Tougher question (Score: 1) by chipotle_pickle on Sunday, November 16, 2003 @ 09:46:06 UTC (User Info | Send a Message) http://freehydrogen.blogspot.com | Time is not on the investor's side in that case. The more time that passes between a mistake and a correction the worse. Rather than talk about legal recourse after they discover it's a scam, I think the investors should be more assertive about figuring out exactly what is going on. They should all know what the balance sheet looks like, how much money was raised, how much is left, and how the rest was spent. This is reasonable for any company. They wouldn't want to be invested in an old and proven technology business that operates out of undisclosed locations and says it has no investors.
About the technology, the investors should demand more solid proof that it can run for 20 years than seeing it run for hours. They have been told that a house has been using it, so they should see the electric bill for the house. Better, they could retest the Edison in a longer (at least a couple of days) test, measuring the weight loss in the gCells. An independent test supervised by a competent chemical engineer would be better still, but there is so much concern for secrecy I am afraid that will never fly. But it seems reasonable that they should be able to run their own test of the gCell lifetime. This would be reasonable for any new technology. If someone tried to get them to invest in a disposable battery that produced power for 20 years, they wouldn't be satisfied to watch it run for hours.
If they take charge and get a clearer picture of what's going on with the business, they will be in a better position to know what to do next than anyone. I hope they let us know what happens. |
| Parent- Re: Tougher question by Anonymous on Sunday, November 16, 2003 @ 10:34:59 UTC
- Re: Follow up by Anonymous on Sunday, November 16, 2003 @ 17:47:45 UTC
- Easier said than done by chipotle_pickle on Monday, November 17, 2003 @ 07:08:33 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 @ 17:36:51 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19, 2003 @ 06:08:34 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Thursday, November 20, 2003 @ 09:27:54 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Thursday, November 20, 2003 @ 11:38:15 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Friday, November 21, 2003 @ 10:27:28 UTC
- Re: silence by baldy on Friday, November 21, 2003 @ 11:22:37 UTC
- Re: Pickle? by Anonymous on Friday, November 21, 2003 @ 20:12:06 UTC
- Re: silence by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 25, 2003 @ 14:55:00 UTC
- Re: silence by baldy on Tuesday, November 25, 2003 @ 15:28:29 UTC
|
|