Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum PyroGenesis Inc T.PYR

Alternate Symbol(s):  PYRGF

PyroGenesis Inc., formerly PyroGenesis Canada Inc., is a Canada-based high-tech company. The Company is engaged in the design, development, manufacture and commercialization of advanced plasma processes and sustainable solutions which reduce greenhouse gases (GHG). The Company has created proprietary, patented and advanced plasma technologies that are used in four markets: iron ore... see more

TSX:PYR - Post Discussion

PyroGenesis Inc > PFAS Contract $9.2 Million
View:
Post by BIGMOE on Oct 08, 2022 10:56am

PFAS Contract $9.2 Million

First issue is the PFAS Contract of $9.2 Million

1.  Pyro won the contract in a fair bid and were selected.

2.  Pyro technology works based on US Navy and UN contract.  IP is developed and protected.

3. Now the question they bid for this projet, I assume in Pyro bidding process that their IP protected and they must have clauses in the bid and contract document.  The Town of Easton (who ever, we are guessing) and WES Construction Corp (we are guessing), they all must have known before they selected Pyro that their IP non transferrable.  This all should have been taken care off when Pyro was issued the contract based on my limited legal d ocument signing.

4.My queston is who did Pyro sign the contract with?  Town of Easton or the WES Construciton Corp?  Can somebody clarify this?  I think Pyro need to clarify?

5.  To me it's kind of strange that last minutes or months before the project in manufacturing process, we are discussing who owns the IP.  I think the Town or the Generact Contractor should know this that no company in the world going to give their secret sauce for just a project.

6.  All above for discussion purpose only and no need to get upset or calling name to anybody or disrespect any organization.  it should be constructive discussion on all sides.
Comment by Gordinno on Oct 08, 2022 11:00am
Was there ever a contract
Comment by sorrenson on Oct 08, 2022 11:41am
No
Comment by sorrenson on Oct 08, 2022 12:07pm
There was never a contract signed and I would think  this should never have been booked under any standard accounting system From what I can tell last year woods environmental was looking at various destruction technologies and plasma gasification was one of them and they reached some form of agreement that should they get funding from the federal government then the may proceed with the ...more  
Comment by beachbuminMexic on Oct 08, 2022 12:22pm
Maybe it was a good thing there were no signed contracts...made it a lot easier to punt whomever wanted to steal Pyro's IP. I still believe there will be a reversal in PYR'S share price when AM powders are certified by.....? Drosite payments start coming in on a regular basis and new contracts signed. When SAT is preformed and large TORCH orders come in. OH and lets not forget about HPQ ...more  
Comment by Casavantsghost on Oct 09, 2022 3:15pm
Who the hell would sell at these losses? You're sounding like Uncle Ron more and more these days. The pumpers should have been pumping us to at the very least. Sell at shite.. I dunno?? $5 a share? You have a lot of pie in tbe sky in those statements about sales given the company's lackluster performance.   
Comment by Casavantsghost on Oct 09, 2022 3:06pm
It would appear that obfuscation has been a large part of the word-smithing Ali g with the client shall remain unnamed for competitive reason. That has become a joke. 
Comment by tamaracktop on Oct 08, 2022 11:11am
Couldn't agree more with your conclusion. Many times over...."All above for discussion purpose only and no need to get upset or calling name to anybody or disrespect any organization. it should be constructive discussion on all sides."
Comment by sorrenson on Oct 08, 2022 11:19am
There was never a contract Peter stated twice it wasn't signed . Iit was an award. It was not WES construction or the town of Easton or the town of Wausau I believe it was woods environmental who is looking at building a pfas destruction facility somewhere in the US and looking at several various methods for destruction. Here is a link to a brochure note that the plasma they talk of  is ...more  
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities