Russia deal helps Clean Energy Fuels rebound from yesterday's 14% loss

Clean Energy Fuels (CLNE +1.8%) overcomes yesterday's big drop on news that its IMW Industries subsidiary entered an exclusive distribution and customer care agreement with Russian Machines Corp.

RM will distribute IMW compressors, compressed natural gas filling solutions and parts, and will be sole provider of maintenance and service within the Russian Federation.

The agreement supports last year's Russian decree to convert 50% of public transit and other vehicles to natural gas fuel by 2020 in cities with a population of more than 1M.

Yesterday's 14% drubbing may have been sparked by a Seeking Alpha post describing how the huge leveraged bet which CLNE placed into constructing 90 liquefied natural gas truck refueling stations - of which ~70 are mothballed - may have wiped out shareholder value.

Comments (10)
  • lonestar40
    , contributor
    Comments (68) | Send Message
    Russia and China push ahead aggressively on natural gas for transportation while our myopic government worries about salamander habitats and income inequality. I hope CLNE can hang in there until we get a more enlightened administration. Still long.
    6 Feb 2014, 04:18 PM Reply Like
  • patriot_invstr
    , contributor
    Comments (38) | Send Message
    I suppose Mr. Shorty posting on this site to drive down a 900 M market cap company proves the power of the Internet (and the fickle nature of the market). If investors had read the comments rebutting the article rather than just the headline, I doubt Mr. Shorty would have made his 14%.
    I took it as a buying opportunity. Time will tell if that was a wise move. Long CLNE.
    6 Feb 2014, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • IndioBravo
    , contributor
    Comments (141) | Send Message
    Fully agree with you. Silly people gave us a nice chance to buy a bargain. I tried to "like" your comment, but it didn't work.
    6 Feb 2014, 07:33 PM Reply Like
  • Wise Timmy
    , contributor
    Comments (298) | Send Message
    Maybe the only people long this stock are (or maybe were) Seeking Alpha readers?
    The move yesterday seemed extreme to be based on a market over-reaction to a SA post.
    My guess: It has or had more to do with the uncertainty around the price of NG and the corresponding effect of that pricing uncertainty on potential purchasers of NG vehicles: Nobody will want to buy a NG powered vehicle if the price and availability of the fuel is questionable.
    6 Feb 2014, 05:06 PM Reply Like
  • Kirby Muxloe
    , contributor
    Comments (176) | Send Message
    The west is so far behind on this. For instance most cars, buses and trucks in Thailand for instance use either CNG or LNG and there are plenty of other countries where this fuel mode dominates. It can be done!
    6 Feb 2014, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • huntm22
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
    I am long and actually work for a competing company. CLNE has the momentum in the right direction. Supplies of natural gas should make everyone happy and give them the incentive to move to it. Your loss!
    6 Feb 2014, 08:04 PM Reply Like
  • Felixofagassiz
    , contributor
    Comments (48) | Send Message
    This CLNE episode in volatility begs a question, niggling in my mind for some while...
    Well, ok, several questions:
    1) How much do SA article truly move the needle?
    2) Do some/any Institutional analysts include SA in their working studies?
    and if so, "yes"...
    3) What percentages of "Mom & Pop" vs. the "Institutional" monies are informed (and thereby influenced) by SA?
    6 Feb 2014, 09:35 PM Reply Like
  • trex678
    , contributor
    Comments (70) | Send Message
    As the weather warms the price of NatGas will cool and CLNE will heat back up
    7 Feb 2014, 05:28 AM Reply Like
  • Movinman138
    , contributor
    Comments (144) | Send Message
    You know, there is another angle, CLNE's IMW product is so full of limitations that it is easier to sell in other markets, which would support the Shark article by "Mr. Shorty" stated above. Just consider these two categories. CLNE's actual performance for their product (gasp - why doesn't that get discussed, oh because investors aren't out their building stations? Fair enough) and CLNE's calms to clearly be the market leader.


    Contrary to CLNE Jim Harger assertion in the Dec.28th 2013 article calling “LNG’s big advantage”, “Our pumps can fuel two dispensers at the same time at 20 diesel gallon equivalents per minute,” Harger says. “The (CNG) industry’s not happy at five gallons per minute,” “.
    Really? The Atlanta MTA dispenses 25DGE's/minute of CNG per hose. Here are some recent examples in the news well above the 5 GGE limit Harger claims:
    TruStar Energy's CNG fast fill rates up to 17DGE:
    Grady Gaubert of Gaubert Oil & CNG station owner states fill rate @ 13 GGEs/min
    LovesTravelStop 's can fill a 60gal class 8 CNG tank in less than five minuets with a fill rate of 12 GGE/min
    Sure doesn’t sound like CLNE is factual in their representation of the marketplace, why? To color the perception of their investors perhaps? To generate investor patience so the HUGE fiscal anchors don't sink the CLNE boat?


    Littlefair’s recent regurgitation saying IMW (made in China and Canada) is a world leading CNG manufacturer with 1,400 natural gas compressors is also misleading. What he didn’t say is their world leading sub-standard compressors are limited to CNG solutions of 50,100 or 150 horse power while CNG solutions continue to focus on 250 hours power and up. The reality is Ariel Corporation of Ohio celebrated shipping its 40,000th natural gas compressor last summer and offers horse power options up to 10,000. GE stated at its expo CNG rollout fall of 2012 that they have produced 15,000 natural gas compressors and offer a max horse power of 7,200 as well. IMW is far from the world leader that they hold themselves out to be. Even the Argentinean company Aspro has more than 4,000 natural gas compressors in the marketplace according to their website. It’s been rumored for some time now that IMW is for sale by CLNE. IMO it’s because of the horse power and other mechanical limitations of the IMW product.


    Furthermore, CLNE says they designed, built, own and operate 450 NG stations. WRONG they bought more than half of them (SoCal as stated in the article and recently with the acquisition of Mansfield Gas Equipment Systems)- they did not design and build them. That’s a BIG difference when one is claiming industry dominance . There are companies like ANGI Energy ( that have designed and built three times that amount with 100% American made equipment, they just don’t own and operate it. Nor do they brag about it or exaggerate that claim either.
    7 Feb 2014, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • The Political Economist
    , contributor
    Comments (350) | Send Message
    the shorts are well organized. but logic is even more organized. if IMW has such a shoddy product, why does it keep winning enormous contracts?
    22 Feb 2014, 10:06 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs