Quadrise Plc (QED) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Quadrise Annual General Meeting. Questions are encouraged. They can be submitted at any time using the Q&A tab situated on the right hand on your screen. And now like to hand over to Chair, Andy Morrison. Good morning.

Thanks, Mark, and I think it's good afternoon. So good afternoon. Thanks, everyone, for coming along. I'm Andrew Morrison. I'm the Chairman. I welcome you to the 2023 Annual General Meeting for Quadrise plc. Before we move to the formal business of the meeting and the business update presentation, I'd like to introduce my colleagues from the board. You have Laurie Mutch. You have Vicky Boiton-Lee, who joined us on the 1st of October. You have Jason Miles,here, the Chief executive, who you know, Sitting at the front here also, we have David Scott, the Chief -- CFO. And amongst the audience, we have several members of our management team, who will be mingling with you afterwards and helping to answer any questions that you may have. Also, Suzanne Alves from MSC Secretaries and outside the share registrars that have been helping as our scrutineers. The meeting will be in 2 parts. Formal business of the resolutions that contained in the AGM notice. This is the AGM notice that has been online. Will that be considered first as shareholders being asked to vote by way of a poll, and you will have been introduced, you've been given poll cards as you came in. As many of you will have noticed, we published an AGA update statement by RNS this morning. This is a generally positive update, giving news on the projects and our future plans. There's a lot going on. Management are very busy. The next few months will be pivotal, and we need to sustain that momentum and focus. We can now turn to the formal Annual General Meeting. The required quorum for Annual General Meeting is present and I formally declare the meeting open. The resolutions on which shareholders will be asked to vote are listed in the Notice of Annual General Meeting that's been circulated to shareholders. With the meeting's permission, I'd like to take the notice of meeting as read. Are we happy with that? Thank you. Now there's a little bit of a [ spiel ] here on the voting procedure, so please bear with me. Voting today will be done by way of a poll on each of the resolutions put to the meeting. This is seen as best practice as it gives all shareholders the opportunity for their votes to be recognized in the business of the meeting and to have their votes recorded in proportion to the number of shares that they hold. I'm appointing the company's registrars to act as scrutineer. When you registered your attendance, you would have been given a poll card, which shareholders -- is for shareholders should complete and sign as indicated. In the case of corporate shareholders, the poll card should be completed by their authorized representatives present at the meeting or by their proxy. You have 3 options for each resolution. You can vote for the resolution, against the resolution or you may withhold your vote. A vote withheld is not a vote in law and will not be counted in the calculation of the proportion of the votes for or against a resolution. I should mention that for those shareholders who have already launched a proxy, you do not need to complete a poll card unless you want to change your votes. When you have voted on all the resolutions put to the meeting, will you please return your completed poll cards to the company's registrars. Should you require any further assistance, our registrars will be happy to help you. It will take some time to complete the poll procedure. Therefore, the results of the poll will be announced through our regulatory information service and posted on the company's website as soon as practicable. Should anyone wish to ask a question during the formal part of the meeting, I would ask that they kept limited to the formal resolution being put forward as there will be an opportunity to ask more general questions after the formal part of the meeting has concluded. When asking a question, can I please ask that you raise your hands, state your name and whether you are a shareholder, proxy holder or corporate representative before asking the question. In accordance with the notice of the meeting, the Board recommends acceptance of the resolutions, which have been put forward in the best interest of the company. If you are thinking about voting against the resolution, I encourage you to ask a question to see if your concern can be satisfied before you do so. I will now turn to the formal resolutions to be considered at the meeting. The first resolution is Resolution 1, which is to receive the annual report on accounts of the company for the year ended June 30, 2023, and the report of the auditors thereon. [indiscernible] from the auditors is amongst the audience here. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with the proposed resolution? If there are no questions, I now put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, please place a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. Thank you. If we're all happy with that, I go on to Resolution 2, which is to approve the directors' remuneration report as set out in the company's annual report and accounts for the year ended June 30, 2023. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with this proposed resolution? Can you just say your name, where you're from?

[ Lionel Fame ], a private shareholder.

Thank you.

I hope this is pertinent. But obviously, from '22 to '23, the director's totality of pay remuneration went up by nearly -- well, approximately GBP 150,000. And I know this vote is for -- up to '23. Is there going to be a similar rise for '24? Are you allowed to answer that in relation to this?

I think what I'd like to do is to bring Laurie into it. And also, I'm going to ask Laurie also to answer another question, which you haven't asked, but I would like to ask, because I know it's on the minds of people, which is about the use of the nominal value options in this year's awards. So Laurie, maybe you could comment on Lionel's question and on the use of the nominal valuations.

I think your question related to is there going to be a substantial salary increase over the next 12-month period. Was that your question? There isn't.

Can I just ask, how do you justify 1 of the Board directors getting a 30% pay rise over that period?

Just can you use the mic, I quite -- I can't, sorry.

Sorry, I just wondered how you could justify given 1 of the directors a 30% pay rise over that period?

Are you referring to Jason, Philip?

Yes. His overall package went from 53 to 68.

It isn't in the previous period.

Right.

[indiscernible] I'll have to check that and come back to you in our report. If you're talking about Phil Snaith, I'll need to check that and come back to you because as a non-exec director, it would not be normal for that to occur. Phil Snaith's remuneration as Chairman of the Compensation Committee at the time was the same as mine, which was around GBP 40,000. If you're referring to me, that was -- there was an increase in my salary, and that was because for a period, I was Chairman of the company whilst we were doing a search for Andy. I think that may be part of your question.

And it's not just a salary, it's your total package, which appears in the report and accounts. Yours went from GBP 61,000 to GBP 66,000. His went from GBP 53,000 to GBP 68,000. And I just think...

Yes. Thanks, David.

Lionel, if I may. Part of this is due to the share option awards, which were awarded last year. There was no counter-party to them the year before. So that's going to throw off the comparatives when you look at last year compared to this year. So it's noncash. It's not either company spending that money in cash. It's to share option expense.

Yes. '22 wasn't broken down, '23 was broken down. So there was no comparison I could make.

Okay. Thanks, Lionel. The second question, the 1 from the Chairman related to nominal value options. And actually, this was a question that was initially raised by Mike Kirk at the back. And this goes back to the RNS that we issued on the 4th of August. And it's actually in 2 parts, and I'd like to be explicit here and make it quite clear. Firstly, Jason had a balance of 12 days leave. And at the time, his presence at work, particularly relating to the Morocco project and the MSC trial was absolutely crucial. And the committee and the Board asked Jason to convert the amount due into nominal value options and he agreed to this. And that was to preserve the treasury that we had at the time. I'll explain the nominal value options in a moment. Regarding the second part, Jason recommended a modest award of bonuses to key staff on an exceptional basis for their efforts during the prior year. The committee agreed to that and 83% of those bonuses were taken up by way of those nominal value options. This was a strong indication in our view of staff's confidence in the company and it preserved cash again at an absolutely crucial time, in our view, it aligned interest with the shareholders and it kept the team together because you can imagine the challenges and the costs associated with recruiting replacements for some of these critical members of staff. Now all of the NDAs vest after 12 months. And the number of options was based on the share price at the time, which was 1.18p. So it appears to be quite a large number of options. But it was purely a factor of that 0.18p. Again, let's be clear, these are go-forward options, and their value depends on project progress reflected in the share price. And again, we feel not only has that action preserved some cash, but have also further aligns with the shareholders. I'm happy to take further questions on this.

Did we have some follow up at all on that? Yes, please.

[indiscernible].

If you just wait for the microphone for a sec. Thanks, Richard.

Laurie, can I ask how many days a month do you work?

How many days a month do I work?

Yes.

It's -- frankly, it's probably 10 days a month. .

And can I say thank you for your service because the pay that you've given is not extraordinary, and it is not generous.

Thank you.

