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.
Another, I hope GERS goes for doubling up their Licensees this year or better, maybe info in the shareholder letter. Last 2 came out end of January, early February. The silence from the company is deafening, again why?
http://www.ethanolproducer.com/plants/listplants/USA/
Same here I saw the .13, but bought at the ask .16
Here is GreenShift's Market, Buyer's?
http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/122.htm
I think GreenShift will factor it all into their settlement demands, of which I'm not sure took place.
They were supposed to present their settlement demands to the court back in November 2011.
http://greenshift-gers.blogspot.com/2011/10/parties-proposed-amendments-to-case.html
The settlement demands were supposedly not to be filed with the court so I don't think we will have access to that info, unless the info is released by the company which is unlikely. Info not available to the public.
"Plaintiff(s) shall make (but not file with the court) on or before November 18, 2011, a settlement demand. Defendants shall provide (but not file with the court) a response thereto within 30 days after receipt of the demand."
and
"Adkins agrees with Plaintiff’s initial proposal that Plaintiff(s) shall serve (but not file with the court) on or before February 27, 2012 [no later than 150 days after the court’s Markman decision] a statement of damages to be sought at trial, if any, and make a settlement demand. Defendant(s) shall serve (but not file with the court) a response thereto within 30 days after receipt of the demand."
Mandate is the floor not the ceiling! Use more Biodiesel!
http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/blog/article/2011/12/surpassing-the-mandate
Clean Diesel car sales up! http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/blog/article/2012/01/2011-us-clean-diesel-sales-up-by-27-percent
USA biodiesel capacity up to 2.881 bgpy!
http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/blog/article/2011/12/2012-data-shows-us-capacity-at-2-881-billion
The World Renewable 54 bgpy by 2015!
http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/blog/article/2011/12/54-billion-gallons-by-2015
Just some interesting articles from Biodiesel Magazine!
USA Exporting Ethanol more than ever. Over 1 billion gallons exported in 2011, So looks like producers will fulfill the RFS2 requirement for US Domestic consumption, then produce more to export! I think this will go as far as is possible in regards to the effect demand will put on the price of Corn. No doubt COES will help if rising corn prices put the pinch in the producers crush margins.
Cellulosic is definitely the next wave. http://www.ethanolrfa.org/exchange/entry/another-record-breaking-month-for-ethanol-exports/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=November+Export&utm_content=November+Export+CID_1563fdb20100311d650dd3efcb9df905&utm_source=Email+marketing+software&utm_term=The+E-Xchange+Blog
And will the EPA raise the RFS2 Biomass Based Diesel requirement to 1.28 bgpy in 2013? It would produce $5 billion in GDP! We have demand by RFS2 mandate, 1 bgpy by 2012. Crude Corn Oil will increase in usage as a feedstock. http://www.biodiesel.org/news/pressreleases/20111227_eparule.htm
GreenShift Licensees and Capacity January 24, 2012
2,049,000,000 gpy licensed, 1,659,000,000 gpy online and producing! About 16% to 17% of the Corn Ethanol Industry, by my best estimates here.
Subtracted 390,000,000 gpy because Licensees BIOF 230 mgpy, ABE 50 mgpy and Andersons/ Marathon 110 mgpy are not yet online
My total amount licensed might have varied a bit from my other post because of available source info on capacity, but should be reasonably close. I tried to take info from each producers site when available.
