm very proud of that. I hope as our company continues to grow we help create wealth for our shareholders and their families. If there's something wrong with me stating that I would like to see our stock appreciate to the benefit of all our shareholders then I guess you've got me on that one. I'll get off my soap box now. Good night all.
I have to disagree with you here. Once a registration statement is filed it is a public document. There is no guesswork. Sure there is some uncertainty as to the amount of time it will take the SEC to deem it effective, but that's one of the reasons we take our time to do things correctly and work with very high caliber legal counsel just as we did with the EFSEC permit.
My experience with securities and particularly micro cap securities is that there is much greater speculation and emotion associated with the trading rather than the very linear approach you are suggesting. My uneducated guess is that the stock will trade up on the filing for emotional reasons as well as for the very logical arbitrage that the shares will command a much higher valuation as an OTCBB security as opposed to a pink. Again, this is just my personal view, but I can tell you that as a company we wouldn't go through all the effort if we didn't think it would yield a better valuation and I doubt we would need to wait until the process is entirely complete to realize some of that benefit. If that does happen perhaps we'll buy shares back and reissue them in a secondary at a better valuation once we are on OTCBB.
You're right to a certain extent. And disclosure of information is the purpose of filing a registration statement with the SEC. You want the information, which is reasonable, but you don't have any idea as to the process it takes to compile the information and file it with the SEC so you repeatedly slam us notwithstanding our work to give you exactly what you want.
I have raised a lot of capital over the years and in dealing with experienced investors I have found that the single most important criteria they use in investing is their confidenence with respect to management and its ability to execute its plans.
If you do your diligence you will see that we have a track record of making deals and completing complex filings, such as the EFSEC filing that I referenced in my last post. Based on that I think it is reasonable to conclude that management has the capability to do what it has said it will do. You are entitled to disagree, but if you disagree and you don't trust management then I don't understand why you are invested in the first place. Hopefully our future actions will make you feel better, but good things take time and patience.
Lastly, to the extent that our IR person has received inquiries from investors I have been very clear in instructing him that we did not feel it was appropriate to put a time line on this type of process because it is a dynamic process with regulatory and other hurdles that are beyond our control. Keep in mind that we are compiling in excess of three years worth of data.
By the way, we will be updating our web site with more information on New Bedford that we were unable to disclose previously in the near future so people should be able to have a better understanding of that project, which I think is really exciting and brings us some excellent business partners.
I received several emails today asking me if I would say something regarding uplisting.
I can tell you that this is a top priority of our company and something we are working on every day. It is no small task. Those of you that remember the EFSEC process know that we are well acquainted with complex filings and I am quite sure we will accomplish this task as soon as possible.
Our interests are aligned with those of our shareholders. We want a higher share price and more liquid market just as much as you do and we will work to bring this to fruition as soon as possible.
We also have a lot more resources at our disposal now than we did a few years ago so we are better positioned to achieve our goals re uplisting and project development.
Thanks for your patience.
Mike
It's approved. Approval of contracts of this type ALWAYS comes with conditions. No surprise there. The fat lady has done her singing and no amount of spin and damage control on the part of project opponents can change that.
I believe we do have to provide quarterly updates to OTC Markets, but I'm not 100 percent sure. Either way, once we file our registration statement we will be required to file 10Qs. We are making good progress on this. I'm not going to offer any estimated timelines though as folks take them too literally. Besides, I like surprises. Got to run folks. Be well all.
This plant is currently operating. Revenues will be part of 2011 financials.
It is fully permitted and near complete. It requires some upgrades but nothing that will prevent it from being operable this year. A long term PPA is currently being negotiated.
Yes but the market is a discounting mechanism. It anticipates future events. So by the time the revenues are reported the current prices will be long gone.
Smart money picks good companies with good management and invests in their future growth. That's how wealth is built. You have to be in it before all the risk is wrung out in order to profit. People on Ihub spend far too much time micro-analyzing every little blip.
Not necessarily re the law. Options can be sold. It's also not at all uncommon for electric utilities to have non-regulated affiliates ("genco"). So utility sells option to genco for value of any over market payments, if any, and ratepayers are made whole irrespective. Good deal for everyone.
