"Big Picture" post from RB plus "mini update"
Out of the 70 billion dollar battery market, the biggest publicly traded
player (Johnson Controls, NYSE:JCI) has a little over 4 billion in sales
dailynews.yahoo.com
earnings a tad over $5 per share and market cap of 4.895 billion.
quote.yahoo.com
Exide (NYSE:EX) has revenues of $3.2 billion resulting from
operations in 89 countries.
ww2.linuxlabs.com
Loss of $6.40 per share and resulting market cap of only $198 million.
Two years ago, this link showed revenues of $2.4 billion with
operations in 19 countries:
hotbot.lycos.com
Summary: the one losing money is at less than 1/5 of of a billion. The
one making money is valued by the market at 25 times as much. So
how will PWTC's technology play into this?
Take Exide's 3.2 billion in revenue. An oversimplification, but at $50
per battery, that's 64 million batteries. Because batteries are priced as
a commodity, markups are less than for many products, so let's say
$30 in manufacturing cost with $20 going to advertising, shipping and
retailer. Reticulation lowers manufacturing cost by 36%, so let's round
to savings of 1/3 for savings of $10 per battery or 640 million total
savings.
Loss was $9.4 million. Look under "Financial Summary on right."
biz.yahoo.com
The 640 million wipes out the loss, leaving 631.6 million in
savings.Divided by 9.4 million shares = earnings of $6.71 per share.
Won't address what happens to value of Exide's shares except to point
out that JCI -- the company valued 25 times Exide -- only made a tad
over $5 per share.
Back to PWTC.... The prospect of saving 100s of millions for major
manufacturers should be worth a few 10s of millions each. In the case
of Exide, maybe $64 million or a buck per battery. Larger amounts
from Johnson Controls and Delphi/Delco. Smaller amount from
Douglas (if they want to stay in the battery business). It adds up, doesn't
it? And that's assuming we only skim the savings as a licensing fee.
Any partnering arrangement (as with BiPolar) should allow for a more
even sharing of the savings.
On its face, Preamp's $100 per share prediction may sound high since
18 million shares translates to market cap of $1.8 billion: "How could
little PWTC even hope for a market cap almost 10 times Exide?"
Answer: "Well, start by solving Exide's problem and make them more
profitable than JCI so that they too can have a market cap measured in
multiple billions. Then do the same for a few other companies."
Note that the above addresses only how PWTC can share in today's
market for automotive batteries. It does not address how a lighter
weight, more poweful battery can "grow the market" by making it
possible for electric vehicles to use fewer batteries and go twice as far
before needing to recharge. Nor does it address powering bikes and
scooters across Asia. Or the follow-on NiFe battery covered by the
same structural patent. Or NiFe's advantages over lead/acid for solar
energy storage. Or any of Snaper's other patents.
Looking at the above paragraph, my hunch is that -- just because EVs
have multiple batteries per car, not one -- we leave $100 per share
behind us long before EVs finish "growing the market" for batteries.
Past experience says that, whether the first surge takes us to $5 or to
$20, anybody we tell about PWTC at that point will look at it and say
"Looks like I missed out on that one. Tell me about your next one." I
doubt whether I'll have a "next one" like this one. That's why my friends
and relatives have already heard about PWTC. Some have bought and
some haven't, but none of them will be able to say "why didn't you tell
me?" Regards, Caradoc
Here's mini-update:
If the logic [above] makes any sense to you, look at the $64 million that would flow from licensing
fees of a buck per battery from only one manufacturer. Dividing by 18 million shares gives
$3.55 per share coming into PWTC. From one manufacturer.
Then factor in that a partnering relationship with the right people (technology, material,
and manufacturing) would give us more than a buck per battery. Between PWTC's
reticulation patent and BPI's paste, we've already got the technology nailed. And thanks
to BPI a leg up on manufacturing. That leaves material (lead) and a little more
manufacturing expertise to be able to satisfy the requirements of the December 99 press
release.
Think it through, Caradoc
*********************************************
Is anybody reading this board? -Gordon |
