Quadrise Plc (QED) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Quadrise plc Final Results Investor Presentation. [Operator Instructions] Given the significant attendance on today's call, the company will not be in a position to answer all questions submitted. However, the company can review all questions submitted today and we'll 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 would be most grateful for your participation. I'd now like to hand over to Executive Chairman, Andy Morrison. Andy? Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Quadrise results presentation for the year ending 30th of June 2025. With me today, we have Jason Miles, CTO; David Scott, CFO; and we have a new face, Peter Borup, the CEO, who was on his second day in the role. You'll hear more from Peter when we get to the Q&A later on. As usual, we've got lots of questions. And so we'll skip through the presentation as quickly as we reasonably can in order to leave time to answer as many of those as possible. And if we don't manage to answer them all, we'll get back to the other ones afterwards after the event. So for most of you, Quadrise is not a completely new company. However, we are continually evolving the -- and refining as we prepare for commercialization. And we are a technology company with patented emulsion fuels, and we're focusing on the decarbonization of shipping or reducing emissions from shipping, both carbon and NOx. And our strategy is to stimulate demand at the same time as creating supply hubs around the world. And we are only a small company, as you know and so collaboration with partners is key to our strategy. And one of the things which I think we take heart from is that we're trying to do something, although it seems difficult at times, we're doing something which has actually been done before. And the -- our emulsion business originated in Venezuela reached a scale of 100,000 barrels a day. So if we can get into commercialization, we have a very good runway ahead of us, and it has been done before. And the year under review has been around getting ready for commercialization. And the fundraise that we did in January provided the firepower for us to make some significant moves, particularly in terms of resourcing ready for commercialization. So we appointed Linda Sorensen as Head of Marine, Tony Foster as a Non-Executive Director with bags of shipping experience. And then most recently, as you know, Peter Borup has joined us as CEO. Of course, we would have wanted our projects to move faster. But overall, we are in a much better financial and strategic position than we were 12 months ago. And of course, Jason will come on to the projects in a few minutes. Also worth saying, I think that the regulatory conditions remain supportive. We'll be looking out for the IMO ratification or otherwise of the emissions regulations later this month. But actually, we feel we're in a pretty strong position either way. If they're ratified, then great. If they're not ratified, then the period of uncertainty that will result actually probably favors transition fuels over the more ambitious fuel changes. So we can benefit from that. And this slide shows in diagrammatic form what is our business. The left-hand show -- or how it works. The left-hand side shows our products and product development, which is what we're doing on demand. So those of you who know us, we're familiar with our MSAR, bioMSAR, bioMSAR Zero product slate. And the right-hand side shows the supply side where we intend to operate through licensing and tolling agreements using our emulsion technology, either fixed installations or blend onboard technology. And front and center of what we're doing, of course, is the maritime transport, the shipping industry, which is what we're trying to serve. We also have use cases for utilities and heavy industry and our license partners could easily be in downstream oil and upstream oil as well. And just before I hand on to Jason, just a few more words about the EU emissions regulations. And this maps our products onto that evolution. And the MSAR product, as you can see on the top left, is quite well mapped on to the early stages of that -- of the regulations. And then bioMSAR and BioMSAR Zero come on later in terms of the regulations. However, there is also the ability for shipowners to pool their fleet. So if you've got 10 ships, you can put one on a bioMSAR and average that across the fleet. So that's another way effectively of getting a lower level of overall performance by using bioMSARs earlier than might otherwise be the case. And also bioMSAR Zero could have application in areas where particularly environmental sensitivity. So whilst we -- whilst MSAR is well suited to the immediate term, we do see markets developing more quickly than you might imagine from this chart in terms of bioMSAR Zero. Anyway, with that, I'm going to hand on to Jason for a roundup of the projects that I know you're all keen to hear about.

