PyroGenesis Inc T.PYR

Nothing has changed

[StairwayTo]

Something has changed, or maybe something has to change.

If you recall 7/2/2020 press release, quite a detailed and very optimistic update on its iron ore pelletization torches business;
Client A On April 30th, 2020, the Company announced the successful completion of the first phase of a torch modeling contract with Client A which successfully demonstrated that replacing fossil fuel burners with PyroGenesis’ proprietary plasma torch (i) had absolutely no ancillary detrimental effects anywhere in the process or with their furnaces, (ii) resulted in significant greenhouse gas reduction while at the same time, (iii) projecting significant additional benefits. The subsequent phases were to be completed by June 30th, 2020 and were geared to further quantify the benefits of transitioning to plasma torches. These phases have been extended for up to six weeks with this additional data being incorporated into an ideal plasma torch configuration for this client. Equipment purchase discussions are expected to be completed by the end of August, and incorporate the ideal plasma torch configuration identified during the modelling process, with the ultimate goal being to eliminate GHG emissions from all their plants.

Client B On June 11 th , 2020 the Company announced that it had signed a second multi-phase torch modelling contract with Client B, aimed at evaluating the performance of PyroGenesis’ proprietary torches in an existing iron ore industrial furnace with the goal of replacing existing fossil fuel burners with PyroGenesis’ plasma torches. The first phase, as expected, is to be completed by mid-August. During the first phase, which is progressing as expected, Client B has already entered into active equipment purchase discussions with PyroGenesis.

New Development – Client C A new potential client (“Client C”), who is not only a significant player in the iron ore pelletization industry but is also a major player in the steel industry, has entered into active equipment purchase discussions with the Company. There seems to be a high probability that Client C may bypass the modelling phase altogether, however it is PyroGenesis’ preference to incorporate a modeling phase if at all practical. “Once again, although there is no certainty that any of these relationships will result in anything substantial, we are extremely pleased with the responses and the speed at which things are moving with this offering,” said Mr. Peter Pascali, CEO and President of PyroGenesis. “As would be prudent under the circumstances, PyroGenesis has taken steps to ensure that any reasonable requests from our clients can be met in a timely fashion, and to their full satisfaction. Barring any unforeseen events, we believe that it is entirely reasonable that initial torch equipment purchases will be placed in Q3 2020.”

Followed in 9/11/2020 by the following; press release;
“There seems to be an indication that certain comments made by a fund manager in the course of an interview lead to this decline. In the interview it appears that one could conclude that he suggested that he did not expect more than 1 to 2 torches to be sold by PyroGenesis within the next 3-6 months,” said Mr. P. Peter Pascali, CEO and President of PyroGenesis. “Although I respect analysis done by third parties, I am also aware of the challenges that this presents to these same very same analysts who, by the very nature of the job, are always on the outside looking in. This is also exasperated by the pressure they have of providing insight within sound bites. Having said that I can confirm that the Company has visibility on more torch orders than that alluded to in the interview. In fact, I can confirm that the current status of torch negotiations with various clients anticipate closing more than 1-2 torch deals in well under 3 months, let alone 3-6 months. These comments are not meant to reflect badly on the analyst in question, but merely to provide additional insight that only a CEO with full information can, and which I felt, under the circumstances, was necessary.”

So if a CEO with full information could have said that, but not concretized...
Something has changed. 

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[therealmccoy]

if you are a shareholder in PYR why do you continually post negative comments? do you like to cr@p on your own investment? watch the latest interview on snn, some great tidbits there...  seriously, if you are a "true" long shareholder, why continually to pester every day about torches and what not? your "tic toc" reports are pedantic at best...

[LastZaz]

Cause he's shorting the stock. Every post he makes is aimed to make investors fearful. Just ignore the clown. 

[Thinkbigsti69]

It is quite obvious that Edgetown has no shares in PYR. Even if  he had sold them off in the past  why would he still linger on? The only logical explanation is that he is shorting the stock and wants to profit from a lower share price. His mission is to scare off investors as to make them sell their shares cheaply for his profit. He is working in a urgent manner bc he knows that his

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[Thinkbigsti69]

Crazy in the coconut talk again Edgetown? Cover your shorts or suffer the consequence. The consequence is that you will lose everything and live in a tent if you can still afford one after the short squeeze.

[kjs4381]

Exactly, something has changed and probably for the benefit of the shareholders. Peter was speaking as to events up to that point. Quite likely questions were asked on a larger order and possibly timeliness, and with every new question in negotiations, it takes time . My guess is the longer it takes the bigger the deal. Anything negative, it would have to be press released as mentioned by Peter

[StairwayTo]

Are you listening to yourself? Probably Quite likely Possibly Takes time My guess Are you speaking on behalf of pumpers?

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[RealistDontalkm]

the second deal of contract was supposedly for 4 torches. Since, no news in regards to it I, personally, assume that either they increase their buying X amount, or found a new competitive deal. In addition, If anyone recall in his interview, " they are the only bidder or the leading bidder for a certain product..."  as for the 3D, I am 110 % they have that down.

[windywolf]

As far as torch deals go. I think most of it will be leased out. Which is a win win for pyr. Still lots of dollars to be made along with their many other irons in the fire. Go pyr.

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy

[rummager]

Metso:Outotec is one of the world's largest suppliers to the iron ore industry. They have no knowledge of plasma torches being planned anywhere US law mandates 11 aircraft carriers. 11 currently in sevice, a Ford-class undergoing sea trials, two more somewhere in the pipeline for which PYR has already contracted waste destruction Drosrite... a long waiting game that seems to be going

[rummager]

Missed one: LKAB, which tested plasma torches, decided to go with biofuels in its new plant. Read into all of this what you will. I'm just a mouse playing in a world of wolves, but, I do try to stick to what appears to be evidence.

[Mamasaidso]

So are you having remorse? Or what else are you here for ?? Need approbation on your selling? Need us to hold your hand and say it is OK!!! Well to bad you will miss the high tide !!

[Edgetown1invest]

This post has been removed in accordance with Community Policy