Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Quadrise Fuels International Plc LSE:QFI London Ordinary Share GB00B11DDB67 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.285 7.28% 4.20 109,199 16:35:06
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
3.90 4.50 3.98 3.90 3.90
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 0.01 -3.56 -0.38 39
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
15:00:05 O 13,125 3.9008 GBX

Quadrise Fuels (QFI) Latest News

More Quadrise Fuels News
Quadrise Fuels Takeover Rumours

Quadrise Fuels (QFI) Share Charts

1 Year Quadrise Fuels Chart

1 Year Quadrise Fuels Chart

1 Month Quadrise Fuels Chart

1 Month Quadrise Fuels Chart

Intraday Quadrise Fuels Chart

Intraday Quadrise Fuels Chart

Quadrise Fuels (QFI) Discussions and Chat

Quadrise Fuels Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
16/10/201917:35Quadrise Fuels. Fuels for the future44,383
05/2/201813:38Relentless 179
21/12/201717:57Thread for Sillies2
04/7/201719:39Quadrise Fuels... The Next AIM Disaster? 107
02/12/201422:26Q&A's2

Add a New Thread

Quadrise Fuels (QFI) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Quadrise Fuels trades in real-time

Quadrise Fuels (QFI) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
20/10/2019
09:20
Quadrise Fuels Daily Update: Quadrise Fuels International Plc is listed in the Oil & Gas Producers sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker QFI. The last closing price for Quadrise Fuels was 3.92p.
Quadrise Fuels International Plc has a 4 week average price of 3.70p and a 12 week average price of 3.50p.
The 1 year high share price is 8p while the 1 year low share price is currently 2p.
There are currently 922,711,895 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 744,689 shares. The market capitalisation of Quadrise Fuels International Plc is £38,753,899.59.
29/8/2019
15:09
loglorry1: Worth noting perhaps when you say that the £2m-4m in funding is secured for the next two years that while it may be secured it is definitely not paid for in shares yet. Our esteemed directors have signed us up for a scheme whereby we have no idea how much stock dilution we will undertake to pay for another two years of their fat salaries. During the call we heard from Mike that they had 5 other offers on the table. I dread to think how bad they were if this is the one that they decided was best. If Bergen want to drip shares out equally over the next 12 months they'll be selling £166K worth of shares a month (not counting the signup shares). That's 8.3K of shares a day (based on 20 trading days a month). Doesn't sound much but at 4p that's 207K shares a day each and ever day that private investors have to absorb to stop the share price decline. So far today the stock is down 12% on volume of 1.6m shares so about 800K buys and 800 sells. Anyone who things an addition 207K shares each and every day won't kill the price is a liar or extremely naive. Which one are you Mike?
29/8/2019
12:45
jaknife: h50j20t60, That's very childish. Are my comments about QFI that controversial that your only response has to be "not listening, not listening, not listening"? How old are you again? I am very firmly of the opinion that, in time, you will find that my comments prove to be 100% correct. QFI have been forced to choose a very dangerous form of finance: a death spiral convertible. I write "forced" because they had no other option: A. They have no institutional shareholders who prepared to corner-stone a fund raise. (This is because the management team have a track record of "over-promising" and "under-delivering" combined with a desire to continue to reward themselves excessively despite having failed to deliver on their business plan.) B. The last attempt to raise money via an open offer was only successful after an extension to the offer date and only then raised a minimal amount from genuine private investors Https://www.investegate.co.uk/quadrise-fuels-intnl--qfi-/rns/result-of-open-offer/201901210700065702N/ C. The company desperately needs cash because it would otherwise all be gone by October (and the directors need to be paid). In such circumstances the company had no other real option than a death spiral convertible. For the record, I am very specifically pointing at the share price charts of both Angus Energy (ANGS) and VAST Resources and highlighting that Bergen lent money to both of those companies via death spiral convertibles and, in both instances, they sold the conversion shares heavily into a falling price and the share price has tumbled. If Mike Kirk has done *ANY* research then he would know that. And hence he must have lied on the conference call yesterday. We can revisit this in six months time. Let's diarise 29th Feb next year. In the meantime, I suggest that you speak to the Ancient Mariner and ask him about the "run ins" that he has had in the past. He will unfortunately have to tell you that I was 100% right with every "run in" that I've ever had with him. Which should make you think carefully! JakNife
