Quadrise Plc (QED) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Quadrise Interim Results Investor Presentation. [Operator Instructions] Due to the significant attendance on today's call, the company will not be able to answer every question received during the meeting itself. However, the company can review all questions submitted today and will publish responses where it's appropriate to do so. Before we begin, we'd like to submit the following poll, and I'm sure the company will be most grateful for your participation. I'd now like to hand over to Non-Executive Chairman, Andy Morrison. Good afternoon.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon from me as well, and welcome, everyone, to Quadrise's interim results presentation. Together with me today, I have Jason Miles, the Chief Executive; and David Scott, the CFO. The presentation that we're going to give you will be relatively short. It's similar to the one that we used actually in the recent fundraising, the successful fundraising in January. And really, there's no apologies for that because the focus is on delivering exactly what we said we would do in that fundraising presentation. The -- there's a disclaimer on the next slide. And then I would say that the Quadrise story is getting easier to tell. And that's really because as shareholders will know, we're in the right place at the right time and the decarbonization of shipping is a huge opportunity. Quadrise, we are a technology company, and we're at the final stages of the proof of that technology, and we're preparing to scale up. And you'll see some of the initial steps being described by Jason and David during the course of the presentation today. And you'll see obviously more of those unfold as the rest of the year goes on. So our approach to the business is to generate both demand and supply at the same time, generating demand through promoting our fuels, MSAR, bioMSAR and increasingly the bioMSAR Zero that you'll hear a little bit more about today. So that's generating demand amongst shipowners and other users. And on the other side, we generate our supply where we're looking for licensing and tolling revenues from our clients who will be based in terminals and refineries and other places. And between those, by generating the demand and the supply, we can then supply maritime transport, which is at the core of what we're trying to do. And also utilities, heavy industry and affect the economics of downstream and upstream oil. But shipping is very much at the center of what we're doing. I'm going to hand over now to Jason to give you an update on the business and what we've been doing during the course of the last few months.

