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.
The movement of shares in this stock and reflected stock price is absolutely meaningless. It's not a barometer of its value but rather based on conjecture. When the market reads company information or lack of information correctly it pulls back and then sells at a opportune time rather than holding on for profit turnover.
This stock is being played, it's not being held in the belief that the technology is here to stay.
FML2013 I hope you're right! And above all let's HOPE the new CEO, his BOD and anyone else associated with the new team have got integrity, intelligence and a moral compass not to deceive us any longer.
This has been said for the past 5 years! 'A 'lease' or 'contract' is about to be signed by the end of the year' Surely it doesn't take 5 years to reach a deal? Remember all the past 'near deals' we have been told? Remember the translation that we were waiting from the Middle East before a contract could be signed? What happened to that? I am not going to list the numerous 'contracts' around the corner that we have been told for the past 5 years.
Perhaps the company projections would be more believable if the same stories were being circulated continuously year in year out. The repetitious information without any back up proof are more damaging than if they came up with a clear statement, without any ambiguity, the real nature of the company's state of play.
There have been too many yearns spun with many colours to take this stock seriously. As much as I would like to!!!!
There was often little trading when Bigger was CEO. And often those small trades of 100 shares would be bought at the last minute to keep the stock price stable. This was often the case and a lot of shareholders commented often about the practice.
I am of the opinion, although I hope for the opposite, as I am still a shareholder, that this will never, ever take off. The oil industry is going through a re-think, no matter how one wants to package it, the reality is that the oil industry will NEVER invest in a new / by now old technology, when its very existence is being threatened by environmentalists. And QUITE RIGHTLY SO, the fossil fuel industry is on its way out, like it or leave it, that is the fundamental truth to this sector. There is too much money being poured into the green, sustainable & regenerative alternatives. This was the reason why most of us originally bought this stock 10 / 15 years ago. We were going to save the world air and now the AOT's very existence is fueling the industry we were against! A Paradox indeed !!
The only people buying this stock are traders, small or large who are looking to make a few cents increase on their investment. That's just small time traders, no one serious and informed enough will buy into this stock. SORRY folks!
Interesting post! Can you please refresh my memory if gone rouge, which are the 2 large oil companies to which you're referring? TransCanada pulled out after 1 week without success or completion and Kinder Morgan abandoned it after a few days. Unless I am mistaken and believe me, it could be true but doubt it, as I have been a long time shareholder of this absurd stock, please inform me.
It seems to me that shareholders of this stock and who follow this feed, tend to get swept up with absurd information that has not basis of truth whatsoever.
Of course you're right in your assessment. This has been an obvious route to insider enrichment but investors can only believe what they want to believe, no amount of highlighting the indisputable facts can convince anyone who's not ready to see the other side of the coin. I gave up on this investment a long time ago however I still hold some shares which will be sold off when I can make them tradeable. That requires a bit of effort and until that is complete, I will periodically visit this site as a point of entertainment.
It appears that this assessment is correct! QSEP has lost the opportunity to introduce a new technology, whether the device works or not is now irrelevant. The oil industry is having to reconfigure itself and morph into something applicable in today's world,renewable energy is hot on the oil industry's heels, there is no way that oil companies will invest in installing a new technology that has taken 7 years to be adopted with no success. The past CEO knew this, that is why he was happy to be paid an absurd salary and never once used his own funds to invest in the company.That should have been a warning bell. The same applies to the current CFO.
I still have shares in this company but have given up on the investment and written off the loss.
Each to their own assessment of QSEP.
If QSEnergy is a public company owned and answerable to its shareholders, I would like to know why shareholder concerns of the past 10 years listed below have never been dealt with.
1) Bigger's severance package & all its perks were never put to the
shareholder's vote.
2) Equally, past CEO's severance packages were never brought to our
attention prior agreement.
3) QSEnergy has never been transparent with its shareholders,
questions go answered year in year out.
4) Public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to its
shareholders which in QS's 15 year history doesn't illustrate.
5) Above all, a public company must ADHERE to its legal
responsibilities and issue information which can be backed up by
historical evidence and financial transparency.
It appears that QSEnergy is willing to allow misinformation,
misleading projections and supposed facts to be publically
shared without proof of substantial evidence.
Rufus101, this is my interpretation of QS / JBL matters and answers to your questions.
1) Jason Lane is CEO to both companies as documents show.
