It's surprising that you were more pessimistic than I was. I never doubted tech would work, it has always been a question of cost. Company cost estimates were merely what the "believed".
If you want to have an idea of the production cost, look at the selling price of the various drop in oils they can make, but are not. With excess capacity at Clinton for a year, surely the highest priced among them would have been produced, if the margin was there. No production inferers, cost is too great. Thus the focus on the high value tailored oils (which btw were reserved for SZYM exclusively with food)in the original JV agreement). When costs skyrocketed, SZYM, IMO, had to give the JV first food, then all tailored oils including cosmetics to meet their commitment to the JV, otherwise Moema could produce nothing. But high value is high priced and slow ramp. And that is a problem for SZYM as they are running out of cash to burn. SZYM does not have a "long term" future w/o cash infusion.
Glad, had none to dump. FWIW, another of those double toppie things. Don't get too negative, in a month or two and below 2 it could be a reasonable time to look for a low for the year. Trying to find shares to short is too much a pain, so have to look for the bounces.
Maybe maybe not. If they get 400 - 500 M. they are out of the woods; 200-400 M. and they are likely to make it: less then 200 M. and they are in trouble. How much they get will go a long way to settling the company's future. But until that deal is done, there will be a basis for recovery. This investing thing is tricky.
FP you are asking the wrong group your question. You should asked whether "Anybody at SOLAZYME ever actually worked in a large scale manufactuting?"
Recall Roquette's comment: "Solazyme does not understand the production process."
Personally, I think there is a big difference between "long term potential" and ability. I am interested in the latter.
If nobody is in this stock for fuel, then your explanation for the yesterday's gap opening (and holding) is, what?
Where can I read about the "the large contracts in hand" that johan references?
If its those press releases, your kidding . . . yourselves . . . but that is what desparate people do . . . especially in a group.
Don't worry, shorts are optimistic and know how this will all end, though it will take awhile. So taking your trading profiits and
It's a UPS fluff piece aimed at: : "“UPS believes these agreements are especially important because they will help stimulate demand for investment in refinery technologies and sustainable feedstocks needed to produce renewable fuels at a total cost that is comparable to more carbon-intensive petroleum fuels,” said Wallace [a UPS, VP]." UPS wants more cheaper bio-f prices from increased competition.
You asked the wrong question. Go to UPS press room and you will find a PR which begins "UPS® (NYSE:UPS) today announced agreements for up to 46 million gallons of renewable fuels over the next three years, constituting a 15-fold increase over prior contracts and making UPS one of the largest users of renewable diesel in the world. . . ."
Correction: change "Muted" to "Delayed" and leave unchanged "While long at the moment, that is likely to change quickly" as have already sold.
May also wish to compare with the Flotek PR of April 14 the pop of 25% one day and 50% over three days. Of course, we know all those gains, and more, have been taken back by the market. But still a far more significant pop.
In comparison with previous partnership announcements, the response to the BASF announcement has been muted. Perhaps that is due to the lack of substance. For example, last year's July 31st PR was with a paint company and provided scale (10,000T/Y) and joint research agreement. This year's on the other hand is absent details and the color they provide. Of course Solazyme is now treated as a post development company and the financials are what matters. Partnerships were nice during the halcyon days of Solazyme's youth, but now it is expected to perform, to produce actual sales, to be judged by the financial statements and not pre-conference call hype.
While long at the moment, that is likely to change quickly.
Good trade. Is it correct to assume you covered due to the possibility the BTC may pass shortly? the cc next week could provide upside since management seems confident having recently committed to a major plant upgrade at Danville and may have surprise in store?
And to think I had a bid filled on that thinking. Ugh. Went back and looked at the chart to see what happened after the that July 30, 2014 cc. Ugh. Checked the transcript for what brought that result about and there was Wolfson bragging "At Moema we’ve made great progress addressing the utility issues." ugh!
You would think the market is now oversold, but then you look back . . . and see the future? ugh!
The credit being shifted to the producer level has been well known. It was in the first draft of the lgs. My guess is that it will not significantly change the way REGI does business, i.e. they will share the credit with their customers the same as always though it may shift the percentage split somewhat (or may be not). I am going on past comments by management to the effect that it is a question of relative bargaining power. With the credit in place producers will increase supply and price will adjust downward. May already be seeing this happen as RIN prices have been falling (again more supply of bio-d, lower price for RINS, hope REGI has minimal inventory of same) in anticipation of greater supply? Could be. However, substantial profitability is very likely for the next two years if the bill becomes law.