Thanks, Andy. So as investors are fairly well aware, I mean, and Andy mentioned earlier that our focus is really on stimulating demand in the main bunker hubs, initially in ARA, where obviously we have the project that we're planning with Cargill and MSC in Antwerp. There's a demand requirement also in the Mediterranean, both with OCP, who is an industrial consumer and also potentially, obviously, MSC and others in the future to cover requirements in the Mediterranean region. And then most recently, we completed the trial in Panama with Sparkle Power on a power station there, 50-megawatt power plant. And then obviously, then with Valkor, we have an upstream project where it can produce a low sulfur, lower carbon fuel for the shipping sector ultimately. And there's been some progress made there, albeit a little bit slower than we would like. And then with a view to the future, obviously, there's a requirement for -- on a large demand for bunker fuel in Singapore. So there's some progress that we've made there. But obviously, with the addition of new resources, it's a focus for the future as well. So in terms of the plan for Antwerp, we have the terminal secured with MAC2. We signed the agreement earlier in the year with the MAC2 terminal. We start -- we've prepared groundworks in the terminal itself as well. So that terminal is ready. And the plan is to -- for Cargill via a bunkering operator to supply the barge and also then the products, which will then toll-convert into a bioMSAR product. And that will then supply the Leandra V, which is a 50,000-tonne feeder container vessel with a very large Wärtsilä engine, which will use the main engine on our fuels for MSAR and bioMSAR. So -- and the plan is to then springboard that to supply other users in that region, but also to obviously expand our network elsewhere as well. So in terms of the marine project the 3-way agreement of -- we're sort of in a similar situation as we were with the 3-way agreement last year, which was finally signed in November. We -- basically that then kicked off the requirement for bilateral agreements to be signed, which we signed the first one with MAC2 in April. We have another agreement with Cargill that's been drafted, but that's pending the final agreement, which is yet to be signed off between Cargill and MSC, which is for the trial fuel supply. And that's really an agreement which is stopping us getting us started. It's a blocker for us moving forward, but there's been progress most recently. And this week, we're on calls to discuss that particular agreement. So obviously, with a view to planning in advance, there's groundwork that's been done, I mentioned before with MAC2. There's a lot of -- it's quite a complex project. So there's a lot of work that needs to get done actually on the ground as well in terms of getting permits, and that's not only just an operating permit, it's permit to apply to handle animal byproducts because the glycerine comes from used cooking oil base. And then there's work that's been done also with the ICC to get the certification and proof of sustainability documents ready for the trial. So there's been a lot of work going on behind the scenes. Obviously, the focus is now on getting that agreement signed and moving ahead and with a view, obviously, to that being successful. And also in parallel in that respect, we're also speaking with other shipowners as well as part of that particular process to use the facility to supply others. With Morocco, again, we supplied the commercial ship framework last year. We were relocated to a new facility, which is where they ultimately are using large amounts of fuel oil. Unfortunately, that also brought in a requirement to get approvals from the original equipment manufacturer that supplies all the equipment, the kiln equipment. That's taken a bit longer to get that particular meeting arranged and get things sort of move forward so we can actually do the trial. In readiness for that, we've also -- we've got all our equipment on site, as people may be aware, OCP are paying for the trials. It's not costing us any money, but obviously, it's costing us time. So we've escalated the issue within OCP, and we expect to get some positive outcome from that escalation. So let's wait and see. And in the meantime, obviously, with a view planning for growth, looking outside of OCP, there are other large fuel oil users within the country as well. And indeed, discussions are progressing with those counterparties. With Valkor, they took a little bit longer and had some issues with their drilling campaign, which I guess they publicized themselves as well. But that essentially -- a lot of those issues have been resolved now. They found the technology that works, both in terms of the subsurface drilling campaign. And they've also got approvals to proceed with a project, which is a pilot oil sands plant for 500 barrels per day. So that's progressing and due to be on stream in the second quarter of 2026. And we've been in sort of active dialogue with Valkor through the period to ensure that there's an opportunity for Quadrise going forward and most recently agreed to revised payment terms where they pay us a nonrefundable deposit of $50,000 upfront and then restage the payment so that we get $300,000 in the second quarter, the remaining -- well, the total of $1 million then by January of next year, and then the third quarter gives us $0.5 million. So we're slightly behind in payments, but that's sort of -- that's obviously built into now David's latest cash flow projections there. And we certainly see a large market for that particular product, and it's good that Valkor have actually overcome some of the technical issues and they're moving ahead, which obviously opens up funding for them as well. With Panama, we completed the trial in July. It was a very successful trial with a very happy customer at the end of it. We demonstrated the fuel for the first time on 2 large medium-speed MAN now called Everllence engines, one 8 megawatts, one 4 megawatts. And these engines are used for power generation at that facility. That's created a lot of interest within the country that's looking for alternatives to heavy fuel for power generation. And at the moment, following the successful test our agents and ourselves are working with the ministries in Panama to get the approvals for MSAR and bioMSAR as alternative fuels alongside obviously other competing fuels like LNG, and then also progressing the fuel supply, the necessary fuel supply in that region as well to supply not only Panama but other generators in the region as well as the marine space. And then to follow on, the other projects that we're working on, obviously, we're developing various different agreements with suppliers of biofuels, really with a view to expanding our pipeline for biofuel components going forward. And that's a range of near-term technologies where the fuels are available today, so things like methyl esters, some of the sugars that come from obviously cellulosic material and ethanol production. Cashew nut shell liquid is another product being used in the marine space for biofuels. And then some of the future technologies, which really are looking at the conversion of very abundant sustainable biomass and converting that into high-value products, but also what's considered to be lower-value products, which are ideal candidates as a low sulfur biofuel for the marine sector. So a lot of work is going on in the background to make sure we've got a very strong pipeline and answer the questions that the marine industry have is around the future of biofuels because as a result of the marine regulations kicking in, in the European Union last year, there's certainly been a change in the mindset there and biofuels are starting to be used, not only liquids but also gases. So we're mindful of that. We're making sure that we've got a unique offering that's palatable for a lot of shipowners. So I'll hand over to David and take you through the financials.

Thanks, Jason. One more for you...