27/7/2019
14:39
brookemia: What’s this, a dissenter, gadzooks🤷205;♂️🤦‍ϓ4;️ Skipper3 Posts: 16 Price: 3.70 No Opinion RE: Would you rather?Fri 11:42 @Foxm - I see your frustration.... i have been very bullish on QFI up until this RNS.... the board have single handedly wiped 50% off last weeks share price by the wording of that RNS... but I don't agree when you say 'amateurs'... I have re-read the RNS several times.....they have worded it in a way to create doubt over their future past early october due to funding.. anyone with half a brain cell could have worded this 100 x better to reduce panic....the more I think about it.. and read fellow shareholders posts on here...the more strongly I believe this has been done deliberately... as now it's obvious they want to do a fund raise at a lower price.... to the expense of us long term shareholders... it seems the only thing QFI and their broker cares about is hoovering up more cash from us... while completely disregarding the shareholder value.. it's an absolute travesty.... I got QFI completely wrong... they are charlatans Answers please oh! Purveyor of falsehoods. gassyboy👯205;♂️
23/7/2019
14:58
kreature: Statement re share price movement. It notes its share price movement. In the zone with that one
27/6/2019
10:00
becclesbasher: I am certainly an investor in QFI. What offends me are the self appointed"experts",the likes of Tongusting and Brokemaniac, taking such pleasure whenever the QFI share price drops. I expect the share price to continue on its upward trend and for both those morons to continue posting their poisonous drivel. Kreature is a different matter. He has a touch of whimsy about him.
20/11/2017
11:47
sb: Brookaemia has shown what an idiot he/ she is ... and is now trying to spin it that he /she has achieved something ... errrr.... yes ..... the QFI share price has gone UP ... but at a cost to QFI and its shareholders to rebutt the BS and issue a RNS, and someone should be made to pay. The intention of his / her actions over the weekend is obvious from comment 39818 to the kreature : "Have fun on Monday my "short" friend" ....it was price destabilisation .... and so I hope the book is thrown at him / her ... Oh ... and learn to write English ... what-if ... anything-is ... I guess it's a second language wherever you are ... ? My Saudi source ... hahahaha... oh dear...
20/6/2017
20:07
brookemia: as promised: Alan Hall 10 Jun (10 days ago) to Mikkel.Elbek.L., stm Maersk and Danish PM Dear Sirs, I can only presume that my recent email, has not been fully investigated, as I have had neither a reply or courteous acknowledgement of receipt. I shall await your reply by Wednesday 14th June, and then shall escalate my involvement of The MEP's to the EU yours truly Alan & Wendy Hall ​Danish PM: 9/6/2017 Dear Prime Minister, I would draw your attention to the above-named collaborative, contractually-defined arrangement between The Maersk group, and Quadrise Fuels International. I shall be as brief as possible, some time ago in 2016, Maersk approached QFI for them to conduct a trial on board The Seago Istanbul, to trial a new ground-breaking emulsion fuel, which if successful would be an innovative fuel with great benefits to the environment and to marine shipping Companies. All was going well, but with the financial muscle and power that Maersk displays and uses, QFI were not allowed to disclose much detail, because of Non-Disclosure Agreements that Maersk have and continue to impose, rather excessively it is perceived. The vessel "allegedly" hit a buoy, although with modern technology/sonar/radar and on duty watchmen, this is rather surprising? Following this "collision", QFI were informed that the vessel was to go into dry dock, with little additional details as per Maersk's cloak of secrecy. QFI were subsequently advised in March 2017 that the trial had been suspended after remaining onboard MSAR had been consumed, DESPITE Maersk confirming that thus far The Trial was a success. QFI were subsequently advised that Maersk would only use compliant fuels from 2020, and that the use of MSAR along with scrubbers-which was/is the preferred option for many in the marine fuel and refining industries, that see the use of high sulphur fuel and scrubbers as the most economic option for 2020 IMO sulphur regulations. It is more surprising as Maersk have already installed scrubbers on some vessels. Also their