bosley
- 20 Feb 2004 09:34
Ted1
- 01 Mar 2006 12:30
- 15335 of 27111
I have dipped me toe today gents.
Interesting debates would be nice to see
some good news in the next 6 months.
Ted
barney12345
- 01 Mar 2006 12:32
- 15336 of 27111
yes alan but do we mean 150 million trays or 1500 million trays, cos using my generous 1 cent per tray royalty that is 1.5 million us or 15 million us or 900k sterling or 9 million sterling.
sorry seen you have edited
hewittalan6
- 01 Mar 2006 12:37
- 15337 of 27111
Barney.
If you work from the tonnage and 50gm trays it works out at 1500 million.
Alan
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:38
- 15338 of 27111
Barney, I will add to my list of questions to SEO how they interpret 'billion'. I'm still waiting for a phone call from them!
kim
hewittalan6
- 01 Mar 2006 12:38
- 15339 of 27111
Just to explain.
50gm per tray.
20 trays per kilo
1000 kilos per tonne
20000 trays per tonne
75000 tonnes = 1500 million trays.
Alan
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:38
- 15340 of 27111
Alan, I agree with that.
kim
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:40
- 15341 of 27111
Ted1
Welcome aboard, good luck with your investment.
kim
garyble
- 01 Mar 2006 12:41
- 15342 of 27111
Barney,
Don't think the UK/US billion matters, its the Tonnage of starpol which is key {~75,000 tonnes @ ~$2,000 per tonne} now was that a US ton or a UK tonne???
hewittalan6
- 01 Mar 2006 12:45
- 15343 of 27111
Metric tonne. All the notes these days are in metric. thats why the trays are measured in grammes (50) not ounces (2).
Alan
garyble
- 01 Mar 2006 12:46
- 15344 of 27111
Tongue firmly in cheek alan!
hewittalan6
- 01 Mar 2006 12:47
- 15345 of 27111
Is that a UK tongue or a US tung???
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:49
- 15346 of 27111
:-D
EWRobson
- 01 Mar 2006 12:49
- 15347 of 27111
The major plus seems to be that this is licence revenue and therefore goes, more or less, through to bottom line. That appears to be major advantage of SEO licensing model. Hope we might get some clarification from evolution.
Eric
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:50
- 15348 of 27111
Yea, we always seem to be waiting for clarification of something or other with SEO - I'm not going to be put off though.
kim
barney12345
- 01 Mar 2006 12:53
- 15349 of 27111
cheers all, think that is sorted, bu would be handy to ask seo Kim
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 12:57
- 15350 of 27111
If they read this BB they will be trying to pencil a couple of hours in their diary to answer my list!
kim
barney12345
- 01 Mar 2006 13:03
- 15351 of 27111
if they read this bb they will never call you kim, too embarressed.
garyble
- 01 Mar 2006 13:14
- 15352 of 27111
Nobody has touched on the finance of the"micro-manufacturing" facilities at the JV partners who will possibly be licenced to produced ~20k tonnes of biodegradable material each.
I assume that the faciloity will cost something and SEO will have to pay a percentage of the bill.
How will X "micro-manufacturing" units be financed?
kimoldfield
- 01 Mar 2006 13:37
- 15353 of 27111
Garyble
I read it that SEO won't have to pay anything:-
"The intention is to offer a number of manufacturing licences in the US"
The joint venture would surely mean that profits would be shared? Maybe SEO will charge for the licences or offer them free in exchange for a larger share of profit, with the jv partners using technology for other purposes (probably not the latter!) Just a thought.
kim
Sharesure
- 01 Mar 2006 14:04
- 15354 of 27111
Re working capital - the Rothschild biodegradeable cigarette butt tender process ends in a couple of months. Assuming success that will give SEO a chunk of cash, so they shouldn't have any need to seek more funds from the market.