I was just wondering why the Guardian edited out the two references to MMR from your article?

Jon

Hmm, needs work.

Thanks andrew- I checked for other filings with the the CRO – unfortunately the most recent detailed accounts which are in the public domain is dated 31/12/2005 (filed on 15/3/2007, and well out of date). I would have been prepared to fork out 2.50 for a reasonably recent set of accounts. Never mind.

andrew, I think it’s very useful to have these figures out in the public domain – thanks for your thorough research. It is firghtening to see how much money the Steorn people a) have available, b) have spent.

A partial transcript follows; mirth-fuelled involuntary micturation prevents me from providing a more complete version.

“The technology develops free energy, the free energy can be used to move your car, power your phone, take your house off the ground.”

“The technology is the ability to construct certain magnetic fields that when you travel around the magnetic fields starting and stopping at the same position you’ve suffered a net gain of energy. Quite simply the analogy would be you know, you walk up to the top of the hill and you walk back down to the bottom of the hill but in doing that you’ve gained energy. And it really is that simplistic.
This is another step in the evolution of the development and exploitation of energy, there’s absolutely no question about that, and everything that means.

But there’s roadblocks, and the first roadblock is the world of science.”

Sean Mc Carthy, CEO Steorn.

((The second roadblock being, presumably, reality.))

As it happens, early in 2007 Steorn’s unaudited P&L figures for 2006 were up on their Investor Relations web page, but they’ve since pulled the 2006 accounts off the page.
Luckily, I have a copy of the page.

Here’s Steorn’s Investor Relations page now, with the 2006 figures missing:
www.steorn.com/about/investor/
and these are the 2006 figures that they’ve removed from the page:

Year to 31 December 2006

Net Revenues:
Fees Earned: 0
Total Revenues: 0

Expenses:
Cost of sales: 0
Research and Development costs: (1,495,756)
Management and marketing costs: (662,552)
Admin costs: (1,089,630)
Profit (loss) before tax: (3,247,938)

In 2006 they had zero (exactly zero) revenues, and a loss of 3.2 million Euro, up from a loss of 1.8 million Euro in 2005.
Their cumulative loss for 2004-2006 was 5.8 million Euro, which pretty much covers where their earlier 6 million Euro investment went, and shows why they needed more money in 2007.
If they’re spending 3.2 million a year, their new 8.4 million Euro investment will last another two and a half years, till Autumn 2009 or thereabouts.

For 2006, their “Management and Marketing” plus “Admin” costs were 1.7 million Euro, whereas “R&D” was 1.5 million.
Someone seems to be collecting significant “management and marketing” fees.
Also, with 1.5 million spent on R&D, wtf was that perspex box at the museum all about?

It is from that date that the shareholder owns the shares, and owes the company the money for them. An investment is a transaction like any other (money-for-shares), the date is the date for the transaction as a whole. The money is owed from that date, the payment terms are by mutual agreement.

It would be interesting to know the total number of shareholders making up the EUR8.4m, and hence the average size of investment.

The Irish Sunday Times archive is behind a paywall, but the story simply reports the contents of a share allotment form submitted to the Irish Companies Registration Office in April.
The Steorn company submissions are here:

www.cro.ie/search/submissionse.asp?number=330508&BI=C

The most recent “B5 Return of Allotments” form (submission number 5094720) was received 03/04/2007.

The form is stamped 3 Apr 2007, and the date of the allotment is 26 March 2007.
(“The return must be delivered within one month after the allotment”).

The allotment for cash consideration was:

Number of shares: 5,284
Share class: Ordinary
Nominal value per share: Euro 0.01
Amount paid or due and payable on each share: Euro 1,583.43
Amount paid or due including premium: Euro 8,377,433

That is, a share allotment of Euro 8,377,433 was made on 26 March 2007.
(The names of the shareholders etc are also on the form).

The form costs Euro 2.50 to download, I’ll email a copy to Dr.G., I’m not entirely sure what the copyright position is if you want to display it on the site.

The context is that, on October 11 2006, Sean McCarthy of Steorn said the following on the Steorn forum:
“First we have made it clear that we are NOT going to accept any new investment while this process continues. So for us if this where a scam there is no return on the investment (some will say that the media/Jury process is in fact a cover-up of an old fraud!!!). Any investment into our company will be a matter of public record and hence can be found. So if we are not telling the truth on this matter it will be found out.”

www.steorn.net/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=19663&page=2&#Item_18

This statement is often quoted to argue that Steorn can’t be a scam as they aren’t seeking investment.
The point here is simply to compare this statement with the B5 submitted to the CRO on 3 April 2007.

It was in an article in the Irish Sunday Times, apparently. The original doesn’t seem to be on the web, but it’s been posted on Steorn’s forum here:

www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=56611

Presumably banckruptcy and prison will all be averted so long as they get a gazillion pounds for their invention before whoever’s paying the bills breaks their legs.

Revenues from sales aren’t the only form of inflow! Investors pouring money in can keep a company wallowing in cash for years – assuming, of course, that the company can sustain a good enough story to keep people gagging to invest.

Actually, what I find more interesting is, given that the accounts show their heading for bankruptcy, why would they be posting them on their website?

I agree this future is crap. Had this discussion with a colleague a few years back when our tube train was cancelled due to wrong kind of contractors on the line. Where are:

1. Crewed interplanetary travel and commerce, Lunar City, Martian Settlements;

2. My personal helicopter;

3. Clean, pollution free cities;

4. The democratic World State?

And please take Global Warming away. Don’t want it.

www.chem1.com/CQ/clusqk.html

It certainly seems clear there are people who will set up bogus companies marketing bogus, though superficially peer-reviewed and journal-published science.

For an American example, also water-based, see:

www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/ATG/index.html