Did anyone else have a -- thank you, Richard. Did anyone else have a further question or comment they want to make on this resolution? No? So I think thank you, Laurie, for your comments. And my summary is that none of these decisions are taken lightly. We have balance our resources with the targets we've got to do. We can't afford to lose young staff even if as not all the targets are met, we have to retain -- and we have to pay what we're -- what is due under the contract. So we've square that circle as best we can, the compensation committee's recommendations were accepted by the board as a whole. So we've tried our best to make that work. And that's why we commend to you the remuneration report. And by all means vote for or against the quarter criteria, but we've explained why is we've got there. So please -- so if there are no further questions, I'll put the resolution to the meeting to vote, please would you put place a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. The next resolution is Resolution 3, to reappoint Dilip Shah as a Director of the company. Dilip, I apologize, but he can't be here with us today. He is retiring in accordance with the company's articles of association by rotation. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with the proposed resolution about Dilip? No? If there are no further questions, I now put the resolution to the meeting to vote, please would replace a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. Next resolution is Resolution 4, which is to reappoint Vicky Su Yin Lee as a Director of the company. Vicky also known as Vicky Boiten-Lee. She joined during the year, so she's being reappointed at the first Annual General Meeting. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with the proposed resolution? If there are no questions, I put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, please place a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. Thank you. The next resolution is Resolution 5, which is to reappoint PKF Little John, LLP as auditors of the company to hold office from the conclusion of this AGM until the conclusion of the next AGM at which accounts are laid before the company and to authorize the directors to determine the auditor's remuneration. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with this resolution? If there are no questions, I'll now put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, please place a cross in the appropriate box in your poll voting card. Thank you. The next resolution is Resolution 6, and this is -- this resolution relates to the directors' authority to allot shares up to a limited amount of 1/3 of the company's issued [indiscernible]. The full text of this resolution is shown in the Notice of Annual General Meeting. And with the meeting's Commission, I would like to take the resolution, which is quite lengthy as read. Are you okay with that? Thank you. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions in connection with the proposed resolution? If there are no questions, I now put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, again, please would you place a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. Thank you. The next resolution is resolution 7, that relates to the disapplication of preemption rights. This is a standard solution, so a special resolution. But it's also a standard in the sense that it's -- it appears in most companies' list of resolutions, gives limited authority to the directors to issue up to 10% of the company's issued share capital for cash, for example, in relation to a fundraising without offering those shares to existing shareholders. The full text of this resolution is shown in the Notice of Annual General Meeting. And with the meeting's permission, I would like to take the resolution, which is quite lengthy as read. Again, are you happy to do that? Before I put the resolution for the meeting, are there any questions in connection with it? No. Okay. If there are no questions, I now put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, please, would you place a cross in appropriate box on your poll voting card? Thank you. The final resolution's resolution 8, also relates to disapplication of preemption rights. This is another standard resolution that gives a limited authority for the directors to issue up to an additional 5% of the company's issued share capital for cash without first offering more shares to existing shareholders provided that this power is used only in connection with an acquisition or other specific capital investment. The full text of this resolution is shown in the Notice of Annual General Meeting. And with the meeting submission, I would like to take the resolution, which is again quite lengthy as read. All okay? Thank you. Before I put the resolution to the meeting, can I ask if there are any questions about this proposed resolution? No? If there are no questions, I now put the resolution to the meeting. To vote, please would you put a cross in the appropriate box on your poll voting card. Thank you. [Voting]

That concludes the formal business of the meeting, and I declare a formal Annual General Meeting closed. As I mentioned earlier, the final poll results of the meeting will be announced to the markets through our regulatory information service and posted on our website as soon as practicable. They will now follow a business update presentation, followed by a Q&A session. Thank you. Before we move directly to that, I'd just like to -- we're now specifically actively starting that. I know that Mike, you had a point you wanted to raise, which [indiscernible] information now, I'm happy for you to raise now.

Okay. Good afternoon, AGM. My name is Mike Fey. The subject I wish to address is the lack of retail shareholder representation on the Board. a subject I'm learning about and I'm quite happy to be corrected. I would class anyone who buys shares online by an execution-only provider such as Hargreaves Lansdown as a retail shareholder. My research suggests retail shareholders own 59.77% of Quadrise. Nearly 60% of Quadrise is owned by retail shareholders, but there is no retail shareholder voice on the board. It is my opinion that there should be a retail shareholder representative director on the board. But how to get a retail shareholder representative appointed as a director? There are 3 ways: one, be appointed by the Board. This is the first and easiest way that is that the Board appointed a retail shareholder representative as a director, and that person is related or not by the members of next AGM. This was the route for Vicky, so it can be done. Two, be rich. Second, if a person or entity owns 10% or more of the company that have the automatic right to be a director or appoint their proxy. Three, be nominated and elected by the shareholders. The third way is more difficult, but possible with 5% of the shareholders willing to propose a nomination to enable an election at a general meeting plus other procedural difficulties. After the formal part of AGM ends, in fact, after the Q&As, would shareholders willing to be part of that [indiscernible] please make themselves known to me, and anyone willing to stand for election to the Board. My questions for the Board are, and I've given the Chair of copy. One, what is their justification for not having any retail shareholder representation on the Board? Two, would the Board appoint a retail shareholder to the Board? Three, given that 60% approximately is owned by retail shareholders, how many representatives should there be on the Board? Four, please hand the Chair on a show of hands, poll this meeting on the question should a retail shareholder representative be appointed to the Board. Thank you for listening.