Andersons, Albion, MI 55 mgpy
Andersons, IN 110 mgpy
Andersons/Marathon, OH 110 mgpy
Utica Energy, WI 50 mgpy
Western, New York, 50 mgpy
Central Indiana Ethanol, Marion IN 50 mgpy
Green Plains, Bluffton IN 120 mgpy
Green Plains, Lakota IA 100 mgpy
Green Plains, Superior IA 60 mgpy
Green Plains, Shenandoah IA 55 mgpy
Green Plains, Blissfield MI 60 mgpy
Green Plains, Central City NE 100 mgpy
Green Plains, Ord NE 55 mgpy
Green Plains, Rives TN 120 mgpy
Green Plains, Fergus Falls MN 60 mgpy
Marquis, IL 140 mgpy
Marquis, WI 75 mgpy
United Ethanol, Milton WI 55 mgpy
Corn LP, IA 60 mgpy
Calgren, CA 60 mgpy
Sunoco, NY 114 mgpy
ABE, NE 110 mgpy
ABE, SD 50 mgpy
BIOF, NE 115
BIOF, MN 115
I think it reasonable for one to want to understand as much as possible about that which they have invested a great sum of their wealth into. Rather than not wanting to know what they spent their money on.
I'll keep digging, listening, learning and Skribing!
Any answer to why these 7 producers are not listed in the Markman Transcript?
408 mgpy
Amaizing Energy, LLC 55 mgy
Blue Flint Ethanol, LLC 50 mgy
Bushmills Ethanol, Inc. 50 mgy
Chippewa Valley Ethanol Co., LLLP 45 mgy
Heartland Corn Products, LLC 100 mgy
Lincolnway Energy, LLC 55 mgy
United Wisconsin Grain Producers, LLC 53 mgy
Hmm?
http://greenshift-gers.blogspot.com/2012/01/markman-transcript.html
16% 2.1 bgpy licensed!
1.7 bgpy online and producing!
* I added another 25 mgpy because my previous post factored the 2nd Marquis plant at only 50 mgpy, when I checked their site it stated 75 mgpy capacity.
At 3% extraction that's 51,150,000 mgpy of crude corn oil extracted.
x a crude corn oil market price of $2.80 = $143,220,000
20% to GreenShift as royalty = $28,644,000 per year!
Licensee's take home $114,576,000 per year.
Fluctuations can occur due to the market price of corn oil and the volume the licensees produce and sell.
The gap between 1.7 bgpy online and the 2.1 bgpy licensed will be filled when licensees ABE, BIOF and ANDE/Marathon Oil bring their remaining systems online, soon! More to be licensed in 2012! Look out for the Shareholder Letter Coming soon! The long awaited communication from Mr. Kreisler.
GLTA!
IMO!
16% or 2,070,000,000 gpy licensed! is my best estimate.
1,681,000,000 gpy online and producingj!
2,071,000,000 gpy licensed which includes these which are licensed, but not yet online,
BIOF 2 plant's with a total output of 230 mgpy,
ABE's Aberdeen plant 50 mgpy,
and the Anderson's / Marathon 110 mgpy plant coming online soon.
2,211,000,000 gpy if the Marquis big plant project goes thru increasing it from 140 mgpy to 280 mgpy!
So I would say my best estimate is 2071 mgpy Licensed. Nearly 2.1 bgpy of 13.2 bgpy * 2012 amount of ethanol to be produced from corn.
So I would say about 16% licensed, 17% if the big Marquis plant's plans go thru.
So we need the 2 BIOF plants, the 2nd ABE plant and the Andersons/Marathon plant to startup to have the full licensed 2,070,000,000 gpy online and producing.
Calculated from this list above which does not list the 2nd ABE plant.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=70048787
MOO!
Not meaning cows saying please extract the corn oil first!
This is my last post for today, I'm out. But SEM1 I know what your wondering about, but without detailed insider accounting info I don't think were able to know those exact transaction amounts.
We would have to look into each Licensee's deal and really dig into costs, but not possible IMO! Going for too much detail. Looking for actual businees reciepts etc...
Just what they reveal to us in their reports.
Well anyways 3% extracted from 1,681,000,000 yields 50,430,000 gpy crude corn oil
x $2.80 market price for corn oil = $141,204,000
20% for GERS is $28,240,800
$112,963,200 for Licensees!
Good deals eh!
My wildcard is here
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=71228384
Although it's BIOF, 2nd ABE and Ande/Marathon, go for more?