One more, so one for the fleet and also pricing to our industry as well. So I think from that perspective, it's become an issue, which is obviously driving the use of alternative fuels and technologies, energy-saving technologies, which we also offer with MSAR.

Okay. So our results for the year, we had a loss of GBP 3 million, which is very much in line with the year before and also very much in line with our cash spend, which is obviously about GBP 3 million per year at the moment. Now the cash balance we had at year-end was GBP 5.9 million, thanks to the fund raise in January. And we're still projecting that, that GBP 5.9 million is going to be sufficient to take us through to revenues, to positive cash flow generation and ultimately profitability. Now when we do get the profitability, we've got some big tax losses there, as you can see, so there shouldn't really be much in the way of tax to pay for a while afterwards. So that's the financials in a nutshell. I'll hand back over to Andy now to talk about our human resources.

Yes. Thanks, David. And coming towards the end of the formal part of the presentation now. The resources has been a really key feature of our focus for this year, knowing that we need to get into commercialization and knowing how impatient we all are for success in that area. And so just recently, Peter has joined us. But even before that, we've had Linda and Tony on board. And we've seen a much stronger development pipeline than we've had in previous years. And so obviously, business development doesn't really hit the RNS screens until you get the end of the process. But the pipeline is much stronger than it was this time last year, thanks to -- in large part to the work of Linda and Tony and the focus that they're bringing to the sector. Jason, as you know -- as you can tell, is still very much looking after the projects as Chief Technology Officer and also the development of the technology and the product slate. And Phil Hill has moved over to Chief Commercial Officer, leading on the supply development because obviously, we need to be able to sign supply agreements alongside the demand side as well. So that's really been a key focus for us over the last few months. And the outlook for us, I think, is very promising. The regulatory environment continues to support our technology, relatively a drop in fuel and therefore, doesn't require the same amount of investment, and it can extend the useful life of the assets that shipowners already have, which is a big win if we can deliver that. And so our product slate is future-proof until 2050 and beyond. So we're in good shape with that as well. We will be continuing, obviously, to focus on the execution of the MSC trial with Cargill once the contracts are signed. And we will be focusing also on the -- following up with Sparkle and with Morocco. And now that we have a way -- in a clearer path forward with Valkor, we'll be able to do that as well. We're -- as I said earlier on, we are in a much stronger position than we were 12 months ago, both financially and strategically. And as David pointed out, we're funded through now to revenue and positive cash flow generation. So we're really excited about having Peter join us on board and being able to lead ourselves into that new era of commercialization. So with that, we'll -- thank you, and we'll prepare for questions.

That's great. Andy, Jason, David, thank you very much indeed for updating investors. [Operator Instructions] I'd just like to remind you that a recording of this presentation along with couple of slides and the published Q&A can be accessed via your Investor Meet Company dashboard. Andy, if I may hand back to you to navigate us through the Q&A, and then I'll pick up from you at the end.

Thanks again. And thank you once again, everybody, for attending and your engagement by submitting all the pre-submitted questions and your live questions that we know are coming in. We have received literally hundreds of questions. So what we've done is we've grouped them together into key question areas, and we'll go through those now. And if we don't get to specific questions, then we will come back to those after the presentation and try and answer them online. And so I'm going to go first with the group's questions from the pre-submitted, and I'm going to give Peter a chance to talk. So Peter, what excited you about joining Quadrise? And can you please tell us something of the changes you're planning to make and how you will leverage your impressive network and expertise to help us get from R&D to a cash-generating enterprise?

Well, I'm coming out of shipping where I've been for 30 years, working with some of the big companies, but also some simpler and more straightforward. I've been living with the many different regulatory changes that have been coming in the last 15 years. And it's quite clear that the shipping community is confused, and there are a few big corporates that have good plans for how to comply, but a lot of people are waiting to see what is actually going to happen. So I see that some of the future fuels, whether it's methanol or ammonium or nuclear power, which are being circulated and a few people are betting on our future fuels if they're even going to prevail. But right now, there are a lot of things that can be done. So you can put on rotor sails that will take you 8 years to pay back on that. You can put on silicone paint on your hull side and save 8% per year, probably that's a good deal. But you also have products like Quadrise's. But if you add them together, it's a significant improvement. So you can actually get some agency regardless of whether the IMO rules will get adopted here in October or whether EU will go ahead as planned. So for a lot of shipowners who need to comply, who needs to do it on short notice, I think we have a very good offering. On top of that, I like the organization. I like that we have strong people. I like that we are now beefed up. So we have a stronger organization to address also the shipping community. I think there are a lot of things that we now with a strong organization can do more of. I think we've been quite exposed on some projects where we decided to look at it as a single project that we want to finish and then move on. But I think we're now at a point where the environment is in our favor, and we need to put more things in the sea, so to speak, so we can work in parallel. So have more than one trial at a time, start talking to [ flat stakes ] and regulatory authorities. So we have a lot to do. I'm also humble about the scale of the challenges, but it's all doable.