Thanks, Mike. And to be clear, this is a compensates -- this is the continuation of a conversation that Mike has initiated with us over the last couple of weeks, maybe slightly longer than that. So there are Overall, I would say, we are positively inclined towards having board members who can add value to the company. And we've seen, as you mentioned, Vicky's joining and adding considerable value. So we don't come at this from a defensive point of view. We're trying to maintain the status quo for the sake of the status quo. And as I pointed out to you in prior -- in effectively, I'm a retail shareholder from the point of view that I have no better things to do than to look after the retail shareholders. So we are not against having retail shareholders on the Board. The question of representation, though, is something which needs to be thought through. And I think the best way to think this through is to continue our dialogue after this meeting and to see if we can find a way to understand what are the underlying concerns that we can address through additional skills or whatever that shareholders may be able to help us with. And so I think we'd like to do that. So we'd like to take your Option 1, I think, is what we're saying, which is let's talk about it and see if we can get to an agreement about what it is that we need and what it is that we can do. But -- and -- but we are somewhat resistant to the idea of representation, which is -- which sounds like somebody in directs going to come at the board and only represent that selection of the community. They need to come on the Board and be a director for that, for all the good and bad that, that involves. And it actually means that they can't communicate with the people they're supposed to represent any more than the rest of us can at any time. So we will talk about that. So will we appoint retail shareholders to the Board? I think that's -- it's -- there's no reason why we wouldn't put point new skills to the Board that we need. If it's somebody who's a retail shareholder, if they're a big retail shareholder, all the better, having alignment is a good thing. So we are we certainly would be willing to consider that as part of the discussion. You just mentioned, given that 60% is owned by retail shareholders and how many representers should they be on the Board. Well, let's start with considering who is the next one, and then we can get -- move from that point. But I think the point you're raising that question is around acting in concert. And there, you raised also, you wouldn't like to hear from other shareholders who might be willing to work in concert with you on what you're proposing if we can't reach an agreement directly with the Board. Just be careful that we need -- we all need to be careful that the shareholders don't act in concert in a way which would require them to make a bid for the company. So just have that in mind. There are rules and regulations around all this, and then we are outside the formal part of the meeting. But -- and there are lots of ifs and buts and questions still you might have about what Mike is saying or what I've responded. But I will allow a show of hands on this. I mean, would you -- do you think that -- is it a conversation that you'd [indiscernible] continue as a Board with Mike with a view to adding additional skill, hopefully, from Mike, as somebody who has amongst the retail shareholders. First of all, are you willing to have a share of hands on this as informally? Lots of nodding, right? So those are the -- those of you who think that's a good idea, you'd like us to continue that conversation with Mike and others that he might put forward, just raise your hand. And is there anybody who thinks that's actually it's a rotten idea? There's 2 people who think it's a rotten idea. So hopefully, that debate about whether it's a good idea or a rotten idea will come out in the course of our conversations with you I think we have the okay from that. The idea is that we should be able to have a conversation and maybe we can circle back to those who have expressed reservations and make sure that whenever we come up with satisfies those reservations. But okay, does that satisfy that point for that for now?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you very much. So this is our disclaimer, which will be on the website. You can read that so it's standard. So we do welcome you now to the project update and for the AGM, which Jason will largely undertake the presentation, and then we will together answer questions. But I would like to first also now welcome those who are -- who've been listening quietly on IMC, joining us online. So welcome to the presentation and Q&A part of this. I know you've had a chance also to observe the main part of the meeting. The main part of the presentation, as I said, will give you an update from Jason. But there are some summary remarks I'm going to make now, which are in line with the update RNS which we issued this morning. So first of all, the -- after much toing and froing to Morocco, we have now proven the -- our products in the industrial application, particularly we also -- in addition to MSR, we've also proven bio MSR at an industrial scale. So at long last, we have a route to commercialization, and Jason will give you further details on that debt from the RNS last week. At the same time as that, we have an entry point into North America with the low carbon tools in, starting with our bridgehead in Utah with Valkor. And this is really an opportunity to try to find a way to use the Americans' enthusiasm for their Inflation Reduction Act to find additional funding and scaling opportunities in the U.S. and beyond. So there's a huge amount. And actually, you're trying to see is other parts of the world also trying to compete with the Inflation Reduction now, which has been such a successful way of attracting investment. And so we believe that our Utah project, the Valkor, is a good bridge head into that, and we're looking to scale that up. We're also looking to scale up our shipping business obviously using MSC as a blueprint for that. And we are an important part of MSC's plans for low-cost compliance. They have a very different strategy to ask. Some of you will remember from the past, Maersk have been doing a lot of buying of ships with methanol fuels and starting looking at ammonia fueled ships. People have tried and had different experiences with LNG as the price has gone up and down. But MSC are very much -- the guys, they always say show me the money, yes. And they are -- their strategy is low-cost compliance. They want to comply with the same thing. They're being driven to comply by their customers. and they want to do that, but they want to do it in the lowest cost way and they see our products as a way to do that. And they're also seeing more -- the customers demanding more of the bio products. As not to say there isn't still an opportunity in the MSR, the traditional products. But what's driving that change and the enthusiasm is the -- are the biofuels, I offer the route to low-cost compliance as the pricing of carbon starts to come MIM. And we have patent solutions or patent applications for blend onboard and crude ship Royal bio MSR. And these are providing us with additional scale-up options. So we obviously are working with that with MSC, and that's a container fleet on fixed routes. But not all ships operate on fixed routes and therefore, the blend onboard solution is potentially applicable. And in answer to previous concerns, if you like, about the supply availability of glycerine at scale. Actually, we're finding that there is quite a bit of glycerine around. But ultimately, as we succeed and scale up, there will need to be other product streams, other components streams and crude sugar oils which appear to be a very good and carbon efficient route for that. We're doing quite a bit of work on that at Valkor facility burners here today at the back there if you have any questions after the event. Now -- and we're continuing to work on net 0 options for biomass derived sugars. And this isn't happening because shipowners are desperate to become green. Actually, it's being driven by customers, their customers, shipping people to -- shippers we know the big ones. I'm not saying that there's a direct causal link here, but the Amazons and the IPs of the world are driving faster appointment -- faster adoption of net 0 fuels, and that's what's really making the change. And we're just starting to see companies now offering, do you want your shipping down with or without carbon and they're offering a different product differential pricing for that. And our ability to provide Bio MSR supports that differential pricing. And we're seeing interesting people we're talking to can see the value of that already. And I think it's I think saw that this week, version Atlantic are using sustainable aviation fuel across the Atlantic in the air. So it doesn't seem out of the ordinary that we should be able to manage a sustainable marine fuel. And we set ourselves a target of 2030, actually. I secretly hope we're going to do it before that. But there's a lot of work to be done in that to make it real. And lastly, you might have been surprised or interested to read about our -- we have a structured process going on now. Look, within 1 of our investment banks to secure partners for the carbonized [indiscernible] shipping, so the NSC and beyond and for the low carbon fuels in North America, the Utah and beyond. And we are and this is -- because this is where we see the greatest investor interest. There is still interest for MSR. But if we want new investment, if you want to scale this up, it's the clean tech angle is being bell for people, and that's what we're really focused on right now. So thank you very much. I've done a lot of talking. I'm going to hand over to Jason to take us forward, and then we'll have Q&A at the end.

