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.
Lots of information there with virtually no relevance to today's PTOI. By the way, JB is no longer affiliated the company and the float has remained reasonably stable for years.
Actually, a number of skeptics routinely reiterate that PTOI is a "share selling scam". That's the ridiculous assertion that many take issue with. The point that pyrolysis has not proven to be economically viable is certainly valid, at least at this point. I consider that to be a reasonable discussion although this economic viability is now being redefined (by PTOI) with the focus placed on large scale plastics disposal, and not fuel production. "Share selling scams" by definition have lots of shares to sell. PTOI's OS count remains app. 120 Million. By comparison, USSE/SSTP jettisoned 1.8 BILLION shares into the float over a much shorter period of time. That shouldn't be overlooked.
Which other "Pinky Land" pyrolysis enterprise proposed a similar business model to PTOI (monetizing processors and focused on large scale plastics disposal)? Nice generalized statement but I need factual verification to ascribe any real significance to your point. Name the company to help promote more relevant discussion.
FWIW, I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the "share selling conspiracy" underlying PTOI. The company has been around for 7+ years and maintains a float of under 120,000,000 shares. It's rare enough for an OTC company to survive for this long, let alone with such a relatively stable share count. If this is a "share selling conspiracy", it is probably the worst one in history. More likely, the current SP reflects a combination of previously poor management and a non viable business model focused on fuel production revenue. Obviously things have now changed regarding both management and the company's focus on monetizing the processors. You should review the CEO's recent letters which outline the new business model in some detail. As far as I know, there is no evidence for new share structure or authorizations in the near term. In my experience, most actual "share selling conspiracies" are defunct within a year, have no real product/IP, and generally involve hundreds of millions if not billions of shares. Awesome Penny Stock's recommended companies serve as good examples. In any event and IMO, this company is actually moving in the right direction and the SP will begin to reflect it surprisingly quickly. Although challenges remain and there are of course no guarantees, I see PTOI as a legitimate investment opportunity, one of the few on the OTC.
Well stated and factual. Nice post.
Nice post, Rakestar. Thanks.
Good question and again I can only speculate on an answer. For the most part, I feel the company limited processor throughput because of costs. Each gallon of fuel simply cost more than anticipated to produce. There's no incentive to maximize production in this setting as it simply adds to costs/debt. I'm fairly certain the processors can ramp up significantly to what we've seen so far. Remember, the P2O process is permitted by the NYSDEC for up to 4,000 lbs/hr, where 8.3 pounds of plastic can yield a gallon of fuel (referenced from the website). We've never really seen that level of throughput other than during the NYSDEC evaluation. I suspect that was mostly because they couldn't afford to.
I think there lies the problem. I can't support my speculation based on the filings. The SEC filings report on the company's revenues and earnings, as it sits in Niagra. The business model in this setting is clearly not viable, as we've seen. The processor input (plastic) is prohibitively costly and thus satisfactory fuel production margins are unachievable, particularly now. The sense that I get, given recent developments and the shareholder letters, is that the Niagra business model is no longer in play. I envision that the company now looks to place processors in locales where large scale plastic disposal is the focus. Viability would then be redefined by defrayed tipping fees, transportation costs, and landfill utilization. The output fuel, in this setting, is essentially a bonus.
I believe that the processor can yield between 85-95% #2 fuel as per the IsleChem report. Your reference to "loads of substandard naptha" is misleading.
buenokite,
FWIW, I enjoy your posts and you bring up good points. With regards to the processor, the initial business model was unrealistically focused on fuel production margins. Those margins, of course, have further deteriorated with the collapse of crude oil. My sense is that the current focus may be on large scale, environmentally conscious plastics disposal. Fuel production margins are less relevant in that setting. I admit it's speculation on my part as the company has not clearly declared this. As for JB as a director, lets be realistic. He designed the processors and was essentially one of two people left standing in Niagra. He remained a company director in practice if not in title. I think things have now changed for good.
Because IMO, it's Heddle's company now. JB should be credited with development of a processor which is distinguished by its refined output. JB, however, was unable to establish a viable business model and has since lost credibilty as a company director. Heddle brings a more committed and pragmatic approach to corporate viability together with personal funding and relevant connections. JB needed to yield for the company to move forward. It may, in fact, have been a power play. In any event, I welcome the move. I also expect that if processor sales are confirmed come May, we may soon thereafter see RH step down in favor of a more seasoned CEO and a functional BOD. Don't forget, both RH and JB remain heavily invested in PTOI by virtue of their stock holdings. There is plenty of incentive for both of them to aspire to effectively advance the company.