Thanks, Peter. I'm going to turn to Jason now. Can you give a specific update on why the MSC and Cargill agreements are taking so long and why MSC have not prioritized this and how confident are we about it concluding? You did address this partly in the comments you've already made, but maybe just as this was a very frequent question, maybe you could just reiterate that.

Yes. I mean, obviously, in the last 12 months, there's been a lot going on behind the scenes in the external world as well in terms of outside of this particular project, right? So they've had to deal with not only some of the political issues facing the world, but also some of the regulatory changes as well themselves. So obviously, mindful of that. Their focus is not always on team Quadrise. So from their perspective, we're coming to the point now of the agreement signature and they're looking at the project obviously in terms of the world beyond the trial as well, right? So it's important for them essentially that not only they're doing the trial, but they're going to be converting vessels in the future to actually operate not only on bioMSAR, but also MSAR as well. So there's some -- we will be going through that process at the moment before sign-off, which we went through last year with the 3-way agreement as well. So we're confident obviously that process concluding positively. But there's obviously no guarantee until the contract is executed. I think importantly in the meantime, we've done everything that we can to be ready for that signature bar actually deploying equipment into Antwerp. So we are very ready. We're in a good position in terms of the permits that are needed and the certification for the fuel, which is very important, which I mentioned before. But also, we're mindful that, as Peter mentioned, we need to be ready and we are already speaking with other owners as well and have spoken with them during the year such that when Antwerp is up and ready and even beforehand, there are other parties that can come into the game as well because MSC is one company, and they're very respectful that they view that other companies will be part of this journey as well. They don't wish to be exclusive at this moment in time. So yes, it's a slightly frustrating time for the company while we're waiting for this to get done. So -- but we're doing everything we can. And like I say, I think some of the questions around how regularly are we speaking with MSC and Cargill. And the answer is at the moment, almost weekly or daily. We have meetings this week just with the key stakeholders. So -- but it's a complicated world and landscape at the moment, but we certainly think we've got a fit.

Okay. Thanks, Jason. And maybe another couple of words, Peter, from you. I mean, how -- what's your approach? How will the company and the new management ensure that we avoid -- what's the approach to avoid further endless delays to MSC and other projects? How do you hope to address...

No, I think it starts by respecting that we don't have total agency. We can't do everything here. We don't call all the shots. So we have to make sure that we are less vulnerable to single projects. So we need more trials with other owners and maybe big owners that are not as big and as complex as the blue chip owners we've been working with so far, which are great companies, a lot of technical expertise. Their word carry a lot of weight. So they have absolutely been the right ones to go to, but we can mix it up. So that's one. The other is that when we start doing trials, we should make sure that it leads into a commercial agreement pathway automatically, right? So given certain milestones and certain test results, there is an offtake agreement. We need to make sure that in the key shipping areas, whether that is around Singapore and the Malacca state or it's in Antwerp, where we have already set up, but also other places that we are aware of what are the suppliers of fuel to us, what is sort of the regulatory environment locally. So we are ready for that. I think also we need to map out what are the alternatives out there in terms of other transition fuels because in most cases, it's not a zero-sum game, it's a plus-sum game. It's cumulative the effects of what others do and what we do. So if we can help each other get on the map, we should do that. But first and foremost, reduce the risk in single projects and start operating in parallel.

Okay. And switching tack now to Sparkle. When will -- when do you think, Jason, that the commercial agreement with Sparkle is going to be ready?

Yes. I mean we have -- at the moment, we've got resources obviously very much deployed looking at this, including our agents in Panama. Obviously, one of the key aspects is making sure that the fuel can be actually utilized commercially in Panama. So we're focusing on getting those approvals from the Ministry of Energy. And in fact, meetings are happening this week with both the Ministry of Energy, together with the Ministry of Hydrocarbons as well to make sure that there's -- both our fuels are actually on the list of approved fuels for commercial use within Panama. And then I mean, ultimately, there are range of suppliers to that particular part of the world, which are large refineries. And we're speaking with various parties to get those agreements, well, basically get an agreement with one of those parties to actually deliver the necessary fuel to Sparkle initially. We're in the process of obviously looking at increasing demand in the region as well. So following the successful test that we had at Sparkle, we're speaking with other power plant operators in the region as well, not only Panama, where fuel power stations are -- use mid-merit, but also in places like Honduras and also Nicaragua as well, where fuel is used for baseload power generation. So that provides a more stable offtake. So for a refinery point of view, that's an important feature. And obviously, coming back to Panama, there's a marine hub as well, has a lot of traffic going through it. It's a good bunker hub to be located. So that fits very nicely with initiating supply to Sparkle with a view to it growing and ultimately supplying a range of different customers. So it should be an attractive prospect. In terms of those commercial agreements, when they will get done, I can't put a timing on that at the moment because it only just kicked off in the last few months. So there's definitely resources deployed to it, including Phil.