Thanks very much, Andy. I have pretty much nothing to say now. You've covered it very well. But let me briefly go through the deck. And obviously, I think it's important the Q&A at the end as well in terms of answering some of your questions. I mean the purpose in Quadrise is to address a very large market that I think we -- a lot of us are aware of now. over $200 billion a year. And there's a general transition where cleaner options are needed, and that's obviously the interest of MSC and others. I cannot emphasize enough the impact of some of the more recent legislation that's coming in that's really starting to drive change in the -- especially in the marine sector that we're dealing with. There's definitely a sizable amount of investment going on now with people like MSC modifying their vessels to really reduce the CO2 impact. And they're doing that really by modifying and using their existing fleets, right? There's a limited amount of investment despite the big fans the Maersk of the world. There's a very large fleet of 700-plus vessels that need a fix. And that's really where we step in with our fairly low cost, easy to implement technology. We have a 3-pronged approach. We basically look after energy solutions with our motion technology. We also have some advantages in terms of what we do, and we're driving some development work in terms of the RDI to take advantage of some technological work, but also to combine that with sustainable biofuels. And I think that's really what sets Quadrise apart from other people in the emulation fuel business, for instance, is this ability to start taking advantage of sustainable biofuels, which are water-based. And nobody else can do that. The main genesis of the project was really to offer a lower cost heavy fuel oil, which you see down on the left, which is a blend of diluent and residuals. Obviously, with MSR, we have the ability to use some of the lower-cost streams from the refinery, or from the upstream application in the case of Utah. And that [indiscernible] works in an engine, obviously, we will look to demonstrate that again on the MSC trial. But previously, we've got quite a significant reduction in CO2 emissions when you use the conventional emulsion fuel. And also now there's a drive certainly in the U.S., especially to combine, if you look at some of the upstream projects and for instance in Utah, combined that with CCS why injecting CO2 underground, which essentially gives you a lower cost hydrocarbon to start with. So the MSR with the lower cost feedstock is actually quite an interesting feature, which is obviously part of the Utah project that we're looking at the moment, and there are other opportunities similar to Utah in the wings as well. bioMSAR is really something that was, I guess, thought of just only a few years ago. We had our first commercial trial of bioMSAR at significant scale. You have to be there to see basically that fuel in action. And we basically -- whatever we need using -- we don't go right to bioMSAR since they work extremely well. Whether we put it in an engine or whether we put it through a massive -- in a massive furnace in the case of Morocco, this product delivers and it's using a waste stream from biodiesel as a starting point. And lower cost. There's lots of lower-cost glycerin, which we're now find about through some of the partners we're working with now on supply side, which we can't announce yet, but we're working on at the moment. But there are streams of glycerin available to the scale that we need to drive the next 2 years of growth. Having said that, there's a lot of other opportunities as well to look at bringing in some other sustainable biofuels as well. And obviously, that drives the work we're doing with Vertoro, with BTG as well bioliquids. So there's a bit more work which we're going to be publishing in terms of some of the stuff we've been doing in AquaFuel recently. But essentially, what we're doing is we are swapping out the hydrocarbon component with biofuels, both on the water side but also on the oil side, ultimately to get us to BioMSAR 0. And as Andy mentioned, I think we all hope that we can get there way before 2030. And the reality is progress we've seen so far demonstrates where we'll be able to do that. Having said that, the key thing is we now start making money out of bioMSAR also MSAR as well. Multiple sectors that we addressed today, really looking at anything for the upstream and refinery works top left. We are utilizing the renewable fuels now from multiple sources. And I think the marine sector, industrial sector are going to be starved of molecules going forward. They are not going to get access to the molecules that are going into staff, the molecules that are going into -- some of the HBO products that are basically harder-treated vegetable oils of the world, which we have very good alternatives for diesel. That will get snapped up by the aviation and transportation sectors. There's lots of other bio-derived products that is not easy to blend into conventional oil products, and that's really where our technology works extremely well. Obviously, to do that, we're using proprietary additives, and that obviously brings in other parties that are interested in obviously selling more of those products. And the consumption side, really, 3 main sectors. Marine fuels, heavy industry includes power plants down the bottom, a heavy industrial usage increased things like furnaces and obviously, drawing applications, which is the case of Morocco all driven around limited commodity and a drive to reduce CO2 emissions, which means that the price of CO2 is now starting to get priced in by anyone in their forward planning process. So all of the big companies that we're dealing with are factoring in the value of CO2 or the cost of CO2 going forward and working out as part of their business plan in terms of the avoidance of having to pay a CO2 tax is really driving the demand for efficiency reductions, which people at MSC and others are spending a large amount of money on their fleet today, but also the drive towards more efficient fuels and biofuels going forward. So there's a very clear trend now that this is a feature going forward. And obviously, the legislation in Europe is starting to bite as of next year. So the main projects we're focusing on, and we are very, very -- sort of this is our main activity is to focus on delivering these projects. I appreciate that obviously speed of these is sometimes not as we would like. But really, we'll take you through each of these projects. I won't go into each of these details. I've got slides to cover these, but we are covering a number of different sectors with all the activities that we're working on now. In the case of Morocco, we've finally completed the trial and appreciate shareholders' patience in getting to the promised land. It's -- yes, it was a challenging trial at times due to 1 annoying component, which is a pump. I can maybe answer the questions afterwards if you have a question at the end or can take you through that particular dilemma. But that being replaced worked extremely well, delivered basically full load with MSAR over from one of 15 minutes actually for the case of sort of 15 hours of operation, both on MSAR and most importantly, on bioMSAR. And the scale of this facility is 1 of the largest units in terms of the single demand from the burner. It's a 33-megawatt burner, which consumes the same amount of fuel as a container ship another big one. And so you can see the right-hand stack is actually the unit actually running on our fuel at full load. So worked extremely well. We've got full load conditions from the unit we are operating on. And now the plan beyond that is now to actually progress commercial supply we had to get through that point where to demonstrate the fuel worked, but now commercial supply discussions can start with the client in earnest. I don't know, closing, obviously, the technical report that Fit and the team are working on at the moment. And the client, obviously, having seen how well it works in that particular time is now looking at other applications, which we talked about before. And this is [indiscernible]. But Site A is their main flagship facility as well. So they're very keen to basically incorporate that as part of, obviously, the commercial rollout process. MSC, as we've done -- I mean, MSC are in this because, I think, as Andy mentioned, is part of their forward-looking plan for sustainability. It's listed -- Quadrise listed in their sustainability report. And that's no mean feat, actually, for a small company. It's a family-owned business, extremely successful for them to put their name against anything they're doing it because they really believe this works, and they actually want to show the shipping industry that this is a viable solution for people going forward. They also like it, frankly, in the case of BioMSAR and with one of the other major trader that we're dealing with at the moment. They like it because it's using components which are not going to get gobbled up by any other sector. It's using in the first point, renewable glycerin from waste-based sources. But in the future, obviously, you can take advantage of some of the biomass-derived sugar. So they get the fact that there's limitations in glycerin initially up to a point. But they also see the development work that we're doing and the results we're seeing with some of the other products offers a pathway for them to give them the scale up that they need. And as Andy mentioned now, there's lots of creative ways of getting money, getting or taking advantage of some of the CO2 credits of greenest solutions. So you can monetize actually the savings that you make, whether you do it as a company or whether third parties do it for you, there is money to be had in some of the lower carbon green fuels, and that's certainly where BioMSAR comes in going forward. So we are in the process of finalizing the agreements. And as they're announced, obviously, in December, you'll get to appreciate some of the people that we're dealing with. There's a lot of work going on in parallel. So the permits actually to actually do the blending for the biome trial in Europe has actually been applied for already. So that's underway. So on delay matters. And obviously, we're looking at fast tracking what we can do on the project side to get the project underway. We'll have a kit on site in Q1 with a view to starting the trial early part of Q2 is the current plan. And as part of that plan, there's opportunities then to get the data from the engine, both on MSR and BioMSAR, look at it side by side. And I think there's some comments and questions coming in about the limited information about oil and water emulsion and the benefits, I think this will give us a flagship opportunity to start publishing some of the benefits of that. And obviously, that's MSC very behind anything they can do to obviously assist and promote what we're doing, which is a little bit unusual from the marine space. In the case of Valkor, we're waiting -- there's basically a number of projects where the Valkor are operating on at the moment. They have some downhole projects where they're doing drilling. And obviously, they're waiting to get drilling permits, which we expect will be issued imminently. And then on the other side of things, they also have another project with a company that's looking at committing oil sands as well, which doesn't -- is not contingent on the drilling. So either of those projects progressing, promoting to get the project finance that they need, and that work is very much in progress at the moment. That gives us the GBP 1 million from the first site license. So either one of those projects, in fact, there's another one working as well, but the 2 main projects that they're working on are all in the sort of the final phase of getting project financed. And obviously, as soon as that's confirmed, then that will give us the $1 million that we've agreed with in terms of the site license and then a follow-up, obviously, of the $0.5 million when the equipment is delivered to site. And [indiscernible] opportunities. Obviously, in the Americas, we really have a number of opportunities in Panama significantly, really with a view to the power plants there. The plan would be obviously then to have a base for supply to marine sector as well. So there's obviously a good fit there. It just so happens, unfortunately, that Panama is going through a state of emergency in terms of very low amounts of water available for the hydro generation. So all of the power plants are running pretty much full load. So it's very hard for them to commit to a trial. Otherwise, they get penalized basically financially. So in parallel, obviously, we've been working actually with fuel in terms of the fuel supply. And there are a number of parties that we are in discussion with at the moment in terms of how are we going to facilitate the trial when it does start, this question is a question of when, not if. And also, with a view then beyond that, how can we supply the marine sector out of Panama as well? Down below, we have another project in Southeast Asia. This is the refinery refueling project with a view to having a base in Asia fairly well located for supply out of Singapore. So we have basically refinery consumer, which is a bit simpler than the -- we have to have work out supply and demand, you can have everything in 1 place. So the plan there is to do a trial in the refinery that could then basically move straight into commercial supply to that particular refinery. And then that gives us obviously a good foothold also into that particular sector for future supply to the marine industry. The ongoing work in terms of, I guess, bioMSAR optimization and product development. Glycerin is not glycerin. It comes from a number of different sources and supplies. So there's a lot of testing going on where we have obviously the major trader and some other counter-parties providing us with glycerin samples going forward. They also bring in other streams as well that they say, okay, well, why don't you try this biofuels, for instance, as mentioned, I think top right, that's come out of the work that we've been doing on the glycerin side. We're also doing a lot of test work at the moment, looking at conventional bends -- sorry, blends of biofuels, which are the basically [indiscernible] so the [indiscernible] by-products we can use as an alternative to the fuel oil in BioMSAR, we doing some blends of B30 together with the glycerin and in the future, obviously, the crude sugar oils as well to progress to a net 0 solution with bioMSAR 0. So what did we do that? We do that in the later at a small scale. We do pilot scale testing, and then we do the engine testing and aqua fuel and then scaling it up, obviously, for the SHIP trial where we'll be looking to bunker 1,000 tonnes each of them basically to supply the MSC ship. So there's a pretty progressive and quick scale up from the lab to delivery. And we mentioned, obviously, the JDAs we've got with BTG with Vertoro but there are lots of other companies coming out of the is especially with regards to the biomass-derived sugars, hugely abundant source of product. And when you split -- when you take some of these lignin cellulose below set products and you split them the value -- valuable part is the lignin component, and that's not great as a fuel, frankly. So that's what everybody wants. And in the left with the crude sugar oil, which they don't know to do with, and that's really where we come in. So it's a bit of a gap in the market that we think was very good to then match up with the marine sector. And obviously, that's why the trading company. And MSC and others are very interested in that opportunity for this particular sector we're working in. I think we presented this before. But really, this hasn't changed in the last few years. Our strategic priorities is really moving towards, obviously, net 0 application. Vicky has come in to the Board, but she's been behind the scenes doing a great job in helping us in putting together the sustainability report, which is now our second report. And obviously, we'll have a bit more information to publish next year once we -- for a year some further test results in there from bioMSAR. But we really believe in this ESG aligned strategy, it's really important for not just the company but the people that we're dealing with, they really do understand that we take this seriously, and they're working with a company that has blue ship ambitions. And I mentioned before, there's work going on, on the strategic side with an investment bank to look at strategic partners to accelerate our growth. So that's extremely important for us going forward is to, okay, we've got some great opportunities here, but how can we turn this immediately into money at a scale that rewards the investors finally for the patience in the company. From a financial perspective, obviously, we topped up our cash with a fundraise early in the year. Obviously, we are relying on the receipts from Valkor as well, which will give us enough cash to the middle of the next year. And obviously, for investors coming in, there are tax losses available that can be offset against the future. The team hasn't really changed in the last year, which is a very light team. You see a picture at the top right. These are all the guys who have been involved in the trial. Bernis missed in there on that wonder he was there as well. So yes, I mean, we've got a very committed team of people who are willing to travel a weekend to get out there and get the job done. I can't stress the value of those guys enough. As well as the additional support of consultants that we have. One of the guys in the picture is Martin Jones, who's been -- is a burner expert from Alston, 30 years experience. So it's extremely useful to have those types of people still on call to provide the assistance that we need. And as Andy mentioned, we've appointed Vicky, I'm glad she accepted to the Board. So it strengthened to strengthen the Board as well and provide some new impetus in terms of how we look at the world going forward. So then in summary, I think that's covered the company pretty well. I mean we are in very much focused on now in terms of the decarbonization of the energy sectors, specifically the marine and industrial power sectors that we deal with. The portfolio of projects have taken a bit longer to get to where we would like them to be, but they're still very much active and very much could be transformative in the next 12 months. And obviously, then we certainly believe we have the leadership and the technical capability to deliver on as well with a very lean but committed team of people. So we are looking forward next year to -- of delivering the trials to get to these commercial agreements, which we've mentioned several times, but we certainly tasted now. And in terms of the work going on in the background, obviously, the biofuel work will continue. We're just going to keep on innovating and offering new opportunities to blend some of these more challenging products into a very stable biofuel that can be used at scale and very quickly. So thank you very much. I think, obviously, we can talk about the strategic partnership as well again with any questions. But I think that's covered what I would like to say today.