Sorry I will look further into it. It's just a number to due estimates off. Could be more?
Complex question, you need to be more specific as to the COES system. As each licensee requires a custom setup that fit's their particular plant. The ethanol plants are all a bit different. If GreenShift does the entire package like with Sunoco then that could be a gauge for GERS costs. Others like Green Plains had contracted with ICM for equipment and install, yet licensed with GreenShift who then take it from there. I know GreenShift prefers to use the Alfa Laval equipment for top performance. All in all I would say it's done to produce a profit, marked up. Sorry, I don't have insider access to exact numbers in equipment and install agreements. What we can look forward to are earnings in the reports showing profitability. Revenues minus COGS and SGA, etc.. equal Earnings!
Yes we need more definition and clarification on the exact list of licensees and how far along they are with their systems. Like are they newly licensed, but still not installed and started up or are they licensed, installed, operational and fully optimized, ramped up? etc.. I will try to gather more info and produce a detailed list to add to others that exist. Skunk has a good list. I don't think BIOF has started up yet? But I know ABE is going to install at their other plant for sure. Oh yeah! we should also look to the Andersons/Marathon plant for progress. Those are for sure, and there are other's we can only speculate on. But I think we can count on the next ABE, BIOF and the ANDE/Marathon plant.
Then we should keep up with what's happening with the Marquis, Hennepin proposed expansion that was setback. Otherwise we have both Marquis plant's online and producing. I believe all licensees except the above ABE, BIOF and ANDE/MRO plant are online, ramping up and producing corn oil, revenues and royalties for GERS right now.
Kind of complex question, but after initial startup systems are of high profitabilty margin for Licensees and GreenShift. The TV video shows how they are plug and play, unmanned, remote controlled, low maint, high performance , etc... In the big picture GreenShift spent millions upon millions in development.
Talk about shareholder support of a startup business, *the newer COES business model for the company going thru the ordeal of patent infringement. Additional paid in capital $116.7 million,
Shareholder support definitely helped keep it afloat, avoiding total loss in bankruptcy.
The patents are the Grail and were, are defended from loss by the GERS army.
Never surrender the Patents to the infringer barrage.
We will be victorious.
$33,264,000 possible as the 20% royalty of 1.9 bgpy ethanol licensed.
Factors include fluctuating market price of Crude Corn Oil and volume of Licensees production and Sales. Something to keep track of into 2012! That $33.2 mill is just from royalties. GreenShift can also gain from equipment and install agreements, etc... This is a set recurring long term revenue stream that after initial start up costs yields a high profit margin. Should solve the debt issue and allow for refinancing if necessary.
Ahh! so it's your son who is the IPA! Lucky you. Let us know!
If the current industry is producing 13.2 bgpy ethanol from corn, then GreenShift's current 15% licensed amount's to about 1.98 bgpy. Extract 3% from that yields 59,400,000 gpy Crude Corn Oil.
When the licensee sell's this at the GERS 10Q quoted market price for Crude Corn Oil of $2.80 they should have sales of $166,320,000 of which GreenShift takes a 20% royalty cut of $33,264,000!
So after the royalty Licensees take $133,056,000 per year
GERS 20% royalty is $33,264,000 per year
This is what's possible with GreenShift's current 15% or about 1.9 bgpy of ethanol licensed.
Factors include fluctuating market price of Crude Corn Oil and how much the licensees produce and sell. Most all of the licensees have passed initial startup phase and are now optimizing and ramping up production and sales. We should now look to signing additional licensees to obtain as much of the 60% forcasted and also turn the infringers into licensees.
IMO!
Well RFS2 states there should be 13.8 bgpy ethanol from corn by 2013.
Now 60% of that would be 8.28 bgpy. Extracting at an average of 3% yields 248,400,000 gallons of Crude Corn Oil. 15% of 248,400,0000 gallons is 37,260,000 gallons of Corn Oil.