Thanks, Andy. And just to remind shareholders about -- sorry, [indiscernible] crazy. Yes. some of the shareholders about the products we make. Essentially, we have a fossil fuel alternative called MSAR, which is a blend of 70% [ related ] with water. That produces a fuel which is lower cost and provides also lower emissions as well to make heavy fuel oil. We then have a product -- a commercial product called bioMSAR, where essentially we're blending 50% fuel oil today, which is a planning of the MSC trial with 40% of renewable glycerin. And that supplies a fuel, which is alternative -- an alternative to marine B30 or marine B24 fuel. And then we have a product on advance or in the advanced development now called bioMSAR Zero, which is essentially 100% biofuel. So that particular product is designed, again, as a B100 alternative to the shipping industry. So each of these products has a fit today. In terms of where it fits regulations, regulations are already in play now in Europe, where they're expecting the shipping industry to selectively or progressively reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. And there's Fuel EU Maritime and there's also sort of under the Fit-for-54 (sic) [ Fit-for-55 ] regulations, other penalties essentially for having a fuel, which is obviously more carbon intense. So MSAR has a part to play because it can reduce down the fuel consumption and reduce CO2 emissions. The bioMSAR also has an increasing part to play as the regulations become obviously more stringent as time progresses. And then obviously, alongside the EU, there's the International Maritime Organization who are bringing in or looking to bring in fairly restrictive regulations along similar lines to the EU. So there's a meeting coming up at [ METCAT3 ], which is then also looking to bring in regulations on a more global basis to cover global marine fuels and trying to incentivize the use of lower carbon or greenhouse emitting products, which again is beneficial for the biofuel components. And that's the thing where we have a compelling advantage with efficiency, which we do. So our strategy is really to support the demand that Andy mentioned before by stimulating supply of fuels around the global marine hubs. The principal project there where we seem to have boots on the ground is in Northwest Europe in Antwerp and a sort of a groundbreaking project with Cargill and MSC to supply MSC containership. We also have a project in OCP in Morocco, which is an industrial client where again, they're looking for MSAR demand. And that fits quite nicely as well with MSC who are also looking at MSAR for some of their fleet as well. So we have a project where there's an MSAR demand location in the Med. We have a project in the Americas with Sparkle Power, where we seem to be doing a trial there in Panama. And again, Panama is one of the larger bunker hubs. And then the project in Valkor looks after the U.S. market and the U.S. ports, specifically L.A. and U.S. Gulf Coast. And then looking further afield also, Singapore is a major bunker hub. So there's work ongoing there to sort of stimulate supply within Singapore as well. So in terms of the projects and where we've got to against -- since our last update, which is sort of late in January as part of the fundraising process. Essentially, since raising the money, we've obviously had to get everything ready for the supply contract and this -- the project in terms of installation of the equipment in Antwerp. There's a number of different containers, which seem to be plumbed together in the Antwerp facility. So each of those are being finalized either in the U.K. or in Denmark. So essentially, the plan is to actually get that -- those systems up and on the ground next month. Bilateral agreements are also underway. Those bilateral agreements don't stop us progressing supply of the equipment on site. But essentially those bilateral agreements with ourselves and Cargill, which is a tolling agreement, ourselves and MAC2, which is a services agreement and then the fuel supply agreement between MSC and Cargill are all at the final stages of being concluded, obviously, going through the legal process there, but there's no showstoppers at this stage. So we expect to get those done. And then that will enable us then to start the proof-of-concept trials in Q2 2025. Obviously, that's subject to the vessel rotation and the vessel schedule, which we obviously need to be mindful of as well. So -- and then in parallel to what's happening in Antwerp, obviously, we now have a facility that sits there in Antwerp with the ability to supply bioMSAR, especially with Cargill. So we're looking to maximize that opportunity with other shipping companies. And with our OCP in Morocco, when we last spoke, I think, sort of late January, we weren't entirely sure exactly where we'd be on site because the production plan that was changing within OCP. That's now been finalized. They've changed where the fuel oil demand is within that particular facility to a different particular site. So we've had to review the new site location, confirm it's suitable. And then basically, we've been preparing the tie-ins, all of our equipment that we have on site luckily and everything else is suitable. It's now a question of deployment on site and getting everything ready on the client side, making sure that the burner supplier is happy with what's going on as well. So all that work is ongoing in OCP now. So we have a time line still to get that done in Q2, which is again a positive development. And OCP in parallel, are looking at some of the other facilities now as well to try and advance where else we can -- once we get through this commercial trial and we conclude a supply agreement, the other sites where this fuel can be utilized as well in Morocco. And then there's some other alternative options also in Morocco that we're looking at as well. And then with Valkor, the samples -- the fuel samples have literally been shipped, so they're in the air at the moment. They'd be delivered to site. The reason for the delay there is that Valkor had made some changes to how the -- their pilot plant operated. So the quality of the samples would have been affected if they sent them early. So the decision was to delay those, get the optimized process up and running and get those samples sent across to us. So they're literally on their way. The plan is then as soon as they arrive to obviously turn those around in the lab and allow us to start marketing the fuel in the U.S. as well. So that's the situation there. And obviously, they've raised the money that they needed to do to obviously advance the financing of the first oil sands facility as well. So those projects -- that project is getting up and running finally, which is good for us. And that obviously leads to the revised site license agreement that we had, we sort of announced in January where we've agreed to revise terms. We're putting a smaller MMU to match their demand in 2025 and with a view to getting the larger units in at the end of the year. And then in terms of the other projects that are going on, there's lots of work ongoing with various different partners in the biofuel space, both obviously BTG Bioquids and Vertoro and others as well, where we're looking at a number of different feedstocks, which we can combine and blend with our bioMSAR platform to produce biofuel, which is ultimately very competitive to the marine sector. Spin-off of that is some of the work we're doing with Vertoro is to look at a B100, a first B100 test of bioMSAR Zero on a Focus Motor Yachts, so during sort of end of Q2. It's the current plan. And then we're also doing similar work with the blend on boards -- with our blend-on-board technology looking at with SEASTARS and the Horizon project, looking at the use of our fuel either for blending-on-board or for -- obviously for bunkering as well. And then the Sparkle test, we've had people on site already preparing for that. The client is very, very technically adept to getting things ready. So we've been delighted with the progress there. So the plan is to get that done also in this quarter, the second quarter. So there's a lot happening that's coming up in Q2. Unfortunately, this -- at this point where things are happening and haven't quite been delivered yet, frustrating for us, but that's the way the quarter goes, unfortunately. So we expect lots of news flow to follow in Q2. And then in terms of Southeast Asia, I think the previous update was we're waiting for the client financial decision to proceed there. That's not been received as yet. It's part of a wider, a larger investment by the client, which hasn't progressed. But so we're still speaking with the owner of that particular refinery to look at other supply opportunities independently of the refinery project and obviously looking at alternative supply sources as well in Singapore and the surrounding region. So in terms of time lines and how that all fits out or how that progresses during the year. The proof of concept is still expected to start in the second quarter of the year. So the next available opportunity we're targeting in sort of mid-May according to the vessel schedule, which most people can look up online. So it's not sensitive information, but the target is to get the first proof of concept delivery then on MSAR, then we progress the next proof-of-concept run with bioMSAR and then the operational trial will happen during the second half of the year. That's a very big opportunity for us to obviously use that as a platform, obviously, to do a lot of business development around that -- around those phases as well in terms of telling the marine industry, this is real, this is happening now. There's lots of things going on to actually to bolster that opportunity. Obviously, we're investing money on the ground, but also look to expect to take advantage of that investment as well from a marketing point of view. There will be -- there will continue to be announcements along with the biofuel program. There's lots of work ongoing behind the scenes to expand that portfolio and get those tests we're doing ultimately to commercialization. We've seen good progress on the majority of fronts there. And then with the blend-on-board system, obviously, the first opportunity is Focus Motor Yachts but we also announced, obviously, that we're partnering up with a company called Auramarine as well of Finland. And Auramarine have the capability for installation of marine fuel systems and equipment such as blend-on-board equipment that we envisage as well. So we're partnering up with Auramarine to take advantage of obviously their skills in terms of marine retrofits, but also that helps the business development pipeline as well because they have particular clients that may require a biofuel solution as an example. And then the other projects, again, I think we've covered some of the time lines there. Q2 will be a key point where we can get some news out with regards to Valkor, samples tested, marketing underway, fuel specs obviously known at that stage. And the plan is to basically take the small MMU, which will be used in the Sparkle Power project in Panama and then send that on to Utah sort of end of Q2, such that we can then carry out some of the client trials then with the Valkor project in Utah for some of their customers there. And then Morocco, we are looking to conclude the site trial there at Jorf Lasfar. But also in parallel, the commercial supply discussions are basically commenced already in terms of supply partners that can supply not only in OCP Morocco, but also with MSC, with MSAR fuel as well. So each of these projects obviously should need to -- need news flow during Q2. David, I'll hand over to you.