Good post. I concur with many of your points, particularly with regards to RH and his methodical approach to monetizing the processors. Although uncertainties remain, there is a significant chance for success IMO. I haven't been able to say that with a straight face for a while.
Thanks Koolmoto. I think these contests will be more exciting/eventful going forward.
FWIW, I wasn't being negative with that estimate. I was being realistic. Conversely, if I were to offer a guess about the SP on May 1st, I would submit a much higher SP of least $0.30-0.40, based solely upon speculation. I view the EcoNavigation deal as "make or break" for RH and PTOI. The company, in essence, is "all in". The business plan appears focused and viable to me. The Shareholder letters are well worded and reasonably detailed. I would guess there to be at least a 25% chance of success given the 8K's and the CEO's commitment. Again, that's not to say the company will ultimately survive considering the immense challenges ahead. But there will be SP appreciation moving forward. I'm betting on it. With even a hint of an actual sale, the payoff will be immense.
I don't agree with you. To me, it seems a viable business plan is evolving, albeit slowly. The Shareholder Letters outline a reasonable approach to monetization of the processors and are well worded. I see no plausible reason to release these letters if the company was preparing for BK. I don't buy the conspiracy theories re: Heddle who seems legitimate to me. That's not to say the company will survive. Immense challenges/obstacles remain to be sure. I, for one, believe the deal with EcoNavigation may bear fruit; perhaps a 20-25% chance for success. My approach to PTOI will remain appropriately conservative (25,000 shares @ $0.065). With even a hint of a sale by May, the payoff should be immense. With failure of the pilot run, I lose probably 50% ($600) and I'm out. I look at PTOI as a legitimate, although highly speculative, investment opportunity. It's not a scam.
Thanks for the update, Bizops. I would strongly suggest that any investment in CTDT be contingent upon the dismissal of the current BOD and in particular, Chas Radovich. The company and our investment are clearly at risk the longer they stay. The current BOD's interests, IMO, are far removed from advancing CTDT and making diamonds.
0.08
Hey Bizops,
Good to see you're still around. Can't believe Snapper opted for Radovich's group over yours. Snapper is a brilliant scientist but obviously has no business acumen. He is also a poor judge of character, without question. As far as the science goes, I still remain hopeful for CTDT. I just hope it's not too late for Centaurus to extricate themselves from Radovich and BAST Holdings.
If I'm not mistaken, the chairman may be able to dismiss the board. I have discussed this scenario with AS who seemed unwilling to consider the option. Snaper is a brilliant scientist/inventor but is clueless with regards to directing a public company.
The whole situation with CTDT is unfortunate. Snapper clearly chose poorly when he invited Radovich into the company. SEC filing non-compliance is very troubling and truly unnecessary. LT could have easily completed the filings with any cooperation from Radovich's team. Radovich seems disinterested with filing compliance despite previous violations with the SEC. There is only one way to explain this from my perspective. BAST (Radovich) has no interest in CTDT or its shares beyond the short term. Filing compliance is not a factor. CTDT was targeted because the trading shell is both clean and compliant, at least for now. Better yet, there are 450,000,000 authorized shares of which only 73,000,000 are currently issued. They almost certainly will attempt to float remaining AS, then pump BAST technologies through CTDT PR's. It's a P & D scheme, no other explanation. Realistically, this will not play out well for Centaurus in the end. They will be suspended and eventually "Greyed Out". As current shareholders and at this low SP, we may see a transient SP spike which is why I'm still in. My advice is to pay close attention and be ready to bail quickly.
I did voice my concerns with AS about Radovich. I tried to stay a little less blunt about his predicament though.
Hard to know how this will play out. If Snaper can maintain company control and if Radovich actually provides the pledged funding (big "if"), the company could truly take off. The ironic side to this is that a Radovich's P & D scheme might also boost the SP, albeit temporarily. That's why I have yet to unload my shares. My advice is to keep a close eye on things including IHUB and the blog. Once the share price starts to move, quickly retrieve your initial investment. It's much easier to deal with the uncertainty with less at stake.
The reason Radovich doesn't file or readily discuss things with LT is that he has no interest in making diamonds nor corporate development. IMO, he is setting up a P & D scam and will certainly disappear. None of the BAST companies on the website look even remotely legitimate to me. Radovich hopes to be long gone before the SEC will act. His history with Cobalis says it all.
You're right. He has said that to me also.
I myself have contacted Al Snaper on numerous occasions. He is always friendly and approachable although he discloses very little and seems a little clueless at times. I have voiced my dissatisfaction with his selection of Radovich as CEO and the company's lack of SEC compliance. I think any serious shareholder should do the same.
