tincom has signed, page-48

gday ttc,
thanks for your reply dude,
apreciated


this is some of my research.

"1. ESI have been in the latrobe for much longer."

ESI have never been in Latrobe, their pilot plant is located in Bacchus Marsh (ehere MNM have secured 1-2bt of coal). ESI's connection with LV is through their agreement with Loy yang to use their power station's waste heat for their proposed drying plant which they will somehow intergrate.

"2. ESI have signed deals."

So have Mantle. The clear difference is Mantle will be sharing profits at 50% whereas ESI are geting 10%. Assuming both projects get up, what in your opinion is better 10% or 50%?

"3. The ESI pilot plant is established (for quite a while now)."

So has the Exergen pilot plant, since 2002. The clear difference is however is that Exergen have trialled their technology as it would be applied in commercial use, ESI have yet to test their technology as designed attached to a power station.

"4. ESI are now selling their output, and positive customer feedback."

Exergen could also do this from their pilot plant but with large backers putting in $10 million each they would have already tested the output and would not need to raise cash from sales.

and your comment

"I don't understand why MNM has moved so high.... "

Do you realise that ESI's dilluted MC is larger then MNM's yet Mantle's 50% deal is far better than ESI's 10%?
thanks ttc