Welcome to 2011. This is another medium of communication. I'm not above anybody. If Steve Jobs can answer e-mails from shareholders and customers, I can certainly take 10 minutes out of my day (hardly ever during the business day) to share my views. I really don't understand your obsession with this, but to each his own. Have a great night.
Well stated.
This is a baseless statement. First, PSNH cannot even legally own a share of a power generator other than what they have now. It would require changing the law. Second, Gary Long is a very honorable guy. I can tell you that for a fact. He is one of the most well-respected businessmen in NH. You are flat our wrong.
Look, I've tried my best within the constraints given to lead you folks in the right direction. Don't say I didn't tell you so when all is said and done.
That's the same guy who was employed by and did the wood study for CPD. Yet another "reliable source..."
Laidlaw is not a party to the proceeding, which is why we have nothing publicly to do with it. You can bet if we remained a party I would be providing the majority if not all of the testimony for Laidlaw.
We are not impacted by changes to the PPA, but approval is certainly good for us and I'm pretty optimistic that this will get worked out.
I'm done with time frames. See my last post for my views on this. To quote Augustus "That which is done well enough is done fast enough." Good night all.
Timeframes provided are our best assumptions at the times they are made. As I've said many times in the past, we don't make widgets and trying to predict with certainty the amount of time it takes to draft and execute agreements/LOIs/etc is far from an exact science. The one thing you can bank on is if I say something will happen it will and since we run the company for the benefit of long-term shareholders rather than traders, short term time frames really shouldn't matter. The end result is what matters.
I'm sorry to hear that you don't expect much from me. That seems perfectly understandable considering myself and my team have only managed in the past couple of years to successfully develop one of the largest commercial biomass projects in the world and negotiate and execute a $1.5 billion PPA, not counting what we have in the pipeline. Maybe you should put your money elsewhere.
We are filing a Form 10 Registration Statement http://www.sec.gov/about/forms/form10.pdf
The template the SEC provides online looks rather small, but it is quite extensive once all the information is input.
Once filed we will file 10Qs and 10Ks at the appropriate intervals.
Looking forward to a successful outcome next week. Two thumbs up!
All the best,
Mike
I suggest you stop speculating because you are wrong about some of the things you're writing and this constant rehashing of this issue only creates distraction. All that aside, the real value of the company comes from how it invests its capital for **future** growth. As I've stated several times, the direction for the company going forward is to acquire projects much closer to revenue production - indeed, that may already be producing revenue. I understand that you don't have the exact details of what this means right at the moment, but if you think management knows what it's doing then give us a chance to show you.
This is not stuff I would put on my blog. The intent was to have some informal "dialogue" with shareholders since it is a slow day at the end of the year. Obviously it hasn't been well-received so please just delete and I'll refrain from doing this in the future.
By the way, there is considerable info in the public record before the state of New Hampshire on this topic, so I would refer you to that for reading, unless of course you feel the state of NH is in cahoots with us....
This has nothing to do with that. It is about protecting our shareholders. This guy and his cronies regularly seek to hurt this company and its share price. That's his M.O. That should always be of concern to shareholders.
I'm not going to debate our business dealings with you. You stated that your "hobby" is to expose fraudulent pink sheet stocks, so if that's the case there are probably literally hundreds upon which you can focus your attention. This is not one of them. The fact that you don't like the timing of our disclosure does not make what we are doing inappropriate in any way. You don't seem to be a shareholder, so not much more I can do for you. Happy new year.
Yes he has most certainly made injurious statements and I can assure you we have legal counsel monitoring this, but quite frankly we haven't pursued anything to date b/c has no significant assets if we were to obtain a judgement and it really just isn't worth the time. He is really just considered a nuisance in the community and in NH.
Have a happy new year and have a good life. When you're done blathering on about your lies and half-truths I suggest you check the scoreboard.
I believe I've made it quite clear in prior posts that we are engaged in a transaction that involves the sale of that interest, the specific terms of which cannot be disclosed at this time. The specific details will be contained in the registration statement filed with the SEC.
Actually, I obviously can't predict market prices. I simply know what we have going on and can surmise what impact that may have. I also can't discuss timing, but I can say that we are very close on a few things which I things have not been considered in our PPS, so I'm hoping that will help. Got to get back to work. Happy New Year everybody.
It's not incorrect predictions - it's the mendacious intent of the poster with which I take issue.