Unfortunately, I also think things are a mess. Here's my take for what it's worth. Al Snaper gets no free pass here. I feel Snaper was seduced by a promise of cash infusion by Chas Radovich. He turned over control to Radovich who actually has little or no cash and absolutely no experience with diamond manufacturing. Radovich also has no apparent interest in filing compliance. I think we've all seen this before on the OTC. This looks like an evolving P & D scheme to me. Nothing else makes sense. Given Radovich's history, I am concerned. CTDT was an obvious target because the ticker shell is/was "clean". The company may not have produced but at least they did file. Snaper also is easily manipulated and clearly does not do adequate DD as evidenced by this association. It's really too bad because Centaurus actually can make diamonds with good margins. The process has been proven already. They simply need a "start-up" cash infusion and a few people who can actually execute production. Radovich will destroy this company to make himself a quick buck. He's not looking to make diamonds.
I actually do not see LT leaving CTDT given he is Snaper's " right hand man". There clearly is, however, considerable friction between our new CEO and LT. That was also the case with Snaper's previous director, Wayne Prentice. Turns out Prentice mismanaged funds, inappropriately delayed production, and was mired in a questionable conflict of interest with GIA. The fact that LT has had problems with directors like Prentice and Radovich is actually a strength, IMO. From a business and integrity standpoint, I would like to see LT become more involved in the CTDT's daily operation. Maybe then something might actually get done!
The new CEO (Chas Radovich) has shown some ability to fund raise but has had little success otherwise. His previous 2 companies (Gold Hill Resources, Cobalis) both failed miserably. Cobalis Corp's securities (share) registration was revoked by the SEC due to the company's repeated failure to file material events and quarterly reports. This guy's track record is not good. Where is the mandatory 8K when he came aboard as CEO? It's 3 months late. Legitimate company directors don't simply forget such things. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see much good coming out of this relationship.
We can say what we want about LT but in truth, he may be the only one able to effectively execute at CTDT. He alone is responsible for the 10K and 10Q filings, apparently. Mr. Snaper seems disinterested in the business aspects of the company. He admits this himself. Prentis was subversive IMO. LT is at least able to present a production plan going forward and he has clear working knowledge of the Magnatek process. I say give him a company position with minimal salary and performance based incentives. Can't lose in that scenario. He can always be dismissed if things don't work out. He certainly can do no worse than Prentis.
Not sure how this will play out in the end but at the least it's good theater!
http://bastholdings.com/
I spoke with both AS and LT last week. They Both confirm that BAST Technologies/Holdings is actively organizing funding for CTDT. BAST has an active web site confirming an association with CTDT. I'm still not clear on the precise nature of this. Chaslov Radovich is the new president of CTDT which I have confirmed through the NV Sec of State website. He has a prior history for organizing start-up funding which on the surface is encouraging. Less encouraging is the lack of an 8K corresponding to CR's board appointment. LT and CR apparently are aware of this and expect to file this week. We should all follow this closely. IMO, this required filing will establish the new funding group's legitimacy and intentions.
No "chill" restrictions that I can see. Added shares both thurs. and fri. without issues (Etrade). No regulatory concerns at least for now. 10K and 10Q signed and filed. A funding group for CTDT has recently surfaced and those 200k shares will hopefully start seeing some action. Cautiously optimistic.
I've added too. Volume seems to be increasing. Still not sure what to expect from the new investment group but if CTDT gets to "production," we'll be OK.
There's clearly some new activity at the company. We've been sitting at 1-2 cents for nearly a year. Funding was the issue other than for Prentis. I do feel that funding may soon happen at which point the company begins to make diamonds. LT's blog previously moved the SP to $0.13. Actually manufacturing diamonds should do much better. Remember, float remains exceptionally small.
LT's blog is heating up! Meetings in Vegas give some hope. Investor group needs to step up and initiate funding. Hope that's what their talking about. I guess we'll see which Chas Radovich is ours (either the successful funding guru or the repeat SEC violator). Hopefully it's the former.
Terrific update Bizops. Thanks.
Don't think so. He's still the company chairman according to both the CTDT and BAST Technologies websites. More likely it's an error in judgement while seeking funding. I doubt this will end well.
Not really. Chas Radovich apparently has history. He's associated with at least 2 corporate bankruptcies ( Gold Hill Resources and Cobalis Corp). Looks like they were P & D's. He's also (at least) an indicted SEC violator who repeatedly failed to file and disclose material events. Not a high integrity guy from what I see. I'm not thrilled to see him involved with CTDT.
LT's Blog.
Unsettling recent Blog posts concerning undisclosed material events. Hope to make some sense of this. Doesn't look great.