Hi
@milz40, LWP have 2 streams of strategy. The first (i.e. Plan A) is to continue their development of specific proppant groups (HSP and LSP) to meet the current market requirements. These activities are ongoing and will remain the 'bread and butter' of what they do for years to come (source: Sean Corbin).
The last 8 years of continued R&D have enabled LWP to obtain the IP which allows them to fine tune fly-ash and other elements into specific proppant combinations. Effectively, their technology, patents and IP will allow proppant producers to manufacturer whatever proppant spec is required, for a lower cost and higher efficiency (source, LWP material released in their investor conferences).
I must stress again, that their low-strength proppant is part of Plan A and has nothing to do with Plan B. LWP can achieve the success they need (and we as shareholders need) with the LSP, providing the test results come back positive. Think of the LSP as Plan A.2
Now as for the second strategy stream (Plan B), we have a lot of information to draw upon - from the videos and other material posted over the last month on HotCopper and other forums. What I (and many others i've spoken to) believe, is that it;
IS NOT a proppant
IS NOT a building material
IS NOT a ceramic tile
We don't know what plan B is yet, and if i've made any comments yet which have lead your thoughts onto tiles etc, then I'm sorry.
My current theory is that LWP will license their IP and patented technology to allow other non-proppant companies to manufacturer fly-ash compounds.
Whatever you think - Plan B is not a
substitution - it is an
addition to their arsenal.
Right now this is what LWP have communicated to the market:
Plan A.1 = HSP (but too expensive for current market conditions, will be viable when oil is around $60)
Plan A.2 = LSP (waiting on test results to come back - will be main product line for next 1 - 1.5 years potentially)
Plan B = unknown revenue stream.
Hope that clears it up!