Thank you very much indeed. If anyone has any questions in the room, if you could just raise your hand and I'll come through with the microphone. Thank you.

Sorry, it's Lionel again. Valkor, on the basis, it doesn't happen on -- it doesn't happen at all or the timing is somewhat out from what you've displayed on there. I guess you run out of cash Q1 next year.

I think that's a reasonable assumption, yes. It depends a little bit on in terms of some of the expenditures obviously on projects is discretionary and RDI is discretionary, so.

But I understand your burn rate is GBP 0.25 million a month. Slightly more, but let's call it GBP 0.25 million. If you raise GBP 1 million, GBP 800,000, take that off from June be around February, March with some good savings. We're now approaching December. Most of December is a dead period from a corporate point of view raising, I guess. And all the presentations in the report account, you talked about June, you just said again to us. Well, the reality is, as things get delayed frequently with this company, that Valkor possibly may not happen as you wish by the end of December. On the basis that happens, what plans do you have to obviously keep the company functioning and viable? I do have one other statement after that's been answered.

Should I answer, or would you like to answer?

You have the first go.

Obviously, we have plans in place, Lionel, to look at obviously plan A is Valkor coming, but there's no guarantee of that coming in the time available. So we certainly have plans in place that would have to kick in early part of Q1, should we need to. Obviously, the key thing behind that is to make sure that we have -- if we do need to raise money again, and we didn't -- frankly, when we raised money last time around, we didn't quite get the funds that we planned on getting. So it was a risk that we knew was there, but that's life. The plan is still very much to get the agreements announced and signed in December, which I think will be from a share price perspective will be -- should rerate it a little bit when they see some of the other partners we're dealing with as well. But yes, we'll likely have to raise money in Q1 again if the Valkor money doesn't come in.

Yes, I think you probably answered that. I think the -- your question is quite right. I think shareholders here must realize as we do. The company is in a tight spot. We've got a great technology. We've got a great projects, but we haven't got a lot of resources. And so we know to make that work. It can work it will help, of course, if we get the Valkor money in, but we probably have to assume that we don't -- so that we don't get caught out if it doesn't. But if we stand up here and say we're going to raise money, then the people mark our shares down immediately. So you just got to leave it with us to do the best we can on that. It's clear that if we can get the news out beating past milestones, then the share price will go up, and we will minimize the amount of dilution. And obviously, if there are opportunities to square the circle by raising money doesn't involve shares, then we would look at those as well. But we're a young stage, although we've been going for a while, we're still a young stage company. And fundamentally, it's an equity story. So we're all in this together. We've all got to face that. It's a tight spot we've got to fight our way out of.

My second question, which may be more of a statement is I'd like to kick off to say that I am a supportive person contrary to the way these questions are coming across. But Andy, you started off this afternoon basically saying the management have been very busy. There's lots going on. I heard that last year with respect. I heard that the year before. The last 2 fundraises, this was a little top-up, which was undersubscribed, clearly, from what your objectives were. But the 1 prior to that, which I think was GBP 5 million, GBP 6 million in totality. I remember that what that was going to see us through to being commercial. And I just want to explore the dissatisfaction and fatigue I know that you guys must all have as well, that everything seems to be delayed. The communications still, again, you got through -- started to get improving. It's got worse. Private shareholders are out there wondering what's going on half the time, speculating on the wrong things. The share price is at the lowest it's ever been similar to other people were well down in terms of our investments. And I wish you all the best, but I want you to get on with things. I know there's third party is controlled in everything. But my god, delay after delay, quarter-after-quarter, MSC particularly, that GBP 5 million, GBP 6 million, that was going to see that through to the end. And it's just -- it's repeated and all wonderful things again. I leave here thinking, oh it's good again. And I've done that year after year. But actually, I've got to stand up now and say for god's sake, get some of this stuff commercial because it's just not happening. I mean, my only observation would be, I know you're going to say no to this, I would really decelerate the amount of effort going into research at the moment and the cost of that, which is half your monthly burn, which I know is for the future. But get over some of the lines that we've -- over the line, some commercials on the things we've invested in for the last 15 years, which still haven't materialized $0.01 for the shareholders. Thank you.

Jason, do you want to comment?

Yes, yes. And I think coming on to your point, Lionel obviously, I appreciate there's definitely been delays well beyond the level that we -- but there are -- and I'm not making excuses, but in the case, for instance, of NSC, it's extremely important to partner up with the right supplier for the business going forward, okay? So -- and that's extremely important, not just for Quadrise, but it's extremely important also for NSC, okay? So there have been dialogues with major trading companies and majors that take time to progress. And not all of them have got to the end successfully because everyone has got their invested interest. So getting to the point of it, finding the right partner who can assist us and work with us from the supply side, but also MSC are willing to deal with as well on the other side because MSC are not buying bunker fuel today from small traders, small little ventures, right, they work with very large entities. So you have to find the right counter-party. And unfortunately, that does take a little bit longer than we would all in this room desire. Having said that, once that counter-party is on board, it's because they want to be on board and they see a strategic a good thing to do going forward, okay? And that's great that we, as Quadrise have something that they would like to utilize and put their name against. So it's frustrating and frankly, your feedback is the same feedback as I get from members of the Board on a regular basis to get this done. And I'd say that we're not fatigued at all. There are times when it gets down things aren't working. I've been in the container 45-degree heat in Morocco swearing at a pump, okay. So it's really frustrating. But we are really bored, I have to say. It's some of the things that we've heard recently, which basically we've been turning to shareholders. But we hear it from a client speaking to 1 of your counter-parties in a meeting, they're in it for the same reasons as we're trying to sell to you and our people's business. I think that's really -- the team are really energized in getting this across the line. And we -- yes, we have to get -- we have to start making money, Lionel, agreement, but yes.

Yes. I mean I've been in the company now for about just over 18 months. And I think I stood here last year and talked about the fact this is a business with a lot of moving parts. And that's fundamentally why we get blindsided by things from time to time. And so rather than just say sorry guys, that's how it is. We're also -- there's the background really to the work we're doing to try to find scale up partners because fundamentally, the business is undercapitalized for what he needs to do. The low Quadrise cannot decarbonize shipping on its own. So we need to solve that -- the question has always been, when is the right time to solve that problem, when os the right time to make deals with people if deals are available and so on. And we to say, okay, well, we've got to get on with this. And that's why we are running a structured process. And so that might give us an answer this relevant to the fund raising. We don't know yet. But we are not sitting on our hands is what I'm saying. We are trying to find other solutions to that problem with delivery. Because what we need are people who, as partners, are people who can reduce the complexity of delivery or help manage their complexity of delivery that will then mean that we're not always on our own buffeted by the things that come at us.

