dynaCERT Inc DYFSF

Thoughts on the AGM, VERRA, etc...

[SIMPLICITI1]

I have received assurances from Mr. Payne, that the AGM will be an in person event. He also sent me a link from the VERRA website that speaks to the Methodology that was reviewed by Earthood last year.

Earthhood is the company that VERRA used to review the Methodology. Just copy and paste the link below in your browser.

https://verra.org/methodologies/methodology-for-improved-efficiency-of-fleet-vehicles-and-combustion-engines/

You will note that it indicates that it is in the VERRA Final Review Stage. What we don't know is when that Final Review started or when it will end. 

We do know that dynaCERT issued a press release on November 27th indicating that Earthood had completed its review of all elements of the methodology and was submitting their results to VERRA  immediately. 

Well it is now May 1st,  and as you know, Mr. Payne has let it be known that VERRA's approval would be forthcoming in either days or weeks depending on the video. 

What on earth could be taking so long?

I for one would like to get a better understanding of how this VERRA approved methodology impacts dynaCERT's  financial fortunes? 

Afterall, a methodology does not generate carbon credits on its own. Unless I am mistaken, it requires end users to consume products or services that comply with the methodology so that they can earn the verified carbon credits. 

As best I can tell, and of course subject to dynaCERT proving otherwise, this would mean that either dynaCERT's widget combined with hydralitica or someone elses widget that speaks to hydralitica must be in the market and reducing emissions for credits to be earned. 

If dynaCERT's financial statements are a reflection of their market penetration and suitablility of purpose then we have a problem, do we not? How many units are actually in the market?

We certainly know that for the last 10 years, dynaCERT has not been able to generate a nickel of profit from the sale of their widgets. In fact, the losses are legendary. And it doesn't seem to matter how many times they've undergone a "total re-design. 

So I say again, absent tens of thousands of units working in the market..... where is the value?

It may be worth your while to review the March 2023 IIF video wherein they visited DYA post the PDAC conference. Pay attention to the comments made between the 6:45 to 7:10 minute mark.  

According to Mr. Cordiero, the Director of Sales for North America, the then latest version of the widget (total redesign number ?) built for class 7 and 8 trucks was proven to be 99.9% RELIABLE with a life expectancy of 10 YEARS. 

That video is now a year old. For Mr. Cordiero to have made that claim he must have been relying on reliability data generated prior to that, right? 

But, once again none of that adds up when you look at the financial statements, particularly where warranty provisions are concerned. 

Could the delay be a result of dynaCERT's inability to demonstrate a market for their products and then by default a market for the carbon credits that would result from its use?

[lscfa]

You are correct. Carbon credits only matter if truckers are using the unit. And truckers are not going to buy units based on carbon credits as they are a fraction of the fuel savings. If truckers are not buying units to save gas, they certainly won't buy units to earn a small carbon credit.     Litres 1000 10

[SIMPLICITI1]

And unless I am mistaken....the trucker is asked to share the value of the Carbon Credit with dynaCERT....and let's not forget the "market's" piece of the action.