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.
Is HSA Investments a broker (an arranging of financing) or the principal?
Don't we already have an "agreement" with Roselle to find money for the Ecuadoran projects> How is that going?
Interesting how CLNV announced Roselle was going to raise capital and there has not been any word from our management regarding the activities of Roselle? Have they arranged anything for Ecuador?
The company has been asked twice to provide an update on the financing with no reply.
Speaking of Ecuador, at last report, none of the three city mayors have said anything on their own social media accounts. Local Spanish speaking media have not also reported anything. How do the CLNV press releases fit into this?
Without new money there are no equipment contracts and by extension no revenues or value added to CLNV.
Regarding PCN, how will Clean Seas earn income from the IP?
There are commercial operations that can take MSW laden with plastics and cleanly incinerate it. They could do the same with pyrolysis. They just buy a system from a supplier and get a feedstock/offtake contracts without any involvement with Clean Seas. Having said this how does Clean Seas benefit.
Your assistance is requested in Aisle 3...
There is a lot of positivity today surrounding HSA Investments. I did a little digging and perhaps my search criteria was off but I could not find anything on HSA. Any insights?
Likewise, I did the same for Nicholas. I did find one but when you look at the photo it is not the same person. Thoughts?
We need more information that can pass the smell test.
Still waiting for a solid update on the funding for the three Ecuadoran projects.
Doing business in India is a challenge.
Unless you know the top political decision maker in an area directly. look at about three years to get through all of the gatekeepers. Make sure that you have ample spending money for those "consulting" fees.
I can speak from experience in this area and know dozens of others who have had lengthy challenges to get into business in India.
There is ample opportunity in India but you must wait and wait.
As for Dubai, it too has a myriad of gatekeepers to deal with with the appropriate fees before you hit the right people.
There is already a big WTE developer Hitachi Zosen going in with a 3000 NT per day plant. It costs about $ 350k per ton per day to build the plant or slightly over a billion.
The LOI's are not contracts.
They are an expression of intent which desperately needs funding to make the four projects move ahead.
The company has been asked a meaningful response to the question of the status of the funding through Roselle or any other party. To date, there has been no response.
The Mayors of the three Ecuadoran cities have not posted the CLNV good news story on their own social media accounts. No local Spanish speaking media outlet had picked up on the WTE story at all.
If you have noticed, the company has not been mentioning the earlier announcements in recent shareholder updates. The focus is now on PCN.
Dubai definitely generates a lot of waste.
I heard that Hitachi Zosen and partners are currently building a massive WTE in Dubai with a very long term supply contract from the government. Its a done deal. Its a Billion Dollar capital cost project and likely all privately financed.
It begs the question if there are big players already on the ground in Dubai with real money to invest and proven technology how does our Company compete?
Can we raise a Billion privately? We still have had no updates on the $ 100 million for Ecuador.
Would Clean Seas be effectively able to convince governments to use the relatively unknown GGII pyrolysis system over modern, clean incinerators?
Accounting standards vary for the size of the business.
Audits are primarily designed to provide assurance that whatever the management has previously reported as revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities are materially correct. They do not pass an opinion on LOI's.
As I said earlier, it will be the notes which will tell the full story.
Not all pink sheet auditors are above board. One CPA agreed with the management of a solar developer was censured for not treating the principles of revenue recognition properly. The company shares tanked to less than 100000 shares to the dollar!
Since Roselle was retained to find the money before the LOI's were issued, there should be some word of the funding closing by the end of October.
The capital markets for new deals will close the Friday before the US Thanksgiving. If the deals are not substantially done by then there will be no chance for a closing before January 2022.
There has been no word on any funding activity for the three Ecuadoran plants. Further, there has not yet been any word from the local mayors or the Spanish speaking media which can raise doubt.
The books for CLNV will be easy to audit as for most part of the three years, it was bereft of cash and loads of booked spending. The auditor should be spending most of their time looking at the share issuances, non-arms length transactions and any implications of the four LOI's. The interesting reading will be in the notes.
I hope that you get an answer.
I posed these questions to Frank before the shareholders conference call on the 8th and have not yet had a response.
Yes, it is a tough question to answer if nothing has happened. I suspect that even if something is moving glacially that it would also be hard to put a respectable positive spin on it.
Only if there was something more substantial could our management team respond. Even then, my gut tells me that they would rely on the confidentiality of the negotiations to defer any watered down disclosure to the shareholders.
Yes, an up listing will raise the price of the stock and the total market value of the listed shares.
A higher listing, however, will not raise the revenue or shareholders equity of the business.
The key is new cash to fund the business plan.
Management has been rather silent on the capital raising side for the Ecuadoran projects. Even the locals are silent on the project.
Regrettably, there is a parallel to a magicians slight of hand where we are currently focused on patents and new board members without a whisper of the funding. I am not saying that these are bad things.