Thanks, Jason. Hi, everyone. So where we are with our cash position is that at the end of December, we had GBP 1.4 million. So we were in a position to raise money in January, and we raised GBP 6.5 million through our placing and retail offer. So overall, at the moment, that gives us about GBP 7.1 million at the end of February. And we see those funds as being sufficient to allow us to progress to revenues and the positive cash flow generation likely midway through next year based on the time lines that Jason discussed earlier. Our loss for the period was GBP 1.7 million. So it's equivalent to the loss last year. Our cash burn rate hasn't changed. And we've got almost GBP 65 million in tax losses now. So we'll be able to utilize those against future profits, which means we shouldn't have to pay corporation tax in the first few years of profitability. And that's pretty much everything from me. So I'll hand back to Andy.

Thanks, David. And we're almost at the point where we're going to be opening up for questions. Just a couple of points before we get there. In terms of resources, we explained in -- as a part of our fundraising activity, the IP and know-how and the channel partners and there is internal team. Amongst the channel partners, we've recently brought on Auramarine from Finland. We have capability around the world, actually, both particularly in Finland, also in China and ability to increase and scale up our engineering capability. So that's an important channel partner. But we've also welcomed a couple of new members to the team. Tony Foster is Chief Executive of Marine Capital, a specialist shipping investment management firm focused on -- most recently on decarbonization. He's joined as a Non-executive Director. And he's extremely well networked amongst the shipping industry and amongst the regulatory bodies that surround the industry. And so he's really been helping us to step up our game, if you like, and to navigate those changes and to be prepared for them. Alongside Tony, we welcomed Linda Sorenson. She's an experienced marine sector specialist with broad operational project and business development skills, and she's been already making an impact in terms of reaching out to new potential customers and so on. So we've been great to have that additional shipping capability on board. We're already starting to benefit from that. And so in summary, before we get on, I would say that our purpose has never been more needed. And our solutions have never been more relevant, the ability to do drop-in fuels and support the existing fleet, which will remain in service for many years, completely relevant, extend the asset life so that we're not wasting resources. And our focus, therefore, is clearer than ever. And now clearly, it's time for revenue and growth, and that's what we're working on right now. So that's the end of the presentation part. I'm going to turn now to the Q&A.

And I'd like to thank everyone for submitting such a lot of questions. And apologize also to the few people who might have been caught out by the stop and start of the question process. We initially had a default of them -- the closing the questions a little bit early, and then we reopened it again. So apologies if you got caught up in that. Hopefully, you've had a chance to put your questions in. And if you haven't, then you will have put them online, and we may have a chance to answer a few of those. But overall, I would say that where we are is that in the course of the last quarter with the successful fund raise, which gives us the additional resources that the team is really buoyed up by this. And we've got what it takes now to make a success of this business. And therefore, when I look at the questions, and there's quite a lot of them, there's clearly a lot of impatience for news. And it's a little bit similar to where we were at the time of the AGM, in fact, where we've got a lot of news kind of -- I'd say in the [indiscernible] because that implies that it's already late. It's not completely ready. We're cooking up a lot of news for the second quarter, and we hope very much to be able to roll that out. So I'll go on to some of the questions. Some of the questions have been answered by Jason and David during the course of the presentation. And so I'm going to a little bit paraphrase some of the questions in order to help get through them quickly and not to repeat too much what has already been said. So quite a few questions about the MAC2 and MSC trial, and about Cargill. Maybe to start with one, which maybe you did touch on, Jason. Plus if you could say anything else a little bit further. When will the agreement between QED, Cargill and MAC2 be signed? It's been soon for a long time now. Will this impact the critical path of the trial?