intended use of Low-sulphur fuel would put them at a distinct disadvantage with their competitors. Maersk's actions decimated the QFI share price and have cost many UK/International shareholders, many thousands/hundreds of thousands of pounds in financial losses, with their unilateral action. I am not sure that this would be allowed to happen in Denmark, as there would be a public outcry. We were advised that Maersk would receive the Interim Inspection LONO reports by end of May 2017. Maersk also previously confirmed that they would work collaboratively with QFI to progress the commercialisation of MSAR to the wider global Marine Industry. I would be grateful, if you would seek assurances from Maersk, that this is still the case, given their contrarian views on the product, and also how they could address the financial plight of these unfortunate Investors, that have occurred, only because of the actions of Maersk. I would ask The MEP's if this question could be raised in The European Parliament as a matter of urgency on behalf of UK Investors. Thanking you Prime Minister for taking the time to read, this unfortunate, but avoidable situation. Hi (redacted)   QFI Director Cheers, and I shall keep to my word, however is it against the rules to just let me know if an MMU is in place either now/shortly, as to how could the trial take place without one? I shall, if, in receipt of a satisfactory answer, also postpone any escalation of MEP's involvement, which might be at the least-irritating. This is not an attempt at unethical behaviour (redacted), I assure you of that. I just need to know(redacted), if my investment is safe, along with my family and whether to-if possible-increase my holdings, in order to take advantage of any possible news uplift. Strangely enough The FT financial pundit gives a year-end share price of 29.75P, now, from where did he get that little nugget? Assuring you of my word kind regards Akzo Nobel/Danish PM/Maersk Public Relations: Dear Sirs, Would you please submit this to the correct department. Please advise me as a shareholder what are Akzo-Nobel's views on the way that Maersk have dumped QFI and Akzo-Nobel, in their public "divorce" of QFI and the MSAR Trial. They have decimated the Share price and nearly brought the Company to bankruptcy. They are holding out on The Wartsila Interim Report, having publicly stated that are not pursuing MSAR and scrubber options, having had the report for a week, and obviously in possession of the true facts, as they had publicly stated that- up to the mysterious "collision" with a buoy-the trial had been a success How do you feel- as a co-partner and renowned Company of good practice about this disgraceful behaviour by Maersk. yours truly Maersk/Danish PM/7 Eastern region MEP's: Dear Sirs, It has been a week since Wartsila have issued you with their Draft report and review. You were already in possession of most of the relevant facts as you have publicly stated that it was a success until The mysterious "Buoygate" affair, where- despite a modern ship with attendant sonar, radar, and watchmen- you were unable to avoid a "collision" and unable , surprisingly-given your massive resources unable  to continue with the trial ? You subsequently publicly "divorced" QFI pronouncing to the world that you would not be adopting MSAR with scrubbers as a viable way forward. This is despite contrarian views in the Marine environment, and the fact that you have installed scrubbers on some of your ships. How can you on one hand, say publicly, that you are contractually obligated to pursue the collaboration with QFI to a satisfactory conclusion, and on the other hand reduce our Share price to its knees, and destroy thousands of shareholder dreams and aspirations. I have made initial enquiries to MEP's, and in the absence of a courtesy acknowledgement form your Danish PM, and a satisfactory reply from yourselves, I shall escalate the involvement of British MEP's, as your usual "cloak of secrecy" persists, and your stranglehold and veto of QFI's ability to release news that might help us, prohibits QFI from any public positive announcements. I am not entirely sure of regulations in Denmark, but I suspect that this kind of censure would not be tolerated. yours truly Reply from Maersk 19th June Alan,   As previously stated we refer to Quadrise communication regarding MSAR – specifically on the receipt of the Interim Letter Of No Objection, I refer to this latest announcement on 8 June by Quadrise: http://hsprod.investis.com/servlet/HsPublic?context=ir.access&ir_option=RNS_NEWS&ir_client_id=4867&item=2816712567160832   Best regards Mikkel I have had calls from QFI-already stated-and they are not happy with my emails, I told them that I was not happy with their performance, and also the former and current Directors who have had made gains. I have tried, but a wall of silence and no reply from Danish PM or any Eastern region MEP, but Nigel Farage emailed me from Brussels, and said it was a legal issue and that we should pursue it from that perspective. I am at a loss now, but can only suggest pressure is piled on individually to QFI. regards Alan