What I am saying is that what is the most critical to the future of the company is the ability for it or its clients to get the capital to build the WTE plants where we, the CLNV shareholders, can get rewarded.
If they get the money within say three months then the stock is worth maybe 25 cents per share. If they don't get the cash then it is worth under a penny.
There are other providers of WTE solutions and more will come to the table. They will have deep pockets to do what is necessary.
The Biden Infrastructure, if passed, will provide ample opportunity for new market participants. If it does not pass then what happens to CLNV? The buyer of plants must have an economic return that makes sense without government support (direct financial and carbon credits).
While you statement is valid to attract more interest in the stock, an audit does not add value unless the company through Roselle or others can find the cash to develop the four announced projects.
No cash means no equipment orders. No equipment orders means no cash flows attributable to Clean Seas.
An audit by a CPA will only confirm past financial results reported by management. If management has made a material misstatement or incorrectly applied GAAP then it will appear in the report to management (never released to shareholders) or as a qualified audit report.
As for the IRS, every tax return runs through an automated process to look at tax returns that have some outlying numbers. This comparison is done to people or firms in the same location or industry. Some people even call this an audit.
Now, if the automated process produces an outlying response then a desk review is performed. This too can be called an audit. If after the review a there is some doubt as to the numbers the IRS may ask in writing for some documentation to substantiate the claims in their review. This is what could be termed as a desk audit. If the documents do not support the numbers the IRS could restate the financial numbers and tax accordingly.
There is an option for the IRS to come into the office for a chat. This is about the only time where a taxpayer should really use the word audit.
Now, the IRS will not spend much time even doing a desk audit as the financial results show a loss.
We should avoid placing a higher ascribed value on the shareholders audit or an IRS review than what is actually there.
An audit will only affirm or qualify the management prepared financial statements.
The LOI's do not have any balance sheet or income statement impact. The existence of one or more LOI's might be included in the notes as a potential item of an indeterminant nature but the auditors should make it abundantly clear that they do not pass merit on the LOI's. The typical audit does not cover any MD + A write up.
In the ideal world, the numbers already issued by the company should be the same as with the audit. If they differ then some caution should be taken.
The existence of an audit does not make the business more valuable or viable. It only provides a third party opinion that management is telling the truth.
It is only a hoop to go through to get to an up listing.
If Roselle or its successors do not deliver the cash to roll out the business plan in a timely manner then why does dilution matter?
If there is no new cash for the projects then dilution is only an issue for a holder to sell their shares to a bigger fool.
We need the $ 130 million from somewhere to roll out the four announced plants. No cash means no equipment orders issued to GGII. No equipment means no cash flow from the projects.
As for the IP, we need cash to market the IP. However, from the buyers side what is in it for them? There are already competing systems for disposal of plastics, foam and all manner of MSW. The systems are substantially clean. China and the Far East may copy the IP based on the disclosed patent filing and ignore any future infringement claim.
I like the list of Clean Seas plants.
Some of them are being developed, financed, owned and operated by others.
Some of them predate the sales agency agreement with GGII.
How can CLNV ascribe a successful history from before its current incarnation?
So, a patent application has been filed.
Even with a patent, what economic advantage does it provide the inventor if the inventor does not have the capital to release the economic value of the patent?
To date, there is no third party evidence proving that the capital raise for the three Ecuadoran plants is moving ahead.
Pyrolysis has been around for quite a while. There are several companies that use pyrolysis to harvest the energy buried within plastics and other high carbon products. Some of these equipment providers are equally as competent as GGII.
It begs the question where is the market advantage to a buyer of the design, process or technology involved in the patent. How does it benefit a person of you can buy systems off the shelf and source amply available plastics?
Assuming that a firm does duplicate the patent for their own purposes does CLVN have the resources and the time to fight a patent infringement case? What happens when the infringement is done offshore where they ignore US law?
To me, is seems that we are placing too much value in the fancy IHUB banner for the CLNV page.
What we have thus far is letters of intent for $ 130 million which require the company and its agents to find it first. If they fail to find the capital then there will not be any contracts for equipment purchases.
Since Roselle was retained prior to the press releases, the clock should be ticking for a few months already which leaves only a few months for credible private funders to conclude a deal.
Please bear in mind that none of the Ecuadoran politicians have post the CLNV press releases on their own social media. Ditto for the local Spanish speaking press. They are playing it cautious until CLNV can deliver the cash.
I am long term investor in CLNV.
I will add to my position as the evidence warrants.
I do not short stocks period.
My questions and comments try to suss out objective facts from subjective hype. I have been burned a few times from not asking the hard questions.
The easiest thing for Dan or Frank to do is to post the link to the USPTO application which would resolve the question if the application is in the mail or it has actually been filed. In doing so the objective result would provide the correct indicator of the value of the company.