And you touched on this, Jason, in the presentation, but since it was a frequently asked question, maybe we should address it again with your further comments. What's the holdup in Morocco? And when can we expect OEM sign-off, do you think?

Yes. I mean we obviously had a delay over -- we're trying to get things done before the summer. Summer kicked in with the OEM. So this has currently been escalated, as I mentioned in the presentation, within OCP, also our agent [indiscernible] is on the case as well to get this particular impulse finalized such that we can get the trial underway. Obviously, if it's -- if there are any issues, then we have equipment that we can redeploy elsewhere. But it's important to say that the equipment is there. We've got a pumping and heating unit at an MM and an emulsion plant there. The emulsion plant we're actually hiring of ENH is not our unit. So -- and that high charge is being obviously charged to OCP. So it's not our equipment really at loss here. But obviously, there's a time perspective where we'd like to get the trial finished and get that contract ahead. And in the meantime, in terms of risk management, we're speaking with other large fuel consumers as well, again, to increase the volume of the opportunity within the country, which is progressing well.

Yes. So one of the other questions was about what parallel opportunities are we progressing in the country. And I think you just answered that already, Jason. David, there's one here for you. Please can you give -- reiterate the Quadrise's cash position? And if it's the case that the business is funded to July 2026, taking into account that the new hires that have come on board?

Yes. So at year-end, we had GBP 5.9 million, and our projections are such that, that is sufficient to take us through the revenues, profitability, et cetera. So we wouldn't put a date on that because that's going to take us all the way through. And that includes all the costs associated with the new resources we brought in. So I think that's covered it.

Yes. And can you also give an update on the -- maybe Jason, one of your update on the Valkor payments and if Valkor's neighbors are interested in partnering with us.

For me, if that's all right. But yes, I mean, obviously, the invoice has got in for the $50,000, which is basically a nonrefundable deposit. So that's in the process. And in terms of the other prospects in the region, obviously, it's Trio Petroleum, I think it was mentioned in one of the questions and TomCo I mean, those relationships are really managed by Valkor. They have very good relationships with both of those companies anyway. So really, Valkor is a lead party that we're dealing with within Utah, that's not to say there aren't other opportunities in the U.S. that we look at from time to time as well.

Okay. And I'm going to turn to you, Jason, for the answer to this, but it's just worthwhile before I do, it's worthwhile mentioning, I think that because it's about Southeast Asia, one of the things that Peter brings to the table is a significant Asian experience -- Asian working experience. And so I think we'll be able to -- in future years, I'm sure that the answer to this question would come from Peter. But in the meantime, I'm going to ask Jason. What is the update on the Southeast Asian refinery project? And what's the plan to stimulate potential MSAR biocide demand in the Singapore area?

Yes. I mean the refinery project that we probably talked about last year has been on hold while the client that owns the refinery has been reviewing quite a significant upgrade to that particular refinery. That decision has not yet been made. So all the time, obviously that decision has been in pause mode. We're unsure as to whether the MSAR project will move ahead or not. In the meantime, I think the decision is to just -- or the decision has been made already to speak with other stakeholders more in the marine space anyway in that particular region. It's still a significant hub for fuel. It's the main place to be. So it's important to be there. So discussions have been ongoing with other stakeholders in that particular region, including some of the very large entities like the Global Center for Marine decarbonisation, et cetera, to get that moving ahead.

Yes. And in response to a particular question around it, can -- are there any updates on Maersk, Saudi Arabia, Carlyle Group, JGC or the Middle East and other projects basically?

Nothing significant to note at this moment in time. I mean each of those counterparties have their own merits, especially obviously Maersk, we're in reasonable contact with as well via Vertoro. Vertoro part owned by Maersk anyway. So there's an opportunity there that we can explore to go back to Maersk, obviously, with Peter's background. There's an opportunity possibly to dust off the file with Maersk. But frankly, our focus is on MSC. And obviously, there's some other opportunities that are similar in scale anyway that we can focus on. And ultimately, I guess, the decision this year was to focus on some of the key projects. And some of these other projects I mentioned were maybe deemed a little bit of a distraction where we wanted to get these main projects underway. But now we have the resources, it could be a time to relook at those. But it's too early to say.

This one looks like it's going to be one for me actually. How have the organizational changes, which you have mentioned strengthened Quadrise's business pipeline? And what impacts have both Linda Sorensen and Tony Foster made to Quadrise during 2025. And I did touch on this actually in my comments on the presentation. And really, the business development pipeline and our understanding of the whole sector and what needs to be done has advanced considerably during the year. And you don't always see the outputs from business development work until they turn into contracts. But we have a much better handle on who are the contacts that -- in the shipping companies that we want to target. And we've made significant inroads. We're attending more conferences. Now Linda particularly is very active in getting us out there. Those of you who follow us will know that we've also contracted BLUE Comms as a marine sector-focused PR agency. And that's been giving dividends in terms of the press that we've been able to achieve in amongst customers. And some of that cross over into the investor space. I'm sure you will -- some of you will have seen it if you follow on social media. So generally speaking, I would say that we're in a much better -- as I said before, we're in a much better strategic position than we were 12 months ago. And that's thanks also to the much better financial position that we were able to create with the help of you as investors at the beginning of the year. And I mean, Jason, maybe you could talk to this in terms of projects and maybe come back to Peter for some comments as well. What deliverables should shareholders be looking for, for the remainder of the year?