2) The move was convenient for many reasons. Bigger had reduced QS's offices to a tiny space to theoretically save money although, unfortunately, that notion didn't spill over to his over generous and unjustifiable salary.
Jason Lane agreed to take over as QS's CEO. He was a known entity to Bigger and was agreeable to Bigger's ridiculous pay-off.
Jason Lane / JBL had the premises and made sense to move the company to Houston otherwise QSEnergy would have been without staff to run the company.
Jason Lane is running a company from his premises with hopefully no rental costs to QSEnergy.
3) It would make more sense if JBL bought QSEnergy rather than the other around.
Whatever happens QSEnergy has been, so far, functioning for 15 years as an R&D company with absolutely nothing to show for it. Previous CEO's have made extremely good money from running this show to the cost of the shareholders. Take it as it is, do your own DD, don't believe anything other than what your findings tell you!
Thank you for points made. Pointless sending email to QSEnergy, most of their submissions have all turned out misleading, I trust information coming out of the company with a barge poll.
Clearly, they have decided that selling the AOT is no longer viable as no company has come up with a sales proposal, no matter how many times QSEnergy tell us the opposite.
So their last alternative is to sell the service derived from the AOT's rather than the device.
That sounds like a good alternative but they will incur huge costs for shipping, servicing & maintaining the AOT's, this will impact on their profits.
Yes, since Jason has taken over more insiders are buying stock however, this too has happened in the past as well, and look where we are now.
Ultimately, even if insiders buy on the open market at $0.15 / $0.20, they still stand to make a good return in between 50% to 70% if the shares go up to $0.30. That share price can go up without any change within the company, just on heresay which seems to be the only way this company's stock moves. That is what has been happening in the past 10 years.
One can say let's wait another year and the goal posts will shift again and shareholders hopes will continue to be fueled by air.
Zerosum, precisely! The amount of $581,000 hasn't been written off, it has simply been deferrred until such time as QSEP have sales of at
least $835,000.
One can't assume that this means 'written off' unless of course one predicts that QSEP may never have sales of $835,000, in which case the debt can't be re-paid.
-------------------------------------------
'The deferred amount won't be due until $QSEP has sales of $835,000. And, because this sets an important precedent, I think all the licensing fees due to Temple going forward will be based on sales, as these fees are.'
As stated below, the correct definition of 'deferred payment'.
Definition
Related Terms
A loan arrangement in which the borrower is allowed to start making payments at some specified time in the future. Deferred payment arrangements are often used in retail settings where a person buys and receives an item with a commitment to begin making payments at a future date.
Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/deferred-payment.html
Therefore Temple has NOT 'WRITTEN OFF' $ 581,000 debt owed by QSEnergy.
The July '17 amendment of the Agreement between Temple & QSEnergy does not state that the debt is 'written off'. It clearly states that it has been 'DEFERRED'.
There is no mention in the 10q that states $581,000 of the Temple debt has been 'written off'. Rather more accurately it states that the amount of $581,000'is deemed past due' which clearly doesn't mean 'written off'.
The other small amount of $222,000 which is "payable has been deferred until the licensing agreements are terminated"
It's important to be transparent with information stated.
Quote:
As of June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, total unpaid fees due to Temple pursuant to these agreements amounted to $840,000 and $727,000, respectively, which are included as part of Accounts Payable – licensing agreement in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. As of June 30, 2017, $222,000 of the $840,000 payable has been deferred until the licensing agreements are terminated and $581,000 is deemed past due.
Management were always shareholders, the only difference is that in the past they were awarded shares for just being on the board and now some are actually buying shares with their own cash. Share ownership, in the past, has always come cheap within management.
Vote NO to the additional share increase. The use of private share selling by the company has gone long enough. The share pool is not a piggy bank that can be dipped in whenever directors need funding for their salaries. If indeed QSEP is out of R&D and ready for sales & distribution, they can go to their bank and raise capital through their order potential. This is the way most companies raise capital. Stock dilution to the detriment of long suffering shareholders MUST STOP.
Zerosum, I find your response to KC interesting. You say that before Jason Lane came on board you considered QSEP dead and yet, at the time, you were consistently praising the old management, its methods and the potential of the AOT devise.
Which is it? Don't quite understand where you're coming from? Would be good to establish an honest dialogue.......
JJ2016, that part is confusing to me as well.
