Corn oil production was just one of the bright spots in Green Plains Renewable Energy Inc.’s third quarter financial report, discussed in a conference call Oct. 27. With installation of corn oil extraction technology completed at all nine GPRE ethanol plants in the third quarter, the company produced 32.7 million pounds of corn oil and generated operating income of $9.6 million, said Todd Becker, president and CEO.
The company had predicted it would produce about 100 million pounds of corn oil yearly but that number is actually closer to about 120 million pounds. Although corn oil yield can depend on corn quality, GPRE expects it will increase its corn oil production numbers as it completes debottlenecking at some of the lower performing plants, Becker said. Payback for installation of the technology was less than a year.
SEE ALL HERE
See Actual Transcript HERE
An Edit/Find shows "corn oil" mentioned and discussed 5 times in the body. Now that they got the Q/A transcript done I see six more mentions for a total of 11. Also note to the right column at the start - right now it says the highest searched item is "corn oil" Way to go Green Shifters!
SkunK
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
If GPRE was better than expected GERS will be too.
"GPRE is continuing to evaluate opportunities to acquire additional businesses, including ethanol plants."
Sounds like more corn oil systems are on the way...
I like the part in the CC where he said 1/3 of next years corn oil prices are locked in. This provides some stability knowing a portion of royaltys are locked in at these high prices.
A question. If Icm is so sure they'll win then why are they trying so hard to get charges against the CEO dropped? thanks
"If Icm is so sure they'll win then why are they trying so hard to get charges against the CEO dropped?"
I am sure the ethanol plants who have their collective neck on the line are asking the same question.
Specially the ones who are paying some attention and at least read the court orders and realize the marksman hearing blew up the Prevost defense as rubbish. Then he is trying to squirm out of his personal responsibility and leave them hanging.
Is the Industry finally paying attention?
Is this what justice looks like?
I think "Justice" will involve a large transfer of funds to greenshift and their long suffering shareholders.
What evidence or historical precedent gives you hope that the common shareholders would see any amount from any settlement?
What SPECIFIC evidence or historical precedent gives you hope that the common shareholders would NOT see any amount from any settlement?
KK has no accountability to the common share holders. He controls everything and answers to no one. For example, have you seen any explanation of why the R/S has been significantly delayed? Do you think that such an event could occur with another company with real governance without some form of communication to the common share holders? Without accountability anything can happen when the cash starts to roll in. Cash without accountability is not a good combination.
What SPECIFIC evidence or historical precedent gives you hope that the common shareholders would NOT see any amount from any settlement?
I am responding to your implied assumption with a specific "gegenbeispiel".
An example is this company taking private GS Agrifuels, when the company announced a more than fair buy back price at a future date, few posters believed because it was about twice the trading value. The shares continued to trade at a discount to the buy back price as posters relentlessly tried to discredit the company and the deal.
The deal went off as planned, 50cents/share if I remember right. Those who trusted the word of the company and loaded up at the discounted price came out way, way ahead at settlement. Those would listened to the haters lost a lot of money.
GS Cleantech absorbed GS Agrifuels and then GS Cleantech became GreenShift if I remember right.
That is my example. Anxiously awaiting a specific example that might change my mind.
The logic was aimed at your assumption being a fact. It is a fundamental tenet of epistemology that a "gegenbeispiel" (counter example) disproves an assumption as fact. It is only required to identify one counter example to disprove the assumption. (Q.E.D. quod erat demonstrandum)
have you seen any explanation of why the R/S has been significantly delayed?
Yes, I saw this this morning. See below. But first:
Your argument is based on an example that we do not yet know if it is true or false. Mr. Richard below takes the same information and arrives to a positive result.
I think the odds of his scenario are higher than the GreenShift Executives are just disinterested in keeping the Shareholders informed. Some believe they simply see shareholders as a cash register till. If so, then they would certainly keep a better eye to the till, and would be giving us more information about the r/s, not less, leading us about like the bull to slaughter.
Can one have it both ways? Saying they are leading us about by not leading us about?
My example of GS Agrifuels has the element of time behind it and we now know exactly what happened and why.
Think of reasons why a prior planned r/s is not taking place. Now think of a reason it is not announced which is in the best interests of shareholders.
Ongoing negotiations with a third or multiple parties/ and or creditors (which are never announced for OBVIOUS reasons) that involve the future share structure of the company immediately come to mind. Anyone who thinks YAGI and our share structure would not be involved with negotiating the payment structure of any kind of serious litigation settlement has not been paying attention.
Gee Whiz, its not like we just finished a successful Marksman hearing and have entered a traditional period of serious settlement negotiations.
Oh wait, its exactly like that.
Mr. Harold Richard
"I think the odds of his scenario are higher than the GreenShift Executives are just disinterested in keeping the Shareholders informed. Some believe they simply see shareholders as a cash register till. If so, then they would certainly keep a better eye to the till, and would be giving us more information about the r/s, not less, leading us about like the bull to slaughter."
I can only respond with a question: have you researched the history here?
"Anxiously awaiting a specific example that might change my mind."
"I can only respond with a question:"
A situation that normally occurs when one cannot answer the question. Its called deflection. Apparently you cannot think of a single specific example that supports your position?
Oh well, GLTU
Oh that's cool, history means nothing and hope means everything.
Deflection again.
I am afraid we are having two different conversations. I answered your question to give an example that defends my position. I am still waiting for an example that defends yours.
Words like "history" mean nothing unless you present your view of it that defends your position. The library and a whole TV channel is dedicated to "history". Of which do you refer?
Being on a deep in the weeds micro cap stock board that few read means that you cannot use "everyone thinks" as a defense of your position. Anyone who puts any credence in group think would not be even here having this discussion to begin with.
I mean you no ill will, I am just curious why you think the way you do and wish you to give me an example of why you think that way. I am aware of events around this stock but unfamiliar with how you can look at these events and arrive at your conclusions.
Post a Comment