Come back to the other point, Lionel, about the cost of the RDI facility. It's certainly not half of our monthly cash flow at all. And if you think about is the Morocco trial. All of the components that were delivered to the Morocco trial, including the burner, the atomizer, everything else. That was all fabricated by us, the case. So it's not just research work in beakers. There's actually money -- sorry, there's investment going in there, that's saving us money because we haven't got to go to [indiscernible] or a supplier, okay, because we can make it ourselves if we need to. So I'd say that I'll take on Board your comments. And where we're moving to now with the JDA works we're doing for Taro and other people is that, that cost is shared. So we're looking to try to reduce those costs for shareholders and ourselves and try and offset those costs with others. I don't think you're Seeing where we start to get paid to do the work basically by others as well to try and minimize that cost. But to stop it at this stage would be probably wouldn't be a good idea just because of where it's leading to in terms of the work with the crude sugars and other things. I just think we have a really unique opportunity to on the back of the BioMSAR work and the vessel testing that we're doing, there's been opportunities if it works very well to then bring in these grocers way before anyone else can do that and we've got the first mover advantage.

So I think, Lionel, that's in the category of good question because we had a lot of just to say that we've received in advance of the meeting, a number of questions. And I imagine that we're receiving questions online as well. We may not get to everybody today in order to keep the meeting in a reasonable timeframe. We will prioritize at least for the time being the questions in the room. But we will get to the -- we will answer the questions that come in online and coming in as late today. So please carry on. Thanks. Yes, Richard?

Richard Body Private shareholder. Can I throw a different point of view from Lionel in that this constant speculation about when if we're going to need additional knows fully well. The difficulty is getting to commercialization. And you need to know there are a lot of retail investors who would fully support. We will not walk away. I will not walk away from a significant investment in this company. we are led by world-class scientists, Jason. And whilst I may be critical at times on as others, inability to actually get to commercialization. We're not going to walk away. I'm not going to walk away. It's not difficult to see that we can extend our runway from June to December with a very modest fund raise which even at today's ridiculously low price will not have a material impact on dilution. So please bear in mind there are those that fully support. And whilst we all want to see success, we're here for the long haul or I am.

Yes. Thank you very much, Richard. And I think Lionel prefaced his comments by also saying that he supports what we're doing. So it's -- I think the -- both your direct support and in less direct, but nevertheless, support, I think, are important to us.

Mark, proxy shareholder. On the same vein that has just been discussed about supporting the company. I've been a long-term shareholder I've invested a hell of a lot of money in this business, I believe, in the business. But it does -- and I take the point that was just raised about supporting the company, but that does become a point when you have to question what you are doing and whether you should put more funds into the company. If I -- let's go back to the fund raise in June. And obviously, yourself and committed around about GBP 40,000 to the placing shares overall, perhaps we should be grateful to undo for that in helping us out there. But in comparison to the other Board members, their investment was extremely low. It was depressingly low. And I should think that, that must -- as well as myself, other shareholders, gotten questioning, why should I put more money into this business? Why should I commit more of my hard-earned cash if other Board members are not showing the sort of confidence in the business that I think that they should show considering that they have got a far better overview of those projects and actually what is going on with that -- with the business? So I think that was extremely poor. And I think that's the reason why that fund raising never actually got to where it was expected to be. So I don't know if you've learned anything from that going forward, but it's prevented me from investing more funds because I couldn't see any confidence from the Board against what we were being asked to do. You were imploring us to company because the alternative wasn't worth thinking about, but the other Board members didn't seem to share that same opinion.

Yes. I can't speak for all the other Board members that they may wish to comment. But I think this is certainly the case that Jason, above anyone, is fully committed to this business. You can see that -- you could [indiscernible] your life's work, Jason. And I don't think a sense which is not committed to it. And I would say everyone [indiscernible] and some of the -- and the cash has to come from somewhere. So it does -- everybody has different abilities to free up cash at a certain point in time for replacing. I'm put some money and I will no doubt put more in if the opportunity arises in the future. I don't want to put all my chips in the first one, if you like, but I will keep something so I can support the company going forward. But now you've made the point, and I think I don't know -- I mean, Laurie, you've been a director for quite a while. Have you got any comment you want to make on that?

Yes. Well, thank you, Mark. And I'm going to be quite personal here and Richard alluded to it at the time. Unfortunately, I did not have substantial funds available to put into the company. What I did do, though, and that was my reply to Richard, is I put skin in the game in the sense of my time. And I've been fortunate, and I do say fortunate for very specific, that I've been fortunate to be working with this company since it launched in 2006. I've put an immense amount of personal time way beyond the nonexecutive director's fees in an endeavor to realize what I truly believe will be a successful company going forward. And I certainly, at the time, would have invested considerably more, but unfortunate if the time those funds were locked up.

Yes.

And incidentally, I think I can speak for Phil Snap. There is a fees don't interpret fines departure in any way as being a lack of support for the company. Quite the contrary. But Phil himself would put a tremendous amount of time and advice towards the company, particularly towards project management, program management, and that was very well received by the company, but it was not by any means the sign of thinking that the company is going to fare, quite the contrast.

And in my case, yes, you want to look at my salary and say, why can't we put all of the salary into a Quadrise placing. I think the reality is that we will have -- I've got a young family going through university. That was literally all my savings present there. And every fundraise comes through whatever I have with cash goes back into the company, I can assure you that is just like Laurie had the time. We just didn't have any disposable income to put into that particular fundraising just because of expenses, so yes.

Yes. I accept what you're saying there. But obviously, it's -- it was a very important time for the company to raise those funds. And there we were investors were left with this dichotomy of one being employed to actually make sure that they supported it and invested to support the company. But outwardly, it totally conflicted the position of the Board. With that mesh?

I think the main problem at the time was that the market share price go below the offer price, and that gave people the opportunity to buy in the market, which obviously didn't help the company directly. And so that kind of undermine us a little bit I think actually, in the case of the timing and the news flow that we were able to put out, we actually was quite a decent result, again, almost GBP 2 million in. It still leaves us tight spa as I described before. But we have a start to get some more milestone. We've got 1 milestone out last week. We're going to get some more milestones I hope we'll be able to finish the job.

So I think I recall that there was a failed IPO on the day, and that had a significant impact, Mark.

Mark, retail investor. Can you talk a little bit more about non-dilutive funding options? So U.K. has reentered the Horizon project recently. There's also U.K. research and innovation funding. Can you talk about how you've been chasing that down? How much of that is applicable, Jason, probably, I imagine?

Yes, we've looked at several Horizon project ventures already. I would say that the first 1 we looked at got relatively well advanced, but the problem with any of these types of initiatives is that it doesn't deliver a tangible result in a period less than 3 years. And in fact, the Verizon projects are generally longer-term projects, which really don't deliver a trial, for instance, in terms of 3 to 5 years' time. I can't keep coming to you saying that we've got nondilutive thing to do a trial in 5 years' time when we know that we can do it ourselves in 1 year. So some of these activities, they sound great on paper. They bring a lot of different academics together and companies together. But a lot of people involved in it are not necessarily really doing it because they believe it's a commercial outcome, it's more as you get involved in the first place. So we're certainly looking at it. We've -- like I said, we've done -- we've looked at 1 already another Horizon projects recently felt be looking at it as part of a process. U.K. innovation funding is available? Yes, the U.K. government unfortunately seems to be hell bent on ignoring biofuels and going straight to hydrogen and ammonia. And the people, I guess, need to reassess what could be delivered today. It's part of the U.K. innovation funding, but we are looking at it. And David and Phil are looking at it all the time as well together themself to see whether we can take advantage of some of these schemes. But the problem is just the term and the nature of these things that just takes so long to get an outcome. It's a good source of funding, but you have to spend the money first and then get the money back afterwards. So from a cash flow perspective, it doesn't really help us out either. So...

The best of nondilutive funding probably so for the sales, if we can get the Valkor money across and the second tranche as well. And if we can get some of the other things going in turn into revenue, then that's nondilutive funding.