I have been an investor for 14 years now and each year there are new additions, new plans, new ways forward but all roads lead to nowhere!
News from the company pumps up all expectations and in the end, nothing changes apart from CEO's after a few years who walk away with huge pay offs.
I have given up being excited about nothing. The only thing that will bring revenue & thus profits with increasing share price will be contracts. No amount of conjecture or debating will change that.
It's futile to believe anything from the company until results come in.
IMHO I doubt if anything will ever come of QSEP or the AOT.
The whole thing will continue to limp on with everyone waiting for success around the corner, for all the promises to come to fruition and then another repeat scenario.
Nobody really knows anything, its all conjecture!
So I presume, by what is being said, that the $500k debt to Temple is still on QSEP'S books. I presume that it's just a verbal understanding rather than a debt accountancy restructure on both companies books.
That means that the debt is still due & payable but Temple has deferred the time line in order to give QSEP more time in which to pay.
That appears to be a completely different version of what has been previously stated.
A company just can't 'write off' a debt, that ISN'T how company accounts are done and anyone who says otherwise is either misinformed or again a 'wishful thinker'.
QSEnergy reported in its SHM that QSEP's motto of 'business as usual' is back on form. In spite of all expectations, nothing new was reported.
Just packaged in an alternative coating.
YAWN!
Incorrect. I am talking about something that happened a few months ago and not 15 years.
The CEO was paid a severance payment that didn't reflect the financial position of the company. That can't be disputed! And it was sanctioned by the old BOD. As I said let's hope that the new CEO and the new BOD have integrity and honesty about how to run a public company.
It's pretty extraordinary to know that QSEnergy's old BOD decided to pay a ridiculous severance pay to a useless and under qualified CEO rather than settle fees with Temple. Without Temple they don't have a technology, beggars belief that the decision was made to make payments that compromised the company and its shareholders rather than run a straight ship.
Let's hope that the new CEO has integrity to change the way of the old if this company is to survive.
Its important to stay calm and not jump to conclusions about what may or may not be revealed at the SHM July 14th.
QSEnergy as a company is still speculative. Until the new CEO comes clean with the state of the AOT and the supposed pipeline companies interested in its technology, we won't be any the more wiser! Transparency and honesty rather than pumping its potential with misinformation is what will give credibility to this company. So far this is what's lacking! CREDIBILITY! No amount of countless messages can deliver believable information and give weight & value to the stock.
Hoorah! for a decent, intelligent and well informed dialogue.
Most of all for its neutrality.
Some of your points about the merits of oil versus renewable energy are convincing especially for the aviation industry. Yes, you're right, world travel is increasing and we need oil to service it.
That was the point, above all else, that brought home the positive prospect of QSEP.
Thank you, it has restored my faith somewhat. It has shown the possibility that perhaps we may be lucky to see this company succeed.
The aviation industry, just by itself, is enough to warrant the continuity of the oil industry for the near future. Until we find another way to service it, the oil industry is here to stay!
With due respect, 'Mr B took QSEP as far as he could' by reducing the share value by 95%, paying himself over 1 mil in salaries, by a company yet to earn a nickel, & to the point of being unable to face the disgruntled shareholders. He had no option but to go!
Mr L will be judged accordingly as time goes by.
I very much hope that he can turn the company around. Presently there is nothing other than hope to cling onto.
"Here on Mad Money, we don't care where a stock has been, we only care where it's going.
Yes, I agree with the above statement. However, in QSEP's case there is no stock value derived from a product. The stock & its value is derived through the selling of options, common stock. This enables the company to sustain itself, the company board directors & its CEO's. Salaries, running costs and the continuous upgrading of a device not yet sold, is all due to this continuous money creation.
One could argue that we're closer now than ever before in getting the device to market. That perhaps may be true, but this is hard to believe given the company's PR representatives & various all and sundry publishing the same drivel for the past 14 years.
Hard to believe when the same misinformation has been passed around without any substantial event to confirm the opposite.
Just trying to understand if this total belief is for the sake of the IH board posters whilst in private, we all have the same reservations.
Just wondering??
On the contrary, the past and its foundation stones dictate how well a company will do in the future. Without sound & solid groundwork, a company has no hope of forging forward regardless of what it has to sell.
Thank you Alkaline, it sounds like you're basing your assumptions and your positive outlook on the new additions to the BOD rather than looking at the technology and the industry to which it relates.
