first post but long time follower on HC CCE threads.
Mega, your posts have always been detailed and linked to data, appreciate the information, but it is striking that mega has provided logarithmic scale more info on CETO progress compared to Ottaviano and team.
Information provided to date by CCE has been quite definitive towards multiple solar projects (Reilly blue provided list recently) with CCE “in running” or “competing for projects”.
These lists of potential upcoming projects have been force fed to the shareholders inexorably since EMC purchase, but no follow up on the multitude of project tender outcomes. If CCE loses tender, rare to offer notification of such, and certainly no explanation as to why we lost it.
Despite the substantial amount of weirdness regarding communication with shareholders, I have been a long term holder in great part due to UN involvement.
Now, the pathway that attracted UN to CCE (solar, battery, wave) has been rent asunder.
UN likely uninterested in SPG solution from wave alone as it is unproven technology.
I detail this to attempt to paint a picture of what the US shareholders have been dealing with, and to express my disdain with the following:
1. Michael Ottaviano does not participate in capital raises. Shame to Michael, you should not ask others for their money when you refuse to join in.
2. Poor, poor communication from CCE. Look at the length of time your shareholders have stayed with this company. Does CCE think that burying the failures of CETO 5 somehow protects the shareholders? Poor disclosure tells the shareholders that CCE is ashamed of their performance, cannot handle failures, and lacks the self-awareness that they are in fact, an R and D company. Most shareholders are holding to watch the progress, guys, to see the technology develop. That includes the failures.
3. No disclosure of EMC finances until sale to TAG announced . Why do shareholders still have to try to guess about financial details leading up to this? All of these issues should have been disclosed throughout process.
4. Finally, a request to HC participants: please share details of your knowledge. Statements made such as “spoke to employees at CCE and they know it never worked” are incredibly powerful, but withholding further details about this devalues your knowledge and your statements. CCE has been stingy providing details, let’s try to be different from CCE as shareholders; if you have knowledge of something, please disclose it.
5. Agree w MO step down, he had all the cards in front of him and chose to play this hand without informing his shareholders, then seems to make a desperate move out of left field.
For an R and D company, where a wild ride is expected, there is no need for the CEO to make the ride more turbulent.
Expand