Because of Patents legally the entire 60% is supposed to be licensed by GreenShift.
Other's like ICM, GEA Westfalia, etc... can profit by equipment and install sales. It's just the method and process is patented by GreenShift and must be licensed. The equipment used can vary.
The amount extracted and sold by each producer varies as they ramp up extraction and sales.
Has Valero backed out because ICM's AOS patent application is being rejected, it's at Non Final Rejection status with time ticking away for them to rewrite claims that pass. Which does not look promising for them. GERS patents have it covered I believe.
Shareholder letters, I noticed the last 2 came out late January, early February.
Looking forward to the long awaited communication from Mr. Kreisler.
I'm getting excited, I think it will have some good news.
I'd better throw a few more hundred bucks at some shares before it comes out.
lol!
If you were a Ethanol Producer would you license with GreenShift or go with an ICM, POET, Etc..?
Knowing that GreenShift has 5 Patents on the tech while the other's have none and are being litigated for patent infringement. Is it tempting to go with the other guy's to skip out on royalty fee's, but on the other hand receive lower performance, extraction yields and run the high risk of being litigated for patent infringement? Or to sign with GreenShift and pay a 20% royalty on all oil sales, but receive legal patented higher performance yields and avoid any kind of infringement litigation risks. Since the industry knows the value and benefits corn oil extraction can bring to their businesses and since they are rapidly mobilizing to procure and install the COES systems what would their likely choice be? The demand for COES is rising fast, but who's systems should a producer install and license? Not just because I'm a GERS investor, but logically I would go with the legal patented method and the best performing systems GreenShift. The other routes look plagued.
IMO!
Stand's for inventor John Prevost. Refers to a Patent Application 20040087808.
Input # here under public pair to view info on the Patent Application which ended in Final Rejection and Abandonment. Never became a Patent. I believe the defendants tried to claim GERS 858 Patent was identical and obvious to the Prevost application and should also be declared invalid as was Prevost's. Yet it is proven not so and the method and process of the 858 Patent is very different.
By comparing the method and process of both you will see why GreenShift is right and the defendant's are wrong. The method's differ and the 858 is successful because so.
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/status/index.jsp
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69870639
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69957579
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=69815040
some old post's for reference.
Thanks! I understand your point. The one time non recurring income from the transaction of the YA Corn Oil asset boosted earnings while the 2 bgpy ethanol licensed went thru the costly start up phase. Now that the licensees systems have passed beyond the startup phase profit margins will greatly improve as systems are optimized and production, sales ramp up. We should see more ups and downs as more licensees are signed and they incur the initial, but brief lower profit startup phase. Although after the startup the revenue stream from each licensee is long term and highly profitable. The YA corn oil transaction is factored into the income statement and is reflected in quarterly, yearly net income / profit, debt reduction and EPS. Now passing the initial costly startup phase the 2 bgpy licensed will increase in profitability and take over as the companies long term recurring income stream. And I'm very confident the company will continue to add to their list of licensees. Much more growth coming.
My opinions only.
Flashback to Slashnuts Flint Hills post and the mystery of the remaining 400 mgpy to have been licensed in 2011. Now what about the Markman transcript blog posted on Skunks site.
http://greenshift-gers.blogspot.com/2012/01/markman-transcript.html
Anonymous pointed out that 7 of the alleged infringing producers were not included in the transcripts list of defendants and their legal representatives. Why?
The seven producers add up to,
Skribe said...
408 mgpy
Amaizing Energy, LLC 55 mgy
Blue Flint Ethanol, LLC 50 mgy
Bushmills Ethanol, Inc. 50 mgy
Chippewa Valley Ethanol Co., LLLP 45 mgy
Heartland Corn Products, LLC 100 mgy
Lincolnway Energy, LLC 55 mgy
United Wisconsin Grain Producers, LLC 53 mgy
Hmm?
So could it be these settled? They fit the missing 400 mgpy and were not represented at the Markman?