Even if the patent is filed and approved, how do you monetized the value of the protection where the biggest countries polluting the oceans are not overly enamored with the US and its laws. You would have no ability to enforce any law or judgement. Domestically, the independent nature of the states may ignore the merits of the "network".
I would suspect that any patent would be more of a marketing gimmick to promote the share price rather than a fundamental shift in future profits.
You can have the best idea since sliced bread and have it patented but unless you can commercialize it the patent does not hold much value.
Thanks for the update.
There are a number of possible reasons for the listing not being updated.
Due to the pandemic, it is possible that the Chamber does not have staff in the office to update the site. However, in the era of working from home, this should have been something easy to change.
I would think that if the CLNV story is the panacea that the area needs then the Chamber would have moved heaven ad earth to get the new member listing updated.
There is also another possibility that the company has not yet applied or is in the process of applying for membership. You can have a press release without any third party verification.
We have seen this situation with the three Ecuadoran press releases where no local Spanish speaking media has picked up on the press release.
Further, none of the mayors of the three affected cities have posted our good news story on their own social media accounts. As an elected official wouldn't you want to have your name out their for bringing in a green project?
If we look at the effectiveness of the membership, it might be better to contribute financially to the election efforts of the local, county, state and federal politicians that represent Cape Cod. These are the people the will get the permits issued and contracts signed a lot faster.
The only way that Clean Seas can report the borrowing of $ 130 million is if the project company being at arm's length from Clean Seas borrows the money from let's say Roselle and the project company buys the equipment from Clean Seas.
If the project company buys the equipment directly from GGII then the $ 130 million cannot be revenue to Clean Seas. If the project company is not independent from Clean Seas then it not revenue. This is simple accounting.
Said another way, would you treat borrowing on a credit card or a line of credit as income?
The first problem is that the company has only LOI's and not contracts. There isn't any third party evidence that the LOI's can be converted to successful contracts as the company has remained silent on the status of its funding efforts.
As for the $ 130 million, assuming it materializes, this only represents capital origination to the Clean Seas projects. If the transaction with the projects is done as a sale of goods from Clean Seas, it would result in a small one time gross margin. Yes, $ 130 million in revenue but some $ 120 million in costs! If it is deal is done as a consulting service, it would be a one time consulting fee say $ 10 million. I do not know the numbers but this is an educated guess.
An existing business earning EBITDA is worth more than what CLNV has produced to date.
Suppose there is an existing business is earning $ 3 million per year EBITDA. Current price to EBITDA in the cleantech sector is over ten times but let's use 10 for ease of the numbers. So, the target company is worth $ 30 million. A 3 cents per CLNV share, the company would need to issue one billion shares. Even if we increase the price per share and increase the multiple we still end up with big dilution and the change in control. This is typical for RTO's using shells.
The unfortunate reality of patents is that the inventor must disclose to the entire world what the patent is about. Minor tweaks provides a second inventor the ability to get a new patent based on the improvement. If the objective of the patent is to reduce plastics going into the ocean (a very laudable idea) the problem is that 80% of the plastics in the ocean is sourced from 10 rivers many of which are in countries that do not car about US patent rules.
Nonetheless, if the statement that a patent has been applied for and cannot be found on the USPTO site then it is more than probable that the patent has not been applied for. It should not be difficult for the management to provide a link to the US government site where the application was filed.
Any one can go onto the internet and find new opportunities to clean up the environment or produce clean energy. You can have the best management and the access to superior technology providers but what about the money?
Can you find the capital to seize the opportunity?
If I owned a revenue producing business in the cleantech space would I consider rolling in my business for shares of CLNV stock? The only way it could make sense is if the vendor becoming the controlling shareholder. If they don't take control what does that say about the business being vended into CLNV?
We have not heard any updates on what Roselle is doing or not doing.
We do not have any details on what capital is being secured from parties other than Roselle.
I agree.
If the funding from Roselle takes beyond six months then there is a strong likelihood that banks, PE funds and the like have taken a pass on the deal for whatever reason.
As I understand it, Roselle was retained before the press releases went out for the three Ecuadoran plants so the timing is even getting a little tighter.
There are other project developers looking for capital and capital providers looking for projects. There are also other technologies that can do a waste to oil process although their system may not be the best. It is a growing opportunity with a lot of competition.
We should not read too much into the press release.
The agreement between GGII and Clean Seas boils down to a two year sales agency agreement. Clean Seas finds new third party clients, gets the permits and raises funds for those clients. For this, Clean Seas will earn a commission directly or as a resale of a system.
For GGII, the big gain is having a new customer coming to their doors with cash.
The only question is if Roselle who has been retained by Clean Seas can find and deliver the cash to the project which is turn will buy systems from GGII. To date, we have had no meaningful update on how Roselle is doing in finding the cash for the three Ecuadoran plants.