15/6/2017
11:39
toby29: Kreature Well my hoped for reason is - see my post 37685 but I recognise this may be wishful thinking on my part. Might also be that Maersk are happy to see the QFI share price drift down to get the technology on the cheap and cut-out Quadrise completely. Would be rather controversial to effectively bankrupt a company and then buy it over but I'm sure they could dress it up to cover up the issue.
08/6/2017
12:09
brookemia: as previously advised, this was sent to Danish PM, CEO Maersk, 7 MEP's and Qfi, Captain Kirk. Please feel free and would appreciate it being forwarded to your own MEP's(just google) UK MEP's: Dear Prime Minister, I would draw your attention to the above-named collaborative, contractually-defined arrangement between The Maersk group, and Quadrise Fuels International. I shall be as brief as possible, some time ago in 2016, Maersk approached QFI for them to conduct a trial on board The Seago Istanbul, to trial a new ground-breaking emulsion fuel, which if successful would be an innovative fuel with great benefits to the environment and to marine shipping Companies. All was going well, but with the financial muscle and power that Maersk displays and uses, QFI were not allowed to disclose much detail, because of Non-Disclosure Agreements that Maersk have and continue to impose, rather excessively it is perceived. The vessel "allegedly" hit a buoy, although with modern technology/sonar/radar and on duty watchmen, this is rather surprising? Following this "collision", QFI were informed that the vessel was to go into dry dock, with little additional details as per Maersk's cloak of secrecy. QFI were subsequently advised in March 2017 that the trial had been suspended after remaining onboard MSAR had been consumed, DESPITE Maersk confirming that thus far The Trial was a success. QFI were subsequently advised that Maersk would only use compliant fuels from 2020, and that the use of MSAR along with scrubbers-which was/is the preferred option for many in the marine fuel and refining industries, that see the use of high sulphur fuel and scrubbers as the most economic option for 2020 IMO sulphur regulations. It is more surprising as Maersk have already installed scrubbers on some vessels. Also their intended use of Low-sulphur fuel would put them at a distinct disadvantage with their competitors. Maersk's actions decimated the QFI share price and have cost many UK/International shareholders, many thousands/hundreds of thousands of pounds in financial losses, with their unilateral action. I am not sure that this would be allowed to happen in Denmark, as there would be a public outcry. We were advised that Maersk would receive the Interim Inspection LONO reports by end of May 2017. Maersk also previously confirmed that they would work collaboratively with QFI to progress the commercialisation of MSAR to the wider global Marine Industry. I would be grateful, if you would seek assurances from Maersk, that this is still the case, given their contrarian views on the product, and also how they could address the financial plight of these unfortunate Investors, that have occurred, only because of the actions of Maersk. I would ask The MEP's if this question could be raised in The European Parliament as a matter of urgency on behalf of UK Investors. Thanking you Prime Minister for taking the time to read, this unfortunate, but avoidable situation.
10/3/2017
11:14
brookemia: QFI share price dropping ? Why, I ask, has there not been a decision-in view of the accident and close proximity to end of LONO- to make an interim assessment and say Yes the LONO has worked. We are-subject to mis/interpretation-over 75% done, so whatever has happened, has happened and is irreversible! The question is, if it was favourable then why has Maersk not said anything as they would gain a commercial advantage, or at the very least get royalties as per the tri-partite agreement? If it was unfavourable, would not Maersk say so, put it to bed and move on? One would have opined that Akzo-Nobel have a say as well as QFI, is Maersk so powerful-in this agreement-that they can order a complete news blackout
Quadrise Fuels share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
QFI
Quadrise F..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20191020 10:20:28