The answer is no. In terms of obviously when it will happen, we expect it to happen very early part of Q2. It's -- but it's not been holding anything back. There's work that's been going on behind the scenes to prepare everything. The only -- I guess the only aspect where -- we have -- one of the reasons we're not necessarily on site yet is that MAC2 had some other activities that we're looking to try and get concluded in March. So they requested us specifically not to start deploying equipment until April time. So that's the current plan. But in terms of everything behind the scenes, both MAC2 and Cargill and ourselves are working in line, the agreements will be signed imminently. And it's just a legal formality now to get those done and across the line. But obviously, until they're signed and announced, that remains to be seen. But yes, we certainly are very confident that, that will be done.

Okay. If we move on to the question 4. We said before that MSC might use MSAR based on the interim LONO done by Maersk, will MSC be able to get insurance? Or is that an issue without a full lONO? Could they consider using it without insurance?

Yes, it's a similar situation to, can you carry out the trial on the vessel. The reality is that insurance is available and can be made available. And it's just making sure that the insurance in place is fit for purpose with our operations. Obviously, we've already got insurance lined up for the trial. And if -- but if obviously it progresses on the MSC supply side, then that's another discussion we have with insurers. But in principle, insurance can be arranged. Obviously, the LONO opens that up, but we are working on the basis that insurance is not the hurdle here.

Okay. And assuming that the LONO trial -- the trials are successful, have MSC indicated the amount of fuel they would actually expect to use each year? Or can we make a realistic estimate?

Forward looking statements. I think in terms of our expectations, we've looked at their particular fleet in terms of its applicability. We've got no -- we have not done the detailed analysis exactly how that will progress. So today, they consume over 10 million tonnes a year of fuel. So even a small portion of that from our perspective is a fairly big ticket. And we wouldn't expect MSC to be the only game in town neither. So MSC, it doesn't all rest on MSC, I would say, in terms of future demand either. So yes, I guess we have plans in place to put multiple MMUs in. We own 2 today, which we would like to get up and running and operationally sort of generating cash flow for us, but we have plans in place to expand that production as well.

Right. Have there been any research estimates going on now?

Research in terms of analyst research estimates, not yet, no. But I guess now we're a -- now we're revenue generative. I guess the analysts will -- we expect the analysts will take a more detailed look at that.

And then there's also a technical question #6, are there any corrosion issues when using MSAR or bioMSAR marine engines due to the water content? And have we tested that? And what were the results?

Yes. I guess if you think about the technology, basically, the technology before MSAR was a product called water emulsion that I was involved with, where oil emulsion was used at commercial scale in boilers and in diesel engines. So we had 150-megawatt power station running for 4 years before supply stopped by Venezuela. And the water content is not the issue in the fuel. So it's a known entity. With MSAR, we've also tested it, obviously, on the Maersk ship over a period of maybe 7 months without any issues. And the key thing really is to make sure the water is clean water. And it's -- if it goes to an engine, it has to be a particular quality that the engine manufacturers are willing to accept as well. So there's already a spec that's out there for water quality for use in engine environments and water injection is a common technology as well. So it's known.

And then there are several questions which are around the schedule for the trial. The question 7 is looking at the schedule of Leandra, are you expecting first use of our fuel in May? And there are several questions which are about the lead up to that. But if we just focus on when we expect the trial to be then all the other things obviously would have been done before that. So is that May when we're expecting the trial?

That's certainly what we're planning for is to get the first loading done in May when the vessel is due to be in Europe. But yes, I'd say that the schedule of the vessel has changed slightly in the last 2 weeks. So that doesn't change, then that's still the current plan. And as you mentioned, there's lots of things to pull together to make sure that, that date is met, not just on our side, but also in all the third-party side. [indiscernible] just needs to be ranged and finalized. The vessel needs to be fully ready and prepared for the need to be there. So yes, there's lots of moving parts to these trials. It's not a simple just Quadrise set a date and everything happens because we need to make sure everything is aligned.

Moving on to a slightly more general question about MSC, question 14. MSC is a massive partner with its own priorities. Have they indicated any hesitation or alternative decarbonization plans since the end of last year that slowed their sign off? And what firm deadline have you -- have they given you for the trial to start beyond the quarter 2 2025?

Well, I guess, yes, they are a massive partner, and they do have their own priorities and the world is not a fixed place at the moment as well in terms of how you manage a global shipping operation with potentially sanctions coming in the U.S., et cetera. But having said that, they're extremely supportive. We're working at least once a week or even several times a week with the people in Cyprus to make sure everything is ready and everybody is geared up for the May loading at the moment or planning for the May loading. So there's nothing that's slowed their sign-off other than the legal department are also busy on other things. So we need to be patient, wait in the queue obviously as much as we can, but be aware that we're not the only game in town there. So -- but yes, we don't see anything delaying the trial happening in May at this moment in time.