The challenge that we see is that CLVN has not presented an update on the most critical element being the status of the funding for the three Ecuadoran projects arranged by Roselle.
Until the financing is closed and funds delivered to GGII, nothing much will happen. It will still take a year minimum to fabricate, ship and assemble the systems. There is only a few million per year in free cash flow available to the project owners starting in 2023.
There is an indirect party to GGII which is promoting pyrolysis systems which to my knowledge is developing sites in three major countries which predates the Clean Seas agreement. There could be some geographical overlap.
For small companies, audits only validate the financial statements made by management team. Only in the notes will they mention binding contracts with a financial implication if they are material. I have seen an audited pink sheet saying they had a billion in receivables yet it could not be validated by another party. The auditor was disciplined.
I am not aware that GGII owns and operates any pyrolysis plants. What they do is sell and assemble systems. I understand that their first partially owned and operated plants will be in Australia or New Zealand.
The systems are very reliable. While the machines are designed primarily for power production then can produce a reasonable quality oils and fuels. I do not know is they are very high end that they would use in California or jet planes.
GGII markets and assembles pyrolysis systems. All of there fabrication is done by third parties. I am not aware that they own any of the systems.
I do not know if the fundamental change released today will overhang the sentiment of the market in the morning.
There is a question if a few investors can get some momentum on the bid side to get some more bullish movement.
However, what will turn some churning of the stock into a rally will be some factual news even if it is only incremental.
In going over the CC today, only one item has a tangible impact on the finances today. This is the announcement of the 100BIO divestiture. This should have been done by a press release after the market closed.
The following morning a CC could have been held to go over the details of the divestiture and followed up with a pep talk highlighting future plans.
I heard the entire presentation and I have mixed feelings on what I heard.
On the positive side, no more dilution is great news. The focus on plastics and MSW is better but it comes at some cost to divest of 100 Bio.
The up listing should attract better liquidity and upwards price potential. However, an audit for a company of this size only verifies the financial statements prepared by management. Accounting rules generally cannot include future revenues from projects.
Depending on whether or not notes are prepared to the statements the best that could be said is that there are LOI's without any testing for the quality of the LOI's.
Dan did mention the work on the Congo project but it was clear that there are some hurdles given the Congo economy and politics.
As for Ecuador, nothing was mentioned on the status of the funding for the three projects. Without the funding in place, GGII will not start any work.
A pyrolysis system takes longer to fabricate and ship than it does to build a building or erect the equipment. From friends that I know, a system of the proposed size would be about 12 from the date of real funding. It would take a couple months to put it all together. So, from a practical viewpoint, it will be January 2023 when any revenue comes in.
We still do not know the structure of the Ecuadorian deals on what happens with the pre-tax cash flow. With $ 13 or so million in revenue, my guess is that there is about $ 5 million in pre-tax profit. If we assume no taxes or depreciation expense, it should leave about $ 2 million after debt service cost. Hmm.
As you can see from my response, the GGII that CLNV is referring to is the pyrolysis equipment provider based out of Singapore.
I do not understand why your are referring to a pinky listed CBD distributor that coincidentally uses the same abbreviation.
I post when there is something obviously missing from a press release such as specificity of claims by the management or others I will post a properly objective counter point. I try to be objective with pink sheet companies.
If the posting happens the same day or the following the timing is not relevant. What is relevant is that despite my postings management has not yet clarified or updated on any of the previous press releases.
For example, it has been a while since the Ecuador press releases have been issued. Has anything happened with those projects? Has Roselle found the money yet? Has GGII from Singapore gone to the site to do pre-engineering work? Have the local authorities started to work on a site, permits and written contracts for the feedstock supply if it is government agency sourced? Said another way has the project died? Is CLNV waiting for something to happen?
Management has an obligation to inform shareholders what is going on. If the project has died, we have the right to know. If it has been delayed, the shareholders should be told so that they can manage their timing expectations.
If it has been delayed, no problem, as it would be a good time to load up on more shares. I do have a small holding and would like to add to it once substantiated facts are released. The company has the right vision.
Already done.
Waiting for a reply or some substantial news on today's chat
The company that you are referring to is Green Globe International Inc which is a pinkie under the symbol GGII. It is in the CBD business.
The provider of the equipment for Ecuador, the Congo and wherever is Global Green International Inc which goes by the contraction GGII. It is a privately held company based out of Singapore and is not quoted on any market.
I have already asked CLNV on the status of the funding through Roselle. It will be interesting if I get a response or something is mentioned in today's conference call.
GGII is a private company registered in Singapore and has its operations in Melbourne. No shares are held by the public.
They do have a public subsidiary called Bioplant Limited which has about 170 shareholders and slightly over 100 million shares issued. They are developing for their own account plants in Australia and New Zealand. According to my friend, the money is not being raised by Roselle.
Perhaps you have the wrong GGII?