Replies to post #219848 on Plastic2Oil Inc (PTOI)

[the big guy]

What you have done is some internet research that backs your point-of-view. I could do lots and annhilate your point-of-view. What we are talking about here is investing money in a plant, not an accounting view, which is what you are suggesting. Having been involved in this analysis, I can categorically state that these accounting numbers have nothing to do with ROI and anybody in the Engineering/ Construction industry would agree with me. SAIC does things the same way as any other Engineering firm because they all compete with each other. Having worked for them, I know what they do.

Because this is a plant investment and we are not looking at a business financial statements and trying to do ratio analysis or something, EBITDA is not a useful ROI-type measure.

All you have to do is look at the numbers. SG&A and R&D are 3M for the quarter, approximately. Revenues are 319k. SG&A and R&D dwarf revenue. those costs have nothing to do with the decision as to invest money in an operating plant. They are neither Direct nor Indirect Cost. They don't matte and will be there whether the plant gets built or not.

No professional engineering or construction firm would use this number as a measure of profitability of a proposed investment.

Yes and you are correct, EBITDA does not include the I, T or A, But, it does include R&D. You are wrong there. R&D is completely unrelated.

So we are not talking about the financial community. We are talking about the engineering consulting community, which I know. They use ROI or IRR., not EBITDA.

[Arthur Edward Whoof]

The problem is that the SAIC report fails to provide the entire picture.

To begin, it is based on outdated equipment, operations and methodology. Changes to these things have not been proven, evaluated, assessed or tested by SAIC. Therefore the SAIC report is obsolete AND as JBI has irrefutably indicated, the SAIC report can not be relied upon back then. It is no longer a valid assessment of current state and therefore can not be relied upon now either.

Second and most conclusive, the SAIC report was extrapolated under the premise that plastic was FREE. JBI has irrefutably stated in the most recent 10K that they will pay for plastic. The cost for feedstock has not been provided in a clear enough fashion necessary to draw any irrefutable conclusions and therefore can not be applied to an obsolete SAIC report to make any solid conclusions. The added cost of the use of HTF (if it really has any value to actually be used) is an added expense that has not been defined. The basis of its use creates a number of added variables that also have not been addressed. Logically speaking, the addition of HTF displaces plastic... to what degree? how much less plastic is in the process due to the presence of HTF? Assumptions and positive speculation do not draw any irrefutable conclusions. The the throughput, volume, output and costs are all unknowns that are in no way addressed by anything except speculation.


In summary, the SAIC report is obsolete and the cost values are unknown. Speculation of the most positive fashion is simply... speculation. It is anyone's guess at this point and there is no irrefutable validation to demonstrate otherwise by SAIC or from JBI in its deficient guidance.



note the correct use of the word irrefutable








Disclaimer;

I am in no way compensated for my opinion or my posts on this site. I have no ‘secret agenda’ or personal gain that can be materialized from the act and method of my postings. I am simply a concerned, ‘outside’ interest with valid knowledge and information that I feel may be helpful. I chose to provide this information and related opinions at my own will and from the direction of no person, company or entity. My motive is to help those that may not have the background, knowledge, means or access to this information and my personal desire to gain additional knowledge and understanding of the topics discussed. I am compelled to educate and help offset the continued barrage of misleading and obscured information that I have identified here. No ill will, malice, defamation, or slander is intended in any way. All literary creativity utilized in my posts are intended as a vehicle to express my opinions. I am always open to mature discussions of substance and encourage rebuttal and enlightenment. My sincere apologies go out to anyone that is disturbed by the revelations of fact that I have conveyed in the past or may provide in the future.