Yes. I mean, obviously, conclusion of the MSC agreement with Cargill will really launch -- provide a launch pad to real project progress to report to shareholders and milestones that commence with, obviously, the deployment of the facility at MAC2, the proof-of-concept trials on MSAR and bioMSAR on the MSC Leandra and then the operational trial, right? All of these give us very good news flow to obviously accelerate some of the other business development activities with other marine customers. Obviously, Morocco is -- we're waiting for one meeting to be concurred and then the kickoff of the project that we expect. And then in terms of the Panama opportunity, obviously, there are other clients to speak with agreements to get signed off, approvals to get obviously completed within Panama as well. So each of those projects really provide a great sort of opportunity to move forward as well as the Valkor, obviously, project moving forward to get the sample -- the final samples, now they've actually optimized the production facilities. Samples are imminent to get that work done and then marketing to start. So such that we're ready for when the Oil Sands Plant gets up and running in the second quarter of next year, we're ready with the fuel. And we basically invested in our own systems to do some of the pretreatment of these oil samples as well, which fits quite nicely with the work we're doing with the MSC project in terms of solid filtration, et cetera, which I won't bore you with today, but there's quite a lot of work, obviously QRF that's preparing for that testing to be done. So that gives us a good platform moving forward alongside, obviously, the development of the biofuel platform, which for us is a very good door opener to the marine companies in our space and also the oil companies and energy companies that we deal with as well as the trading companies. We have something very unique, very much of interest at the moment to the sector. So we're in a good position from that perspective. But obviously, getting agreements across the line and getting this implemented and done safely. We know that like with Sparkle, when we get the opportunity to complete the trial, we do it exceptionally well. So it's just a question of getting these agreements signed off now to get moving.

Okay. Thanks, Jason. That brings us to the end of the sort of the summary preprepared questions and answers that we had. Are we able to access the live questions?

Personally, possibly, although there are some other questions probably.

Yes. Okay. We will carry on then if we haven't got the live questions, immediately to hand. So it's another question about going back to MSC, a little bit more detail. If all the equipment and necessary permitting is in place, why not install the MMU and the associated equipment into the MAC2 facility to bypass the chicken and egg scenario that has been holding the company back. Surely, this removes the [ solar last ] MSC, especially if Cargo QED have a tolling agreement drafted in the barge secured.

Yes. I mean, ultimately, it incurs quite a large cost to us to deploy the equipment still. So at the time where we don't have a trial agreement signed with any counterparty, which is at this moment in time where we are, is what we're waiting for, it's been the decision of the company to not deploy the equipment to site to have everything ready to basically do it all that we can. But that additional expense, which not only costs us money, but it costs us time and our resources as well is something which we decided is not being -- we've decided against it for financial reasons, which I think is important. And I think the build it and they shall come approach is something that we probably want to avoid because potentially you end up having filling up a jetty or so at MAC2 with a facility that's been costing us rental and getting in their way. So we don't want to make sure -- we want to make sure that we work well with counterparties in that regard.

Okay. Have you -- have we discussed the MSAR adoption with Cargill for their vessels after the MSAR proof of concept? And can you -- if so, can you expand on that at all?

Yes. I mean, Cargill obviously have a large fleet. Obviously, a very recent bunkering joint venture also with Hafnia. We have had discussions with Cargill in the past. And there's very much -- they're very much interested to see the results, initial results of the MSC trial to see how that goes, first of all, on the 2-stroke engine. And then obviously, that will be something that we will be progressing with them. And amongst others, I mean, Cargill would be the only counterparty in time.

Yes. And another one for you, Jason. What happened to the motor yacht trial? Why has it been extended by such a time?

Yes, it's really readiness on behalf of Focus Motor Yachts. So we're using our relationship with Vertoro, which is where the Focus Motor Yachts opportunity came from to progress that matter. There has been some other work that's been ongoing with bioMSAR 100 in terms of engine testing. But yes, in terms of the vessel trial with Focus Motor Yachts, that's really been delayed at their end. They're going through some changes this year as well. So we're waiting for that to happen. It's just been -- it's been delayed.

Okay. Peter, you've got the live questions. So do you want to ask...

