3 things strike me; 1. The Glaucus report challenged the 19.8kg...

3 things strike me;

1. The Glaucus report challenged the 19.8kg per tree yield that QIN apparently claim, , somewhere. QIN dont rebutt that one specifically, which is odd, rather just saying they expect yield  to double from here, even though their own project forecasts dont appear to back that up. They also dont refer to the fact that the big volume harvests are the 2008 and 2009 projects, for which their own figures project 12.1 and 13.3kg yields, hardly a doubling of recent harvest rates. The 15.7kg projections for recent projects are for much  smaller no. of trees.  Indeed a calculation of the weighted (by no. of existing trees) average of the projected project yields (from the table in the post above)  gives a weighted average for all harvests to come of  12.32kg (my calcs). Still not doubling anything.

But I'm not sure it matters. Each project has an individual  projected yield and survival rate and those projections seem reasonable, and a project DCF value calculated using those project level inputs. The overall DCF value of all the Biological Assets has to be a summation of the DCF values for each project, not a company level  DCF using 19.8kg pre tree yield right? The 19.8kg doesnt appear to be used anywhere. 12.3 kg is enough to support the existing DCF valuations. So by that logic the 19.8kg is a furphy, I just dont know why they wouldnt address that point specifically.

2. On pricing, QIN make a good case that whatever they are actually selling of the higher grade oil is at $4500, and since thats what all the rest is then if anything they are being very conservative using $2800 in all their DCF calcs.  That leaves 60% more upside if the $4500 price or better holds. Win by QIN here.

The price of the wood they are alleged to have bid up is also not relevant if "Wood sold by Quintis is sold at the oil equivalent price". Its  the end oil price that matters.

3. On the other hand, this Chinese buyer is a worry. Notwithstanding how small or how dodgy they are, to have taken orders for/sold/contracted 150 tonnes pa,  of which it turns out 2.25t has actually been shipped and paid for and then orders have dried up for whatever reason, is an epic fail. I am not sure just optimism they will find another buyer/agent makes up for it. Its still an epic fail