ADVFN Logo ADVFN

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for discussion Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.

RED Redt Energy Plc

52.50
0.00 (0.00%)
14 Jun 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Redt Energy Plc LSE:RED London Ordinary Share GB00B11FB960 ORD EUR0.01
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.00% 52.50 50.00 55.00 - 0.00 01:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
0 0 N/A 0

Redt Energy Share Discussion Threads

Showing 34351 to 34369 of 35200 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  1384  1383  1382  1381  1380  1379  1378  1377  1376  1375  1374  1373  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
27/9/2019
11:45
1501
ZtH, completely agree with you. Yes, there was a change in direction to "smaller" C&I projects around 6 months ago. In theory, smaller means faster turnaround. I have to wonder whether such sales are managed direct or through partnerships. It certainly isn't growing the business fast enough.

That said, what are the timescales on the Oxford Superhub? Planning permission was only granted 2 months ago. Prior to that (in April 2019) it was announced as "The Energy Superhub Oxford project plans to locate the energy storage near Cowley substation, with the location subject to planning permission being gained, and is due for delivery across 2019 and 2020." Potentially some sales in 2019, but I would say 2020.

Very disappointing, but as this reflects a transitional period, post Scott, I am not surprised.

The RTO should transform the company in the C&I market.

ts0mev
27/9/2019
11:44
All I'll say is that we've been here before with the March RNS. Basically the RNS is saying almost nothing is out of the question. I'm still invested and hoping that RED can attract the necessary funding. Something is a bit funny if you listen to Boris' rhetoric about the UK leaving the EU at the end of October and about how the UK's battery technology is particularly noteworthy and both have been fiascos so far.
guppygould
27/9/2019
11:19
It is an awful RNS and I'm glad the share price is suspended. Lets hope the news of the RTO, promised in the near future, can give us some hope here as the RNS totally failed in that department IMHO.
mikemine1
27/9/2019
10:26
I won't feel so bad now if the RTO goes through at 1.65p.
ts0mev
27/9/2019
10:08
One element I do like is the guidance:

"Remote 0-10%
Possible 10-40%
Reasonably likely 40-60%
Probable 60-90%

This pipeline excludes the recent 72 unit Energy Superhub Oxford project win, as this is considered an order."

This is a sober attempt to re-set expectations although it makes a total mockery of the 2018 projections.

zero the hero
27/9/2019
09:55
As investors we adjudged Vanadium and its abilities very correct, what we did not understand was Scott's inability to run the company correctly. Looking back (oh isn't hindsight so wonderful) the lies and misleading sales projections are laid bare and no-one (including dlg3 and his multiple avatars) understood the company change of direction from direct sales to large orders only; a massive mistake. The dishonesty lies within the projected sales information and the high % indications of success. I fell for this element badly.

The hope that remains is that the merger goes ahead and that Neil is not the type of man to willingly let PI's get totally ripped off by allowing this to cease trading. I do not believe that is his game plan so I still feel a merger will happen, but the clock is ticking.

At least we will have a better 2020.

zero the hero
27/9/2019
09:30
Zero

I couldnt agree more ,Maybe as investors we have got this totally wrong and Vanadium is not the way to go, because they sure are not selling anything!!!

chestnuts
27/9/2019
08:29
Good job this is suspended as that was as grim an RNS as I have ever read. Sales = zero, pathetic to be honest. What the hell have this company been doing?
zero the hero
27/9/2019
08:18
Yes the timescale for either eventuality is clear now.
luminoso
27/9/2019
07:32
So; soon.
money runs out in Dec.

gspanner
26/9/2019
10:26
It looks like RED are required to post half year results 3 months after June 30th , so they only have a few days left. Perhaps they will be issued as part of the finalised merger plans. We can hope.
greenmachine2
26/9/2019
10:12
#1490 Further to Jamonit's query re suspension, it looks like turnover is a consideration in assessing various factors under the class tests rules. These include reverse takeovers. I am right in thinking that the merger with Avalon is subject to the cash injection? If so might it need some tradeable instrument associated with the new or existing shares to satisfy the fundraising element of the merger?
greenmachine2
26/9/2019
09:41
#1490 Jamonit. RE rules for suspension. Sadly it looks like there are no rules over the length of suspension in Red's situation where AIM considers the merger to be a reverse takeover.

I hope this link works

greenmachine2
24/9/2019
19:58
The potential crash in sterling might cause people to throw money into the market. If RED had enough things in order to enter the market they could raise plenty of money in combination with all the climate and environmental focus there is at present.
guppygould
24/9/2019
17:40
1484: Way back in 2017 whilst Gen 3 was being conceived the idea behind it was to be using less Vanadium per unit with more storage. At that point it was alleged 4 units Gen 1 = 1.5 units of Gen 2 against 1 unit of Gen 3. If they achieved their goals it would be cheaper to manufacture and more margin rather than lower purchase costs for the buyer. Gen 3 was planned to make money out of direct sales.

The Rental units were said to be better for Red as they could make more on leasing from the customer than outright purchase.

On both units the money to be made was in the after care of the units by selling servicing. Scott was very enthusiastic about the rental of Vanadium and servicing as being key to Red long term viability. This was before the vanadium price spike.

There was another element that was presented as a viable money maker and that was in STOR, which I believe has proved itself unworkable. This was proven to me after someone challenged the output models (released by Red via and RNS - I think)in 2018 which included no STOR and I contacted Joe who admitted it was hard but promised to release an example. The fact this was never disclosed indicates STOR to be unviable.

EDIT: don't forget when that article was released the Vanadium price was just off its peak and has been falling ever since and I believe rental is no longer so attractive

zero the hero
24/9/2019
16:35
1484, for customers it is a question of affordability. Smaller customers may want to go down the electrolyte rental to limit the CAPEX, i.e. when raising funds to get a project off the ground. Ultimately either business model must be profitable or RED wouldn't offer them.
ts0mev
24/9/2019
14:59
I have very little idea on the commercialisation of Gen3 and I doubt that anyone else outside of company could answer that question. If you ring Joe on the information site he will tell you more perhaps. He's very approachable but what he can tell you will be limited.
mikemine1
24/9/2019
13:47
This link is a Feb 2019 article re VRFB with reference to Avalon and RED and rental of Vanadium electrolyte.

My interest is in the RED bit I quote here.

"Over in Europe, redT has employed a vanadium rental model for multi-megawatt-hour grid storage projects in the United Kingdom and Germany, as well as for commercial customers, the company said. RedT uses a 20-year, interest-only model, after which the electrolyte returns to redT ownership. It kicked off the rental model with a 300 kilowatt-hour industrial system in Dorset in 2017."

My question to those still reading this RED chat forum is this: Is the interest only model for electrolyte rental vs outright sale, a profitable one for RED and the customers? I know that interest rate and electrolyte purchase price are factors in this issue, but I am interested in people's ideas.

greenmachine2
20/9/2019
10:41
RE 1482: unfortunately that is the question everybody wants to know the answer to. :(
guppygould
Chat Pages: Latest  1384  1383  1382  1381  1380  1379  1378  1377  1376  1375  1374  1373  Older