As you say there is nothing to say other than 'wait & see'
I guess after 14 years of this 'wait & see' philosophy one can't do anything else.
My comments of 'no belief & no trust' in the company is based on the historical behavour of the past CEO's, the BOD that enabled their behavour and their peripheral staff members who propelled a culture of misinformation to fuel an illusion of success around the corner.
I am a long time investor who has lost faith in the company for a multiple of reasons; one being the continuous same story year after year that a ROI is just around the corner.Surely this story can't be serious! 10 years later and here we all are!!
I would like an intelligent dialogue so please no abusive posts.
Can anyone comment on how you see this technology being implemented by an industry that is fast being forced to change and adopt a more environmentally friendly approach? Wind, wave,& solar energy is being heavily invested globally, perhaps not in USA due to Trump but his term will soon come to an end.
In order for the AOT to be installed on pipelines, a huge investment will be needed, not only to buy the devices but also to install and service annually. For the same investment, oil companies are now looking into longer term solutions and greener energies are being sought after.
The oil industry has only about a 10/12 year window so any
forward thinking oil company CEO would be looking at new ways to grow their companies & not retro fit old pipelines with a technology that has been bantered around but not adopted for the last 10 years.
Surely you all must have considered this possibility? The AOT could have been considered as an environmentally friendly device 10 years ago but things have moved on since, the world and the energy industry is changing rapidly but most views appear to have remained the same. Just curious???
'Soon' is a relevant term! It could denote late 2017 or early 2018 depending on your time perspective.
Share fluctuations are meaningless as we have seen recently. The only way the share price will have a significant & stable increase will be when a contract comes in. So far it looks unlikely until end of 2017.
We still don't have info on verifiable testing results, we still don't have any info on what happened with KM, there is a lot of tenuous information that has not been proven. The share price increase of the last 2 weeks was just a reflex of new BOD coming on board, then it reduced when the Proxy was released. It showed that nothing as yet has changed, the new BOD & new CEO are showing self interest with little regard for the shareholders.
Again this is IMHO. Each to their own belief or hope. Better to stay focused on the obvious.
Zerosum, where did you get the share price being @$0.30 as per your post. Presently it is showing as $0.13
Agree Zerosum. Enough is enough! We're not a bank!!
No to Proposal 3 whatever way it is presented
There is no reason whatsoever to increased the authorised shares to 5oomil, that is absurd!!
They have available to 300mil. That's enough for them to pay themselves and get the company into production.
I think it's clearly time to let go of the continuous, old garbage of 'Suppositions', 'Case Studies' and 'Projections' using hear-say misinformation. I am sure the new CEO & his team will want to build a strong, credible foundation for the company. This will be based on new approaches rather than unreliable copy & paste PR's based on nothing.
This is market manipulation. If the 'million share buyer' was legitimate he would have bought small increments of shares thus maintaining a share price favourable to him. Absurd to think that he has now increased his bid to $0.12 when his initial price was $0.08. That's an increase of 50%, no savvy investor would be performing in this way.
Please send me the KM link to the test results as per your post. I am not interested in QSEP's PR disclosures or indeed the misinterpretation of the SEC filings by shareholders or QSEP's IR department.
It's one thing for the company to say, through the 10K filing that 'Based on final analysis of in-field test results, SCADA operating data and subsequent analysis of crude oil samples at TEMPLE UNIVERSITY, Kinder Morgan & QS Energy are CONSIDERING moving the AOT test facility to a different, higher-volume pipeline location 'and another to interpret the wording as KM have published test results!
I think if one is to engage in a transparent, ethical dialogue one has to come from that position.
Zerosum, can you please share the details upon which you based your conclusion that KM verified the test results. As far as I know, no such results or mention of the test have ever been published by KM.
This is news that should have been shared publicly if this was the case.
Of course shares bought through a private offering can be sold. There is a time limit after which the restriction is removed and sold on the open market through a broker. It's absurd to even think that investors would buy shares that they can't sell on.
The notion is laughable.
Perhaps that's the point of the bid. Place it, knowing that it would never be filled and by doing so, they influence the market and get a understanding of the liquidity.
It's market game playing!
Sales IMHO are still a long way off. The company has yet to perform an indisputable successful test and have it verified by a third party independent body.
Company propaganda for the past 3 years that
'