Yes. I mean I would just add that. I think that all shipowners are very much focused on decarbonization and fuel is obviously an important part of that, but they do -- their all shipowners group will also have other strategies about bulbous bow and that slow steaming and different things that they can do to adjust the carbon intensity of their current and future fleets. And so MSC is no different. They do look at all those kinds of things, but they've always been supportive of the trial that we're doing. It fits very much with their sort of fleet profile. So we've not -- other than that they get busy from time to time buying and selling ships, we've not seen anything really to indicate that they've changed their level of interest. And in fact, as we've heard earlier in the presentation, they're now interest -- renewed interest, if you like, in the MSAR as well as the bioMSAR because they can see that, that can help them with the short-term compliance in -- particularly in Europe.

Yes. And to add to that, bioMSAR have the experience from the proof of concept as well, which they'd like to witness it themselves as well. So that's a good turning point for us.

And then I think we should move on to Morocco. So this is a flavor of the kind of some of the sort of questions that of impatience, if you like, another 19. You've obviously known for some time that Morocco project wasn't going to proceed until late in the quarter 2. So why didn't you tell us your excuses are not credible? 5 years and counting, certainly embarrassing. Why can't we -- what happens? Why can't we sometimes say these things?

Yes. I mean the reality is we're waiting for the client in terms of production change within fuel feedstock. They had to repurpose one of their production lines to run on heavy fuel oil and produce a product that, you could be the large consumer of heavy fuel for energy as energy [ fuels ] rather. And as part of that process, there was not a lot of information forthcoming from OCP at the time as to what the reason was for delay, but that was happening behind the scenes. So now that's been done and that production line is now up and running, we have a new location for the trial, which is actually in many ways better for us. So the kiln is a larger kiln, which means that the trial may not be needed to run for 30 days and will get done -- we may able to get that done in a shorter period of time, we hope. So yes, we -- there is a delay. Sometimes it's us trying to get information from the client, which isn't immediately forthcoming because it's sensitive to them. And we knew it was going to happen. I think it's important to stress, I've seen some of the other questions coming in. This is a paid trial. We're getting paid to do this, right? So if you're looking to question the commitment of OCP, they're actually paying our invoices in terms of getting things paid for so we -- it shows their commitment that they're willing to pay for it as opposed to just bring it along and not paying for anything at all.

So this is another question similar to #23. The Morocco project with OCP was originally presented in 2022 as simpler and quicker to execute the marine trials due to fewer stakeholders and less complex technical arrangements yet by March 2025 completion still not being achieved. And the recent communication continues to lack concrete time lines. Can you explain what specific factors or challenges have caused such delays and why given that suppose simplicity has not been the first project completed? And then just maybe to sort of add that question 20, how much have we spent in employee salaries and resources on Morocco project [indiscernible] And at what point should the company decide that there's enough and walk away from that delay. So there's 2 questions there, which are expressing that frustration that shareholders are seeing. And so how do we respond to that, I think, Jason?

Yes, it's a good question. I mean the reality is that we've had to maneuver our pathway through OCP. The original plan was to try and get something done in Jorf Lasfar back in 2022. That didn't happen because Jorf Lasfar was very busy on other things didn't have the time. So that pushed us to doing the trial in another facility in [indiscernible] to get that kiln trial done, which we achieved successfully in the end. They had some [indiscernible] issues in terms of the combustion system that they installed there and some equipment failures on our side. But we negotiated that pathway if we think got us back into the key Jorf Lasfar test, which we're looking now to get completed, which is, I think, from a head office point of view, the final tick in the box before they go commercial with this. But yes, it's taken way longer than we first anticipated. And yes, we've had to do quite a lot of the groundwork ourselves to get that done. But that's -- I think we'll get to the end of this with obviously a positive outcome.

And I think as you pointed out, Jason, they are paid trials. So they are a customer, if you like. They will not be there, So I mean -- to be clear, the Board has debated this point about is this really -- is it ever going to happen kind of thing. And I think we are getting to the stage now where we feel more confident in the portfolio of projects that we've got such that we will be in a position to walk away from projects. However, I think in the case of Morocco, we do judge that we are close enough here. And also, there's another prize to the Moroccan project, which is the establishment of supply of MSAR in the Mediterranean, which we would also be able to use for shipping clients. And there's actually a question about that I mean we have an LOI for OCP. Do we have a defined suppliers yet? What uptake can we offer on that, if anything?

Yes, we don't have a defined supply, but we've got discussions well underway with a number of potential suppliers of the fuel who are obviously looking to license our technology, install it and then operate it for supply to OCP and maybe to MSC as well. So yes, it's progressing, but we can't obviously reveal it.

And then so we're looking at the head of the fixture congestion that we were talking about for those -- the second quarter. Question 26, will Sparkle and the Morocco trials be run during the same month or be staggered? And if staggered, which month do you expect these to be run in?

