1,000% more up time yet still using old assumptions on feedstock issues?
Seriously?
Why not release the number of gallons produced by processor #3? Gallons produced is a combination of uptime and throughput and if you trade one for the other you have really gained nothing. The reality is if you tend to believe the SEC filings of the company processor #2 should have easily produced 60,000 gallons of the 82,000 gallons claimed to be produced from July 1 to August 12.
At no point has the company claimed processor #3 can accept a wider range of feedstocks than processor #2, are you making that claim on their behalf?