This isn't a sorry, Bob Sharp, long, long-term retail holder. This is what I was first going to say, but I'd like to say a great big thanks to Laurie because what he is up just then and said, with the truth. Because I lived through it. In the days when he took a pay card, and I believe he went down to GBP 17,000 per annum. And money was tight. I used to pop into the then office [indiscernible] for coffee with the ins when no internal matters were ever discussed, of course. And you didn't know which day I popped in. Laurie was sitting there shuffling papers every single time I went. It was quite incredible. We're paying this guy the same as my cleaner. He was there all the time. Helping I don't really want to say I took the opposite route to Mark. I put into this placing last placing via my various nominee accounts and my [indiscernible], more than the entire Board in the exception of you. So Mark's point is right. Indeed, scuffle some of the potential investment. But I actually feel the thing that really scuffled it was communication I've noted in all of your years over and over for years, you need to interact with your retail hold. Every time we want cash, great. This presentation, the sustainability report is obviously absolutely wonderful. It's the best 1 you've ever produced. But none of it actually gets money out of the retail people's hands because you go quiet 10 minutes later. You do disappear months. And maybe it's the reason investors that bought [indiscernible] well, maybe we don't have knock on your desk, but that will lower your chances of raising money. If you look at it, if you want GBP 5 million, how many of your investors we got in each 1 put a couple of thousand house, you'd raise a great deal of money. What's GBP 1.5 million, it's peanuts. Richard and I are on the same [indiscernible] there. There's no way I want the company go down. But there is a limit to how much a [indiscernible] like me can keep putting in.

Yes. Thanks very much. Well, you attribute to dedication of Laurie is deserved. Laurie, you're doing, I mean, it's so much into the company. So yes, absolutely. And now I've lost the thread of the second part of your question. He wants a cup of coffee, yes. The communication is there, basically. And we try to get it right, but we don't always. And what I mean by trying to get it right is that the ideal amount of communication that official RNS communication might be, you might say would be once a month. If you had a company that had news every month, you said that was about right. If you're putting out news every week, it's feel desperate. And so -- but then sometimes you don't have things to say they're right at the exact moment and then says, Okay, well, should we supplement that with social media. And we did -- earlier this year, we had we were more active on social media than we have been more recently. And the reason for that is because -- we put -- as we went on social media became [indiscernible] here they are again let's put us a negative comment on the kind of thing. So we kind of -- well, to avoid that, let's not create too many opportunities for a negative comment. So we do try to -- we do think about these things, and we do try to get it right. We -- and I think your point also is it sort of echos to what Mike was talking about earlier on about the retail. So we think we do need to find a way to improved communication within what we're all allowed to do to get a maybe kind of a model which works for us all. I don't want to come to solution in. But I think we are to things we can find a way of doing that.

[indiscernible], private investor. Just 2 questions at the moment. One is why did -- why weren't any warrants added to the open offer? .

So David, it sounds like 1 you could answer.

Yes, we are placing obviously, and then an urban order, and we want to make sure that the player sees and the investors through the open offer are treated the same. We'd have needed to have headroom to give warrants to the players, which we didn't have enough headroom basically on that front. We would have to effectively half the number of shares available if it was 1:1 or to make room for [indiscernible], and you don't know whether you're going to get the money in or not. So shareholders have always had -- since I've been around, always had code a bit of a tight leash when it comes to attestation rights. And so that's why we've been happy to work within the 10% that we've put forward today and that you've all voted on. But that's our consequences if we are have a short rope on that because it means we can't always don't have the flexibility on time to do things which might otherwise be desirable.

And the second question is whenever you see a list of future fuels lifted like methane or LPG -- not LPG. Thank you, LNG. Why doesn't emulsion fuels appear?

I would say that the simplest answer to that is that it's not being used yet at scale. I think that would change once we get the projects underway with MSC and it starts to hopefully. So you would hope that the MSCs PR department will get behind it as well and provide the emphasis that we need that people see that as a as a viable solution going forward. Do you think you've seen us distinct from biofuels in general will be kind of grouped into that -- we would sort of potentially be groups into biofuels, but I guess not the conventional by blends, which are all based. So yes, I think -- it does come in on -- if you look at the things like conferences, et cetera. And we're quite active in organizations like [indiscernible], where emulsion fuels are listed on the ABF slide as a solution. But at the moment, a lot of the industry is a little bit niche. I think someone like MSC picks it up and go through it commercially, then we move out of that niche bracket. So -- but it's something always we want to work with, work on. But actually, the most important thing is probably getting an MSC trial underway and showing people that it's actually a hard-to-col commercial alternatives that other people can use.

Jeremy Nelson, retail investor. I think the gentleman over here asked 1 of the questions I was going to ask about the warrants. Just going on to having funds available to invest, I think a good proportion of private investors hold other investments to support you other investments that we're doing well and/or put money earmarked for other investments, which have now gone up but have not been invested in. So I think there's always a way and a means for people to get invested and support the company. So I'd just like to say that. The other thing is, as far as the support for yourselves, I'm not seeing it from the nameless entities who can't be named in MSC and their PR. You don't feature. The only person supporting you that I take seriously is [indiscernible]. There's nothing coming out of any of these entities, and that affects people's belief and whether you've actually got something going.

Yes, it's a good question, Jeremy. And I think in the case of MSC, there have been willing to the side by side, we were in last year's conference in Geneva, conference next to [indiscernible] talking about the project. Now obviously, the project has taken a little bit longer to get the partners together to proceed to the vessel trial. Once we get agreements signed off next month, then we'll definitely -- there'll be no further opportunities to work with MSC to obviously, integrate with the PR department. But because there's been a little bit of hiatus getting everything arranged. It's obviously gone a little bit quiet. But it hasn't meant that we dropped off the most recent sustainability report, is very much myself and Andy, and I recently met with him as well. It's very much one of the lead decarbonization levers that they feel that they're willing to put their name against, which is extremely supportive. But yes, because of the project delays, it has impacted the day-to-day appeal. You're right in observing.

[indiscernible], private investor. Two questions. This is maybe a refresh for me. On a core -- the 1 when it comes in, not saying if when it comes in, is it 1.5 and that's it? Or is there going to be more royalty and stuff like that because we just talked about the 1.5 million not ongoing. That's number one. And then number 2 was just a refresh on the IP because you a few products going through. And I know it was 50-50 on one of them. I just wonder what the IP is for all your products. Just a general update on that will be quite useful.

Yes. So first question was nothing about the IP First quarter Yes, I'll look at the IP first. I mean in terms of the -- the most recent -- obviously, we've got basically IP around the marine cell products. That's the first patent basically under the quarter name together with Axel now in Irion. Then the bioMSAR product basically have. We basically were about 2 of patents, 1 of the cationic factors. We've got 2 patents there on basic MSR. We've got the bio MSAR patent that's been potentially granted. And then we've got another bio MSAR labor with bringing in these distributors and that ones jointly with Vertoro. There's another patent which is really 100% Quadrise on in terms of land on Board. So most of the patents are 50-50 with new for most territories. One is with Vertoro in terms of the crude sugar oils, the blend on Board is a Quadrise, Quadrise patent. And there's more in the wings. There's some work that we've -- there's some results that we're getting, which certainly worthy of putting a pattern against as well going forward. So we're not a patent generator, but where there's an opportunity to obviously protect IP, that's really we want to sort of strengthen the portfolio as much as possible in the first part of our Valkor -- and the first part of that car, sorry, yes, was -- yes, the 1 million comes in from site license agreement for 1 site, obviously up to a certain amount of fuel. 0.5 million we deliver the equipment to sites. We still own that equipment, so there's an opportunity for Valkor to buy that within a 2-year period for which we get another tenant $1 million -- we also get paid $75,000 a quarter as part of a service are as soon as that equipment is delivered to site, we get 75,000 a quarter. And then there's a profit-sharing scheme, whereby once we the idea is to do side trials and then once we basically deliver on a sell that product for a premium over what they can get today, then there's 5 growth any what the input of both parties, roughly 50-50 share in the profit beyond what they would sell that product for today. And then beyond that, if there's -- we have drafted a sublicense agreement as well. So there's an opportunity then through Valkor to sign that sublicense agreement whereby they can sell licenses or deploy licenses to sites for which we, again, get an income from other opportunities in that particular area as well beyond the first license. So it should be a trigger to many more things, but obviously, the -- it doesn't end the 1.5%, correct.

Yes. Just a way of explanation to those one online, I think we probably aren't going to get to the online questions today. And I think it to attempt to do so, we'll find that we're always saying we were kind of thing. So we will have to get back to the online questions and the pre-submitted questions afterwards to the extent that they not have already been covered. We want to get people a chance to mingle with us informally as well. So I want to try and draw the formal part of this meeting to a close. If there are any further questions, then we can maybe give you another couple of questions and then we can finish.