I mean it's hard to be very specific about which month. It's not going to be April, [indiscernible] free. But yes, I mean, essentially, in terms of which one operates first, it depends very much on the Morocco trial date. Sparkle is -- we have a firmer idea of when that will happen and certainly in Q2. And the Sparkle test is a fairly limited duration test. So the idea is it will only take something around a week, may stretch into 2 if there's any issues arising. But basically, that's 1 to 2 weeks where it can get done. And we're utilizing the use of third-party people. Our asphalt [indiscernible] plant supplier can operate the MMU for that period of time. So we're using third parties where we can and consultants are added as well and as well as [indiscernible] people to manage that. So people like Bernard and others are not necessarily tied up on site for a long period of time. So the idea is even if they had to run in parallel, which I doubt they will, but if they did, then we could probably -- we could work around it. But the plan is to sequence those. And we don't expect the Morocco trial now to be 30 days, but we expect it to be a little bit less than that.

Right. And another question about Morocco, which has got a sort of financial twist to it. So I'm going to ask David if you would answer on #27. In the RNS following the statement was made, the commercial trial at OCP's Jorf Lasfar site and the MAN diesel trial at Sparkle, both planned to commence before the financial year-end. Can you confirm what this means if financial year ends shortly. What's the terminology that we're using here?

Yes. Well, when we're referring to financial year, we're talking about the company's financial year. So its year-end at 30th of June 2025. It's not the tax year. So we're not saying these things are going to be done by 5th of April 2025. And we use that term financial year to avoid confusion with calendar year. So I think that answers the question.

Yes. Here's a few questions like that. I wonder if you could say anything more, Jason, #32. Why is the Asian refinery project slipping away when it was due to be signed in December, January? Was it really expected to be signed? Or were you just hoping?

No, we were generally expecting the financial investment decision to be made, which led to that trial going ahead, but that's been deferred. So yes, there's nothing we can do about that. It's in a third party's control. So we weren't just hoping. We were led to believe at least that, that was going to be signed off and things would progress. But that's the way it works sometimes.

Yes. So we haven't had long to review these questions. And so I don't think we're going to have numbers here. But question 36, maybe we can give a sense of this. With Utah, please, can you provide a realistic estimate of the potential scale of the opportunity in terms of tonnes per year and the [ tonnes days ] to get there? And it may be something we need to come back to in written answers afterwards, but...

Yes. I mean, I think the original intention for that particular project, which is the basis behind the site license agreement that was certainly this year, our larger MMU would be installed, and that has a capacity to produce about 350,000 tonnes a year. So the site license agreement is for a set quantity of product. So yes, you mean the tonnes per year number there, 6,000 barrels a day of emulsion equivalent. The reality is that, that project has been slightly delayed. So the agreement was made to put the smaller unit in. But ultimately, we're expecting the bigger unit to be installed there to replace a small unit later this year towards the end of the year. And then it's been a gift really to try and maximize the output of that particular project. It's well documented that the asphalt Ridge and surrounding areas have several billion barrels of oil equivalent available and they have the option to obviously drill wells and get maybe 40 barrels a day from each well or they also have the capacity to install oil sands plants, which is part of the work that obviously, the pilot plant work that Valkor has been doing recently is optimize the oil sands process that they've got as well and provide a fairly low CapEx solution to that. So each of those oil sands plants is 5,000 barrels a day. So we're sort of matched with Valkor's projections. But in terms of the scope, it's obviously quite large. It will take time. I expect that's going to happen over a period of 5 years.

And then there are a few questions around the Panama Sparkle trial. Maybe to summarize them, it would be, can you give a bit of a flavor as to what that trial is actually going to look like? Do you know how long does it take to do the trial? Who needs to be there and who is -- how is it going to work?

Yes. I mean the trial is on a 4-stroke MAN diesel engine. I think they've got 8 engines [indiscernible] for a smaller, older for a larger -- it's one of the larger 4-stroke engines. But it's a good test for us because it's MAN 4-stroke engine. The duration of the trial is deliberately sort of set around just making sure that the emissions are compliant. It's not long-term durability trial necessarily because the client believes that there's no issues from that perspective. So the intent is to carry out that trial over a period of less than a week, so a few days we cover it. We've also made sure there's capability -- the opportunity to test bioMSAR side by side as well. So again, it gives us another good set of data to compare MSAR with bioMSAR on an MAN application. In terms of who's involved, we have consultants on our side who are diesel engine experts who will be involved on our side. And then the clients also bring in the OEM, the diesel engine manufacturer and some of the agents there as well as well as we're looking to bring in potentially some other power companies as well with a view to sort of reviewing what's happening to attract additional interest there.

Okay.

[ Question #42 ], actually.

Go for it.