Oh my goodness! The sky is falling!! I'm willing to bet 43 is going to look cheap soon.
We could literally fill a book with your incorrect assertions and things that you don't know and I'm not going to debate with the likes of you, but to correct you:
Laidlaw Energy conceived of the plan of converting the Berlin site in 2006. We negotiated and executed 100 percent of the transaction. We financed it just as virtually every other energy developer seeks financing for its energy projects. The fact that you don't seem to understand this speaks volumes.
We received a unanimous permit from the site evaluation committee. I don't know exactly, but I would guess that Laidlaw's principals and its consultants provided 90 percent of the testimony. The permit contained customary conditions just as every permit contains conditions. There is nothing unusual about this.
Laidlaw completely negotitated and executed the PPA with PSNH. You will note that it's my signature on the document. Your opinions regarding its validity and amendments are worthless. After Bow, Berlin is the largest construction project in the state of NH. If you think the state is going to be an impediment to economic development that is sorely needed in an area with double digit unemployment you are nuts.
But you know all this. You just continue to post your lies and half-truths because you are angry that we have beaten you and proven you wrong at every turn.
I honestly don't understand why you are allowed to post here. At a minimum there should be some disclosure about why you are here. I have no issue whatsoever with differing opinions, but you have a long track record of lies, half-truths and flat out incorrect predictions related to our company. Anyone who actually listens to you would be a complete fool, which is why you have zero credibility in the Berlin community and these folks should know that.
I hope you find something better and more productive to do with your time in 2011.
My friend, if I was the type of person to say "in your face" I probably would have already said it to those agenda driven folks you mentioned who made the following predictions:
"They'll never close on the Berlin acquisition." Wrong
"They'll never file an EFSEC application." Also wrong
"Their application will never get approved." Really wrong on that one - unanimous approval
"The city of Berlin opposes the project." Wrong again
"They'll never sign a PPA." Wrong yet again
Do you see a pattern here? I'm sure there are quite a few more we could add to the list. I wonder what all those naysayers can say they have accomplished over the past two years? I wonder what the next wrong prediction will be that we add to this list? PUC? Uplisting? Mass projects? Or something else?
You're right though. We should wait until $.01 for the victory cigar. I have a box of Montecristos set aside for the occasion.
Thank you again to all of our loyal shareholders, friends and supporters without whom we never could have gotten so far. I wish all of you a happy, healthy and prosperous new year.
Mike
Well, obviously we are going in the other direction by becoming fully reporting. It's not the nature of public ownership that bothers me. Sometimes the lack of understanding on the part of investors bothers me because I know they are panic selling over nothing.
I don't read this board every day, but when I do I am always perplexed why someone who owns shares would make negative statements. Sure, perhaps you may want to convey your feelings to the company (and we do read all the emails we receive), but it seems self-defeating to advertise those feelings to other potential investors.
The ironic thing is that I was recently reading "Too Big to Fail" and I couldn't help but take note of how some of the CEOs of the largest financial companies in the world, like John Mack and former Lehman CEO Dick Fuld, made many of the same complaints I often read here about the shorts and others spinning info to manipulate the share price of their companies.
At the end of the day, a lot comes down to investor confidence. When investors lost confidence in Leh and BSC they went down. I guess the frustration is that we have done much that I think should give investors confidence that management has a good plan and knows what it's doing, but I often don't think investors understand what an accomplishment it is to take something like Berlin from an idea to reality.
Unfortunately we don't make widgets, so we can't update investors every week on the progress of our widget making. When we release news it is usually when some sort of agreement has been signed, so it is not anticipatory, it is done. The people with whom we do deals wouldn't like it if I told the world what we were doing with them before the deal is signed, so those without patience get frustrated and sell, but any given day could bring an announcement of the next project has been signed and when you are on the inside looking out it can be a bit frustrating.
Anyway, enough for tonight. I hope everyone has a happy and healthy holiday!
Mike
Aside from the fact that I think people blew this issue way out of proportion, people also forget that we have several other things in the works that have nothing to do with Berlin and that will likely have a positive influence on the PPS. There are always people who sell right before the run and then come back to try to bash the company and try to get back in because they are annoyed with their own misstep.
I should add that the PPA contains a mechanism to ensure that rate payers do not pay above market prices for energy. It seems this has been completely overlooked.