Couple of live questions. So the first one is whether we think that the IMO rules measures, if they adopted, if it means that EU will cancel fuel EU immediately. And as a former shipowner, I'd like to take that one. Obviously, the fuel EU were enacted exactly because there was not an international agreement. And what most shipowners have been calling for is a level playing field. So the fact that IMO now comes in with stronger measures, but probably poorer enforcement, at least seen from the outside and even EU's enforcement is still to be sorted out. I know that amongst a number of large shipowners, there's speculation that it might be canceled, but it would be something that the EU has to do on its own. I'm not sure about that. What I am sure about is that neither -- I mean, both measures are actually Quadrise's advantage. We -- if there's clarity about the future fuels and fines and rewards from the European Emissions Trading scheme, we will benefit from that. But in the absence of clarity, the best place to look for shipowners if they want to meet some of these targets are the rotor sales, the silicon paint on the hull and Quadrise's products, right? So I think regardless, we are in a fairly good position. But still the major factors that we still have to execute. I think we have a great strategy. We have a good organization. We're in a world where we're not the biggest creature in the sea, but there are a lot of things we can do and we just need to make sure that we focus on pushing on all fronts and the organization we have in place now is going to help with that.

Are there any other ones you guys...

There are a couple of other ones as well. What has held up the MSC contract? Why is there a lack of urgency on behalf of the company, which should benefit enormously from our products? I think that relates to whether MSC should have signed a long time ago. I think most of the big players in shipping, and I can't really speak for MSC, but I think I can speak generically for big companies, particularly European who have been leading the way in terms of biofuel -- sorry, in terms of alternative fuels and meeting the CO2 zero emissions early is a complex one, right? And the IMO standards just means that compliance means something else. And for many of them, they're looking at what are the measures we can do to make sure that we are compliant next year, in 3 years, in 5 years. So if you're sitting as a big company looking at port licensed, products or other products, your primary concern will be to be in compliance and then secondarily, exactly what is the technology you want to use. So my impression is that they are keen to pursue this, but also that we need to make sure that we can supply to them in the volumes that they need for some time forward.

Anything else...

There's one question that I think David has answered about when we believe to be in positive cash flow from projects. I don't know if you want to add any detail or...

Yes. I don't think I've answered when we're forecasting that, but the current projections are that's planned for Q1 2027?

Then there is a question about how Quadrise could address the tramping markets. Are there any operators who don't require worldwide bunkering? That's where I come from, obviously. And for those of you who don't know what tramping markets are, it's a bulk carrier and tanker fleets that tend not to run on fixed or regular schedules, but we call many different ports, and they only really know 3 to 6 weeks in advance exactly which port they would be in. So in terms of supply and distribution of Quadrise's products is a separate challenge. I think for many of them, they -- I mean, we're appealing to different things. Number one, we are cost effective. Number two, we help them reduce emissions, but also with the European Emissions Trading scheme, there could be real value in being a good corporate citizen and actually under emitting because you can sell these credits. And a big company like NORDEN, which is one of the biggest tramp operators, have recently announced that they are doing deals with people like Microsoft and other American IT companies who have an enormous need for offsets for their own emissions, and they can buy them from people like NORDEN. And the going rate right now, I believe, is around EUR 340 per CO2 ton emitted. So this is a real business. So you may not have to run on Quadrise's product all the time. But if you can pick it up in Singapore, if you can pick up in Antwerp, you're covering 2 major areas. So I do think we can address that also for the operators.

Okay. There's a question that I got here from the pre-submitted, Peter, which is -- you could perhaps take as well. It says, given your history with the A.P. Moller - Maersk, are you looking to involve them in the MSAR and bioMSAR trials in the future?

I mean the great thing about shipping is that there are so many companies out there, and many of them are first-class corporate citizens, and they have great expertise. Also technically, A.P. Moller stands out as one of the preeminent ones. So I think we should talk to A.P. Moller to make sure we know where they're heading. They're running a very large fleet. So they have clear policies that occasionally change on how they want to achieve their targets. But I don't think we can afford not to talk to A.P. Moller, but we can, of course, force them to use our products, and they may have different policies. They may have a different investment horizon, but they have already invested in dual fuel ships that uses methane and I believe also ammonia. And this may be a 5- or 10-year time horizon before they actually have the supply. But obviously, we should have the dialogue, and we will continue that. We already have one. But there are plenty of other first-class companies out there that has strong technical departments that has a strong interest in this, and we shouldn't rule them out either just to have -- just 1 or 2 very big companies and there are plenty of very strong companies. And as we've said already, I think it's crucial that we don't play on just one on red or black in this game. We need to have more partners in this because we will need that.

Thanks, Peter. I'm going to come on to a couple of questions for Jason again about, it's more on the biofuel side. So with the addition of glycerol to the bioMSAR mix, how much does that lower safe storage temperature of the product compared to MSAR, glycerol having antifreeze qualities. With that in mind, have any operators been approached regarding its viability in Arctic operations where environmental performance is paramount?

Yes, we have spoken with certain clients who do operate in that part of the world. And obviously, that is the feature that is attractive for them. It does reduce the freeze point of the temperature by about 10 degrees, although we always recommend really that the fuel is handled at a normal storage temperature of around 25 degrees. So it wouldn't take away the need for tank heating as an example, but it's a useful safety feature, if nothing else. So in that regard, yes, I mean, it's a great feature as well as it's obviously safe to handle as well compared with the other opportunities. So -- but yes, I mean, I think the Arctic operations has other features, the ships that operate in that part of the world, they have requirements also -- specific requirements to be able to break the ice. So the engines have to run on max power at full load. So that brings in some other conversion requirements as well for ships in that part of the world, which could incur a minor incremental cost over the usual conversion to MSAR. But that's certainly something we've looked at.