Yes. So based on the RNS in December on the bioMSAR Zero, which you recently tested offers substantial CO and CO2 reductions, but NOx was only reduced by 18%. Given that regulators will also want NOx reductions, how much of a problem is this? I think when you look at -- one of the concerns with -- in the marine space when they first started looking at biofuels was that there was the potential for some of these biofuels to actually produce more NOx than conventional marine fuels. So yes, NOx is a problem and NOx is obviously they're looking to reduce that where they can. But there are many opportunities by switching fuels and switching to a biofuel that offer a reduction in NOx whatsoever. And most opportunities are actually concerned about that NOx actually increasing. So the fact that the bioMSAR Zero products had a reduction in NOx emissions of 20% is quite -- is certainly tangible. And we've obviously seen similar reductions in NOx with bioMSAR as well, if not more. So this capability to have a reduced NOx is very, very -- it seem to be very, very beneficial actually for the marine sector.

And then #45 is a similar thing, but on a different topic. Can you please provide some details about blend-on-board? How exactly does this work? What are the benefits? What more needs to be done to progress the idea and how close are you to making it work? And the MSC has expressed an interest in it?

Yes. Well, certainly, MSC have expressed an interest in it because it's incorporated in the agreement that we signed with them originally. So they're certainly interested, although the main focus is obviously on the bunkering solution. The blend- system, what I mean -- what that does is it essentially takes fuels that have already been bunkered on board the vessel and that could be -- potentially that could be conventional fuels, but it could also be 100% biofuel because each of the container ships or other ships have multiple fuel tanks. So the idea is you have the capability to blend a biofuel directly that could be bunkered onto the vessel and you can put one of our blending systems inside the ship before the booster unit, blend to make the emulsion and then use that emulsion then to feed the engine. So it's a miniature version quite similar to the 5-tonne MMU unit that we've got already deployed in Morocco and plan to use in Sparkle. It's using a very similar system to that, albeit marine approved to do online blending of biofuels and provide the flexibility to vessels that can't always bunker in the same place. And that opens up a class of vessels, ships which are bulk carriers or tankers that are going to the point to point.

Maybe moving a little bit on to business development here. Question #43. Andy said in the RNS that -- in terms of RNS that you have recently had markedly increased levels of inquiries for shipowners. Please, can you give some more details, i.e., the number of companies that you've [ envisaged ] and if they are interested in using the fuels given that the fuels cannot be used for the LONO, then what really is there to discuss at this stage? Where we got to the business development?

Yes. We -- well, I mean, we're in reasonably advanced stages with a number of different shipping companies who are very -- who take a similar view to MSC, and they may not be necessarily in the same line as them, but they take a similar view to MSC that biofuels is an important component for them to decarbonize their fleet going forward. Ultimately, they'd like to carry out their own test because their technical people need to be convinced. It's not -- they're just not necessarily willing to wait for MSC to conclude. And they want to be ahead of the curve themselves and take the opportunity potentially, they're obviously being available in Antwerp to do it. So in terms of where we are, obviously, we are reasonably happy with that. Obviously, bringing Linda on board is expanding those discussions and gives us more capability to expand the network to try and expand that particular pipeline. But with the pipeline we've already got, with a number of different shipping companies, we feel optimistic that there are more people involved, very interested in testing bioMSAR and not waiting necessarily for the LONO to be completed to do that because they want their own experience. And they understand the shipping -- I think it's important to explain to shareholders that shipping companies are carrying out tests of different fuels all the time. They know the process and how it can be done. So they're willing to do their own trials and not wait for approvals to happen in several years' time.

Okay. And then a question here, what are we going to do with the additional funds that we received during the recent fundraiser? And maybe I'll try to address this one. The -- obviously, the main purpose of the fundraising was to fund the project activity to get through, as David explained, to the cash flow and profitability and to -- then to accelerate our business scale up into the opportunity after that. Clearly, we raised more money than we first anticipated in that process. And we have been able to secure Tony and Linda, as we mentioned, and also be able to approve the projects that we're doing. And that -- but it remains the case that the additional funds have not been deployed yet. And the Board is working to how best to deploy that. It's something which we will bring into our planning cycle. So we are very much aware that we need to use those funds wisely and to be sure that we will be able to accelerate the business as a result of deployment. So we will give further details of the deployment of those funds. You'll see that through the RNS as we go forward.

Do you have anything, David?

Yes, there's a few come in on the live questions, there's live Q&A. So there's one from Alastair B. Is there a PR strategy in place to be rolled out in conjunction with the MSC trial to maximize the opportunity for getting the Quadrise name out there? It will be great to see as mentioned in some national publications.

Yes, a very sort of timely question actually. Yes -- the answer is yes. I mean, Andy mentioned use of funds, obviously, we're aware this is a great opportunity for us to now showcase what's happening in terms of the projects and things are moving ahead and there's new boots on the ground, a wider range of activities. So yes, the idea is the idea that there's definitely a plan in place to accelerate our sort of PR process, both from the trade press. I think not necessarily the broad sheets in terms of the broad sheets in the marine industry, people like TradeWinds, Lloyd's List [indiscernible] A lot of these journals sort of read by the shipping industry. So the idea is to bring on a trade specialist PR company to accelerate the PR activities and [indiscernible] that involved Linda and her work as well in developing the pipeline.