Andy, could I just say something -- there has been a situation in the past where we've actually unfortunately closed the meeting too early. So I would encourage us to allow the floor to ask any questions that they have remaining. .

Okay. Well, we're all have the same stretch target of 10 minutes, so let's see how we do. And we don't want to close for you face, but we do want have means to inform me as well.

Yes. On Morocco, why are we only now talking about a supply agreement with them? We've been there in Morocco for what, 3, 4 years. I know the finer points of it maybe that we discussed. But surely, there's a framework that has been set up. So once those trials going to be successful. So that's the first part of the question. Second part is, how long do you think this is all going to take to get this fuel supply agreement sorted out? And thirdly, how far are we with the actual refiners in terms of a fuel supply agreement with them?

So comprehensive Morocco, question.

What next? The client in question is very process focused. -- okay. So although we have a framework in general principles, is basically why they got involved in the first place, -- they would not release their commercial team until they got the results that they required from the first facility that's been able to trial the fuel in their particular sort of fleet. So -- now sites done. Obviously, that particular site that demand for that particular site and commercial supply discussions can commence now. . In parallel, self-fill have been involved with discussions already with certain refiners about the supply to Morocco alongside the supply to MSC and other people, right? Because refiner is not interested just 1 client is looking at multiple opportunities. And obviously, Morocco is very useful in that regard for MSC and vice versa. So those discussions have already started and very much are in progress. But on the client side, we had to unfortunately meet that milestone. I could conclude the trial right the technical report, which we're doing. But now commercial discussions can formally start. And they -- it's just the way they work -- they have those procedures and you can't deviate from that at all. So in terms of discussions with refineries, that's extremely important for the marine for the -- sorry, for the conventional MSR business, not necessarily so important for the biofuel for bioMSAR necessarily because the buy components we're using are actually lower cost as well. So why we still looking quite attractive just with blending conventional fuels or heavy fuel. So having said that, there's always more money to be made once you can access the [indiscernible]. so Yes. But you need refiners, but you may go on to tap into the big trading companies like we are with MSC. So there's opportunities to supply Morocco also potentially from the work that we're doing with the NSC project as well.

Can I ask? I believe I'm correct that the -- for Marine, the boiler configuration and the changes necessary to allow any to be burned, will then allow bioMSAR to be burned? And then even later generations of even more friendly bio MSAR. Is that correct, Jason?

For Marine, the engine is the biggest consumer, the main engine, the 2 stroke. So that's -- if you think about a containership, I'd say 90% of the consumption is on the main 2-stroke engine and then a smaller amount from the auxiliary engines have furnaces as well. But whatever conversion you do for MSAR is applicable for bioMSAR. So yes. And in the case of -- it's the same in the case of the Morocco application. So we use the same supply system and the same burner setup for bioMSAR as we did with MSAR and it worked pretty well, actually. We change that you can switch between the 2 [indiscernible].

Which is bloody unbelievable. Are we shouting that enough from the rooftop because we're a one-stop shop. You start boning in Saturday, bioMSAR tomorrow when the later generation further down the road. That is just phenomenal.

And it's certainly what we say to clients before maybe we're not advertising it well enough on our website, which probably does need a bit of -- bit of a refresh as well. We did a bit of work, obviously, as part of the rebranding of the company, but it needs other revisits are really [indiscernible].

And the next RNS.

Sorry?

And; please raise that, mention that in the next RNS whenever that is.

This is a very good point because my recollection, Jason, is that blending different types of fuel oil is actually a challenge where as lending our products is relatively straightforward. .

Yes. by adding the additives that we add and obviously using our technology, we create stability that you don't have.

Sorry, this was something I wanted to mention earlier. Regarding stability, it shouldn't be forgotten how long the fuel was in Morocco. On the one hand, you might say, come on guidance, you should have goosed that feel much earlier, but it does make the point that the fuel is extraordinarily stable.

So it was the same fuel used to refresh it?

No.

Are there any other questions?

[indiscernible] long-term retail shareholder. On the -- I think we're all feeling pretty trial-weary and don't you as much as us. On the back of the successful Morocco trial, do you perhaps see if another customer came along with somewhere else in the world with a similar requirement and say, oh, we'd like to try this that you could term and say, no, it works. Just have it. Do you foresee a day when that will happen, that we won't be going through trials with every new customer?

I think -- yes, I mean Unfortunately, the nature of the Morocco application is that each of the units do tend to differ slightly. But I think in that particular application because we've done the trial in that one particular site, the rest of the trials in similar sites will be more like, okay, a commissioning phase before you actually full production we've undersold a lot ourselves as well. It's our own design burner, an air atomized burner, which is pretty new to us, which is the first of a kind, but worked pretty well actually of PAT. So I'd like to say that's the case. Also on the marine side, if we can get the letter of objection on the Flex engine, then again, there's very little objection then from anyone to use it in that type of engine. So -- it depends a little bit on the type of standardization in the industry, in the marine sector is actually better -- it takes a long time to get a bit of paper, but then it opens up quite a lot of large number of vessels. In the industrial application, you may have to do a little bit of tweaking certainly every single reference customer you've got then helps to enhance the business going forward, such that the duration of the trial, Luckily is actually quite short as well. And good this is not 6 months period anymore, you can do something in a couple of weeks and then go to commercial phase.

Sorry, I'm coming in here again. I think we've got to be careful of is select and focus. And we've got a limited resource, and the 1 exec directors point this out, of course, to the management team. And we need to be exceptionally careful there. But I would make the point also that the work we're doing on potential partners work, and that's both in the context of potential financing but also resources so that we can take these projects further that, that may be an opportunity that we would pass on to our partner.

And just quickly. Your Slide 12, I think it was, where you showed the output of the burner at full chat. Is that -- was that just steam coming out of it?

Yes just steam.

That needs to be plugged as well because you see some environmental thing on the telly about how unclean everything is and you see which is of steam stack checking out just water.

[indiscernible] it drives several hundred tons of products and how that particular unit. So it's running at full speed. And it's just a very low very, very low emissions, to be fair, also low emissions on fuel oil as well. But yes, but it's very impressive when you see it at full speed.

Can we have one final question here?

So how many counter-parties were involved in the LONO trial? I think there's been a bit of confusion about who's doing what, how many parties are involved. Is a refinery involved? Is it just are we using heavy fuel oil as an analog for resin, et cetera? Could you maybe give us an idea of who's doing what, without naming names? And what -- so people can get an idea of what the shape of things is?

Yes. Good question, Mark. So looking at MSC, we have a major trading company that we look -- we're working on to supply the biofuels component and the oil component. We have a terminal that's also willing to host the trial, so we can actually put our facility on do the blending there and do the supply. And we have MSC pretty much other than the other stakeholders being people like [indiscernible], people like [indiscernible] Register who've class society and the flag state bunkering is done by the major trading company that's what they do. So a few components, but you need to make sure that you're working with people who can do multiple things as well. And a lot of the things going on behind the scenes beyond the permits to actually run and things like making sure that you've got the sustainability certificate as well for the product that you're delivering. So in the case of our products that you get ICC certification for the product as well, which is then gives you the ability to get some of the credits back from the Dutch tax system as well. So there's a lot going on in terms of that, but it's a relatively few number of counter-parties that we did it.

That's great. Thank you to the Board of Quadrise and thank you to everybody for your engagement, both online and in this afternoon, Mr. Chairman, [indiscernible] direct investors to give you their feedback online, if there's any closing comments you wish to make? .

Just to say, apologies again to the -- those online who have had their questions answered, but we will definitely circle back to those. But I thank you for attending and online. But also thank you very much, everyone, in the room for your engagement today, and we very much appreciate you the time comfortable about we need that feedback whatever it is to be able to move forward. So thanks very much. And I believe the edited highlights or whole thing will be available on line for too long, yes?

Thank you very much indeed. Could I please ask investors online, not to close this session. We're now automatically redirect you for the opportunity to provide your feedback that the company can better understand your views and expectations. It's going to take a few moments to complete, but I'm sure it will be greatly valued by the company. on behalf of the management team and the Board of Quadrise, I'd like to thank you for attending today's Annual General Meeting. Thank you.