Okay. There's one more question I'm going to ask Jason in a minute. And then really, the majority of the remaining questions are kind of variations on a theme. So after this next question, I'm going to just turn to Peter to wrap up with the ideas of how you're going to approach the next few months. But -- so bioMSAR Zero can cut CO2 emissions by 85% and its feedstock comes from renewable biomass waste. This seems like holy grail for a combustion fuel. Have you -- any calculations yet as to how its cost will compare with existing fuels, especially B100?

Yes. I mean there are numbers that we are putting together at the moment. Obviously, there's a range. I think I showed in the pipeline, there's a range of different opportunities and feedstocks that we can utilize to make bioMSAR Zero. The first derivation of that was a blend of FAME and glycerin, and that offers at least a 5% fuel saving in terms of its manufacture cost and then potentially another 5% through the efficiency benefit. So that's a starting point. I think from our perspective, that work continues. That's a very good starting point. And it's a very -- if you look at opportunities that are coming up in the marine sector that have only this year really opened up in terms of the -- some of the emission control areas in the Mediterranean as an example, people are starting to utilize biofuels or B100 fuels as an alternative to gas oil, which is used in these emission control areas, especially for the ships that don't have scrubbers on. So there's -- or even ones with scrubbers and open loop. So I think there's an opportunity there to further develop the cost advantage of bioMSAR Zero or B100. And it's -- yes, but for sure, whether it's a holy grail or not, the shipping industry ultimately still likes a low-cost feedstock, and they will comply with the regulations as they need to. So it might be the holy grail from an environmental perspective, but it might not be the holy grail from a shipping perspective. But there's definitely a demand for B100 and bioMSAR Zero, and that's an area where, obviously, we're ramping up some of the testing that we've been doing on that particular product as well.

Okay. And just to sort of set up your thoughts, Peter, your sort of final thoughts for this session. Are you aware that 63% of QED's owners are retail shareholders? And how will this influence you? And given the high average age, it says here of the retail shareholders, can dividends be monthly, please? And if that's what really shareholders want. And at the same time, I'll ask another question, again, you can comment on one or both of these. So a comment made really, I congratulate Jason on getting us inside some of the biggest companies in the world. And Peter, what is your plan to capitalize on this springboard?

I mean one of the questions I have here is what do I bring to the table actually apart from my network. And I think one of the things I do bring to the table is that I'm really, really restless, I think we -- right now, we are at a point where we need to start taking advantage of the great technology we have and the reputation we have in the market. So I think that we can make this very complex. But at the end of the day, within the next couple of months, I would want us to have signed the trial with MSC and Cargill and one more player. And within the next 6 months, I would want us to have started these trials. And these are critical because we need the approval from the main engine manufacturers to get on with the selling, right? And I'm not underestimating how difficult it will be to sell because it's -- you never have a 100% hitting ratio when you're selling, but we can improve it. But before we can really sell, we need to have these letters of no objection in place. So that's the first priority. Operating in a fairly complex area because it's not just about selling, it's also about getting approvals, right, and about getting the fuel. So we need to make sure we start developing sources of fuel of procurement of that, that are reliable and safe in at least 2 areas. For me, that would be Singapore and Northern Europe as it looks now. And then we need to go and visit suppliers, clients. We have competing ideas, and I can see so have the investors on what kind of clients should we focus on first. Should we take the big ones that give early cash flow, but where you probably don't have a hitting ratio of 10% or maybe less? Or should you focus on the smaller players like you find in the shipping market and then have a higher hitting ratio presumably. I think for now, we need to do both. But clearly, as you can also hear from this presentation, our focus is very much the emphasis on the shipping markets and these players. So let's get these letter of no objection, let's get the fuel supply sorted and then try to sell in the meantime as well, subject to all these things being in place.

Well, we are delighted to have you on board, Peter, and look forward to working with you on those things. And I'm sure that shareholders will have been pleased today to have had a chance to start to get to know you. And I'm sure that there will be plenty of other opportunities going forward. I'd like to thank everyone as well for taking the time today to listen in and to engage as fully as you have with the presentation and the questions. We are, I think, as I commented in as part of the results in a much stronger position in terms of financially and strategically with the resources in place now than were 12 months ago. And we are really excited about what we can do together as an expanded team, and we look forward to speaking to you guys again soon. I hand back to the operator for the closure..

That's great. Very good, Andy. David and Jason, thank you very much indeed for updating investors. If I please ask investors not to close this session as we'll now automatically redirect you for the opportunity to provide your feedback in order the company can better understand your views and expectations. This may take a few moments to complete, but I'm sure will be greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team of Quadrise plc, we'd like to thank you for attending today...