Maybe not, but why are they not listed in the Markman Transcript, are they not part of the case?
Be sure to click back and reread the Slashnuts Flint Hills post.
2011 Earnings of $15,000,000 divided into 18 million shares yields a TTM EPS of .83 that if because of very positive market sentiment trades at 12x earnings, GERS market price would be $9.96!
A market cap of $179,280,000!
Actually the $15,000,000 earnings for the year ending 2011 is my guess. I'm hoping Qtr 4 yielded earnings of $3 million to do so. Up to Qtr 3 earnings were about $12 million. Much due to the YA corn oil transaction. Nevertheless a transaction of value. Its my guess GreenShift finished 2011 with a Profit/Net Gain of $15,000,000 and revenues of $25,000,000. I figured Qtr 4 with $8 million in revenue and $3 million in earnings. My opinionated guesswork and calculations only!
$180,000,000 earnings / 18,000,000 o/s = $10 eps
Only a settlement of that would do it. Or some kind of lifetime intrinsic valuation. Otherwise i would say about .75?
I think we'll have some good news in the shareholder letter and the 10k which should be out within a month. Combined the group in court, POET, Valero represent wayyy to much infringing going on, maybe up to 4 bgpy possible if they fully start up, infringing!. They have to be stopped and made to license. They have no patents, only rejected applications and are using methods that infringe on GERS patents.
Nice chart's Pickitup!
POET & Valero = 2.8 bgpy ethanol production, about 20% of the industry.
GreenShift is the only way! They must license or join ICM, etc... In patent infringement litigation.
If Ollie77 is right and the infringers have been licensed giving us 30% there will be no waiting for startups as the systems are already installed. GreenShift will just go in and optimize. If not its still inevitable as the court will make them license or shut down. Then GreenShift can get to licensing and setting up COES for the next 30% of the producers. Giving us 60% by 2013!
IMO!
Right no IMO! At the bottom of those SEC filings!
After initial install startup costs the profit margin should rise and decrease COGS.
The COES are unmanned, remote controlled, low maintenance, energy saving, high performance systems.
As shown in the TV video. So we should be looking for more earnings, yet because of the surging demand by producers to implement the systems GreenShift might be overwhelmed? with another 30% of the industry requesting licensed systems. A good thing of course. EPA calls for 60% by 2013, I think GreenShift is prepared, unlike the Cellulosic producers who were not able to reach the RFS2 production goals.
These systems are life savers in a corn ethanol business with tight margins and there is to much risk to run unlicensed infringing equipment.
IMO!
60% or about 8 bgpy to use GERS patented COES tech by 2013. A 3% extraction rate with a $2.80 corn oil market price will yield about $134,400,000 per year in royalties for GreenShift. The Licensees will keep the other $537,600,000, their 80%! ROI for Licensees is 6 months per GreenShift!
Huge profitability after ROI and the systems actually reduce the plants energy costs. After initial startup costs these systems are highly profitable for GreenShift and Licensees.
Huge growth coming! Look for news in the Shareholder letter and 10K coming soon.
http://www.greenshift.com/news.php?id=281
In my opinion.
Some positives I see are finishing 2011 with a net gain. The first since 98' ? , A breakthru!
Looking forward to Qtr 4 #'s, I think revenues will be over $8 million and growing into Qtr 1 as all licensees are online and ramping up their production and sales. Hopefully Qtr 4 yielded more earnings that will add to our TTM EPS. I predict 11' revenues will be above $25 million which factors in the YA corn oil transaction. I'm speculating that Qtr 4 will yield earnings of about $3 million which will give GERS about $15 million in Net Income/Earnings/Profit for 2011. Now if Ollie77 is right and the O/S is about 17.25 million, the TTM EPS should be about .87! Today the stock ended the trading day at .16. Trading nearly 5.5X below Earnings. I prefer to use the TTM EPS for valuation rather than Book Value because the company is growing in terms of business and revenues and has a great future outlook. I prefer not to value it on it's current book value because it is not at risk of bankruptcy or liquidation. Because of it's positive movement it's book value and shareholder equity will also become positive soon as the debt is eliminated and or refinanced. 2 bgpy licensed and online, royalties ramping up. We have growing revenues and earnings now. GERS has 5 Corn Oil Extraction Patents.
