That's true - I missed that. Thanks. I find it

That's true - I missed that. Thanks. I find it hard to make these two claims logically consistent when taken together: 1) the plant is presently testing feedstock, and 2) the processors are idle. It requires making assumptions, such as a) at least one of the two statements is wrong, b) "testing" means something other than running processors, c) the management only meant that *some* of their processors will remain idle when they said "the processors will remain idle until at least 2014", or c) "idle" doesn't mean really idle.

Of course, it's possible I've missed some other piece of information that would clarify the above.

The company also claiming that "The Company had to shut down its production late in the fourth quarter of 2013 due to severe cold weather that caused damage to condensers and other components of our processors.

Management estimates that the repair of the processors will require the expenditure of between $175,000 and $200,000. At June 3, 2014, we lacked the working capital or access to bank credit to make these repairs."

So did the cold weather leave processor #3 operational, or at least sufficiently operational to "test feedstock"? That seems important enough to have been mentioned if that were true.