Pyrogenesis Canada Inc T.PYR

Communication

[canyousayiii]

I would summarize that there is a communication issue. Peter is talking terms that many of us are not properly interpreting. For example, I don't know how you can have a draft contract in place in September that you are trying to finalize but then shift from sales to lease. That change in the business proposition is huge in terms of contract terms so I don't see how it could result in a tweaking of what has been drafted. In my view, the "contract" in September was not as advanced as some of us may have interpreted it and the business structure was still being negotiated. Now we have to wait to see what the actual deal will be, and yet again, we have the "hell of a lot more money" that was tossed out there. Make sure your starting point is not Uncleron's for interpreting what this means!

[SmiteWorx]

The alternative is that leasing has been on the table for a very long time, and that key information has been withheld from stockholders for several months or more. Just speculation of course. .

[canyousayiii]

OK, to be blunt, I think the wording in September never should have referred to a contract but should have been advanced negotiations. The wording at that time made it sound, like a number had opined here, that it was done and then the lawyers from both sides were kicking it around. Lawyers don't kick sales into a lease, I don't think. Anyhow, it is done, and Peter has to learn something

[canyousayiii]

PS. I bought more today. Solely on the communication from Peter on Agoracom clearly stating that this is much better than what he was envisioning before.

[ArnoldLayne]

So now the communication is right ? Right ?

[fdfd12]

Sorry but of course he will say that. All along, we were thinking that they would sell and now he brings in lease. The way you please investors is to say "this is much better" He will not say this is worse. Do not be fooled.

[MidtownGuy]

Just a theory, but there's something you may have all overlooked: Client and PYR were talking. Went to draft contract negotiations. During this period, client decides they want a much bigger order than even imagined. Client proposed they would do it if different payment options existed, so brought up leasing. Leasing is then on the table, when it wasn't initially. If that is the case,

[canyousayiii]

I would not go out of my way to suggest that communication could not have been done more deliberate. September wording was that they received a draft contract. You don't go into advanced writing of something and then as you hand it over you start inquiring about other scenarios. Presenting a draft contract at that stage would be a waste of everyone's time. At least that is from my

[SmiteWorx]

The only problem is, the biggest size of the contract seems to be already known...I think it was estimated around 500 torches if the customer was one of two or three key players. No, I cant believe the customer hasnt known since for a long time what plants they are going to put the torches in and when.

[canyousayiii]

The size of the contract is NOT known and has never been known. Folk here were assuming full conversion based on assumed number of plants and torches per plant. Nothing is in the bag yet. It could be nothing, it could be torches in one plant, it could be a few torches in a few plants, or over time, it could be full conversion. I don't know what modelling means. To me it means simulation. If

[MidtownGuy]

I had asked Peter about modeling, a couple months back on Agoracom. About what it's comprised of, etc. His answer is on there. 

[Yajne]

MtG, that is the same theory that I have, that leasing was likely was raised in negotiations as a means for Client A to expand their initial order without a massive outlay of initial capital for outright purchase of torches. Also, it would also provide a business model to acclerate installation into all Client A plants without facing a massive capital outlay for each one. And with a third party

[MidtownGuy]

Yeah it really does make a lot of sense, especially as just one of a few possible payment options.

[fdfd12]

Very possible MTG but we need Peter to include this in the press release! Or at least a conf call where anaylsts can ask questions. He is going on the TSX for f sake. He has to have conference calls for earnings or releases like this. He needs to communicate so we DO NOT panic.

[Brieguy]

[ArnoldLayne]

Maybe the client gets a 10 for 1 now in terms of leasing the torch compare to buy them. So for the same amount of money, recurring each year, client have 10 torch leased instead of 1 bought. Maybe its 5 for 1, I dont know. After 5 or 10 years, PYR is in big profit with those reccuring leasing revenu GLTA

[Mattboy]

Agreed Lets say the company needs  $1.5billion worth of torches but doesn't want to drop that all at once. Instead they pay $25-30 million per month in lease and get the tax write offs as well. Many companies may have the financial capability of leasing monthly but not outright buying. This may also drive them to have bigger purchasing power. Maybe they need $1.5billion in torches