the $3M per torch dancePeter has always put forth the notion that a torch sale should be $3 million per torch.
Mcwhirter goes on BNN in 2020 and says a torch sale is $3M ( 50 torches per plant and one customer has 10 plants so just 1 customer = 1.5 billion " with a B ".) remember that.?
Then he goes on to say the maintenance / parts should follow other PYR contracts and land on the 5% range = $150,000 / torch = $75 M per year for this 1 customer order in addition to the 1.5B.
Prior to yesterday I have never heard Peter breakdown a sale of a torch at $3M like this ....
the Company estimated that each torch sale could represent a $3MM NPV to the Company. The original figure was based on very conservative estimates which projected the initial torch sale to be between $1-1.3MM with subsequent maintenance and spare parts contracts limited to 5 years.
I find it dishonest of Peter to have been using the $3M figure for torch "sales" and slipping in the NPV as an accounting catch all so you can add what ever you want in there. Now he is talking about $7M NPV per torch using 20 years of future maintenance earnings !!
This is a salesman at work here .....
All this based on over $300K per year ( twice what McWhiter said ). At a $7M NPV over 20 years the maintenance / parts is much as $6M or 85% of the NPV.
The 300K+ per year is very much and unproven #. No one has signed a contract for maintenance / parts for short or long term. I have serious doubts that anyone will pay 25% of the cost of a new torch - per year - for maintenance.
We should all be using maybe $1.3M per torch when dreaming up future sales -- and leave the maintenance / parts as a separate service revenue stream that has yet to be determined.
This is how it should have been presented to investors a couple years ago -- but then we would not have had huge upward stock price movement - then stock offerings.
When McWhirter ( the main PYR analyst ) goes on TV and says the $3M is only for sale of torch and $150K / year is in addition to the $3M -- and Peter does nothing to correct this notion -- there seems to be an effort to mislead the investing public.