If the EPA forecasts 60% of the corn ethanol industry will be using COES by 2013 then that 60% will be licensed with GreenShift. If not they will be unlicensed and most likely become subject to patent infringement litigation. Time is money here and without COES installed oil remains unextracted and money, value is lost, wasted, fed to the animals. So as the EPA forecasts COES installation and use to double this year to 60% by 2013. They know the valuable oil is wasted if not extracted, thus the urgency and gusto to rapidly install and mobilize. Demand!
My opinions only!
Hopefully GERS has gained more long term investors by way of that TV spot that had potential to reach a hundred million viewers. Looks like pps has dropped a few cents, must have been sell on the news for the flippers. Traders must have made out good on that run. But I'm hoping that gaining new long term shareholders will keep the support level up higher. Until we get the next PR.
But if indeed the 4th qtr reveals more earnings from a nearly guaranteed rise in revenues, the low dilution, low O/S will yield a higher EPS. Because Price and Earnings effect and respond to each other a growing EPS with a forecast for more should no doubt stimulate the market price.
I've noticed profitable companies with good future outlooks trade in the positive multiples of their earnings. GreenShift just needs to keep growing the earnings.
Because of the great demand for COES and all that the company is involved with it's interesting to see how a relatively small group can get it all done. If 30% is using COES tech now and the EPA forecasts it to double by 2013, there will be lot's of work to do. They got their work cut out for them. I'm just part of that other part owner, the one with the thousands of faces, who as an individual has made a relatively small contribution, investment, but united as a whole are quite a force. I guess you could say I believed and put my money on this race horse. I factored in the jockey too. It will be ironic when settlement time comes as the systems will already be installed. GERS can then optimize. Too bad though because Alfa Laval equipment from GreenShift is higher performing than what they got from ICM, Flottweg, Westfalia.
Historically I do believe 2011 will be the first year since 98 ? that the company finished with a yearly net gain. That's quite a breakthru! That's profits applied to EPS, current stock price is still far below the TTM EPS. As for the P/E Ratio the stock is still trading at negative multiples to the earnings. The future outlook for the company looks good in my opinion. I don't see them in any danger of bankruptcy, only growth in revenues and earnings.
Looks like Big River Resources is only getting about 2% extraction from their systems which is low performing. I see they produced 245 million gallons ethanol from their 3 plants which have a combined capacity of 240 mgpy. They must have COES at their two larger plants, because the smaller is not named in the infringement list. Licensing with GreenShift would legalize, optimize and increase the extraction performance of their systems.
The following is a current list of the defendants in GreenShift's pending infringement action:
David Vander Griend, personally
ICM, Inc.
GEA Mechanical Equipment US, Inc. (f/k/a GEA Westfalia Separator, Inc.)
Flottweg Separation Technology, Inc.
ACE Ethanol, LLC
Adkins Energy, LLC
Al-Corn Clean Fuel, LLC
Amaizing Energy, LLC
Big River Resources Galva, LLC
Big River Resources West Burlington, LLC
Blue Flint Ethanol, LLC
Bushmills Ethanol, Inc.
Cardinal Ethanol, LLC
Chippewa Valley Ethanol Co., LLLP
Heartland Corn Products, LLC
Iroquois BioEnergy Company, LLC
Lincolnland Agri-Energy, LLC
Lincolnway Energy, LLC
United Wisconsin Grain Producers, LLC
* The Multi Media 21st Century PR stated the 30% of the industry using COES tech is using GreenShift's patented tech. The list above is allegedly using it without a license.