Yes. I mean that ties into a few of the questions we've had. Just wanted a bit more clarity on Linda's role.

Yes. I mean I mean Linda has been brought in specifically to -- as -- we don't have a large sales team, right? It's myself and Phil and who else can assist in that process. So Linda has been brought in specifically to firstly bring in leads, but bringing in her experience in our network. She's already widely respected professional in the shipping industry. So bringing her on board has brought in that experience. And the idea is to make sure that, that experience is in, brings in new leads to the company, sort of defines the PR strategy going forward and the business development strategy as well for the company, which we'll see how that progresses. But so far, so good. She's ready to hit the ground running. It's great.

Just one more from Alastair. Are we expecting to require any additional business development resource...

Yes. I think we're looking at the moment. Obviously, we don't want to rush into that particular decision, and we've made maybe some mistakes in the past, which we are cognizant of as well. But certainly, beyond the marine space or even the wider team, frankly, there are gaps or there are -- we need to bolster up the team anyway. So there are additional people that we will look to make sure that everyone supported in operations. Bernard obviously worked extremely hard as well. So we need to make sure he has support. So yes, throughout the team, we're looking at a number of different opportunities to expand that. But BD is obviously is one area where we're looking to expand that too.

And then I've got one here from Dave [ Van ]. Have there been any further conversations with Maersk?

In the last 2 months? No, not directly anyway, but yes, the Maersk is a company that obviously we respect -- but we have other shipowners, fortunately, well not unfortunately, but fortunately rather, who we have to make sure that they're serviced and showing more interest. So frankly, we'll -- if we have clients who are interested, then we're going to -- we'll service them first.

Yes. And one I've got here for Andy. Does the Board consider Donald Trump to present the risk to U.S. strategy at all? Or maybe Jason could answer...

I think the U.S. opportunity actually with Utah is pretty much a stand-alone opportunity. And I think that there is a lot of interest in the U.S. in domestic fuel supply and our ability, therefore, to expand on our bridgehead at Utah, I think this could be a great strength. And we're very much at the early stages of that. But I see the U.S. as a huge opportunity. And just to go back to one of the points that Jason was making, I think that's where we can see that when the time is right, we should apply some additional business development resources. The point, bring somebody there if they've got nothing immediately to do and so we've tested the fuels and things. But that is an area where if we can find projects, we can find lots of them. And the American psyche is one which is a can-do attitude. And I don't make any political comment, but certainly, I would think that can do is what we're seeing quite a lot of at the moment. And so I don't see -- I don't really see that as a threat. There is obviously an issue if world trade becomes disruptive, that could affect shipping operations. But no, I don't think it's something that is -- that we're overly exposed to. We're going to wrap up fairly soon. There are quite a few of questions about a pre-committed around missing deadlines and frustration around that. And that's a recurring theme that we have at our presentations, and we recognize that. And so various questions right now, what are we going to do about it. I think the best thing really is to let the actions speak louder than our words on that. And I think as Jason has said that we do anticipate that the second quarter of this year will be very, very busy. And shareholders will perhaps also remember that we were in a similar position before the AGM where we were just about to publicize news. We didn't quite have it done, and then it came in a bit of a rush thereafter. So I hope that shareholders will understand that that's the way the cookie crumble sometimes and that we were in a similar situation, we do expect to have a flow. And to sort of wrap that up into one of the final questions, can you confirm whether senior management's compensation or incentives are explicitly tied to achieving milestones within the publicly stated time frames? And if not, why not? And this is a question actually that was addressed by Vicky at the AGM, one of our Non-Executive Directors, and she's on the Compensation Committee. And the answer is absolutely yes, that the management's compensation is set by the Compensation Committee and key elements of that are tied to the achievement of milestones and time frames. And we will continue to do that and try to find ways to make sure that, that becomes ever closer in the future. We do understand, of course, that deadlines are not always [indiscernible] another was hit and that does cause frustration. But I think that we're on the right track. We make -- we've got the resources now, and we are in a position to scale up the business. So I don't think that we want to go down a sort of negative spiral at this point. I think we are -- as a company, we're pretty buoyed up by where we are. We've got lots of challenges. We've got lots of things to do, but we're getting on with it. And we hope to be in a position when we come back to you next time with some good news and some further progress. So I'd just like to finish up by thanking you all for attending for your questions. I know we didn't get to all the questions today. Somewhere that's too detailed for us to be able to address during this call. We will try to do so offline. And any other questions that we received during the course of the call that we didn't get to, we will also try to address those. So many thanks again. Good afternoon to you all.

That's great. Andy, David, Jason, thank you very much indeed for updating investors. We're going to close this session as we're now going to automatically redirect you for the opportunity to provide your feedback in order that the company can better understand your views and expectations. This may take a couple of moments to complete, but I'm sure will be greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team at Quadrise, I'd like to thank you for attending today's presentation, and good afternoon to you all.