So thankful to have Bernard as our CEO:
https://agoracom.com/ir/HPQ-SiliconResources/forums/discussion/topics/779897-q-a-at-the-agm/messages/2360659#message
We did have some issues with the taping of the AGM questions & answers section of the meeting, mostly because an investor present did not want to be filmed and that resulted in us losing some of the videos from the meeting.
Now I see that “Pennymaker69” is claiming that the video edits were made to hide his “friend” more pointy questions … That could not be further from reality since, in addition to answering the questions during the video, I also took the time to reply to each question.
So, for the benefit of all, I will therefore post the questions and my replies that were made to a follow-up email sent after the AGM. My replies are in RED, BOLD and ITALIC
First the follow-up question:
Do you have a link for the AGM? I want to see how it went and answers to the questions.
Not yet, our IT/Video guy is working on to…Yes, the meeting went very well...
The original questions
On Tuesday, June 28, 2022, at 03:50:09 p.m. EDT, X.X <xxx@rogers.com> wrote:
Ok here are my questions for the AGM since there is no Zoom this year.
1) years ago, the company announced in a news release there was a purchase order with another company with an NDA. What is the value of that contact and for how much Nano Silicon/size? Also is it using today's price for Nano Silicon or the price back when the contract was signed.
As explained, many times in previous interviews, the important fact about that news never was about the value of the contract, the quantity of Nano silicon to be delivered or its selling price. It was and still is, about the fact that the company requesting the samples, fully aware of our technology development level (Early R&D), still sent us a purchase order because they want to be one of the first to test our material. That reality has not changed.
2) Why does it take 1 full year to test the plant?
We never said it would take one full year to test the plant, what we said was:
"Budgeted at CDN$ 2,830,000 and lasting up to twelve (12) months, this final phase of the program will allow HPQ to validate and quantify the following PUREVAPTM QRR disruptive advantages identified during the previously completed Gen1 and Gen2 PUREVAPTM QRR testing phases:
a) Produce silicon material of higher purity than any traditional processes in a single step[1],
b) That it can do so without the need for extremely pure feedstock required by conventional processes[2],
c) That it only requires 4.5 MT of raw material to make 1 MT of Silicon versus the 6 MT required by conventional processes[2],
d) That it does possess a significant cash cost advantage versus the lowest cost traditional Silicon producer[2]."
[1] (HPQ February 26, 2019)
[2] (HPQ June 17th, 2019)
This having been said, I believe that investors forgot about the complexity of the reactor and all its systems, so reaching all the goals stated above in a twelve-month period will be quite an accomplishment. But I have no doubts that PyroGenesis will deliver the goods.
3) after all the testing is done will the test plant become the production plant, or will another plant be built?
No, the pilot plant will not become a production unit and yes, we will be building next a large-size commercial unit (Gen4 Purevap). This is all public information and has been part of our investors' Deck for a long time.
4) Why is Fumed Silica plant for startup in q2 2023? Has that started being built? Can it be done sooner?
I don’t get the issues with that, as this is a fast timeline, the project is advancing as planned and no it can be done sooner.
5) Have you figured out how to transport the Nano Silicon.
Not yet, but one of the advantages of our Nano reactor is its scalability, so it is not impossible to see a scenario where our nano powder plants are ring-fence within Gigafactories.
6) What can the company do to get into production sooner and start turning a profit?
As we say in our investor deck, we have a 3-year plan to get into commercial production. We have no intention of deviating from that, as our focus is on developing our technologies.
As the CEO, I strongly believe that focusing on revenues and profits generation at this stage is counterproductive and may make us take some dangerous development shortcuts, so my focus remains on developing the technologies.
7) Why do you think the company will be bought out before production when 50% is owned by Pyrogenesis. Company's like to own 100% of a tech not 50% of a tech.
I have no idea why some investors assume that our technologies are 50% owned by PyroGenesis, that is not the case. The technologies are 100% HPQ. We finance 100% of the development cost for 90% of the revenues. In two subsidiaries, we have structured the deal whereby, PYR can sell its 10% royalty back to the subsidiary in exchange for a 50% equity stake. If these subsidiaries were to be sold, the buyer would get 100% of the companies, and HPQ and PYR would split the revenues of the sale 50/50.
As a side note I would stay away from the hydrogen company. If they failed to setup a proper working test, then that's not a company I would want to deal with. The focus should be on the Nano silicon and fumed silicon and getting that into production.
I have total confidence in the technical team I have chosen to give us an accurate reading of the potential of the system, if it works, they will tell me and if it does not work, they will also tell me, so I am not worried about that. Regarding your comment about the focus of the Company, our primary focus is on getting the QRR technology working, then the Nano and fumed silica one, but we should not limit ourselves to that and be ready to be opportunistic.
It was after Tesla was in production and at a PROFIT when the stock started to take off.
Not true, looking back at the chart of Tesla from the start, it has some pretty impressive market runs when it was still a non-revenue innovation company… Yes, it had an impressive run when they started to make money, but that still took them many years to get there...
When the stock started to move expectations seemed that it was close to production and ran up to 60 cents. Then down after the CEO said testing for 1 year.
Have you never heard of the concept, buy on rumours, and sell on the news, that is exactly what happened! We announce that we were starting the technology validation after many years of delays, and that was a sell-on news event, combined with the bad market for tech innovation companies and that is what happened…
As the technology validation process advances, we should get another positive run….
I can't quite wrap my head around 1 year of testing.
Well, I can quite get my head around the fact that you are surprised by that… It is not something new that we have just announced…
I guess that you may not realize that we are developing a completely new process to make Silicon, so it is just normal that it takes time to get the kings out of the systems. That is not something unexpected but normal with what we do… Our great differentiator is that we have PYR in charge of the technology development, and that has a track record of doing that that is second to none.
I hope the AGM goes well and hopefully next year on zoom.
It when very well. The Board members, including myself, were reelected with 99% of the votes from real shareholders...
Regards
Bernard Tourillon, CEO