RE:RE:RE:RE:Time to average down Why ?Gottofly wrote: kingscorpion wrote: butastita wrote: This. Also on the line are the jobs / lives of hundreds or thousands of employees, sometimes even a nation's GDP. As we know things don't always work out the way they were planned. When it comes to (new) technology I know this from 20-year professional career of 1st hand experience. Rushing into replacing 500 burners in 10 plants sounds like a reckless move. Would be surprised to see that happen as, like you said, it's a conservative crowd. We're talking such huge clients that often even the government has a say and it won't be an easy task to convince their boards of seasoned industrialists and businessmen. Much less harder in the future if the initial deployments prove worthy.
ElanS2 wrote: The clients will be putting their personal careers on the line when selling the job to owners. They will be conservative.
They will be replacing something that works with something that has no track record in their business. That could be personally dangerous.
And all the green companies you came to PYR to give us your no-expert opinion. Climate change is real and they have been discussing this for over 2 months I hardly think companies are being pressured in these contracts but they are being pressured by governments all around
Opps, posted before with nothing there. Anyhow, I guess we all have our opinion, this is totally new technology jump. So many moving parts to the contract and for something totally new. Yes, still potential for things to move more slowly than light speed. I guess I am willing to wait an extra 6 months for a move to $20 SP. However, I do think things will move very quickly given the pot for funding climate reduction technology is only so large. Once it is gone, you will have to finance without grants. I believe the modelling will have calmed any nerves and companies will dive in to get the grants. Just IMHO