Having followed the conversation in this room for several months, I thought I would contribute some thoughts on what I suspect is a business problem.
The problem I sense is that the company is caught in a chicken and egg situation, not unlike many small undercapitalized companies I have consulted for in the past. Before I go any further, I am a believer in the technology, have done considerable DD, and see little purpose in the pom-pom type of chatter in here as well as all the MM chatter. Who cares what the MM is doing if the product is real (which as noted above I believe it is) and - importantly - properly funded. On to the issue and how we, in here, might help.
I suspect the chicken and egg problem is as follows and granted what follows is over simplified. Potential customer A loves the product, has tested it him/herself and is satisfied that ECSL's representations are accurate and wants to place a large order. To produce product to satisfy a large order takes money. Money for Methanol, gasoline, and additive production as well as blending of these. Maybe ECSL can obtain terms from a methanol supplier (which in effect is a form of financing) as well as a down payment from Customer A (also a form of financing), but my guess is these two are not sufficient to finance the large order. Typically the difference required is funded out of company's (ECSL) working capital and it appears that ECSL does not have sufficient working capital nor sufficient cash flow from operations to bridge the gap. I also suspect that by making some assumptions on profit margins, that first large contract will generate sufficient cash flow to make the second order far easier to fulfill.
The issue is less complicated for the diesel (trucking product). Here, it is just working capital to produce the additive in sufficient quantities to supply a large order. A small trucking company in Georgia is one thing. A national outfit like Roadway is quite another.
So how does ECSL fix its working capital problem assuming my assumptions are correct? Any constructive ideas on that subject should be sent to Mr. Mills directly and /or posted here. But, he can read all the ideas and still pursue his current strategy of trying to get customers and suppliers to finance the sales-an assumption on this end. Best as I can tell, that strategy hasn't worked so far but that doesn't mean it won't succeed. However, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is questionable. I choose to simply call it management risk.
Bottom line is that rather than a large contract announcement, maybe we should be hoping for the announcement of a bank line of credit dedicated to order fulfillment that could facilitate the announcement of the long hoped for large contract for the fuel.
